D&D General What spells should be on the rangers list?

[Shades of Eternity]

The main argument for me for a ranger class is spells, as some sort of druidic knight or avatar of a hunting god.

so I'm asking

which spells should be on the spell list?

This can include spells that are already there or should be there.

They can be from the latest edition or bring back a personal favorite from a previous edition.

Doesn't matter whom has the spell.

Please explain why, as it might lead to new insights.

 

[J-H]

The 5e Ranger had a very weak spell list across the first 3 levels of spells, with some good spells that come online late game. The Paladin list, in comparison, is much stronger, and the Paladin is one of the best-built classes in the game. Part of the issue is the Paladin's better damage mitigation (saves, Lay on Hands, aura, higher AC) vs. the ranger's lack of defensive features on most subclasses, but the other part is the lower-utility spell list.

I would cut Hunter's Mark entirely, as it takes up far too much BA space (vs. Swift Quiver, TWF, commanding a beast companion, and various other class features) and just give them +WIS to damage vs. favored enemies.

Looking at things on the Paladin list that are missing from the Ranger list in terms of capabilities:
Deadly strike: 1st level, free action. Expend a spell slot to gain 2d10 bonus damage on an attack against a Favored Enemy. It's like Smite Evil but more limited in who you can use it against, so the damage is slightly higher. Doesn't tie up concentration or become weapon-limited like Branding Smite or the Entangling Arrow one.
Lightfooted Travel: 2nd level, 15' radius. The caster and up to 6 allies of his choice who stay within 15' have their overland travel speed double as long as they focus on traveling and not combat, for up to 4 hours per day.
Rangers are meant to be great at cross-country travel, but a Paladin with 2nd level spells is faster and better. So is a level 6 Totem barb with the Elk Totem (increased overland speed for the party). Longstrider doesn't cut it in comparison.
Natural Shield: 2rd? level, Concentration up to 1 minute. Trees, boulders, vines, walls, and other surroundings seem to always be perfectly placed to foul attacks against the caster, giving him 3/4ths cover against all attacks.
+5 to AC for 1 minute and a bonus on Dex saves should help with damage prevention, while staying on theme with the ranger as being a nature-y fighter.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The main argument for me for a ranger class is spells, as some sort of druidic knight or avatar of a hunting god.

so I'm asking

which spells should be on the spell list?

This can include spells that are already there or should be there.

They can be from the latest edition or bring back a personal favorite from a previous edition.

Doesn't matter whom has the spell.

Please explain why, as it might lead to new insights.

I don't think rangers should have spells at all as a default, just class features focusing on exploration first, then combat (with a smattering of social options).
If you want a magical ranger, include an archetype that features spellcasting. Such spells should IMO have a druidic feel.

 

[CreamCloud0]

find familiar

 

[Micah Sweet]

find familiar

The spellcasting archetype I suggested should definitely have that spell.

 

[CreamCloud0]

The spellcasting archetype I suggested should definitely have that spell.

i would say all rangers should have it, it is a hard claim to make that the the animal companion is not one of the strongest threads in their cloth and i'd say the spell embodies something not exclusive to the spellcasting ranger and so should not be limited to them, it lets you play into that companion concept without needing to dedicate your entire subclass to a partner beast.

 

[J-H]

I don't think rangers should have spells at all as a default, just class features focusing on exploration first, then combat (with a smattering of social options).
If you want a magical ranger, include an archetype that features spellcasting. Such spells should IMO have a druidic feel.

How do you make a spell-less ranger work? The 3.5 version, as I vaguely recall, was not very good. In 5e, a spell-less ranger and a Scout rogue pretty much overlap completely.

 

[Micah Sweet]

i would say all rangers should have it, it is a hard claim to make that the the animal companion is not one of the strongest threads in their cloth and i'd say the spell embodies something not exclusive to the spellcasting ranger and so should not be limited to them, it lets you play into that companion concept without needing to dedicate your entire subclass to a partner beast.

I can see it as an optional class feature. It just has less utility (but not no utility) if you aren't a spellcaster.

 

[Micah Sweet]

How do you make a spell-less ranger work? The 3.5 version, as I vaguely recall, was not very good. In 5e, a spell-less ranger and a Scout rogue pretty much overlap completely.

The Level Up ranger is not a spellcaster (unless you choose the Wildborn archetype that has spells). Instead, it has a variety of class features that enhance exploration, combat, and (to a less degree) social options. Most provide a choice from several options at level up. Rangers also have combat maneuvers, specials actions grouped among several themes that enhance versatility and power in the combat sphere.

 

[bloodtide]

I like a ranger with spells.....but very much lesser spells then wizards/clerics...but more focused on nature.

Plenty of detection and divination spells like "detect prey" "find hunter" "detect blood" "find food" and such.....things a ranger can do with mundane way.....but magic gives a boost. Like detect blood has a range of 30 feet and can detect blood under grass or leaves.