D&D 5E Tasha's really improved and changed the feel of Rangers

[Tales and Chronicles]

Colossus Slayer
Giant Killer
Horde Beaker
Druidic Warrior

scribbles notes frantically

 

[ECMO3]

Considering that the PHB says nothing about verbal components having to be loud, that's a DM-specific inflicted issue.

This is not true.

The PHB rules state spells with verbal components "require the chanting of mystic words ...... with specific pitch and resonance"

That means technically they must be out loud, if not there is no pitch. Further the rules go on to say you can't cast these while gagged or in an area of silence. If they did not need to be out loud, the silence would presumably have no effect.

 

[Undrave]

It's not like fighters had access to advanced fighting styles or fighting masteryy to say "well rangers and paladins and especially barbarians don't train with weapon enough to get Great Weapon Mastery or Archery MAstery."

Like I said, some of the feats in the game feel like 'Advanced Fighting Styles' that would have been Fighter features but were shunted to the Feats section just so they can say "Fighters get more feats! Just like in 3.x! You loved 3.X right? LOVE US!"

Great Weapon Master, Heavy Armor Master, Polearm Master, Shield Master...

 

[Minigiant]

I don't know. We roll it into the fiction in our games. Fighters know weapons and armor more so than the others. And the rules give more flexibility to optimize in that regard. There is also a lot of fiction and theme in the subclasses.

If your sneaky Fighter in leather and a Rapier comes across a magic longsword and plate, he can switch gears easier than most and optimize for it. In terms of the mechanics that works better when you roll stats but even with the 8 strength dex fighter you can still do it if you find some other magic.

If Combat Flexibility is the fighter's thing then no edition has succeeded in making it unique to Fighters. Any flexibility fighters had, rangers had. And in 2 editions, rangers were more flexible as they had access to good archery and dual wielding.

This is not true.

The PHB rules state spells with verbal components "require the chanting of mystic words ...... with specific pitch and resonance"

That means technically they not only must be out loud, if not there is no pitch. Further the rules go on to say you can't cast these while gagged or in an area of silence. If they did not need to be out loud, the silence would presumably have no effect.

The verbal component must be said out loud. But nothing in the rules says you must be loud when saying them.

Basically you must be able to use your "outdoor voice" to cast a spell with a verbal component. You can't speak softly. There is no shout requirement.

Requiring anything louder than your normal speaking voice is a table to table house rule.

 

[Minigiant]

Like I said, some of the feats in the game feel like 'Advanced Fighting Styles' that would have been Fighter features but were shunted to the Feats section just so they can say "Fighters get more feats! Just like in 3.x! You loved 3.X right? LOVE US!"

Great Weapon Master, Heavy Armor Master, Polearm Master, Shield Master...

The armor feats 100% feel like fighter class features.

Fighters should wear armor better than any other class. Rangers should dodge attacks better.

 

[ECMO3]

If Combat Flexibility is the fighter's thing then no edition has succeeded in making it unique to Fighters. Any flexibility fighters had, rangers had. And in 2 editions, rangers were more flexible as they had access to good archery and dual wielding.

Well fighters are more flexible in this edition because they have more fighting style options and can change them once more than Rangers can.

The verbal component must be said out loud. But nothing in the rules says you must be loud when saying them.

The post I responded to said they could not be said out loud. Moreover the rules say you "chant" the verbal components and in normal English "chant" would mean "say, shout or sing" which would be AT LEAST a speaking voice.

The rules also state you can make an arcane check to determine the spell someone is casting, that would presume you know they are casting a spell, which would not be the case if you did not have to say the verbal component loud enough to be heard.

Finally, Crawford has stated that verbal components make an "appreciable noise" further stating you can not remain hidden while doing them.

 

[Azzy]

This is not true.

The PHB rules state spells with verbal components "require the chanting of mystic words ...... with specific pitch and resonance"

That means technically they must be out loud, if not there is no pitch. Further the rules go on to say you can't cast these while gagged or in an area of silence. If they did not need to be out loud, the silence would presumably have no effect.

There's a difference between "out loud" and "loud". You can chant without being at normal talking volume (let alone at a louder than normal volume). It's chanting, not belting. There is no prerequisite to be loud our shouting to be silenced—silence affects normal talking volume (and even whispers).

 

[Minigiant]

Well fighters are more flexible in this edition because they have more fighting style options and can change them once more than Rangers can.

That's not flexible because fighters , paladins, and rangers each only get to choose 1 fighting style.And barbarians and monks are locked into their 1 as well.

The class is flexible but individual fighters are not. Rangers and Paladins are more flexible as they have spells tailored to different fighting styles and can prepare multiple types of spells.

 

[ECMO3]

That's not flexible because fighters , paladins, and rangers each only get to choose 1 fighting style.And barbarians and monks are locked into their 1 as well.

No since Tasha's they can change their fighting style and choose a different fighting style every timethey get an ASI, which means they can change to a different fighting style 8 times over 18 levels and have many more fighting styles to choose from.

This is what makes them more flexible as martials with weapons.

I am not considering spells when I say this and that is a different discussion as spellcasters are more versatile than non-spell casters across the board. In this case I would agree Ranger spells bring versatility to the hand-to-hand combat I don't really think Paladin spells bring more versatility, although they do bring more power.

 

[Krachek]

Paladins use spells! Didn’t see that for a long time!