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.

 

[Corinnguard]

Obviously. But you'd be choosing to delay your sneak attack progression, other class abilities and the jump in power that each 4th level gives, in order to get a couple +1d4s per day. It's a ridiculous proposition.

It really depends on how you level up both the Ranger and Rogue classes.

Picking a good species that does well in either class also helps. Preferably one that is already something of an ambush predator (conditional +2d6 whenever they are ahead of an opponent in the initiative timeline).

 

[Staffan]

You would never say this about any other casting class, what's so special about Ranger that they shouldn't be casting spells in combat?
Beyond the fact that, ideally their buffing is done before combat starts, but considering Hunter's Mark is where the conversation begins and ends, that's a short list.

I'm not the person you asked, but I can see the attraction in shifting ranger casting mostly to the exploration pillar. You want something found? Locate animals and plants, locate creature, or locate object. You need to sneak? Pass without trace. You wanna talk to a badger? Speak with animals. Hungry? Goodberry. Camp time? Alarm. You want something dead? Hunter's mark.

Mind you, I can also see the argument that that makes them kind of boring in a fight, like a Champion that starts off with a spell. Mark, attack attack, attack attack, move mark, and so on.

 

[Rocker26a]

I'm not the person you asked, but I can see the attraction in shifting ranger casting mostly to the exploration pillar. You want something found? Locate animals and plants, locate creature, or locate object. You need to sneak? Pass without trace. You wanna talk to a badger? Speak with animals. Hungry? Goodberry. Camp time? Alarm.

But these options already exist without being the only option for Rangers. You don't have to make them good at one thing to the detriment of the other.

Mind you, I can also see the argument that that makes them kind of boring in a fight, like a Champion that starts off with a spell. Mark, attack attack, attack attack, move mark, and so on.

It sounds genuinely interminable to me.
The thing is, Hunter's Mark as a class feature isn't like Rage. It's not something that you can look at and say "I'm not even worried about how it lends itself to tunnel vision in terms of what I'm doing turn by turn in a combat, it's so self-evidently useful and in tune with my intended role that it doesn't matter". Like it gives the sense that it's absolutely required to use, but it's also so near worthless at all times, and it doesn't even feel cool.
Nothing about Ranger's design as it currently exists lends itself to maximizing the benefit of Hunter's Mark. Because that's what Fighter does.

 

[Minigiant]

meh who cares about damage

Take all the bits of Natural Explorer, break em up, attach a combat bonus, and make a new spell

• Sure Foot: Difficult terrain doesn’t slow your group’s travel and you get advantage on Dexterity and Constituion saving throws.
• Mapmind: Your group can’t become lost except by magical means. You can sense every city, town, camp,and settlement in 10 miles.
• Goosebumps: Even when you are engaged in another activity while traveling (such as foraging, navigating, or tracking), you remain alert to danger. You cannot be surprised and have a +5 bonus to Initiative
• Prime Shot: If you are traveling alone, you can move stealthily at a normal pace. If no ally is within 10 feet, of you, you have +3 to attack and damage roles and +5 to Dexterity (Stealth) checks.
• Detect Rations: You detect the closest sources of of rations and water for 4 creatures/spell slot within a 1 mile. When you forage, you find twice as much food as you normally would.
• Bloodhound: While tracking other creatures, you also learn their exact number, their sizes, and how long ago they passed through the area.

 

[Rocker26a]

meh who cares about damage

I'm sure it doesn't need to be said, but. Right or wrong, a lot of people care about damage. It's fun to roll dice, it's good to feel tangibly useful, it sucks to feel hopelessly outclassed by your peers. I think Ranger should do combat well, I'd consider it as important as the survivalist aspect, if not moreso.

Take all the bits of Natural Explorer, break em up, attach a combat bonus, and make a new spell

I like these features, but I don't really want them as spells. Some of these are just what I liked from Revised Ranger. You get them early and they form a decent foundation. You're not hanging on till 8th level to negate difficult terrain under specific circumstances.

 

[Minigiant]

I like these features, but I don't really want them as spells. Some of these are just what I liked from Revised Ranger

Here the rub.

1. There is no exploration pillar focus in D&D 5e.
2. Even if there were, many groups would skip it.

The best way to invoke these aspects of the Ranger in a way that can be swapped out for combat abilities .

That's spells or infusions or Invocations.
Or a ranger only feat that rangers get for free like 3.5e

 

[Rocker26a]

Here the rub.

1. There is no exploration pillar focus in D&D 5e.
2. Even if there were, many groups would skip it.

The best way to invoke these aspects of the Ranger in a way that can be swapped out for combat abilities .

That's spells or infusions or Invocations.
Or a ranger only feat that rangers get for free like 3.5e

The exploration thing is talked about a lot, I personally think just giving Ranger easy and early access to tools you'd consider within that sorta avenue (the additional movement speeds/other movement buffs, Survival/Perception/other skill expertise, heightened/exotic senses, combat bonuses for ambushes, animal kinship etc.) is fine enough. Like these things are relatively widely applicable, and they'd be pretty great if you are at a table that leans into the exploration side of things, but they're not useless if you're not.

That isn't to say I'm against Rangers getting more spells, even non-combat focused ones, I just don't think they should outright replace actual features in the same way I don't think their signature ability should be a spell with mediocre buffs. Let the features be features, let the spells be spells.

 

[mellored]

HM without concentration and not to be forced feature at 1st level.

So what level 1 feature would you replace it with?

And how many people would agree that it's a "ranger" feature?

 

[Minigiant]

The exploration thing is talked about a lot, I personally think just giving Ranger easy and early access to tools you'd consider within that sorta avenue (the additional movement speeds/other movement buffs, Survival/Perception/other skill expertise, combat bonuses for ambushes, animal kinship etc.) is fine enough. Like these things are relatively widely applicable, and they'd be pretty great if you are at a table that leans into the exploration side of things, but they're not useless if you're not.

That isn't to say I'm against Rangers getting more spells, even non-combat focused ones, I just don't think they should outright replace actual features in the same way I don't think their signature ability should be a spell with mediocre buffs. Let the features be features, let the spells be spells.

But like some people say
Facts don't care about your feelings.

We've tried that. It doesn't work.

Only if Rangers and NPCs who act as Ranger's role have exclusive access to Rangering stuff AND it doesn't pull resources from combat power does it work.

And that's magic. Or Ranger exclusive free feats.

 

[Horwath]

So what level 1 feature would you replace it with?

And how many people would agree that it's a "ranger" feature?

bonus 3 skill proficiencies and 3 expertise picked from:
Stealth, Nature, Animal handling, Medicine, Perception, Survival.