D&D 5E Spell-less Ranger

[Dargrimm]

Thank you Paraxis! Didn't know about Barbarians of Lemuria. I'll be sure to check it out.

Tony, thank you. I'm aware of all the shortcomings of D&D to play a pure Sword & Sorcery game but still I really like 5e and I think with some tweaking it can be done. After all magic is not absent but reduced compared with a standard D&D game.

 

[CapnZapp]

Honestly it's easier to build a spell-less ranger with the Fighter, pick the Outlander or Hermit background and you'll have more or less a rangery, no-companion, no spells ranger.

It can't be more difficult than staying out of the thread if you have nothing constructive on topic to say...

Mod Note: Folks, do remember that nobody owns threads, and you don't generallyget to tell others when and where they can post. One person's "nothing constructive" may be another's "simple and elegant solution". ~Umbran

 

[CapnZapp]

Honestly, 5e may not be the way to go. Think about it: The PH has 38 sub-class options. About 30 of them cast spells. The Champion, Battlemaster, Berserker, Thief and Assassin are the only ones that are fairly unambiguously non-magical. No class lacks a magic-using archetype. Non-magical 'healing' (HD) is inadequate, and inaccessible in combat.
It's a very high-magic and magic-dependent game.

3.5 has numerous fighter builds, barbarian, rogue, knight, scout, numerous PrCs, the Marshal f/Battlesystem - and, heck, the first 3 levels of ranger. It's obscure, but there's an 'inherent bonuses' option to reduce the need for magic-items to maintain balance as you level. The only downside is the need for potions or UMD+WoCLW for healing. Pathfinder adds more non-caster classes, including it's own take on the Marshal.

4e offers you something like 6 builds each of Fighter, Ranger, Rogue and Warlord. Essentials adds the Knight, Slayer, and Thief and post-Essentials the Berserker (you have to be pretty careful to avoid primal powers, but you can do it) and, I guess, Executioner (it might have a magical 'shadow' power or two, I forget). If you ignore the Essentials classes, they're all reasonably balanced. You can use inherent bonuses to remove magic items from the expected advancement. And, non-magical healing, especially with a Warlord, is quite sufficient.

13th Age has a Fighter, Ranger, Rogue, and (in 13TW) Commander, with modest variety among them, and, like 4e, has adequate non-magical healing, including an in-combat 'Rally' option.

Finally, if you can dig up the d20 Iron Heroes, it's prettymuch exactly what you're looking for - mighty-thewed barbarians, big weapons, manly combat, and not too much magic. It has 10 PC classes - /one/ of them is a caster, and it's optional. Oh, and, 'reserves' - a form of non-magical 'healing' used in a few d20 games to take up some of the slack from the loss of magical healing.

I am positive 5e can handle one more non magical sub class. While interesting, your reply too falls into the directly negative "don't do what the thread is about" camp, unfortunately.

This special kind of thread crapping is rife here at EN world, and I'd wish everyone to stay out of threads if all you have to say is "don't do [topic]"! Thanks.

 

[Klaus]

Thank you all for the responses.
Giving them some spells as abilities looks like a nice idea.

I already thought about going with fighter and making it more like a range through skills and feats but then, things like the beast companion or natural explorer are not easily replicated.

All this if for a campaign world I'm brewing now that is low on magic. The most commonly used classes are martial (barbarian, fighter, ranger, rogue) and magic is mainly used by the bad guys, and only full spell caster characters (cleric, druid, sorcerer, warlock, and wizard, not sure how to handle the bard yet...) which are very rare.

Edit: I've always been a huge fan of pulp sword and sorcery and I want to make a world based on that. Conan and Red Sonja comics and art by Ken Kelly, Frank Frazetta, Boris Vallejo and others is what inspired me.

Edit 2: Really looking forward for the new Conan RPG coming this summer!

I'm listening to the original soundtrack of Conan the Barbarian while writing this so you can get the idea...

I'm pretty sure 5e can handle a Swords & Sorcery game. Between Berserkers, Totem Warriors, Champions, Battlemasters, Thieves and Assassins, plus the variations allowed by Backgrounds, you have quite the range of character possibilites. If you push "low magic" a bit further, you can even include Open Hand Monks, Warlocks, Eldrtich Knights and Arcane Tricksters (these would be the top PC spellcasters -- remember that the Grey Mouser was an apprentice wizard before becoming a rogue). Healing would be handled mostly through Hit Dice, the Healer feat and healing potions made with the Herbalism kit.

PC magic can easily be allowed with the Magic Initiate and Ritual Caster feats, which are entirely within the scope of Swords & Sorcery.

Finally, consider allowing the full caster classes, but with the restriction that they'd have to alternate between the spellcasting class and a non-casting class.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I am positive 5e can handle one more non magical sub class. While interesting, your reply too falls into the directly negative "don't do what the thread is about" camp, unfortunately.

I know. And I'm recommending a different game here in the 5e forum. That feels downright disloyal, and I cringed a little before doing it.

But, ultimately, I want 5e to do well, and that means I want people to have good experiences with it. I'm afraid that trying to adapt 5e to a low-magic campaign (in the sense of few/no PC casters - 5e is fine for 'low-magic' in the sense of magic items being rare to non-existent) is unlikely to result in a good experience. 5e is just too PC-magic-focused, both in the sense of 87% of PC class options using magic, and in the sense of that magic being critical to the balance and playability of the game, overall. Coming up with a non-casting ranger is just the tip of the iceberg.

There are multiple, closely-related games, OTOH, that can handle the campaign more easily - at least, until the OP gets his upcoming Conan game. A d20 game like 3.5 or Iron Heroes is not going to feel /that/ different, mechanically, from 5e, either, so it's not like his players will be turned off from 5e or have a lot to un-learn when approaching it, either.

I'd rather he try running 5e in a context where it's more likely to shine. 5e is fantastic at evoking the feel of classic D&D, but PC casters playing critical roles in the party is an indelible part of that classic feel.