Isn't a spell-less ranger just a scout?
I think the Scout subclass of Rogue shows that the Scout subclass of Fighter, is about as obsolete as the Artificer subclass of Wizard.
For me, it depends very much on what the monster's motivation is for conflicting with the party. Zombies tear you apart and eat you. Gnolls IMC love destruction, and for them the payoff isn't when you fall to zero HP, it's when your corpse disintegrates--unless they are very desperate (about to be TPKed), they will always pause long enough to mutilate a dead body. A ghoul might just want to snag a meal, and as soon as it's got a dead body it tries to drag it away while the other ghouls keep fighting.
Except for organized, militaristic humanoids (who will have zero trouble dealing with a Guardian Aura after they realize what's going on), most monsters shouldn't be trying to "win" the combat or "challenge" the PCs. They have goals of their own, and those goals will dictate how they respond to a downed PC.
It actually does make the ability more powerful. If an obvious strategy to counter it does not works well, it leads to the enemies wasting actions, something that is always good.All true. But it won't stop certain monsters from trying--it's not like they know what the PC's Acrobatics score is. They just know they're trying to score an easy meal; or in a dragon's case, it just knows it's trying to pick off the weakest-looking PCs one at a time. It doesn't know that the spindly-looking wizard is actually a high-Dex Bladesinger with Acrobatics +9 who can just Dimension Door away even if he is caught.
That doesn't make Guardian Aura more powerful though. In fact it just indicates why it's still unexciting: it only covers a single threat vector.
The difficult terrain thing is indeed a nice synergy. Spike Growth is pretty nice too for locking down movement.
Note that it's unclear when/whether difficult terrain impedes jumping movement. In some cases, some DMs may allow a monster like that toad-thing from Volo's to hop away with a PC in its gullet, ignoring 15' or so of the difficult terrain.
BTW, I am not arguing here that DMs should metagame against Guardian's Aura. I'm just arguing that Guardian's Aura isn't all that great against various things that a DM is probably already doing anyway. (At least, I am.)
Depends on what happens after that. Remember that the point of grappling isn't just to remove an enemy from healing, it's to remove it from healing and party support. A dragon or a vampire will grapple and kidnap a PC in order to turn a 4:1 fight into a 1:1 fight. The fact that it shuts down Guardian Aura is just one more example of how 1:1 fights are harder.
I'd call "investing 15 levels in Ranger" a pre-requisite, wouldn't you? And you still only get healing up to half health. I agree that it's questionable design from the point of view of Champion invalidation, but with my powergamer hat on, it's hard to think of a campaign where I would want a 15th level ranger in the party even with this ability.
I'm not sure what this last sentence means. IME, the only reason why Aura of Vitality doesn't get cast more is because the party doesn't tend to take thousands of HP of damage. By level 15, a Paladorc (say Paladin 9/Sorcerer 6) with Extended Aura of Vitality would have, what, 8 castings of Aura of Vitality available to him? That's 1120 HP of healing per long rest, and he's not even a full-time healer.
Death monks don't have to kill "hostile creatures". They can kill 2cp chickens in grotesque ways and still gain 10-25 temp HP from it. (And indeed, this is very much in character for them.)
Reiterating: I agree that the ability should be revised to be more idiomatic for 5E and to not eclipse the Champion. (And actually, in its current state it actually makes some of the 1/long rest Paladin capstones look exactly as lame as they in fact are.) But from a powergaming perspective, it doesn't matter if the ability is nerfed or not, because AFAICT it doesn't push the boundaries of what is already possible. The single most exciting thing it does is make melee parties more attractive/durable/fun; which is entirely a good thing BTW. But that is only a playstyle change, not a balance change. You could have killed the exact same monsters anyway, with a different party composition.
Why not both? I know 2e had a number kits that had the same name across classes. I don't see it as a problem for subclasses in 5e doing the same. Their approach may be different, but they're both scouts.Given that we have nature-themed subclasses for the barbarian, cleric, and paladin, I don't see why they wouldn't have nature subclasses for both the fighter and a rogue. Of course, which one is called the scout is a matter of opinion.....
Personally, I prefer the rogue one, but I seem to recall the fighter being popular (on the forums which might or might not mean anything on the surveys) in its day.
And if you are using 8 slots (On a spell that does not have upcasting. That’s all your highest-level spell slots.) and 8 sorcery points (What would lead to using at least one more slot because you only have 6 points by default) for healing, you’re clearly being more than a occasional healer. That’s a lot of resources. But I see you’re only showing a maximum healing capability, not a real example. Also, you are considering that the sorcerer used one of their 2 metamagic choices on one of the worst options just to double the amount of healing.
Not a major issue but it means when your throwing ideas around you can't just go I want to be a scout.Why not both? I know 2e had a number kits that had the same name across classes. I don't see it as a problem for subclasses in 5e doing the same. Their approach may be different, but they're both scouts.
Not a major issue but it means when your throwing ideas around you can't just go I want to be a scout.
The Horizon Walker and Forest Guardian don't fit the style of campaigns that I run so they will never get used in my campaigns. As for the Scout, it reminds me of why I dislike several classes not receiving their subclasses at first level.
8th level Guardian Ranger (for easy math), gets fireballed in an ambush. You run up, change:
You heal 16 hp, your max increases by 16, and at the start of every turn you gain 4 temp hp.
Enemy breaks, you drop form to follow. Next turn go Guardian again, you heal another 16 hp.
If a DM allows the transformation outside of combat (which I'm inclined to do so they can take advantage of Large size), they can just pop it on and off to heal x2 their level until they are back to full health. Which is not the intent.
RE: chickens, your DM will probably love it if you buy a flock of chickens and put them on a long multi-leash or in cages, and cart them around with you to sacrifice in your grotesque Death Monk voodoo rituals. He will have so much fun with those chickens. You're right that those questions do occur, but they get resolved in play and it's a blast. In fact, I highly recommend trying out a chicken-flock at least once, for any player, whether or not their PCs have weird life-draining powers.
They edited the PDF to allow this ability only once per rest.
Starting at 3rd level, you gain the ability to
temporarily grow and take on the appearance of
a treelike person, covered with leaves and bark.
As a bonus action, you assume this guardian
form, which lasts until you end it as a bonus
action or until you are incapacitated.
You undergo the following changes while in
your guardian form:
• Your size becomes Large, unless you were
• Any speed you have becomes 5 feet, unless the
speed was lower.
• Your reach increases by 5 feet.
• You gain a number of temporary hit points at
the start of each of your turns. The number
equals half your ranger level. When the form
ends, you lose any temporary hit points you
have from it.
Starting at 15th level, your guardian form
emanates a magical aura that fortifies your
injured allies. When any ally starts their turn
within 30 feet of your guardian form, that ally
regains a number of hit points equal to half your
ranger level. This aura has no effect on a
creature that has half or more of its hit points,
and it has no effect on undead and constructs.
They edited the PDF to allow this ability only once per rest.
I'm not seeing it. The page (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/ranger-and-rogue) still links to this PDF (http://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/downloads/2017_01_UA_RangerRogue_0117JCMM.pdf) with this text:
No mention there that I can see of per-rest. Am I just blind, or is there some other version of the PDF?
I heard that on a different forum, but no matter what I do the improved version does not appear for me.
Is it long rest or short rest?
Do we think this ability is still worthwhile once per rest? Is 14 hp a short rest a good 7th level ability?
I agree it needed the limit, I just want to know if people think that takes it into the territory of being a bad ability to gain.
Even at once per rest it's better than Second Wind, and I have yet to hear anyone say Second Wind isn't worth it.