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.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I like the concentration mechanics, but they went overboard with it.

if you reduce PWT in power, it can lose Conc tag.

and Im against Rangers having Cons on HM as it is mandatory pick, that is, it costs class resources, no proficiency in Con saves for the class, and the class is expected to take damage in fights(HD d10).
Now, if ranger gets Con saves at 3rd level, I might be sold on HM having Conc tag.

Yes. No proficiency in con saves is a bummer. I would indeed be very happy if the ranger gets con saving throw proficiency by default.
Having to do with bad weather and poison and exhaustion, the ranger really should have con saving throw proficiency, not dexterity.

 

[Minigiant]

People complained about it during the playtest.

Because it's very strong once you get other attack buffs.

People forget that rangers get damage buffs.

 

[Horwath]

People complained about it during the playtest.

Did they really?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Trust me. If HM lost concentration, people would be complaining in 6 months.

< Press X to Doubt >

I mean I really don't think anyone would be legitimately complaining in 6 months (as in "this has caused a real problem" rather than "I think this is theoretically a problem on paper"). Nor would a significant number of people be complaining either way/

I think part of the issue here is that, for simplicity's sake, there's only one Concentration slot, and it feels absolutely awful to have that essentially permanently locked away for the entire rest of your character's life, when you're being given access to other Concentration spells, only a very small number of which have any meaningful balance implication to them.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Trying to sneak as a group without Pass without Trace is pretty much guaranteed failure. Someone is going to get unlucky, roll a 2 and get spotted even if they have a decent stealth bonus.

 

[Remathilis]

Did they really?

Some charops types complained how it was basically free damage without concentration, there was no penalty to using it or having it up constantly. This was the second time WotC tried this (remember that favored foe in Tasha was also concentration free in the UA and uses concentration in Tasha) and I believe it was for the same reason; it was stacking with other concentration buff spells and basically has no cost to use.

I will not agree or disagree with that analysis; I didn't crunch the math and my knowledge of it is second hand at best. I do know that WotC did try twice with a concentrate-free bonus damage ability and twice they backed off of it. I'm not sure why they keep getting cold feet about it, but apparently there is enough internal or playtest feedback that keeps putting it back.

 

[Remathilis]

Trying to sneak as a group without Pass without Trace is pretty much guaranteed failure. Someone is going to get unlucky, roll a 2 and get spotted even if they have a decent stealth bonus.

Technically, this is what group checks were supposed to fix: if you have five people trying to sneak, if three or more succeed, the whole group succeeds. It's supposed to stop the "one guy rolls a 2 and everyone fails" scenarios.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Yes. No proficiency in con saves is a bummer. I would indeed be very happy if the ranger gets con saving throw proficiency by default.
Having to do with bad weather and poison and exhaustion, the ranger really should have con saving throw proficiency, not dexterity.

To iterate on that:

Treantmonk says in his video that there is another significant improvement that they glossed over.
Since he is not complaining about losing concentration in melee, I could see how this could actually be what he meant.

That solution is so simple. And it is a significant improvement and at the same time so minoor that it might not be noteworthy for a ranger advertisement video.

With con save proficiency, your chances to save vs DC 10 concentration checks goes up from 65% (assuming 14 con on average) to 75% at level 1 and increases to 80% at level 5 and 85% at level 9. Which is not bad at all for a melee character.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Trying to sneak as a group without Pass without Trace is pretty much guaranteed failure. Someone is going to get unlucky, roll a 2 and get spotted even if they have a decent stealth bonus.

That's not how group stealth works in 5E.

The official rule is that everyone makes a check, and if at least 50% of PCs succeed, everyone succeeds (p. 175 PHB).

You've been running it VERY wrong if one person failing screws everyone. There's no group size where that's true - even two people that's still a success by RAW/RAI!

 

[Incenjucar]

How is it mildly insulting to hunters?

It's essentially replacing hunting skills with a form of external technology and implies skills aren't good enough for adventuring on their own. A hunter can't possibly hunt without magical GPS target paint, etc.