Search results

Y'know that thing Jeff Goldblum said in the dinosaur movie? It's like that! (Sure a lot of things technically can be spells but not everything should be. In particular, not everything in a classes loadout should be relegated to spells.)

I mean, generally speaking, yeah probably most of those listed. Though some of them I'd take as a given, you probably don't actually need to specify things like the ability to dual wield or use a bow and arrow. And a decent few of those are definitely traits that some of those characters share...

Yeah, honestly. I don't even think it'd be that foreign a notion to them, they've had their fingers on that pulse in previous renditions, and even in this one for some of it. Roving genuinely is/was a good start with that logic. They could just do with expanding that general principle, and not...

Not untrue, but also they could've just made it flatly non-concentration at the baseline and I wouldn't have even blinked. It is! But the fact that it's another feature that only does something for Hunter's Mark, without being actually a part of the feature that grants Hunter's Mark, irks me...

Wouldn't fly on it's own though, they kinda need a damage buff of some sort, and they need it on the levelling table.

You're probably right yeah, but I don't think it's particularly necessary. Rogues getting their Expertises first was the protection, I thought. Yeah Bards have to hang on till 10th level to get their 2nd set, but being a Bard for those 10 levels helps. Rangers could fit into that equation...

Yeah but they also; Spent 3 additional spaces on the levelling table, including the capstone, making "Hunter's Mark but with some free castings" a very lukewarm better (Like, even if your stance is "those levels are usually blank anyway", they could've at least rolled them in to the base...

I dunno! I don't even think it necessarily has to be dramatically different (even though it's not to my personal taste), like even the same general idea but a little stronger could be just fine. And maybe let some stuff arrive together at earlier levels. So they don't have to break formula and...

I just think Ranger was what they really could've done with impressing us on, every version has been mediocre to some degree, had very vocal criticism, so it's a bit unfortunate to have gotten to this point and it's just the same old story. Like even if it's functional, I think there was a...

I mean. Sure. They probably had those spells there, and then replaced them with the Hunter's Mark gubbins. So yes, I think it seems nominally likely that they probably would have put something there either way, given that they put things at those levels on two out of the two versions of the...

It's more that it came up as a result of "what does hunter's mark enforcing concentration prevent you from doing" being asked. Yes, Zephyr Strike in particular could do with a re-write. It's got a fair bit going on and it's a bit weirdly worded/constructed, it doesn't even specify what ends the...

Funny you should say; that's yet another aspect of my homebrew tinkerings! I'm in the process of homebrewing a subclass with some themes of a shared creed, and they have an 11th level feature "Esprit de Corps". Once per rest, as a reaction, an ally within range of your senses can roll your...

I mean especially if you're committed to only offering minor variations on the same thing each time.

But how can we make room for buffs when we have to sacrifice Four class features on the altar of Hunter's Mark??

That's another thing right, it's not even always about stacking buffs, some spells that are functionally one-and-dones like Zephyr Strike use concentration as well.

Not unreasonable, but. Y'know, I calls 'em as I sees 'em. It's 2024, and Paladin is still just getting the better version of Ranger's entire shtick at level 11. Even when you're like me and came in at 5E, this has been business as usual for a decade.

Besides the "what does concentration prevent running together" angle, there's also the gameplay aspect. When your main combat feature obliges concentration, it favours less aggressive play. You're incentivized to stay at "range", plinking your mark from around cover rather than striding out to...

I see that sort of sentiment crop up sometimes when the notion of a Ranger doing their main thing without concentration is offered, and. I just don't know what they think they've stumbled upon. "but what if the ranger stacks their relatively negligible buff with something else??"

Genuinely, it's so consistent. Like, the initial incarnation of Favoured Foe from the CFV UA offered Hunter's Mark with no concentration, and I'm pretty sure every incarnation since has specifically gone back on that.

I still really like the beast kinship part of Revised Ranger's Primeval Awareness! I so wish they didn't ditch that! Or I'd even be okay with just appropriating that part of Speech of the Woods from Shepherd Druid. (Frankly I kinda think all Druids should get that part of Speech of the Woods as...