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.

 

[CreamCloud0]

We don't even have rules for fire arrows.

like far too many other basic martial things they instead decided to design it as a spell.

I mean it's pretty simple in my mind; there is a belief that Ranger should be good at doing high damage.

wasn't it classified as a striker in 4e?

 

[Rocker26a]

In video games:

• Archers are DPS.
• Dual wielders are DPS.
• Trappers are DPS
• Weapon is shield is tank.
• Two handed weapon users are off tank/backup DPS aka Brutes
• Beastmasters and Summoners vary depending on game.
• Duelist "don't exist"
• Throwers "don't exist"
• Polearms "don't exist"
• Smiters (Paladins) are tanks who can spend resources to heal or deal damage
• Situational Warriors (like the D&D hunter) don't exist

I don't really know what any of that is meant to imply. I didn't say "there is a belief that Ranger should be good at doing high damage because video games".
"Archers are DPS"? There's one-naughty word-million archers in "video games". And they're not all "DPS", whatever that means.

 

[Rocker26a]

wasn't it classified as a striker in 4e?

Does sound familiar I think, yeah. Don't know hardly anything about 4E though, it's a bit of a bramble thicket. Lots going on.

 

[Corinnguard]

wasn't it classified as a striker in 4e?

Rangers were Martial Strikers back in 4e. Which atm is surprising because 4e had the Primal power source. They could have been Primal Strikers instead.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't really know what any of that is meant to imply. I didn't say "there is a belief that Ranger should be good at doing high damage because video games".

I'm saying.

there is a belief that Ranger should be good at doing high damage because video games

Rangers were Martial Strikers back in 4e. Which atm is surprising because 4e had the Primal power source. They could have been Primal Strikers instead.

Primal came out After Ranger.

Ranger was published when the only power sources were Arcane, Divine, and Martial.

Primal along with the Primal classes and races were cut from the PHB to save space.

 

[Rocker26a]

I'm saying.

there is a belief that Ranger should be good at doing high damage because video games

Fine? I guess? Sure?
So then, would you nominally agree that there is a justifiable position that, Rangers should be one of the higher damage combat classes, in a manner that isn't strictly tied to their magic (only not strictly tied, not completely distinct)? Like regardless of the issues with getting it up and running at all, nevermind in 5E and after a decade of attempts.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

like far too many other basic martial things they instead decided to design it as a spell.

Easy: just use the damage of a torch. Flame arrows are not that great vs people anyway. They are used to burn things down.
Why? Because if you wrap an arrow in cloth, you lose the aerodynamic properties and your arrow head is not exactly an arrow head anymore.
And if you hit a person, a normal arrow head is deadlier than a flame head that burns you a little bit?

A flame arrow as spell at least makes sense, as you don't lose the sharp arrow head including aerodynamic properties.
And the magical flames are actually really hot.

wasn't it classified as a striker in 4e?

 

[Incenjucar]

Rangers are associated with DPS because they are associated with hunting and wielding two weapons. D&D defined a lot of video game tropes.

 

[Minigiant]

Fine? I guess? Sure?
So then, would you nominally agree that there is a justifiable position that, Rangers should be one of the higher damage combat classes, in a manner that isn't strictly tied to their magic? Like regardless of the issues with getting it up and running at all, nevermind in 5E and after a decade of prior attempts.

No?

Rangers should be Damage, Tank, or Control based on spell loadout.

The Ranger is supposed to match the tactics of their quarry or the strategy allowed by their terrain.

A tanking ranger covered in ice armor swinging a maul and shooting heavy crossbow bolts in the tundra is a vaid ranger.

A controlling ranger in light armor shooting solar-chain arrows as swirling circles of sand hold lizardmen in place in the desert is a valid ranger.

A brutish ranger turning his dog into a dire wolf then himself into a dire wolf then pounding a demon still in two spinning masses of fangs and fur is a valid ranger.

WOTC and many designers are just tame and narrow in their outlook.

 

[Rocker26a]

Rangers should be Damage, Tank, or Control based on spell loadout.

I don't think that's true. Magic just isn't the be-all-end-all. Rangers should have magic, but they're martials. They should have something to make the martial bit pop besides spells.