Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Faolyn" data-source="post: 8420736" data-attributes="member: 6915329">The rest of what? You claimed those monsters need magic to kill. But they don't. It's not like in earlier editions where you had to have magical weapons in order to even harm many monsters.You're the one who said "all day" ("Okay come on, really? They're gonna...what, spend the entire day fighting to take a dangerous monstrosity down?") In reality, the combat would likely be spaced over a hour or so of guerilla attacks and tracking the creature as it moved around.Sure. So how is a single ranger--even one with spells--going to be able to take out a ravening monster super-quickly? Especially if the creature is more powerful than it?You said: "A ranger of appropraite level compared to CR should be able to survive a hostile encounter with a hag, and win if they're smart about it, with minimal or no help."So clearly you expect rangers to be encountering level-appropriate challenges and win with "minimal or no help." I have no idea what you expect to happen if you have a ranger that sees a monster that's a lot more powerful than it. Because...You said: "If they have to call upon outside help for fairly normal threats, they aren't a ranger." and "Many creatures in the wild require magic to effectively combat. Especially on a reliable basis, and especially without access to a whole squad to other combatants to help you."So yes, on multiple occasions you have said that you expect rangers to work mostly alone or in a "small group" and not to rely on others.That sounds like a reason to multiclass to druid, bard, or archfey warlock.And why do you assume that every ranger tradition must include magic?So the vast majority of time, rangers are solitary, because patrolling the wilds takes up a lot of time. And do you think that they only will encounter and fight monsters when they're in small groups, never while patrolling the wilds solo?They're not "limited" to that. I simply didn't list every one of their abilities. Also, spellcasting rangers don't get dispel magic, dispel evil and good, or counterspell, so I have no idea how you expect them to "counter" spellcasting monsters.So... this means that only rangers can use the banes, right?Since they're not artificers, I'd say that making a bane should require at least a rest to accomplish, if not be an entire downtime activity. If they need one in a hurry, then I see no reason why they can't buy one. I mean, you probably don't force assassins to only ever make their own poison, or fighters to forge their own weapons.So what did you mean, when you said that a ranger who relies on outside help isn't a ranger?What other examples? All I saw were some "if they had this ability, it'd be magical."Four out of ten fighter archetypes, five out of nine rogue archetypes (six if you count the mastermind), and two out of eight barbarian archetypes are nonmagical. And three out of nine monk archetypes are "nonmagical," but since ki is magical, according to the PH, it doesn't count. Every other archetype and all of the other classes are magical.So, not as much choice as you might think.</blockquote>

Verification