D&D (2024) How to simply fix Ranger in 2024.

[ECMO3]

this is a fast scrapped sub-class for fighter due to suggestion that ranger should be nothing more than a fighter subclass.
I do not agree, but I did try a whack at it.
And as fighter subclass(and Aragorn did not cast spells), this subclass does not get spells.

Aragorn did cast spells, multiple times and some of the things he did were allegedly the thematic impetus behind the V/S/M components. It is just endlessly debated whether he was able to cast spells because he was a Ranger or because of his Elven blood.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Aragorn did cast spells, multiple times and some of the things he did were allegedly the thematic impetus behind the V/S/M components. It is just endlessly debated whether he was able to cast spells because he was a Ranger or because of his Elven blood.

Or because he was a paladin.

 

[Horwath]

Or because he was a paladin.

or because he was a magic item hoarder

 

[Minigiant]

Aragorn did cast spells, multiple times and some of the things he did were allegedly the thematic impetus behind the V/S/M components. It is just endlessly debated whether he was able to cast spells because he was a Ranger or because of his Elven blood.

It really doesn't matter because the D&D ranger would cast spells because in D&D settings woodcraft and nature lodge is supplanted by primal or nature magic.

So in order to do many of the things people would assume a ranger could do they would be using spells.

In worlds and media where Rangers are noncasters typically those are low fantasy low magic settings so the rangers don't even have access to magic. Just like everybody else doesn't have access to magic.

 

[Xeviat]

It really doesn't matter because the D&D ranger would cast spells because in D&D settings woodcraft and nature lodge is supplanted by primal or nature magic.

So in order to do many of the things people would assume a ranger could do they would be using spells.

In worlds and media where Rangers are noncasters typically those are low fantasy low magic settings so the rangers don't even have access to magic. Just like everybody else doesn't have access to magic.

To me, Rangers have spells for the same reason Paladins have spells: because they're mystical. The woodsman and the monster hunter of legend can do things that other people can't. Herbalism and woodcraft are seen as magical by the common folk, just like the Paladin's faith and conviction gives them supernatural power.

Fighters can get a Guerilla or Commando subclass, and Rogues can have their Scout subclass for nonmagical rangers.

 

[g00se99994]

If you have Eldritch Knight with minor spellcasting, than Fighters having a Ranger subclass with similar capability of casting would be cool. I'd allow something like that at my table.

 

[Kannik]

No, no reason why wilderness guy should be limited to a particular class, backgrounds offer more flexibility.

Very much this. I would much prefer "Ranger" be a theme or profession or background or something similar overlaid on other classes such that the wilderness protectors, or guerillas, or band of merry men, could all be a diverse group of wilderness-y capable folk.

The reason for Hunters Mark is that without it there is nothing distinctive whatsoever for rangers to do in 5e. “

The main archtypes that I see a "Ranger" class (or classes) could fill are Archer, Skirmisher, Beastmaster, and Nature/Primal Paladin (ie, the Druid equivalent of a Paladin).* Archer could be a fighter subclass** for a non-magical version, and there could also be a ranged version of the/a Primal Paladin class for an interesting magical shenanigan version. Skirmisher (as a light mobile fighter, including focusing on dual wielding) could be it's own class, or a subclass of Fighter**, and the Scout Rogue also occupies a similar niche albeit tied into the sneak attack schtick. Depending on how the above shakes out, Beastmaster could be a subclass of the Skirmisher class, with mechanisms tied in to ensure long-term viability of the beast and working to ensure the overall damage capacity matches the core classes. Primal Paladin is likely best done as it's own class to give it the maximum differentiation instead of just being an Oath of the Ancients kind of rider thing.


* Drakewarden is also cool, as a special kind of Beastmaster.
** Hopefully with some Battlemaster-esque features/options.

 

[Minigiant]

Funny stuff

Apparently For Slayer currently doesn't work on DNDB character builder.

It can't change the 1d6 to a 1d10

Ranger fans, if you needed a laugh.

 

[mellored]

Another alternative.
Spells that buff Hunter's Mark.

Wolf Pact Mark
Level 2 spell
Cast immediately after using Hunter's Mark (no action).
Duration: same as the Hunter's Mark.
You empower your Hunter's Mark. Your allies have advantage against the target of your Hunter's Mark as long as you are with 5' of it


Eagles Mark
Level 3 spell
Cast immediately after using Hunter's Mark (no action).
Duration: same as the Hunter's Mark.
You empower your Hunter's Mark. When you move towards the target of your Hunter's Mark, you gain a fly speed equal to your speed. If you have no target at the end of your turn, you slowly up to your speed.



Or something similar.

 

[ECMO3]

It really doesn't matter because the D&D ranger would cast spells because in D&D settings woodcraft and nature lodge is supplanted by primal or nature magic.

Yeah but we are talking about Aragorn, not a generic woodland nature man. For the most part, Aragorn didn't do woodcraft/nature stuff.

IRL Rangers are not about woodcraft. They are badass special forces soldiers.