D&D 5E Poll: Should Orzel's "Favored Enemy" idea be implemented in D&D Next?

[RigaMortus2]

In 3e and 4e, the Ranger had to choose Archery or Two Weapon Fighting (and thus was suboptimal with any other fighting style).

No more so then a Fighter or Rogue is "suboptimal".

The Ranger had an advantage if they chose to specialize in archery or two-weapon fighting, and got advantages for doing so. If you chose not to partake in that, you'd be wasting your class features. But a 3e Ranger who chose to do sword and shield or two-handed style was at no more a disadvantage than a Rogue or Paladin that chose to do the same (the Fighter had extra feats on their side, so they were more customizable above all other weapon-using combatants).

 

[Fifth Element]

In 3e and 4e, the Ranger had to choose Archery or Two Weapon Fighting (and thus was suboptimal with any other fighting style).

Yes, but of course the complaint was not that rangers have to choose a fighting style, it was that "every ranger" has to be a two-weapon fighter, which has not been true since 2E.

A more carefully-worded complaint might be in order.

 

[Fifth Element]

The Ranger had an advantage if they chose to specialize in archery or two-weapon fighting, and got advantages for doing so. If you chose not to partake in that, you'd be wasting your class features. But a 3e Ranger who chose to do sword and shield or two-handed style was at no more a disadvantage than a Rogue or Paladin that chose to do the same (the Fighter had extra feats on their side, so they were more customizable above all other weapon-using combatants).

I'm not sure that's valid. What class features are fighters or rogues wasting? They have much more flexibility in their choices. They can choose something else, rather than having a limited choice forced upon them.

 

[GX.Sigma]

No more so then a Fighter or Rogue is "suboptimal".

No more so than a Fighter or Rogue who wastes a feat slot is "suboptimal."

 

[Jiggawatts]

Yes, but of course the complaint was not that rangers have to choose a fighting style, it was that "every ranger" has to be a two-weapon fighter, which has not been true since 2E.

A more carefully-worded complaint might be in order.

For clarity's sake, I wish for rangers and two weapon fighting, from any source that makes the style a "class feature", to be decoupled.

 

[CM]

Ranger

In 3e and 4e, the Ranger had to choose Archery or Two Weapon Fighting (and thus was suboptimal with any other fighting style).

Assuming you're only talking initial 4e PHB...

Otherwise:

FIGHTING STYLE
Choose one of the following fighting styles and gain its benefit: Archer Fighting Style, Beast Mastery, Two-Blade Fighting Style, Marauder Fighting Style, Hunter Fighting Style.

 

[ren1999]

Basically I am taking a poll to see how many would like to see Orzel's idea about the ranger's "Favored Enemy" mechanic.

If you're not sure about what it is, here is the Wizard's site where it all started.

Favored Enemy idea.

Respectfully no.
Races should not have a favored enemy.
Races should not have racial weapon bonuses.

 

[Mercule]

I'm not sure if I like the specific bonuses listed, but it's a great seed of an idea. Flesh it out a bit and it may be the best implementation, yet.