D&D (2024) What type of ranger would your prefer for 2024?

[nevin]

Honestly other than being called a ranger and his tracking skills Aragorn has nothing else that ties him to 1st ed ranger. Only because Gandalf called him a ranger does he even get included in the discussions.

 

[nevin]

but then everyone calls Gandalf a wizard and if you had to convert him to dnd he'd be a angel unable to use most of his powers unless he was directly confronting other divine / infernal beings.

 

[Reef]

Thing is though that the things thematic to the Ranger aren't Dunedain abilities; only his lifespan is. Likewise, his skill as a healer is both a learned skill and a matter of prophecy (the returned King shall have the hands of a healer). These are the only strict things one could point at about Aragorn and say "he's magic", and they aren't tied to his Rangering.

And actual Ranger stuff does justify having it as an archtype, as theres more to the Ranger than just Aragorn. Theres also Faramir, Robin Hood, Will Treaty, and a host of others.

And thats before you start conflating stuff like Dar the Beastmaster or Geralt of Rivia with the archtype (both of which actually are their own archtypes in the Beastmaster and Monster Hunter respectively)

I suspect this is an discussion that will never satisfy anyone, because you say Faramir, Robin Hood, and others and I say ‘Fighter’ (or Rogue).

And I say Dar and Geralt may be exactly the wheelhouse that the D&D ranger is supposed to accommodate.

Edited to add: the only way I could see justifying a magic-less Ranger is to make it a subclass of fighter or rogue. And they basically did that with the Scout. Make a Fighter version of Scout, and I’m really not sure why you’d need a whole other class.

 

[Mephista]

In a fantasy world where one of the assumptions is that animals (and trees) are all sapient and can communicate through speech (even of said speech is esoteric and hard to learn for more conventional sapients), then theres nothing "magic" about learning those languages and convincing them to help you out. They aren't being compelled by some mystical force.

This basically sums up how druids cast magic. At least the animistic "Old Faith" ones. In most fantasy stories I'm familiar with, using spirit magic like this usually does involve some kind of payment in the form of feeding them some kind of mana or ritual.

If a cleric invoking their god for a miracle is casting a spell and is considered magic, then there's little reason that asking local nature spirits for favors shouldn't be considered spells or magic either. Not all spellcasting and magic is some flavor of wizardry.

 

[le Redoutable]

Following my trajectoire, a Ranger can easily be low level Druid and high level Scout

 

[Emberashh]

and others and I say ‘Fighter’ (or Rogue).

In other words you just don't like what Rangers actually are in fiction and seem apprehensive about letting them be what they are, as though Beastmasters and Monster Hunters can't possibly be their own archtypes, and so we must cannibalize a entirely separate trope to include them.

then there's little reason that asking local nature spirits for favors shouldn't be considered spells or magic either.

What nature spirits? Learning to talk to squirrels doesn't mean learning to talk to magical ghosts separate from regular squirrels.

 

[DEFCON 1]

spells means spellcasting and that means spell components.

Nothing says guerrilla, stealth warrior as yelling your "powers" and flapping with hands like a drunk mime.

not to mention that all your "powers" can be counterspeled, dispeled, made useless with antimagic, and next to useless with creatures with spell resistance.

You sound like a Psionics stan.

 

[Mephista]

spells means spellcasting and that means spell components.

Nothing says guerrilla, stealth warrior as yelling your "powers" and flapping with hands like a drunk mime.

not to mention that all your "powers" can be counterspeled, dispeled, made useless with antimagic, and next to useless with creatures with spell resistance.

Druids (and thus Rangers), Clerics and Wizards all cast magic differently. Clerics pray to the gods of the Outer Planes to send a miracle. Druids invoke Fey or Elemental "nature gods" to do stuff for them. Neither involves yelling or "flapping your hands like a drunk mime."

A whispered prayer to the local spirits fits very well as the Ranger V component. Many of the Ranger spells' material components are their weapons themselves, and the spells describe the somatic components as "you brandish the weapon used to cast the spell." Its all very natural movements that make sense for a hunter.

Portraying the Ranger as yelling and flapping hands is very much not accurate in any way, shape, or form.

 

[Emberashh]

The issue is that the VSM system doesn't have a meaningful impact on how the abilities feel in play; its still a spell at the end of the day, and that it is a spell is the problem.

The fiction matters, and how a spell is cast does not change that you're still casting a spell.

 

[Reef]

In other words you just don't like what Rangers actually are in fiction and seem apprehensive about letting them be what they are, as though Beastmasters and Monster Hunters can't possibly be their own archtypes, and so we must cannibalize a entirely separate trope to include them.



What nature spirits? Learning to talk to squirrels doesn't mean learning to talk to magical ghosts separate from regular squirrels.

No, I’ve just never seen anyone come up with an example of a magic-less ranger in fiction that justified a class. Like I said, Robin Hood? How is that a Ranger?

What is a Ranger to you? What does it need (that isn’t mystical) in order for it not to be a scout, or a dex fighter? What woodland ability does it need that isn’t covered in a high Survival or Animal Handling skill. And what do you use those skills for, if not the things that people seem to want a magic-less Ranger to do?