D&D (2024) 2024 Player's Handbook reveal: "New Ranger"

"More than any other class, the ranger is a new class."

​

It has been a year (less a day) since we last saw the Ranger in UA Playtest 6. There still could be a lot of change. My sense is that they are more or less happy with three of the subclasses (Fey Wanderer, Beastmaster, and Gloom Stalker), but many questions remain: Will anyone be happy with the favored enemy/relation to the land abilities? Will Hunter's Mark be foregrounded in multiple abilities? Will rangers at least get a free casting of the Barrage/Volley spells? For the Hunter, will the "Superior" abilties at levels 11 and 15 continue to be things you didn't choose at lower levels? For the Gloom Stalker, will they pull out 3rd level invisibility from "Umbral Sight"? Any chance for a surprise substitution of the Horizon Walker? Let's find out.

OVERVIEW

• "widely played, but ... one of the lowest rated"
• Spellcasting and Weapon Mastery at 1 (as with Paladin). Spellcasting can change spells after long rest (not every level)
• NEW: Favored Enemy: Hunters Mark always prepared, and X castings per day. (was level 2 in PT6, where it was WIS times/day)
• NEW: Fighting Style at 2 (no limits on choice). or you may choose two cantrips (again, like Paladin).
• NEW: Deft Explorer at 3: expertise in a proficient skill, +2 languages. NO INTERACTION WITH LAND TYPES. This is a nerf from PT6, where at least you got a bonus to Intelligence (Nature) checks.
• Extra attack at 5, Roving at 6 (+10' move, Climb Speed, Swim speed).
• Two more expertise options, at 9, presumably. Compared to the playtest, this is a nerf: PT6 gave 1 expertise, the spell Conjure Barrage always prepared, and +2 land types for Explorer. These had problems, but it's a lot to lose for one additional expertise.
• At 10, Tireless (as in PT6) -- THP and reduced Exhaustion.
• NEW: At 13, Damage no longer breaks concentration with Hunter's Mark.
• At 14, Nature's Veil -- invisibility. At 18, Blindsight.
• NEW: At 17, advantage vs person marked with Hunter's Mark.
• NEW: Damage of Hunter's mark increases to d10, not d6. (This too is a nerf from the playtest, which gave +WIS to hit, and +WIS to damage.)

The clear expectation is you are using Hunter's Mark, occupying your concentration and taking your first Bonus action every combat, from levels 1-20.

SUBCLASSES
Beastmaster

• command Primal Beast as a bonus action, and higher level abilities as in PT6, apparently.
• stat blocks level up with you (as in Tasha's and PT6). Beast gets Hunter's Mark benefits at 11.

Fey Wanderer

• vague on specifics; apparently just as in Tasha's.

Gloom Stalker

• as in PT6, Psychic damage bonus a limited number of times per day. +WIS to initiative (cf. Assassin and Barbarian)
• Umbral Sight, darkvision bonus, and invisible in the dark.
• NEW: psychic damage goes up at level 11. Mass fear option of Sudden Strike mentioned, nothing about Sudden Strike.

Hunter.

• Hunter's Lore at 3: know if there are immunities/resistances of creature marked by Hunter's Mark.
• NEW: Hunter's Prey at 3: you have a choice and can change your choice every short/long rest.
• NEW: Defensive Tactics at 7: you have a choice, and again can choose after a rest. The choices are Escape the Horde, Multiattack defense (not Evasion, Uncanny Dodge, and Hunter's Leap, as in PT6).
• NEW: At 11, Hunter's mark now "splashes" damage onto another target.
• NEW: you can choose to take resistance to damage, until the end of your turn.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That game is my example.

The fighter is so well designed that the ranger class is almost pointless and performative.

How do you figure? The LU ranger has plenty of its own class abilities and the like to choose from that the fighter doesn't get. Is this an expression of a belief that there should simply be fewer classes in your opinion?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think that is the problem.

The 2024 ranger looks like a good class.

It's just bland and barely flavored like a ranger because WOTC only knows how to season with spells but won't create new ranger spells.

I believe someone suggested above that the real reason the 2024 ranger is designed the way it is is not because they wanted to get the flavor/class fantasy right, but simply because they didn't want to get yelled at for making a weak ranger, which admittedly this is not. With that premise, everything else they've said about it justifying that choice, and that all seems logical to me.

 

[Minigiant]

This is false.

Since the PHB was released in 2014, Ranger had 14 spells added to the game.

Of those, Beast Bond, Zephyr Strike, Summon Beast, Healing Spirit, Guardian of Nature, Steel Wind Strike, and Wrath of Nature are clearly designed for Ranger and/or Druid specifically, with Zephyr Strike being exclusively Ranger.

Other classes have had more, maybe. But Ranger absolutely has gotten spells designed for them or their niche since the PHB dropped.

As far as the preview videos, the only one that mentioned a new spell was Paladins. That doesn’t mean no other caster is getting unique spells.

Of those spells only Zephyr Strike is ranger exclusive and tailored specifically to rangers.

I thought there was a new Spell mentioned for Druid and Wizard. However I'm 2 drinks in from brunch so I could be mistaken

But overall the focus is one giving Rangers Druid spells not Ranger spells.

WOTC's never highlighted a Ranger spell except Hunters Mark.

That's the Core Issue. WOTC only gets one Ranger spell and tailored the whole class around it.

 

[Minigiant]

I believe someone suggested above that the real reason the 2024 ranger is designed the way it is is not because they wanted to get the flavor/class fantasy right, but simply because they didn't want to get yelled at for making a weak ranger, which admittedly this is not. With that premise, everything else they've said about it justifying that choice, and that all seems logical to me.

That person

was me.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I see no point in a spell less ranger. This would not be a D&D ranger for me.

And if you give them abilities that emulate spells. Why not give them spells in the first place...

Some people (fairly IMO) don't want every class throwing around magic.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And to me the LU ranger is a nerfed LU fighter in a green cloak with nonmagical versions of 1st and 2nd level spells. It's really only has a point if you use LU's exploration system that links them to the system.

That to me is the problem.

As D&D and D&D clones relax The limitations on various classes and allows them to pick abilities from other classes, The model of the third edition Ranger becomes a redundant because it was purposely created to make a character that didn't have those restrictions.

Basically if a fighter can pick up 1st level Druid spells and get expertise, what's the point of a ranger that just has nonmagical druid spells and expertise?

This is where getting into the flavor of the Rangers starts mattering. Allowing the Ranger to substitute themselves with logs, shoot explosive arrows, turn their arms into claws, silver and golden their swords, sync with a bird, grow gills and fins, and meld with the rocks. Etc etc.

You think the LU ranger shouldn't have abilities that tie into the LU exploration system?

 

[ECMO3]

To me the interesting thing is there's this class that people either don't think is powerful or interesting enough to play or it's OP and should be banned. Obviously a lot of people play Rangers, so that can't be a universally true assessment. What do people think about that take, though?

Ranger is an awesome class but the class itself is disappointing if you want to play it like a Warrior who is awesome in combat, a Nature's guy or a pet guy. A lot of people want this out of the ranger and the class is going to disappoint on these themes unless they patch it with a subclass (Gloomstalker as a warrior for example).

Ranger as a caster class and to make it fun you need to dive into the spells IMO. I play a lot of Rangers, but I max Wisdom instead of Dexerity or Strength and I focus on Wisdom-boosting feats that get me more spells. In games with the first level origin feat I am taking Magic Initiate every time. In play the character is mostly a caster that can fall back on extra attack instead of someone who is primarily building to attack in combat. I would hate the Ranger if the class was "Hunters Mark and attack" because that is just not fun IMO. I also typicallly don't have proficiency in either Nature or Survival and Nature in particular is usually aweful because I am usually dumping Intelligence.

Fey Wanderer in particular is a great subclass to facilitate this playstyle and I have pretty much play this subclass exclusively now.

 

[Micah Sweet]

They have never put any stress or emphasis on the Rangers spell list or new Ranger spells and the entire 10 years of fifth edition.

They spent more time in the preview video talking about the Faye while then ranger mentality and skills

So I think Guilty untill Proven Innocent is a valid stance on Ranger spells.

In fairness to WotC, the designers there really seem to have a love affair with the Feywild.

 

[Chaosmancer]

UnOrdinary the anime online manga-style comic? Come to think of it spells/powers like hunters mark are common on anime characters, so fair point, though they're generally magic detectives or supernatural warriors without much of a hunting vibe.

You did ask "what fiction".

But here is an interesting question, slap some leathers on them and throw them in the woods, what is the difference between a magical detective and and a magical hunter? First thing that comes to mind is that most detectives are worse at fighting, which the Ranger is actually great at... but also because most detectives are in the modern day and usually don't kill their quarry, but capture them for the police. Part of that whole "we live in a society of laws" thing.

I will also point out, as has been pointed out a few times before, that most "hunting" shows/stories focus on non-magical settings with non-magical beasts. Yeah, you don't get the person able to magically mark their foe, teleport away from them, and shoot them with a dozen arrows of lightning when their big challenge is "hunt a bear". Turns out, as scary as bears are, you don't need magic to deal with a bear. Which is at worst a CR 1 opponent that any level 1 character should be able to face. But when you start looking to monster hunters, demon slayers, ect you start seeing more of these abilities.

This is why I've said for a long time, the biggest thing holding back the Ranger's theme and story, is that "Nature" in DnD is too tame and easy to deal with. Or at least it is perceived that way. I'm actually hoping with their focus on "apex" monsters, that DnD gives us some CR 10 thru 24 BEASTS and PLANTS that truly showcase that, in the deep parts of nature, you need a specialist.

 

[Weiley31]

People keep harping on Hunter's Mark: the class but you know what I see?

I see a class with martial weapons, medium armor and shields, expertise in three skills, two attacks, d10 HD weapon mastery, and half-caster druidic magic with the option to get cantrips or a fighting style if wanted.

If WotC had called this jack of all trades "the bard" you'd all be going gaga over it! And that's even before ignoring its speed boost, free invisibility, etc.

If you look at the ranger as Jack of all trades class, it's pretty amazing. It's centrally got as much going for it as the rogue and is maybe a step behind the barbarian. (I await the monk and bard previews to determine how they fall, considering the bard was never shown in it's close to final form and the 2nd monk was a touch overtuned). I think there are things that still could have been done a bit better (that capstone is uninspired) but I have come around that it's not as going to be bad a class in play once your character is able to fight, sneak, blast and heal with others as the 2nd best in each.

It's the Druidic Gish!