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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 7028308" data-attributes="member: 1465">Maybe you weren't directly referring to my post, but anyway I think it's very likely if not almost certain that the expansion book will contain the revised Ranger class, because they have already put a lot of design effort and multiple UA rounds to it, collecting a lot of feedback.My guess is that the revised Ranger which will be published will be either identical to the last UA article, or having only some fine-tuning. That latest version clearly indicate that they decided to have high compatibility with the PHB version, and I think that's a winning move, because it doesn't alienate all those players (me included) which don't want anything in the PHB to become obsolete. Revising core stuff and introduce incompatibilities is exactly the kind of thing that fractures the fan base, and they don't want to do that, until they are already preparing the ground for 6e. The latest UA Ranger does an awesome job at satisfying both those who wanted a revision and those who don't want it, with the exception of the kind of gamers who are never satisfied at anything until the day they are officially hired as D&D designers.On the other hand, the spell-less Ranger variant is in a much more difficult position. It is not compatible and it is not clear how many gamers actually want it. We know that when WotC designed 5e they ran a lot of surveys, and on this specific issue they concluded that the PHB Ranger should have had spellcasting. They could have handled it like the Fighter and Rogue which have a spellcasting subclass but spells are not part of the base class. Even as a fan of spellcasting Rangers, I think this would have been a better solution, but apparently their surveys indicated it was the way to go.Back to the expansion book, it's hard to tell how much of the previous UA material will make it into the book. Personally I wish for all of them, because even those which I don't need can be useful to someone else. I am not even sure if everything UA would fill such book, or if WotC would need to come up with even more stuff to reach their target page count.</blockquote>

Verification