D&D 5E [Poll] Ranger Satisfaction Survey

[CapnZapp]

I completely understand why the Ranger was the first PHB class to be revised. Nuff said

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[Charles Rampant]

I've only seen one in play, a PHB Hunter Ranger. It's been okay. Being the archer who can cast Pass Without Trace has been the defining trait of the character in play. The class doesn't feel like it has enough spells though - the character can't heal, do damaging spells, do controlling spells, and talk to animals very easily. In other words, the class seems to use spells to gain archetypical Ranger abilities, and it didn't seem to me as DM that they had enough spells to cover all the bases. It's a pretty small sample though, so I would be hesitant to start houseruling over it.

 

[Leatherhead]

I voted other.
Because it's already being revised and we don't have the final draft of that revision yet.

 

[Yunru]

The original Ranger is okay, if a little on the weak side. Only complaints with it is beast master sucks.
The new Ranger is okay, if stepping far too heavily on the Assassin's toes. Only complaint is that it steps far too heavily on the Assassin's toes.

 

[Istbor]

I really like the worked over Beastmaster and others from the UA. It strikes a good balance in my book and makes the class feel more interesting. Hoping that I get that version in a real book soon.

 

[ro]

The newest Revised Ranger from UA seems just about right for making the Ranger a fun, competitive class. The only improvement it needs on the surface is to open up beast companion options to all those available in the PHB Ranger rather than the select four or so they offered in UA.