Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Minigiant" data-source="post: 8010061" data-attributes="member: 63508">The first one was a typo. It's the revised ranger that added damage.They should be outlander fighters then. D&D Ranger have been something more than just archers in a green hood and a pet canid, raptor, or feline. 5th edition finally let people who wanted to just pick fighter in order to be master archer who can track. Those who wanted to master hunting a foe and ranging an area would play ranger.That's how Rangers worked for 0e to 3e.  Plently of rangersin literature and other media have favored enemies and preferred terrain.  The only ones who can rightly complain are those coming from 4e as the 4e ranger is a 5e fighter.I have a Saturday game of all D&D newcomers and none of them showed  disgust in the idea of favored enemies or terrain. They all understood that a wilderness ranger might have special knowledge of certain terrains and enemies.You're right though. I haven't hear many complaints for removal of FE or FT.Most of the articles, videos, forum posts, blogposts, and comments on FE and FT are about implementation. Rarelydo I see calls for removal. Almost every 5th edition homebrew I find has Favored Enemies and Natural Explorer/Favored Terrains. Some people boost them in power. Some people addcombat featres to it. Some people expand its flexibility.  Some people even move it to a subclass but then give it to every traditional ranger subclass.The common complaints are on implementation not inclusion. The only reason why WOTC didn't fix FE or FT in the CFV is because the goal was not to invalidate what was written the PHB.I get your other point. Most of these people are hardcore fans. But here's my point. "What do newcomers know?" If they want to be an archer with Survival, then and play an outlander or folk hero fighter. You want a spllbook,you play a wizard or tomelock, nor a bard or sorcerer. But making FE/FT an option was never gonna be an official thing with 5e being a nostalgia edition. That's false hope. Theranger needed a call back.Oh there is tons of design space in the ranger.The Ranger is the only class with out a combat class feature at level 1 in D&D 5th edition.There is design space. That's the whole problem with Ranger. The core class is all niche ribbon abilities except Fighting Style, Spellcasting and Extra Attack. Too much of it is in the subclass already.Thereis no suprise that this discussion is on Ranger and Druid. The Druid doesn't have enough design space for all it's iconic aspects. The Ranger's design space was underused and underutilized.</blockquote>

Verification