Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="James Gasik" data-source="post: 9519728" data-attributes="member: 6877472">Speaking to the class itself, there's nothing wrong with the Ranger, beyond the usual issue of most people having their own ideal of what the Ranger is/should be in their heads- it's a class that has struggled with it's identity, and generally changes the most with each new revision (2024 being the exception).You could play a Ranger and have a lot of fun with it's mix of combat prowess, skill focus, and magic.  The issue (if there is one, not everyone agrees) comes down to people who wanted something different from the Ranger- and the fact that the class isn't terribly exciting.  There's nothing about the Ranger that stands out.  For people who want a "WOW" factor to a class, they're not going to be happy with it.They'll gravitate towards other classes- Druids turning into great huge beasts, Paladins being invincible burst damage machines, Rogues with the big crits and making godlike skill checks, Wizards turning reality inside out in brief spurts, or Monks making concepts like "encounter distance" laughable.But the Ranger?  He's not crackling with mystical energy or making a thousand attacks per turn or inverting encounter balance.  He's just doing the best he can with the tools at his disposal.  At the end of the day, I think most people wish those tools were better/different, but at least they work.The Ranger isn't the best at anything it does, not really.  But that doesn't make it a bad class.  At worst, it's boring or superfluous.  The "fifth party member", if you will.But it's still early.  We have more subclasses to see, and I'm sure the class will have it's devotees, just like the Monk has over the years.  Granted, the current Monk seems to have found it's groove at last, and may outshine the Ranger, but the Ranger has never really been a class for glory hounds anyways.---Ranger has always been that class I've always thought about playing, but never actually did.  It always felt like it was missing something, or that some of it's mechanics were unwieldly, begging questions like "will I fight my favored enemy this session?  Will we ever travel in my favored terrain?  Will the party need my abilities to succeed?".And the answer, too often, was "no, not really".  I don't see that changing now, sadly, which is a bit frustrating, but that's fine.  Not every class has to be for me.Scout Rogues and Oath of the Ancients Paladins still exist.  I can play a Druid and never even touch Wild Shape- heck, the Druid in my current campaign throws javelins about as often as he casts spells (magic javelins, but javelins all the same)!So in a way, everyone has options to work with that can scratch the Ranger itch in a way that suits them.  "Ranger" is more of a concept, an idea, than a class.  If the current class doesn't suit you, well, there's more than one way to fulfill that fantasy.It doesn't make the Ranger bad, just maybe, not the Ranger for you and me.</blockquote>

Verification