D&D 5E Why are non-caster Ranger themes so popular?

[Krachek]

The other sub question is
Do we seek also a surnatural-less Ranger?

 

[Greg K]

I think a shared secret written language a-la trail marks would be pretty dope.

Which as an aside, I find annoying that WOTC still has not included such an ability as an official substitution for the Rogue's Thieves' Cant after sticking the Scout under the rogue banner.

 

[Charlaquin]

Something with.

Ranger (Base Class, Non-Caster)
-> Animal Companion Subclass
-> Half Caster Subclass
-> Archer Subclass

All seems pretty in line then?

This is how I would probably have done it, yeah. With beast companion options being like “the hound,” “the raptor”, “the steed,” and maybe “the drake”. The casting sub could have various specialization options as well, like how Druid of the Land gets different spell list expansions based on their favored terrain, I think that would fit well here. And then I might expand the “archer” subclass into like like “slayer” with various bonuses based on a chosen fighting style.

 

[J.Quondam]

For those who want a spell-less Ranger, what are your core abilities/tropes/mechanics that such a class would reflect?

For me, a ranger is a hunter and has a strong connection to their land. So to give name to some of those aspects, maybe something along the lines of:

• Survivalist (foraging, shelter, healing [mundane, first aid, herbal], navigation and weather sense, etc)
• Hunter (ranged weapons; tracking, trapping, efficient killer [of food and/or foes], etc)
• Outdoorsman (terrain familiarity, sure-footed, easy movement [climb, canoe, etc, as appropriate], etc)
• Natural Geographer (locale knowledge and shortcuts, environmental knowledge (of minerals, water, flora/fauna, etc), etc)
• Guerilla Fighter (ranged, light melee weapons; hit-and-run, surprise/ambush, "fighting dirty", traps, etc)

Not sure if that a bit too much (eg, remove Guerilla fighter?) or not quite enough. But I think mix/match most or all of those gets close to my idea of what a ranger is.
A few other points could be added on to narrow the character, for example by motivation (Guardian of Civilization, Gentleman Robber, etc) or disposition (Outcast, Animal Friend, etc)

 

[Greg K]

Tracking, hunting, foraging, navigation, camouflage, herb-lore, beast-lore, self-sufficiency, forestry, leadership, skirmish tactics…. Maybe cartography…

Good start.

Animal companions are kind of problematic mechanically, and I don’t think they’re essential to the concept, but certainly having a hunting dog or doing falconry feels appropriate to it.

Animal Companions should be available as an option.

I think archery is an important element personally, but I know people don’t love tying weapon choice to class that closely and that’s fair. Couldn’t care less about dual-wielding.

Styles should be a choice

I think a shared secret written language a-la trail marks would be pretty dope.

Yep. Signals and Trail SIgns!

edit: and Rambo in First Blood stuff.

 

[Charlaquin]

The other sub question is
Do we seek also a surnatural-less Ranger?

Personally, I think the ranger should at least be uncanny. They should be able to do things other folks just can’t, things that are arguably beyond the mundane, but not necessarily supernatural (but keep a truly supernatural subclass cause that is a cool way to express the archetype, as long as it isn’t the only way to do so). Of course, again I feel that way about every class. It is, after all, a fantasy game, characters should be capable of doing the fantastical. They just shouldn’t all need to learn and cast spells to do it.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Okay, if the fact that the term “spell slot” is used makes the Ranger too magical, regardless of how supernatural or mundane the abilities fueled by them are, how about;

Survival Points. You get around 1/level, like Ki on Monks, and you can use them to fuel special abilities. You get some automatically, and some come from Favored Terrain/Enemy and other class choices. Let’s call them Wilderness Knacks.

For those of us who see the Ranger’s basic identity as fundamentally magical, some Wilderness Knacks are supernatural, and some straight up give you spells you can cast by spending 1/Survival point per spell level.

This would create a very unique class, that accommodates all three preferences.

@Charlaquin @Greg K what you think? All currently magical class features would be a decision point, possibly on a warlock style chassis where Knacks are chosen like Invocations. Seem fair?

 

[Minigiant]

Depending on the campaign. I would not unequivocally state that the DM was wrong.

Yes it depends on the campaign.

But for the baseline PHB/DMG/MM version of the game foraging for food is not a challenge for...

The Archmage
The Living Saint
The Master Assasin
The Greatest Knight in a Generation

Every other classes' skills increase with level, the Ranger's should too. The Ranger Knight in his Tier 3 Paragoness and the Ranger Lord in his T4 Epicness should be handling paragon and epic exploration obstacles respectively. A level 10 ranger should not be struggling with level 1 woodcraft issues at baseline.

If the DM still wants that struggle thats on them. But the by the book baseline ranger should have a progression and should progress to more dangerous exploration challenges.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Okay, if the fact that the term “spell slot” is used makes the Ranger too magical, regardless of how supernatural or mundane the abilities fueled by them are, how about;

Survival Points. You get around 1/level, like Ki on Monks, and you can use them to fuel special abilities. You get some automatically, and some come from Favored Terrain/Enemy and other class choices. Let’s call them Wilderness Knacks.

For those of us who see the Ranger’s basic identity as fundamentally magical, some Wilderness Knacks are supernatural, and some straight up give you spells you can cast by spending 1/Survival point per spell level.

This would create a very unique class, that accommodates all three preferences.

@Charlaquin @Greg K what you think? All currently magical class features would be a decision point, possibly on a warlock style chassis where Knacks are chosen like Invocations. Seem fair?

Even though upthread I proposed spending spell slots on alternate abilities, I think that is only a fix for subclasses of the current ranger.

I would prefer to avoid both “points” (sorcerer, monk) and “dice” (bard, battle master)

If I were starting from scratch I would have a mix of:

• Abilities that can be used at will, in some cases with a circumstantial requirement
• Abilities that can be used 1 + PB / rest*
• Abilities that can be used 1 / rest*

*short or long, depending

One Ranger ability I’ve always thought about is some kind of bonus versus creatures with reduced movement rate, the idea being that the Ranger is practiced at using traps and terrain to ambush enemies.

 

[Hussar]

/snip

Animal companions are kind of problematic mechanically, and I don’t think they’re essential to the concept, but certainly having a hunting dog or doing falconry feels appropriate to it.
/snip

I agree with your points except this one. I think that the easiest way to really differentiate a ranger from the other classes is to lean into the pet option. But, since this is a fantasy game, we shouldn't be limiting animal companions to domesticated animals. I mentioned earlier that I thought the Smith Artificer was a good way to go. Having seen it in play and how the companion works there, I'd say it's fantastic. I'd probably give rangers a supernatural spirit animal - they can choose from a short list of forms, similar to the Tasha's Animal Summoning rules when they bring out their companion.

Right there, that covers 99% of what a ranger should be able to do- tracking? Well, we've got a companion for that. Foraging? Check. Traveling quickly? Check. Scouting? Check. As the ranger gains levels, the companion gets new ribbons - maybe new types and whatnot.

Sure, it's supernatural, but, it's chockablock with flavor and it makes it super easy to adjust. The ranger takes his actions, the companion goes right after the ranger and can take it's action (move and attack, generally - no multiattack.) Easy, simple, and fixes nearly all the problems with a ranger while making the ranger distinct from other classes.