D&D General What is appropriate Ranger Magic

[Corinnguard]

why not battlemaster on a caster?

I could see the Bladesinger Wizard gaining combat maneuvers, there are a couple of Level Up combat traditions that could work for this subclass. Arcane Knight and Cutting Omen come to mind.

we got weapon masteries as 5E24 version of combat traditions from A5E. I know, little disappointed with that.
masteries could and should have been better/more powerful.

They aren't quite the same IMO. The maneuvers in each of Level Up's Combat Traditions are the martial equivalent of spells, and they're spread across 5 degrees (which are the equivalent of spellcasting levels). Each degree is progressively more powerful.

 

[CreamCloud0]

why not battlemaster on a caster?

because casters already have a laundry list of options that provide versatility or allow them to influence things and martials have pretty much diddly squat? like, let's just look at what offensive cantrips ALONE provide shall we? i'll skip over the fact that most if not all of them deal some form of energy damage, quite a few have range and in general can target a range of saves amongst themselves as an alternative to attack rolls.
Acid splash - multitarget
Booming blade - movement control
Chill touch - healing control, applies attack roll disadvantage to certain foes
Create bonfire - persistant hazard creation
Eldritch Blast - N/A (although invocations can give a range of additional effects)
Firebolt - N/A (can ignite flammable objects but i'd label that as ribbon ability)
Frostbite - defensive control
Green flame blade - autohit damage to secondary target
Infestation - forced (if uncontroled) movement
Lightning lure - forced movement
Mind sliver - weakens saves
Poison spray - N/A
Primal savagery - N/A
Produce flame - N/A
Ray of frost - movement control
Sacred flame - ignores cover
Sapping sting - inflict condition (prone)
Shocking grasp - action economy control, advantage against certain targets
Sword burst - AoE
Thorn whip - forced movement
Thunderclap - AoE
Toll the dead - conditional extra damage
Vicious mockery - attack roll disadvantage
Word of radiance - AoE

that's four cantrips, five if you stretch to include eldritch blast which can gain riders, that purely do straight basic damage to single target without any form of additional bonus or somesuch in a single action out of twenty-four cantrips, not to mention the pages upon pages of leveled spells that are bigger and badder than these, that's why martials deserve battlemaster and casters don't.

 

[Minigiant]

This ought to be Battlemaster for all martial classes only. All of the martial classes in Level Up get their fair share of Combat Traditions to choose from. The Combat Traditions are Level Up's idea of addressing the martial-spellcaster gap.

So, what kind of exclusive subclasses do you see here with your feat tree idea?

This essentially is the whole problem with feet as class


Different classes have different amounts of power within its base assumption

The Ranger got Beastmaster because the Ranger class itself is weak. You couldn't put a strong beast in a wizard class.

And that is the core issue with a heavy feet base game You would have to be Alan's every class perfectly in order to make the feats general love that multiple classes can use it.

And typically there's only one way to do it either by making classes weak or by making feats weak.

 

[Horwath]

I could see the Bladesinger Wizard gaining combat maneuvers, there are a couple of Level Up combat traditions that could work for this subclass. Arcane Knight and Cutting Omen come to mind.


They aren't quite the same IMO. The maneuvers in each of Level Up's Combat Traditions are the martial equivalent of spells, and they're spread across 5 degrees (which are the equivalent of spellcasting levels). Each degree is progressively more powerful.

I know they are not the same, maybe WotC should have just c/p A5E work into 5E24

 

[Corinnguard]

I know they are not the same, maybe WotC should have just c/p A5E work into 5E24

That would be a nice improvement.

 

[James Gasik]

I don't know that I'd want WotC to make more classes. That isn't to say that I wouldn't want more classes, but their designers seem to have problems with the classes that they have, and this is the same company that cranked out such fun things as the Complete Warrior Samurai and the Hexblade...and then turning around and giving us the Archivist.

Or in 4e, where the quality of new classes beyond the PHB (and well, even in the PHB, the Paladin needed support) was extremely suspect- Psionic Defenders who can't hit with opportunity attacks, the original Assassin with it's backloaded damage mechanic, Sorcerers with worse damage powers than Wizards (despite one being a Striker and the other a Controller), and the hot mess that was the Essentials Warlock all come to mind.

Even in 5e, the Artificer isn't fully baked, and seeing as how we're in a thread devoted to the ongoing saga of the Ranger, would we really want these people to give us a book with five new classes and 10-15 subclasses for those classes?

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Theoretically, if ranger did become a pure martial, what class should replace it as a primal half-caster?

I've noticed that the entire concept of half-casters seems unpopular. I'm always seeing people saying ranger should be pure martial and artificer should be a full caster. And I've even seen paladin suggested as a pure martial several times.

 

[Horwath]

Theoretically, if ranger did become a pure martial, what class should replace it as a primal half-caster?

maybe ranger subclass

I've noticed that the entire concept of half-casters seems unpopular. I'm always seeing people saying ranger should be pure martial and artificer should be a full caster. And I've even seen paladin suggested as a pure martial several times.

because you get spells of higher level too late, and most good spells are out of reach as most campaigns are finnished around levels 11-13.

that is why I made faster half-caster progression;

left table default spellcasting progress, right table is accelerated.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Theoretically, if ranger did become a pure martial, what class should replace it as a primal half-caster?

In the sense of a new class or retooling one of the existing 13?

I've noticed that the entire concept of half-casters seems unpopular. I'm always seeing people saying ranger should be pure martial and artificer should be a full caster. And I've even seen paladin suggested as a pure martial several times.

Ive seen suggestion the artificer should be taken in both directions, martial and fullcaster

Personally the three halfcasters are my favourite classes

 

[Minigiant]

don't know that I'd want WotC to make more classes. That isn't to say that I wouldn't want more classes, but their designers seem to have problems with the classes that they have, and this is the same company that cranked out such fun things as the Complete Warrior Samurai and the Hexblade...and then turning around and giving us the Archivist

The issue is that the first set of classes were designed for a fan base that Did not convert to 5e.

The fan base that did adopt 5e eventually forced the company to keep the rules that they learned.

So you essentially have a game designed for other people that a second group plays and the second group no longer wants to relearn a system designed for them but are the main audience for the game.

You see it in the poll answers for this thread.

5e fans want something but it would be completely different from the group of people who are the original people surveyed