D&D (2024) Ranger 2024 is a bigger joke than Ranger 2014:

[Minigiant]

call it nature's favor then.
bonus damage can be even redesigned to choice of acid, cold, fire, lightning, poison or thunder.

Healer's Mark
1 Divination
Casting Time: 1 bonus action
Range: 90 feet
Target: A creature that you can see within range
Components: V
Duration: Up to 1 hour
Classes: Ranger
You choose a creature you can see within range and mystically mark it as your ally. Until the spell ends, whenever you restore hit points or grant temporary hit points to the target, the target gains an additional 1d6 hit points or temporary hit points

If the target hits it's maximum Hit Points before this spell ends, you can take a Bonus Action to move the mark to a new creature you can see within range.

You also have advantage on any Wisdom (Animal Handling or Medicine) check you make to heal or diagnose illness on it.


At Higher Levels: When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 3rd or 4th level, you can maintain your Concentration on the spell for up to 8 hours. When you use a spell slot of 5th level or higher, you can maintain your concentr⁠ation on the spell for up to 24 hours.

Season's Wrath
1st level Evocation
Casting Time: 1 bonus action
Range: Self
Target: Self
Components: V S
Duration: Up to 1 minute
Classes: Ranger
Your incantation empowers you with the harshness of weather. Until the spell ends, your weapon attacks deal an extra 1d4 fire or cold damage on a hit.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I think one of the core issues is that people don't agree with the ranger game loop on paper compared to it in play.

However they cannot describe what they want to ranger core play loop to be in play.

So we have this classic survey based answer of:

I don't like it
So what do you want
I don't know

The paladin doesn't have this problem because everybody agrees to what the planet gameplay loop. "Melee Attack then if the target is important or grow high Smite". Warlock is "EB while concentrating on a spell".

it really doesn't help that the most obvious and generally agreed upon gameplay loop for the ranger is also the most neglected and barebones part of the system: exploration and monster identification.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Sure.
However it's bland and flavorless.
Like why does a Ranger get to ignore the break of concentration of all spells.

The 2024 Ranger is already "Screw flavor, more power". I don't want the ranger to end up being a bland flavorless vanilla blob like the fighter and wizard for "Screw flavor, more power"

It sounds like you are saying it is bland and flavorless only because it is not limited? The ability itself is the unique flavor for the class. You just need to find the right words.

Relentless Hunter
Nothing can shake your primal focus in matters of life and death. When in combat, taking damage can’t break your Concentration on Ranger spells.

 

[Minigiant]

It sounds like you are saying it is bland and flavorless only because it is not limited? The ability itself is the unique flavor for the class. You just need to find the right words.

No I was saying it's bland and flavorless because it was bland and flavorless.

There is no description of why a ranger would have such feature and why another class which would be more magically inclined would not have this feature.

Relentless Hunter
Nothing can shake your primal focus in matters of life and death. When in combat, taking damage can’t break your Concentration on Ranger spells

That at least has flavor.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

There is no description of why a ranger would have such feature and why another class which would be more magically inclined would not have this feature.

<snip> No I was saying it's bland and flavorless because it was bland and flavorless. That at least has flavor.

One could argue "why do only Aberrant Mind Sorcerers get X and not other Sorcerers, or why do only Fighters get Action Surge, because I can imagine other physical classes having that nonmagical ability as well."

It's not a good argument for a class-based system.

If the suggestion is to change a rule, then of course the existing wording usually doesn't work and the wording needs to change to make the new rule make sense.

Rather than say "No" why not build on the proposed suggestion so that you are constructively collaborating on a solution? Obviously a wording change shifted the needle of your position. You can be the one coming up with ideas that shift your own needle, whether on your own, or through collaborative problem solving with your peers.

 

[FrogReaver]

One could argue "why do only Aberrant Mind Sorcerers get X and not other Sorcerers, or why do only Fighters get Action Surge, because I can imagine other physical classes having that nonmagical ability as well."

It's not a good argument for a class-based system.

If the suggestion is to change a rule, then of course the existing wording usually doesn't work and the wording needs to change to make the new rule make sense.

Rather than say "No" why not build on the proposed suggestion so that you are constructively collaborating on a solution? Obviously a wording change shifted the needle of your position. You can be the one coming up with ideas that shift your own needle, whether on your own, or through collaborative problem solving with your peers.

What I find is true of most mechanical change discussions is a few people have a bunch of other baggage and use the opportunity to push for changes that address some of their other baggage.

There’s nothing inherently rangery about keeping concentration on spells no matter what flavor you give it.

 

[Minigiant]

One could argue "why do only Aberrant Mind Sorcerers get X and not other Sorcerers, or why do only Fighters get Action Surge, because I can imagine other physical classes having that nonmagical ability as well.

Well it's not an X.
It's "Why do Rangers get to ignore damage breaking concentration?" and "Why can't Wizards?"

Sometimes the answer to the second question is simply should the other class should be able to do it but it can't fit in their Power Budget.

The fighter only has Action Surge and Second Wind because it's simple, fit the theme, and it was the only class that didn't have an iconic aspect of the class hogging up most of its power budget.

To me one of the issues for the post 2014 Ranger is that many people were just ignoring flavor in order to get more power in the direction they want. They were willing to diluoting or moving all of the flavor in the class in order to get what the power where they wanted it.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

There’s nothing inherently rangery about keeping concentration on spells no matter what flavor you give it.

With 12 classes in a class-based system, that is true for many class/subclass abilities. I even gave examples.

We could pedantically pick apart any version of any class design created by Wizards, or any another company, or by any creator. No design is immune. I could pedantically pick apart every A5E class if I wanted. But I don't find value in it.

The questions are, is it worth doing, what is our true intent, and what good can we construct from the criticism?

Is the benefit the catharsis of complaining about Wizards' design itself, and to make oneself feel better because one is confident that they could design something better? Or is it actually suggesting house rules/variants?

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Well it's not an X.
It's "Why do Rangers get to ignore damage breaking concentration?" and "Why can't Wizards?"

Sometimes the answer to the second question is simply should the other class should be able to do it but it can't fit in their Power Budget.

The fighter only has Action Surge and Second Wind because it's simple, fit the theme, and it was the only class that didn't have an iconic aspect of the class hogging up most of its power budget.

To me one of the issues for the post 2014 Ranger is that many people were just ignoring flavor in order to get more power in the direction they want. They were willing to diluoting or moving all of the flavor in the class in order to get what the power where they wanted it.

So even your example isn't about unique flavor. "Power Budget" is the ultimate deciding factor. Because if any other 2014 class got Action Surge instead, and the Fighter got something else just as cool, we'd not be saying "the Fighter should have had Action Surge because that is iconic to the Fighter." It could have easily been reflavored as a Barbarian or Ranger ability.

I think a hunter's primal focus on their prey is flavorful. But expanding that primal focus to their connection to Primal Ranger Magic while in combat is also flavorful. Sure, it could be adapted to any other class with the right flavor. But the ranger getting it does not take away from anyone else who doesn't get it. Maybe, to borrow your justification, other classes just don't have the Power Budget to have something that powerful for their entire repertoire, and maybe it can work just fine for a weapon-focused half-caster.

 

[Minigiant]

So even your example isn't about unique flavor. "Power Budget" is the ultimate deciding factor. Because if any other 2014 class got Action Surge instead, and the Fighter got something else just as cool, we'd not be saying "the Fighter should have had Action Surge because that is iconic to the Fighter." It could have easily been reflavored as a Barbarian or Ranger ability..

Action Surge and second wind were literally abilities every single player character and forth edition had.

It's easy to justify such a bland ability to every class. It's just that only the fighter had to power budget to fit it.

I think a hunter's primal focus on their prey is flavorful. But expanding that primal focus to their connection to Primal Ranger Magic while in combat is also flavorful. Sure, it could be adapted to any other class with the right flavor. But the ranger getting it does not take away from anyone else who doesn't get it. Maybe, to borrow your justification, other classes just don't have the Power Budget to have something that powerful for their entire repertoire, and maybe it can work just fine for a weapon-focused half-caster.

Sure ranger's focus is a good justification.

My point is that some fans were willing to spout anything irregardless of flavor with no justification for power. And some wanted things that would put the ranger out past the bounds of balance to do it.

I don't want a bland ranger even if it's super strong