D&D 5E Why are non-caster Ranger themes so popular?

Greg K · Oct 3, 2021

Campbell said:
Prior to learning spell casting in AD&D Rangers lacked any sort of overt supernatural themes. If you never reached 8th level in those editions or if the sudden onset of spellcasting seemed pretty jarring it's easy to see why you might prefer a Ranger without spells based on actual play experience.

Paladins on the other hand started out with quite explicit divine magic even if they lacked spellcasting. In AD&D 2e a paladin started out immune to disease, could lay on hands, could detect evil intent, could cure disease once a week, and had an aura of protection. At 3rd level they could turn fiends and undead. It just kind of felt right to me when they started getting spellcasting earlier.

Personally, I think that I want the 5e Paladin to have its spells replaced with abilities tied to Oath that are fuled by Conviction points, because the class has moved away from the AD&D Paladin and the vast majority of 5e Paladin spells, imo, have nothing to do with the concept of the class as a whole or Oaths.

Then, aad a Holy Warrior for a hyrbid Divine Warrior caster with a more tightly tailored general spell list with spells and domain related abilities.
As for the Ranger, Monster Slayer conclave, I think that that the Dragon should be pulled out of the subclass and the subclass moved out of ranger and into its own class (or as subclasses for other classes).
Also, I think the Ranger's spellcasting should be supported in subclasses and not the base class (Bring back in the Warden for a base class that is more spell focused).

doctorbadwolf · Oct 3, 2021

Charlaquin said:
Oh, god, please no!

Yeah while I like the idea, I’d rather use a mix of warlock and artificer mechanical concepts, with an eye toward being able to switch from self-reliance to leading a group in exploration activities.

J.Quondam · Oct 3, 2021

doctorbadwolf said:
leading a group in exploration activities.

Ah, the "park ranger" ranger archetype. Nice!

dave2008 · Oct 3, 2021

Minigiant said:
Of course.

My point is you can't play a Rangery game of D&D without spellcaster.

You can't sit out in the D&D wilderness, killing whatever a random encounter chart vomits up PLUS villainous organizations for weeks or months at a time with little to no access to civilization without spellcasting.

I would disagree, but I am not even sure what you are suggesting. I definitely feel like we can play a ranger without spellcasting. In fact we had one (Ranger) - it just the class is called a Scout (Rogue).

Bill Zebub · Oct 3, 2021

J.Quondam said:
Ah, the "park ranger" ranger archetype. Nice!

There's a great parody subclass hiding in there.

Favored enemy: "Bipedal, talking bears."

Tales and Chronicles · Oct 3, 2021

Charlaquin said:
Actually, I think you kind of can. For example, Paladins never have to cast spells. They can use all their spell slots on smiting. I would be ok with something similar as an alternative to a non-spellcasting ranger. I’m not sure what ability you could give to rangers that spell slots would fuel, but if one could be thought up, I’d accept that.

''Foebane: Starting at 2nd level, when you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one spell slot to deal damage of the same type as your weapon to the target, in addition to the weapon's damage. The attack ignore all resistance or immunity a creature may have. The extra damage is 2d6 for a 1st-level spell slot, plus 1d6 for each spell level higher than 1st, to a maximum of 5d6. The damage increases by 1d6 if the target is one of your favored enemy, to a maximum of 6d6.''

Something like that would be cool.

Greg K · Oct 3, 2021

Campbell said:
Paladins on the other hand started out with quite explicit divine magic even if they lacked spellcasting. In AD&D 2e a paladin started out immune to disease, could lay on hands, could detect evil intent, could cure disease once a week, and had an aura of protection. At 3rd level they could turn fiends and undead. It just kind of felt right to me when they started getting spellcasting earlier.

Wheras, for me, spells earlier for the Paladin does not feel right,

J.Quondam · Oct 3, 2021

Bill Zebub said:
There's a great parody subclass hiding in there.

Favored enemy: "Bipedal, talking bears."

Poor bears.

Greg K · Oct 3, 2021

vincegetorix said:
''Foebane: Starting at 2nd level, when you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one spell slot to deal damage of the same type as your weapon to the target, in addition to the weapon's damage. The attack ignore all resistance or immunity a creature may have. The extra damage is 2d6 for a 1st-level spell slot, plus 1d6 for each spell level higher than 1st, to a maximum of 5d6. The damage increases by 1d6 if the target is one of your favored enemy, to a maximum of 6d6.''

Something like that would be cool.

Bypassing resitance/immunity is too supernatural/mystic for my taste.

Charlaquin · Oct 3, 2021

Bill Zebub said:
I would if I could. If I had my druthers I'd want the base class non-spellcasting. But I don't expect it to happen so for the most part I don't waste electrons asking for it.

Yeah, non-spellcasting ranger with one or more spellcasting subclasses would be the better way to go in my opinion too, but that ship has sailed.

D&D 5E Why are non-caster Ranger themes so popular?

Greg K

Legend

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle

J.Quondam

CR 1/8

dave2008

Legend

Bill Zebub

“It’s probably Matt Mercer’s fault.”

Tales and Chronicles

Jewel of the North, formerly know as vincegetorix

Greg K

Legend

J.Quondam

CR 1/8

Greg K

Legend

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)

Similar Threads