Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Wyckedemus" data-source="post: 8800311" data-attributes="member: 1079">I like D&D having D&D tropes. I like that the baseline conceit for all D&D worlds is that magic is prevalent, and many classes interact with the magical world in some way. The spell system is a solid toolbox for all D&D classes to be able to reference an non-comprehensive suite of powers within the universe, even if they access those magical powers in different ways outside of traditional spellcasting progression. I like the spellcasting D&D ranger, as it is very D&D to me. I want a spellcasting magical ranger who can alternate between their bow and two short swords who can also have a drake or other beast companion and whose spellcasting lets me keep those companions hearty and alive (and revived) instead of becoming griffon food in every other encounter. Siloing spells and beast companions into different subclasses prevents me from being able to create what I see as a quintessential D&D ranger.If I had my druthers, I'd let the D&D Ranger be the D&D Ranger, and let 3rd party sources be the authors of "non-spellcasting" rangers if their versions better fit those 3rd party campaign conceits. And when it comes to Adventurer's League, all those campaigns take place in D&D-magic worlds, not low-magic settings, so the argument for low-magic Rangers in supported AL play is less convincing. As a specific example and opinion, D&D doesn't need to copy Level Up's ranger. The LU ranger is already a perfectly fine non-spellcasting ranger that is completely compatible with D&D. Why are people asking that D&D copy it? I doubt that the 2024 PHB ranger could ever come close to making both spell-ranger fans and LU ranger fans happy. And why would we want it to in the first place? Just play the LU Ranger instead. It's designed to be able to be played alongside the D&D ranger.</blockquote>

Verification