D&D 5E (2024) The Problem with Treantmonk's Hunter's Mark

[Lord Twig]

I've really enjoyed reading all of the responses. The original premise of this post was that it was a mistake to put the fix for the Ranger's Hunter’s Mark in the spell itself, and reading everyone else's house rules makes me think that most people agree, as almost all of the fixes are added as a feature of the Ranger, which is where I think it should be too.

The level 13, 17, and 20 Ranger features are another issue, but as has been pointed out, the Paladin gets NOTHING at 13 and 17. So the Ranger features at those levels are better by default. Everyone agrees that the Ranger capstone is bad, but until then I think they are fine.

The level 11 power boost for Ranger comes from their subclass. On the one hand this means that each Ranger subclass will play different than all the other subclass at that level and above. On the other hand, a bad subclass feature at 11 can make the whole class weak in tiers 3 and 4. But I still think it is better than the Paladin that gets the same thing for every subclass. And while +1d8 to attacks is good for damage, it isn't really interesting or fun to play. IMHO.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Can't.

Backwards compatibility. Spell in 2014 has to be a Spell in 2024.

WOTC screwed it up by grognarding it up and making it a spell in the first place. Then they screwed up by caving to fans who demanding referencing backwards compatibility.

Nah, the two can both exist. Rename the feature, make it compatible if you want idc. Maybe Quarry gives higher crit chance or something whatever.

 

[Minigiant]

Nah, the two can both exist. Rename the feature, make it compatible if you want idc. Maybe Quarry gives higher crit chance or something whatever.

Crit chance isnt impactful enough for most fans.

Plus ranger is super strong in Tier 1 and good in tier 2.

Having Hunter's Mark and Anything worth caring about would be blatantly OP levels 1-10.

The reverse wizard.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Treantmonk has a new video series on fixing the 2024 Ranger which, to be clear, I am enjoying. I don't agree with a lot of the changes, but I respect the thought put into them and think that some of his suggestions are very good.

His Hunter's Mark spell, however, is very bad. Here it is:

You can find the original source here.

So why is it bad? Because it isn't a fix for the Ranger. It is a buff for everyone, and the Ranger suffers for it.

One of Treantmonk's main criticisms of the Ranger is that it lacks a clear identity, and he makes some changes to rectify it. One of the ways he does this is to make the Ranger spells more powerful, the problem is that Hunter's Mark doesn't just belong to the Ranger. Unfortunately, WotC decided to also give it to the Vengence Paladin, one of the strongest class/subclass combos in the game, as one of their automatic spells (this was a terrible thing to do, but it was done back in 2014, so there is probably no fixing it). They also made it available to ANYONE that takes the Fey Touched feat. This means that your Vengence Paladin, Eldritch Knight Fighter, Pact of the Blade Warlock, Valor Bard, Bladesinger Wizard, etc., etc. can take the Fey Touched feat and then spend at 3rd level spell slot to get +1d6 to every attack for the next 8 hours CONCENTRATION FREE! Yay?

I understand the problem with requiring Concentration on Hunter's Mark, but the correct place to fix this is in the Ranger class features (and probably a pretty high level feature). Not in the spell that just anyone can take and get the benefit of.

It strikes me that one other way to fix the ranger is make the changes to subclasses or to introduce Tasha like replacement features that have the fix.

One of the things I like about Treantmonk's fix is the addition of other concentration ranger spells as alternatives to Hunter's Mark.
What is the minimalist way to introduce think kind of features to the base class with the least amount of disruption.
One thing would be to move the "remove concentration with a higher level slot" feature to an optional class feature that replaces an existing feature like favoured enemy.

 

[Tigris]

I've really enjoyed reading all of the responses. The original premise of this post was that it was a mistake to put the fix for the Ranger's Hunter’s Mark in the spell itself, and reading everyone else's house rules makes me think that most people agree, as almost all of the fixes are added as a feature of the Ranger, which is where I think it should be too.

The level 13, 17, and 20 Ranger features are another issue, but as has been pointed out, the Paladin gets NOTHING at 13 and 17. So the Ranger features at those levels are better by default. Everyone agrees that the Ranger capstone is bad, but until then I think they are fine.

The level 11 power boost for Ranger comes from their subclass. On the one hand this means that each Ranger subclass will play different than all the other subclass at that level and above. On the other hand, a bad subclass feature at 11 can make the whole class weak in tiers 3 and 4. But I still think it is better than the Paladin that gets the same thing for every subclass. And while +1d8 to attacks is good for damage, it isn't really interesting or fun to play. IMHO.

I think this is a really good summary. Maybe to add:

The reason why people dont want to change hunters mark is to make sure the "fix" does not empower other classes which can somehow grab hunters mark. Especially full casters which have higher spell slots.

Additionally, many people do not like the class being dependant on Hunters Mark (and some like me argue that it is not at the moment), so improving hunters mark would make this depencency stronger / or be there in the first place.


Thats also the reason why the capstone is bad/ not liked, because it is 100% dependant on hunters mark, and not just "improves your backup spell" like the other "hunters mark features".


I actually think the level 13 and 17 features are really clever gamedesign. It comes at levels where you normally would not get features because higher spell level, so it needs to be a weak feature. And a weak feature helping to keep a low level spell relevant (which else might not be anymore, especially now with higher level spells), is great. Thats the one thing I feel missing in the stars druid subclass, something to make sure the free level 1 casts you get stay useful.

Also overall (with the below quote as argument), I dont really think that the Ranger needs a "fix", except the capstone. The capstone should make hunters mark no longer need a bonus action and no longer uses concentration (or that you can concentrate on it + another spell). (Instead or in addition to making the hunters mark 1d10).

Crit chance isnt impactful enough for most fans.

Plus ranger is super strong in Tier 1 and good in tier 2.

Having Hunter's Mark and Anything worth caring about would be blatantly OP levels 1-10.

The reverse wizard.

I agree and also the Ranger is (especially in 2014) all about consistency, so crit chance really does not fit.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Crit chance isnt impactful enough for most fans.

Plus ranger is super strong in Tier 1 and good in tier 2.

Having Hunter's Mark and Anything worth caring about would be blatantly OP levels 1-10.

The reverse wizard.

Making the ranger as deadly as the paladin 1-10 won't break the game, but you can also just not make the feature that powerful at low level and make it more about hunting. Give a bonus equal to wisdom mod to checks to hide from, find, etc, or give it the ranger the ability to give allies extra damage agisnt the target, there are a multide of options, most of which can start small and tune up when the ranger needs it.

 

[tetrasodium]

Crit chance isnt impactful enough for most fans.

Plus ranger is super strong in Tier 1 and good in tier 2.

Having Hunter's Mark and Anything worth caring about would be blatantly OP levels 1-10.

The reverse wizard.

Agreed. IIRC back in 3.5 people didn't really even consider it a crit build unless it was getting towards crit on like 12-15 or better for 3x damage. Even then it was usually critting sneak and elemental dice or something

 

[Minigiant]

Making the ranger as deadly as the paladin 1-10 won't break the game, but you can also just not make the feature that powerful at low level and make it more about hunting. Give a bonus equal to wisdom mod to checks to hide from, find, etc, or give it the ranger the ability to give allies extra damage agisnt the target, there are a multide of options, most of which can start small and tune up when the ranger needs it.

The ranger is than the paladin level 1-10.

Ranger is top 3 class levels 1-4 and very good levels 5-10.

The problems start at levels 11 when ranger goes all defense in base class and relies kn subclass and spell choice for offense and skill power.

That's 100% fixable with 2 new spells of 3rd level and 4th or 5th level.