D&D 5E (2014) Convince me that the Ranger is a necessary Class.

[CreamCloud0]

Wouldn't this have made the Ranger into arcane half-casters rather divine half-casters?

i'd rather they ditched how arcane/divine/primal relates to what spells you can get.

 

[ECMO3]

Another topic brought me back here.

Why do we need the Ranger?
Why do we need any class?

Well they are exaggerations or realizations of the character backgrounds for PCS.

In a Feudal Society

1. Royals - (Depends of what the culture respected)
2. Nobles - (Depends of what the culture respected)
3. Priests - Clerics/Druids/Warlocks
4. Mages - Wizard/Sorcerer/Warlocks
5. Knights - Fighter/Ranger
6. Peasants - Rogue/Barbarian
7. Outcasts/Barbarians- Barbarian

In which Rangers would be part of the military elite who either protect owned wilds or act as everpresent scouts and lookouts in the borders for the military

If each Background was a class​

• Acolyte- Cleric
• Artisan - Smith (Nonexistent)
• Charlatan - Rogue
• Criminal - Rogue
• Entertainer - Bard
• Farmer - Barbarian
• Guard - Fighter
• Guide - Ranger
• Hermit - Cleric
• Merchant - Any
• Noble - Any
• Sage - Wizard
• Sailor - Monk
• Scribe - ???
• Soldier - Fighter
• Wayfarer - Rogue

This is what is so screwed up about the 2024 backgrounds. Most Monks are sailors ..... really?

 

[CreamCloud0]

This is what is so screwed up about the 2024 backgrounds. Most Monks are sailors ..... really?

not really encouraging this kind of attribution, but i might've at least assigned hermits as monks instead.

 

[Minigiant]

This is what is so screwed up about the 2024 backgrounds. Most Monks are sailors ..... really?

Jeremy Crawford loves Tavern Brawler
This is his personal stamp after we down voted out Brawler fighter.

 

[Corinnguard]

i'd rather they ditched how arcane/divine/primal relates to what spells you can get.

What would be the alternative? curious

 

[Micah Sweet]

Nah.

It's because Druids didn't exist in first edition so Rangers had to get wizard spells to get some of their desired effects and then Rangers became associated with elemental and nature weapon buffing magic because they were the best ones at using them.

The druid entry in my 1e PH begs to differ.

 

[Micah Sweet]

i'd rather they ditched how arcane/divine/primal relates to what spells you can get.

I've always really liked those divisions. They make the world feel more like a real place, with different effects resulting from different traditions.

 

[James Gasik]

The druid entry in my 1e PH begs to differ.

Minigiant clarified, he was talking about the Ranger as presented in The Strategic Review #2. They do indeed get alternating levels of cleric and magic-user spells starting at level 8, so that a 13th-level ranger could cast level 3 cleric and level 3 magic-user spells.

 

[CreamCloud0]

What would be the alternative? curious

i mean, Wizards already writes out individual spell lists for all of the casters anyway, i'm not against the idea of classifying which casters are A/D/P but it doesn't actually seem to have any effect on what casters can or can't cast what or how they do it, not in the same way like they used to matter in prior editions where the lines were more hard drawn and arcane casters had to memorize spells vancian style.

so if you want to give the ranger elemental evocation or divination just give it to them, bard already spits in the face of 'arcane casters can't heal', so don't fuss about them being a primal caster who 'don't get those kinds of spells', just give them the things that feel like what a ranger ought to have.

 

[Corinnguard]

Since no one wants to use tracking rules.

You mean the Tracking rules in the DMG? They're pretty simple and easy to use since they mostly require the player to make a Wisdom (Survival) check.