Search results

Because the fictional archetypes that inspired it don’t have magic. The same reason as all the other classes have what they have. And don’t have what they don’t have. Aragorn was never a Ranger, he was a paladin with the outlander background.

I’ve long argued that sorcerer is a redundant class in 5e.

Taking a look at Gortash, could you boost the encounter with lair actions that are deadly traps?

They are not nature spirits, and Aragorn can only do anything with them because of his birthright, it has nothing to do with ranger skills. “Spells”, as already pointed out, are just a mechanical tool to describe what the Ranger can do, and the legacy of being the Aragorn class. The Ranger...

Why? I don’t recall Aragorn dealing with spirits, or Davy Crockett, or Robin Hood, or Owen Grady, or Drizzt, or Minsc or any other fictional or real world examples of the Ranger archetype that I can think of. I'm not sure rangers are generally known for being experts on rocks.

This is a good example of why the Ranger class is not necessarily a woodsman/hunter stereotype. Indiana Jones stated as a Ranger? Could be. In the real world, plenty of people study zoology or oceanography at university in order to study and protect the natural world rather than hunt and kill...

Bear: put out a picnic basket and hide behind a bush. Dear: go for a drive at night and wait for one to run out in front of the car.

In those days cinemas offered much more choice, and films were available for a lot longer.

Yeah, soda water is carbonated water. You put it drinks. Soda siphons were a standard wedding present in the 60s..

Jaws vs. Alien Coming soon.

We know that WotC's own feedback showed that players did not like the valour bard because it changed in nature when it gained in subclass, so it's fairly obvious why the feedback on this was negative. However, the problem could be avoided if the class dropped the idea that it was a sorcerer...

I would have expected Quebec to be more French, with people drinking wine, with watered wine for children.

More of a spork. Looks clever but is absolutely useless.

Quite. UA is a taste test and a teaser trailer, it's not about design or balancing. WotC pay professional game designers for that. They don't always get it right, but it's better than listening to unpaid randos off the internet.

Something like the Pathfinder Bloodrager? Little or no spellcasting, magic channelled into being a combat monster.

Superman is the only one that could potentially tempt me back to the cinema (I haven't been since lockdown). But I will wait for the word of mouth.

Good story, good characters, good atmosphere and sense of place. Would have been even better if WotC hadn't vetoed the "you destroy the wall of the faithless" ending. Storm of Zehir is in some respects better than the OC too. It’s a sandbox, and as such it has minimal story, but it does have...

So? It did me, frequently, to the point of massive frustration. And I’m far from the only person who complained about being railroaded.

No, I think they are aware that it is niche, and therefore doesn’t matter to many players, who can ignore it without consequence. It’s purpose is largely narrative - to tell the story of the Red Wizards and give them their own thing - not to add a major gameplay element.