D&D 5E I think people want the Ranger changed for the wrong reasons.

[DEFCON 1]

I think people want the Ranger changed for the wrong reasons too. They want it changed because they think they're actually going to like what WotC comes out with. But in point of fact... there are SO MANY divergent opinions about what the Ranger "should" be or "should" get... no matter what WotC finally releases probably three out of every four players will still think they screwed the pooch.

The "best" way to fix the Ranger? Tell each and every player that doesn't like the one in the book to go through the myriad of ranger mods that hundreds of different people have already made on all the dozens of different websites and find the one you do like and ask the DM to let you play that. And if by some chance you happen to be one of the 1% of players who wants desperately to play a Ranger in an Adventurer's League game and refuses to play anything else... but also just can't can't can't deal with the Ranger in its current form to the point where you feel your ONLY option is to give up playing AL altogether... WotC can offer their sincerest apologies.

 

[Edwin Suijkerbuijk]

The problem with the beastemaster is there is no equivalent of "hunter's mark" for it.
No "Beast master's mark". The closest is "beast bond" in the EEPC.

There should be a "mark" for all ranger subclasses.

And that's the problem. The ranger's spell list is too small and has too few "unique spells". Same with the sorcerer.
Not enough page space.

So maybe A beast mark might allouw the animal companion to alouw to attack the marked target without having to spend the action.

 

[ZickZak]

I believe it was The Jester who said that a class has to finish last and this time it was the Ranger. I don't believe that makes the class bad. I for one just want to see a well written spell-less ranger but that;s not really the topic here.

Ranger is boring. It has much higher dmg than archer assassin/monk4e MC and that is what I play, even though I always played ranger.

 

[Sunseeker]

I can't speak for anyone else but I'm with CapnZapp.

I want the option to not use spells (aside from timply not taking them). I want a Hunters Mark that works. I want a pet that isn't a one-shot-wonder.

 

[CM]

First of all, I don't think there's too many people dissatisfied with the hunter, other than the problem of Hunter's Mark's fragility.

For the beastmaster, the sheer clunkiness of making the beast take your action is a dealbreaker for me (same reason I wasn't too fond of the 4e version).

So how to fix it? 4e's summoned creatures had a thing where, lacking direct instruction, the creature had a couple of default actions it would take. I think someone here suggested a table of random actions for beast companions as well. Taking direct control out of the player's hands (unless they want to direct it via actions) seems like a good compromise and also helps make the beast feel like a unique being rather than as an extension of the ranger's body.

 

[Minigiant]

So maybe A beast mark might allouw the animal companion to alouw to attack the marked target without having to spend the action.

That's who the Beast Master's mark works in my game.
You mark the target and all friendly or charmed beasts with Int 3 or lower within 5 feet of it attack it at the end of your turn with bonus damage. They also can follow its scent to the last point it was on the plane.

 

[Xeviat]

Or simply require the ranger to use cure to keep their beast going, where the hunter uses it for hunter's mark. I'm considering giving share spells earlier instead.

 

[Zalabim]

The problem that stands out the most in the Ranger, to me, is the lack of a unique feature. Sorcerer shares this problem to a degree, even with having its subpaths start at level 1. Every other class has differentiating features at levels 1 and 2 that make that class stand out from other classes, even before getting a subpath that makes it stand out from other characters in the same class. Both classes are functional. They meet or exceed the required numbers. They're just a little too badly written for me to overlook.

 

[Sezarious]

The problem that stands out the most in the Ranger, to me, is the lack of a unique feature. Sorcerer shares this problem to a degree, even with having its subpaths start at level 1. Every other class has differentiating features at levels 1 and 2 that make that class stand out from other classes, even before getting a subpath that makes it stand out from other characters in the same class. Both classes are functional. They meet or exceed the required numbers. They're just a little too badly written for me to overlook.

Agreed. I feel that there is a certain lack of flavour of some sort that the other classes do not lack so much. At the end of the day though, the core books will always exist, but it's nice to see a company that seems to care about the product after it's initial release. Whatever they choose to do will be a welcome optional add on I feel.

 

[Azurewraith]

I cant speak for everyone but i think the Hunter is fine BMs need a pet that can act with them. I want spells gone forever and ever never to be seen again! but some people like it so subclass it.

The main reason i want ranger changed is this damn wilderness paladin crap a a wilderness paladin is a druid straight up through and through. Im pretty sure im repeating myself but meh everyone likes the sound of there own voi.... urm key strokes. The ranger is also not a guardian of nature they are a guardian of civilization and man and couldn't care less about the trees.

EDIT: Should maybe add what i want to see in.

To me a ranger should be tough rough n ready living on the borders of civilization shutting down the savage races and animals if they begin to threaten civilization. Tracking and self sufficiency should be a key concept of the class, they should be the last man to fall after a long day they need to be swift to keep up with their quarry and to evade a Superior force. Nature should be their tool not their god! they should use it to heal themselves and others to craft traps to hide in to burn to the ground as a nuke

I would Make hunters mark a feature.