D&D 5E What is/should be the Ranger's "thing"?

[fuindordm]

"The ranger's thing is to survive the world's thing and help other's survive it."

Riffing on this, the ranger could be improved by giving them picks from a menu of nature-themed defensive and utility perks. Surviving is something they don't do too well in the current version, apart from the hunter's high-level trick. I'd like it if Surviving were part of the base class.

For example,
Advantage on poison saves
Advantage on saves vs fey magic
If the party is surprised, pass a DC 15 Dex save to take a single action in the surprise round
Healing poultice
Help self or ally overcome exhaustion
Camouflage (this doesn't really need to be a high-level trick)
Disguise campsite (party invisible during short rest)

 

[steeldragons]

Most D&D settings are not defined by a conflict with one particular kind of creature. The one that comes closest is probably Dragonlance with dragons (particularly if you include draconians), but I'm not familiar enough with it to say for sure.

A ranger in Eberron, Greyhawk, or Forgotten Realms? He's likely to face orcs one adventure, goblins another, then maybe a foray into the underdark with drow and duergar. He's also probably going to fight a lot of weird like manticores, ankhegs, and carrion crawlers.

Specializing in fighting a particular kind of creature is not something that I see as essential to rangers, because of the variety of things you can fight.

This is all true...and again the false dichotomy rears its ugly head. Not having combat bonuses against EVERY kind of creature or that you can use against EVERYbody does not somehow mean/make it that you CAN NOT FIGHT these guys. You still have to roll a d20. You still add aproficiency bonus. You still add an ability modifier...and when you hit, you will roll damage.

The ranger being inherently better [trained/practiced] at fighting particular foes, as part of their story/archetype of the class, does not make it so that it can't be any good at fighting anything else. You can pull out your sword and swing it around and probably kill stuff when you hit it enough.

Will you do it as much/as well as a Fighter? NO! You won't! Know why? CUZ YOU'RE NOT A FIGHTER!!!

This concept that if you're not getting "+'s" that can apply to any situation, then you suck, REALLY needs to die in a fire.

 

[Staffan]

The ranger being inherently better [trained/practiced] at fighting particular foes, as part of their story/archetype of the class, does not make it so that it can't be any good at fighting anything else. You can pull out your sword and swing it around and probably kill stuff when you hit it enough.

And yet you said: "So, if 'the world's thing' is on the verge of being overrun with orcs who will kill or enslave you given the chance...then that's the ranger's thing. And what are her options for survivng that? Knowing how to hide. Knowing how to move. Knowing how to fight and kill orcs. Is that "racial hatred"? Maybe. Technically. And who cares?! It's survival. That's what's going on in the world. Don't know how to fight and kill orcs? You're dead. Game's over. What do you want to play next?"

There are very few D&D worlds where an advantage against orcs (or goblins, or aberrations, or elementals) in particular will be very helpful. The ranger should be flexible - they can take whatever the wilderness throws at them. Sometimes that's an orc band, sometimes it's an ankheg. The ranger should be just as good at either one.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

This concept that if you're not getting "+'s" that can apply to any situation, then you suck, REALLY needs to die in a fire.

Where it would no doubt burn very well, because it is a strawman.

Here's the exchange in summary. You've now had it multiple times.

Somebody: Why does the ranger have the favored enemy ability?
You: It's okay! You can still contribute to adventures even when your favored enemy isn't up!
Somebody: Okay, but why does the ranger have the favored enemy ability?

It's as if we're asking why there's a turd in the punch-bowl, and you're saying it's okay because the punch still tastes kind of like punch. You don't need to reassure us about the taste. You need to justify the turd.

(A sentence I did not expect to be typing today...)

 

[steeldragons]

Where it would burn very well, because it is a strawman.

Here's the conversation you've been having, repeatedly, with multiple people:

Somebody: Why does the ranger have the favored enemy ability?
You: It's okay! You can still contribute to adventures even when your favored enemy isn't up!
Somebody: Okay, but why does the ranger have the favored enemy ability?

It's as if we're asking why there's a turd in the punch-bowl, and you're saying it's okay because the punch still tastes kind of like punch.

It's actually NOT like that at all. Because what has been said a hundred times over in this thread is the story of the ranger is to defend/guard/patrol/"range" the borderlands and outskirts...fighting their recurring/ancestral/known threats to their people/realms/civilization.

AND, just for some icing on the actual cake of the answer, there is the tradition/legacy/history of the class, WHICH of course you know as someone who likes to tell others what 1e was/did, has had "favored enemies" throughout its entire history from "giant class humanoids" on up.

You are correct in one thing. IT has been asked...and answered a thousand times. And then "someone" asks, again, "But, why does the ranger have this ability?"

Ya know, I've been suspecting for several pages now you are just an inciting/baiting "troll" who will simply reply to anything anyone says with whatever irrelevant examples/observations/arguments happens to refute what they're saying...and I'll take this as my final deciding evidence.

This thread's about to get a whole lot shorter me. Welcome to my ignore list. Enjoy your stay. Have fun baiting and ignoring responses from others that are foolish enough to engage you.

 

[Staffan]

It's actually NOT like that at all. Because what has been said a hundred times over in this thread is the story of the ranger is to defend/guard/patrol/"range" the borderlands and outskirts...fighting their recurring/ancestral/known threats to their people/realms/civilization.

Exactly: threatS. Most settings don't have a singular threat to civilization, so why should the ranger focus so much on a particular one?

 

[steeldragons]

Exactly: threatS. Most settings don't have a singular threat to civilization, so why should the ranger focus so much on a particular one?

*sigh* No ranger in the PHB is handling a "single" threat. You either get a whoooole category of monsters or 2 humanoids. At 6th you get another "Favored Enemy"...that's another whoooole category of creatures or 2 more humanoids....and at 14th you get another.

SO, at 14th level, you are either good at 6 humanoid races, 3 entire categories of creatures or any combination thereof.

There is not a single ranger, in all of 5e-dom that is good at fighting a single creature. If you take "Dragons" you are goo dat fighting anything that is labeled as a dragon. If you take "Monstrosities" you are good at fighting anything labeled as a monstrosity. If you take humanoid races, there you are. AND NONE OF THESE ARE DEPENDENT ON TERRAIN/where you are! You get your bonuses against them [whatever "them" are] ANYWHERE you go!

What I am really puzzling (through a LOT of this thread, now) is how many people here a) are ranger fans, b) are 5e fans and not just whiney 3e'ers or sour grapes 4vengers complaining that 5e isn't doing it "right"...,and C) have actually READ the damned PHB?!

 

[Corpsetaker]

If you are great at killing everything then you are a fighter.

Being trained to kill specific things is what makes a ranger different. That is his thing.

 

[Remathilis]

What I am really puzzling (through a LOT of this thread, now) is how many people here a) are ranger fans, b) are 5e fans and not just whiney 3e'ers or sour grapes 4vengers complaining that 5e isn't doing it "right"...,and C) have actually READ the damned PHB?!

You should see the number of 1e grognards that still can't figure out why they aren't getting 2d8 HD at first level...

 

[steeldragons]

You should see the number of 1e grognards that still can't figure out why they aren't getting 2d8 HD at first level...

Interestingly, having read this thread from the beginning, I haven't seen any of that. But it wouldn't surprise me.