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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 9463153" data-attributes="member: 7030563">You can say that about any spell.   Hunter's Mark is a spell, it works like a spell, you concentrate like a spell.All 2024 Rangers that use their class features rely on spells.  In 2014 there may have been rangers who picked up things like Goodberry and Speak With animals and really were all weapons in combat, but that is no longer the case as a combat-focused spells are part of the class abilities and in a volume that is significant.As for relying on martial combat extensively that depends entirely on the build and the game.  I 've played many Rangers using the 2014 rules who did not rely extensively on combat with weapons.  Starting in tier 2 they were mostly controllers and spell casters in combat.It is 11 additional points of damage per round at level 20 .... if you hit twice.  For the level it is objectively weak and the spell itself is objectively weak compared to other spells Ranger can concentrate on at this level.Power Word Heal that targets 2 creatues?  That is going to be used all the time in play.  I have played a lot of 2014 characters to level 20and this was actually a common spell to get for Bards before it had this buff. Here is one of my characters that had it from Bard:[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.dndbeyond.com/characters/122882011[/URL]Power word kill is going to be used less often, but let's compare this:  PWK is going to do 78 damage average to 2 creatures (156 total) with no save in one action.  Your Ranger using HM is going to take about 6-7 rounds to do that and HM, at 20th level is only actually only doing a 3rd of that damage, about 50 or so.156hps in one action vs 50 hp in 6 rounds.  Are you really saying the Ranger ability is more valuable?How about we just compare this to something the Ranger could concentrate on at this level:HM is a base extra 11 DPR, it can be higher with certain feats and builds but that is the base increase at 20th level.  Swift Quiver is 19 DPR,  Conjure Elemental is 28 DPR plus is another creature giving extra control and extra actions, CWB is 22.5 per creature in your emanation, Summon Fey at 3rd level is 13 DPR (or 28 on a 4th level slot) plus an effect every turn, in addition to being another ally, Spike Growth is difficult to calculate explicitly but it will usually be more than HM and is one of the best spells in the game.   Then there are subclass spells like Web and Fear.There is little logical reason to use HM, even at 1d10, when these other, better options are available at level 20.Rangers have some great combat spells, especially if you take more spell-casting focused subclasses.  Hunter's Mark is not one of them though. What they don't have are great combat spells that are not concentration and Hunter's Mark conflicts with those spells that are concentration.Ok let me break this down for you.  I play Rangers more than any other class.The reason I am not a fan is twofold:1. The 13th/17th level abilities focus on a specific spell and the 20th level capstone is pathetic.  Rangers have some really awesome concentration spells, there are others available through feats and abilities that would let them leverage spells besides HM would be better.2. I think the new Ranger is a big step backwards from the old Ranger in terms of flavor, abilities and thematics.  Specific things I miss are Primal Awareness and getting Nature's Veil later.  I also would rather have Favored Foe than Favored Enemy, but that is not as big a loss.As for the other things you mention, that is just pointing out that:1. Hunter's Mark is a weak spell (which underscores why everyone does not love it)2. The Ranger capstone is a weak capstone.I have always said they have great concentration spells available.  I said they had poor non-concentration spells generally.I think you misunderstood what you replied to.  Wizard and Sorcerer ABILITIES (not spells) are far more effective than the Ranger ABILITIES we are talking about.The Ranger abilities we are talking about are talking about are precise Hunter and Relentless Hunter.  The contention was they can't do that because Wizard and Sorcerer players would be upset if these abilities worked with any spells.I pointed out they have no reason to be upset and their abilities with spells are far more effective.  Metamagic and Spell Mastery are way better class abilities than Precise Hunter and Relentless Hunter and they are still better if the Ranger abilities apply to any 1st level concentration spell.This is irrelevant to the discussion.  The contention was we can't let PH and RH apply to any spell because Wizards and Sorcerers would be "complaining".  They wouldn't.Yeah you are not following what you posted earlier.  You made this mixed comparison by bringing Wizards and Sorcerers into the discussion in your last post.Right.  But the Wizard has Spell Mastery at 18th level .... the Ranger has Precise Hunter at 17th level.  So these are at a similar level.Which do you think is a better ability?  Would the Wizard "complain" if PH applied while concentrating on any 1st level Ranger spell?  Would Wizards really rather have PH than what they get?I don't think so on any of those.  YOU brought Wizards and Sorcerers into this discussion.  Not me.  I answered your post suggesting it was unfair to apply RH and PH to any Ranger spell, by pointing out how much better their abilities (which apply to their spells) are than this would be.</blockquote>

Verification