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

[Tigris]

Wow. Yeah i disagree completely, and frankly i doubt we will reach any common ground. We rarely do when it comes to the ranger anyway.

Anyway the problem with all hunters marks is thst the spell is bland, makes ranger gameplay frustrating, and scales in a way that is meaningless for many tables or just certain adventuring days.

Regardless of balance at different levels, the simplest fix is to add a feature that works alongside it while being more flavorful, and waiting for later levels to be directly punchy.

Well if we do not care about balance, then we can also just let the ranger kill an enemy they are tracking with 1 attack? Also feels flavourfull.


Most 5E class features etc. are meaningless for certain adventuring days:

• Some tables dont take short rests because the GMs dont like it / feel like they cant take 1 hour to waste.
• Some tables have 1 fight per adventuring day.
• Some tables 1 fight per short rest.

This is a 5E problem not a Ranger problem. And many class features dont matter for some of these situations.


The Hunter's mark spell is the "default spell" which just works and is reliable so it needs to be to some degree bland. The same as the "Divine smite" spell for the paladin. Its there to make sure you always have something useful to do, even if its not optimal and flashy, and the Hunter's mark here is definitly less bland than the paladin one, since it also gives non combat advantages.

And having this bland spell as a backup/default (which does not even need spell slots most of the time), allows you to take many really situational spells as Ranger, since you can always do the bland damage up spell. This allows to NOT be frustrated when you have no use for your situational spells.

 

[Bladesinger]

The problem with hunters Mark is it should not be a spell in the first place. It should be a class feature that you can use a number of times per day, doesn't use concentration, and scales with class level. It should scale similar to the bards feature eventually ending up as a d12.

This is how Tales of the Valiant does it. The ToV Ranger is pretty good IMO.

 

[ECMO3]

Treantmonk's buffs do nothing for the Ranger identity IMO, even though that is what he was striving for. They do make Rangers more powerful and most of the Ranger-specifci spells could use a boost.

The boost in power is not a lot on a single class Ranger, but it is going to be extremely powerful when optimized with feats or multiclassing.

 

[ECMO3]

The problem with hunters Mark is it should not be a spell in the first place. It should be a class feature that you can use a number of times per day, doesn't use concentration, and scales with class level. It should scale similar to the bards feature eventually ending up as a d12.

I don't particularly like Hunter's Mark, but I don't mind it as a spell. I am against making it a non-spell though.

Ranger already has enough weapon damage boosts for my tastes when you consider the subclass boosts, weapon masteries and extra attack. If you want a bit more cast a spell.

Another damage boost ability has no flavor. At least as a spell it is magic.

The fix for a Ranger in my opinion is more spells - more slots, more prepared spells and more options. In particular I think there should be more Wizard/Sorcerer spells on their list- Magic Missile, Tasha's Laughter, Misty Step, Mirror Image ....

 

[Corinnguard]

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.

WoTC can't. But I doubt that is going to prevent certain homebrewers from trying anyway.

 

[Silam]

If this is the problem, isn't the trivial solution to treat Treantmonk's version of Hunter's Mark and WotC's version of Hunter's Mark as different spells? Use the former for the Ranger, the latter for anything else.

You're already allowing custom content. This doesn't seem like a terribly difficult customization to make if it bothers you.

Not only that, you can make it a 3rd level (or whatever) spell directly. This way it not only avoids the Paladin subclass spell list, but also prohibits taking it with Fey Touched.