D&D 5E It's official, WOTC hates Rangers (Tasha's version of Favored Foe is GARBAGE)

[UngeheuerLich]

Revised Ranger Beast Master is better.

Revised ranger had destroyed the game by being pure powercreep.
The ranger problem was never its overall power. It was DM dependant abilities mixed with bad interaction (bonus action, extra attack with attack action for hunters or TWF and then a level 11 multiattack that does not use the attack action.)

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Revised ranger had destroyed the game by being pure powercreep.
The ranger problem was never its overall power. It was DM dependant abilities mixed with bad interaction (bonus action, extra attack with attack action for hunters or TWF and then a level 11 multiattack that does not use the attack action.)

Did you really see the revised ranger as more powerful than the other options in the phb?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Did you really see the revised ranger as more powerful than the other options in the phb?

Yes. Considering that in play the ranger did fine, something way beyond that baseline is necessarily too powerful.

Edit: it is probably not as gamebreaking as I remembered.
The natural explorer variant is a bit too much in my opinion, and favoured enemy revised is even more situational, and if it works, too powerful.

Also, the optional class features should bring the ranger in line with the rest of the classes. Primal awareness actually is quite good and does replace the revised rangers primeval awareness quite well.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Did you really see the revised ranger as more powerful than the other options in the phb?

I thought the revised ranger was overcompensating in terms of raw power...then I went and look back at the Paladin's class...I changed my mind

 

[Horwath]

I thought the revised ranger was overcompensating in terms of raw power...then I went and look back at the Paladin's class...I changed my mind

this is the main problem,
when you compare these 2 classes, as they are made on the same concept, that is a divine half-caster martial type, ranger class features are a joke comparing to paladin ones.
Especially in levels 1-10.

 

[Helldritch]

Revised ranger had destroyed the game by being pure powercreep.
The ranger problem was never its overall power. It was DM dependant abilities mixed with bad interaction (bonus action, extra attack with attack action for hunters or TWF and then a level 11 multiattack that does not use the attack action.)

And

Yes. Considering that in play tge ranger did fine, something way beyond that baseline is necessarily too powerful.

Really? And I mean REALLY?
We are using the revised version (but not the conclave themselves. We use PHB for the conclaves). And the ranger is now quite ok. Two small house rule and the ranger is quite good now. Not the heavy hitter that the paladin is, but at least now he can hold his own, especially against its favored enemies.
Rule one: Hunter's mark requires no concentration.
Rule two: Ordering the beast is now a bonus action. As long as the beast can follow its last order it will do so, freeing the ranger's bonus action if needed.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

this is the main problem,
when you compare these 2 classes, as they are made on the same concept, that is a divine half-caster martial type, ranger class features are a joke comparing to paladin ones.
Especially in levels 1-10.

But you are a paladin then... You have to overcompensate quite a bit there by default.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

And


Really? And I mean REALLY?
We are using the revised version (but not the conclave themselves. We use PHB for the conclaves). And the ranger is now quite ok. Two small house rule and the ranger is quite good now. Not the heavy hitter that the paladin is, but at least now he can hold his own, especially against its favored enemies.
Rule one: Hunter's mark requires no concentration.
Rule two: Ordering the beast is now a bonus action. As long as the beast can follow its last order it will do so, freeing the ranger's bonus action if needed.

I think your rule 2 is good. Rule 1 maybe if it is solely a ranger feature at level 5 or so. I know the ranger does not need a lot to be good. This is why I think the revised ranger was a bitt off.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yes. Considering that in play the ranger did fine, something way beyond that baseline is necessarily too powerful.

Edit: it is probably not as gamebreaking as I remembered.
The natural explorer variant is a bit too much in my opinion, and favoured enemy revised is even more situational, and if it works, too powerful.

Also, the optional class features should bring the ranger in line with the rest of the classes. Primal awareness actually is quite good and does replace the revised rangers primeval awareness quite well.

It was more powerful than the phb ranger, not than most of the phb classes.

So, not power creep, and certainly not game breaking.

it just makes the class less situational, and from experience, no, the revised favored enemy isn’t too powerful when it comes up. It’s a small damage boost, not a big deal.

 

[Flamestrike]

Revised ranger had destroyed the game by being pure powercreep.
The ranger problem was never its overall power. It was DM dependant abilities mixed with bad interaction (bonus action, extra attack with attack action for hunters or TWF and then a level 11 multiattack that does not use the attack action.)

The problem with the Ranger was:

• Its main abilities lay in the exploration pillar, which is the pillar with the least rules focus, and the one most often handwaved in most campaigns anyway, and is the first pillar to be rendered totally obsolete by spells. Its core ability is 'I can get you to the dungeon safely' and most adventures proceed on the assumption you're getting to the dungeon regardless anyway.
• It's frontloaded (it's actually a fantastic class at levels 1-6) and then has no incentive to stick with it after those levels barring its 1/2 caster spellcasting increase (and if you want spellcasting you're better off just taking your remaining 15 levels in a Spellcasting class). It has no compelling class features past 6th level that you cant get better elsewhere and little incentive to stay in the class.
• Beastmaster action economy (now fixed with the new universal 'Pet' rules seen on the Artificer and the new Beastmaster beasts that are available).

Personally I've always found a Ranger 6, Battlemaster Fighter 3, Scout Rogue 11 does a better job at being a Ranger than the core Ranger.