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

[FrogReaver]

1. Througout the entire spell table add one more spell prepared.


Favored Foe: You can regain some of your magical energy by studying your spellbook. When you finish a Short Rest, you can choose expended 1st level spell slots to recover. The spell slots can have a combined level equal to no more than half your proficiency bonus (round down) plus one.

Relentless Hunter​

You can alter your spells to suit your needs; you gain two Metamagic options of your choice from ]metamagic option later in this class’s description. You use the chosen options to temporarily modify 1st level Ranger spells you cast.

Precise Hunter​

You can use metamagic on any 1st or 2nd level Ranger spell you cast.

Thats some of the most flavorless ranger abilities I’ve ever seen.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Sure there is. We can cover all three of these easily within the bounds of the current rules:

1. Replace Favored Foe with Arcane Recovery
2. Replace the 13th and 17th level abilities with metamagic

Those two are not very fitting for a ranger... I guess that would generate more backlash.

3. Replace the captstone with something worthy of a capstone.

IF you did this you would have a boost for any spell you wanted to cast, including Hunters Mark, goodberry and Speak with Animals.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Ok then change it on a Ranger to give them 2 more spell slots they can use on any spell.

It is not that hard to figure out and this argument is a strawman.




The TCE Ranger had enough castings to do both.



Ok. So lots of players want to play a Ranger? How is this bad?

Also I would argue the current mechanic encourages this just as much since any Martial character can dip Ranger for two free castings of HM plus 2 more 1st level spell slots. That is a huge boost.



They have a bunch of exclusive spells they can choose. That makes it exclusive to them.

What about giving rangers full spellcasting? Would that please you?

 

[ECMO3]

Those two are not very fitting for a ranger... I guess that would generate more backlash.

They are more true to the original D&D Ranger than Hunter's Mark is.

Moreover magic is magic, if it is thematic to cast and enhance one spell it should be ok to do it with another spell of comparable power.

IF you did this you would have a boost for any spell you wanted to cast, including Hunters Mark, goodberry and Speak with Animals.

Any 1st level Ranger spell ... but yes concievably all of those.

You would be limited by the metamagic options you chose, for example Quicken Spell would be useless with Hunter's Mark, so you would balance your MM choices with the 1st level spells you prepare.

 

[ECMO3]

What about giving rangers full spellcasting? Would that please you?

I would be fine with that. I don't think it is necessary, what is necessary is breaking them free from the Hunter's Mark yoke.

 

[ECMO3]

Thats some of the most flavorless ranger abilities I’ve ever seen.

True, and yet they are still more flavorfull than the current 3 abilities they would replace.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

They are more true to the original Ranger than Hunter's Mark is.

Not really. But hey.

Moreover magic is magic, if it is thematic to cast and enhance one spell it should be ok to do it with another spell of comparable power.

You just slapped a wizard and a sorcerer ability on them. That is some lazy design.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I would be fine with that. I don't think it is necessary, what is necessary is breaking them free from the Hunter's Mark yoke.

Maybe take the druid. Then erase the class name and write ranger?
Or do the same with bard? Or wizard. I am really not getting what you want the ranger to be except for a spellcaster.

 

[ECMO3]

Maybe take the druid. Then erase the class name and write ranger?

I don't want to play a Druid. There is only 2 classes I have never played since 2014, even in a dip, and which I have no desire to play. Druid is one of them (Barbarian is the other).

Druid has nothing that I want thematically or mechanically.

I am really not getting what you want the ranger to be except for a spellcaster.

Rangers are spell casters and have been spellcasters in I believe every version of D&D published by TSR/WOTC.

Also Hunter's Mark is a spell. It is disingenuous to suggest you want a Ranger less focused on spells while defending 4 class features, including a capstone, that are specifically focused on spell casting.

 

[CreamCloud0]

You just slapped a wizard and a sorcerer ability on them. That is some lazy design.

Wizards just slapped hunter's mark and buffs for it on them four times over, That is some lazy design.