Search results

I somewhat disagree, not because there's anything wrong with better, more bespoke benefits in and of themselves (besides taking up a bit more real estate on the page I guess), I just think Favoured Enemy's premise was/is always gonna be a hard sell. Any remedy for Favoured Enemy has to deal with...

I think Revised Ranger's spin on Favoured Enemy was close to something workable, it just didn't move far enough away from the original feature, so you've still got that "welp, my choice isn't in this campaign, guess that's that" problem.

That's very similar to what I've got in my homebrew. Ranger gets an ability they activate with a bonus action, that adds a damage die to their attacks, plus better senses, tracking and movement. And then Hunter's Mark itself is a backup/double-down, adds a slimmer but guaranteed damage bonus...

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...

Do definitely like some of these, although I'm hoping to have stuff besides things that just grant you spells. Particularly spells already on the Druid list, I might not have bothered with the Wind Fan if it weren't for the Wind Waker association.

So me and my DM have been working on a Druid subclass that's partially focused around controlling/empowering plantlife. One of their starting abilities is, the ability to replicate and temporarily maintain magic items using Druidcraft. Similar to Artificer's Infuse Item, but smaller scale...

This was something I was dabbling with for Hunter's Mark. I wanted to put together some alternative castings/upcasts to bring it more into parity with the Smite spells, around the theme of particular monster abilities. So if you be a good Ranger and assess the incoming threat, you've got...

See ideally spells like Flame Arrows or Lightning Arrow would fill that sort of utility, but. I find you unlock them far too late, and they're pretty expensive spell slots for what you get. Lightning Arrow is at least kinda cool and effective, Flame Arrows kinda shakes out to just elemental...

Ranger's lack of a definitive enemy in terms of bestiary category (outside of Monstrosities debatably), like what's generally considered true for Paladins and Undead etc., is part of why I like Force damage as Ranger's "element". They become a universal threat, they can fight anything! There is...

I agree, but the wilds already are pretty naturally chaotic and magical. Though admittedly just as much is down to meddling. Hubris of Wizards, cruelty of extraplanar entities etc. That's sorta part of how I tend to think of Rangers, they're like the counterbalance against the things plaguing...

Not for me personally, no. My thinking on the issue is partly on flavour grounds, and I've already arrived at a solution I like. And I don't plan on changing my view.

I dunno. You can if you want I guess?

Oh yeah for sure. Like I get them being reluctant to mess with that sorta stuff for the main chunk of 5E's lifespan, but. Bit of a shame they never did.

I mean technically Fighter has additional (attack) actions as their thing too, sorta. Somewhat double-dipping in that respect. But yeah possibly. I don't necessarily have huge problems with 5E's designs for the other classes like some folks. Not in "you should try another system" territory yet...

That's the sorta thing I might like for Ranger. I was messing with something in that vein for my homebrew; I wanted them to have more means of capitalizing on their bonus damage mechanic. I figured they probably can't get more Extra Attacks because that's Fighter's bag, so I gave them a later...

Do sorta agree, but I still reckon those are solveable issues. I like what BG3 did for the Thief subclass specifically, just gave them an additional bonus action. Universally useful, nominally relevant for specific Thief/Rogue things.

Yes, I think that's accurate. I don't really care about this discussion. You got anything else?

Spell scrolls specifically don't require any components. So okay, pretend I said that then. I mean, I agree, so I have no idea why you brought settings up. That's what I was expressing confusion over.

I mean. It was the point I was making. The initial question was about power-gaming multiclass combinations, and the reasons why a given occupant of a world might not immediately rush to achieve the pinnacle of power. Not everyone can, not everyone wants to. It came out of a point about Ranger...

But that is my point! Something might be, in a mechanical sense, the absolute highest power a person can achieve in a setting, but not everybody can do that, nor does everyone want to! Even when they're risking their skin going out to fight stuff.