Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ZombieRoboNinja" data-source="post: 6347719" data-attributes="member: 54843">Let me say first off that I would prefer the ranger have a different resource system for his abilities, because I hate spell slots.That said, I can think of plenty of strong martial archetypes that COULD get a full class write up with abilities just as unique and iconic (from a flavor perspective) as a martial ranger. A knight who excels at mounted combat and courtly manners; a swashbuckler with acrobatic fighting technique and a rapier wit; a master tactician; and so on. In fact, a lot of those hold together a whole lot better than the "iconic" D&D ranger who is good at tracking and dual wielding (for some reason) and being really racist against specific types of monsters. But those all get tucked into fighter and rogue for the same of simplicity and modularity. In fact, the only reason the barbarian and monk escape that fate is that they have their own tradition within D&D. (Which is to say, anything in the 3e PHB got a free pass.)And you know what? It's fine by me that there aren't 30 martial classes in 5e. That encourages them to make the classes they do have more thematically flexible, rather than trying to come up with mechanical gimmicks for a bunch of similar classes. If the martial ranger as a full class is a casualty of that approach, I'm fine with it.</blockquote>