D&D 5E (2014) Should Hunter's mark (Ranger spell) drop Concentration requirement?

[SilverfireSage]

Fair enough. But those things cut both ways. Maybe the fighter doesn't expend all his SD nor uses his AS, but then neither does the ranger use his best limited-use features. We're again down to fighter dishing out over 200 damage with his attacks only (it's only going up, he'll probably use at least an SD or two), while the ranger is stuck at 150. And this of course supposes rare short rests with a bunch of encounters per day. Some campaigns/groups use the short rest more liberally and are not so fighting-heavy, so it's more likely for PCs to nova on a more regular basis.

What best limited-use features are those? The only one that I can see is the spells, all of their other abilities are constant. When a fighter has used all of those abilities, he's down to about 4d8+20 a round, assuming no magic items. Max, this is 52 damage. Meanwhile, a ranger would deal 2d8+10+1d8+1d8, or 42 damage, which isn't that bad, and adds up to 208 damage a round, shy of the 260, but nothing to sneeze at. Of course, that's just with hunters mark. A ranger can keep up Swift Quiver for 12 rounds, which puts him actually ahead of the fighter after the fifth round, doing 5d8+20 damage! And if the combat continues, he can always go back to hunters mark, use other spells, heck, there are a hundred things he can do. At that point, the fighter is down to just hammering away at the enemy like usual, but without all of their crazy bonuses.

Sure, but 5E does tend to have somewhat shorter battles. As for the longer ones, what do you think will be the Champion's contribution there? I feel it would be even worse for our poor ranger.

Champions are more about durability than attack, and I really don't care to calculate damage with Critical hits.

This I would be OK with if other ranger features were all that great. Sadly they aren't. Favoured enemy is woefully inadequate and other features are just as situational/on the weak side. Just look at his 20th level "ultimate" ability!

So 11 known spells and 15 spells per day sucks? Hide in Plain Sight sucks? Land's stride sucks? Feral Senses, being able to fight something that you can't see just as well? Sorry, I don't agree, those are all fantastic. I don't know what kind of group you play with, but my group spends easily 75% out of combat, where all of these make the ranger far more useful than the fighter.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

So 11 known spells and 15 spells per day sucks? Hide in Plain Sight sucks? Land's stride sucks? Feral Senses, being able to fight something that you can't see just as well? Sorry, I don't agree, those are all fantastic. I don't know what kind of group you play with, but my group spends easily 75% out of combat, where all of these make the ranger far more useful than the fighter.

Yeah, I have to kind of agree here. You're complaining that a fighter narrowly outdamages a ranger, and that a rogue is occasionally better outside of combat. You don't really mention that the ranger pretty handily beats the rogue in combat and the fighter outside of it.

If you want to play a high-damage sniper with a bit of woodland skill, that's a fighter.

 

[SilverfireSage]

Yeah, I have to kind of agree here. You're complaining that a fighter narrowly outdamages a ranger, and that a rogue is occasionally better outside of combat. You don't really mention that the ranger pretty handily beats the rogue in combat and the fighter outside of it.

If you want to play a high-damage sniper with a bit of woodland skill, that's a fighter.

I'm really confused. I never mentioned a rogue, you're attempting to argue against my points, yet you agree with me? Were you referring to someone else?

 

[mcbobbo]

I'm really confused. I never mentioned a rogue, you're attempting to argue against my points, yet you agree with me? Were you referring to someone else?

It seems he's reiterating your points back at Mr Fixit.

 

[Unadvisedgoose]

I dislike that Hunter's Mark is a spell at all; it seems like a pretty core feature for the class after all. Maybe de-spell it and make it a martial feature, no concentration required, available for, let's say, Wis modifier times per day or some such.

This is brilliant and I love it. I think I'll do this with both Hunter's Mark, and maybe even Hex for the Warlock.

Having said that, the others make good points. Rangers get way too much crap for a perfectly powerful and useful class. They have lots of awesome stuff. But thematically I agree with the quoted post. I don't like Hunter's Mark being a spell and I like this solution for it.

 

[Chocolategravy]

Yeah, I have to kind of agree here. You're complaining that a fighter narrowly outdamages a ranger, and that a rogue is occasionally better outside of combat.

25% more is narrowly? The ranger gets weighed down by a lot of situational garbage and not much really stands out. The fighter has a lot of stand out abilities. A better comparison though would be the paladin and the paladin is stronger class than the ranger as well.

 

[Blackwarder]

Having played a ranger for some time now I think that it's fine as it is.
he is a beast in combat, easily dishing tons of damage, I once even managed to one shot an Ogre! (Crit but still) and he is the point man when it comes to leading the party through the wilderness.

Making hunter's mark a spell makes casting it a meaningful choice instead of an automatic one and that add to the playing experience IMHO.

Instead of theory crafting just play the game, give it a few months to sit in and check for yourself what is working and what isn't working and than start changing things.

Warder

 

[Mr Fixit]

What best limited-use features are those? The only one that I can see is the spells, all of their other abilities are constant.

Yes, I mean spells like Hunter's Mark and Swift Quiver. He gets only 2 of the latter per day at 20th level.

When a fighter has used all of those abilities, he's down to about 4d8+20 a round, assuming no magic items. Max, this is 52 damage. Meanwhile, a ranger would deal 2d8+10+1d8+1d8, or 42 damage, which isn't that bad, and adds up to 208 damage a round, shy of the 260, but nothing to sneeze at. Of course, that's just with hunters mark.

I'm the first to admit that my math prowess is laughable, but how did you come by those numbers? Using Colossus Slayer and Hunter's Mark a ranger does around 150 damage over 5 rounds not 208. Did I miss something? And that's using an expendable (Hunter's Mark) and hoping his concentration won't get broken. How does that compare with fighter's flat 200 damage over 5 rounds without using any expendables? Factor in at least a couple Superiority Dice and maybe even an Action Surge, and he's well over 250 as well as, I dunno, knocking guys prone or incurring disadvantage or something.

A ranger can keep up Swift Quiver for 12 rounds, which puts him actually ahead of the fighter after the fifth round, doing 5d8+20 damage!

Not entirely true. Swift Quiver is concentration too, so he can't use it in tandem with HM. SQ would give the ranger around 210 damage over 5 rounds, just a little bit more than the fighter. And note that this option includes casting a 5th level spell, of which a ranger has only two per day. In this experiment, let's then allow the fighter to use his Action Surge as well (he also gets two of those, but they refresh after a short, not a long rest). Such a fighter would then dish out 240 damage, or 280 with both AS. And that's still not taking into account a single SD which would push him over 300. That's not "narrowly beating", that's a huge advantage.

So 11 known spells and 15 spells per day sucks? Hide in Plain Sight sucks? Land's stride sucks? Feral Senses, being able to fight something that you can't see just as well?

Well, a bunch of those spell slots will go to HMs, SQs and the like, right? I mean, you did include them in your math. I'm not denying ranger has extra spells and utilities, but then again I didn't mention fighter's stuff as well: 2 more feats (or score boosts), other SD effects which are quite beneficial, etc. Look, I'm not denying that a ranger has a role to play, but I simply think he's neither here nor there. He's much, much, weaker in combat at higher levels than either fighter or paladin, and his utilities aren't all that great. Helpful, certainly, but nothing to write home about. And again, a rogue that is a better survivalist and tracker than a ranger? How's that for a character concept?

 

[Minigiant]

Having played a ranger for some time now I think that it's fine as it is.
he is a beast in combat, easily dishing tons of damage, I once even managed to one shot an Ogre! (Crit but still) and he is the point man when it comes to leading the party through the wilderness.

Making hunter's mark a spell makes casting it a meaningful choice instead of an automatic one and that add to the playing experience IMHO.

Instead of theory crafting just play the game, give it a few months to sit in and check for yourself what is working and what isn't working and than start changing things.

Warder

I found the opposite in my games.

The second the ranger casts Hunter's Mark, the thought of breaking concentration for the other concentration spells are gone.

Those other concentration spells have to be cast first or an optimal situation (lightning arrow in a crowded hallway) has to appear. Otherwise Hunters mark addiction appears.

It is worse if the ranger is not in a hack n slash combat heavy game. The exploration spell compete with spells known AND spells per "day".

This is unlike spells like Longstrider which can be casted whenever you feel.

 

[Blackwarder]

If found the opposite in my games.

The second the ranger casts Hunter's Mark, the thought of breaking concentration for the other concentration spells are gone.

Those other concentration spells have to be cast first or avery optimal situation (lightning arrow in a crowded hallway) has to appear. Otherwise Hunters mark addiction appears.

It is worse if the ranger is not in a hack n slash combat heavy game. The exploration spell compete with spells known AND spells per "day".

This is unlike spells like Longstrider which can be casted whenever you feel.

I just realised that we've been using it wrong! Totally forgot about the con save when being hit

Warder