Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana: Another New Ranger Variant

*Deleted by user*

 

[Sacrosanct]

Gilbert "why am I not surprised" Gottfried the human variant ranger 1/ Fighter 2 with the alert feat is never surprised, and thus gets effectively an extra attack action every single combat. On top of that he gets action surge from the fighter class. So he gets to attack, initiative order happens-attack again, and then action surge to attack again.

I'm neutral on the hit dice. Not a fan of the spirit companion, really can't stand ambuscade and its blatant breaking of the action economy, and have roll my eyes at skirmisher's stealth. This is one of those mechanics that is just plain stupid because it operates in a manner that is impossible to explain logically. 3 rangers meet up with a hill giant in plain open terrain. Of course they all choose Og the giant as the creature that can't see ANY of them for some reason. Then they all attack with ambuscade- hey where did they come from? How did that hiding occur in that situation by mundane means? Just stupid.

Well, FWIW, it's not an auto hide. The rangers have to make a successful stealth check from the get go. It only allows them to remain hidden if they first succeed in hiding in the first place.

 

[Ristamar]

Plus, instead of taking an action to attack with a beast, just swapping out an attack for one of its attacks should suffice. Maybe slip in an extra attack with it at higher levels.

The official class already does both of those things.

Once you have the Extra Attack feature, you can make one weapon attack yourself when you command the beast to take the Attack action.

Bestial Fury
Starting at 11th level, your beast companion can make two attacks when you command it to use the Attack action.

 

[Jester David]

The official class already does both of those things.

I was thinking on an attack-by-attack basis. But I imagine for a bow ranger it wouldn't be much different.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

So a fighter 2 ranger 1 wizard xx gets a free round to attack or hide and use a bonus action spell then can action surge for a spell and that is before his 1s1st round action?

Reminds me of the celerity spl from 3.5...I win on someone else's turn

 

[Sacrosanct]

If I were to make some changes, I'd probably make a lot of things level based, so as to address the problem of level dipping (for those that would consider it a problem).

Ambuscade: At the start of combat during the ranger's special turn, the ranger can either attempt to hide, or to get a quick strike attack. A normal attack roll is made, and damage is equal to twice the ranger's level.

Primeval Awareness: instead of spending a spell slot, this ability can be used 1x per ranger level per long rest

3 ranger subtypes:
1. spell ranger (as written in the PHB)
2. spirit ranger (as written in this new format)
3. beast companion (as written in the PHB, but no spells. Instead companion is beefed up a bit and you don't have to give up an attack for it to attack.)

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

And did you just say that the the knights of the round table weren't particularly religious?

No, I didn't. Read the second half of the sentence ("not particularly religious in a sectarian way"), and then the bit about fatwas. Are you willfully misinterpreting or just in such a hurry to post that you don't have time to read before disagreeing? Come on, man, you know better than this.

We all agree that paladins are holy warriors. The disagreement is crucially over whether, in AD&D and 5E, a paladin must have "a god" to whom he is tied. Both the 2E and 5E paladins are written in such a way that they don't need to. I'm on phone so can't quote extensively like I did earlier, but notice that tithing and atonement are not sectarian--you can tithe in 2E to any old lawful good charity, Muslim or Hindu or Catholic or Mormon or Scientologist. And you can confess your sins to any of the same. Paladins in 5E/2E are powered by Lawful Good, not by Vishnu.

No opinion on 1E. I've said that I wasn't around for that edition.

 

[Sacrosanct]

So a fighter 2 ranger 1 wizard xx gets a free round to attack or hide and use a bonus action spell then can action surge for a spell and that is before his 1s1st round action?

Reminds me of the celerity spl from 3.5...I win on someone else's turn

I don't think so. You can hide or do an attack action on the special turn. No extra bonus actions or class abilities. Then you go on your regular initiative for everything else.

 

[Sacrosanct]

No, I didn't. Read the second half of the sentence ("not particularly religious in a sectarian way"), and then the bit about fatwas. Are you willfully misinterpreting or just in such a hurry to post that you don't have time to read before disagreeing? Come on, man, you know better than this.

We all agree that paladins are holy warriors. The disagreement is crucially over whether, in AD&D and 5E, a paladin must have "a god" to whom he is tied. Both the 2E and 5E paladins are written in such a way that they don't need to. I'm on phone so can't quote extensively like I did earlier, but notice that tithing and atonement are not sectarian--you can tithe in 2E to any old lawful good charity, Muslim or Hindu or Catholic or Mormon or Scientologist. And you can confess your sins to any of the same. Paladins in 5E/2E are powered by Lawful Good, not by Vishnu.

No opinion on 1E. I've said that I wasn't around for that edition.

No, the disagreement was with the statement that no edition other than 4e did the paladin have to be tied to a deity(s) and that it was a fancom only. And I'm saying that in 1e, they pretty much did. Not only in the class description itself, but with how clerical magic worked and how it was described--coming directly from divine granting. This was also reinforced by the many supplements that came out during that period. For example, a Dragon article in the mid 80s was all about flavors of paladins, and explicitly called them out as being servant to a higher divine power.

I didn't make the argument that in every edition they did have to be tied to a deity, which seems to be what you're arguing against.

Are you willfully misinterpreting or just in such a hurry to post that you don't have time to read before disagreeing? Come on, man, you know better than this.

Indeed.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Yeah. My group uses the average HP rules, so the 2d6 is largely irrelevant other than for recovery Hit Dice. And... I love the recovery aspect of this variant, so I'm disinclined to poke it too much.

Has anyone else noticed that double HD = double healing from the Healer feat? Nice.

 

[jrowland]

Re: 2d6 Hit Dice

Thinking about it, I think I would keep them 1d10 hit dice and then give them a class feature where they gain bonus Hit Dice for healing purposes. Say a number of d4's equal to their level. So a level 7 Ranger would have 7d10 HP, and could use 7d10 and 7d4 hit Dice for healing after a short rest. That's actually slightly better than 2d6/level for healing, but keeps the actual HPs down.