Ranger Rehash

Went on holiday. Took a break from the psychic (and got distracted ) and worked/reworked a ranger redo with a spell-less base.

Let me know what y'all think. Constructive criticisms/comments always welcome.

Interesting! You've definitely put some thought into this

Apparently you've got your own house rules this is designed for? Lots of little examples that made me raise my eyebrows: for example, "advantage on Passive Perception checks." Say what?

Very 1e vibe with your inclusion of "Scrying Adept"! Not sure how gaining proficiency with clairvoyance & divination spells matters, but the other aspects are interesting.

With "Favored Quarry" you went with even more exacting specificity than the PHB ranger's Favored Enemy, granting specific individual enemies as the ranger gains levels rather than monster types. Very odd choice. Especially considering the "weight" of your ranger's combat ability rests in Favored Quarry (since you excised the bonus damage from Hunter's Mark & from the Hunter sub-class). What happens if the ranger kills one of their specific enemies? Then that "slot" in their Favored Quarry arsenal is left empty. I see you accommodate this with increased number of Favored Quarry improvements as the ranger advances, but still very odd choice...

It seems you've embraced specificity and certain campaign setting assumptions that aren't explicitly in the class? For example, in addition to the Favored Quarry thing, looking down at the "Nature's Ward" of the Warden sub-class, you specify frightened or charmed by elementals or fey. *Are* there any elementals that cause charm or fear effects?

Also, for the Warden you follow the PHB ranger with # Spells Known, but why not give the ranger a more paladin-style of spell casting where you prepare a number of spells equal to your Wisdom modifier + half your ranger level? This is the basic model for druids and cleric, and seems to make the most sense for rangers if you imagine Warden rangers as casting spells from their connection to the land. Though maybe you're going for more the "forgotten secrets" angle, so in that case it would make sense I guess.

Criticisms aside...

I think you've got great sub-classes! Looking at my own ranger re-design I see parallels with your Warden (I used the name Wildlands Warden) and the Guardian (Borderlands Guard). Instead of Slayer I went with a Scout, and I turned Animal Companion into a "ranger invocation" rather than a sub-class.

I like the Slayer's 15th level ability to sense their quarry.

I liked the Beastmaster's 15th level warg-like ability imitating the Beast Sense spell.

I also like how you gave a nod to the 1e ranger's magic-user spells with the Guardian's 11th level Forgotten Lore feature.

Thanks [MENTION=20323]Quickleaf[/MENTION]. Appreciate it.

I should clear up, and if it's reading this way, I really need to clarify the writing, but the "individual creatures" of the Favored quarry are not, specific individuals. That is, you don't choose "The Orc named Grod."

The PHB allows you to pick creature categories (Beasts, Elementals, Giants, Dragons, etc...) or two Humanoids.

I meant, following your 1st level pick, you can choose single types creatures...since you can not choose the whole category.

In other words: We have two rangers, say.

One starts with Giants. She wants to go out hunting Giant types and take down the evil Fire Giant King. Great. Her bonuses from Favored Quarry apply to ANYwhere he encounters a monster of the "Giant" type: so, actual giants, ogres, trolls (?I think) and anything else listed in the Monster Manual with/as/of the "giant" category (not "giant animals", obviously).

Ranger two, instead, goes a bit more traditional, elf ranger with the whole "orcs slew my village/family/parents, wah wah, bitter jaded loner guy." He chooses, instead of one of the categories listed, to take Orcs &...what do orcs generally fight with...let's go with Goblins. Very classic D&D elfy kinda enemies to have.

When it comes time to select new Quarry, Ranger 1 is finding that at 1st-3rd level, she's not running into very many giant-types. She did put the serious smackdown on that ogre, that one time. BUT the party is running into goblins and orcs left and right. The other party ranger is having a ball. So, for her "individual creature" at level 4, she picks "Orcs."

Several levels later, a bit more has happened and they have had multiple forays into an arctic tundra to repeatedly raid on the Frost giant's ice-fort. There is a pack of white dragons that hunts the territory and, whether they are working with the giants or not, they have become a recurring and consistent threat and nuisance when trying to get to and fro the frost giants. So, for her 7th level "individual creature", she chooses "WHITE dragons".

...You see? Since she can not take the whole category of "[All/Any] Dragons", she can choose the "individual creature", White Dragons...not a singular, one, white dragon...all white dragons.

For the Warden, I am thinking of actually trimming them way back down to an Eldritch Knight level of casting...and ggranting them access to the druid cantrips. We'll see.

I need to do some reworking, of course. This whole Favored Enemy business seems to stick in a lot of craws...I just don't get it.

OH! As for the Nature's Ward, that is a straight out of the PHB Druid's ability. I thought the same thing, "What elementals cast charms or fear"...but I suppose genie's might cast spells...if they keep nereid's water elemental creatures (instead of properly switching them to fae, as a subset of nymphs), they could charm. Sylphs, air elementals...I don't recall their spell use...but I don't remember a charm.

I don't know. But, so, that's not any homebrew/setting specificity going on, it's a direct quote from the PHB druid ability of the same name.

Nice to know someone caught the nod to magic-user spells in the guardian too. Thanks.

Like I said in the other topic. Very nice. I like how you incorporated the very important magic abilities of the ranger into individual class features. You more or less made a warrior class with situational expertise and supernatural features as the core.

I still notice the up the power of favored enemy and terrain. This does reintroduce the "Favored enemy problem" where the DM has to tell the ranger player which choices to pick ahead of time. the PHB versions were weak so choosing wrong was less detrimental. Some... MANY DMs are not smart enough to make sure a FE appears every 3 levels or a FT every 6th. And almost no adventure writers take ranger Favored enemies into regard, either loading their adventure with the same monster for an OP ranger or doing the opposite and tossing out the kitchen sink for the worse ranger ever. This makes the ranger's combat ability very very wonky.

[MENTION=92511]steeldragons[/MENTION]

Favored Quarry: Gotcha, that makes more sense. Clearer language like "choose a specific monster, like white dragons or gnolls." Individual has connotations you don't mean.

No hang ups on Favored Enemy here, but I don't think it's wise to put the weight of the class' combat power (damage) into Favored Enemy due to it being far more circumstantial than, say, a rogue's Sneak Attack. With that caveat, I think Favored Enemy *should* be a class feature since it is classically identified with the ranger since the class' inception.

Warden: My version (Wildlands Warden) uses Eldritch Knight casting, chooses whether to have access to either the druid or ranger spell list, casts spells like a paladin (no "spells known", instead prep # spells = WIS + 1/2 ranger level), even if choosing ranger spell list still gets Druid Cantrips. Then the 15th level ability Aspect of the Wild allows them to use tree stride, commune with nature, or meld with stone once per long rest, and while using the spell they can spend hit dice to heal as if they had a short rest.

Guardian: The protector of ancient civilization/knowledge aspect of the ranger, and especially the Guardian, is an interesting twist. It sort of makes sense with the Dunedain as inspiration, but I've never seen it explicitly called out for the ranger before. Interesting.

Ok. did a bit of tweaking.

Here's the revision...what do we think of this? Comparisons? Contrasts? Things to change back?

steeldragons said:

Ok. did a bit of tweaking.

Here's the revision...what do we think of this? Comparisons? Contrasts? Things to change back?

Click to expand...

To be honest, presenting it as image files is a PITA due to loading times. Doing it as a PDF would be much easier to review.

Quickleaf said:

To be honest, presenting it as image files is a PITA due to loading times. Doing it as a PDF would be much easier to review.

Click to expand...

Oh sure. Here ya go.

Better anyway as I caught a coupla typos and had to add something to the slayer's entry.

Thanks

Ok, I'm going to dive right into some more critique (some is based on your changes, and some is old stuff I'm just now noticing):

Skills & Wilderness Expertise: Why do you feel the need to make special Ranger quasi-skills? I would just add more skills to the list of skills they can choose from. Much more elegant.

Precision Dice: Nothing mechanically wrong with this. However, it's awfully similar to the battlemaster fighter. and you get it at level 1 vs. a battlemaster fighter's level 3! The thing is the battlemaster fighter is all about managing superiority dice as a resource within a single combat, so it's a distinctly tactical approach. I'm not convinced that's the feel the ranger should have. Rangers strike me more as the types to engage in long-term strategies of guerrilla warfare, reconnaissance, outlasting the enemy, etc. The tactical angle of dice recharging after a short rest doesn't feel distinctly "ranger-y" to me. Instead, I would use a damage mechanic that emphasizes the ranger's unique approach to combat: scouting, knowing the enemy, and exploiting their weaknesses. YMMV.

Ranging Stride: This looks like a feature that should improve with level, at least in terms of the speed bonus it grants.

Scrying Adept: Still not sure when "proficiency with any magic item that deals with clairvoyance or divination mag- ic, including spell scrolls, crystal balls, wands of detection, etc" would come into play.

Guardian - Home Field Advantage: That seems like a major bonus for a class that can already wear medium armor. Hmm. No other class gets an AC-boosting feature that good. I think a Guardian Ranger would have the best AC in the game!

Guardian - Honed Senses: That seems flat-out OP. Essentially ANY scenario that could involve senses/balance the character gets proficiency in? Shoot, there are so many scenarios I can think of that qualify. Probably too broad of a bonus.

Guardian - Pass without Trace: OTOH this is a little under-powered. Probably should apply to the whole adventuring party rather than having the number of creatures increase. Say 8 companions and be done with it. These are the sorts of abilities you want to apply to the entire party or not at all.

Guardian - Forgotten Lore: I like it! Only change I'd make is that "casting from spell books" isn't usually an option for ANY spellcaster. Better to leave that bit out, as it's prone to abuse.

Guardian - Ranger-Knight: One precision die to grant the entire party a +4.5 bonus to hit and +4.5 damage is probably OP given that most parties have characters who can make multiple attacks. Even if you only allowed each character to benefit from this on ONE of their attacks, it is still VERY VERY powerful. Are you balancing this based off a spell or another class' feature?

Slayer - Slayer's Fury: I don't think this damage boost is necessary, and actually some added utility would do this sub-class well. Since this is the "monster hunter" build, maybe some sort of boon that you gain from tracking a monster? If I think of something else I'll let you know...

Warden - Spellcasting: Nothing in the sub-class flavor you describe seems to indicate they would have access to Wizard spells. I know there's a bit of 1e nostalgia here (and I appreciate that as much as the next gamer!), but I actually think it's anachronistic for the Warden. I think the Guardian sub-class captures the 1e vibe perfectly. If you do agree with my critique, then you may also want to change Warded Step.

Overall, it looks very good

I may post up my attempt at a revised ranger in another thread, coming at it from a slightly different angle. Might be fun to compare notes!

Quickleaf said:

Thanks

Ok, I'm going to dive right into some more critique (some is based on your changes, and some is old stuff I'm just now noticing):

Click to expand...

First, thanks very much for the thorough read through and critiques. I REALLY appreciate them. It's so difficult to get folks to just LOOK at something and tell you what they think. They get three sentences in or scan it for ONE thing they hate -stop reading- and then want to argue about it. It's such a nice breath of fresh air to actually just have a TALK with someone about the creative side of things.

Anyway, second, I'm going to get started, just in the interest of continuing discourse, but have a meeting innn...20 minutes. So probably won't get too far. I'll come back to all of your points later on.

So let's dive in...

Quickleaf said:

Skills & Wilderness Expertise: Why do you feel the need to make special Ranger quasi-skills? I would just add more skills to the list of skills they can choose from. Much more elegant.

Click to expand...

I'm guessing you mean, here, the Herbal Medicine and the Tracker bonus thing? Well, the Medicine skill as defined just lets you stabilize a character at 0. It's something anyone can do/try. That doesn't seem close to sufficient for what people expect/want from a ranger in terms of their natural first aid/herbalist know-how and skill. So, first, there has to be the actual HP healing.

Now, with that, I had considered simply making the addition to the Medicine skil: "When you make a successful Medicine roll..." blah blah blah.

But more than that, people expect the ranger to be able to treat poisons! Which makes sense. Pretty much any environment you put a ranger in they're from, there are going to be poisonous plants and animals in the wilderness that they need to a) know to avoid and b) know how to manage if they can't avoid it...accidents happen.

With the array of abilities I already had, there was the 8th level slot and I REALLY felt that that was too late for the "Aragorn using some plant to slow Frodo's decent into darkness from the Morgul blade"...PLUS, and I think it's from Castles & Crusades and other OSR games...I wanted the ranger to have an eventual ability, through mundane means, to purge/neutralize the poison entirely.

SO, I needed a skill/ability that could slow the poison (since, ime, most of your poison encounters are going to be at lower levels) and a higher level one to cure it entirely...and it gave me the opportunity to bump up their healing skill by a hp, as well. So I think it worked out.

For the Tracker...I needed/wanted something more for the ranger in terms of tracking. Having it lumped in with the Survival skill in 5e is...kinda a downer for me...and for the ranger. So I needed to tease that out, as one of the [few] central Ranger things everyone agrees they should be good/the best at (maybe closely seconded by Barbarians).

Also, for the Precision dice (more on that later) I needed/wanted something that was NOT combat specific but still "Hunter" evocative and useful. What is more quintessentially "Hunter" than stalking your prey?

Quickleaf said:

Ranging Stride: This looks like a feature that should improve with level, at least in terms of the speed bonus it grants.

Click to expand...

Curious as to why you think this? I want them to be better at going farther than most folks. Sure. Movement/mobility is definitely also a near-universal "ok" with the ranger fans. That's all it's for. I don't want them becoming the Flash! They have/get a little edge in moving farther/"faster" than other classes and can move through difficult terrain...I don't see how/why they should get more than that.

Remember this has to be a class anyone who wants to can take, for all races. The idea of a halfling or gnome moving at 40-50' per round...because they're a ranger? Little ridiculous...or, at the very least, skirting much too close to "anime or superhero" for something I am trying to keep a mundane base class.

Quickleaf said:

Overall, it looks very good

Click to expand...

Thanks!

Quickleaf said:

I may post up my attempt at a revised ranger in another thread, coming at it from a slightly different angle. Might be fun to compare notes!

Click to expand...

That would be great/fun! I'll look forward to it.