D&D General Ranger Identity Patch (+)

[TaranTheWanderer]

Flavour-wise, if you were going to redo the sub classes for Ranger, what would you do?

Looking at the current ones, I feel like the fey and the gloomstalker are too specific and they don’t really fit my view of a Ranger.

I was thinking: Hunter
Tracking, bounty hunting, damage

Wise Bushmaster: fey/nature protections, party support, outdoors knowledge, survival, protection from elements, maybe crowd control. Very perceptive. Scout?

Beast Master: guy with a pet, speaks with animals, scout?

I can’t think of another one.

 

[Minigiant]

Please no beast only buff spells. Even ranger exclusive

Why?

A spell that is beast only can be justified as a lower level spell than the one its derived from.

Like you could do Barkskin or Stoneskin for a spell slot lesser as beast only

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Why?

A spell that is beast only can be justified as a lower level spell than the one its derived from.

Like you could do Barkskin or Stoneskin for a spell slot lesser as beast only

It is needless clutter. Just give the ranger the ability to cast self spells on their beast. The ranger has too few spwlls known to be saddled with stuff that niche.

 

[Minigiant]

It is needless clutter. Just give the ranger the ability to cast self spells on their beast. The ranger has too few spwlls known to be saddled with stuff that niche.

You are getting the point of it.

Stoneskin is a 4th level spell that requires Concentration.

Stonefur would be a 3rd level spell that doesn't require Concentration but is beasts only.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

You are getting the point of it.

Stoneskin is a 4th level spell that requires Concentration.

Stonefur would be a 3rd level spell that doesn't require Concentration but is beasts only.

No i get the point and I dont see the need. I dont believe that the benifit outwieghs the cost. I would never take it, whereas i would take a level 3 defensive spell that i can use on myself or my wolf or another ally if i am playing a ranger without a pet.

 

[Minigiant]

No i get the point and I dont see the need. I dont believe that the benifit outwieghs the cost. I would never take it, whereas i would take a level 3 defensive spell that i can use on myself or my wolf or another ally if i am playing a ranger without a pet.

A dedicated beastmaster might use it to free up their high level spells.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Flavour-wise, if you were going to redo the sub classes for Ranger, what would you do?

Looking at the current ones, I feel like the fey and the gloomstalker are too specific and they don’t really fit my view of a Ranger.

I was thinking: Hunter
Tracking, bounty hunting, damage

Wise Bushmaster: fey/nature protections, party support, outdoors knowledge, survival, protection from elements, maybe crowd control. Very perceptive. Scout?

Beast Master: guy with a pet, speaks with animals, scout?

I can’t think of another one.

I think the trick here is to add a layer below subclass to give extra customization, then you can just lean into stuff with the subclass.

So, paralleling warlocks: you get knack that are single discrete boons a la invocations, a Talent that's more powerful and possibly build-defining but a secondary feature identity-wise, and a conclave that's your subclass: flavorful, progressing, and potent.

Subclasses could be Tempest (two-weapon master), Arcane Archer, Horizon Walker (adapts to whatever environment, can also adapt allies), Dragon Slayer (bonuses v elemental damage, area effects, flying enemies), Giant Slayer (bonus damage to targets larger than you, dodge projectiles), Druidic warrior (half-caster) and a Beastmaster who gets a combat-capable animal companion to act as a secondary character.

Talents are similar but more limited in power: Combat Talent (fighting style + masteries), limited magic, a pet (but more like a familiar than a combat ally), expertise in several skills, hunter's mark

You can double up in some cases (you can have a pet and an animal companion), stack in some cases (druidic warrior + limited magic is a more-than-half caster) but it won't always stack (an Arcane Archer probably already has the archery style and masteries for bows so picking combat talent gets you more weapons to use rather than being an even better archer)

 

[CreamCloud0]

Flavour-wise, if you were going to redo the sub classes for Ranger, what would you do?

Looking at the current ones, I feel like the fey and the gloomstalker are too specific and they don’t really fit my view of a Ranger.

I was thinking: Hunter
Tracking, bounty hunting, damage

Wise Bushmaster: fey/nature protections, party support, outdoors knowledge, survival, protection from elements, maybe crowd control. Very perceptive. Scout?

Beast Master: guy with a pet, speaks with animals, scout?

I can’t think of another one.

i do think you could get some good mileage if you went and made dedicated 'favoured terrain' subclasses, like the Winter Walker '24 subclass but if you don't want to do that:

subclass archetypes i can think of
the hunter-tracker-slayer
the all-terrain survivalist-explorer (favoured terrain specialist)
the beastmaster
the 'florakinetic' plant caster
the sage of the wild (knowledge cleric ranger edition)
the herbalist healer
the potions+poisons brewer
the stealth master (maybe also traps?)
the far traveled (CHA-face ranger)
the primal being (totem barb/wildshape ranger edition)

 

[jmartkdr2]

i do think you could get some good mileage if you went and made dedicated 'favoured terrain' subclasses, like the Winter Walker '24 subclass but if you don't want to do that:

subclass archetypes i can think of
the hunter-tracker-slayer
the all-terrain survivalist-explorer (favoured terrain specialist)
the beastmaster
the 'florakinetic' plant caster
the sage of the wild (knowledge cleric ranger edition)
the herbalist healer
the potions+poisons brewer
the stealth master (maybe also traps?)
the far traveled (CHA-face ranger)
the primal being (totem barb/wildshape ranger edition)

The problem with terrain specific subclasses is it’s hard to make them useful outside that one terrain. A Winter Walker is great in an arctic campaign but much weaker in a globe-trotting one. (This is why I prefer a Horizon Walker type that can adjust to whatever terrain you’re in, though not instantly)

With monster types it’s a little easier - just don’t lock abilities to monster type; instead pick general abilities that usually appky against that type. A Dragon Slayer should have evasion for all dex saves not just dragon breath, but they have evasion at all because they’re prepared for dragon breath. Etc.

 

[CreamCloud0]

The problem with terrain specific subclasses is it’s hard to make them useful outside that one terrain. A Winter Walker is great in an arctic campaign but much weaker in a globe-trotting one. (This is why I prefer a Horizon Walker type that can adjust to whatever terrain you’re in, though not instantly)

With monster types it’s a little easier - just don’t lock abilities to monster type; instead pick general abilities that usually appky against that type. A Dragon Slayer should have evasion for all dex saves not just dragon breath, but they have evasion at all because they’re prepared for dragon breath. Etc.

the winter walker, and presumably any other environs themed subclasses isn't directly designed to make you better in an arctic environment, it instead more took the angle of having learnt from it gave you features themed off of harnessing cold and ice, your weapon attacks deal additional cold damage, an expanded spell list of cold-themed spells, ect, ect...

in this way their themed abilities become more universally useful, a swamp ranger might excel in inflicting sickness or could have their own personal swarm to command like swarmkeeper (lots of insects in the swamp), a mountain ranger would be an expert climber and could know how to reshape stone with geokinesis and direct the winds how to blow.

it's like, yes, you could design a dragon slayer ranger to purely only have traits that activate against dragons OR you could have this ranger having learnt from their target, becoming more dragonlike in themselves, flight, to match them in their air, intimidation, you've stood strong against the king of reptiles and are considered as scary as they are, speaking draconic, learning the tongue of your enemies to understand what was previously eluded from your understanding.