D&D General Magical Non-Spellcasting Ranger and Paladin

doctorbadwolf said:

No. I hate that playstyle more than almost anything else in 5e.

Click to expand...

I agree, but I would keep it available to anyone that wants it.
even tho I hate it.

doctorbadwolf said:

The last thing the game needs is for mote classes that play like a champion fighter. imo

Great point

Click to expand...

See above,
I dont mind if anyone plays wizard with only magic missile, shield and fireball, I just would not play it myself.

But, the system must be designed to most complex play ever(or most powerplay), then it can be harmlessly down played.
If it is designed other way around, then there is a problem.

Horwath said:

I agree, but I would keep it available to anyone that wants it.
even tho I hate it.

Click to expand...

Yeah i mean the standard paladin does that job, though. What it doesnt do is a magic but not spellcasting paladin that isnt basically a fighter with a 'more damage' button

Horwath said:

See above,
I dont mind if anyone plays wizard with only magic missile, shield and fireball, I just would not play it myself.

But, the system must be designed to most complex play ever(or most powerplay), then it can be harmlessly down played.
If it is designed other way around, then there is a problem.

Click to expand...

I hear ya.

If i was getting a noncaster ranger I’d like them to come with an extensive list of both active and passive tricks and perks ranging(heh) both mundane and supernatural that i can individually pick and choose to customise them like warlock invocations, and I’d especially like the option to have absolutely zero resources dedicated to marking anyone or anything if I don’t want my ranger to be doing that.

Horwath said:

Hunter's fury:
once on your turn, as a part of Attack Action you can spend a spell slot to make extra attacks during that Attack action.
you gain extra 2 attacks for 1st level slot.
you gain 1 extra attack for each spell slot level above 1st, with max of 6 attacks for 5th level spell slot.

Click to expand...

what the hell?????????????

W'rkncacnter said:

what the hell?????????????

Click to expand...

paladin smite +9 damage on average. double if you wait on a crit.

ranger: 2 attacks for 1d8+3 at 2nd level at 60% accuracy: +9,2 damage
more later on, but probably less if you use it on a high AC target, target that probably matters.

this will give on average more damage than smite, but paladin has more survivability, so it works out.
ranger in t3 sucks, so this helps to close the gap.

Horwath said:

paladin smite +9 damage on average. double if you wait on a crit.

ranger: 2 attacks for 1d8+3 at 2nd level at 60% accuracy: +9,2 damage
more later on, but probably less if you use it on a high AC target, target that probably matters.

this will give on average more damage than smite, but paladin has more survivability, so it works out.
ranger in t3 sucks, so this helps to close the gap.

Click to expand...

horwath. my guy. do you even realize what you're doing here?
action surge is one of the biggest features fighters get. and one of the best things you can do with them (especially given how the magic action is excluded now) is make additional attacks. you're effectively giving rangers multiple times more action surges then even the highest level fighters. i made a table.

RSE is "ranger surge equivalent" (i.e. how many effective action surges the ranger gets from their spell slots assuming the same number of attacks as a ranger of that level) and FSE is "fighter surge equivalent" (i.e. RSE but fighter attacks). this is NUTS. even at level 1 this is NUTS. WHAT are you doing?