• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

D&D 5E The Ranger

I play rangers will always play rangers because I love rangers. Rangers have one of the best early game spells in the game in hunter's mark. At lv 2 you are dealing an extra d6 damage, I think people over look this spell. If you look at the weapon section the only weapons dishing out that type of damage is heavy two handed weapons. Others have said this before but combine that with multiple attacks such as two handed fighting and a decent modifier you can dish out 20 plus damage a turn before lv 5 after lv 5 your in the 30 damage per turn range.

My lv 4 human ranger has a 20 dexterity due to the ability score improvement. He dishes out a ton of damage because of hunters mark. The character used the variant human trait to get the crossbow expert feat. Combat with this character goes like this: move, hunters mark (bonus action), fire hand crossbow (attack action). The character has archery as its fighting style so thats +9 to hit doing 2d6 damage + 5 on the way in. If the target doesn't die before the character's next turn it attacks with its rapier doing d8+d6+5 damage, if that doesnt kill the creature the character fires its hand crossbow at +9 to hit (no disadvantage because of feat) doing another 2d6 damage.

If the rapier kills the creature, than the character has two choices fire the hand crossbow at someone or use the bonus action to mark a new target. That way next turn it can make the rapier and crossbow attacks with the extra d6. When you add the hunter archetypes to combinations like this your adding another d8 damage, or your able to hit multiple creatures making your damage output just as high as any other class. The d8 is similar to fighters extra d8 maneuvers damage, right?

The beast master option is not as appealing because everyone is concern with one phase of the game. Your companion can do alot of other things outside of combat to help you out such as following enemies that have escape and finding out their hidden lair. Certain animals can mimic or use telepathic like abilities to communicate with you to let you in on conversations you should not hear. How effective a beast is outside of combat is usually determined by your GM. Most GM rewards players when they find a way to use their beast companion outside of combat because of its reputation as being a useless option.

I like the pseudodragon it helps my ranger alot, especially when I am being used as a scout. I use his limited telepathy ability to communicate with the team, when the character finds the enemy the party is usually able to take advantage of surprise. The character normally waits for the party to get into position while waiting he takes advantage of hide in plain sight (+10 to stealth check). When the party gets in position the character usually starts the combat off by making a ranged attack using sharpshooter feat because he has advantage due to unseen attacker. He than use a bonus action to have the pseudodragon swoop in and use the help action giving the ranger another sharpshooter attack at advantage because of the dragon. After the dragon use the help action it flys away while the party comes rushing in. The ranger than use hunters mark on the scariest dude and take shots at him than next turn the pseudragon use help to give him advantage on one of the shots with sharpshooter+hunters mark. The ranger is dishing out more than enough damage to matter.

The coolest thing so far is that the party once lived because the party's bard used a nice spell that made the pseudodragon look like a big guy and we got to use frightful presence ability that made the enemy run like hell.

Rangers will always be my favorite! Not the best at anything but above average or good in all categories and thats good enough with me.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

They are mechanically quite strong...you will contribute damage and utility to any party as a ranger. I find them a bit dull though....not all that interesting to play and no "woah!" abilities. I was similarly disappointed in the sorcerer. Still...all of the classes are mechanically strong and valuable even if I think they dropped the ball a bit on some of the flavor. So they got the most important part right.
 

It plays better than it reads, but that is because most of the power of the class is tied up in spell casting and in the Hunter subclass. The Beastmaster subclass will work great in some campaigns, but it is highly playstyle dependent. I do second the notion that it should have been either a feat (so that Barbarians and Druids could have a crack at it because it fits flavorwise) or simply made into a spell (like the Paladin's Find Steed or the Wizard's Find Familiar which had both been class features in the playtest). It isn't a bad subclass, but it is really meant to be used for certain kind of campaigns.

I imagine we will see a reimagined Ranger offered as a freebie option on their website next year. It does seem to play fine, but for someone who is skimming and isn't really looking at the specifics of the spells and the Hunter subclass options, it really just look like a sea of favored enemy, favored terrain selections with a few things for hiding in nature thrown in.
 

It plays better than it reads, but that is because most of the power of the class is tied up in spell casting and in the Hunter subclass
Ditto. After reading the Ranger entry in the PHB I was kinda "meh!" (especially because I expected Favored Enemy to work like in past editions), but when I hit the Ranger spells in the last section of the book I changed my mind. They're really good, IMO.
 

I think beastmaster can work perfectly well with the sentinel feat, and making lots of goodberries to heal your pet. And provided the DM applies PC healing/death rules to the pet, ie the pet gets HD healing and takes 3 failed saves to die. If not the pet will die far too often to be useful/turn your ranger into a PTSD wreck.
 

The beastmaster isn't bad, it just plays different from most beastmaster in past editions and most RPGs. Most of the time in RPGs beasts would at as tanks or bonus damage sources for the master while providing bonus senses, scouting, and tracking. The 5e beastmaster's beast still has the tracking, senses, and scouting but in combat works easiest as support you don't want it targeted too much and draining your spells.

The hunter is great though in most campaign provided the DM doesn't hose its features by keeping your enemy type out too long.
 


Yes, it does break something--the ranger gets more actions than anyone else. Keep in mind that the animal's basic attack is often better than the ranger's. Whether it would be imbalancing to give the ranger free control over the beast is still up in the air. There was another really long thread last month on how to handle the ranger's beast.

It hasn't come up for me yet, but I'm thinking that if the ranger commands a beast to engage in combat (using his action) then it will either continue to attack or flee in subsequent rounds, depending on the strength of the opposition, even if not commanded again. It certainly doesn't make sense for it to just sit there.
 



Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top