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.

 

[Rocker26a]

What does that matter?

More a demonstration of the fact that it doesn't fit any of the criteria of being a spell, it's just fuelled by spell slots. I get why you say it, but I don't think it's accurate. There is the Smite ability, and there are Smite spells, they are meaningfully distinct.

The class feature is... free castings of the spell. That doesn't make the spell a class feature,

Tell me what it does if I don't care about Hunter's Mark and don't want to use it!
(But actually don't because I'm thoroughly bored of talking about why I don't like Hunter's Mark and don't care about any notion of it being Ranger's only shtick. I'm really super happy for you if you think it's good or makes perfect sense, WOTC absolutely adheres to your perspective and will continue to do so, but I can't jive with it.)

 

[mellored]

So, it's an ability they're synonymous with. It's something only they can do, it's thematic, actually useful, can lead to cool moments etc. Every one of the more "thick of combat" classes has at least one ability I'd put in that category, and I think it'd be good if Rangers got a feature that was their version of this. Even if it was mechanically comparable to the spell, or allowed the ability to double-down with the spell, I think it'd be an improvement.

(Last time I'll say it, I've said it at length by now)

Hunters mark is an ability that only rangers can do. It's thematic (as thematic as a ranger can be), actually useful, and can lead to cool moments.

The fact that it's a "spell" instead of 'you can't concentrate while raging' doesn't really change anything. Unless your campaign is full of counter spell abjuration wizards, but then the ranger is still doing a lot better than most classes.

 

[Rocker26a]

Hunters mark is an ability that only rangers can do.

Something something Vengeance Paladins.

actually useful, and can lead to cool moments.

Mostly disagree with these bits.

 

[mellored]

Tell me what it does if I don't care about Hunter's Mark and don't want to use it!

The same thing that happens if your a Barbarian and don't want to use rage. Or bard who doesn't want to use bardic inspiration.

Probably better off picking another class, like a rogue with expertise in survival. Or maybe fighter/druid.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

So, it's an ability they're synonymous with. It's something only they can do, it's thematic, actually useful, can lead to cool moments etc. Every one of the more "thick of combat" classes has at least one ability I'd put in that category, and I think it'd be good if Rangers got a feature that was their version of this. Even if it was mechanically comparable to the spell, or allowed the ability to double-down with the spell, I think it'd be an improvement.

(Last time I'll say it, I've said it at length by now)

Yeah. More than enough. Your distinction still makes no sense to me.

 

[Rocker26a]

The same thing that happens if your a Barbarian and don't want to use rage. Or bard who doesn't want to use bardic inspiration.

Exactly. So the spell, fundamentally, is the feature. It lets you use that and only that spell more, and later gives it buffs in tiny, pathetic increments.

Probably better off picking another class

And if I weren't making my own homebrew for Ranger, and/or if I was playing in a game that didn't allow for homebrew, I absolutely would.

 

[mellored]

Something something Vengeance Paladins.

Are you suggesting there should be a paladin of rage?
Because subclasses dipping into other classes is common. Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster both directly take wizard features. Dance bard gives you monk punches. Ect...

Mostly disagree with these bits.

1d6 damage is useful. Uninspired, sure, but definitely useful.

And having advantage to track a fleeing enemy can provide cool moments. Not often, but it's there.

To be clear. I don't think it's great. But I never thought the ranger had anything decent thematically to begin with. And leaning into hunters mark is at least something.

Now if all rangers had a beast companion.... that would be thematic.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

More a demonstration of the fact that it doesn't fit any of the criteria of being a spell, it's just fuelled by spell slots. I get why you say it, but I don't think it's accurate. There is the Smite ability, and there are Smite spells, they are meaningfully distinct.

All smites are spells now, or was that change reverted?

Tell me what it does if I don't care about Hunter's Mark and don't want to use it!

Play a Paladin and don't use smite.

(But actually don't because I'm thoroughly bored of talking about why I don't like Hunter's Mark and don't care about any notion of it being Ranger's only shtick. I'm really super happy for you if you think it's good or makes perfect sense, WOTC absolutely adheres to your perspective and will continue to do so, but I can't jive with it.)

Oops. Too late.
I am happy that you are happy for all those people that don't have problems with it. And I am sorry that you don't get what you want.

Speaking with the wise words of @Micah Sweet : "it might be worth looking at A5e Level up." or any other 3p alternative.

 

[ECMO3]

The need for magic is just a 5E thing.

That and a player thing. Magic on the Ranger class is overwhelmingly popular for your average casual player (and many not so casual players).

 

[mellored]

And if I weren't making my own homebrew for Ranger, and/or if I was playing in a game that didn't allow for homebrew, I absolutely would.

And what's thematic about your homebrew?

Is it something like using a bonus action to select a target, and you are better at killing and tracking that target, limited to 1 target at a time?

Or something cool like rangers have beast companion?