D&D 5E [+] Rangers should have monster fighting spells equivalent to Paladin's Smite spells. Discuss!

[Rocker26a]

Later I’ll post or send my Bane document so you can see if you want to mine it for ideas at all.

Thanks, sure, that'd be potentially helpful! I'll also maybe show what I've got for Ranger in general. I have limited options as far as second opinions go, so.

 

[Rocker26a]

Exactly. There isn't anything that stops a heavy armor character from choosing light armor and a better Dex. You don't get a bonus for choosing one option over another just because the option you chose isn't the default assumption one.

Also, like. This particularly stings because, the reverse isn't true. Rangers don't get Heavy armour proficiency, there actually is something that stops you from playing a Green Knight Ranger out the gate.

 

[Undrave]

Exactly. There isn't anything that stops a heavy armor character from choosing light armor and a better Dex. You don't get a bonus for choosing one option over another just because the option you chose isn't the default assumption one.

It's most Medium Armor that's inferior to both options. Makes you more MAD and you still get a penalty to Stealth...

As an aside, I HATE this kind of thinking. The "I'm not going to use this, so it's wasted and I should be able to trade it out for something else" thinking. If you want to be a stealthy paladin, then don't wear heavy armor. You don't get to trade it in for skills or feats. That's part of a class based system. Once you start being able to chop up classes and swap around parts (I want to swap armor for skills, and spellcasting for maneuvers) you're just playing a classless system with extra steps.

Well, it’s easy to think like that when you consider that each Armor Proficiency is worth a whole feat. It’s like if you spent a level up on a feat you’re not using, it doesn’t feel good. A DEX paladin gives up better armor and better damage (can’t even use Smite on ranged weapon attacks) to do some stealth stuff… it’s not a particularly efficient concept IMO but I’m curious what kind of story and playstyle would arise from that concept.

People wanting a stealthy divine character just tells me they are yearning for a 5e incarnation of the Avenger! Which I highly welcome…

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Thanks, sure, that'd be potentially helpful! I'll also maybe show what I've got for Ranger in general. I have limited options as far as second opinions go, so.

Sweet I look forward to it

Also, like. This particularly stings because, the reverse isn't true. Rangers don't get Heavy armour proficiency, there actually is something that stops you from playing a Green Knight Ranger out the gate.

Yep, especially since the ranger doesn’t really have what it needs to truly be a Dex/light fighter class, either.

It's most Medium Armor that's inferior to both options. Makes you more MAD and you still get a penalty to Stealth...

Well, it’s easy to think like that when you consider that each Armor Proficiency is worth a whole feat. It’s like if you spent a level up on a feat you’re not using, it doesn’t feel good. A DEX paladin gives up better armor and better damage (can’t even use Smite on ranged weapon attacks) to do some stealth stuff… it’s not a particularly efficient concept IMO but I’m curious what kind of story and playstyle would arise from that concept.

People wanting a stealthy divine character just tells me they are yearning for a 5e incarnation of the Avenger! Which I highly welcome…

Dex vengeance paladin is fantastic. I’ve seen it with two rapiers, and tbh they weren’t really losing out by not having the TWF fighting style, I just am allergic to not adding my Dex mod to the damage of the off hand attack. But with the dual welder feat and defensive fight style, studded leather armor was plenty of protection.

My ancients paladin was rapier and shield with dueling style until I took a level of fey warlock and got at-will mage armor, and armor of Agythis, at which point I ditched the shield and picked up a hand crossbow and xbow expert.

Neither was hyper optimized, but they ran great.

Being Dex based doesn’t mean they’re range focused, though.

 

[Remathilis]

It's most Medium Armor that's inferior to both options. Makes you more MAD and you still get a penalty to Stealth...

Well, it’s easy to think like that when you consider that each Armor Proficiency is worth a whole feat. It’s like if you spent a level up on a feat you’re not using, it doesn’t feel good. A DEX paladin gives up better armor and better damage (can’t even use Smite on ranged weapon attacks) to do some stealth stuff… it’s not a particularly efficient concept IMO but I’m curious what kind of story and playstyle would arise from that concept.

People wanting a stealthy divine character just tells me they are yearning for a 5e incarnation of the Avenger! Which I highly welcome…

If I opt to use a greatsword, I cannot use a shield. Should I be able to trade shield proficiency for some boon since I never intended to use one? What about trading in proficiency in simple weapons? Maybe I'm a barbarian who opts to wear medium armor, can I trade in Unarmored Defense for a different feature?

I get that a dex-based paladin is not as efficient as his strength-based alternative (despite Dex being a superstat) but I don't believe you should be able to trade away features you don't intend to use to further build edges in the things you will. If you want that kind of granularity, get rid of classes and let PCs build out of a pool of features.

 

[Undrave]

Dex vengeance paladin is fantastic. I’ve seen it with two rapiers, and tbh they weren’t really losing out by not having the TWF fighting style, I just am allergic to not adding my Dex mod to the damage of the off hand attack. But with the dual welder feat and defensive fight style, studded leather armor was plenty of protection.

My ancients paladin was rapier and shield with dueling style until I took a level of fey warlock and got at-will mage armor, and armor of Agythis, at which point I ditched the shield and picked up a hand crossbow and xbow expert.

Neither was hyper optimized, but they ran great.

Being Dex based doesn’t mean they’re range focused, though.

Yeah you don't need to be ranged focused but I assumed having good ranged attack options is one of the appeal of going DEX for a Paladin. It's also how you get the most damage as a DEX build. A studded leather Ancient Paladin sounds really cool.

If I opt to use a greatsword, I cannot use a shield. Should I be able to trade shield proficiency for some boon since I never intended to use one? What about trading in proficiency in simple weapons? Maybe I'm a barbarian who opts to wear medium armor, can I trade in Unarmored Defense for a different feature?

I get that a dex-based paladin is not as efficient as his strength-based alternative (despite Dex being a superstat) but I don't believe you should be able to trade away features you don't intend to use to further build edges in the things you will. If you want that kind of granularity, get rid of classes and let PCs build out of a pool of features.

I get you, I get you. I was just saying I understand why people feel that way.

That said, I'd let them trade the chain mail in the Paladin's starting equipment for mundane equipment of equal value without too much hassle.

We should still have a 5e Avenger.

 

[Stormonu]

I think you're underrating what this would mean for Battlemaster, in spirit and in practice. You're giving the key to their kingdom to another class. Rangers getting maneuvers from their base class, on-top of maneuvers exclusive to them, that's damaging to Battlemaster's identity in a way that getting maneuvers from a Fighting Style or a Feat, isn't.

No, I don't think I am. The problem is the fighter isn't allowed to have nice things in the first place, so the other martial classes have to suffer for it.

No one complains about the Sorceror or the Warlock (or any of the Divine classes) getting access to spell slots. Maneuvers boil down to just being spell slots for the martials, falling between the cantrip and 1st level spell range. It's a bit of a pity that the Barbarian and the Paladin as well are locked out of them, I'm sure they could have some interesting uses for them.

If anything, all the martials should have access to Maneuvers. Like the spell-casting classes, you balance them by having a curated list of which ones they can access, not denying access altogether. The fighter should probably have the broadest array (like the Wizard)*, while the Ranger's are more specialized toward certain creature types or anti-enemy abilities (like Regeneration, Incorporealness or vs. specific creature types). The paladin's list would be more limited to melee feats, those for fighting fiends, celestials and undead or incorporating their "holy" abilities. Barbarians would have Manuevers that synergize with skills, saves or their rage ability - and perhaps some anti-magic capacity.

* The Champion fighter should be the Warlock of the fighter subclasses - around 2-3 locked-in manuevers they just use over and over. The Battlemaster fighter would be the Wizard of the fighter subclasses with a wide range of Manuevers and the Eldritch fighter trades Manuevers for actual spells.

 

[Corinnguard]

If anything, all the martials should have access to Maneuvers. Like the spell-casting classes, you balance them by having a curated list of which ones they can access, not denying access altogether. The fighter should probably have the broadest array (like the Wizard)*, while the Ranger's are more specialized toward certain creature types or anti-enemy abilities (like Regeneration, Incorporealness or vs. specific creature types). The paladin's list would be more limited to melee ranged feats, those for fighting fiends, celestials and undead or incorporating their "holy" abilities. Barbarians would have Manuevers that synergize with skills, saves or their rage ability - and perhaps some anti-magic capacity.

This is the case in Level Up.

Adepts (the Level Up equivalent of the Monk) gains proficiency in two combat traditions from the following list: Mirror’s Glint, Rapid Current, Razor’s Edge, Unending Wheel.

Berserkers (the Level equivalent of the Barbarian) gain proficiency in two combat traditions from the following list: Adamant Mountain, Mirror’s Glint, Rapid Current, Tempered Iron, Tooth and Claw.

Fighters gain proficiency in two combat traditions of your choice. They gain proficiency in a third combat tradition when they choose a Fighter archetype at 3rd level.

Heralds (the Level Up equivalent of the Paladin) gain proficiency in two combat traditions from the following list: Sanguine Knot, Spirited Steed, or Tempered Iron.

Marshals (the Level Up equivalent of the Warlord?) gain proficiency in two combat traditions from the following list: Biting Zephyr, Mirror’s Glint, Mist and Shade, Rapid Current, Razor’s Edge, Sanguine Knot, Spirited Steed, Unending Wheel.

Rangers gain proficiency in two combat traditions from the following list: Biting Zephyr, Mirror’s Glint, Rapid Current, Razor’s Edge, Spirited Steed, and Unending Wheel.

Rogues gain proficiency in two combat traditions from the following list: Biting Zephyr, Mist and Shade, or Rapid Current.

There are 11 Combat Traditions in Level Up's Adventurer's Guide. Several more Combat Traditions exist in the various issues of the Gate Pass Gazette and 3pp.

 

[Rocker26a]

The problem is the fighter isn't allowed to have nice things in the first place, so the other martial classes have to suffer for it.

But they do get some nice things, primo access to maneuvers being one of them. It's just that there are some definite winners and losers as far as builds go. Either mechanically, or flavourfully. Or both.

No one complains about the Sorceror or the Warlock (or any of the Divine classes) getting access to spell slots. Maneuvers boil down to just being spell slots for the martials, falling between the cantrip and 1st level spell range.

I actually think a better analogy would be Metamagic. There has always been a desire for Metamagic on other spellcasters, but nobody thinks Sorcerer shouldn't be the best at them, and have the most straightforward access to them. Warlock Invocations are in a similar boat there. The solution is to give additional options that the source class can also benefit from. Maneuvers are even in a better position than both of those, since they're a mundane skill, so getting maneuver(s) from a Fighting Style is an easy in. They just need to, uh. Be good.

If anything, all the martials should have access to Maneuvers.

I nominally agree! But it never shouldn't be Battlemaster's home turf. They are the Masters of Battle. You just need to create some equity between them and the other subclasses, and also make the additional sources for maneuvers appealing.

Like the spell-casting classes, you balance them by having a curated list of which ones they can access, not denying access altogether. The fighter should probably have the broadest array (like the Wizard)*, while the Ranger's are more specialized toward certain creature types or anti-enemy abilities (like Regeneration, Incorporealness or vs. specific creature types). The paladin's list would be more limited to melee feats, those for fighting fiends, celestials and undead or incorporating their "holy" abilities. Barbarians would have Manuevers that synergize with skills, saves or their rage ability - and perhaps some anti-magic capacity.

This is waaay too much to me. Maneuvers aren't fundamentally interesting enough to justify being the backbone of all martial combat, they're just a mundane but neat and useful thing some adept combatants can do. Beyond that, as with spells, they're not right for every character. Not everyone who swings a Sword cares for such artful tactics. Barbarians don't get a fighting style for a reason.

 

[Corinnguard]

Barbarians don't get a fighting style for a reason.

So Barbarians can't rage with style? "And here we have some fashionable Barbarians walking down the catwalk...."