D&D 5E Companion thread to 5E Survivor - Subclasses (Part XI: Rangers)

[EzekielRaiden]

Yeah, see, I don’t see the spell slot system as anything but a neutral delivery system.

Which is a pretty big non-starter for me. It isn't at all neutral, it's a very specific and limiting approach. The fact that "shoot a lot of arrows" is a spell is utterly bizarre to me.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Which is a pretty big non-starter for me. It isn't at all neutral, it's a very specific and limiting approach. The fact that "shoot a lot of arrows" is a spell is utterly bizarre to me.

Why? A spell is just a distinct and repeatable magical effect. Ultimately, it's a rules mechanics widget. There's no actual difference between it and 4e powers, except that 4e was able to actually properly leverage the widget for the benefit of all characters.

And the example isn't "shoot a lot of arrows" it is "shoot an arrow that explodes into a hail of literal thorns", and even if we change it to Conjure Barrage, it is "shoot an arrow that duplicates magically into enough arrows to blanket a 60ft cone, with enough density that it's more lethal to anyone in the area that a single well aimed arrow would be".

Those are very magical abilities, that makes sense as "powers" (ie mechanical widgets representing distinct fantastical abilities, which since they are magical, means...) or spells.

Spell slots are literally just a measure of how much power you have, used to mechanically balance the game so that conjure barrage isn't at-will.

 

[Tonguez]

And the example isn't "shoot a lot of arrows" it is "shoot an arrow that explodes into a hail of literal thorns", and even if we change it to Conjure Barrage, it is "shoot an arrow that duplicates magically into enough arrows to blanket a 60ft cone, with enough density that it's more lethal to anyone in the area that a single well aimed arrow would be".

Those are very magical abilities, that makes sense as "powers" (ie mechanical widgets representing distinct fantastical abilities, which since they are magical, means...) or spells.

now this is a Barrage of Arrows predicted on Martial Awesomeness rather than magic - not only does our hero fire three arrows at once, the momentum when they strike throws the targets back to hit the enemy behind them too.

I like to think of Spells as Feats of Magic - which also means that they can be duplicated as non-magical Feats of Power

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Why? A spell is just a distinct and repeatable magical effect. Ultimately, it's a rules mechanics widget. There's no actual difference between it and 4e powers, except that 4e was able to actually properly leverage the widget for the benefit of all characters.

Sure there is. For one thing, a spell has a level and consumes a slot. A spell has (or explicitly does not have) specific types of components: verbal, somatic, material; each of which can be disrupted. Slots are 100% fungible within a single level, and very near fungible (minus scaling effects) in general. A spell can be counterspelled, or deactivated by an antimagic field, or otherwise negated in ways that do not generalize to "literally any pre-defined thing someone can do."

Spells, in the D&D sense, are a VERY specific thematic and mechanical package. They are not, and should not be mistaken for, a totally general "any repeatable magical effect" mechanic.

And the example isn't "shoot a lot of arrows" it is "shoot an arrow that explodes into a hail of literal thorns", and even if we change it to Conjure Barrage, it is "shoot an arrow that duplicates magically into enough arrows to blanket a 60ft cone, with enough density that it's more lethal to anyone in the area that a single well aimed arrow would be".

Those are very magical abilities,

Nope. Not to me. They're things Green Arrow can do on a whim, so long as he still has ammo. Representing Green Arrow's completely mundane (if high-tech) ammunition as interchangable, upgradable, completely magical effects is a non-starter.

that makes sense as "powers" (ie mechanical widgets representing distinct fantastical abilities, which since they are magical, means...) or spells.

Spell slots are literally just a measure of how much power you have, used to mechanically balance the game so that conjure barrage isn't at-will.

Spell slots are way, way, WAY more specific than that.

 

[CreamCloud0]

It mostly boils down to, from what I’ve observed, that just because something is magic that doesn’t mean it needs to be a spell, and by a similar token, just because something is fantastical that doesn’t mean it needs to be magic.

There’s too much of anything in 5e that slightly pushes the boundaries of being beyond the perception of mundane abilities being fasttracked straight into being a spell when it doesn’t need to be, because that puts it in a neat little box for wizards to place into the one system they have for all their supernatural abilities.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Sure there is. For one thing, a spell has a level and consumes a slot. A spell has (or explicitly does not have) specific types of components: verbal, somatic, material; each of which can be disrupted. Slots are 100% fungible within a single level, and very near fungible (minus scaling effects) in general. A spell can be counterspelled, or deactivated by an antimagic field, or otherwise negated in ways that do not generalize to "literally any pre-defined thing someone can do."

Spells, in the D&D sense, are a VERY specific thematic and mechanical package. They are not, and should not be mistaken for, a totally general "any repeatable magical effect" mechanic.

They are only so specific in mechanical context, not thematic. They are whatever they are described as at the table.

Nope. Not to me. They're things Green Arrow can do on a whim, so long as he still has ammo. Representing Green Arrow's completely mundane (if high-tech) ammunition as interchangable, upgradable, completely magical effects is a non-starter.

The green arrow absolutely cannot shoot a hundred arrows at once in a 60ft cone that cause more damage to each creature they hit than a normal arrow shot normally would do. Exploding arrows are one thing, but that would fit the ranger far less than anything I’ve seen proposed in any ranger thread.

Spell slots are way, way, WAY more specific than that.

No, they aren’t. If we can’t even agree on this, there’s no point continuing this particular discussion.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

now this is a Barrage of Arrows predicted on Martial Awesomeness rather than magic - not only does our three fire three arrows at once, the momentum when the strike throws the targets back to hit the enemy behind them too.

Yeah that’s magic IMO, just like throwing someone 30 feet with a kick would be, which is also common in Bollywood style action movies, but it also literally isn’t on the same level as conjure barrage, lightning arrow, or the Ranger’s non arrow based spells like pass without trace.

I like to think of Spells as Feats of Magic - which also means that they can be duplicated as non-magical Feats of Power

In that case, feats of power can reasonably be fueled by spell slots, easily allowing a single ranger to cast spells and make traps and have a pet they can boost, and perform feats of ability, all on the same limited resource.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

They are only so specific in mechanical context, not thematic. They are whatever they are described as at the table.

Can you actually separate the theme from the mechanic? I see no way to do so here. D&D spellcasting, much to my frustration, has theme and mechanic welded together better than almost any mechanic I know of.

I like when theme and mechanic are deeply intertwined, but if, and ONLY if, it is reasonable and effective for them to be so. 4e's Lay On Hands, as I am wont to reference. I deeply dislike it when the mechanic is welded to a theme that is completely off for the rest of the class. Ranger abilities are not hand-jive mojo. Forcing them to be so, with all the things so entailed, is deeply frustrating to me.

The green arrow absolutely cannot shoot a hundred arrows at once in a 60ft cone

In JLU he could do effectively equivalent things. Not sure why I should care about versions that can't.

No, they aren’t. If we can’t even agree on this, there’s no point continuing this particular discussion.

Sure they are. I gave you a comprehensive list of the problems. You blew it off with a "that's just thematics." Every class which uses spell slots is beholden to the rules and trappings I described. The mechanic and the theme are welded together. Instead of just blithely dismissing those concerns, show me how they can be addressed.

Show me how you can have spell slots that don't enforce a very specific mechanical and thematic expression.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Pictured above: Two second level rangers face a level-appropriate encounter in the ideal edition of D&D.

 

[niklinna]

now this is a Barrage of Arrows predicted on Martial Awesomeness rather than magic - not only does our three fire three arrows at once, the momentum when the strike throws the targets back to hit the enemy behind them too.

Not only that, but he shows the princess—and us—how to do it! You just use not two, but four fingers, and turn the wrist facing outward. Easy peasy!

Yes this is the kind of over the top ranger I would want to play. I don't want no VSM components and anti-magic counterspells messing with my day.