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

[Minigiant]

DMs with bad house rules can ruin anything.

Net

Dungeons and Dragons (D&D) Fifth Edition (5e) Equipment, Gear, & Items - Net - Proficiency with a net allows you to add your proficiency bonus to the at...

www.dndbeyond.com

OFFICIAL RULES

Wanna see the official rules for a hunting trap?

 

[Incenjucar]

Net

Dungeons and Dragons (D&D) Fifth Edition (5e) Equipment, Gear, & Items - Net - Proficiency with a net allows you to add your proficiency bonus to the at...

www.dndbeyond.com

OFFICIAL RULES

Wanna see the official rules for a hunting trap?

Use a bigger net.

Edit: Falling Net:

Roll20 - Compendium and Rule Set Directory

Browse and reference your favorite RPG rule sets for systems including D&D, Pathfinder, Call of Cthulhu, and Cyberpunk RED.

roll20.net

 

[Vaalingrade]

The D&D spell-slot magic system is a great, efficient system does a number of things that is important for story, pacing, and functionality:

That burgled that functionality from everyone else.

1. You get to do things FAST, often as an action, where if you did it in a a mundane fashion, it could take an hour or days to do.

Genre issue. This is not real life. Things can be done quickly in fiction without magic.

1. You get to bypass a lot of mundane physical material components if the act requires construction.

As above.

1. The effect is usally very accurate and/or efficient, not requiring a skill check for failure.

As above.

1. It is a system that allows multiple classes get access to these abilities as an option.

Feats.

1. Spell slots introduce a limit for how often you can perform those actions in a day.

This is not a positive.

And regarding your comment about "just a thing normal people do," I will contest that claim. Let's look at the level 1 Ranger spells:

I already went through them on this thread and easily converted the vast majority of them to non-magical versions.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Some of it is. Some of it isn't.

Normal people can't speak to plants, see through the eyes of beasts, call fairies, summon thorns, walk on water, leave a wake of fire, or teleport through trees.

So give the druid a bow they won't use.

 

[Vaalingrade]

This is the reason why Eldritch Blast is considered superior to Firebolt, isn't it?

That and invocations allow you to finally make a caster that works like some casters in greater popular culture.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Oh I thought you were asking an honest question, not engaging in a cheap and failed attempt at gotcha. I'm willing to have an honest discussion, but not on your terms when you open with a dishonest attempt at a gotcha.

Dishonest attempt at a gotcha? Seriously? Okayyy. I am asking for your clarifications for what you are looking for, because your argument made no sense to me. I had to point out why your reasoning was dissonant to me. You provided an answer to my example, which was probably give three classes the same ability because they all have the option of casting it as a spell. I asked how you would handle all the other spells that fit that same answer. Then I provided different options that I thought might represent your argument.

So I will reiterate my question. What is it you want to see, and how does it fit into 5E? And just so we are very open and honest, if you have a great idea, I'm going to say so. If I see a problem with it, I'll offer my concerns and ask for your clarification.

To jumpstart this, you said that 5E is lacking some customizable slots. What would those look like? Because to me it sounds like "spells, but not spells" or perhaps an expansion of the feat system. Or is it a complete rewrite of the rules into a Warlock-ability type system where you build a class based on abilities? Because 4E didn't do that either. And no, I don't have a "memory hole" for how 4E worked. I was right there playing it for the entirety of the edition. Levels 1-30.

What is this vision of yours that offers an alternative to the Spell system, which in my opinion is, like feats, an elegant way to provide a common ruleset for a diverse number of abilities to be used by a diverse array of character types?

 

[Chaosmancer]

A beast companion that can be stomped by an ogre and strip 50%+ of your class features away is a not starter for design.

Okay? I never said it was. I just pointed out that for many people the requirement of magic was a non-starter. That doesn't mean all their companions have to be ogre smashable.

The beastmaster has a feral inner spirt/mentality and has a deeper mental empathy for other feral or animalistic beings like their companion.

Easy peasy.

So, a magical, primal connection? Cause that's exactly how I might describe a magical, primal connection.

You are kidding me.

You forgot the moon druid is a whole full caster, right,

The Beastmorph has 5 1d6 claw attacks at level 20 with no magic buffs.

Did you forget Moon Druids spend most of their time not being able to cast spells while transformed? Also, yeah I flat out did the math of 5d6+25 earlier. Kind of weird though, if I was a Feral Spirit Tamer, I could get one or two attacks AND THEN 5 attacks of "stronger than normal" so, maybe like 5d6+35? But this Beastmorph loses attacks to just.. combine? I mean, if you don't get any benefit from combining, why not keep your health pools separate so you can double benefit from buffs and magical healing from other classes?

So, you've now taken it from hilariously broken, to fundamentally weaker than the baseline tamer you want to create. Again.

Were are you getting that math?
Did I say the base beastmaster class has more that one attack themselves? Or even spells?

No, but if you aren't a caster and you aren't a rogue, you get extra attack. So, two attacks is pretty reasonable. And... I didn't mention spells in my math except for the paladin. And you don't need to tell me paladins get spells. I know.

The fearl companion has more HP, the fey companion can teleport away to heal. The beastmorph's beast can hide in their master.

No math was mentioned because the math can be adjusted to match baseline before printing.

The feral Companion has more HP and can be healed from class abilities and OTHER party members. You didn't say teleport away to heal, you said teleport away when they hit 0 hp. Could be like the new Familars who have a similar mechanic, that doesn't involve healing. And... how do you hide in the master but also give them temp hp?

I know you have built this yet, but you were raking me over the coals for saying it would be difficult. Yet for how extremely mindlessly easy you claimed it would be, you sure are making a whole lot of messes that you only fix after I point them out.

Imagine a slider. Class on one side, Subclass on the other.

As long as the beastmaster is solely a subclass, the beast master's beast companion has a whole section of the power unavailable.

If the Ranger's power is 50% Class 50% Subclass, the beast can only have access to 50% of the PC's power.
If the Ranger's power is 70% Class 30% Subclass, the beast can only have access to 30% of the PC's power.
If the Ranger's power is 80% Class 20% Subclass, the beast can only have access to 20% of the PC's power.

Afterall, you can't trade out your Spellcasting and Extra Attack for more companion HP and better AC. Not directly.

If you shift the beast companion to the class, you have access to the full class power and subclass power for design space.

This is best displayed with the 4e Ranger. You can choose between Weapon Powers and Beast Powers in the Ranger. But not with your Paragon Path. Those are separate pools.

Why did people complain about the beast master? It was and required trading out your ranger actions.
Why did WOTC force this? Because there is no simple way to trade unusued martial or primal power to the companion.

You can't trade out medium armor, natural explorerm and favored enemy for an extra beast attack. Or like 4e did, lose your fighting style.

This is all painfully obvious, but do you know what else is painfully obvious?

No one is complaining about the Beast Master losing their action any more... because they don't. The Artificer's Beast Companion was very well received, and often lauded as exactly what the Beast Master Ranger should have been. Same with the Drakewarden, it is very well recieved.

So, you've created this entire elaborate structure to justify changing how strong the beast is... and completely missed that people are general satisfied with the current set-up. So, you have all this set-up, all this work, couched in the idea of removing things people currently like and want, all to maybe make it better if you don't mess up the design?

Why not... just stick with what is working?

Because as the poll shows, a lot of people still want an magical ranger.

And no one as I've seen has design a ranger class that has the option full martial or a 1/2 caster.
A5e went with 1/3 caster.
PF2 cut the magic.

The best option is 2 classes. Or 3 for the Beastmaster.

Right.... so, I'll restate my question. Why can't the Warden be the non-magical one, since the poll shows people still want the magical ranger? Seems kind of obvious to make the new thing into the new thing, instead of making the old thing into a new thing so you can make the new thing into the old thing.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Because I know how D&D fandom and WotC's acquiescence to it works and the next time the go jumping editions, only the ranger gets to be core because we're stuck with 3e Core + Warlock in the core from now until Judgment Day.

Okay? How is that a problem? You just port your fan-made class into the new edition. You'd have to do that anyways.

 

[Minigiant]

So give the druid a bow they won't use.

The point is a 1/2 caster doesn't have enough spell slots for the class fantasy but a full caster has too many.

Lets say you have 5-8 fights, 1-2 exploration scenes, and a social conversation between long rests.

Accounting for easy fights, hard encounter, niche exploration or social interactions ,and average of 5 combat rounds, a spellcasting casting ranger might want to do an instance of mysticism,supernature, or some other matter of magic about 8-10 times a day.

That's level 8-10. Your campaign ended before you can play a magic ranger.

Or in simpler term.

If a 5e ranger casts Hunter's Mark or some other magic for every major fight in an adventuring day, they wont have enough spells left to charm animals.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Okay? How is that a problem? You just port your fan-made class into the new edition. You'd have to do that anyways.

1) We're talking about what should be done officially on the forum dedicated to the new we-promise-this-isn't-as-edition.

2) Have you seen how DMs around here react to 3rd party material, much less fan material? I'm sorry, but my palms are not strong enough to hold my body weight via applied spike.