D&D 5E The Dual Wielding Ranger: How Aragorn, Drizzt, and Dual-Wielding Led to the Ranger's Loss of Identity

[Chaosmancer]

I agree, there is something. Sometimes, people are masochists.

No, in seriousness, I just wanted to point out the bipolar need of the audience when it comes to character classes.

That is fair enough, but I think there is value in trying to posit a purpose for the ranger, and letting that guide our new designs. I think there is a bit too much obsession with "where did it come from" which never helps the actual design.

I also think since "the wilderness" lacks enough teeth for the Ranger to interact with, going with a wider theme helps clarify them. Not because we need a whole new slew of mechanics, but because it offers some connective tissue to what we do have, and shows a skeletal structure.

 

[jayoungr]

So Aragorn had more than one agenda based on his birthright. That doesn’t mean he can‘t serve as a primary ranger archetype. Same with the sons of Elrond. Or the Rangers of the North.

Aragorn at a certain point in his career--the "Strider" period--is a ranger archetype. But as the story progresses, he starts to multiclass. None of the other examples you list become heavily-armored charismatic battlefield commander types. I think a problem of the original ranger design was that it was trying to model Aragorn's entire career, rather than just Strider.

"the wilderness" lacks enough teeth for the Ranger to interact with

It seems to do fine for druids....

 

[Chaosmancer]

It seems to do fine for druids....

Druids get wild shape and full spell casting, it makes a huge difference.

But how often do you use the 8th level Land's Stride ability to ignore non-magical plant damage? How often is the ability (of the Nature Cleric to be sure) at 17th level to have protection from Beasts applicable?

After about level 5, the wilderness stops presenting many serious threats. By level 9, basically nothing fully natural is even going to show up.

 

[Scott Christian]

That is fair enough, but I think there is value in trying to posit a purpose for the ranger, and letting that guide our new designs. I think there is a bit too much obsession with "where did it come from" which never helps the actual design.

I also think since "the wilderness" lacks enough teeth for the Ranger to interact with, going with a wider theme helps clarify them. Not because we need a whole new slew of mechanics, but because it offers some connective tissue to what we do have, and shows a skeletal structure.

Yeah, I agree with both points. The wilderness thing is tricky too. I mean, it all depends on how narrow you make the classes. It definitely could feel like a background just as much as a class.

 

[Minigiant]

Druids get wild shape and full spell casting, it makes a huge difference.

But how often do you use the 8th level Land's Stride ability to ignore non-magical plant damage? How often is the ability (of the Nature Cleric to be sure) at 17th level to have protection from Beasts applicable?

After about level 5, the wilderness stops presenting many serious threats. By level 9, basically nothing fully natural is even going to show up.

The issue is that level 10 or so with a new tier of play and D&D more or less doesn't create wilderness threats of that tier. And DMs don't include the few that are given.

At level 8 or so, you should be dealing with malicious nature spirits, aggressive noble fey, and mutant or apex animals and plants.

You know what an 8th level wilderness challenge is. A T-rex.
You get lost and a random wandering nature reanimates a dinosaur or animates a chunk of the forest and rocks.

 

[Alzrius]

You know what an 8th level wilderness challenge is. A T-rex.

You know you're about to face a T-Rex when you suddenly hear this background music starting to play (NSFW for language):

 

[Chaosmancer]

The issue is that level 10 or so with a new tier of play and D&D more or less doesn't create wilderness threats of that tier. And DMs don't include the few that are given.

At level 8 or so, you should be dealing with malicious nature spirits, aggressive noble fey, and mutant or apex animals and plants.

You know what an 8th level wilderness challenge is. A T-rex.
You get lost and a random wandering nature reanimates a dinosaur or animates a chunk of the forest and rocks.

Exactly my point. Around level 10, there is no need for a wilderness expert of that level. There is no nature threat for levels 11 through 17. Maybe the Eladrin, but Rangers and Druids get abilities related to plants and terrain, to beasts, not to Fey and Monstrosities.

If we had a more robust design or threats and challenges for high level nature, I think that would help clarify Ranger design a lot. It is one of the reasons I am so disappointed in the loss of Primal, and the various spirits from 4e. We have divine threats, we have arcane threats, and we have martial threats, but without naming Primal and instead trying to fold it over into Divine, we don't have Primal Threats.

 

[Minigiant]

Exactly my point. Around level 10, there is no need for a wilderness expert of that level. There is no nature threat for levels 11 through 17. Maybe the Eladrin, but Rangers and Druids get abilities related to plants and terrain, to beasts, not to Fey and Monstrosities.

If we had a more robust design or threats and challenges for high level nature, I think that would help clarify Ranger design a lot. It is one of the reasons I am so disappointed in the loss of Primal, and the various spirits from 4e. We have divine threats, we have arcane threats, and we have martial threats, but without naming Primal and instead trying to fold it over into Divine, we don't have Primal Threats.

Heck. There are barely any martial threats past level 10 beyond other fighters and outsiders who use swords.

It's not like the ideas don't exist. We have a big natural no-no-word ravage the world for a year. It's that the designers and fanbase have a lapse of imagination in the wild or martial area since few are outdoorsy, warriors, or experts in either area.

I mean King Kong and Godzilla are level 15+ beasts, right?

Someone summon Mike.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Heck. There are barely any martial threats past level 10 beyond other fighters and outsiders who use swords.

It's not like the ideas don't exist. We have a big natural no-no-word ravage the world for a year. It's that the designers and fanbase have a lapse of imagination in the wild or martial area since few are outdoorsy, warriors, or experts in either area.

I mean King Kong and Godzilla are level 15+ beasts, right?

Someone summon Mike.

kong is cr 20+ at the weakest.

 

[Voadam]

I mean King Kong and Godzilla are level 15+ beasts, right?

Are you talking King Conan magic axe-wielding Kong?