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

[ECMO3]

His tracking ability sure looks like hunter's mark without a damage bonus amd slower.

He needs to observe a creature for 30 minutes and can then track the creature.

The 1E Ranger was the only class that could track anything (there was no survival skill). The observe requirement was only when underground, they did not have to observe above ground.

In play any PC in 5E with a good Wisdom or Survival proficiency (one or the other) is going to be better at tracking than a 1E Ranger was, and the Ranger is the only one that can track at all.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The 1E Ranger was the only class that could track anything (there was no survival skill). The observe requirement was only when underground, they did not have to observe above ground.

Ah ok.

In play any PC in 5E with a good Wisdom or Survival proficiency (one or the other) is going to be better at tracking than a 1E Ranger was, and the Ranger is the only one that can track at all.

Yes. And hunters mark helps to track your mark better...

So the relation from 1e is kept.

High wis. Expertise survival. Hunters mark. That target does not get away.

 

[KryHavok]

It isn't feasible because it would likely be OP if it worked

The idea of a fully capable TWF warrior and a fully capable pet companion with access to magic not being the top 3 offensive and defensive build in an RPG in a fantasy is almost a fantasy itself.

Oh, I didn’t realize — the nick weapon mastery does let you preserve your bonus action, which the scimitar has, so a Drizzt build will work.

 

[ECMO3]

High wis. Expertise survival. Hunters mark. That target does not get away.

Ok. But what does that have to do with the 13th, 17th or 20th level ability.

 

[Rocker26a]

Darn, missed the bulk of the discussion. Not that I had much to contribute that others didn't cover.
@Horwath @fluffybunbunkittens @CreamCloud0 Particularly echo the sentiments of you folks!

So, yeah. Putting the power aspect aside, I also think it's lame to be pigeonholed into Hunter's Mark (however much you think WOTC are or aren't twisting your arm on that). That's something I've thought for a long while, ever since that first Class Feature Variants UA with Favoured Foe. It feels better when Hunter's Mark is just one arrow in Ranger's quiver, if you like. Even if it is, admittedly, a more commonly seen arrow than the others.

What I personally did/am doing for my Ranger homebrew, is build it in to their spellcasting feature. I've talked about this idea of a list of the "core Ranger spells" before here and there. It was inspired by the notion that "Warlocks should just get Eldritch Blast for free since it's so ubiquitous, and then they can use other cantrips they might not otherwise without feeling like they're handicapping themselves". This is what I've got down for it currently;

When you unlock spellcasting at 2nd level, you also gain access to a list of spells that get added to your prepared spells without counting against your total. At 2nd level, it's Hunter's Mark and Zephyr Strike. So you've got something for a long fight, and something to finish or open a fight, get the eff outta or into dodge. And both work for ranged or melee, no bias either way, so that's nice.

(I also retooled Hunter's Mark and Zephyr Strike specifically. I made Hunter's Mark still concentration but multi-target, you mark every creature you can see of a chosen type within range. You add WIS to damage, and learn any damage damage resistances/vulnerabilities etc. of marked targets. Borrowed from the Hunter feature. Zephyr Strike, I just made it's wording a little clearer. And removed concentration.)

You can cast a spell on that list without expending a spell slot and without requiring concentration a number of times equal to your Wisdom modifier (in practice, this is likely gonna be 1 or 2 for most of the game, but a Ranger that favours magic can do it more). And yeah, you unlock other spells every time you unlock a new spell level. Still working on the list, 5th level would give Pass Without Trace for example, right now I'm thinking it caps out at Guardian of Nature at 13th level. And then, to compliment the fact that the old standbys are guaranteed, I'm working on new spells so there's actually decent things to do with that afforded freedom.

I'm positive that a lot of players and tables would hate this, and there's no way in hell WOTC would ever offer anything like it, but. Y'know. I quite like it so far!

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Ok. But what does that have to do with the 13th, 17th or 20th level ability.

Those are extras.

 

[Horwath]

Those are extras.

again, there is no "extras".
everything has a price, a price of not having something else for your character.

unless you are specific for extra effects on HM. then you are correct, those are extra effects exclusively for HM.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

again, there is no "extras".
everything has a price, a price of not having something else for your character.

Again. If you want more, you have to pay an extra price.

unless you are specific for extra effects on HM. then you are correct, those are extra effects exclusively for HM.

Yes. On a first level spell. Not a lot to pay there.
The level 20 ability is not that great though.

 

[Minigiant]

again, there is no "extras".

No those are literally extras.

Rangers didn't have or need class features at those levels except for level 20.

 

[Mistwell]

Treantmonk has been doing some very simple class optimization, breaking each down into a species-less basic build with no subclass and then a basic build with a subclass and comparing all the classes for single-target damage per round. He is not making only damage-dealing options, just realistic options. Which sometimes means choosing a defensive feat, even though he's not tracking defense, because realistically that's what he'd do if he were actually making a character sometimes. For instance he's not choosing Savage Attacker as his origin feat, even though it increases damage a bit, because it's not generally a good choice. He's done Monk, Rogue, Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, and now Ranger (and will get to the others with Warlock next).

Somewhat surprisingly he had found up until this point that all of them do roughly similar damage to each other. Barbarian was best in tier's 1 (levels 1-4) and 2 (levels 5-9), fighter was best in tiers 3 (levels 10-14) and 4 (levels 15-20), but overall they're all pretty competitive with each other and perfectly viable and all tracked relatively close to each other, which Treantmonk took as a good sign.

Until he got to the ranger. Which, so far with his simple builds, isn't holding up great beyond tier 1 and really doesn't work past tier 2. Not when he builds it focused on two-weapon fighting. Not when he changes the build to focus instead on ranged fighting. Not with adding a subclass. None of his simple tweaks are holding up, and yes this includes using spells to add to damage just like he did with the Paladin, though in a relatively simplistic way with Hail of Thorns.

Of course none of that is conclusive. Others will build a better version I am sure, and he's not trying to perfectly optimize everything. And maybe he made a mistake, or made a bad comparison, or made mistakes in some other builds he is comparing to. And maybe Ranger does better as a multi-target attacker and not a single-target attacker.

But I'd say it's not a good sign for the new ranger, so far.