Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 9076583" data-attributes="member: 6779196">They want to get rid of it because it’s not part of their fantasy of the ranger.Because thematically it shouldn’t be a spell. Just like how forest gnomes can talk to tiny beasts without a spell, Druids and rangers should be able to do the same regardless of size (and so should forest gnomes, frankly). It should be treated like a language.It makes perfect sense to have it not be a spell. It should just be a thing they know how to do.That is the case currently. We are arguing about whether it ought to be the case. My position is no, it ought not to be.They are RAW, and Xanathar’s guide has more detailed rules on how to do so. Though I do think rangers should be able to do so more quickly and efficiently than with those rules. They should get a class feature that lets them do so.No, it doesn’t. The druid ain’t a tracker, sorry. I mean, any character should be able to try anything. But Druids shouldn’t have a special ability to track better than other characters. The druid is a priest, not an expert. They use spells to accomplish these things, not know-how.And I am arguing they should not.Yes, because spellcasting is thematically inappropriate for the ranger. Do try and keep up.[USER=63508]@Minigiant[/USER] has already quoted the PHB on the matter. It’s quite clear that the ranger as-written is a native of civilization who learns to protect themselves and others within the wild, and ventures out into it to hunt down threats to civilization. They are not necessarily an enemy of nature (though they certainly can be,) but they are certainly not at home there. It is a hostile place, that they apply their expertise to be able to survive and thrive within. As opposed to the druid who reveres nature and literally transforms themselves into a part of it.</blockquote>

Verification