I am one of the ones that believed the ranger was woefully underpowered compared to other classes, and I am all for this new revised ranger. I actually don't think they've been given too much. it's just been modified so their core abilities and beastmaster are useful in combat as opposed to just being there for thematic purposes.
I am with you on this. The 3 pillars of the game are Social, Combat, and Exploration. To me, Exploration should be divised between actual exploration/survivability, and stealth/inflitration. The idea to me is that then Exploration/survivability, stealth/infiltration, and social abilities could be then balanced to various degrees, with each classes having her + and -. Combat, however should be balance similarly with all classes. This is DnD people. Who will play a class utterly for socializing ? I mean, I will choose to be the old ranger, cause i want to be melee, but less effective at damage than the paladin or fighter, less effective in armor than the paladin, and with no lasting power like the barbarian. Sure, I can talk to a specific group of enemy, even tho I hate them. Comon. I have training to be one man armyr, but i need an army with me to use them.
I've never interpreted the favored enemy ability as "I am a ranger, so I hate XXX." I've interpreted it as, "I have a lot of experience fighting against XXX, so I have a good understanding of their strengths and weaknesses." For example, a ranger who works as a scout for a human kingdom who is constantly in conflict with a neighboring human kingdom would reasonably have "favored enemy: Human" without "hating" humans. Interpreting favored enemy as "hating" is, in my opinion, a very simplistic interpretation.
Favored enemy does not necessarily mean the Ranger hates on type of foe, they may just have more experience with that one type and that extensive experience with that foe makes the ranger skill much more effective.
Put a saddle on your black bear, pick gnome or halfling as your race, get the mounted combat feat, pick Dueling as your fighting style, use a lance as your weapon and have a shield, and nab the sentinel feat for good measure. Now if someone attacks your bear while you're mounted, you get to make another attack by using your reaction.
Problem is the companion moves on its turn. If there are no enemies in range on your turn then you will have to ready the attack and lose out on any possible bonus attack. Also the mounted combat feat does little good due to only getting adv against small/tiny enemies and the mount already being quite hearty. Wolf would make for a better mount due to pack tactics always in effect while you are mounted. Also going Halfling with a hand crossbow and picking up crossbow expert and sharpshooter feats would allow for consistent bonus attacks even if no enemies are in melee range.
No need to lose your extra attacks. If you roll higher initiative than your beast, I believe the rules allow you to forego your turn until after your beast's turn. I don't currently have the books on me so I apologize if I'm incorrect. The downside is you are effectively rolling initiative with disadvantage every combat.
Sorry for the confusion, to clarify I'm saying you should not ready your attack at all. If you roll initiative 14 and your breast rolls initiative 8, your ranger can wait until 8 on the turn order to take his turn and use his attack actions as he normally would. (Again, if I'm remembering correctly.)
The only RAW way of doing that is via Readying an Action. Nothing in 5e allows for delaying your full turn. This was a design decision to speed up combat and minimize players ability to game the system.
The Most Powerful feature about this class if you ask me is the New Natural Explorer. The advantage on initiative and attack, ignore difficult terrain on all terrains, these items are really useful for most campaigns. However this update is very much needed, it allows the Ranger to actually feel competitive with other classes. I like feeling like some adventuring badass that knows everything about most campaigns. This makes that possible with bity Deep Stalker and Beastmaster now. Deep Stalker is now actually apart of the Conclaves(and really feels a lot like a scout...or Batman), while Beastmaster is now pretty awesome and worth the conclave in both roleplay and combat. Vanish is now almost comical. Paper thin Characters now just turn to the side...poof he's gone. But this ability is really fun and leads to awesome spy scenes. The bonus damge is nice, but I don't think it is too op. It gives off some nice poke it certain situations. I really like this update, everything just feels nice but not too OP to make ranger lovers enjoy it, while other classes don't feel like they are dropping behind.
PlayMadness I didnt even notice this the first time I grabbed a ua ranger. me and my DM missed it, so I was only hunting humans alone. now that I noticed it's all humanoids not just select one im scared I might be too strong. were in an evil campaign so I killl humanoids all the time.
I think people are overblowing how powerful the new Natural Explorer is. The features it gives only make it so that Rangers are good at getting the jump on enemies. It makes up the basis for the class, just like Martial Arts does for Monks and having access to all weapons/armor/shields and fighting styles is the basis for the Fighter and Sneak Attack and Expertise are the basis for Rogues, etc. etc.
I wish they would let you raise the challenge level of the beast companion. 1/4 is good at the start but later is nothing. should at least go up to 1/2 or something
Please, don't bring back favored terrain. While all classes kick ass in the whole world the ranger is forced to kick ass in two ninths of the world, that is terrible class design, and it's what made the ranger UnFun in the first place.
That and the limiting of your beast companion in feat of "omg he can control another creature so it must be OP" are the two plagues o the original Ranger. Hopefully they remedy this before they print it in a book.
personally I think having the large bonuses from natural explorer in only a certain terrain is fine. They are very large boons, such as ignoring all difficult terrain and having advantage on all initiative checks.
Yea, I remember in 3/3.5 the whole big thing about Ranger is that you got all of the feats for your fighting style for free without having to meet the req. Plus the pet, spells, tracking, and HIPS that only worked in nature.
@@blakebrockhaus347 in certain terrains. Subterranean and dungeons not being one of them.... yeah it's not fine. If it was all outside terrain that would be fine. But its not. Its 1 biome on the surface. Favoured terrain is probably the worst part of the original ranger
To be honest in my experience having advantage in any roll isn't so over-powered as one might think. I've seen on so many occasions an advantage roll still fail. I feel that "+" bonuses are much more powerful. With that said, the new Ranger seems overpowered but in reality its probably more balanced than we think. Good Stuff Guys!
I have a cool idea for a modified Ranger, and I'm not sure where I should share it. The idea is basically to replace spell-casting for the Ranger with Herbalism. You would have herbs known, and you would collect them. This could either be tied to a Survival check, or you could automatically get a certain number of each level like spells (I have a survival roll chart worked out where you would get the same amount of herbs if you roll on it twice a day). This would only give you the Ranger spells with the target of self or one creature you touch. The Ranger would lose the rest of the spells, but get some of them as class features instead. Particularly hunter's mark (replacing favored enemy). Hunter's Mark would still take an action, so it would be a waste to cast against creatures with low HP, which I think is an interesting strategic choice for the Ranger. Another alternative if that's OP would be to make Hunter's Mark into a poisonous herb that you can collect, and leave the ranger with favored enemy. In addition to Herbalism, a lot of the Ranger's abilities would be replaced with traps the Ranger could set, starting with a simple alarm trap, but upgrading over time to disable some number of enemies in different ways. Anyway, I have the whole thing written out, but I'm not sure where I should share it to. And what do you guys think? Do you like the idea of replacing Ranger spells with Herbalism and Traps?
+Nathan Riggins (Nate the Nerdarch) Huzzah! Welcome back brave adventurer! I see your "arrow to the knee" has healed haha. Glad to have you back sir. I hope to see you at SJ GeekFest.
When I read the Revised Ranger, I can't believe that it took care of almost every gripe I had and also didn't go into a direction too far from the original. This was exactly what I was looking for. When I was thinking of my own revision to the original Ranger, the hardest part was finding something unique about the Ranger. Yes they can be a mix of a Fighter, Druid and Rogue but I would rather see something unique about the class that abilities are constantly relating to. I'm still not a huge fan of Favored Enemy, but the Natural Explorer has that flavor and mechanics that I was looking for. And they added just enough to the core abilities all while balancing the three subclass features so there is no obvious choice. Having a Pet path (Beast Conclave), a Warrior path (Hunter Conclave) and a Magical/Stealthy path (Deep Stalker Conclave) was a great decision. All that being said, the front loading of all the level 1 abilities a little scary.
taking the mobile feat you can use the bonus action to dash with no worry. Using multiattack defense and whirlwind attack with two weapon with your extra attack. Throw on plate armor and a shield with defense fighting style if you get hit and are targeted by it again you have +4 ac added now. So it's like a 25 ac, so I'd go to either a Max defense hunter or the crazy two handed weapon user. That just wails on everything then either just stand still and your forgotten by all or you just mobile nope it out of it all.
I support your decision! I've had fun playing a halfling mobile archer character in Pathfinder (a ranger/druid), I might have to make an iteration of that character for D&D now!
I thought about making a lightfoot halfling ranger with a giant crab as an animal companion and each round I hide within its space for cover because of the giant crab's really good AC. Then I peek out and make shots with dual wielded hand crossbows (with crossbow expert of course). When they get close or something I unleash bolt hell into them as the crab goes for perpetual grapple checks with its claw attacks (with advantage being had for my attacks if the grapple checks succeed). I made this with the intent of mounting it at some point but there is no possibly way you could mount a giant crab; like what would that saddle even look like?
I love every bit of this ranger I immediately made a char, I disagree with my other players about hide in plain sight. Base on the wording just trying to use the hide action I could stand still and foes takes a -10 to perception. You can also take a hide action as a bonus action. My group says you'd have to actually succeed in hiding then you can use the plain sight. That is not how it was worded, just trying to hide let's the hide in the plain sight work. Too bad the other players won't listen to me about it. I think of it kinda like how a boxer will stay in another boxers blind spot when they have a injured eye. Just you know, your standing still.
The whole problem of Ranger specific terrains is if you pick a terrain the campaign doesn't go in. Maybe if it was like circle of land druid where they get specific benifits for terrain type.
Hey Nerdarchy, I have a question for you guys that has been on my mind for quite some time. I am in a D&D group as a Wood Elf Ranger (original I know) that went into the stalker conclave after some character development. After some time, he survived everything that was thrown at him and his group and was granted level 20. Time of resting took place afterwards however, more needed to be done and has left me with the task of forging epic level abilities and upgrades for the stalker conclave and revised ranger UA edition. This is what I came up with: Lv21: ASI & Improved Natural Explorer (Cannot be lost, even by magical means, forage 3 times as much food.) Lv22: Active Camo (Camo doesn’t become removed if action is taken while wearing but requires natural materials to make Camo) Lv23: Deadly Foe Slayer (add WIS mod to ATK and DMG roll for one attack) Lv24: Favored Enemy 3 (new favored enemy and increased damage on favored enemies to +6) Lv25: ASI & Improved Active Camo (Can make Camo out of any material abundant in the area gaining +10 to stealth) Lv26: Extended Spell Capacity & Gain the spell Scrying as a Deep Stalker Spell Lv27: Underdark Conqueror (+20 to speed and gain two more attacks on the first turn) Lv28: Improved Deadly Foe Slayer (no longer limited to one attack, now a passive bonus for all ATK against favored enemies) Lv29: ASI & Favored Enemy 4 (new favored enemy and increased DMG on favored enemies to +8) Lv30: Renowned Foe Slayer (Favored enemies have disadvantage on all attacks against you, and you have advantage on saving throws against any spells they cast that require you to make one. Additionally, all of your attacks are made with advantage, and the first time a favored enemy is attacked by you, it must succeed a Wisdom saving throw or become frightened by you for a number of rounds equal to your Wisdom modifier. An affected creature may repeat the saving throw at the end of each of its turns, ding the effect on a success and becoming immune to your Renowned Foe Slayer’s fear feature for 24 hours.) Any and all helpful advice is appriciated! Thanks guys! NERDARCHY RULES!
The only problems I have with the ranger still is that A) muticlasing into this ranger gives wayyyyy to much and B) the Hunter's Whirlwind Attack is still pitiful compared to the Hunter's Volley Attack. Otherwise I love this new version. The options for beasts could use a little tweaking though.
I think the "You are a master of navigating the natural world and you react with swift decisive action" signifies the intent that you only get the level 1 bonuses in natural environments. Though the wording could use some rework.
I’m not sure if anybody is still out there looking at this, but I am because I just decided to build a Ranger. That being said, in regards to Natural Explorer, I believe they entirely missed the sentence preceding the perks. It states, “when attacked”. Please correct me if I’m wrong but that means having advantage on initiative and attack rolls is only if attacked, not all the time. Thoughts? Opinions? Additionally, it seems they’ve repeated the issue in regards to “difficult terrain”, the preceding sentence clearly states, “when traveling for an hour or more”. So not you can’t run though a tavern or over a spell effect.
It's only powerful because people can multiclass one level and get it. Change it so you get it around level 3 where that really where the game starts and it's totally fine with me. "It's too easy to flip through the multiclass catalog and order it within the night" is a funny way to put it.
Hey guys, great video as always. I just wanted to say I really love this version for one reason above the rest. It feels like they gave the ranger a role to play in a party now. I tried being a ranger twice and felt not only overshadowed in combat but overall, I had no real function in the group. After trying this out it was the most fun playing 5e I've had yet. Now a ranger acts as a skirmisher/scout, the opening move of the party, like a predator striking quickly before the rest of the pack finishes the job. I really wasn't overpowered next to the others since after the opening move I didn't have many big tricks left. In fact it was even more fun for the others, I wasn't dragging behind them but we also were able to play differently, the rogue and I could draw in enemies and form an ambush. Well that's my two cents.
I spent a lot of time as the old ranger, and it wasn't great. We ended up cashing out before I got to play with the revised version, and it looks like it would have been a LOT better.
I think I will keep this more broad application of Natural Explorer with the following changes at my table: Land's Stride will be added at 8th level, and the Ambuscade Feature from Ranger Options from a few months ago will be making a comeback rather than the bonus to initiative and advantage on attacks. Y'all do make a good point: the Deep Stalker definitely feels a few shades off of being a scout of some variety. I also would like to see a further exploration of Spirit Companion, that was a very interesting direction from the aforementioned article.
for the natural explorer, I would make terrain movement like magical attunement, you need to live in that area for a month to gain learn the environment and gain the benefits
I still think it adds to the feel that rangers are, above all, adaptive. People like that don't need a month getting used to some place new in the wilderness. They need a couple of hours at most.
oO PPH Oo true. I just like the similar idea for attunement. Some magic items take a day to attune, a ranger would need 24 hours to "attune" to the environment. Could actually be really cool, in say, the underdark. First go down, not used to the area, but after a day, the Ranger is good to go.
Matthew Walsh We agree at the base of it though the comparison with magical item is a bit too much off for my liking. In terms of mechanics it's decently comparable but the flavor of it is not. That, however, is a technicality. We both like the idea of a transitioning phase where the ranger adapts to the new surroundings rather that it happening instantly. A month seemed unnecessary long. A day is even a tiny bit too long for me. IRL survivalists learn to adapt to new surrounding before it gets to sundown hence why I suggest a few hours and as few as a single hour.
The only thing that PHB has over revised is share spells, really helps the limited spells ranger has go farther. My favorites are ensnaring strike, absorb elements, cure wounds, and guardian of nature
We just had a lengthy discussion around our table about the scope of Humanoids. Currently we are tinkering with "Class or Nationality" as categories so Mage Hunters and More Deadly Against the English (blackpowder campaign being run by a friend) would both be valid choices, part as an expert and part a mini rage reflected in the additional damage. The previously defined humanoids as races of Orcs and Goblionoids still running with. The new quandary is Elves. Could our Ranger choose all Elves or would it have to be narrowed down to Drow? We are going with the latter so far. On the brighter side, looking forward to someone actually taking a Beast Companion with actual survival potential (closer to the Nerdarchy house build for hit points at least). Will see then how it breaks the system.
Foe Slayer did change. It used to be only favored enemies, now you can use it once per turn against any enemy. Not a massive boost, but it makes it better, equal to a free precision attack every round I've been told. Honestly, I like it a lot, and barring multi-classing shenanigans I don't think anything it gets is too powerful. Once you can multi-class an assassin rogue and deep stalker or hunter ranger... arguments for too powerful could be made.
The Beast Conclave Ranger could gain more attacks by multiclassing into Barbarian, Fighter, Monk or Paladin, because I believe Coordinated Attack and Extra Attack both work together.
I'm glad the pet gets some love. I still feel like a ranger is essentially a fight who traded his good armor and best tricks for a granola bar and patchouli oil. Maybe, since magic is really what separates those classes, the ranger's spell list needs some attention. Some group friendly spells that won't normally come up from the other casters. Maybe a cheap move, but giving them the Guidance cantrip and the Heroism spell would prop them up better than this stuff. Or maybe, have their spells renew on a short rest rather than long. That would sure enable them to use their few spells more. And seriously, Hunters Mark should be a twice per short rest ability- not a spell at all.
I have a player that created a Bugbear Rogue-Assassin 3/ Ranger Stalker 3 character for the my new D&D campaign. Going to be fun to watch, nightmare to DM.
What you forgot to say is the best needs to be able to see you to use the attack. So if it can't see u u make one attack on ur turn so the dps for you will suck later game depending on the campaign. The ranger needs that extra attack to be able to make any difference.
As far as I play it, the beast is part of the character, and as such your beast is effected by self, but!!! I only allow one self instance per round. So you choose, economically, which is more beneficial as far as effects like favored enemy and hunters mark for the current round at start of round. Not perfect, but avoids murderous Rogue/Rangers getting double sneak attack hunters mark in a turn (as allowing all effects on your character to effect both would technically allow). just my thoughts on it.
The only rough issue with the revised version is I'd make the natural explorer combat options only apply in wilderness setting; or as the book might phrase, in a setting without manmade constructs. People might complain the exploration options might be too OP now, but look at how it was originally. All the stuff from favored terrain would apply to too little of the world when you wanted it, and begging the DM to make it to your own benefit is unbecoming and a hassle to them. Letting a perk be universal is kind to both parties and still puts the onus on a ranger being a master explorer. (Shrugs) I didn't feel like watching a half hour video, so everything I said they probably said. I just think comparing and contrasting this to other classes helps put balancing into perspective. "Oh, their adv on initiative, first round attack and diff. terrain bonuses are OP", well they also get the Rogues level 2 feature...spread out far into the future, into two different level ups. All a matter of perspective
I like the new ranger except one thing, I like how a level 20 ranger compares to level 20 in other classes, but I would divide up the abilities to spread throughout all levels, I think ranger was previously front loaded with too few features at hihg levels to look forward too and to stick in the class for, and would like some of the cool things with favored enemhy and terrain mastery to be earned at higher levels, keep the travel stuff but make some of the combat features like better saves, and initiative and advantages at higher levels.
I thought about making a Aarcrokra Beastemaster with a blood falcon pet, it never seen the light of day because of how bad the old Beastmaster was. As soon as these new rules are revised/polished I think i'll be taking a look at the idea again. Who can say a flying duo that is all mobility based (probably dip into monk as well) isn't the best concept for a Beast Conclave? *cue Flight of The Valkries*
The new Natural Explorer as it is written is too much. I like that the benefits aren't restricted to natural terrains only, so the Ranger becomes more viable for Urban Campaigns, but they should reduce to just 1 benefit. IMO, the bonus to initiative is the one that should stay. The Favored Enemy is such an iconic feature of the Ranger from older versions that I understand the desire to keep it in the game. But it's something that could go away, imo, in favor of something more useful. Maybe a new feat, that showed the prowess of the Ranger in hunting down his prey. Something like: Master of the Hunt: As a bonus action, you can give yourself advantage on Wisdom checks to track down enemies or on Inteligence checks to recall information about them. You can use this feature 1 + your Wisdom modifier per day (minimum 1). Once you reach level 6, you gain use this feature to gain a +2 to damage. You recover all expended uses on a short/long rest. The New Beastmaster is stronger and better now. It was a needed change. But I don't like it. I think they should have gone to a different approach. I don't know, something that gave utility to the beast, instead of just combat power. Maybe the ability to cast Speak with Animals and Beast Sense at will in your Companion. The beast could gain proficiency or expertise in Survival and Perception, so it becomes a better hunter and can help the party scouting/exploring/guarding. The level 11 feat, storm of claws and fang, seems to strong. The Ranger can attack with his action, attack with his bonus action, attack with his beast reaction and order it to attack everyone around him with the companion's action. It makes the Whirlwind attack from the Hunter archetype sound weak. The Deep Stalker Conclave is awesome! I would really love to play one if they ever release it officialy! We don't play UA in our table.
I like the direction here, but a few quibbles: 1) Natural explorer is obviously too front-loaded. 2) I dislike Dash at 8 and hide at 14. Stalker is clearly supposed to be the stealthy ranger. Take bonus hide away from core ranger and given it exclusively to stalker. Dash could be part of a natural explorer expansion at 6, 8, or 10. 3) Foe Slayer is still boring. 4) The core problem here is still that every class has a feature that scales from early levels level, and ranger does not. Sneak attack, rage, divine smite, wild shape, sorcery points (...) Ranger could still use something like that rather than being so front loaded. 5) I'm fine with the damage boost to FE. 6) I'm not convinced bringing back terrain exclusivity to Natural Explorer is a good idea. 7) Seriously just give bonus hide and hide in plain sight to stalker.
As you said, the early levels are really quite powerful compared to the other classes. Id even go as far as comparing it to the druid in power level in early game casual play. However, 5th level to 10th level that power level slowly begins to line up back with the other melee classes, maybe a bit more powerful still. I think its a great start but maybe spreading the first 5 levels worth of abilities out would be better. Once again great vid Nerdarchy :D
Topic for discussion: So since your beast companion gets ability score improvements does that mean you could substitute it for feats that don't need hands such as tough, mobile and savage attacker to name a few?
Nice overview, thanks. I think the lvl 1 stuff might be a bit much for such a low level. A bunch of other classes will look the Ranger's way for a 1-lvl multiclass dip for the initiative and terrain bonuses alone. Wish it scaled with lvl or some of it was lvl 2-3 instead. That's my lone gripe. I love most of the changes/additions, and think this will bring Rangers back for a lot of people.
I will be ruling in that you have to be in a natural terrain of your choosing for the advantage on initiative and attack and ignoring difficult terrain. Other than that, I freakin' love these changes!
In general terms, what Mearls & Co. did right here was they stopped trying to reinvent the wheel. The structure of the ranger is basically the same as it was, with the partial exception of reconfiguring the second attack as a Conclave power instead of a class power. In the end, they're probably going to slightly tone down some of the new abilities they have here, and put the revised class in a new printrun (like they put clarifications about the beast's ability to defend itself if the ranger is out of commission). I can't imagine many people will play the old version now, even if (like me) they didn't have much of a problem with it. Here is how I would tamp down on some of the changes: - I doubt *Natural Explorer* will go back to Favored Terrains, because people complained about rangers being at the mercy of DM largesse. A class which specializes at being good in the wilderness in general is fine with me. What they should do is to eliminate the perks as features that work *automatically*. What they need to do is apply skills more to how this class works. If you want to catch twice as much food, avoid getting lost, or ignore rough terrain, make a Survival roll. At advantage, since you are a ranger. This way, you have a decent survival roll even if you fail to take proficiency in it (since rangers don't get a Survival freebie). I would, however, only give the effective surprise bonus and initiative bonus in wilderness conditions, if these abilities are going to be packaged as *Natural Explorer*, they should apply out in nature. - With Primeval Awareness, if the ranger no longer has to spend a spell slot, there should again be a limitation on the ability, in the form of a roll. Animal Handling to communicate with an animal, and Insight to detect the Favored Enemy. They shouldn't just be freebie at will abilities. If limited, this will discourage dipping (ditto for natural explorer). - For the Beast Conclave, they should probably cut down on the amount of benefit the beast gets from the ranger's proficiency bonus, now that the beast gets its own attack from the start. I would say, give the beast a bonus for every ranger plus *over +2*. That way, they;re not getting anything extra until 5th level, and the 3rd level Beast Conclave ranger, with an additional attack, doesn't outclass every other combat class or archetype. Two things that bug me about some of the continuing complaints (not from Nerdarchy, but other sources) have to do with class identity being built into the class, and spell use. Belonging to a Conclave is a cool feature, IMO. Rangers guard the frontier, and the idea that they, *as a rule* operate on a solitary basis strikes me as being silly. A Conclave, as the name implies, is a gathering that occurs from time to time, not a unit or place that requires a ranger's permanent presence. It connects a ranger to an institution or a mission. For those who think that class - crunch only, they can feel free to ignore this trait. But whining to take it out is counterproductive. On the spells: thematically, the rangers have always been a spellcasting class. Yes, they were spellcasters at 8th level before, and at 2nd level now, but I'll take that complaint seriously when those who complain agree to move Wild Shape back to 7th level for druids. Most of the spells have to do with good aim, fixing wounds, getting along in the wild, so they can easily be reflavored as preternatural abilities rather than spells if particular DMs and players don't want their ranger to look too "magical". Here, too, if the spells bother you that much, play a fighter with Survival Proficiency, an Alertness Feat, and maybe, construct your own Natural Explorer feat - in this case, probably for a specific terrain.
Great points about natural explorer. As far as the Conclaves, I agree that it makes sense to have them around. In our city of Gryphingauf my nature cleric organized some of the woodsman and warders of the area into lodges. It was simply a place to meet from time to time, exchange information, stories, train skills, rest, recover, eat a big dinner, etc... As far as people griping about rangers getting spells too early I say it is better for both the ranger to get their spells and the druid to get their wildshape early on because those are key abilities of those two classes. To push it back would be akin to pushing back the fighting style for the warrior. Class defining abilities belong up front
Well, the people who are unhappy about the ranger having any spells don't think spells should be class-defining abilities, but possibly just variants that some archetypes get. But logically, such people can get an wilderness archetype of fighter, and let the rest of us play rangers with spells as a core ability.
I do think there's a semantic difference between "natural" explorer and "nature" explorer if you catch my meaning. Natural in this case would be closer to "intuitive." I think that follows logically, as the skills you develop in a hostile wilderness are tempered by healthy caution. Being the first to act can sometimes be imperative. Faced with the potential of stalking ambush predators, that's the line between life and death. It means spotting danger before it spots you. Imagining a scenario wherein a ranger spends a great deal of time--perhaps a majority or the totality of their time--well into the wild, it is unwise to be caught napping. Every sense you hone to detect your prey is a sense you best do well at beating. You can't miss the constrictor snake on the branch overhead or the fresh bear tracks underfoot followed clearly by smaller cub prints. Sharp, almost painful awareness is as necessary in the ruined temple of a demon cult as it is in mountain lion territory. I see no reason for a survivalist (who plans on surviving long) to discard the skills which have carried them to where they are simple because they are in an urban scene or a wilderness unfamiliar.
That subtly changes the meaning of the skill. A "Natural Explorer" doesn't just have danger sense - he or she is also aware of the environment - i.e. knows where the trolls live, where to find kingsfoil, how to find clean water, a pass over the mountains, etc. It's hardly a stretch to say these should be disaggregated from a "Danger Sense" skill.
I don't own this book, so I'll draw bullet points from what I hear being said in the video. • Ignore Difficult Terrain •Advantage on Initiative Rolls •On (your) first turn, Advantage on creatures that have not yet acted I understand that the way I went about describing my thoughts might have left a different impression than what I intended. I don't mean to describe a "danger sense" but instead describe a very dangerous situation that the average Ranger may very well find themselves in. You might call it paranoia, but I think a Ranger would fall into some habits that kept them alive where danger lurks around every corner. Such habits would make them natural explorers, capable enough to travel hither and yon without getting themselves killed through lack of caution. Even in a dungeon, this can serve them well. In terms of difficult terrain, perhaps there should be some mechanical differences, but it does pay to be adaptable. The Ranger must spend a lot of time on uneven ground, watching their step. I think this is a kind of surefootedness that comes with escaping through tangled underbrush and skittering down mountainsides. If I had to describe what an explorer is, it'd be a person who travels to or investigates anyplace that is unfamiliar. I don't think this necessarily means undeveloped, but I can see where that could be inferred. What you're describing sounds very much to me like the Survival skill its self, which I would agree is necessary if you plan on exploring any substantial wilderness. Physical needs (clean water) are no less important in a survival situation, however I think the "Natural Explorer" skill is describing the more reactive (as opposed to proactive) aspect. This would be the capability to first find where the trolls live and still have arms left over to mark it on a map. In combination, I think these three aspects of Natural Explorer work directly into the initial flight or flight response. In an unlucky situation, say with a group of trolls, a surviving Ranger is the one who manages to turn tail and escape through the dense forest or straight up a difficult incline. Likewise when escape is not an option, the fittest Ranger has to throw it on the line and hope to get the first blow. Better yet if they can finish off their attacker without much back and forth. This is certainly the case for every adventurer, yet I picture a Ranger in his formative days being tested frequently and against wide range of threats. Getting whatever advantage possible is the best that can be managed. If that requires faster than average reaction times, and the drive to make that first strike count, well maybe those are the only Rangers we hear about. The rest are fertilizer.
I didn't comprehend the point regarding using pole arm master feat to gain an "offhanded attack" ? I would think using the pole arm (1 attack + bonus attack with other end) would not allow you to make an "offhand attack". Perhaps I misunderstand the mechanics of a multiple attack concept.....just trying to visualize using a two-handed pole arm in a round wherein you get the 1 normal (2-hnded attack) + bonus attack (two handed other end) and then manipulating to an off-hand attack. With what would that attack be with ? open hand ?
Google "Joachim Meyer, quarterstaff". There are polearm specific manuals, but the quarterstaff is the base for all of them, it will help you visualize this sort of thing.
@Nerdarchy Hi. I am not a native english speaker. Even though I`ve lived in the US and do speak english fluently, sometimes, when you guys get too excited, it gets hard to understand what y`all say. I know it sounds annoying but I think you guys could give us a little help and try to talk one person at a time hahaha. I don`t know if that is just a non-native speaker issue but... anyways. Thanks a lot guys, keep up the great comments, they are really useful. Best;
Every beast has a different HD. If you look at the Monster Manual there will be a hit dice in front of the HP, something like: HP = 13 (3d8). I think you are supposed to use the HD the Beast has.
Since Beast Master goes off proficiency bonus, would taking 5 levels in Ranger to get a beast companion and then going the rest of the way in Rogue be awesome? You can use your companion to make sure you get Sneak Attack if your party is lacking in melee or you want to stay ranged as a rogue, your companion can smash using its reaction when it sees you attack so if I'm reading this right it would usually get 2 attacks per round... Hunter's Mark could help make up for one of the Sneak Attack dice you lose for the dip into Rogue As far as a Halfling or Gnome mounted on a companion, if they were both melee attacking while the player was mounted, would you still allow them to get Sneak Attack damage?
Thank you for all the great videos guys! Ranger is all I play. I am a ranger (eagles scout), so I really connect with this class. I always liked the hunter as a killer, the beast-master has more of a "jen ne sais quoi". Great for role playing and tons of flavor. I have a forest gnome beast-master my, my beast is a vulture and I ride him. The new beastmaster looks more a combat specialist.
The new ranger looks significantly strong in combat but personally I always found the PHB ranger not bad AT ALL: *if you combo the archer fighting style with the longstrider spell and/or hunter's mark then you got a character that can pepper the enemy lines with arrows and move away without anyone even thinking to get close to him.* Granted the PHB ranger works mostly in the open field (grasslands, hills, forests and mountains). He's alot weaker in tight spaced dungeons.
I totally agree with this, the problem that I had with the Ranger was the fact that was the ONLY way to play the Ranger. It was really hard not to be the Hunter with the Giant Slayer choice. I am interested in seeing this version. I feel that there will be more options with this new edition.
That is a good way to go with it. I think they went all the way to super powered so that they can simply dial back the things that are shown to be easily abused
Nathan Riggins Agreed. It's usually easier to tone down something OP rather than buff up a class. If I remember correctly they usually do surveys every so often concerning Unearthed Arcana materials. The feedback they get then will most likely point this out.
I can finally make the dwarven ranger with crossbow character that I've been wanting to make for some time. If you go beast master, you only have the one attack and you don't have to worry about having a 15 Dex and then being forced to take crossbow mastery feat at 4th. Boar, bear, or wolf would all be thematic for a dwarven ranger.
I have a dwarf ranger hunter who has favored terrain Underdark, and is duel wielding warhammers. He's very fun thematically, these changes make him much more viable now. I thought about switching to a companion ranger, but the beasts are too squishy for the Underdark, and if it dies there goes half of your power until you res him again. Not to mention how much more difficult it would be to obtain the special ingredients needed to res him.
Biggest issue I see with the Beast Conclave is that roughly half of your damage is coming from a beast that has no way of making its damage magically and I highly doubt the DM will allow you to silver the beast's teeth/claws. This means later on you will be facing enemies that are immune/resistant to your beast's damage. They really need something similar to the Monk's level 6 feature for the beasts to remain relevant in combat.
You could say the same for the barbarian or the fighter though, they have nothing to make their attacks magical and rely on the DM giving out magic boosts to them. It's not hard for the DM to give the beast a magic item like they would give the fighter or barbarian a magic sword.
The martial classes have a RAW way of getting magical damage. If this revision was to be allow in AL, there is no RAW to allow magical damage for the beast. THere is no item to make natural weapons magical, which is why monks get their magical fists feature. Saying the DM can making something up to fix the issue is not a good enough answer. If it was, then there would be no need to revise the ranger as the DMs could just house rule a fix.
It's not really a house rule. It's a magical item. You can find a Magical Collar that makes all the attacks of a Beast wearing it magical for the purpose of overcoming Resistance and Immunity from Non-Magical weapons. It's not really hard to put it in a game.
Would this Magical Collar be legal in an Adventures League game? I was under the impression that in AL you can only give your players items that are found in the books.
You are right. Maybe they need to fix the issue. But they don't need to change the feats the Companion gains. They can give new magic items options when they officialy release the new ranger.
***** but both are terrible animal companions with base stats. They really can't provide much, but thematically my character needed one so we modified the giant owl to work long term.
***** but both are terrible animal companions with base stats. They really can't provide much, but thematically my character needed one so we modified the giant owl to work long term.
Curious.....is there a FIGHTER build that would give the 3 attacks (per round) ability that the Deep Stalker RANGER gets at 5th Level ? I tend to "balance" melee combat options against what a FIGHTER class build could possibly have.
Well, I've always wanted to have a Giant-Crab-riding sailor halfling ranger, now I finally get to play one without the crab being ridiculously vulnerable. Good going on WOTC, though I'll agree that the always-on natural explorer is just a little too much for 1st level.
But does your halfling have a shirt that says, "I got crabs on the Sword Coast"? Jokes aside, that sounds like a lot of fun and a delicious animal companion! -Nerdarchist Ryan
Delicious animal companion? That brings up a dark idea: given that it's only 25gp and 8 hours to recreate the animal companion, a particularly detached ranger might just resort to using it as a portable primary food source... spend Monday slaughtering and then re-creating your animal companion, and you've got meat for the rest of the week.
I'm reading this at the moment since one of my group has decided to go with this updated build. I'm not a big fan of the "non-specific" grouping for the Favored Enemy. I prefer distinct race or creature type in my games with a developed backstory. Although I know my group will vote in favor of RAW concepts. We rarely challenge RAW as a group. I do like that they've updated the Ranger and hope this UA version is suitable. I'll let you know after I've seen it play-tested. The Forest Gnome Ranger is about to embark on an adventure with my Arcane Cleric. LOL ! Thanks for the conversation and I appreciate the points of view offered with your multiple presenter concept.
Nerdarchy! You missed one thing that is op about the companion. He or She can take feats!!!!! read the wording. The Stat increase is the exact same as a players. Teach your ape to use a pole arm and take sentinel/mage slayer!!!!
I pasted the segment below but I don't think it is how it reads. The animal companion does not gain the class feature"Ability Score Improvement" the character gains it. The text simply states that the companion's abilities also improve, then they go on to describe how they improve in the following segment without mentioning the optional rules for feats. "Whenever you gain the Ability Score Improvement class feature, your companion’s abilities also improve. Your companion can increase one ability score of your choice by 2, or it can increase two ability scores of your choice by 1. As normal, your companion can’t increase an ability score above 20 using this feature unless its description specifies otherwise.
If you read under the Ability score improvements for each class, none of the classes involve any words about the optional rule. I do not know where the optional rule is directly worded but the wording for the companion and the character only change in two regards. First, it states your companion gets the stat bump (as expected) and, secondly, you choose where the stat bump is applies (also expected since the animal does not have free will to level it's self. If you can find the exact wording on the optional rule I would greatly like to discuss this further. Also, as a side note. The baby brass dragon is within 1 hp of the beast companion requirements and meets all other requirements so enjoy the idea of your baby dragon friend. My DM is already considering my Inquizitive rogue gaining a ranger dragon as he levels ^^
The closest mention to an Optional Feat Rule in the PHB is in the second paragraph under the Feat section on page 165, "...At certain levels, your class gives you the Ability Score Improvement feature. Using the optional feats rule, you can forgo taking that feature to take a feat of your choice instead..." The way I interpret these sentences in regards to the new Ranger's Beast Companion is that since the ability score increases are granted by the player's Ranger class feature and not a class feature of the Companion the increases in the Companion's stats are not subject to the Optional Feat Rule.
That is a fair understanding. Under human variant it says it is in chapter 5 but there isn't one. I am going to assume that is not the way it works because that would mean taking a feat steals the stat bumbs from you and your pet because it replaces the feature by that wording.
yeah i don't like favourite enemy, i would rather a favourite terrain replace it and natural explorer and gain a different , like mountian, forest, swamp, plains, city, tundra, or island some terrain you have learned about and lived in you know about trick and tactics of the like dodging in between trees or rocks. i can't currently think of a second first level could be but i think there is room without using favourite enemy something about being vengeful to a type of enemy is not my style and natural explorer; just cause you like being out side doesn't mean you know about everywhere, a desert is different than a tundra
they at least need to go back the problem with natural Explorer being limited to a specific train is that the DM kid set the campaign in a totally different train than your favored terrain and then that ability becomes 100% absolutely useless. The reason Wizards did not specify specific to rain now, is because it was so limiting before, everything on the ranger was so limiting so conditional, there wasn't a single game where you would get your full kit power. And combat aside it just made the ranger useless and even with combat the ranger was just a worse version of a fighter, so don't even say that the ranger didn't need all these boss because obviously they did because they redid it like after working on it a lot and they're still tweaking on it like that is in the final build and unar Arcana.
Eeeeh, I'm kinda peeved at how restrictive the choice of beast companions is now, sure, even some of their examples don't fit into one of the guidelines they set or another, but basically, some of the cooler pets like Flying Snakes are now dependent on DM approval.
Get rid of ranger spells known. Change it to half level + wisdom mod and have them prepare them like Druids. Change foe slayer to something cooler and we are good.
Advantage on Initiative coupled with Advantage to hit on creatures who haven't yet yet gone yet is broooooooke. But I love it, especially since I have a Cleric/Ranger that is for sure going up to level 5.
Yeah, I enjoy a lot about the changes particularly having Natural Explorer have an actual combat effect, but they should definitely pull-back on some aspects. A bonus to initiative perhaps and I also think a +2 to damage for Favored Enemies for such a wide range of foes seems off for this edition, maybe +2 should be its ceiling? -Nerdarchist Ryan
Scaling it up to +4, isn't the worst thing I can think of - even in Out of the Abyss, if you pick Fiend at level 6, you aren't purely running into demons. It is still a very specific type of encounter to be useful. I think they should tier Natural Explorer - The stuff that comes out of the PHB should happen at level 1 but at like 3/6/9, a player can pick another one of the awesome features. That way every ranger will eventually be all sorts of awesome, but it isn't a flat out gimme at 1st.
Is there anything that has been happening with this lately cause I like how some of the features in the revise but I still feel like it needs some work and I just feel like there is potential here that has yet to be taped into.
@@Nerdarchy again Dave thanks for the answer and if you are ok with it I have some ideas that I would like to run by you to make sure that if I do edit the class that it won't be game breaking (Doubt it though) or screw with the balance of the game. I also doubt what I have in mind hasn't been thought of before. Mostly its just taking two of the features from this revised ranger and melding them with the PHB Ranger. Favorite Enemy and Natural Explorer I think are very close to perfect for the class as a whole, but for Favorite Enemy I kind of liked the diversity from the PHB and the actual function of the revised Rangers ability. the Natural explorer I think is fine as it is.
the +2 from favoured enemy makes the two weapon style a really viable option compared to the norm of archery. Also agree with the natural explorer to be one select terrain.
Did anyone else notice that Wizards of The Coast is cherry picking elements of the Pathfinder ranger for this 5e version? In Pathfinder the ranger gets his favored enemy bonus on attack and damage rolls, and then there is favored terrain which is thematically similar to natural explorer and also gives you a boost to initiative.
If that is where they're getting their ideas from then great. Go with what is proven to work and change what didn't. Perfect example of refining the game throughout the editions.
The problem with the ranger is that he/she is restrained by what type of enemy you are fighting. If it was something you did to gain power it would be fun. Right now, once the DM knows what your favored enemies are, you never fight them again. Its worthless.
Old Ranger always felt "serial-killer-y" and pretty racist. I love the new changes they're trying to create. My friends and I have taken a look at what this new playtest ranger means for multiclassing, and I still think they need to change some things, because it looks like it can be pretty busted. Advantage on Initiative with an Assassin archetype Rogue seems really strong, for example.
I think this is an example of power creep. I will definitely agree that Rangers needed a buff but giving them everything and the kitchen sink is too much.
It's a good starting point in my opinion. Now it just needs to be reeled in a little. Making natural explorer a bit more specific would satisfy me. Nerdarchist Dave
I know this is going to get a lot of friction. However... Agreed. I've see two Rangers in two campaigns, and those players were in the top two of DPS. Sure, Beastmaster sucked, but the Hunter is easily very brutal especially at lower levels. longbow, Ranged Combat, Hunter's Mark, Colossus Slayer, and Sharpshooter...I've seen that a LOT. Ignore 1/2, 3/4 cover, Damage of 2d8+1d6+10+Dex... And yet, "Rangers are under-powered." Frustrating. Reminds me of the Swashbucker "I sneak attack for free". Favored Enemy is something from a lot time ago, and added a large buff to the to-hit roll. Now...though....please. Turning Rangers into Assassins isn't fair. Rogues are now being basically replaced by Uber-Ranger. What upsets me is that there are other classes who NEED help, yet they throw everything at this class. Attack buffs, damage buffs, Advantage to a lot more...it's too much. Wild Mages need help, and Chain/Book Warlocks need a lot of help. Resolve how Charm works officially so that Enchanters do not get boned. Take the time to actually look at the new races that you TRIED to release and make them less suck-ish. The Eberron races would be a nice place to start, then perhaps the MTG races. Everything other than the Celestial race there sucked. Otherwise this is the first step to power creep where anyone who complains gets the whole shopping basket instead of a legitimate fix. There's a real danger of making every effort in the beginning to create balance irrelevant. I agree that work needs to be done, but it's not done by throwing the entire kitchen sink at A class.
Ranger doesn't seem that bad unless it's really low level. They could rearrange the skills so it isn't a level 1 monster. Other than that it seems fairly solid with other martial classes (minus intimidation barbarian).
Natural Explorer... not like "Explorer of Nature" but more like "This dude's a natural at exploring."
"Born Adventurer" is a good way to word it.
I am one of the ones that believed the ranger was woefully underpowered compared to other classes, and I am all for this new revised ranger. I actually don't think they've been given too much. it's just been modified so their core abilities and beastmaster are useful in combat as opposed to just being there for thematic purposes.
I am with you on this. The 3 pillars of the game are Social, Combat, and Exploration. To me, Exploration should be divised between actual exploration/survivability, and stealth/inflitration. The idea to me is that then Exploration/survivability, stealth/infiltration, and social abilities could be then balanced to various degrees, with each classes having her + and -. Combat, however should be balance similarly with all classes. This is DnD people. Who will play a class utterly for socializing ? I mean, I will choose to be the old ranger, cause i want to be melee, but less effective at damage than the paladin or fighter, less effective in armor than the paladin, and with no lasting power like the barbarian. Sure, I can talk to a specific group of enemy, even tho I hate them. Comon. I have training to be one man armyr, but i need an army with me to use them.
I've never interpreted the favored enemy ability as "I am a ranger, so I hate XXX." I've interpreted it as, "I have a lot of experience fighting against XXX, so I have a good understanding of their strengths and weaknesses." For example, a ranger who works as a scout for a human kingdom who is constantly in conflict with a neighboring human kingdom would reasonably have "favored enemy: Human" without "hating" humans. Interpreting favored enemy as "hating" is, in my opinion, a very simplistic interpretation.
Favored enemy does not necessarily mean the Ranger hates on type of foe, they may just have more experience with that one type and that extensive experience with that foe makes the ranger skill much more effective.
That's the way I've played all my rangers except 1
Put a saddle on your black bear, pick gnome or halfling as your race, get the mounted combat feat, pick Dueling as your fighting style, use a lance as your weapon and have a shield, and nab the sentinel feat for good measure. Now if someone attacks your bear while you're mounted, you get to make another attack by using your reaction.
Problem is the companion moves on its turn. If there are no enemies in range on your turn then you will have to ready the attack and lose out on any possible bonus attack. Also the mounted combat feat does little good due to only getting adv against small/tiny enemies and the mount already being quite hearty.
Wolf would make for a better mount due to pack tactics always in effect while you are mounted. Also going Halfling with a hand crossbow and picking up crossbow expert and sharpshooter feats would allow for consistent bonus attacks even if no enemies are in melee range.
No need to lose your extra attacks. If you roll higher initiative than your beast, I believe the rules allow you to forego your turn until after your beast's turn. I don't currently have the books on me so I apologize if I'm incorrect. The downside is you are effectively rolling initiative with disadvantage every combat.
Readying an attack requires your reaction to trigger. Also you can't make any bonus action attacks with a readied attack.
Sorry for the confusion, to clarify I'm saying you should not ready your attack at all. If you roll initiative 14 and your breast rolls initiative 8, your ranger can wait until 8 on the turn order to take his turn and use his attack actions as he normally would. (Again, if I'm remembering correctly.)
The only RAW way of doing that is via Readying an Action. Nothing in 5e allows for delaying your full turn. This was a design decision to speed up combat and minimize players ability to game the system.
The Most Powerful feature about this class if you ask me is the New Natural Explorer. The advantage on initiative and attack, ignore difficult terrain on all terrains, these items are really useful for most campaigns.
However this update is very much needed, it allows the Ranger to actually feel competitive with other classes. I like feeling like some adventuring badass that knows everything about most campaigns. This makes that possible with bity Deep Stalker and Beastmaster now. Deep Stalker is now actually apart of the Conclaves(and really feels a lot like a scout...or Batman), while Beastmaster is now pretty awesome and worth the conclave in both roleplay and combat.
Vanish is now almost comical. Paper thin Characters now just turn to the side...poof he's gone. But this ability is really fun and leads to awesome spy scenes. The bonus damge is nice, but I don't think it is too op. It gives off some nice poke it certain situations.
I really like this update, everything just feels nice but not too OP to make ranger lovers enjoy it, while other classes don't feel like they are dropping behind.
It a good start. Probably could still use some minor tweaks. I look forward to seeing it in my game.
Nerdarchist Dave
I can't believe you can pick youmanoids as a favored enemy.
PlayMadness I didnt even notice this the first time I grabbed a ua ranger. me and my DM missed it, so I was only hunting humans alone. now that I noticed it's all humanoids not just select one im scared I might be too strong. were in an evil campaign so I killl humanoids all the time.
That's Yuge!
that's awesome if u hunt humans like an "half.-orc ranger could be pro in hunting humans" knowing where to hit
I think people are overblowing how powerful the new Natural Explorer is. The features it gives only make it so that Rangers are good at getting the jump on enemies. It makes up the basis for the class, just like Martial Arts does for Monks and having access to all weapons/armor/shields and fighting styles is the basis for the Fighter and Sneak Attack and Expertise are the basis for Rogues, etc. etc.
I wish they would let you raise the challenge level of the beast companion. 1/4 is good at the start but later is nothing. should at least go up to 1/2 or something
Please, don't bring back favored terrain. While all classes kick ass in the whole world the ranger is forced to kick ass in two ninths of the world, that is terrible class design, and it's what made the ranger UnFun in the first place.
That and the limiting of your beast companion in feat of "omg he can control another creature so it must be OP" are the two plagues o the original Ranger. Hopefully they remedy this before they print it in a book.
personally I think having the large bonuses from natural explorer in only a certain terrain is fine. They are very large boons, such as ignoring all difficult terrain and having advantage on all initiative checks.
and not all terrains are listed, like for undersea adventures a Triton couldn't pick any undersea/aquatic terrain with the base ranger
Yea, I remember in 3/3.5 the whole big thing about Ranger is that you got all of the feats for your fighting style for free without having to meet the req. Plus the pet, spells, tracking, and HIPS that only worked in nature.
@@blakebrockhaus347 in certain terrains. Subterranean and dungeons not being one of them.... yeah it's not fine. If it was all outside terrain that would be fine. But its not. Its 1 biome on the surface. Favoured terrain is probably the worst part of the original ranger
So what's OP about +2 dmg and a possible chance of adv on the first attack?
So primeval awareness is basically Aragorn recounting the events at the Uruk Hai camp by looking at the ground?
To be honest in my experience having advantage in any roll isn't so over-powered as one might think. I've seen on so many occasions an advantage roll still fail. I feel that "+" bonuses are much more powerful. With that said, the new Ranger seems overpowered but in reality its probably more balanced than we think. Good Stuff Guys!
I agree. I just don't see how the Initiative advantage and first round attack advantage are such a big deal that people are making it out to be.
It depends on the dice whether advantage or a + is more statistically powerful. There are calculators on the net for that sort of thing.
Chris Chapman Exactly, as far as advantage on first turn, assassin gets it at lvl 3 so definitely not super strong.
Well, on the topic of favored enemy. Real life hunters also specialize in certain prey they like to hunt/track the most.
I have a cool idea for a modified Ranger, and I'm not sure where I should share it. The idea is basically to replace spell-casting for the Ranger with Herbalism. You would have herbs known, and you would collect them. This could either be tied to a Survival check, or you could automatically get a certain number of each level like spells (I have a survival roll chart worked out where you would get the same amount of herbs if you roll on it twice a day). This would only give you the Ranger spells with the target of self or one creature you touch. The Ranger would lose the rest of the spells, but get some of them as class features instead. Particularly hunter's mark (replacing favored enemy). Hunter's Mark would still take an action, so it would be a waste to cast against creatures with low HP, which I think is an interesting strategic choice for the Ranger. Another alternative if that's OP would be to make Hunter's Mark into a poisonous herb that you can collect, and leave the ranger with favored enemy.
In addition to Herbalism, a lot of the Ranger's abilities would be replaced with traps the Ranger could set, starting with a simple alarm trap, but upgrading over time to disable some number of enemies in different ways.
Anyway, I have the whole thing written out, but I'm not sure where I should share it to. And what do you guys think? Do you like the idea of replacing Ranger spells with Herbalism and Traps?
I'm super late, but for what it's worth I think your idea is fantastic
I can't believe nobody commented on the fact that THE WHOLE GANGS BACK TOGETHER! (For this video at least.) Reminds me of the good ol' days lol
Yesterday on the weekly wrap up it was announced that I was back but not everyone saw it. So the good ol' days are back!
HELL YEAH!!
giphy.com/gifs/monty-python-and-there-was-much-rejoicing-WIg8P0VNpgH8Q
+Nathan Riggins (Nate the Nerdarch) Huzzah! Welcome back brave adventurer! I see your "arrow to the knee" has healed haha. Glad to have you back sir. I hope to see you at SJ GeekFest.
Haha. Oh yeah Geekfest, that will be cool to go to that this year. I missed it earlier
Bonus on Beast Conclave: Get a Druid cast Awaken on your beast companion. It suddenly has INT 10 and can talk.
Hahaha that's awesome!
When I read the Revised Ranger, I can't believe that it took care of almost every gripe I had and also didn't go into a direction too far from the original. This was exactly what I was looking for.
When I was thinking of my own revision to the original Ranger, the hardest part was finding something unique about the Ranger. Yes they can be a mix of a Fighter, Druid and Rogue but I would rather see something unique about the class that abilities are constantly relating to. I'm still not a huge fan of Favored Enemy, but the Natural Explorer has that flavor and mechanics that I was looking for. And they added just enough to the core abilities all while balancing the three subclass features so there is no obvious choice. Having a Pet path (Beast Conclave), a Warrior path (Hunter Conclave) and a Magical/Stealthy path (Deep Stalker Conclave) was a great decision.
All that being said, the front loading of all the level 1 abilities a little scary.
taking the mobile feat you can use the bonus action to dash with no worry. Using multiattack defense and whirlwind attack with two weapon with your extra attack. Throw on plate armor and a shield with defense fighting style if you get hit and are targeted by it again you have +4 ac added now. So it's like a 25 ac, so I'd go to either a Max defense hunter or the crazy two handed weapon user. That just wails on everything then either just stand still and your forgotten by all or you just mobile nope it out of it all.
Given how strong the Beast Conclave is I would totally play a gnome or halfling ranger and use my companion as a mount lol
I support your decision! I've had fun playing a halfling mobile archer character in Pathfinder (a ranger/druid), I might have to make an iteration of that character for D&D now!
-Nerdarchist Ryan
Me and my group were talking about having a halfling ranger with an ape companion which fastball specials you into combat.
I thought about making a lightfoot halfling ranger with a giant crab as an animal companion and each round I hide within its space for cover because of the giant crab's really good AC. Then I peek out and make shots with dual wielded hand crossbows (with crossbow expert of course). When they get close or something I unleash bolt hell into them as the crab goes for perpetual grapple checks with its claw attacks (with advantage being had for my attacks if the grapple checks succeed). I made this with the intent of mounting it at some point but there is no possibly way you could mount a giant crab; like what would that saddle even look like?
I love every bit of this ranger I immediately made a char, I disagree with my other players about hide in plain sight. Base on the wording just trying to use the hide action I could stand still and foes takes a -10 to perception. You can also take a hide action as a bonus action. My group says you'd have to actually succeed in hiding then you can use the plain sight. That is not how it was worded, just trying to hide let's the hide in the plain sight work. Too bad the other players won't listen to me about it. I think of it kinda like how a boxer will stay in another boxers blind spot when they have a injured eye. Just you know, your standing still.
Was really hoping this would appear in Xanathar's Guide, but alas. I'll just have to wait
The whole problem of Ranger specific terrains is if you pick a terrain the campaign doesn't go in. Maybe if it was like circle of land druid where they get specific benifits for terrain type.
Hey Nerdarchy, I have a question for you guys that has been on my mind for quite some time. I am in a D&D group as a Wood Elf Ranger (original I know) that went into the stalker conclave after some character development. After some time, he survived everything that was thrown at him and his group and was granted level 20. Time of resting took place afterwards however, more needed to be done and has left me with the task of forging epic level abilities and upgrades for the stalker conclave and revised ranger UA edition. This is what I came up with:
Lv21: ASI & Improved Natural Explorer (Cannot be lost, even by magical means, forage 3 times as much food.)
Lv22: Active Camo (Camo doesn’t become removed if action is taken while wearing but requires natural materials to make Camo)
Lv23: Deadly Foe Slayer (add WIS mod to ATK and DMG roll for one attack)
Lv24: Favored Enemy 3 (new favored enemy and increased damage on favored enemies to +6)
Lv25: ASI & Improved Active Camo (Can make Camo out of any material abundant in the area gaining +10 to stealth)
Lv26: Extended Spell Capacity & Gain the spell Scrying as a Deep Stalker Spell
Lv27: Underdark Conqueror (+20 to speed and gain two more attacks on the first turn)
Lv28: Improved Deadly Foe Slayer (no longer limited to one attack, now a passive bonus for all ATK against favored enemies)
Lv29: ASI & Favored Enemy 4 (new favored enemy and increased DMG on favored enemies to +8)
Lv30: Renowned Foe Slayer (Favored enemies have disadvantage on all attacks against you, and you have advantage on saving throws against any spells they cast that require you to make one. Additionally, all of your attacks are made with advantage, and the first time a favored enemy is attacked by you, it must succeed a Wisdom saving throw or become frightened by you for a number of rounds equal to your Wisdom modifier. An affected creature may repeat the saving throw at the end of each of its turns, ding the effect on a success and becoming immune to your Renowned Foe Slayer’s fear feature for 24 hours.)
Any and all helpful advice is appriciated! Thanks guys! NERDARCHY RULES!
The only problems I have with the ranger still is that A) muticlasing into this ranger gives wayyyyy to much and B) the Hunter's Whirlwind Attack is still pitiful compared to the Hunter's Volley Attack.
Otherwise I love this new version. The options for beasts could use a little tweaking though.
whirlwind literally means that you can attack anyone nearby you . if u are going melee ranger seems pretty cool
I think the "You are a master of navigating the natural world and you react with swift decisive action" signifies the intent that you only get the level 1 bonuses in natural environments. Though the wording could use some rework.
I’m not sure if anybody is still out there looking at this, but I am because I just decided to build a Ranger. That being said, in regards to Natural Explorer, I believe they entirely missed the sentence preceding the perks. It states, “when attacked”. Please correct me if I’m wrong but that means having advantage on initiative and attack rolls is only if attacked, not all the time. Thoughts? Opinions?
Additionally, it seems they’ve repeated the issue in regards to “difficult terrain”, the preceding sentence clearly states, “when traveling for an hour or more”. So not you can’t run though a tavern or over a spell effect.
Your comments on Natural explorer are interesting. I do kind of think of legolas though when I read it, but your are right its powerful.
It's only powerful because people can multiclass one level and get it. Change it so you get it around level 3 where that really where the game starts and it's totally fine with me. "It's too easy to flip through the multiclass catalog and order it within the night" is a funny way to put it.
Hey guys, great video as always. I just wanted to say I really love this version for one reason above the rest. It feels like they gave the ranger a role to play in a party now.
I tried being a ranger twice and felt not only overshadowed in combat but overall, I had no real function in the group. After trying this out it was the most fun playing 5e I've had yet. Now a ranger acts as a skirmisher/scout, the opening move of the party, like a predator striking quickly before the rest of the pack finishes the job. I really wasn't overpowered next to the others since after the opening move I didn't have many big tricks left.
In fact it was even more fun for the others, I wasn't dragging behind them but we also were able to play differently, the rogue and I could draw in enemies and form an ambush. Well that's my two cents.
I spent a lot of time as the old ranger, and it wasn't great. We ended up cashing out before I got to play with the revised version, and it looks like it would have been a LOT better.
I think I will keep this more broad application of Natural Explorer with the following changes at my table: Land's Stride will be added at 8th level, and the Ambuscade Feature from Ranger Options from a few months ago will be making a comeback rather than the bonus to initiative and advantage on attacks. Y'all do make a good point: the Deep Stalker definitely feels a few shades off of being a scout of some variety. I also would like to see a further exploration of Spirit Companion, that was a very interesting direction from the aforementioned article.
for the natural explorer, I would make terrain movement like magical attunement, you need to live in that area for a month to gain learn the environment and gain the benefits
That could be an appropriate limiter for it
I still think it adds to the feel that rangers are, above all, adaptive. People like that don't need a month getting used to some place new in the wilderness. They need a couple of hours at most.
oO PPH Oo true. I just like the similar idea for attunement. Some magic items take a day to attune, a ranger would need 24 hours to "attune" to the environment. Could actually be really cool, in say, the underdark. First go down, not used to the area, but after a day, the Ranger is good to go.
Matthew Walsh We agree at the base of it though the comparison with magical item is a bit too much off for my liking. In terms of mechanics it's decently comparable but the flavor of it is not. That, however, is a technicality.
We both like the idea of a transitioning phase where the ranger adapts to the new surroundings rather that it happening instantly. A month seemed unnecessary long. A day is even a tiny bit too long for me. IRL survivalists learn to adapt to new surrounding before it gets to sundown hence why I suggest a few hours and as few as a single hour.
The only thing that PHB has over revised is share spells, really helps the limited spells ranger has go farther. My favorites are ensnaring strike, absorb elements, cure wounds, and guardian of nature
We just had a lengthy discussion around our table about the scope of Humanoids. Currently we are tinkering with "Class or Nationality" as categories so Mage Hunters and More Deadly Against the English (blackpowder campaign being run by a friend) would both be valid choices, part as an expert and part a mini rage reflected in the additional damage. The previously defined humanoids as races of Orcs and Goblionoids still running with. The new quandary is Elves. Could our Ranger choose all Elves or would it have to be narrowed down to Drow? We are going with the latter so far.
On the brighter side, looking forward to someone actually taking a Beast Companion with actual survival potential (closer to the Nerdarchy house build for hit points at least). Will see then how it breaks the system.
Foe Slayer did change. It used to be only favored enemies, now you can use it once per turn against any enemy. Not a massive boost, but it makes it better, equal to a free precision attack every round I've been told.
Honestly, I like it a lot, and barring multi-classing shenanigans I don't think anything it gets is too powerful. Once you can multi-class an assassin rogue and deep stalker or hunter ranger... arguments for too powerful could be made.
The Beast Conclave Ranger could gain more attacks by multiclassing into Barbarian, Fighter, Monk or Paladin, because I believe Coordinated Attack and Extra Attack both work together.
I love this hunter, with its crazy bonus for just traveling a hour with the party. Next char I play is definitely my new ranger lol
I'm glad the pet gets some love. I still feel like a ranger is essentially a fight who traded his good armor and best tricks for a granola bar and patchouli oil.
Maybe, since magic is really what separates those classes, the ranger's spell list needs some attention. Some group friendly spells that won't normally come up from the other casters. Maybe a cheap move, but giving them the Guidance cantrip and the Heroism spell would prop them up better than this stuff.
Or maybe, have their spells renew on a short rest rather than long. That would sure enable them to use their few spells more.
And seriously, Hunters Mark should be a twice per short rest ability- not a spell at all.
I have a player that created a Bugbear Rogue-Assassin 3/ Ranger Stalker 3 character for the my new D&D campaign. Going to be fun to watch, nightmare to DM.
What you forgot to say is the best needs to be able to see you to use the attack. So if it can't see u u make one attack on ur turn so the dps for you will suck later game depending on the campaign. The ranger needs that extra attack to be able to make any difference.
As far as I play it, the beast is part of the character, and as such your beast is effected by self, but!!! I only allow one self instance per round. So you choose, economically, which is more beneficial as far as effects like favored enemy and hunters mark for the current round at start of round. Not perfect, but avoids murderous Rogue/Rangers getting double sneak attack hunters mark in a turn (as allowing all effects on your character to effect both would technically allow). just my thoughts on it.
Actually for natural explorer you have to be moving through the rough terrain for an hour to ignore it, so it can't be used in combat.
Ok I can't find the the part where is says they get advantage on attacks if you go before the creature you are attacking? Can someone please help.
The only rough issue with the revised version is I'd make the natural explorer combat options only apply in wilderness setting; or as the book might phrase, in a setting without manmade constructs.
People might complain the exploration options might be too OP now, but look at how it was originally. All the stuff from favored terrain would apply to too little of the world when you wanted it, and begging the DM to make it to your own benefit is unbecoming and a hassle to them. Letting a perk be universal is kind to both parties and still puts the onus on a ranger being a master explorer. (Shrugs)
I didn't feel like watching a half hour video, so everything I said they probably said. I just think comparing and contrasting this to other classes helps put balancing into perspective. "Oh, their adv on initiative, first round attack and diff. terrain bonuses are OP", well they also get the Rogues level 2 feature...spread out far into the future, into two different level ups. All a matter of perspective
Why would you put that limitation on it? What if somebody would like to play an Urban Ranger? I don't see it as game-breaking to allow that....
I like the new ranger except one thing, I like how a level 20 ranger compares to level 20 in other classes, but I would divide up the abilities to spread throughout all levels, I think ranger was previously front loaded with too few features at hihg levels to look forward too and to stick in the class for, and would like some of the cool things with favored enemhy and terrain mastery to be earned at higher levels, keep the travel stuff but make some of the combat features like better saves, and initiative and advantages at higher levels.
I thought about making a Aarcrokra Beastemaster with a blood falcon pet, it never seen the light of day because of how bad the old Beastmaster was. As soon as these new rules are revised/polished I think i'll be taking a look at the idea again. Who can say a flying duo that is all mobility based (probably dip into monk as well) isn't the best concept for a Beast Conclave? *cue Flight of The Valkries*
The new Natural Explorer as it is written is too much. I like that the benefits aren't restricted to natural terrains only, so the Ranger becomes more viable for Urban Campaigns, but they should reduce to just 1 benefit. IMO, the bonus to initiative is the one that should stay.
The Favored Enemy is such an iconic feature of the Ranger from older versions that I understand the desire to keep it in the game. But it's something that could go away, imo, in favor of something more useful. Maybe a new feat, that showed the prowess of the Ranger in hunting down his prey. Something like: Master of the Hunt: As a bonus action, you can give yourself advantage on Wisdom checks to track down enemies or on Inteligence checks to recall information about them. You can use this feature 1 + your Wisdom modifier per day (minimum 1). Once you reach level 6, you gain use this feature to gain a +2 to damage. You recover all expended uses on a short/long rest.
The New Beastmaster is stronger and better now. It was a needed change. But I don't like it. I think they should have gone to a different approach. I don't know, something that gave utility to the beast, instead of just combat power. Maybe the ability to cast Speak with Animals and Beast Sense at will in your Companion. The beast could gain proficiency or expertise in Survival and Perception, so it becomes a better hunter and can help the party scouting/exploring/guarding. The level 11 feat, storm of claws and fang, seems to strong. The Ranger can attack with his action, attack with his bonus action, attack with his beast reaction and order it to attack everyone around him with the companion's action. It makes the Whirlwind attack from the Hunter archetype sound weak.
The Deep Stalker Conclave is awesome! I would really love to play one if they ever release it officialy! We don't play UA in our table.
I like the direction here, but a few quibbles:
1) Natural explorer is obviously too front-loaded.
2) I dislike Dash at 8 and hide at 14. Stalker is clearly supposed to be the stealthy ranger. Take bonus hide away from core ranger and given it exclusively to stalker. Dash could be part of a natural explorer expansion at 6, 8, or 10.
3) Foe Slayer is still boring.
4) The core problem here is still that every class has a feature that scales from early levels level, and ranger does not. Sneak attack, rage, divine smite, wild shape, sorcery points (...) Ranger could still use something like that rather than being so front loaded.
5) I'm fine with the damage boost to FE.
6) I'm not convinced bringing back terrain exclusivity to Natural Explorer is a good idea.
7) Seriously just give bonus hide and hide in plain sight to stalker.
As you said, the early levels are really quite powerful compared to the other classes. Id even go as far as comparing it to the druid in power level in early game casual play. However, 5th level to 10th level that power level slowly begins to line up back with the other melee classes, maybe a bit more powerful still. I think its a great start but maybe spreading the first 5 levels worth of abilities out would be better. Once again great vid Nerdarchy :D
Topic for discussion:
So since your beast companion gets ability score improvements does that mean you could substitute it for feats that don't need hands such as tough, mobile and savage attacker to name a few?
It isn't intended that way according to Sage Advice.
Nerdarchist Dave
Nice overview, thanks. I think the lvl 1 stuff might be a bit much for such a low level. A bunch of other classes will look the Ranger's way for a 1-lvl multiclass dip for the initiative and terrain bonuses alone. Wish it scaled with lvl or some of it was lvl 2-3 instead. That's my lone gripe. I love most of the changes/additions, and think this will bring Rangers back for a lot of people.
I will be ruling in that you have to be in a natural terrain of your choosing for the advantage on initiative and attack and ignoring difficult terrain. Other than that, I freakin' love these changes!
In general terms, what Mearls & Co. did right here was they stopped trying to reinvent the wheel. The structure of the ranger is basically the same as it was, with the partial exception of reconfiguring the second attack as a Conclave power instead of a class power. In the end, they're probably going to slightly tone down some of the new abilities they have here, and put the revised class in a new printrun (like they put clarifications about the beast's ability to defend itself if the ranger is out of commission). I can't imagine many people will play the old version now, even if (like me) they didn't have much of a problem with it.
Here is how I would tamp down on some of the changes:
- I doubt *Natural Explorer* will go back to Favored Terrains, because people complained about rangers being at the mercy of DM largesse. A class which specializes at being good in the wilderness in general is fine with me. What they should do is to eliminate the perks as features that work *automatically*. What they need to do is apply skills more to how this class works. If you want to catch twice as much food, avoid getting lost, or ignore rough terrain, make a Survival roll. At advantage, since you are a ranger. This way, you have a decent survival roll even if you fail to take proficiency in it (since rangers don't get a Survival freebie). I would, however, only give the effective surprise bonus and initiative bonus in wilderness conditions, if these abilities are going to be packaged as *Natural Explorer*, they should apply out in nature.
- With Primeval Awareness, if the ranger no longer has to spend a spell slot, there should again be a limitation on the ability, in the form of a roll. Animal Handling to communicate with an animal, and Insight to detect the Favored Enemy. They shouldn't just be freebie at will abilities. If limited, this will discourage dipping (ditto for natural explorer).
- For the Beast Conclave, they should probably cut down on the amount of benefit the beast gets from the ranger's proficiency bonus, now that the beast gets its own attack from the start. I would say, give the beast a bonus for every ranger plus *over +2*. That way, they;re not getting anything extra until 5th level, and the 3rd level Beast Conclave ranger, with an additional attack, doesn't outclass every other combat class or archetype.
Two things that bug me about some of the continuing complaints (not from Nerdarchy, but other sources) have to do with class identity being built into the class, and spell use. Belonging to a Conclave is a cool feature, IMO. Rangers guard the frontier, and the idea that they, *as a rule* operate on a solitary basis strikes me as being silly. A Conclave, as the name implies, is a gathering that occurs from time to time, not a unit or place that requires a ranger's permanent presence. It connects a ranger to an institution or a mission. For those who think that class - crunch only, they can feel free to ignore this trait. But whining to take it out is counterproductive.
On the spells: thematically, the rangers have always been a spellcasting class. Yes, they were spellcasters at 8th level before, and at 2nd level now, but I'll take that complaint seriously when those who complain agree to move Wild Shape back to 7th level for druids. Most of the spells have to do with good aim, fixing wounds, getting along in the wild, so they can easily be reflavored as preternatural abilities rather than spells if particular DMs and players don't want their ranger to look too "magical". Here, too, if the spells bother you that much, play a fighter with Survival Proficiency, an Alertness Feat, and maybe, construct your own Natural Explorer feat - in this case, probably for a specific terrain.
Great points about natural explorer. As far as the Conclaves, I agree that it makes sense to have them around. In our city of Gryphingauf my nature cleric organized some of the woodsman and warders of the area into lodges. It was simply a place to meet from time to time, exchange information, stories, train skills, rest, recover, eat a big dinner, etc...
As far as people griping about rangers getting spells too early I say it is better for both the ranger to get their spells and the druid to get their wildshape early on because those are key abilities of those two classes. To push it back would be akin to pushing back the fighting style for the warrior. Class defining abilities belong up front
Well, the people who are unhappy about the ranger having any spells don't think spells should be class-defining abilities, but possibly just variants that some archetypes get. But logically, such people can get an wilderness archetype of fighter, and let the rest of us play rangers with spells as a core ability.
I do think there's a semantic difference between "natural" explorer and "nature" explorer if you catch my meaning. Natural in this case would be closer to "intuitive." I think that follows logically, as the skills you develop in a hostile wilderness are tempered by healthy caution. Being the first to act can sometimes be imperative. Faced with the potential of stalking ambush predators, that's the line between life and death. It means spotting danger before it spots you.
Imagining a scenario wherein a ranger spends a great deal of time--perhaps a majority or the totality of their time--well into the wild, it is unwise to be caught napping. Every sense you hone to detect your prey is a sense you best do well at beating. You can't miss the constrictor snake on the branch overhead or the fresh bear tracks underfoot followed clearly by smaller cub prints.
Sharp, almost painful awareness is as necessary in the ruined temple of a demon cult as it is in mountain lion territory. I see no reason for a survivalist (who plans on surviving long) to discard the skills which have carried them to where they are simple because they are in an urban scene or a wilderness unfamiliar.
That subtly changes the meaning of the skill. A "Natural Explorer" doesn't just have danger sense - he or she is also aware of the environment - i.e. knows where the trolls live, where to find kingsfoil, how to find clean water, a pass over the mountains, etc. It's hardly a stretch to say these should be disaggregated from a "Danger Sense" skill.
I don't own this book, so I'll draw bullet points from what I hear being said in the video.
• Ignore Difficult Terrain
•Advantage on Initiative Rolls
•On (your) first turn, Advantage on creatures that have not yet acted
I understand that the way I went about describing my thoughts might have left a different impression than what I intended. I don't mean to describe a "danger sense" but instead describe a very dangerous situation that the average Ranger may very well find themselves in.
You might call it paranoia, but I think a Ranger would fall into some habits that kept them alive where danger lurks around every corner. Such habits would make them natural explorers, capable enough to travel hither and yon without getting themselves killed through lack of caution. Even in a dungeon, this can serve them well.
In terms of difficult terrain, perhaps there should be some mechanical differences, but it does pay to be adaptable. The Ranger must spend a lot of time on uneven ground, watching their step. I think this is a kind of surefootedness that comes with escaping through tangled underbrush and skittering down mountainsides.
If I had to describe what an explorer is, it'd be a person who travels to or investigates anyplace that is unfamiliar. I don't think this necessarily means undeveloped, but I can see where that could be inferred.
What you're describing sounds very much to me like the Survival skill its self, which I would agree is necessary if you plan on exploring any substantial wilderness. Physical needs (clean water) are no less important in a survival situation, however I think the "Natural Explorer" skill is describing the more reactive (as opposed to proactive) aspect.
This would be the capability to first find where the trolls live and still have arms left over to mark it on a map. In combination, I think these three aspects of Natural Explorer work directly into the initial flight or flight response. In an unlucky situation, say with a group of trolls, a surviving Ranger is the one who manages to turn tail and escape through the dense forest or straight up a difficult incline.
Likewise when escape is not an option, the fittest Ranger has to throw it on the line and hope to get the first blow. Better yet if they can finish off their attacker without much back and forth. This is certainly the case for every adventurer, yet I picture a Ranger in his formative days being tested frequently and against wide range of threats. Getting whatever advantage possible is the best that can be managed. If that requires faster than average reaction times, and the drive to make that first strike count, well maybe those are the only Rangers we hear about. The rest are fertilizer.
OK, I was unaware of this until I stumbled on this vlog. I am going to have to play with this a bit but I like the way this looks.
I didn't comprehend the point regarding using pole arm master feat to gain an "offhanded attack" ? I would think using the pole arm (1 attack + bonus attack with other end) would not allow you to make an "offhand attack". Perhaps I misunderstand the mechanics of a multiple attack concept.....just trying to visualize using a two-handed pole arm in a round wherein you get the 1 normal (2-hnded attack) + bonus attack (two handed other end) and then manipulating to an off-hand attack. With what would that attack be with ? open hand ?
Google "Joachim Meyer, quarterstaff". There are polearm specific manuals, but the quarterstaff is the base for all of them, it will help you visualize this sort of thing.
@Nerdarchy
Hi. I am not a native english speaker. Even though I`ve lived in the US and do speak english fluently, sometimes, when you guys get too excited, it gets hard to understand what y`all say. I know it sounds annoying but I think you guys could give us a little help and try to talk one person at a time hahaha. I don`t know if that is just a non-native speaker issue but... anyways. Thanks a lot guys, keep up the great comments, they are really useful.
Best;
Do you like this Ranger more than the Variant Ranger that Unearthed Arcana made that has 2d6 hit dice and the awesome ambusher features?
How do you determine the Beast Master's Companion Animal's hit dice? I didn't see where it specifies that.
Every beast has a different HD. If you look at the Monster Manual there will be a hit dice in front of the HP, something like: HP = 13 (3d8). I think you are supposed to use the HD the Beast has.
Since Beast Master goes off proficiency bonus, would taking 5 levels in Ranger to get a beast companion and then going the rest of the way in Rogue be awesome? You can use your companion to make sure you get Sneak Attack if your party is lacking in melee or you want to stay ranged as a rogue, your companion can smash using its reaction when it sees you attack so if I'm reading this right it would usually get 2 attacks per round... Hunter's Mark could help make up for one of the Sneak Attack dice you lose for the dip into Rogue
As far as a Halfling or Gnome mounted on a companion, if they were both melee attacking while the player was mounted, would you still allow them to get Sneak Attack damage?
Thank you for all the great videos guys! Ranger is all I play. I am a ranger (eagles scout), so I really connect with this class. I always liked the hunter as a killer, the beast-master has more of a "jen ne sais quoi". Great for role playing and tons of flavor. I have a forest gnome beast-master my, my beast is a vulture and I ride him. The new beastmaster looks more a combat specialist.
The new ranger looks significantly strong in combat but personally I always found the PHB ranger not bad AT ALL: *if you combo the archer fighting style with the longstrider spell and/or hunter's mark then you got a character that can pepper the enemy lines with arrows and move away without anyone even thinking to get close to him.*
Granted the PHB ranger works mostly in the open field (grasslands, hills, forests and mountains). He's alot weaker in tight spaced dungeons.
I was ok with the phb hunter ranger, but the beast companion needed a rework bad.
Nerdarchist Dave
I totally agree with this, the problem that I had with the Ranger was the fact that was the ONLY way to play the Ranger. It was really hard not to be the Hunter with the Giant Slayer choice. I am interested in seeing this version. I feel that there will be more options with this new edition.
Primeval awareness was pretty bad in phb.
If you multiclass with beast master and another combat class and gain a second attack can you attack twice then your beast attacks?
Tabaxi Re-Ranger is just awesome powergaming!
Wolf companion, drop ASIs in intelligence and charisma, give it proficiency in deception and perform. Make it pretend to be someone's grandmother.
I probably wouldn't use this ranger as is, but I might pick it apart to mesh the stuff I like to the PHB Ranger!
That is a good way to go with it. I think they went all the way to super powered so that they can simply dial back the things that are shown to be easily abused
Nathan Riggins Agreed. It's usually easier to tone down something OP rather than buff up a class.
If I remember correctly they usually do surveys every so often concerning Unearthed Arcana materials. The feedback they get then will most likely point this out.
I can finally make the dwarven ranger with crossbow character that I've been wanting to make for some time. If you go beast master, you only have the one attack and you don't have to worry about having a 15 Dex and then being forced to take crossbow mastery feat at 4th. Boar, bear, or wolf would all be thematic for a dwarven ranger.
I have a dwarf ranger hunter who has favored terrain Underdark, and is duel wielding warhammers. He's very fun thematically, these changes make him much more viable now. I thought about switching to a companion ranger, but the beasts are too squishy for the Underdark, and if it dies there goes half of your power until you res him again. Not to mention how much more difficult it would be to obtain the special ingredients needed to res him.
Biggest issue I see with the Beast Conclave is that roughly half of your damage is coming from a beast that has no way of making its damage magically and I highly doubt the DM will allow you to silver the beast's teeth/claws. This means later on you will be facing enemies that are immune/resistant to your beast's damage. They really need something similar to the Monk's level 6 feature for the beasts to remain relevant in combat.
You could say the same for the barbarian or the fighter though, they have nothing to make their attacks magical and rely on the DM giving out magic boosts to them. It's not hard for the DM to give the beast a magic item like they would give the fighter or barbarian a magic sword.
The martial classes have a RAW way of getting magical damage. If this revision was to be allow in AL, there is no RAW to allow magical damage for the beast. THere is no item to make natural weapons magical, which is why monks get their magical fists feature.
Saying the DM can making something up to fix the issue is not a good enough answer. If it was, then there would be no need to revise the ranger as the DMs could just house rule a fix.
It's not really a house rule. It's a magical item. You can find a Magical Collar that makes all the attacks of a Beast wearing it magical for the purpose of overcoming Resistance and Immunity from Non-Magical weapons. It's not really hard to put it in a game.
Would this Magical Collar be legal in an Adventures League game? I was under the impression that in AL you can only give your players items that are found in the books.
You are right. Maybe they need to fix the issue. But they don't need to change the feats the Companion gains. They can give new magic items options when they officialy release the new ranger.
I think the beast options for the beast conclave need to be expanded just a little bit. Give me some flying things XD
TheGentlemanDuelist expanded. options say anything at or under cr1 and less than 15 hp I believe. everything loses its multiattack.
Jeffrey Owls and hawks are both covered
***** but both are terrible animal companions with base stats. They really can't provide much, but thematically my character needed one so we modified the giant owl to work long term.
***** but both are terrible animal companions with base stats. They really can't provide much, but thematically my character needed one so we modified the giant owl to work long term.
„This way we can always have another timmy“. Nice.
now they need to fix the warlocks spell slots
Curious.....is there a FIGHTER build that would give the 3 attacks (per round) ability that the Deep Stalker RANGER gets at 5th Level ? I tend to "balance" melee combat options against what a FIGHTER class build could possibly have.
Well, I've always wanted to have a Giant-Crab-riding sailor halfling ranger, now I finally get to play one without the crab being ridiculously vulnerable. Good going on WOTC, though I'll agree that the always-on natural explorer is just a little too much for 1st level.
But does your halfling have a shirt that says, "I got crabs on the Sword Coast"? Jokes aside, that sounds like a lot of fun and a delicious animal companion! -Nerdarchist Ryan
Delicious animal companion? That brings up a dark idea: given that it's only 25gp and 8 hours to recreate the animal companion, a particularly detached ranger might just resort to using it as a portable primary food source... spend Monday slaughtering and then re-creating your animal companion, and you've got meat for the rest of the week.
I'm reading this at the moment since one of my group has decided to go with this updated build. I'm not a big fan of the "non-specific" grouping for the Favored Enemy. I prefer distinct race or creature type in my games with a developed backstory. Although I know my group will vote in favor of RAW concepts. We rarely challenge RAW as a group. I do like that they've updated the Ranger and hope this UA version is suitable. I'll let you know after I've seen it play-tested. The Forest Gnome Ranger is about to embark on an adventure with my Arcane Cleric. LOL ! Thanks for the conversation and I appreciate the points of view offered with your multiple presenter concept.
Nerdarchy! You missed one thing that is op about the companion. He or She can take feats!!!!! read the wording. The Stat increase is the exact same as a players. Teach your ape to use a pole arm and take sentinel/mage slayer!!!!
I pasted the segment below but I don't think it is how it reads. The animal companion does not gain the class feature"Ability Score Improvement" the character gains it. The text simply states that the companion's abilities also improve, then they go on to describe how they improve in the following segment without mentioning the optional rules for feats.
"Whenever you gain the Ability Score Improvement class feature, your companion’s abilities also improve. Your companion can increase one ability score of your choice by 2, or it can increase two ability scores of your choice by 1. As normal, your companion can’t increase an ability score above 20 using this feature unless its description specifies otherwise.
I was thinking along the same lines. As written, it neatly removes the option for the beast companion to gain feats.
If you read under the Ability score improvements for each class, none of the classes involve any words about the optional rule. I do not know where the optional rule is directly worded but the wording for the companion and the character only change in two regards. First, it states your companion gets the stat bump (as expected) and, secondly, you choose where the stat bump is applies (also expected since the animal does not have free will to level it's self. If you can find the exact wording on the optional rule I would greatly like to discuss this further. Also, as a side note. The baby brass dragon is within 1 hp of the beast companion requirements and meets all other requirements so enjoy the idea of your baby dragon friend. My DM is already considering my Inquizitive rogue gaining a ranger dragon as he levels ^^
The closest mention to an Optional Feat Rule in the PHB is in the second paragraph under the Feat section on page 165, "...At certain levels, your class gives you the Ability Score Improvement feature. Using the optional feats rule, you can forgo taking that feature to take a feat of your choice instead..." The way I interpret these sentences in regards to the new Ranger's Beast Companion is that since the ability score increases are granted by the player's Ranger class feature and not a class feature of the Companion the increases in the Companion's stats are not subject to the Optional Feat Rule.
That is a fair understanding. Under human variant it says it is in chapter 5 but there isn't one. I am going to assume that is not the way it works because that would mean taking a feat steals the stat bumbs from you and your pet because it replaces the feature by that wording.
yeah i don't like favourite enemy, i would rather a favourite terrain replace it and natural explorer and gain a different , like mountian, forest, swamp, plains, city, tundra, or island some terrain you have learned about and lived in you know about trick and tactics of the like dodging in between trees or rocks. i can't currently think of a second first level could be but i think there is room without using favourite enemy
something about being vengeful to a type of enemy is not my style and natural explorer; just cause you like being out side doesn't mean you know about everywhere, a desert is different than a tundra
I’m using a ranger and I’m going by this and my ranger is pretty OP, too OP and I’m going with the beast conclave
they at least need to go back the problem with natural Explorer being limited to a specific train is that the DM kid set the campaign in a totally different train than your favored terrain and then that ability becomes 100% absolutely useless. The reason Wizards did not specify specific to rain now, is because it was so limiting before, everything on the ranger was so limiting so conditional, there wasn't a single game where you would get your full kit power. And combat aside it just made the ranger useless and even with combat the ranger was just a worse version of a fighter, so don't even say that the ranger didn't need all these boss because obviously they did because they redid it like after working on it a lot and they're still tweaking on it like that is in the final build and unar Arcana.
Where do you get the unearthed arcana?
Great breakdown, thanks guys
Eeeeh, I'm kinda peeved at how restrictive the choice of beast companions is now, sure, even some of their examples don't fit into one of the guidelines they set or another, but basically, some of the cooler pets like Flying Snakes are now dependent on DM approval.
Flying Snake is really cool but you can still get a Hawk, Falcon, and Blood Falcon so as least there's that.
Get rid of ranger spells known. Change it to half level + wisdom mod and have them prepare them like Druids. Change foe slayer to something cooler and we are good.
Advantage on Initiative coupled with Advantage to hit on creatures who haven't yet yet gone yet is broooooooke. But I love it, especially since I have a Cleric/Ranger that is for sure going up to level 5.
Yeah, I enjoy a lot about the changes particularly having Natural Explorer have an actual combat effect, but they should definitely pull-back on some aspects. A bonus to initiative perhaps and I also think a +2 to damage for Favored Enemies for such a wide range of foes seems off for this edition, maybe +2 should be its ceiling? -Nerdarchist Ryan
Scaling it up to +4, isn't the worst thing I can think of - even in Out of the Abyss, if you pick Fiend at level 6, you aren't purely running into demons. It is still a very specific type of encounter to be useful.
I think they should tier Natural Explorer - The stuff that comes out of the PHB should happen at level 1 but at like 3/6/9, a player can pick another one of the awesome features.
That way every ranger will eventually be all sorts of awesome, but it isn't a flat out gimme at 1st.
Is there anything that has been happening with this lately cause I like how some of the features in the revise but I still feel like it needs some work and I just feel like there is potential here that has yet to be taped into.
I believe it was abandoned.
Nerdarchist Dave
Nerdarchy that’s kind of sad. The ranger really needs some work though. Guess we will just have to stick with home brew.
@@Nerdarchy again Dave thanks for the answer and if you are ok with it I have some ideas that I would like to run by you to make sure that if I do edit the class that it won't be game breaking (Doubt it though) or screw with the balance of the game. I also doubt what I have in mind hasn't been thought of before. Mostly its just taking two of the features from this revised ranger and melding them with the PHB Ranger. Favorite Enemy and Natural Explorer I think are very close to perfect for the class as a whole, but for Favorite Enemy I kind of liked the diversity from the PHB and the actual function of the revised Rangers ability. the Natural explorer I think is fine as it is.
how does the gold work? you make a pile of gold and it transforms?
For the beast companion I think it is 11 special herbs and spices
+Nathan Riggins (Nate the Nerdarch) Kentucky Fried Aaracoka. It's finger lickin' good!
kurgon1976 it's fine bait and herbs to summon them. then you take them After the offering.
the +2 from favoured enemy makes the two weapon style a really viable option compared to the norm of archery. Also agree with the natural explorer to be one select terrain.
my ranger has a bulette as his companion
How useful or useless would favored enemy (plants) be?
Ranger, Treat Feller, Myconid Masher, Blight's blighter ... that might be it from the general MM
Everyone's facial hair is looking on point.
Did anyone else notice that Wizards of The Coast is cherry picking elements of the Pathfinder ranger for this 5e version? In Pathfinder the ranger gets his favored enemy bonus on attack and damage rolls, and then there is favored terrain which is thematically similar to natural explorer and also gives you a boost to initiative.
If that is where they're getting their ideas from then great. Go with what is proven to work and change what didn't. Perfect example of refining the game throughout the editions.
okay I'm picturing the bride now as a ranger.
The problem with the ranger is that he/she is restrained by what type of enemy you are fighting. If it was something you did to gain power it would be fun. Right now, once the DM knows what your favored enemies are, you never fight them again. Its worthless.
U can not use natural explorer on magic terrain
its just like Drizzt's Gunewhyr tjat could be summoned from the astral plane and couldn't die.
Horizon walker. Gg boys
Old Ranger always felt "serial-killer-y" and pretty racist. I love the new changes they're trying to create.
My friends and I have taken a look at what this new playtest ranger means for multiclassing, and I still think they need to change some things, because it looks like it can be pretty busted. Advantage on Initiative with an Assassin archetype Rogue seems really strong, for example.
I think this is an example of power creep. I will definitely agree that Rangers needed a buff but giving them everything and the kitchen sink is too much.
It's a good starting point in my opinion. Now it just needs to be reeled in a little. Making natural explorer a bit more specific would satisfy me.
Nerdarchist Dave
I know this is going to get a lot of friction. However...
Agreed. I've see two Rangers in two campaigns, and those players were in the top two of DPS. Sure, Beastmaster sucked, but the Hunter is easily very brutal especially at lower levels. longbow, Ranged Combat, Hunter's Mark, Colossus Slayer, and Sharpshooter...I've seen that a LOT. Ignore 1/2, 3/4 cover, Damage of 2d8+1d6+10+Dex... And yet, "Rangers are under-powered."
Frustrating.
Reminds me of the Swashbucker "I sneak attack for free".
Favored Enemy is something from a lot time ago, and added a large buff to the to-hit roll. Now...though....please.
Turning Rangers into Assassins isn't fair. Rogues are now being basically replaced by Uber-Ranger.
What upsets me is that there are other classes who NEED help, yet they throw everything at this class. Attack buffs, damage buffs, Advantage to a lot more...it's too much. Wild Mages need help, and Chain/Book Warlocks need a lot of help. Resolve how Charm works officially so that Enchanters do not get boned.
Take the time to actually look at the new races that you TRIED to release and make them less suck-ish. The Eberron races would be a nice place to start, then perhaps the MTG races. Everything other than the Celestial race there sucked.
Otherwise this is the first step to power creep where anyone who complains gets the whole shopping basket instead of a legitimate fix. There's a real danger of making every effort in the beginning to create balance irrelevant. I agree that work needs to be done, but it's not done by throwing the entire kitchen sink at A class.
I don't understand how it's very good
Thank you for doing this.
You are welcome
So basically, ranger just became more OP... My DM is allowing this tonight, but it may soon get vetoed.
Ranger doesn't seem that bad unless it's really low level. They could rearrange the skills so it isn't a level 1 monster. Other than that it seems fairly solid with other martial classes (minus intimidation barbarian).
it seems better than old ranger that was just bad
why not have the ranger capable of parcor?
Geek poison run! Run!