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

[Yaarel]

I think most of the time when people fail to use DND for things other than straight Appendix N, its not so much that the game can't support it but more that they're failing to properly mix the genres.

It seems to me, most D&D players today in year 2023 have never heard of most of authors in Appendix N.

The N books that they might have heard about are: Tolkien, Conan, Cthulhu, and Tarzan. Maybe, John Carter.

I happen know and like Andre Norton and Michael Moorcock (picked them up cold from a library scifi section), but I doubt most D&D players have heard of them.

Meanwhile the scifi that D&D players today do love and care about are absent from Appendix N.

Appendix N is less relevant in our century today.

 

[Incenjucar]

It seems to me, most D&D players today in year 2023 have never heard of most of authors in Appendix N.

The N books that they might have heard about are: Tolkien, Conan, Cthulhu, and Tarzan. Maybe, John Carter.

I happen know and like Andre Norton and Michael Moorcock (picked them up cold from a library scifi section), but I doubt most D&D players have heard of them.

Meanwhile the scifi that D&D players today do love and care about are absent from Appendix N.

Appendix N is less relevant in our century today.

Fiction like Lankhmar and Elric were already obscure by the 90s. I imagine most modern audiences were introduced to fantasy by either the LotR movies, cartoons, or YA novels starting with Harry Potter.

 

[Emberashh]

I think the issue the game faces is that it's founders and designers loved Appendix N but the increasing majority of players and DMs of the game do not prefer the characters, themes, game focus, and mechanics of Appendix N sources. You can swap one of them but I think if you swap out two of more aspects of Apprentix N style games, the mechanics stop matching the source.

Aragorn can't be your top ranger if your game hits liches at end game and archmages at mid game.

Not if you are an entry game or a mainstream game.

I don't believe being unable to face a Demilich from the Abyssal Plane of Doom is a critical thing people need out of a Ranger that emulates Aragorn.

Its being able to face such things without having to be a cruddy Druid. The two ideas aren't mutually exclusive, and people who genuinely want that low fantasy approach are factually playing the wrong game. DND mechanics support and call for higher octane fantasy heroics.

Plus, to be frank, what we see in LOTR is already a part of Appendix N and is still a part of what 5e can provide for. Aragorn and Legolas can go toe to toe with trolls and hordes of orcs. Thats high power enough on its own to be compatible, and if we take the assumption that LOTR dragons are just a different construction altogether to the DND dragon, then thats your bases covered, aside from stuff thats explicitly designed to be a mage problem.

At which point it isnt a genre problem but a game design problem. If we assume such designs should exist at all, magic equipment provides the means to bridge the gap. And likewise, it should go in both directions. There should be things that magic can't actually handle well, and they should need equipment (or abilities, in both class types) that help bridge the gap.

Using my game as an example, martials pretty much exclusively get your standard trio of Blunt/Piercing/Slashing damage, and through them they get the best Conditions in the game.

A Sorcerer subclass, Stone Carver, bridges the gap on that access, compressing their Earth-based magic (the weakest of the elements in terms of raw power) into rocky shards that can inflict BPS damage, and thus drive those Martial conditions through magic.

Making damage matter and setting class, magic, and weapon design to create a good interplay between them all is the key, essentially, and you can carry the same philosophy through all of the games components.

It seems to me, most D&D players today in year 2023 have never heard of most of authors in Appendix N.

Sure, but they are well aware of the tropes if they've spent time playing the game. You can recognize where DND came from in Three Hearts and Three Lions for a reason, after all, and you don't need to know who Poul Anderson is to like the genre. (Because fundamentally if you like DND you already do like the genre)

 

[Yaarel]

Fiction like Lankhmar and Elric were already obscure by the 90s. I imagine most modern audiences were introduced to fantasy by either the LotR movies, cartoons, or YA novels starting with Harry Potter.

Maybe most of spefi (spec fic) today is the superhero genre set in the modern world. DC Titans, Doom Patrol, Superman (plus spinoffs), Legion, Legends of Tomorrow, Constantine, Arrow, Flesh, Marvel Dr Strange, Cloak & Dagger, Runaways, X-Men Gifted, indy The Boys, and many more.

The jedi of Star Wars and tech-magic of Star Trek are also central influences.

Various TV shows are huge influences: Teen Wolf, Adventures of Merlin, Roswell, Vampire Diary (plus spinoffs), Game of Thrones, Supernatural, classics like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Charmed.

I will indulge to add: Killjoys, Shadowhunters, Dresden Files, Wolf Pack, Humans, Magicians, Kyle XY, Sense8, Travelers, Witcher, Trickster (Canada Indigenous), Discovery of Witches, True Blood, Cidade Invisivel (Brasil), Ragnarok (Norway), Limitless, Midnight Texas, Motherland Fort Salem, Librarians, Secret Circle, Shannara Chronicles, Jake 2.0, Babylon 5, Altered Carbon, Raised by Wolves, Carnival Row, Mob Psycho (Japan), Cleverman (Australia), Westworld, Grimm, Misfits, Tomorrow People, Brave New World, and many more.

Animation: Avatar the Last Airbender, Dragon Prince, Young Justice, Mashle, Inuyasha, and many more.

 

[Minigiant]

don't believe being unable to face a Demilich from the Abyssal Plane of Doom is a critical thing people need out of a Ranger that emulates Aragorn.

Its being able to face such things without having to be a cruddy Druid. The two ideas aren't mutually exclusive, and people who genuinely want that low fantasy approach are factually playing the wrong game. DND mechanics support and call for higher octane fantasy heroics

That is the issue.

People want to play character of iconic media in a D&D class past the level those characters would be in 5e D&D.

People want to be Aragorn. But Aragorn is level 6 7 or 8 in modern D&D.

But the Aragorn aspects don't scale in modern D&D. There are no mechanics to get "more Aragorny"

And in D&D at Aragon's level, you get features that skip, diminish, or subvert the Aragorny parts of the game.

And the parts that help you continue the scale of Aragorny stuff are in the DMG and ignored, littered in bits and pieces in 10 books, or flat out missing.

In zero edition D&D when Aragorn was created he was a level 20 character. In modern D&D he is maybe a level 8 character. The level 20 magic user in first edition would be a level 9 or 10 Wizard in 5th edition power wise.

This was because the iconic end cap characters from Appendix N that were the building blocks for the classes were made the capstone. But now these appendix end characters are early to late Tier 2 PCs.

So now you have to create 12 levels of stuff to continue the scale

This is what keeps the spellless ranger from happening. Because now you have to complete the scale and force people to play it in order to justify not just using it already there.

 

[Yaarel]

Sure, but they are well aware of the tropes if they've spent time playing the game. You can recognize where DND came from in Three Hearts and Three Lions for a reason, after all, and you don't need to know who Poul Anderson is to like the genre. (Because fundamentally if you like DND you already do like the genre)

I never read Anderson, but if I remember correctly, his books are an inspiration for Law versus Chaos?

So, you are giving the alignment system as an example of why Appendix N is relevant in our century today?

For me, the Alignment belongs in the same bio section as Ideal, Flaw, and "Quirk", and must never have mechanical requirements.

I am less sure your example of alignment as a D&D must-have is helping your case about an N relevancy in our century that D&D must continue to emulate.


Plus even the authors from the last century who I do like, tend to be absent from the N list, like Christopher Stasheff, Ray Bradbury, and Isaac Asimov.

 

[Yaarel]

Also highschool Shakespeare is still a spefi influence: the witches of MacBeth, the mage of Tempest, and the fey of Midsummers Night Dream and Merry Wives.

 

[Minigiant]

Fiction like Lankhmar and Elric were already obscure by the 90s. I imagine most modern audiences were introduced to fantasy by either the LotR movies, cartoons, or YA novels starting with Harry Potter.

Maybe most of spefi (spec fic) today is the superhero genre set in the modern world. DC Titans, Doom Patrol, Superman (plus spinoffs), Legion, Legends of Tomorrow, Constantine, Arrow, Flesh, Marvel Dr Strange, Cloak & Dagger, Runaways, X-Men Gifted, indy The Boys, and many more.

The jedi of Star Wars and tech-magic of Star Trek are also central influences.

Various TV shows are huge influences: Teen Wolf, Adventures of Merlin, Roswell, Vampire Diary (plus spinoffs), Game of Thrones, Supernatural, classics like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Charmed.

I will indulge to add: Killjoys, Shadowhunters, Dresden Files, Wolf Pack, Humans, Magicians, Kyle XY, Sense8, Travelers, Witcher, Trickster (Canada Indigenous), Discovery of Witches, True Blood, Cidade Invisivel (Brasil), Ragnarok (Norway), Limitless, Midnight Texas, Motherland Fort Salem, Librarians, Secret Circle, Shannara Chronicles, Jake 2.0, Babylon 5, Altered Carbon, Raised by Wolves, Carnival Row, Mob Psycho (Japan), Cleverman (Australia), Westworld, Grimm, Misfits, Tomorrow People, Brave New World, and many more.

Animation: Avatar the Last Airbender, Dragon Prince, Young Justice, Mashle, Inuyasha, and many more.

The issue for the spell-less ranger, much like the monk, spell-less bard, spell-less paladin, and many others is that there are no examples of a those archetypes above level 7-8 or so in the Appendix N. And few examples at 4th-6th.

A lot of old fantasy that isn't straight up myths and legends are very low level in 5e terms.

And the designers of 2014 and 2020 5e are not willing to insert examples from other media into the core of these classes to take the spells out of the same core (except the monk). Nor are they willing to create new fully fleshed out subsystems to interact with. This leaves it allup to 3PP to fill the gaps in a disjointed method.

The willingness to design and create the scale is the core of the absence

 

[Yaarel]

The issue for the spell-less ranger, much like the monk, spell-less bard, spell-less paladin, and many others is that there are no examples of a those archetypes above level 7-8 or so in the Appendix N. And few examples at 4th-6th.

A lot of old fantasy that isn't straight up myths and legends are very low level in 5e terms.

And the designers of 2014 and 2020 5e are not willing to insert examples from other media into the core of these classes to take the spells out of the same core (except the monk). Nor are they willing to create new fully fleshed out subsystems to interact with. This leaves it allup to 3PP to fill the gaps in a disjointed method.

The willingness to design and create the scale is the core of the absence

This problem relates to the Mythic Fighter as well. The Gygax "N" reading list doesnt incorporate material about superhuman warriors.

 

[Incenjucar]

Unfortunately the last major interest in physical activity I'm aware of is parkour and Hunger Games, and Hawkeye kind of ruined that.

We may have to wait for a random generational fad before people remember that athleticism and skill are cool on their own.