D&D 5E The 2024 Ranger is Actually Pretty Good (with numbers)

[Minigiant]

IT will be interesting to see how the class fares if some of the spells for ranger but not in the new PHB are used.
Must get into this myself but I need to refresh my probability math. Since weapon masteries bring in a lot of conditional probabilities. Feats also have much higher utility in the 2024 game than before.

I mean a Ranger literally has more spell slots available since the Paladin only get 1 free smite but the Ranger gets 2-6 free HMs.

Once Zephyr Strike is converted.

1. You don't need to take Shadow Touched to get Wrathful Strike. You could burn burn all your crits into d6s from level 1.
2. This frees up a feat for +2 Wis or Dual Wielder

At level 13, that's 16d6 if you use 1/2 your slots.
That's 3.5 *1.X where X is your present to crit.
TM uses 30% so that's +4.55 DPR at 13.

 

[niklinna]

I mean a Ranger literally has more spell slots available since the Paladin only get 1 free smite but the Ranger gets 2-6 free HMs.

Once Zephyr Strike is converted.

1. You don't need to take Shadow Touched to get Wrathful Strike. You could burn burn all your crits into d6s from level 1.
2. This frees up a feat for +2 Wis or Dual Wielder

At level 13, that's 16d6 if you use 1/2 your slots.
That's 3.5 *1.X where X is your present to crit.
TM uses 30% so that's +4.55 DPR at 13.

A slot I can only use for one thing isn't really a slot. It's a use, of that one thing.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I mean a Ranger literally has more spell slots available since the Paladin only get 1 free smite but the Ranger gets 2-6 free HMs.

Once Zephyr Strike is converted.

1. You don't need to take Shadow Touched to get Wrathful Strike. You could burn burn all your crits into d6s from level 1.
2. This frees up a feat for +2 Wis or Dual Wielder

At level 13, that's 16d6 if you use 1/2 your slots.
That's 3.5 *1.X where X is your present to crit.
TM uses 30% so that's +4.55 DPR at 13.

Yeah, I haven't sat down and done the 1 to 1 math, but the fact that Paladins can easily use half their spell slots to increase their single-target damage (which is what? one 3rd, two 2nd, and two 1st giving you 14d8 more damage? More if you count crits) and the Ranger not having an equivalent way to chose to spend their spell slots, you end up with rangers looking worse than they would be in actual play

 

[Minigiant]

A slot I can only use for one thing isn't really a slot. It's a use, of that one thing.

The point is that Rangers can't use it for that one thing but Paladins and Warlocks can.

Like I said before, Rangers attempting to beat Fighters, Barbarians, and Paladin in damage or toughness is a fools errand. Those 3 classes are just damage tanks. Ranger is a skills class.

But they should have the option to convert slots to damage. Not as good as a Paladin or Warlock though.

That or increase the damage of each Ranger subclasses 11th level feature.

 

[OptionalRule]

Thanks for this. I like a good analysis. I agree, I think Ranger is better. I feel like 2024 is more bloated and it plays slower at my table as the additional options with new feats and weapon master slow down with even more choices. That might normalize and people get use to the new edition though. That said, there are a lot of it that I like, and the Ranger redesign is one of those things.

 

[niklinna]

The point is that Rangers can't use it for that one thing but Paladins and Warlocks can.

A slot that I can't even use for the one thing it's supposed to be for isn't even a thing. Paladins and Warlocks can use their actual slots for multiple things (spells), plus another thing (which I suppose might as well be a spell but let's not drill into the absurdity of D&D class design).

But a Ranger can use their Hunter's Mark "slots" for one thing—Hunter's Mark (a spell; see parenthetical above). And they can't use those "slots" for that other kind of thing Paladins and Warlocks can.

 

[Zardnaar]

Thanks for this. I like a good analysis. I agree, I think Ranger is better. I feel like 2024 is more bloated and it plays slower at my table as the additional options with new feats and weapon master slow down with even more choices. That might normalize and people get use to the new edition though. That said, there are a lot of it that I like, and the Ranger redesign is one of those things.

Yeah my players are generally struggling.

Old hat for wife and myself.

 

[Zardnaar]

Thoughts on paladin dip for smites?

 

[Minigiant]

A slot that I can't even use for the one thing it's supposed to be for isn't even a thing. Paladins and Warlocks can use their actual slots for multiple things (spells), plus another thing (which I suppose might as well be a spell but let's not drill into the absurdity of D&D class design).

But a Ranger can use their Hunter's Mark "slots" for one thing—Hunter's Mark (a spell; see parenthetical above). And they can't use those "slots" for that other kind of thing Paladins and Warlocks can.

Okay I get ya now.

For half casters, damage buffs comes from 4 parts

1) Your concentration spell buff
2) Your nonconcentration spell buff
3) Your Spell Strike
4) Your class buff
5) Your subclass buff

A Paladin has all 5.
1, 2, and 3 all cost spells slots.
4 is resourceless but melee only
5 is a Channel Divinity.
So Paladins are more flexible but have less resources

A Ranger has 1, 4, and 5. Rangers only have 3 at ranged and both options are weak for pure signal target damage. Ranger 3 is SOE. Ranger didn't have a 2.

1 is Hunter's Mark and uses FE charges
2 doesn't exist
3 is ranged AOE only and costs spells slots.
4 is a modification of 1
5 is okay.

Paladin has 5 sources of damage but 3 of them share resource and 1 is melee only.

Ranger has 4 sources of damage but only 2 of then share resource and 1 is ranged only.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Thoughts on paladin dip for smites?

Very MAD and not worth it when you could do a feat instead.