D&D (2024) 2024 Player's Handbook reveal: "New Ranger"

"More than any other class, the ranger is a new class."

​

It has been a year (less a day) since we last saw the Ranger in UA Playtest 6. There still could be a lot of change. My sense is that they are more or less happy with three of the subclasses (Fey Wanderer, Beastmaster, and Gloom Stalker), but many questions remain: Will anyone be happy with the favored enemy/relation to the land abilities? Will Hunter's Mark be foregrounded in multiple abilities? Will rangers at least get a free casting of the Barrage/Volley spells? For the Hunter, will the "Superior" abilties at levels 11 and 15 continue to be things you didn't choose at lower levels? For the Gloom Stalker, will they pull out 3rd level invisibility from "Umbral Sight"? Any chance for a surprise substitution of the Horizon Walker? Let's find out.

OVERVIEW

• "widely played, but ... one of the lowest rated"
• Spellcasting and Weapon Mastery at 1 (as with Paladin). Spellcasting can change spells after long rest (not every level)
• NEW: Favored Enemy: Hunters Mark always prepared, and X castings per day. (was level 2 in PT6, where it was WIS times/day)
• NEW: Fighting Style at 2 (no limits on choice). or you may choose two cantrips (again, like Paladin).
• NEW: Deft Explorer at 3: expertise in a proficient skill, +2 languages. NO INTERACTION WITH LAND TYPES. This is a nerf from PT6, where at least you got a bonus to Intelligence (Nature) checks.
• Extra attack at 5, Roving at 6 (+10' move, Climb Speed, Swim speed).
• Two more expertise options, at 9, presumably. Compared to the playtest, this is a nerf: PT6 gave 1 expertise, the spell Conjure Barrage always prepared, and +2 land types for Explorer. These had problems, but it's a lot to lose for one additional expertise.
• At 10, Tireless (as in PT6) -- THP and reduced Exhaustion.
• NEW: At 13, Damage no longer breaks concentration with Hunter's Mark.
• At 14, Nature's Veil -- invisibility. At 18, Blindsight.
• NEW: At 17, advantage vs person marked with Hunter's Mark.
• NEW: Damage of Hunter's mark increases to d10, not d6. (This too is a nerf from the playtest, which gave +WIS to hit, and +WIS to damage.)

The clear expectation is you are using Hunter's Mark, occupying your concentration and taking your first Bonus action every combat, from levels 1-20.

SUBCLASSES
Beastmaster

• command Primal Beast as a bonus action, and higher level abilities as in PT6, apparently.
• stat blocks level up with you (as in Tasha's and PT6). Beast gets Hunter's Mark benefits at 11.

Fey Wanderer

• vague on specifics; apparently just as in Tasha's.

Gloom Stalker

• as in PT6, Psychic damage bonus a limited number of times per day. +WIS to initiative (cf. Assassin and Barbarian)
• Umbral Sight, darkvision bonus, and invisible in the dark.
• NEW: psychic damage goes up at level 11. Mass fear option of Sudden Strike mentioned, nothing about Sudden Strike.

Hunter.

• Hunter's Lore at 3: know if there are immunities/resistances of creature marked by Hunter's Mark.
• NEW: Hunter's Prey at 3: you have a choice and can change your choice every short/long rest.
• NEW: Defensive Tactics at 7: you have a choice, and again can choose after a rest. The choices are Escape the Horde, Multiattack defense (not Evasion, Uncanny Dodge, and Hunter's Leap, as in PT6).
• NEW: At 11, Hunter's mark now "splashes" damage onto another target.
• NEW: you can choose to take resistance to damage, until the end of your turn.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That is totally ok. But the ranger has always been a magic using class in D&D.

Not from the get-go. Casting spells at level 1 is jumping in with both feet.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Perhaps, or perhaps the players forced the game in that direction.

I remember playing 1E Barbarians and Dwarves with their restrictions and limits on magic and it was not very fun. I don't know anyone who liked it.

I did, the dwarves anyway (never played a 1e barbarian).

 

[Minigiant]

It was a much less magic-centric class, however, if

Yeah, this would help. Unused resources feels baaad.

It was a much less magic class in a game where the exploration tear was more cleared out and used by most groups.

The current game does not have the explanation tear flushed out nor do most coups expand or even use it.

Therefore the only aspect that you can place the Rangers skill in the expiration tier is in the aspect that can be switched out or focused in the Ranger players choosing which is...Spells.

The Ranger in the next half edition of the game is a Hunter mark spell monkey because too many tables do not roll survival or nature checks which matter. So WOTC made the class into a viable hunter's mark combat grunt.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It was a much less magic class in a game where the exploration tear was more cleared out and used by most groups.

The current game does not have the explanation tear flushed out nor do most coups expand or even use it.

Therefore the only aspect that you can place the Rangers skill in the expiration tear is in the aspect that can be switched out or focused in the Ranger players choosing which is...Spell.

The Ranger in the next half edition of the game is a Hunter mark spell monkey because too many tables do not roll survival or nature checks which matter. So WOTC made the class into a viable hunter's mark combat grunt.

Then perhaps WotC should just tell us that fantasy superhero shenanigans with a heavy focus on combat is what they think D&D is all about, and abandon all this talk of "pillars" they clearly don't actually believe in or want to support. A little honest candor from the makers of the "world's greatest tabletop RPG" would be appreciated.

 

[Minigiant]

Then perhaps WotC should just tell us that fantasy superhero shenanigans with a heavy focus on combat is what they think D&D is all about, and abandon all this talk of "pillars" they clearly don't actually believe in or want to support. A little honest candor from the makers of the "world's greatest tabletop RPG" would be appreciated.

I can't blame WOTC completely.

The community itself skips exploration and extremely minimizes social mechanics.

WOTC is giving people what they want. The issue is the community don't like the result.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I can't blame WOTC completely.

The community itself skips exploration and extremely minimizes social mechanics.

WOTC is giving people what they want. The issue is the community don't like the result.

Then again, tell us that's what you think D&D is WotC, whether or not you think that because that's what "the community" is telling you. Stop pretending anything other than fantasy superhero shenanigans with a heavy focus on combat matters to you.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

yeah, I know. Some others should also go.

Like mandatory Heavy armor proficiency is other thing that I have with fighter and paladin.
I would be nice to be able to switch that with +2 skills or +1 skill and some tools/languages.

So not unlike Cleric's and Druid's level 1 ability.
But I am not sure I really want that in classes. For clerics and druids ok. But for fighters, when people already claim that str is useless compared to dex. I am not convinced.

 

[Horwath]

I can't blame WOTC completely.

The community itself skips exploration and extremely minimizes social mechanics.

WOTC is giving people what they want. The issue is the community don't like the result.

there should be special resource pool for social/exploration feat(s). So it does not compete with combat pillar.

I.E. a number of bonus feats equal to proficiency bonus that focuses on bonus skills, tools, languages, expertise, getting non damaging cantrips, getting some exploration knacks or whatever it's called from LU5E.

 

[Minigiant]

Then again, tell us that's what you think D&D is WotC, whether or not you think that because that's what "the community" is telling you. Stop pretending anything other than fantasy superhero shenanigans with a heavy focus on combat matters to you.

I, Minigiant, prefer a heavy focus on exploration.
I want a Ranger spell that gives the caster a dog nose and ears.

The community doesn't.

 

[Horwath]

So not unlike Cleric's and Druid's level 1 ability.
But I am not sure I really want that in classes. For clerics and druids ok. But for fighters, when people already claim that str is useless compared to dex. I am not convinced.

you can add that ALL armors need min STR not just heavy,
maybe 10 or 12 for studded leather and 16 or maybe even 18 for fullplate.