D&D 5E Am I missing something with Favored Foe?

[doctorbadwolf]

It's not ranger vs paladin situations where I'm worried about strict overshadowing - what they do is different enough that they can be tweaked into specialties easily enough. It's ranger vs rogue where you've two sneaky dex guys with high mobility and expertise on their skills.

The Rogue will probably do less damage, tbh, unless they can very reliably get a reaction attack and avoid needing to use their reaction for uncanny dodge, but will still outdo the ranger in nearly every other part of the game, unless the rogue ignores a given aspect of the game and the ranger focuses on it.

That one I don't have direct experience with, though. My only experience with a rogue and ranger in the same group, both are multiclassed.

 

[Neonchameleon]

The Rogue will probably do less damage, tbh, unless they can very reliably get a reaction attack and avoid needing to use their reaction for uncanny dodge, but will still outdo the ranger in nearly every other part of the game, unless the rogue ignores a given aspect of the game and the ranger focuses on it.

I think this is .... optimistic. The ranger is of course going to out-sneak the rogue for example and it's not even close. +10 to the entire party's stealth checks is overwhelming. And if the ranger wants to play face they can do a surprisingly good job as a fey wanderer.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I think this is .... optimistic. The ranger is of course going to out-sneak the rogue for example and it's not even close. +10 to the entire party's stealth checks is overwhelming. And if the ranger wants to play face they can do a surprisingly good job as a fey wanderer.

Pass Without Trace benefits the rogue as well, nearly all the time. The Rogue also can get unbeatable stealth at-will. Neither of them need PWOT if they have Stealth Expertise, and the Rogue alone has Hide as a bonus action before level 10 or whatever.

And the ranger adding their wisdom to face checks doesn’t make them as good as the rogue. They can get an edge on one skill by using their one expertise, and the rogue will still be better at everything else.

So, yeah, only if the ranger focuses on an aspect of play will they challenge the rogue out of combat, and then only in that one aspect.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Pass Without Trace benefits the rogue as well, nearly all the time. The Rogue also can get unbeatable stealth at-will. Neither of them need PWOT if they have Stealth Expertise, and the Rogue alone has Hide as a bonus action before level 10 or whatever.

Pass Without Trace benefits the rogue - who knows they are being carried by the ranger because +10 is such a huge difference. PWOT is (a) the difference between a 5 succeeding and failing in many cases and (b) enables the entire party to stealth which automatically makes characters with it the stealth kings because they can sneak the entire party with them when the rogue simply can't.

And the ranger adding their wisdom to face checks doesn’t make them as good as the rogue.

How so? Even if we grant the rogue expertise they get Cha + 2*prof on face checks, whereas a focused ranger is getting Cha + Wis + Prof - not much difference there, especially with some magical backing. There's not much between the two. That is, of course, assuming that the rogue specs face.

They can get an edge on one skill by using their one expertise, and the rogue will still be better at everything else.

How so? The rogue doesn't get Expertise on that many skills. It's only level 11 where the really get good.

And the rogue never gets ranger type stuff like seeing through the eyes of animals. The ranger (with Tasha's options) should always be the better scout.

So, yeah, only if the ranger focuses on an aspect of play will they challenge the rogue out of combat, and then only in that one aspect.

You do realise pass without trace is only one single spell - you don't need much focus for that. So the ranger can manage stealth plus whatever they focus on, possibly plus a couple of other things.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Pass Without Trace benefits the rogue - who knows they are being carried by the ranger because +10 is such a huge difference.

The rogue is practically impossible to find by most monsters without it.
It’s also a team game. Hasting the Barbarian doesn’t make any Barbarian I’ve ever seen feel like the Wizard is carrying them.
A player who feels that way should consider playing video games, instead.

PWOT is (a) the difference between a 5 succeeding and failing in many cases and (b) enables the entire party to stealth which automatically makes characters with it the stealth kings because they can sneak the entire party with them when the rogue simply can't.

You’ve moved the goalposts with that last. The ranger is a great exploration support class, though not as good as they should be. The Rogue is a better forward scout in anything but the wilderness, and wins there too if the ranger is siding Deft Explorer and the Rogue is wilderness focused.

How so? Even if we grant the rogue expertise they get Cha + 2*prof on face checks, whereas a focused ranger is getting Cha + Wis + Prof - not much difference there, especially with some magical backing. There's not much between the two. That is, of course, assuming that the rogue specs face.

It’s only fair to assume the rogue “specs face”, if we are assuming the Ranger is taking the “be okay at being a face” subclass.
Further, the Ranger will have lower charisma. They are fairly close at level 3 and 4, but the gap just widens from there.

At level 3, ranger has maybe +6 (prof+14 wisdom+14Charisma), +8 using Deft Explorer to Expertise 1 face skill, at best. More likely a point lower, because they still need Con to not suck.

A face rogue, even with only 14 Cha (I’ve seen plenty of swashbucklers with 16 Cha), will have +6 to probably 2 of 3 Cha skills, for those 2 levels. At 5 they pull ahead further. And the Rogue has 1 more class skill, and 3 more expertise skills, than the ranger.
Hell, a scout can face better and scout just as well as the ranger. At will.

How so? The rogue doesn't get Expertise on that many skills. It's only level 11 where the really get good.

4 expertise by level 6, plus cunning action, 4 skills from class, and thieves tools for free. Thief can Use An Object as a bonus action and effectively has a climb speed at level 3. Scout has expertise on 6 skills by level 6, two of which are Survival and Nature without using up any of their 4 skill proficiencies. Arcane Trickster (at will) can pick pockets and work locks and traps from 30ft away, and it’s invisible.

Ranger cannot compete with that without burning spell after spell, the best of which are all concentration.

Favored Foe helps here, by easing the need to turn spell slots into damage, but not by much.

And the rogue never gets ranger type stuff like seeing through the eyes of animals. The ranger (with Tasha's options) should always be the better scout.

Neither class natively has find familiar, but both have a subclass than can get either that spell or a pet. The ranger again, can pull ahead with a spell slot, but not if the rogue decides to focus on that, or even just get a familiar.

The ranger will likely be better at survival checks, but most of the time they’ll be even on perception, and the rogue will be better at stealth. The ranger can’t use Pass Without Trace and Beast Sense at the same time, and is best off scouting with the rogue, with PWOT up and letting the rogue take the lead.

A Scout with Stealth, Athletics, Investigate, and Perception as their Expertise skills, or Arcane Trickster, or a Thief with Ritual Caster, wins this contest easily.

You do realise pass without trace is only one single spell - you don't need much focus for that. So the ranger can manage stealth plus whatever they focus on, possibly plus a couple of other things.

The ranger is spending a 2nd level spell slot, and concentration. It’s a great spell, but a ranger that is relying on it to be great at stealth...is only situationally great at stealth.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The ranger is fun to play, if often frustrating.

But the rogue is one of the best all around classes in the game, especially if an adventuring day is longer than 1 fight and some talking.

 

[Neonchameleon]

The rogue is practically impossible to find by most monsters without it.

So the rogue can sneak past your average monster but struggles with the experts. Meanwhile a ranger occasionally stumbles - but can waltz past the experts and can guide the entire party past average monsters.

It’s only fair to assume the rogue “specs face”, if we are assuming the Ranger is taking the “be okay at being a face” subclass.
Further, the Ranger will have lower charisma. They are fairly close at level 3 and 4, but the gap just widens from there.

If the rogue specs full face then the ranger's greater flexibility will crush them. Spells are really useful.

A face rogue, even with only 14 Cha (I’ve seen plenty of swashbucklers with 16 Cha), will have +6 to probably 2 of 3 Cha skills, for those 2 levels.

Sure they will. And if they do they don't have expertise in stealth or thieves tools. They can do anything but only get expertise to a few skills.

At 5 they pull ahead further. And the Rogue has 1 more class skill, and 3 more expertise skills, than the ranger.

Indeed. But skills aren't everything. A wis of 14 on a fey wanderer (I've seen 16 Wis on rangers just as I've seen 16 Cha on rogues) is almost a match for expertise.

But you talk about skills? The Tasha's ranger has two more languages which closes that gap (and languages are another type of face skill that cost a skill slot). Expertise is slightly better than a wisdom bonus but only slightly. So when you take languages into account you're getting the ranger more or less matching the rogue even before having to go above and beyond.

Thief can Use An Object as a bonus action and effectively has a climb speed at level 3.

This is a matter of interpretation and we have competing tweets from Mearls and Crawford on the subject of what climb speed actually is intended to mean (damn fuzzy rules) but being able to climb fast is not as I understand it the same as having a climb speed. Having a climb speed to me (and to Mearls) involves being natural when climbing and not having to make rolls when others would (it's not spider climb that allows for along ceilings without rolling). Thieves are just faster.

It’s a great spell, but a ranger that is relying on it to be great at stealth...is only situationally great at stealth.

A ranger is by default very good at stealth without PWOT. A rogue is very slightly better at stealth. But a ranger with PWOT makes Batman seem clumsy and obvious; a rogue just wants to be Batman.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So the rogue can sneak past your average monster but struggles with the experts. Meanwhile a ranger occasionally stumbles - but can waltz past the experts and can guide the entire party past average monsters.

If the rogue specs full face then the ranger's greater flexibility will crush them. Spells are really useful.

Sure they will. And if they do they don't have expertise in stealth or thieves tools. They can do anything but only get expertise to a few skills.

Indeed. But skills aren't everything. A wis of 14 on a fey wanderer (I've seen 16 Wis on rangers just as I've seen 16 Cha on rogues) is almost a match for expertise.

But you talk about skills? The Tasha's ranger has two more languages which closes that gap (and languages are another type of face skill that cost a skill slot). Expertise is slightly better than a wisdom bonus but only slightly. So when you take languages into account you're getting the ranger more or less matching the rogue even before having to go above and beyond.

This is a matter of interpretation and we have competing tweets from Mearls and Crawford on the subject of what climb speed actually is intended to mean (damn fuzzy rules) but being able to climb fast is not as I understand it the same as having a climb speed. Having a climb speed to me (and to Mearls) involves being natural when climbing and not having to make rolls when others would (it's not spider climb that allows for along ceilings without rolling). Thieves are just faster.

A ranger is by default very good at stealth without PWOT. A rogue is very slightly better at stealth. But a ranger with PWOT makes Batman seem clumsy and obvious; a rogue just wants to be Batman.

You have a conclusion that you won’t deviate from, apparently.

None of this post actually refutes the points I’ve made, and I’m not going to go in circles.

 

[Neonchameleon]

You have a conclusion that you won’t deviate from, apparently.

None of this post actually refutes the points I’ve made, and I’m not going to go in circles.

You have a conclusion that you won't deviate from, apparently.

I have refuted most of your points and adapted slightly on the rare occasion you made a valid one and expanded where the difference is one of understanding. That you keep repeating and not engaging means that we can agree that this will go in circles.

 

[fearsomepirate]

So the rogue can sneak past your average monster but struggles with the experts. Meanwhile a ranger occasionally stumbles - but can waltz past the experts and can guide the entire party past average monsters.

By 5th level, your average rogue will have a minimum stealth roll of 10. He'll beat most monsters most of the time in normal lighting conditions, and in darkness, so few monsters have a PP above 15 (or blindsight/tremorsense) that failing a stealth check will be virtually unheard of.

That said, I don't see how there's even a debate over whether the Ranger is better than the Rogue at some things. Just by virtue of being a half caster, any competently built Ranger will have options open that the Rogue doesn't. A Beastmaster with Goodberry and Spike Growth can do things no single-classed rogue can do. It's just how it is.