mellored
Legend
It's still a net buff.
Losing -1 HP, but gain +Con in healing.
So slightly more fragile, but they can recover quicker.
D&D 5E Ranger fight: PHB vs. UA
Losing -1 HP, but gain +Con in healing.
So slightly more fragile, but they can recover quicker.
Gnashtooth
First Post
ScuroNotte
Explorer
The PHB Ranger as the other choices are worse. The impression I get is the Ranger is the unwanted child by WoTC.
They are a 1/2 caster, but learn less spells than 1/3 casters (especially when cant rips are accounted for).
Their "Rogue/Monk"-like abilities are gained almost twice the level after their counterparts.
Their survival skills are stunted by limitations i.e. Primeval Awareness - know the creature is in an X mile radius, but clue about general direction or number. It could atleast offer general direction and approximate number.
Natural Explorer doesn't offer atleast 1/2 the terrains. A Rogue or Bard with skill expertise would be a better all around character with Expertise in Survival, Nature, & Perception which can be utilized for All terrains. When another class can equally compete in your Main Niche, that is a major concern.
Favored Enemy is also restricted to a small number of opponents.
Why WoTC has the need to place strict limitations on Rangers is confusing. They do not need to revamp the entire class. They have a good foundation in the PHB, they only need to expand and tweet it.
The group I play with worked together to modify the abilities where it felt fun for us. It is posted on the forum and comments would be appreciated
They are a 1/2 caster, but learn less spells than 1/3 casters (especially when cant rips are accounted for).
Their "Rogue/Monk"-like abilities are gained almost twice the level after their counterparts.
Their survival skills are stunted by limitations i.e. Primeval Awareness - know the creature is in an X mile radius, but clue about general direction or number. It could atleast offer general direction and approximate number.
Natural Explorer doesn't offer atleast 1/2 the terrains. A Rogue or Bard with skill expertise would be a better all around character with Expertise in Survival, Nature, & Perception which can be utilized for All terrains. When another class can equally compete in your Main Niche, that is a major concern.
Favored Enemy is also restricted to a small number of opponents.
Why WoTC has the need to place strict limitations on Rangers is confusing. They do not need to revamp the entire class. They have a good foundation in the PHB, they only need to expand and tweet it.
The group I play with worked together to modify the abilities where it felt fun for us. It is posted on the forum and comments would be appreciated
Oooo...What if the Ranger, now, becomes a Bard subclass? Knowledge (applied to terrain and favored enemies, nature in general). Check. Access/Expertise in Skills. Check. Access to Spellcasting? Check...AND ANY spellcasting via Magical Secrets: druidic, clerical or arcane, as the bard/ranger wishes. VERY 1/2e.
My only beef there with that (assuming I didn't want the ranger as a class of its own, though I do) would be that bards in 5e are "full casters" which, I think is ridiculous and won't truck in that nonsense. Half-caster, at best. Third-caster if you want the 1e feel/flavor...for a bard or a ranger! In 1e, Bards, literally, got their spells from 1 of the 3 classes they had to get XP from. That's your 1/3rd caster right there.
Granted, they were not considered 'bards" until they started casting [druid] spells...but since half-casters get their spells from 2nd level and third-casters get their magic from 3rd, I'm not really worried about that.
But I digress...Rangers as Bard subclass? Anybody? No?
My only beef there with that (assuming I didn't want the ranger as a class of its own, though I do) would be that bards in 5e are "full casters" which, I think is ridiculous and won't truck in that nonsense. Half-caster, at best. Third-caster if you want the 1e feel/flavor...for a bard or a ranger! In 1e, Bards, literally, got their spells from 1 of the 3 classes they had to get XP from. That's your 1/3rd caster right there.
Granted, they were not considered 'bards" until they started casting [druid] spells...but since half-casters get their spells from 2nd level and third-casters get their magic from 3rd, I'm not really worried about that.But I digress...Rangers as Bard subclass? Anybody? No?
Similar Threads
- Poll
- Poll
