D&D (2024) The Lackluster Ranger

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Like the non-casting Ranger class from Level Up.

I've got the SRD for Level Up downloaded. I find certain aspects of it a bit fiddly and overly-detailed, but it is nonetheless a great representation of what a spell-less Ranger should be.

 

[Horwath]

Which is not terrible... it isn't great either.

so you rate it 3,6/10?

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

so you rate it 3,6/10?

The 2024 implementation doubles down on the idea of Hunter's Mark as a spell, which to me, is a point against it. In its favour, it does a pretty good job of putting lipstick on that pig (e.g. getting tons of free uses). I get that the 2024 designers were more than likely handcuffed by the paradigm of backwards compatibility. So given that restriction, they did well. I still prefer the Tasha's implementation, but this is close.

One of the big problems I think with HM as a spell is that it competes with many other Ranger spells which have the Concentration tag. I guess the idea is that having so many free uses of HM encourages players to 'turn it off' so that they can stop disregarding the other Concentration spells on the list? Better than ignoring the problem I suppose.

 

[FrogReaver]

I have been watching several video reviews of the 2024 Ranger and I haven't found any that make the class look even decent when compared to the other martials and half-casters. Perhaps the most revealing video I watched was by a creator named DnD Unoptimized where he breaks down the 6 martial classes not only on damage capability but also mobility, durability, mental resistance, and control capability. While no system is perfect and he only focused on one build, the issues with the class started to become obvious. The Ranger is classically billed as the class that good at everything but not great at any one thing. The result of the numbers in this test indicated the Ranger was only middle of the road at damage and possibly mobility but was terrible at everything else. It lacked control, durability, and mental resistance to the point where it was last or second to last on all of them.

Maybe it was just the build he used, but this is exactly how I feel about the Ranger. It feels like a pushover that doesn't get a strong amount of defensive capability in exchange for being only average offensively. I will be selecting feats, spells, and subclasses for my Ranger builds that address those weaknesses to make the class more well-rounded. This explains to me why Wizards expressly did an article on DnD Beyond about the 12 best Ranger feats. They were basically giving suggestions on how to fix the holes that they left in the class. It's not ideal that the Ranger doesn't actually address the issues in the base features because this means I will need to plan and spend my precious few optional features on repairing a busted class. This is exactly why I do not think the class was designed well.

Maybe I am just seeing some bad apples ruining the whole bunch. If anyone finds any breakdown videos or articles showing that the Ranger is actually a pretty good martial class please let me know. If I am just being duped with biased reviews that are twisting the Ranger into looking worse than it is I would be happy to change my mind.

A few thoughts.

Online reviews often focus on level 20, but asking if a class is good at level 20 doesn’t mean it isn’t as good or better through most of the game.

Online reviews often focus on DPR as a single number when we really need at least melee and ranged dpr numbers. In the actual game there will be situations where the actual damage you do is dependent on both, meaning that in the actual game being good at melee and ranged but not the best at either is a big pro for actual damage dealt. Also note that opening with the bow and then switching to melee also alleviates some bonus action pressure. And honestly, aoe probably needs a separate component as well. Something else rangers tend to be better at than their melee counterparts.

An example of the previous principle in action. Combat starts at 90ft. Ranger can use hunters mark attack with his longbow and advance for solid but not great damage. Next turn the enemy might dash up to him so he puts away his bow and pulls out his short sword and scimitar. He can then proceed with a sequence of up to 4 melee attacks all with hunters mark on them (nick mastery and dual wield feat).

Also not typically mentioned is that rangers get alot of free hunters mark casts. Meaning they can often use their actual slots for something else. Something like hail of thorns on ranged attacks can further help out their damage.

I’ve not crunched and compared classes at lots of different levels yet, (2024 is harder to compute DPR for due to how masteries work), but when multiple ‘realistic’ situations are considered at various level points, its very possible rangers start to look quite a bit better. In comparison.

 

[Pauln6]

I've got the SRD for Level Up downloaded. I find certain aspects of it a bit fiddly and overly-detailed, but it is nonetheless a great representation of what a spell-less Ranger should be.

I am really enjoying the extra combat options in level up (basic damage alone has seen a spike in pushing tactics) and ways that expertise opens up tactics and passable skill rolls for non rogues.

I'm more nervous about baking manoeuvres into the martial classes because it seems that the options multiply quickly, which could slow combat, and add to book-keeping.

I was wondering if 5.5 weapon mastery could take the place of manoeuvres, but maybe give characters access to a small number of at-will manoeuvres that they can swap in place of mastery as a bit of icing on the cake.

I can see how swapping second wind and action surge back in could make fighters absolute rock stars. I'd love for them to become one of the more powerful classes.

I'm a bit more nervous about how badly other classes like ranger and adept might be affected by the loss of manoeuvres? I think rogues, berserkers, and rangers might be ok in that scenario as they are still great fun to play in 5e.

 

[Corinnguard]

I've got the SRD for Level Up downloaded. I find certain aspects of it a bit fiddly and overly-detailed, but it is nonetheless a great representation of what a spell-less Ranger should be.

Agreed. The Level Up Ranger is a good example of what a spell-less Ranger ought to be. Aside from that, I like the classes in Level Up because the base version of each class has features that cover the three pillars of combat, exploration and social interaction.

As for a spellcasting Ranger, I like Laser Llama's version of the class better.

Alternate Ranger by laserllama

What I like about this version of the Ranger:
* Knacks
In the wild, you have learned bits of primal knowledge, known as Knacks, which bolster your hunting, survival, and tracking skills. At 1st level, you know one Knack of your choice from the list at the end of this class. Whenever you gain a Ranger level, you can replace one Knack you know with a Knack of your choice, so long as you meet the prerequisites for that Knack. You cannot replace a Knack that is a prerequisite for another Knack you know. At certain Ranger levels, you learn additional Knacks, as shown in the Knacks Known column of the Ranger table.

Like I mentioned earlier in this thread, I prefer Rangers that rely more on their skills and training. So, having something which bolsters those skills is something of a plus for me. This particular feature is also a good customization feature for this version of the class.

* Laser Llama's version of the Ranger has the class being a prepared spellcaster instead of a known spellcaster.
At the end of each long rest, you prepare a list of spells that are available for you to cast. Choose a number of spells equal to your Wisdom modifier + half your Ranger level, rounded down. Spells must all be from the Ranger spell list at the end of this class, and be of a level for which you have spell slots.

Being able to swap out spells per long rest is very nice.

* Ranger's Quarry

You focus your senses to hunt as a predator of the wild. Also at 2nd level, you can use a bonus action to mark one creature you can see as your Quarry, gaining the benefits below:
+Whenever you damage it with an attack, you deal bonus damage equal to a roll of your Quarry Die, which is a d4.
+Whenever you make an ability check to track or locate it, you can add one roll of your Quarry Die to your d20 roll.

These benefits last for 1 hour but end early if your Quarry is slain or if you mark another creature as your Quarry. You can use this feature a number of times equal to your Wisdom modifier (a minimum of once). You regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest. When you have no uses left, you can expend a spell slot to use this feature again.

When you reach 6th, 10th, 14th, and 18th levels in this class, both the duration of Ranger's Quarry and the size of your Quarry Die increase, as indicated in the Ranger table.

Ranger's Quarry looks like a cross between Sneak Attack and Hunter's Mark IMO.

 

[Corinnguard]

I'm more nervous about baking manoeuvres into the martial classes because it seems that the options multiply quickly, which could slow combat, and add to book-keeping.

If you are worried about book-keeping when it comes to keeping track of which combat maneuvers your character has, Level Up does have a deck of Combat Maneuver cards that you can use.

 

[Pauln6]

If you are worried about book-keeping when it comes to keeping track of which combat maneuvers your character has, Level Up does have a deck of Combat Maneuver cards that you can use.

Yes I will probably treat myself to a set for my birthday. We have one fighter/ranger/barbarian who multiclassed because the 5e barbarian was too basic but he seems non-plussed about converting to A5E with all the manoeuvres. Apart from that, we just have a few level 2 and 3 multiclass fighters, and a few multiclassed rogues, all levels 2-7.

I love all the non combat stuff. It's just turning basic classes into kore complex resource management classes that I'm not sold on.

 

[Minigiant]

Like the non-casting Ranger class from Level Up.

The main problem with the level up Rangers and many other non-spellcasting Rangers that are homebrewed is that they typically are not in a traditional D&D campaign at exploration and other rangering aspects of the game.

They typically are designed for a lower magic power low magic frequency settings which is not the typical D&D. They also heavily lean on fighter aspects.

The level up Ranger mostly relies on you using level ups exploration system to make it good exploration. If you stick it in to a traditional D&D 5e game, it becomes lacking because it doesn't have those magical elements to match the games magical elements.

Thus becoming as what I said before fighters wearing green doing green tricks.

 

[Corinnguard]

They typically are designed for a lower magic power low magic frequency settings which is not the typical D&D. They also heavily lean on fighter aspects.

Which fighter aspects is the Ranger heavily leaning upon? And which D&D setting is low magic power/low magic frequency?

Thus becoming as what I said before fighters wearing green doing green tricks.

You make that sound like it's a bad thing. You might as well as say that the Paladin is a fighter wearing holy raiments and doing holy tricks. The Barbarian is a fighter with anger management issues. And so on...