Thanks for the context, wow.
Agreed that there are no truly "bad" options in the game, as there were in prior Editions.
Since I guess (shocker) I now need to defend myself from ad hominem attacks instead of discussing my position...
Yes, I have advocated for starting at a 16 in your primary stat, especially for spellcasters. I have had multiple games where we did not do that, and those characters felt bad to play. You can hate and deride me for my experiences, but that doesn't discount their existence.
Yes, I see no purpose in the Ranger Primeval Awareness feature by RAW. It costs a spell slot to tell you "some number of fey exist somewhere within a six mile sphere of your location". That information is largely worthless. It tells the player nothing that they didn't already suspect, because why would you attempt to detect dragons, fey, undead or other types of enemies if you didn't suspect they existed somewhere within 6 miles.
As for the second half of Max's post, let me be clear. The 4e monk and the Beastmaster ranger aren't entirely unplayable and worthless, that is a strawman of my position. But they were badly designed and did not work properly. Something that in the case of the 4e monk, you yourself have agreed with.
Now, I imagine I will continue to be harrassed over these points. For those of you who didn't wish for every single thing ever to be relitigated again, I am sorry, but I refuse to simply stand by silently while ad hominems are thrown at me for why I shouldn't be listened to on any subject, because one two people don't like my positions on one or two issues.