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

[Corinnguard]

While the A5e Ranger doesn't have spells, it does gain proficiency with a number of combat traditions and can use combat maneuvers. Biting Zephyr, Mirror’s Glint, Rapid Current, Razor’s Edge, Spirited Steed, and Unending Wheel. Rangers recently gained the chance to be proficient in the Unerring Hawk combat tradition. These combat maneuvers are the martial equivalent of spells

 

[Minigiant]

They included a Ranger archetype with spellcasting (the wildborn) specifically for those like you who apparently see a spell-less ranger as a fighter with a nice coat of paint.

Not the core ranger and too close progression.

I disagree, and really see this as belittling the A5e design work. "Ranger" is not an inherently magical concept, so IMO it doesn't need spells to feel like a ranger. You personally may feel a Ranger isn't a Ranger without magic, but that is your subjective point of view

I'm not belittling the system.

I am saying that the effects that people typically desire or want in the Ranger requires magic in D&D.
They don't exist out of side of spells or supplemental materials in D&D.

I mean it took 30 years for Rangers to even heal without magic in D&D.

How many years will it take for any D&D or adjacent community to let a ranger to have the ability to talk to a plant or locate items without magic?

 

[Minigiant]

The A5e Ranger as a Green colored Fighter, a M:TG reference?

It's more that nature tinted classes are associated with Green or Brown.

The A5e Ranger is very similar to the A5e Fighter.

 

[Corinnguard]

It's more that nature tinted classes are associated with Green or Brown.

The A5e Ranger is very similar to the A5e Fighter.

Both are martial classes that rely on skill and training. However, both are built around different class concepts. The A5e Ranger is a wilderness survival and exploration expert. The A5e Fighter is a master of martial techniques and weapons.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Not the core ranger and too close progression.

I'm not belittling the system.

I am saying that the effects that people typically desire or want in the Ranger requires magic in D&D.
They don't exist out of side of spells or supplemental materials in D&D.

I mean it took 30 years for Rangers to even heal without magic in D&D.

How many years will it take for any D&D or adjacent community to let a ranger to have the ability to talk to a plant or locate items without magic?

What I'm hearing from you is that you think the ranger needs magic, and you're trying to strengthen your opinion by saying that other people "typically" agree with you. I have never and will never see that tactic as a legitimate way to increase the validity of a personal opinion, or indeed to have any value at all outside your own table beyond casual discourse, unless money is involved.

In any case, I have no issue with non-magical healing to an extent, provided that there is an in-setting reason why it has the effects it does, either with a technological base or because it specifically recovers vitality in a way that doesn't effect actual injury. IMO encouragement alone does nothing to actually heal physical injury on the time scales typically used in D&D, particularly in combat. It can absolutely be helpful on a more long-term basis, but that's more a matter of downtime (which IMO should be a bigger deal).

All of this is, of course, my personal opinion on the subject.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It's more that nature tinted classes are associated with Green or Brown.

The A5e Ranger is very similar to the A5e Fighter.

They have significant different class features, both the ones all rangers get as well as the ones they get to choose from a menu of options, even if some choices can be made by either class. Do you see all non-magical classes as essentially similar?

 

[Minigiant]

What I'm hearing from you is that you think the ranger needs magic, and you're trying to strengthen your opinion by saying that other people "typically" agree with you. I have never and will never see that tactic as a legitimate way to increase the validity of a personal opinion, or indeed to have any value at all outside your own table beyond casual discourse, unless money is involved

You're not hearing what I'm writing.

I'm saying that the D&D Ranger fantasy is a character who can accomplish a set of effects.

Part one is:

The D&D community won't let Rangers produce most of those effects without magic. And those they allow require heavy nerfing via "realistic" restrictions.

I don't mind Rangers not having magic. I just still want those effects.

Part 2 is
The 5e ranger has 80% of those effects at 50% strength.

The 5e ranger has 50% of those effects at 30% strength

 

[Micah Sweet]

You're not hearing what I'm writing.

I'm saying that the D&D Ranger fantasy is a character who can accomplish a set of effects.

Part one is:

The D&D community won't let Rangers produce most of those effects without magic. And those they allow require heavy nerfing via "realistic" restrictions.

I don't mind Rangers not having magic. I just still want those effects.

Part 2 is
The 5e ranger has 80% of those effects at 50% strength.

The 5e ranger has 50% of those effects at 30% strength

When you say "the D&D community", I assume you mean the community for WotC's current game?

 

[Minigiant]

They have significant different class features, both the ones all rangers get as well as the ones they get to choose from a menu of options, even if some choices can be made by either class. Do you see all non-magical classes as essentially similar?

Nah. Every nonmagical class is not the same.

But the A5e ranger doesn't have an exclusive School of my numbers. Instead it gets a subset of the school that the fire has plus a damaged bonus and some very very minor exploration abilities.

Or more the other way, a A5e Fighter can take all the maneuvers that a Ranger has and only lose their subclass and some minor exploration stuff.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Nah. Every nonmagical class is not the same.

But the A5e ranger doesn't have an exclusive School of my numbers. Instead it gets a subset of the school that the fire has plus a damaged bonus and some very very minor exploration abilities.

Or more the other way, a A5e Fighter can take all the maneuvers that a Ranger has and only lose their subclass and some minor exploration stuff.

I don't consider the exploration stuff minor. It's as important to the class as the 5e rules base allows it to be.