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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 7481854" data-attributes="member: 6801228">I have to wonder though, since we don't have access to their data, what exactly they measured. No one has been complaining about the Xanathar's rangers, because for the most part they are perfectly fine. And in fact, they have additional spells known which is a big step towards helping the ranger spellcasting as compared to it's closest relative classes. A feature that the PHB rangers don't have. Also, almost no one thinks that the Hunter is poorly balanced, and conversations about fixing the ranger have almost always included the caveat that the PHB Hunter works just fine. In addition, we have the Revised Ranger, which many people are happy about. And, we can't deny Multi-classing can change things even more. So, what did WoTC learn in their surveys? If, after Xanathar's, they simply learned that a lot of people are playing Ranger's, this actually tells us nothing about whether or not the Revised Ranger was still needed. Because playing a Revised Ranger is still playing a Ranger. It tells us nothing about the state of the Beastmaster, because people playing Hunters, Gloomstalkers, and Horizon Walkers are still playing Rangers. So if all WoTC has determined is that the ranger is fine, except for the Beastmaster, then they haven't addressed the main point of contention that has existed this entire time. And, considering nothing has changed mechanically for the Beastmaster, we are left with one of two conclusions. Either people have always been happy with the Beastmaster (which has never seemed to be the case as far as I have ever seen or heard) or people don't mind the Beastmaster being sub-par with the other Ranger options to turn to. That does not lead to the solution I want or need for my groups though, which is that the Beastmaster is brought up to par with the other rangers. Because, people have not had fun playing a PHB Beastmaster at my table, so it isn't where I need it to be yet. And, personally, the class being fine despite one of it's most iconic sub-classes not meeting player perceptions and requiring jumping through hoops to work doesn't sound right to me. The Beastmaster only starts becoming mechanically "fine" at 5th level, for two full levels the player is either not attacking with their character, or not using their beast. And, many of the "best" combat options for the beast have it simply regulated to a pool of hp and an Armor Class with Dodge... which sucks to be honest, I can't imagine getting excited by the tactical possibilities of standing there and doing nothing.</blockquote>

Verification