Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana: Another New Ranger Variant

*Deleted by user*

 

[Paraxis]

Cast a Spell is not one of the allowed actions on the Ambuscade turn.

Correct the Action on the special Ambuscade turn can't be Cast a Spell, but you can cast a spell as a bonus action on it, move, and attack. If multiclassed with fighter they could use action surge to gain another action, and with that action use the Cast a Spell action.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Correct the Action on the special Ambuscade turn can't be Cast a Spell, but you can cast a spell as a bonus action on it, move, and attack. If multiclassed with fighter they could use action surge to gain another action, and with that action use the Cast a Spell action.

"Rise of the Sorlockrangerfighters!" coming soon to a theatre near you.

 

[Mercule]

Correct the Action on the special Ambuscade turn can't be Cast a Spell, but you can cast a spell as a bonus action on it, move, and attack. If multiclassed with fighter they could use action surge to gain another action, and with that action use the Cast a Spell action.

I'd blame the GM.

 

[Zaran]

Clearly a work in progress. Meanwhile my party's ranger is a default PHB type and seems to be just fine. Does good damage, has decent hp, versatile skills wise... Plus a few spells. Maybe it's his synergy with the rest of the party, but he has no complaints.

My main beef with the ranger is the low hit points and poor spell defense of the beast companion of the one subclass. Also that Hunter's Mark is a concentration spell with a melee class that doesn't have Con for a save. I don't think it needs to be replaced, just tweaked so a single fireball doesn't kill the beast. The other ranger subclasses seem fine to me but I haven't played them.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Not only did I never say the thing you think we're disagreeing about (in bold, above), but I have explicitly disavowed portions of it multiple times. In particular, I never played 1E, nor 3E, and very little 4E, so I don't make generalizations about how things worked in "every edition except 4E". And I've said so.

I think you may have a disagreement with another poster, who did say something about "fancom" or something, but why are you using my posts to do it? If you're talking about 1E, I don't even have an opinion on that subject. Shouldn't you address the guy you're actually meaning to argue with and not the guy who's talking about something which apparently doesn't interest you as much, namely "paladins in 2E + 5E are not required to have 'a god'"?

I never said you said it. I disagreed with him (or her) and then you felt the need to reply basically backing their claim up by disagreeing with me. Otherwise, I'm not sure why you felt the need to disagree with me in the first place if by your own admission you weren't even familiar with the edition I used as an example.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Correct the Action on the special Ambuscade turn can't be Cast a Spell, but you can cast a spell as a bonus action on it, move, and attack. If multiclassed with fighter they could use action surge to gain another action, and with that action use the Cast a Spell action.

Wrong. That ability only grants an attack action or a hide action, not a bonus action. You can only ever get one bonus action in a round anyway.

 

[GobiWon]

It can be insanely powerful.

Just to confirm yes you can move and take bonus actions. https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/641685715290484736

How did this make it too print? This entire article is half-baked. It should never of been given to the public even as a beta test. It doesn't fix the beast master. It is a broken bastard of a class that tries to meld the scout and the warden. Give the ranger expertise on survival and animal handling. Let the ranger use persuasion and animal handling on a single beast (with an intelligence cap of 5 or 6) that has a CR half the ranger's level. After the creature is persuaded, make an animal handling as a bonus action every time you want the creature to act. Give the creature it's full turn on a successful roll in the initiative after the ranger.

 

[Bloodsausage]

My first impression is that the 2d6 HD seems high too, but then I considered something else:

Both the Ranger and the Barbarian have the high hit dice and base Light Armor Proficiency, but the Barbarian is going to have a substantially higher AC. I'm ok with the 2d6 to mitigate this.

 

[Paraxis]

Wrong. That ability only grants an attack action or a hide action, not a bonus action. You can only ever get one bonus action in a round anyway.

It is a full turn.

On a turn you can move and take an action, if something gives you a bonus action you may take a bonus action.

The ambuscade ability limits what Action you can take on the special turn it gives you to Attack or Hide, but you can still move and if something gives you a bonus action you can still gain it.

This has been clarified by Mearls and I have posted the quote and links in this thread.

There is no limit of bonus actions in a round, just on a turn. This ability gives you a turn.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I never said you said it. I disagreed with him (or her) and then you felt the need to reply basically backing their claim up by disagreeing with me. Otherwise, I'm not sure why you felt the need to disagree with me in the first place if by your own admission you weren't even familiar with the edition I used as an example.

Well okay then. At least now we know that we're not arguing with each other. Good enough. I'm not about to getting into an argument about who disagreed with who first.