D&D (2024) Ranger 2024 is a bigger joke than Ranger 2014:

[Rocker26a]

It's not enshrined in their spellcasting mechanics because it's up to the DM to decide.

That's exactly the point though. There's no debate with your DM about whether a Gith can cast their Psionic Spells without components, for example. They can do it. It says so in the description of that ability, end of discussion. The argument is that Ranger's spellcasting would benefit from operating on a similar principle, without nagging your DM to allow it every time.

 

[CreamCloud0]

True. When the DM asks what you are going to do next, you can tell them that you want to whisper the verbal component of your spell while moving stealthily and casting your spell. The DM then decides on whether or not they want you to do a stealth check vs. your opponent's perception check. It's not enshrined in their spellcasting mechanics because it's up to the DM to decide.

personally, i'd say this is one of those things that is SO subjective and inclined to steep variability based on matters of personal opinion that it shouldn't be left up for someone to decide, at least not without a formalised guiding framework, without such you get the entire range of 'no you can never cast discreetly without an explicit ability' to 'sure you don't even need to do anything extra to do that'

 

[mellored]

disagree, that's exactly the sort of thing you'd want a ranger to be able to do.

You want a ranger, with expertise in stealth and pass without trace, to be able to deal damage without breaking stealth?

Let me flip that around.

DM: roll dex save as fire suddenly burst at your feat. 7 damage
Player: where did it come from?
DM: you look around but only see trees. Make another save.
Player: I cast true sight.
DM: still don't see anything make another save.
...5 rounds later
Player: I'm dead. What would I have had to do to survive?
DM: DC to find the ranger is 31. What's your perception?
Player: +4
....


Hunter's Mark from stealth, sure. Spend a round buffing up before striking is fine. Killing without a chance of being seen isn't good.

 

[Rocker26a]

Let me flip that around.

Shall we veto every mechanic this evil DM might concievably inflict on this solo player that's being made to fight other PC builds?

 

[Nebulous]

The ranger should be some elaborate fighter subclass picked for campaigns where it fits, but as a whole class to itself, I don't think it works.

 

[Corinnguard]

The ranger should be some elaborate fighter subclass picked for campaigns where it fits, but as a whole class to itself, I don't think it works.

If the Ranger was a subclass of the Fighter, then it ought to be written up as the druidic equivalent of the Eldritch Knight subclass.

 

[Minigiant]

That's exactly the point though. There's no debate with your DM about whether a Gith can cast their Psionic Spells without components, for example. They can do it. It says so in the description of that ability, end of discussion. The argument is that Ranger's spellcasting would benefit from operating on a similar principle, without nagging your DM to allow it every time.

The argument is why a ranger would be able to do it automatically and without permission while druids, wizards, and sorcerers despite them being more knowledgeable about magic.

And again, a ranger shouldn't be casting spells withing enemy earshot anyway unless they are started combat.

Hunter's Mark has an hour duration for many reasons.

 

[Rocker26a]

The argument is why a ranger would be able to do it automatically and without permission while druids, wizards, and sorcerers despite them being more knowledgeable about magic.

I can't speak for everyone on this side of the fence, but here are my thoughts off the cuff;

Thematically, I personally like the idea that a Ranger's connection to their magic, their spells, is different than the other casters. Comes from their intuition/instinct, that's their forte. When another caster casts a Ranger spell, they can't approach it as a Ranger does, they have to supplement it with their practices.

Mechanically, just so they've got something kinda interesting going on that the others don't I suppose.

 

[Chaosmancer]

They said they are adding rules about how loud things are, including spell casting is.

So maybe there are changes there.

I literally cannot wait for that, even if I disagree with the rule, at least it will be a settled matter for once.

 

[Chaosmancer]

True. When the DM asks what you are going to do next, you can tell them that you want to whisper the verbal component of your spell while moving stealthily and casting your spell. The DM then decides on whether or not they want you to do a stealth check vs. your opponent's perception check. It's not enshrined in their spellcasting mechanics because it's up to the DM to decide.

Many people will point to the intonation and "chant" verbiage of the spellcasting section and declare that means that all spellcasting, all the time, must be completely audible to all creatures within 120 ft, even over battlefield conditions. Hence the accusations of how you could possibly sneak cast something while screaming at the top of your lungs.

I disagree. But the rules are vague on the issue.