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

[James Gasik]

So if I'm understanding this right, they want a bow using class but don't want to play Bards.

I'm assuming they want it to be a ranged damage class and don't want to use magic, because I don't really see why Ranger would be "necessary". Because in Final Fantasy, the "Ranger' is either A) an archery class that focuses on boosted accuracy (and sometimes specialty arrows that inflict elemental damage or status effects) and/or B) a class designed to fight certain kinds of monsters.

Oh there that one time, in FF Tactics A2 where the Ranger could set traps and use items offensively, I guess.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

On the other hand, when a subclass requires you to make choices to best utilize it before you get it, that's at least somewhat problematic. For example, let's say you're destined to become a dragon sorcerer. You better not take Mage Armor for the first two levels, because you're going to get natural armor! Oh and also, you need to focus on certain types of damage because you're eventually going to get bonus damage! And you have to avoid taking any spell that you'll get from your subclass, which in the case of the Sorcerer, means Alter Self, Chromatic Orb, Command, and Dragon's Breath.

Well, at least with mage armor, because you can swap out one Sorcerer spell each time you level up, you can replace it with something more useful once you hit level 3--which is quite reasonable, since that also gets you 2nd level spells.

But your remaining points are quite valid. Personally, I'm of the opinion that there should be a blanket rule: If you gain a feature through a class, subclass, or feat that would be a duplicate of what you already have, you may retrain the original feature to something else of equivalent level. So, if you gain chromatic orb as a 1st-level Sorcerer, and then gain it by becoming a Draconic Sorcerer at 3rd, you can instantly retrain the original chromatic orb to any other 1st-level spell.

This still leaves some gaps--like mage armor and the Draconic armor bonus--but those are generally infrequent enough that it's less of an issue.

I remember having a similar problem in Pathfinder 1e, where I couldn't take Burning Hands, despite having bonuses for using it, because I was going to get it for free at level 3.

And sure, yeah, you can swap out spells at level up in 5e, but you can only do one at a time, and it's still just unnecessary.

Ah, sorry, hadn't read this far and didn't see this. I guess I just see this as a reasonable "cost of doing business" thing. You want the extra armor, pick it up at 1st level and swap it at 3rd. Don't want to swap, or want to swap something else? Might have to accept not having much AC until 3rd level!

Is this as bad as waiting to find out at level 3 that you can wear heavy armor like in 2014? I don't know, but it feels like if your subclass is going to be transformative in any way, they should come in as soon as possible.

Sure. It's one of the (many) reasons why true Novice Levels, rather than the "levels 1 and 2 are training wheels to be skipped" approach, would have been significantly better.

It also kind of feels a bit nonsensical that you get several features at once at level 3 out of the blue. What should be happening is that you should be getting these gradually. Like, why can't you get 1 thing at each of levels 1-3, to show you slowly becoming a "true" member of your subclass?

I feel like that would be more logical, but YMMV.

We're running into the inherent illogic, the baked-in artificiality, of the class-and-level system. Knowledge in the real world doesn't come in large, chunky blocks. At most, it comes in very small chunks, like learning one specific skill (e.g. "how to take the derivative of a polynomial" or "what a redox reaction is" or "how to true up a board"), which spread out over a significant period of time. One does not go from being a rube to being "trained" in a skill all at once. The problem is, it's...generally not very fun to play through this really really gradual, tiny-bit-by-tiny-bit growth, unless the system has been specifically designed for it. (This is another of the reasons to have robust Novice Level rules--because, if implemented in a 13A "incremental advance" kind of way, they DO allow us to parcel out one little chunk at a time.) D&D isn't and, with the possible exception of 4e, never has been designed that way. 13th Age was, as noted, but it's far from typical.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

So if I'm understanding this right, they want a bow using class but don't want to play Bards.

I'm assuming they want it to be a ranged damage class and don't want to use magic, because I don't really see why Ranger would be "necessary". Because in Final Fantasy, the "Ranger' is either A) an archery class that focuses on boosted accuracy (and sometimes specialty arrows that inflict elemental damage or status effects) and/or B) a class designed to fight certain kinds of monsters.

Oh there that one time, in FF Tactics A2 where the Ranger could set traps and use items offensively, I guess.

Well, all "jobs" in FFXIV inherently manipulate aether, which means they're all, in some sense, "magic". The difference is that a "Disciple of Magic" (read: caster) is someone legitimately "casting spells", e.g., flinging around fireballs, calling down space-dragon lasers, or bringing magic paint to life, or manipulating the aether in others' bodies to restore them (healers). By comparison, a "Disciple of War" is manipulating the aether within their own body, and to a limited extent the aether of the physical world around them, as part of a martial art. Bards manipulate aether through the power of song, but also imbue their arrows with poison and wind, fire and light.

The other two "physical ranged DPS" jobs (to distinguish from melee jobs and ranged casting jobs) are Machinists, who use guns, turrets, and magitek devices; and Dancers, who wield dual chakrams (think Xena: Warrior Princess, except Dancer chakrams come in pairs) and inspire their allies through beautiful and deadly physical motions (various dances with aether-manipulating properties.)

Machinist is the only phys ranged job that is (almost) pure DPS, minimal support. So there's a small but vocal minority who dislike that their only choices are "not-medieval" (Machinist) or support-heavy and more mystical in some way (Bard and Dancer).

And yes, part of the design problem is that the thing Rangers in other FF games have been used for don't fit very well in the multiplayer RPG environment. They make a lot of sense in single player, where choosing to specialize one of your party members in "I kill specific things REAL REAL good" or "I set down powerful traps that have to be triggered by enemies interacting with them" is perfectly workable. In an MMO environment, those mechanics....don't fit properly, and would be extremely likely to be either a design or balance headache, or be not very fun to use as a player.

That said, it's been two whole expansions since we last got a ranged physical job (MCH was added in the first expansion; DNC followed in the third expansion), so like most folks I think it's very likely we get a new one with the next expansion, which should launch sometime next year. "Ranger" is one possible option they could pursue there. Personally, I think it's more likely to be a "Demon Hunter" in the Diablo style, or my personal preference, an "Arbalest", but either way using crossbows (either one big repeating crossbow, or two hand crossbows)--but either way, we may finally get an option that fits better with how FF "Ranger" fans have wanted to play.

 

[cbwjm]

On the other hand, when a subclass requires you to make choices to best utilize it before you get it, that's at least somewhat problematic. For example, let's say you're destined to become a dragon sorcerer. You better not take Mage Armor for the first two levels, because you're going to get natural armor! Oh and also, you need to focus on certain types of damage because you're eventually going to get bonus damage! And you have to avoid taking any spell that you'll get from your subclass, which in the case of the Sorcerer, means Alter Self, Chromatic Orb, Command, and Dragon's Breath.

I remember having a similar problem in Pathfinder 1e, where I couldn't take Burning Hands, despite having bonuses for using it, because I was going to get it for free at level 3.

And sure, yeah, you can swap out spells at level up in 5e, but you can only do one at a time, and it's still just unnecessary.

Is this as bad as waiting to find out at level 3 that you can wear heavy armor like in 2014? I don't know, but it feels like if your subclass is going to be transformative in any way, they should come in as soon as possible.

It also kind of feels a bit nonsensical that you get several features at once at level 3 out of the blue. What should be happening is that you should be getting these gradually. Like, why can't you get 1 thing at each of levels 1-3, to show you slowly becoming a "true" member of your subclass?

I feel like that would be more logical, but YMMV.

I remember having the same issues with PF1e, the spells were really thematic but for some reason they decided to delay the spell acquisition, I always figured that a common house rule would be to allow them to get the spells as they unlock the levels rather than waiting. I also felt the same way about the bard college of valour when 5e came out, wanting to be a warrior bard and having to wait until 3rd level for medium armour and shields was painful.

 

[Horwath]

I like Sorcerers waiting for their subclass. I never liked how each sorcerer immediately knows the source of their power. I’d much rather find out over time, and it’s better for new players to be able to choose after a few sessions playing the character.

sorcerer can be in ignorance about the source of it's power, but it still should be there to a degree,
I agree with @James Gasik in the next post as proficiencies(weapons, skills, armor, tools) and bonus spells should be added from 1st level.

Like Scout rogue,
Proficiency in Nature and Survival as 1st level then expertise at 3rd level, with reaction movement.
It's much smoother than going from knowing nothing(Jon Snow) to being an expert in the field overnight.

same way for sorcerer, even if we say that new players struggle with new features), it's better then to get 2 spell at 1st level, actually use them for few sessions, rather then getting piled on with 4 spells, 2 of which you will miss out most of the time.

I mean how much do you use burning hands at 3rd level?

 

[Minigiant]

And yes, part of the design problem is that the thing Rangers in other FF games have been used for don't fit very well in the multiplayer RPG environment. They make a lot of sense in single player, where choosing to specialize one of your party members in "I kill specific things REAL REAL good" or "I set down powerful traps that have to be triggered by enemies interacting with them" is perfectly workable. In an MMO environment, those mechanics....don't fit properly, and would be extremely likely to be either a design or balance headache, or be not very fun to use as a player.

I think this is an understated issue with Rangers.

Rangers as D&D and most fantasy world are trained

1. Solo Play (Witchers, Wow Hunter's, Monster Hunter)
2. All Ranger parties (Ie ASOIAF Nights Watch Rangers, Dragon Age Wardens)
3. Escort Missions of NPCs (Aragorn. 0e rangers)

But D&D like MMOs are team games.

Fans say Ranger skills are important for the game but then you must figure out how to organically enter them in a team game AND suck so many resources out the base class that it is weak.

This is how the 2014 and 3e ranger failed. It is a perfect representation of how a solo or all-ranger ranger would look. They stay in their favored terrain and kill their favored Enemy. And if you really need to kill a red dragon, there is a ranger who speaks dragonic, kills dragons easily, and skips all your mountain troubles.

But this is terrible for teamplay.

2024 had the right idea and focus on swappable spells and a separate spell pool. So ranger can swap out magic spells to match their goes and territory but it doesn't touch their combat power.

It just never goes far enough because WOTC and most 3PPs don't produce tons of niche spells anymore. And many other games go the fear route and have Rangery Feats compete with Combat Feats. (OR like PF2 make 90% the skill feats suck).

 

[Horwath]

But this is terrible for teamplay.

So true,
ranger features, even if they look specialized, need to have broad effect.

I.E:
favored enemy can have small combat boost, like once on YOUR TURN when you deal damage to your favored enemy, deal +1d6 extra damage of the same type, or different number.

then broader abilities can be skill bonuses, resistances and/or immunity to damage types. additional movement modes.


if ranger really need to be chained to HM, then make it a good team spell.

on higher ranger levels, HM can negate invisibility, etherealness, slowing movement, prevent or hinder teleport usage, give everyone bonus damage or advantage on attacks, negating resistance or immunity, or giving damage vulnerability to certain damage types.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

sorcerer can be in ignorance about the source of it's power, but it still should be there to a degree,
I agree with @James Gasik in the next post as proficiencies(weapons, skills, armor, tools) and bonus spells should be added from 1st level.

Like Scout rogue,
Proficiency in Nature and Survival as 1st level then expertise at 3rd level, with reaction movement.
It's much smoother than going from knowing nothing(Jon Snow) to being an expert in the field overnight.

same way for sorcerer, even if we say that new players struggle with new features), it's better then to get 2 spell at 1st level, actually use them for few sessions, rather then getting piled on with 4 spells, 2 of which you will miss out most of the time.

I mean how much do you use burning hands at 3rd level?

We're trying to square a circle with compass and straightedge.

On the one hand, in the old way, going back to 3e, since that's when à la carte multiclassing became a thing and still somewhat present in 5.0, we have the problem of frontloading, in two directions. First and more important long-term, we have "front-loaded features become dippable power" and other, similar balance-related issues. Such things will only get worse over time, especially with 5e's extreme reluctance to issue errata to core class features (that's why we didn't get PHB1 errata, we got a brand-new "revised but totally not revised but it's way better but it's exactly the same" edition). Remember, for example, how they chose to weaken Storm Sorcerer, because people complained that it would power-creep Dragon and Chaos due to them not getting bonus spells but the playtest Storm Sorcerer did. The "lesson" they took from that wasn't "fix the Dragon and Chaos Sorcerers to have bonus spells", it was "nerf all future subclasses so they don't automatically outshine the original ones". Second and more important short-term, we have the "don't scare the new players with a crapton of features all at once" problem.

On the other, we have the comments that have just come up in this thread, and which are the big complaint with 5.5e vs 5.0: the two directions that delayed features cause problems, narrative and gamist. Which, again I would classify as "short term" and "long term" respectively; narrative concerns about what does or doesn't make sense for two levels fade once you're 5 levels down the line, more or less, but making those early levels suck or forcing weird early problems will be a perennial issue.

All of this would be solved by ditching the new-with-5e "the first level or two are training wheels, experienced players should skip them in most cases" style that D&D has adopted, and instead replacing this with robust Novice Levels.

By "robust", I mean that they enable a wide variety of starting points and growth rates, and can be extended more or less uniformly to telescoping out higher levels as well. So a bare-minimum 0th level character has....nothing. No proficiencies, presumably all 8s in ability scores, no spells, no saving throws, zip, zero, nada. Maybe one (spoken-only) language, since that's relatively important. That's about the absolute bare minimum you can have and still have "a character" in D&D terms. Then, a truly robust "Novice Levels" system would allow you to parcel out the pieces of becoming a 1st-level character, preferably with the ability to "try before you buy" as it were. So maybe you pick up divine spellcasting and get a single spell, but that could be the first step on the road to becoming a whole host of characters, not just specifically a Cleric--you could become a Paladin, or a Divine Soul Sorcerer, or a Celestial Warlock, or a Druid, or maybe even a Bard (if the spell is reasonably compatible with being one, e.g. cure wounds), or a character who started with Magic Initiate: Cleric (or equivalents) but actually studied arcane magic.

With a system like this, it would be a snap to develop two kinds of "0th-level adventures": "intros", designed to get brand-new players up to speed as they learn by doing rather than having to read through a zillion manual pages before they can even start to start to play; and "grinders", designed to give old-school fans that brutal, deadly, no-holds-barred challenge they crave. (For some old-school fans, I presume all and only grinders would be their preferred "intros" for new players, but most of them are aware that that isn't gonna fly for most players.)

Further, we'd have the ability to directly support old-school players who want that feeling of very very slow progression, AND 3e-style fans who love slow, methodical, organic growth of their characters over time. You could, for example, employ "Novice Level" rules as a form of downtime activity training. Spend X number of days (and appropriate training costs/materials) in downtime, get half proficiency (or half Training or whatever) in a new skill. Spend another X (+costs/mats), you get full proficiency. Or maybe it's X to get +1 bonus, and you need to repeat that enough times to match your current proficiency(/training/etc.) bonus--so training is harder for higher-level characters because they're trying to achieve greater mastery that WOULD have come from using the skill in the field, but now they must learn that through accelerated education instead.

It really is one of those extraordinarily rare design elements that manages to offer SOMETHING to nearly everybody. The one and only cost is that...well, designing such a thing is nontrivial. It would require the designers to think very carefully about how the system is built and how to make that work well. But, personally, that's what I think designers should ALWAYS be doing when they design a system, so to me that is just "expecting the designers to earn the money they expect us to pay for their work".

 

[Horwath]

We're trying to square a circle with compass and straightedge.

heh, maybe

but really, getting extra 1st level spells and maybe even a cantrip at 3rd level is too little too late for most spell.
they are good at 1st and 2nd level and fall of the cliff after.

frontloading is a problem, but on the other hand without it, characters are boring to play, I mean even now, everything under 5th level is snorefest unless you are a new player, characters simply do not have enough things to do.

our last fight, the rogue did same thing 5 rounds in a row, Aim+Elven accuracy with longbow.
why? because rogue, does not have really anything else to do, unless you are AT, but those spell slots will run out fast.

battlemaster? 5th level, well, you have superiority dice for 2 rounds, after that? d20 "auto-attack" like a bad champion.

 

[Minigiant]

So true,
ranger features, even if they look specialized, need to have broad effect.

I.E:
favored enemy can have small combat boost, like once on YOUR TURN when you deal damage to your favored enemy, deal +1d6 extra damage of the same type, or different number.

That's still bad.

Effects that only target your favored Enemy or only work in your favored terrain is bad.

Too many games go all one way or another.

It should be like Divine Smite.

You get 80% power at base and 100% vs your specialty.

+1d6 normally, +1d8 vs favored enemies.

The Dragoncloak spell gives fire/cold/lightning/poison/acid resistance normally, immunity vs damage from dragons.

PWT gis +10 normally. AOE triples in Favored terrain.