@carlosmarroquin3019 it most likely will, but it probably won't be worse than 4e was. I liked 4e a lot, so I speak from experience. As DMs, we'll have to come up with an easy way to track it. Personally, I put colorful paper clips on Initiative cards to track conditions, but I know not everyone uses index cards to track Initiative.
I think it's funny that they're still saying that Hunter's Mark is suboptimal as a focus of a class feature when you just did a 17 level paladin build and honestly would be using Hunter's Mark for a good chunk of it. And this is on a paladin Ranger just has a better Hunter's Mark, the new style is the old style, two weapon fighting elf Ranger just like Legolas.
Hunter's Mark should have been made a class feature instead of a spell. Much like other classes that apply their effects when you hit an enemy with an attack. Starting with a low amount of damage per hit and scaling with hunter level, or something along those lines. This also would let them do more fun and unique things with it like giving extra effects like Rogue's sneak attack. If anything, it makes more sense for Hunter than it does for Rogue. Or set them up to be the ranged smite class with nature themed smite attacks based around hunter's mark. Ranger definitely needed more time to cook.
Actually they did kinda do that. A lot of the Ranger spells now work like the new Smite spells and some have lost concentration as well. I do agree though that they probably should've made it a feature cause I want to feel like the Barbarian Ranger multiclass is at least an excitable option.
"applied on hit instead of consuming a bonus action and scales with ranger level" is already how the Tasha's Favored Foe feature works (d4 at lv1, d6 at lv6, d8 at lv14). They should've leaned into it (by making it apply on every attack instead of once per turn) and dropped Hunter's Mark as a spell entirely. I fully agree that Favored Foe/Hunter's Mark should have more options (perhaps some general and some tied to subclass) for alternate effects on their marked targets (like maybe the gloomstalker ranger could have the target save every turn against a creeping blindness or something). Maybe rangers could use a reaction to consume the mark and gain some kind of benefit (immediately attack it or something). It would've gone a good way towards giving the Ranger a cool class identity, but now we'll have to wait another half decade for them to pull another Tasha's and give us a satisfying class.
Exactly, they did that for the Vengeance Paladin and their 'Abjure Enemy' feature. On top of the fact, they also got a level 1 concentration free spell that boosts damage lol
Minor note, fey wanderer damage is once per round per target, so if you get past the first enemy the second one takes it too, particularly good for hordes
Not certain I agree, its more versatile, but hunter has a better specialization for both hordes and single target depending on how you build it if we are speaking damage That being said, they get wisdom to a ton of charisma stuff so I do think they are overall better even if not in combat
@@hamc7112Hunter shifts into neutral after 6th level. It's a shame it has little to offer beyond the early levels. The other subclasses feel pretty evenly balanced amongst themselves.
@@elementzero3379 do agree with that yeah Outside of campaigns where you know you are going constantly against hordes, I don't find it particularly memorable All other three feel really good tho
I think around level 11 or 13, the ranger should be able to either get a concentration free hunter's mark, or be able to apply it as part of their attack. Like the new paladin's vow of emnity.
Said the same thing ... Im going to homebrew it so you can hold Concentration on Hunter's mark as long as you keep concentration on different RANGER spell ... rather than not loosing it by damage.
Yeah lets give them an emanation on level 6 that boosts their and their allies saving throws based on wisdom. WotC really dropped the ball on paladins and esp rangers it feels like they redesigned the warlock, then they were bored so the paladin took some of the changes from warlocks (and gutting DS) and last they couldn't be bothered with the ranger so they made it a dex/wisdom combination of warlock and paladin.
@@mpetrov2402Paladin DPS hasn’t been gutted. Paladin’s Nova-ing down targets is what got changed, their DPS is far more sustainable now and they can still do a ton of damage on crits and whatnot.
@@keeganmbg6999 read what I wrote again. As for NOVA damage Valor bards and Eldritch knights can do similar burst to a 2014 Paladin for multiple combats and not just 3 rounds (assuming lvl 11 paladin, smiting every hit).
@emulationemperor8924 Honestly, stop looking purely at dps. Rangers can do a lot more than just damage. Dwarf 13th level gloomstalker. 13 str, alert origin feat, expertise in perception and investigation, sharpshooter at 4th level, max dex at 8th level, great weapon master at 12th level. As a scout: darkvision 180ft, invisible to darkvision, tremorsense, double prof bonus to perception and investigation. As an explorer: +10 ft speed, climb and swim speed equal to land speed, access to longstrider and water breathing. As an ambusher: Advantage to init rolls, +10 init ( 5 dex + 5 alert ), can switch initiative with any party member. As an archer: 2 atks/turn: 2d8+22 piercing + 2d6 force HM, + 1d8 psychic + frighten every creature in a 10ft radius that fails a will save. Atks ignore half and three-quarters cover and have a 600ft max range with no disadvantage.
Postitive Critique as requested: I feel like getting the free casts of Hunter's Mark is a decent change because even though it still requires concentration, there's much less of a penalty in dropping Hunter's Mark to cast a different spell requiring concentration. And now you can freely use other spells without having to even consider saving a spell slot or two for casts of hunter's mark. You can have Hunter's Mark up, drop concentration to cast Zephyr Strike using a spell slot then cast Hunter's Mark the next turn without using a spell slot. It's not perfect but it does add flexibility with casting different spells. If you cast spike growth and then all the enemies get passed it or spread out to the point where it's no longer needed, you can drop concetration and switch to a free cast of Hunter's Mark until a better opportunity for a spell comes up. It gives you a little extra damage at any point as a fallback option, which is a nice change.
At least some of the other Ranger smite-style Spells which used to require concentration to augment a single attack no longer require concentration. So there aren't many competitors any more.
@@broomemike1 Yes, I really like the loss of concentration on those spells, Hail of thorns is still meh, but Lightning Arrow is pretty good. However, I feel like they will almost never see the light of day because they are both based on the Ranger using ranged weapons but the two-weapon fighting ranger is so much better than the ranged ranger now.
@@agilemind6241 Maybe... But don't rule out having both options available. You can still use ranged attacks when you're closing in distance or need to use AoE options. It's more of a trap to see yourself ONLY using melee. Rangers should adapt based on the circumstances.
This is kind of where I'm at. It's not necessarily about having it up 100%, but it's there when you need or want it. Which I think a lot of people are missing and focusing on it being up 100% of the time. Hey, you now get free castings of it (which with the new rules you can now cast other leveled spells using the free castings on the same turn), and it's no longer a huge resource cost to drop it when you really need to and reapply it when it matters. It frees up quite a bit of spells slots, and only applies when you want or need it to. It is a nice option to have in reserve, and shouldn't really ever be your main focus.
My issue is Rangers were slowly lifted to where they were with Tasha's. They still didn't have a strong theme, but they at least worked as a class, and you didn't feel like a worse archer fighter. However, the ranger class still was severely limited in bonus action economy and concentration. They have now given a "theme" to the ranger that is built around hunters mark. However they didn't give it enough scaling for me to really want to use it throughout, so I am again, like in 2014, left feeling like I am missing class features. Also, if I do choose to utilize HM, I am switching it every turn because most enemies that are focused fired do not last more than a round. So now the stress on BAs and Concentration is more stressed than ever. Further, with all of the many many new and easy ways to knock someone prone you will frequently have disadvantage. Unfortunately, without DM intercession, I think Ranger feels like a trap. I think, at minimum, removing HM concentration after level 6 is required, possibly also increasing damage scaling. Of all the classes, I think Ranger was done the most dirty.
I actually think the Bonus Action economy is the bigger problem, particularly for the Beast Master. Although I think the solution there is to let them command the companion as a free action, but in general power wise the Ranger is actually doing mostly fine. I think the better solution is to move the 2 new features down a couple levels and make them apply to more than just Hunter's Mark. Feats and spells will let you scale already as the Ranger has really good spells, but they'll be trapping new players into thinking HM is your only option.
@@malmasterson3890 IMO the major problem with 2024 Ranger is the general nerfing of ranged combat. Longbow is basically dead because it's Weapon Mastery is really lame, and there are no good feats to enhance it as SS is basically a waste of your time. Then you have all the new proning-effects which will land you with disadvantage if you try to use ranged weapons. In contrast two-weapon fighting is mega-buffed so you can make 3 attacks per turn and have a BA free for Hunter's Mark.
@malmasterson3890 I agree the Bonus Action economy is the issue. 2024 Beast Master can sacrifice 1 attack to make the beast attack, but that hardly helps. Although I heartily disagree with a concentration free Hunter's Mark. I think transferring it without the use of an additional Bonus Action would be a nice upgrade.
@@agilemind6241 Making it so SS could get around prone effects in addition to cover would've been a nice add on to compensate. That said, I do disagree a little bit as Heavy Weapon Master is actually a solid option, but of course once you get CBE the.Heavy Crossbow will just be better, so perhaps we need a new Bow specific feat.
@coltonhorton4225 Rituals are for out of combat utility. There are plenty of situations where you'll want to have another concentration spell over HM, as Ranger has a really good spell list.
Hunters mark is accessible via Fey Touched and Vengeance Paladin, I think that was the issue here. But still easily solved by giving the Rangers base class a bypass to Conc
@@kbeazy_3050They do get to bypass concentration, but not until level 13, which is why it's so fucking stupid. That upgrade needed to come at like level 6 at the latest.
Yep, my basic homebrew would be to have the free cast hunters mark be concentration free. I would also go further and give hunters mark an upcast version too that does more damage to make the concentration version attractive to use also… but yeah, this base version of hunters mark sucks and needs home brewing to make it worthwhile.
Rangers in D&D suffer from identity crisis for two reasons. 1st is that no one in 10 years of this edition really designed things for exploration. 5e exploration is one survival check and that's it. 2nd issue is that everyone has a different idea, and no version of 5e Ranger has fulfilled it. I've played a Ranger for 7 years, in one campaign, and my DM is very intentional about including survival and exploration because we all enjoy it. But even then we tweaked the hell out of the Ranger. Rangers in D&D use magic, that's just the way it is. When you stop trying to think of Aragorn or Drizzt, and just think of what a magical druidic/nature magic warrior is, you are still unsatisfied with the 5e Ranger. Most spells are concentration or archery themed, they don't hit hard, move the best, control the battlefield well, or excel anywhere. I love their ability to contribute here and there, but that's me, I don't need the spotlight. If they are a fighter who has become entangled in nature magic, their class and subclass should reflect that.
Last part of your comment is the crux of the ranger identity issue. They don't need to excel at anything, that's the key part they are moderately good at everything and a lot of people don't like this playstyle cause they feel robbed of the spotlight. If you want a spotlight play a paladin they are now truly the main character. The issue with this to me at least is a lot of people who don't like the ranger aggressively weighing in whenever the ranger is being altered and muddying the waters with unreasonable expectations.
To your first point, I think that was a big shortcoming of the RotFM adventure rules as written. It's one of my favorite stories with a fantastic environment begging for environmental survival and exploration, but the larger game outside of RotFM had very poor, but established, rules for it and WotC probably didn't want to provide rules that worked just for that adventure but undercut the core guidelines. I think they should have done that anyway, but they are pretty easy to homebrew/find alternatives online. I highly recommend that adventure, despite it being very polarizing online lol
What they really need is explorer class features that can be applied in all circumstances, but also feel flavorful and like a survival expert. Deft explorer is great but incredibly bland. The natural explorer option of the revised ranger (UA) had a really great version of it, where you didn't choose a terrain, but instead can ignore difficult terrain, have adv on initiative rolls, and the "travel for 1 hour or more and your group gets" section. Also I disagree with comments on how Ranger doesn't need to feel standout. Every other class stands out, not just paladin. Ranger doesn't know its identity, because theyre trying to hard to merge the three classes (druid, fighter, rogue) rather than using those classes to create something new - where you can tell it's a mix of those classes, but it feels entirely unique as well.
I'm playing a Fey Wanderer ranger in a 1-20 campaign where we're currently level 19 (I did multiclass into Rune Knight fighter after level 13). My biggest issue is that almost every ranger spell worth casting is concentration. Same as paladin spells. But they at least removed concentration from the smite spells.
They've removed Concentration from some Ranger spells, as well. We agree that this design sucks, but it is still possible to build a pretty good spell loadout with this Ranger. In Treantmonk's Ranger video (isn't yet public as of today), Chris talks about this and lists all of the Concentration-free spells he'd like to prepare. The list included more spells than any Ranger could ever prepare. So, while it's an annoying design, at least it doesn't kneecap the Ranger. I do agree with the Dudes that the ranged (bow/crossbow/musket) Ranger is now far less appealing, given how melee combat has been buffed.
Rangers as imagined in DnD exist on a spectrum with fighter at one end and druid at the other. The problem isn't that different people have different ideas on where the Ranger sits on that spectrum, it's that its on that spectrum at all, rather than possessing a unique mechanical identity of it's own.
@bigdream_dreambig I disagree. The paladin absolutely DOES have identity issues, especially when compared to war clerics and eldritch knights. I think they simply benefit from being a cultural darling of the player base, due to having mechanics that naturally lend themselves to the epic main character hero archetype in a way that Rangers dont.
I don't like any class being inextricably tied to a specific spell that becomes its entire identity. It has been my thought that Rangers are wilderness survivalists, guides, and explorers who serve as the buffer between civilization and the wild. They are the quintessential roving warriors who study nature and exploit it to survive the wilderness and combat threats to civilization. When I think of a ranger, I think of a hybrid of a Witcher and a Druid. They're trained in nature, animals, monsters, martial combat, and primal magics.
Just changing it from a spell to a feature would have done wonders. Action Surge is the most notable feature of a Fighter. Bardic Inspiration is the big part of Bards. Wildshape for Druids. Hunter's Mark could have been a fun feature every Ranger got, and each subclass could have given unique ways to bend it. Like Druid Wildshape, Hunter's Mark could be different between a Hunter and a Gloomstalker. For Beast Master, make it work for the pet too. Gloomstalker, allow advantage to hide from your marked target. Hunter, up the damage once per turn, which is crazy vanilla but at least unique. It shouldn't just be a spell. It should be a fun feature that is exciting to build around -- not just a boring d6 of damage and, "Oh, you can track them better... you know, if the target escapes after you've used it on them.
100% this. I've been saying the entire time that Witcher, bounty hunter, wilderness guide, and trapper are all quintessentially Ranger. They're not necessarily magical (definitely not as a core concept), they're trained specialists. They're survivalists and detectives and tamers of wild beasts. Just like Rogue is the one you send in to pick locks and disable traps, Ranger is the one who can locate and interpret forensic evidence (tracks, scat, refuse, blood, etc.), guide the party through perilous terrain, extract useful materials from their environment (healing salves, poisonous mushrooms, food, clean water). Hunter's mark is such a narrow pigeonhole for the entire class, and it doesn't even capture the class identity.
@@justinsmart581 I think Hunter's Mark should be replaced with a feature that gives you a small fey, beast, or celestial spirit as a companion in the form of an animal bound to you. They take initiative immediately after you and don't require an action to give it commands. They have one action, and no bonus action. They can use that action to attack, dodge, dash, disengage, help or hide. The damage starts at 1d6 + Wis mod force damage and increases like a cantrip ( 2d6, 3d6, 4d6). It's HP is Ranger level * 2 + Wis Mod + PB. If it's HP is reduced to 0, you can expend a spell slot to summon it as a bonus action. AC is 10 + PB. A land form would have +2 AC plus a single melee mastery property added to its attack, a flying form would have flyby plus a flying speed of 60 ft, and a water form would give you water breathing plus a swim speed equal to your walking speed. You determine its appearance. As you level up, it can increase in size and become a mount. Now, subclasses would also modify the companion further. For example, the Drakewarden from Fizban's could give the companion a breath attack. The Hunter companion would gain an extra attack. The Gloom Stalker companion would gain advantage on stealth checks. When a Fey Wanderer gets an opportunity attack, the companion can attempt to knock the target prone.
I’ve always felt that way with EB and warlocks. The difference is EB Is fantastic from both a thematic and mechanical perspective so it gets more of a pass
I love that rangers now have access to all the fighting styles. This opens up strength based builds. I could see hunter with the great weapons master feat using a cleave weapon along with the horde breaker trait to get four attacks with a potential fifth bonus action attack with a critical hit or kill.
What fighting style did you want that didn't benefit strength rangers before? I don't see how that helps, especially when they killed what was already the weakest fighting style (great weapon fighting) by making it unbelievably weak5
@@limaTheNoob Tbh great weapon fighting has been dead for ten years. The change in the new great weapon fighting is barely noticeable, changing your average greatsword damage from 4.2 to 4.0 is such a minor nerf that you wont realyl even notice it, and is a fair trade off for speeding up combat by removing all those constant rerolls (not that you should ever pick that fighting style with either version of it in the first place).
@@Klaital1 what is that 4.2? That seems off, greatsword gained 1.33 damage from it, and now it fell to 0.6 or something. It's not a big number, but they could have buffed it by making the increase better, but no, they haaaad to nerf it. Before, there was a niche for it, which is magical weapons that add dice to each hit. Now, it's uber dead and there's no saving it. More trap options to the game.
@@limaTheNoob Ah sorry that was per die, my bad, so it changed from 8.4 to 8.0. Which is still less than half a point per attack. Previously if you rolled a 1 or 2 you rerolled it which averaged to 3.5, so it was 3.5 + 3.5 + 3 + 4 +5 + 6 divided by 6, or 4.2 average result on the dice, whereas now it's 3 +3 +3 +4 +5 +6 divided by 6 or 4 average result on the dice.
I feel too many comments I've seen about the 2024 ranger are conflating "I don't like this class" with "this class is weak". Any class with access to heavy weapons and spellcasting as a baseline can not be a weak class, period. The new spellcasting rules means that casting hunter's mark without using a slot means you can cast a spell with your action, your bonus action clog is all but non-existent now due to the nick property and beastmaster being able to give up one of those nick attacks to have their beast attack if they need to reapply hunter's mark. I think people also forget that levels 9, 13, and 17 also give you brand new spell levels as the MAIN feature, and the hunter's mark perks are just a bonus. There's a reason full spellcasters get less class features compared to the martial classes, new spell levels ARE a class feature, they just don't show up on the chart. Personally, I think rogue is in a much shakier spot than the current iteration of the ranger, absolutely the worst class in the game if we're talking mechanics. If you don't like hunter's mark, that's fine, but saying that ranger is a bad class because you personally don't like the spell is just disingenuous. The class is good.
It's crazy how much the PF2e Ranger accomplishes everything you want. The core is your Hunt Prey, which provides bonuses to tracking and searching as well as your range on ranged attacks. You get Survival by default, with core actions and exploration abilities that make you do all the things that being a survivalist is good at, with class/skill/general feats to build on that even more. Your subclass builds on your Hunt Prey, whether you are the Flurry for multiattacking with a bow or two weapons (both are supported), the Precision do deal extra damage once per turn, or the other one that isn't very good but like helps with learning creature stat blocks and increasing your AC against your prey and stuff. If you want spellcasting, you take Warden feats to get some focus spells. If you want an animal companion, you take companion feats. If you want to be an urban ranger, adjust your stats and take certain skill feats. Bow ranger, dual wield ranger, and great weapon ranger are all viable and strong.
When a friend was trying to get me into PF2e a couple years ago he told me to build a ranger to see how it feels. I was amazed at how PF2e allowed the freedom to build whatever style of ranger I wanted and it simply felt good. DnD5e can't seem to figure out what they want the ranger to be and I almost wish they had simply left the class out until they found a solution.
@@GrecoRomanNinja They really needed to embrace more class feats and class choices. They got close during D&D NEXT. People love Invocations and Metamagic and Maneuvers.
Really appreciate the thoughtful discourse in your video, and the way that you point out the math and the changes to the class in the wider context of the whole system (feats, spells, weapon masteries). The class is still a very viable damage dealer, and the fact that half the subclasses (beast master and fey wanderer) get a concentration free summon in the battlefield means rangers can have a summons and have hunters mark up. Other ranger subclasses, like the drakewarden and swarm keeper, also continue the theme of extra bodies in the battlefield. I wish they’d done some things differently, but most of my critiques have to do with style and changes to the meta of archery in general, not in the power of the class.
@@DungeonDudes true but definitely homebrewing alot of stuff on rangers the other classes so far and general rules on reviews i haven't homebrew alot of changes for them but so far monk and ranger are going to be a pain (mostly hunters mark definitely changing that to not require concentration and if the party agrees guving them 3 so they can switch bow to others once again thats if the party agrees to it) and some things in monk out of all the campaigns i have ran ranger by far is the biggest problem out of all them homebrewing monk is challenging but not a pain unlike ranger but i still go through with it to make it fun for everybody
It seem like every class or subclass received a feature or spell update that took away concentration for one of their spells or abilities and the ranger got boned.
There definitely seems to be a need to have either done a consistency re-read/edit, or maybe explained the difference somewhere in the book itself, likely in a call out text box in either the classes that don't follow the rule, or in the general character creation chapter.
What I would have liked to see for Ranger in regards to hunters mark: Hunters Mark scales like a damage dealing cantrip (2d6 at lvl 5, 3d6 at 11...) At lvl 7, ou apply Hunters Mark to 2 targets with one cast. Also, (not sure at what level) you can fire two arrows at once (hitting 1 target twice, or two separate targets) a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, per long rest. (Both arrows apply hunters Mark damage.) OR, for Melee, you get an extra swing (to a second target within 5 feet) a number times equal to your proficiency bonus, per long rest.
*Edited* There are interesting interactions that are still worth noting. Because Ranger gets Hunter’s Mark casts for free without using a spell slot… you can actually use it round 1 along with another spell. Long Bows I believe are compatible with Great Weapon Master. Additionally, a number of spells had their concentration removed, like ensnaring strike I believe. Lightning Arrow is still a bonus action so you can’t drop it round 1, but you can still do a lot of great casting. So you can open with Hunter’s Mark and then your 1 spell slot per turn if needed, and then in subsequent rounds additional spells. There’s still strong combos if you look beyond the focus on Hunter’s Mark. I think Monty is very right about the fact no one is ever super happy with Ranger. It was my first class in 3.5e. Find Familiar really needs to be a default part of the class list. It's almost worth starting with Magic Initiate: Wizard for Find Familiar. Having Find Familiar would fix the problem of people wanting a pet but not be a Beast Master. It worked in BG3. Do you have any idea how many enemies my Cat Familiar has killed? Just by doing a paltry 2 damage? And then Boo is even more ridiculously strong. Also, looking at Poisoner, and the fact the save DC can be based on your DEX... While it would be expensive, in a campaign where money isn't really an issue... That would 100% be worth it for Ranger. I always wanted to do a poisoner build. At upper levels Piercer plays really well with the permanent advantage. You're always crit fishing at that point so the extra damage on a crit is nice. And while Spike Growth is superior for crowd control, once you get down to single targets, is it really that much better? One thing I learned in Baldur's Gate is... Spike Growth means NOTHING when enemies jump. I was so excited when I got Halsin and then threw down a Spike Growth in Moonrise Towers and had like 10 enemies in it... They all used Jump and ignored it. And realizing that... in my DMing once enemies are aware of a Spike Growth... They all start using Jumps to minimize the damage. You can't weasel around Hunter's Mark. You can weasel around a lot of alternatives. I think though with Ranger... it's all about thinking of how to build and compound your damage along side Hunter's Mark. If you can set something up with Ensnaring Strike (Concentration Removed) and Hunter's Mark, you have a lot going on. I think ultimately one of the worst things WotC did was removing a lot of the Skill Expertise that Ranger had in early Playtests. Ranger I feel should be a hybrid skill-monkey and ranged support. And when think of it as that, it makes more sense. It's not as much about big damage numbers, but sustained support and utility.Paladin is tanking, damage, and face of the party, while Ranger is flexible with support, crowd control, and skills.
27:44 this is pretty much exactly what the real issue is with rangers, yeah getting only hunter's mark stuff for certain levels feels weird but that isnt why people dislike rangers, its because people have all these character concepts they want the class to embody and DnD design team doesn't (and them being the most popular fantasy ttrpg probably can't) actually stick with a concrete class fantasy and just kind of dilutes a lot of things into one pot, which ends up feeling bland to people. I think that if they moved the hunter's mark buffs entirely to the hunter (they do get hunter's lore which is really nice) and maybe gave rangers even some ribbon features instead of those at the respective levels people would have been happier. As it stands though, they're kind of close to just letting subclasses take the burden of the *insert specific character fantasy here* but as it stands for the rangers, no dice in 5.24e. This is surprising tbh since their barbarians, for example, actually are concretely different from just a generic angry guy as actually usually being kind of these primal warriors who embody the wild itself, and that was reinforced even in 2024 as apart from frenzy, all other classes have this identity along with the rage boosting certain checks actually also embodying this feeling which is cool, and something rangers (who quintessentially are the opposite, man with all the tools available to them going in reverse into the wild) can take a note of. Maybe next time hunter's mark is just a class feature instead of a spell so it doesn't have to be competing with concentration. As for the good bits of the ranger, this is by far the best hunter has been which is really cool, in terms of glow ups till like level 10 a hunter is going to feel excellent, if a little simple
I wonder if it would be better if Ranger were a subclass of Fighter. Kind of like how Eldritch Knight blends some wizardry into the Fighter, the Ranger could add some druidry.
That's exactly how it started way back. But it's such a popular theme I think it is ok as a class. WotC just need to decide what a ranger is in their game rather than trying to be lots of different archetypes of ranger at once. They'll piss off someone, but at least they'll have made a clear choice about direction.
I felt like a big issue playing my first big campaign as a ranger was, that while I was supposed to be one of the most versatile classes being a half caster, I still ended up feeling like I had no variety in options on what to do on my turn. The painfully low number of spells known if you don't play a subclass that has conclave spells as a feature and over reliance on concentration spells ended up making me throw out one concentration spell and then Just attack for the rest of combat as casting further spells never felt like significant value compared to just attacking, especially considering the partys fighter and druid still outdid me big time in both. Hunters mark as a class defining feature is conceptually cool as the ranger didn't really have one before whereas other classes had recognisable features like divine smite, rage or metamagic, but the anti synergy with the rangers kit in concentration and bonus action economy hurts a lot, not to mention the lack of lategame scaling. Houseruling hunters mark to require no concentration as a low mid lv class feature and giving it upcast potential as a high lv class feature might help the ranger to keep up with other classes, and at the very least make him feel more inherintly synergistic and fun to play
That is how pretty much every character that isn't a full spellcaster plays if you want to be optimal, it's not really anything unique to rangers. The versatility comes mostly in out of combat utility.
@DungeonDudes it’s my bday tomorrow I hope you guys have the energy to do another one today for an early gift. I just got into DND and looking forward to the new rules
The new best master can use on of their attacks to command their beast and their beast can benefit from hunters mark Drake warden will very probably get the same changes
@@Reapor234 which is stupid. But its typical of 5e and its horrible rules that need dms to fix. The Bethesda treatment as i like to call it. Why make something that works if others will fix it for you?
I think if they were set on making the class revolve around hunters mark, a more appropriate progression would have been something like: 9th level - hunter's mark no longer requires concentration, 13th level - hunter's mark now does 1d8 damage, 17th level - hunter's mark now does 1d10 damage, 20th level - you have advantage on all attacks against your hunter's mark.
Honestly, i think a great alternative to HM would have been to treat it like the old fey wanderer did with its level 11 feature. Give rangers the option to either cast HM normally with concentration, or reduce the duration from 1 hour, down to 1 minute and not have concentration. This would keep you from having 1 hour/8 hours/24 houra of free damage for a single spell slot, to having the option to cast it once per combat. The cost of a spell slot each combat would balance the power out very well on a half-caster, especially if theyre using another spell slot to use a concentration spell. If they dont want to do that, they can conserve resources by either casting HM normally for the increased duration, or uaing another spell. Either way, it gives the player more options. If i DM for a ranger under the new books im definitely using this rule, and asking for it if I play one.
I actually think Ranger needs a couple more ranged Smite-lite options for spell slots 1 and 2. Something a bit more interesting than Hail of Thorns like Sniper Shot - 1 reaction immediately after you hit a target with a ranged weapon attack. 2d6 damage (of the same type as the weapon). You do 1d6 additional damage if the target is one of your Favoured Foes. Basically makes it so that the Ranger gets some better damage and cool flavour.
Playing a ranger in our current campaign. I was so disappointed when I saw the updates to the ranger class because I love the thematic of the class. We’ve homebrewed ranger to make it more viable. HM no longer requires concentration, at 7 when the ranger cast HM they learn the immunities, resistances, and vulnerabilities of the monster, at 13 you can change the damage type of your HM damage, and capstone is that you can end your HM on a creature and deal max damage to it. This feels really good to me as it makes the ranger the class that knows how to take down an enemy and can hit them where it hurts.
@@AndrewThoesen dude, it feels to me that the team that did the ranger was completely isolated from the rest of the design team and told, “think 4.5e.” I don’t understand how the current iteration made it into an official publication.
Is my memory correct that HM is now force? So your level-13 fix is no longer relevant. I'm also unsure that the "max damage" capstone is good enough. 🤔
@@bigdream_dreambig the idea behind it is that the ranger can learn the vulnerability of a monster and then change the HM damage to deal that type of damage. So an enemy that is vulnerable to cold damage would now take 2dx (forgot to mention scaling) rather than 1dx. The capstone might still be underpowered but if you score a crit against an enemy and target its vulnerability, you could decide to max out all that damage rather than rolling at the cost of a 1st lvl spell slot.
I'm binging on your 'changes in 2024' videos. I love how you break stuff down and make it easier to understand. As for the Ranger, part of the issue is that Aragorn set the bar really high. Another issue is that Travel, the one thing that Rangers really should excel at, is the most-overlooked pillar of the game.
Lean on Hunters Mark for the class but add flavour per subclass. Off the top of my head… Gloomstalker = Adv on your HM if you or the target is in dim light or darkness Fey Wanderer = You can teleport up to 30ft to within 5ft of your HM Beast Master = Your beast can deal the extra HM damage Hunter = You know the vulnerabilities/ resistances of your HM
I don't think that's good enough for Fey Wanderer. They get so many unlimited teleports that yet one more -- and this one limited in its destination -- seems lackluster.
As a huge ranger fan myself, I'm just disappointed. The roleplay, flavor of the class just isnt there unlike the monk, rogue, fighter etc. where you feel like you're contributing more than just extra damage each hit.
@@bigdream_dreambig I cant disagree with you. I didnt give those ideas proper thought to be honest. I was just trying to offer a solution that provides a bit more flavor
So much YES! Every time Monty says "I just feel like..." and what comes next, is the exact critique and pain points I have. Previous vid it was with the Warlock who should've gotten more spells on their table instead of putting it in Magical Cunning.
I think one of the big problems with the ranger has always been that they don't focus enough on what the ranger should excel at -- survival and adaptability to any environment they find themselves in. While that should include martial prowess and possibly some spellcasting, those should not be the primary focus of the class. Also, forcing a choice for favored enemies and favored terrain should never have happened. Rangers should have all terrains as their favored terrain. They should be able to favor whoever they're currently dealing with.
" Rangers should have all terrains as their favored terrain." This is it, right here. Nobody when they talk about party composition is like, "man, we REALLY need a ranger". But look at the Natural Explorer features and think about that applied to ALL travel and... its actually kind of tempting. Being able to long rest or explore at lower levels without nasty surprises actually has some value.
The thing is: Survival is not a big aspect is the vast majority of DnD Campaigns. So basing the class around that would not work greatly. And even then: The rouge would probably still be better at survival and stuff due to expertise and reliable talent.
@@AndrewThoesen But I, the player, enjoy those nasty surprises! Why would I want to avoid them?! But being serious: given the choice between: A: 4 Clerics B: 3 Clerics and a Ranger I would choose A every day of the week.
I agree about adaptability. Regardless of which character you think of when you think of a fantasy ranger, one thing almost all of them have in common is that they are _versatile,_ sometimes to the point of being a jack-of-all-trades (Link from The Legend of Zelda being a good example). And yet, for some reason, WotC keeps designing rangers to be specialists.
@@IgnavumFortuna Wilderness and long distance travel has never had a set of rules that make it fun in any way. In the wilderness you are either lost or not-lost. Being lost is not fun. Slowly dwindling supplies as you stumble around lost is not fun. Those reasons and many others are why long distance travel through wilderness is usually hand-waved in D&D.
I mean, the difference between Ranger and Warlock is that EB is actually good and less taxing to use. A non-concentration, high damage Cantrip vs a concentration 1st level slight damage increase spell on a half caster class. It's not a competition on what is worse when it's centered around it.
Here's how I changed it for my campaign: Level 5 : Ranger's Ire At 5th level, Hunter's Mark no longer requires concentration. Also, you get 1 free casting of Hunter's Mark at your highest leveled spell slot available, regain expended use upon finishing a Long Rest. That's in exchange of no more "semi-PB amount of free casting per day". This means that the Ranger, effectively, at level 9 gets 8 hours of Hunter's Mark during the day as a 3rd level spell and it's active for 24 hours at level 17 as a 5th level spell. No shenanigans of advantage at level 17 though, it stays its usual "base" spell otherwise. Also, level 20, it doesn't go up to d10. I changed the capstone to : Foe Slayer : When attacking, you can choose to add your Wisdom modifier to both Attack and Damage rolls.
"When attacking, you can choose to add your Wisdom modifier to both Attack and Damage rolls" That actually feels thematically accurate since they're supposed to be a wise, tracking, weakness-exposing killer.
@@inkubus6192 Yeah, that's on top of it. I based it off the Monk and Barbarian capstone features that they just get a+4 score/max score boost to their DEX/WIS and STR/CON respectively. So Rangers which are wildeness experts... gets to have their strikes to be at their mightiest. I mean, it still sucks that Rangers are MAD (multi ability dependent), but if you roll stats early and get to use 20 in both WIS and DEX or STR... you're getting quite nasty.
Rangers also get to prepare spells now. I love playing ranger because they are the "i do a little bit of everything" character. And preparing spells lets me bring less used, niche spells to the table.
I dont even understand why hunter's mark is a thing. It's a spell that doesn't function like a spell, has a huge impact on action economy, and scales poorly. Spells like hail of thorns, lightning arrow, conjure barrage, summon beast, and summon fey are all way more interesting and flavorful. Ditch the spell completely and adjust ranger to have increased damage on successive attacks against a target--essentially focus firing you become more and more lethal. Have this damage scale with ranger level, giving more incentive to stay last level 5. Also, i know it's high level but the advantage on all attacks against a marked target devalues all vex weapons at that point, so at least short bows and short swords.
Concentrating on Summon Beast was more thematic than HM, so I never experienced said clunkiness. Unfortunately, I just feel mocked now, since the only buff to the subclass is that the companion can now apply the HM damage if you use HM - introducing a Bonus Action clusterfuck that wasn't there before! I will still ignore HM, but that's now a 4th HM feature that I'll be frustrated about the existence of, leaving me with such a sour taste that I can no longer find any excitement in playing a Beast Master Ranger, despite it being strictly buff (but in a way that I don't appreciate). Ironically, Beast Master Ranger is great if I just ignore the 4 HM features, but my satisfaction would be much higher if those 4 features hadn't been included (even without being replaced by anything). Class and subclass features tied to HM have recreated the issue that WotC otherwise alleviated by removing Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer, which where ineffective ribbon features that gave the class a bad reputation even though it could actually perform quite well without said features doing anything for you.
Honestly, Beastmaster should've had it that your beast auto attacks the Mark without input from you. That way you can Mark a target, then use your Action to do something else necessary and still have your beast do something.
Crikey! Love the Steve Irwin comment as someone who is from Down Under. There's a road here named after him! Sharpshooter feat changes make an archer build less satisfying but WOTC want Rangers to be up close and personal, dual wielding. Drakewarden is still do-able though. Get a ring of Feather Falling, and you can eventually be a High Altitude, Low Opening (HALO) drop trooper with your drake! Rangers are still fun to play, so that's what really matters at the end of the day. I'm loving these class change summaries from you guys. Keep them up!
What I'm thinking is at level 7 allow the ranger to concentrate on Hunters mark and 1 additional spell, concentration can still be lost, but at least a second spell is now available.
Literally made that: Level 7: Improved Favored Enemy You don't lose concentration on hunter's mark if you cast another spell that requires concentration and you can concentrate on hunter's mark and another spell at the same time. If at any time while concentrating on both spells you are forced to make a saving throw to maintain concentration, roll for each spell separately.
Feels like Drungar (Ranger 5/Druid X) is going to be the optimal play for a Ranger (if you can call just Ranger 5 being Ranger play) - Conjure Minor Elementals from the Druid with the Dual Wield Ranger four attacks (Normal 1 + Extra 1 + Nick 1 + DW 1). The Spell Slot scaling is great for CME, so preferable to go Ranger 5 (three Spell Slot levels) over Fighter (zero Spell Slot levels) here for the Spell Slot progression. On the other hand, a Wizard with Scorching Ray does this better as a nova and without the delay of five levels while being simpler (at will is weaker, though). If you want to go really overboard you can use a Valor Bardlock (Warlock 2/ Valor Bard X) with Dual Wield Feat, a Light Nick weapon (plus extra Light weapon to be drawn), and a shield, to have 5 attacks at level 6 at will (Eldritch Blast 2 + Normal 1 + Nick 1 + DW 1) scales to 6 attacks at 11, and 7 attacks at 17. While still having the same Spell Slot scaling of the Druid/Ranger for CME (Ranger 5 loses two Spell Slot levels, as does taking Warlock 2), but better Spell Level scaling for the Bard vs the Druid (Bard loses two levels to Warlock 2, Druid loses five levels to Ranger 5). Plus, Bardlock is SAD (Charisma main stat only) rather than the Drunger MAD (Dex and Wis both main stats).
The changes to Conjure Barrage are no joke. It's 5-40 (avg 22.5) damage to everything in a 60 foot cone you want to hit. No friendly fire like the previous version. It's the one thing that tempts me into at least going to level 9 in Ranger. Also, the Ranger having access to ritual casting is really going to help it cast exploration spells without burning spell slots. I just wish they would have been given some more spell slots maybe tied to those spells. With that said, I am going to expand on Monty's statement of the issue with the Ranger. I agree that many people want many different things from the Ranger. I disagree that designing such a class is impossible or even difficult. The Warlock came out of this process just fine and it has options galore for many different builds.
@Rushbolt43 absolutely. I'm sick of every TTRPG making the Ranger just "Aragorn: The Class" when that should have never been the gold standard for what a ranger is. The reason so many have different ideas on what a ranger is, is because there are so many different characters in media *AND REAL LIFE* with Ranger in their name/title. But for whatever reason they refuse to take inspiration from those sources and so you have a class which does not mechanically support the idea of what a ranger is for anyone who hasn't seen or read Lord of the Rings. It would not be some massive undertaking to give the class at least 1 internal class feature that lets you build your character into more of a Monster Hunter, Trapper, Scout, or Ronin. Or if they won't do that, at least give us subclasses based on other media instead of just making stuff up like the Fey Wanderer and Swarm Keeper.
@@Rushbolt43 the Conjure Barrage change is nice but you're forgetting that by level 9 Fireball isn't as overpowering as it used to be. An AoE spell that only deals damage and is less powerful than Fireball isn't that significant. As for Rituals, the only ones you have that could help with exploration are Speak with Animals, Beast Sense, Locate Animals and Plants, and Commune with Nature. Those options ain't great, particularly because Magic Initiate is an origin feat so pretty much everyone can have Find Familiar, and Commune with Nature is most players will never even to a high enough level to cast Commune.
> I agree that many people want many different things from the Ranger. Now I feel like Rangers should have something like the Warlock. Be something way more customizable.
@@M9Seradon The level progression for being a half caster does make it tough to design effective damage spells for those classes, but just looking at this as a third level spell it is much better than the 2014 version of 3d8 damage and friendly fire. My point about the rituals is that you can now do these things without spending a spell slot. That was not an option in 2014. I'm not saying these are perfect solutions, but they were steps in the right direction.
@@clarkside4493 Just roll a fighter and take the specialist origin feat and pick perception and survival. And then finish it out with all your other extra feat picks however you want.
Ngl I've not played that many different characters in DnD yet (only like 6/7 between campaigns and one-shots) but hearing about that Heavy Crossbow + Spike Growth build has got me super excited to play a Ranger whenever I make my next character. Swapping around between that and Hunter's Mark, with the Beast Master pet as well, sounds kind of awesome to me
Someone may have mentioned this already, but the World of Warcraft Hunter's Mark currently puts a debuff on your (primary) target that increases all damage you do to them by 20%, I believe. It does help with tracking the target, too, and I think it stays on the target until they either die or you recast it elsewhere.
Rangers should be at its core, the master survivalist who’s fully in tune with their surroundings and who always gets their mark. Here’s my rework if y’all want inspiration- * Deft Explorer - Proficiency and advantage on perception and survival. If you are already proficient in either skill you also gain an additional proficiency from the ranger list. In addition learn 2 languages - 1 * Spellcasting 1/2 rounded up - 1 * Marked Foe - Know hunters mark automatically. In addition you can cast hunters mark once per long rest without a spell slot or concentration. You can do this as a 3rd lvl spell at ranger lvl 9 and 5th lvl spell at ranger lvl 17 - 1 * Fighting style - 2 * 2x weapon mastery - 2 * Rover - +10 movement speed - 2 * Primal Powers - starting at 3rd lvl you gain the ability to expend some of your primal power as special ability. You expend a corresponding spell slot as directed to perform the listed effect. You gain a new primal power at 5,7,9,11,13,15, and 17 - 3 * -PP Unseen Sight - Spend a 1st lvl spell slot as an action to see invisible things and see into either the ethereal plane, feywild, or shadowfell for 10 minutes - 3 * Subclass choice - 3 * Feat - 4 * -PP Predatory Wave - Spend a 2nd lvl spell slot as an action to cause each creature in a 10ft radius of you to become frightened on a failed WIS save. While frightened they must spend their reaction, action, and bonus action to dash and movement to move away from you. This lasts until the end of the creatures next turn - 5 * Extra attack - 5 * Expert explorer - Expertise on perception and survival and expertise on 2 skills you are proficient. If you’re already an expert in perception or survival, select another skill to become an expert in - 6 * Unyielding March - Can’t be affected by non magical difficult terrain and you gain a climb, crawl, and swim speed - 6 * Uncanny Recovery - When ever you expend hit die, roll 1d4 per hit die and regain that much hp. In addition, you can spend a number of hit die as an action equal to your Wis mod - 6 * -PP Natures Veil - Spend a 2nd lvl spell slot to make yourself and everything you’re wearing/carrying invisible until the start of your next turn - 7 * Subclass feature - 7 * Tireless - You loose a lvl of exhaustion on a short rest. - 8 * Extreme Conditioning - Gain fire and cold resistance. If you already have a permanent source of such resistances then select from acid and poison. - 8 * Feat - 8 * -PP Predatory Gaze - Spend a 3rd lvl spell slot as an action to paralyze a non undead creature within 30ft with fear if they fail a WIS Save until the end of your next turn - 9 * Unerring Mark - Expertise in weapon attacks against hunters mark target. - 10 * -PP Elemental Invulnerability - Spend a 3rd lvl spell slot as a reaction when you take damage of a type you have resistance to. Give yourself immunity to that type including the triggering damage until the end of your next turn - 11 * Subclass feature - 11 * Feat - 12 * -PP Mend Flesh - Spend a 4th lvl spell slot as a bonus action to heal someone you touch 15 hit points, reattach a limb if it was removed in the past minute, or reattach a head if it was removed within the past round and revive them to 0hp but stable. In addition at the end of every round the target regains 1d8 hit points for 1 minute - 13 * Unstoppable Strikes - Your attacks can’t be disadvantaged, In addition hunters mark attacks are made with advantage - 14 * Predatory Awareness - When you use your marked foe ability and when you transfer the effect to a new target, choose one of the following to learn about the target. (1) CR, alignment, and able to speak/understand any language it does; (2) AC and damage vulnerabilities; (3) to hit bonus and save DC; (4) damage resistance and immunity; (5) high and low stat; (6) speed and sense types. For the full duration of your marked foe ability, you also detect one of the following creature types and their direction within 600 feet; aberrations, celestials, dragons, elementals, fey, fiends, giants, monstrosities, and undead - 14 * -PP Wilds Ward - Spend a 4th lvl spell slot over 8hr to give a huge or smaller thing or 200 foot cube area within 60ft the effect of antipathy/sympathy for 10 days - 15 * Subclass feature - 15 * Feat - 16 * -PP Forewarning - Spend a 5th lvl spell slot as a reaction to your d20 test or an attack against you to give yourself advantage on d20 tests and +5 AC for 1 hour - 17 * Primeval Perception - You gain 60ft truesight, blindsight, and tremorsense - 18 * Epic Boon - 19 * Foe Slayer - You can add your wisdom modifier to either the attack roll or damage roll of an attack. You can make this decision after knowing if it would be a hit or not - 20
I think Hunter's Mark should be a class feature, but I always wondered if Rangers could get "Invocations" like the Warlock, where you get Ranger abilities that can modify your Hunter's Mark or gives you better ways to explore/track, or give like primal features to boost your physical abilities.
I've played Ranger more often than any other class, and tbh I usually don't even bother taking Hunter's Mark, so to have a first level concentration spell that doesn't scale become practically the entire focus of the class is bafflingly awful. What's even more baffling was how well the Tasha's changes helped improve the Ranger, only for them to somehow double back and make it worse again. Looking forward to a new edition of Tasha's to save us Ranger mains I guess...
Every time I played a ranger I would do math to see if HM was worth it and generally it never was if I had anything else to do with my BA or concentration. Which made me very confused when I heard people say how HM was a main for rangers and even more confused when wotc decided to make it a core part.
wait, I'm confused, in what way do you think the 2024 Ranger is a step back from Tasha's? Like half of this video is dedicated zo talking about how it basically is the same Ranger we see in Tasha's with a couple QOL improvements.
@@Mike_Hogsheart Not all of the Tasha's improvements were imported over. Primal Awareness, which gave you extra spells prepared, is gone. Land's Stride, which let you ignore difficult terrain and have advantage on saves against plants, is gone. You get Nature's Veil, which lets you turn invisible as a BA, 4 levels later now. All fairly small stuff, sure, but the only new Ranger features gained in return are bonuses to HM
@Mike_Hogsheart also for certain subclasses favourite foe was a better hunters mark because you didn't waste BA. And with backwards compatibility and beast master for those it still would be
@@faithfullyfaithless Well, it's certainly not true that the new Ranger only got HM features. They also get massive improvements to spellcasting (more spells prepared, the ability to switch spells on a long rest, access to Spellcasting at level 1 and better progression when multiclassing) as well as Weapon Masteries and additional Expertise
Now that I think of it; the ideal species for the 2024 Ranger seems to be the Thri-Kreen from Spelljammer. They have unarmored defense that goes up to AC 18 with your DEX modifier, also with advantage to Stealth already built in, darkvision and no need to sleep; making them perfect to keep watch during a long rest, telepathic speech; allowing them to communicate without making any noise as well as effectively making verbal spell components unnoticable, and four arms that can wield a shortsword, scimitar, and two hand crossbows at the same time!
I don’t understand. In the earlier video with Crawford he said they changed things so you didn’t feel bad if you don’t take something. How is HM anything but that. You can’t use class and subclass features if you don’t have HM up, which means you can’t use a ton of money other really cool spells .
Unironically the only explanation that makes sense to me is that Ranger was the last class they worked on but they just ran out of time before they could come up with something that aligns with their stated goals. Hence why this edition's ranger really kinda just feels like Tasha+ more than a rework
Hunters mark was reworked to work like in 4e but people hated on it so they had to revert it at the last minute and now all reverted hunters mark feature don’t work and hunters mark just can’t be concertation free
I want to love the Ranger. I like the outdoorsy feel. I just want the damage to keep up or the utility to keep up. I dont want to be a burden because I like the role. I would like to see a Beastmaster that can recruit animals by using Speak With Animals and then have a pack similar to what a necromancer can do.
Positive Critiques: Wis Rangers are more viable than ever, and may be better than Dual Wielders with Shillelagh scaling better, Dueling Fighting Style and Polearm Master Feat. Also, you could potentially be a swichter between melee and ranged with Crossbow Expert and Nick property. With these, at 17th level, you will be able to make 5 attacks with Swift Quiver
Would've loved an earlier version of Feral Senses that gave 10 feet of blindsight, which then got upgraded to 30 feet at Level 18. Also, when I think of Rangers in fiction, some are loners, and others like the Scout Regiment in Attack on Titan are like elite special forces type specialists. That would've been a neat subclass to see developed.
Btw, lvl 20 paladin with divine and mark wielding a GS with GWM and smiting at max level is dealing 48.75 DpR while a dual wielding ranger using shilelagh on a club and a scimitar and a beast of the land deals 52.275 DpR. Basically, stock beast ranger out dpses paladin
btw, my simplest ranger "fix" is: Move "Relentless Hunter" from lvl 13 to lvl 9, move the capstone from 20 to lvl 13 and add (Whenever you cast hunters mark without a spell slot, you can choose to do so without concentrating on it with the duration of 1 minute) And finally, give rangers the same capstone as the new monk.
I think a possible middle ground with hunters mark could’ve been that you can concentrate on an additional (different) spell while also concentrating on hunters mark-so you can use another spell but still have that risk of losing concentration
Two big missed points on spells: 1. Shillelagh is INSANE for rangers now, especially with Polarm Master. Let's you be SAD (Wisdom), with a shield, and comparable damage to the dual weilding. 2. The ranger can easily pick up Divine Favor with a 1 level dip, and do the same combo the Vengeance Paladin can. But yeah I think the problem with the class is that the designers chose to use spells as if they were class features. But if look at the exclusive spells they aren't actually very good or don't really make sense as a spell. If they were going to go with this direction, the spell list needed a lot more love (and hunter's mark needed to be concentration free).
@@DaMuetze it’s a paladin only evocation spell and it was removed from the war domain spell list. Evocation is not allowed though fey touched or shadow touched so unless I’m missing something else a paladin dip is the only way to get it.
@giltigt correct, but these are two seperate thoughts. A 1 level dip isn't a high cost, and if you're playing something like fey wanderer, you already wanted a good charisma. I would only really consider the dip if I'm trying to do a "max damage" build but I think it ends up being very potent at all levels of play in that scenario. Lots of thematic opportunities too.
Beast master = bonus action to make your pet attack, but at 7th level your pet can also Help action at the same time. using this bonus action reduces your attacks by 1, but fear not, if you are a high elf you get true strike, meaning you get bonus damage on 1 attack per round. At lvl 11 the beast can hit twice, still help and you can add 2d6 to your main shot that again has advantage. Since everything stacks on your wisdom this also allows you to just pick Guide background, grab Magic initiate with Shillelagh, Guidance and Feary fire. Shillelagh also took a boost, the dice becomes larger, so when your pet dies grab a staff and double-attack with D10s or D12 on a 1handed weapon. While you are wisdom based you open up to feats like Fey touched (giving you a lvl 2 spell at lvl 4), Bless, Silvery barbs, and other stuff. Once you hit lvl 11 just multiclass into cleric or rogue depending on your wishes.
My thoughts to fix Hunter's mark: Remove concentration for Ranger's specifically. Its just silly. Sorcerer's have new ability's that don't require concentration, Divine favor the paladin's doesn't require concentration, and there aren't a lot of other ways to really boost the damage of the ranger, so getting an extra d6 on 3 maybe 4 attacks is not broken in the least bit. Average amounts to 9-12 extra damage?.... oh no!.... Allow the ranger to mark a new target when the first target dies as a REACTION not a bonus action. This enables them to leave that bonus action open for the numerous other things they can do. Bump the damage for the *capstone* ability from 1d10 to 2d12. That might seem like a mega damage boost, and it is. But we are talking about a 20th level character here. And if a DM is capable of running a campaign with a 20th level wizard or sorcerer, they can handle a high damage ranger. Thoughts on my fixes? Thats gonna be my homebrew fixes anyway because I agree overall its a very cool class and I want people to be excited about it. Hunters Mark just needed a little more time to cook in the oven.
I’d rather have the capstone be not a damage increase to HM, but yeah if it’s gonna be damage buff ur right it needs to by WAY more than 1d6 -> 1d10 also I love the idea of switching HM as a reaction
I would rather remove the marking of a new target from the action economy completely: just make it part of the first attack against that creature. (This is largely because the Fey Wanderer's defining feature -- Beguiling Twist at level 7 -- uses up their reaction.)
I haven’t seen anyone bring it up in the reaction videos I’ve seen to the Ranger, but (obviously speaking for myself), the Tales of the Valiant Ranger nailed what I was hoping 5.5’s Ranger would be, and since they’re cross compatible, that’s what I’m playing in our next campaign.
I haven't played a ranger, but other people in my D&D group have so I will be interested to hear their thoughts. My biggest issue is that hunter's mark is a bonus action and that conflicts with other things the ranger might want to do especially the Beastmaster. The Beastmaster would either have to cast Hunters mark/move hunter's mark or command their beast companion to do things. Also, hunter's mark being only 1d6 until the late levels is just not strong enough. This is frustrating because you now have free casting for hunter's mark that will go unused. On the plus side, I like the idea that favored enemy and natural explorer are not tied to specific use cases and have more utility.
Excelent video!! Something that improved on the new ranger: being able to change one prepared spell per long rest. About dual wielding, still no reason to stick to ranger past lvl 5. Even the 17th lvl feature seems almost pointless if you are dual wielding using a shortsword with Vex.
I agree it's a buzzkill to nerf Sharpshooter damage, but I agree with the mechanical style of ranged dealing less damage than melee *because* being ranged typically means you're going to take less damage because you're not rushing into the throng of the battle, you're on the outskirts peppering them. Melee dealing more damage makes sense since you're risking getting surrounded, taking hits from multiple sources, essentially being on the front-lines. I still feel like there should be ranged options for improving damage, but I agree with the idea of having it not be as optimal as melee.
See my issue with that is that it treats "taking damage" as a bad thing. Sure from your character's perspective it is bad, but from a game-play point of view taking damage does nothing to reduce your character's ability to function and it increases the drama & excitement of the game. From a strategic point of view, you actually want the enemies to spread damage across the party as that reduces the chance of any one character going down. There's a reason PCs focus-fire on enemies, if enemies focus-fire on PCs 5e combat gets a lot more deadly.
Since you can cast Hunters Mark without a spell slot as a Ranger, you can cast any other spell that is an Action as long as it isn't concentration. For example, Hunters Mark + Conjure Barrage
25:48 Hard disagree. A lot of the options that were removed wouldn't have hurt anything if they had remained, and even been tweaked for better utility. Losing them strips the Ranger of a ton of it's flavor.
I started a character about 2 years ago in a campaign as a standard (+1 to all scores) human Champion Fighter who had a sailor background. She used two weapon fighting from the start at level 1 with shortswords. After a couple of levels, I had her multiclass into Ranger since she was consistently helping the party navigate their travel throughout the campaign. After that, I had her pick up the Dual Wielder feat and the Drakewarden subclass (the latter for cool story reasons but also feels pretty good to play). Now with the new rules update, I can't help but feel extremely lucky that all of the upcoming changes will benefit the exact type of character I play. 😄
How come every time these videos upload I'm always watching the Drakenheim series also I bet Kelly and Monty are both pleased and kinda disappointed with the ranger a little bit
As it stands, my use of Hunter's Mark is as a fallback spell when I either run out of spell slots for other things, or I don't want/need to bother casting another spell for that encounter. Sort of supporting that train of thought is that the Ranger's HM-related features come at the same levels that they get new spell levels (13 and 17) ... levels where the Paladin still gets nothing other than those new spell levels.
Ranger is probably stronger than its ever been, especially at lower levels. The problem is that it forces you to be a dual weilding Hunter's mark combatant to be viable.
One thing to note about the free casts of Hunter’s Mark is they allow you to cast another leveled Spell with your action (Fey Wanderer’s Summon Fey maybe) which is pretty cool.
Not a fan of the new ranger. They fixed only a few things about the class that bother me, while stripping out a lot of the flavor from class features and making other things worse. I hate that half of your class features now depend on using Hunter's Mark, since that locks out out from using actually interesting spells that require concentration unless you want to go full support. Then, there's the fact that you're often using your bonus action to cast/move it, which fights with subclass features that want to use your bonus action every turn (Beast Master, Drakewarden, Horizon Walker). It's gonna have to be the same 'ol homebrew as before for me...
So you can cast Hunter's Mark without spell slots several times in a day. This actually synergizes with the other Ranger spells, since we can now cast 2 in that round. So it has been buffed in that way.
I like the ranger, and I think the changes to dual wielding are good. I love Tireless as a feature, but the class as a whole suffers from slow progression. They've got so much stuff to give the ranger and they're afraid to have more than one thing per level. Invisibility doesn't come until 14. Blindsight doesn't happen until 18. All their good toys are so back loaded they may never get to use them. Hunter's Mark should no longer require concentration starting around L9, and it's progression through the whole class should be about making things easier to hit. I'd like to see an increase to attack rolls much earlier in the game. I would love to see Hunter's Mark gain the functionality of sharpshooter or see invisible at higher levels, where your marked target can't benefit from cover or invisibility. I don't need it to do more damage necessarily, I just want it to be worth keeping.
Drop the hunter's mark/favored enemy gimmick. Give Ranger the Skirmish ability (Scout 3.5e) where they move X amount of distance and can then deal Yd6 bonus damage on their attacks.
Sharpshooter should be changed to provide profiency to damage like GWM does, but change the ignore cover to ignore half-cover and downgrade three-quarters cover to half-cover.
You guys summed it up perfectly. Rangers are just worse, Paladins. I would argue they are on par because they have ranged options when Paladins don't. But with how bad ranged is now with Sharpshooter being nerfed into irrelevance ...
Kudos to you two for not taking the normal negative stance. It's okay to recognize the issues with things without saying " ugh it's ruined it's the worst thing ever". If an egg recipe has some odd choices, I simply adjust things to my liking and say "well these things were weird about this recipe but overall it was good with some adjustments."
So... At lower levels before you didn't have class features outside of specific conditions start at lower levels. Now, you don't have class features at higher levels if you do not want to cast a spell that fell off level 5-8 levels ago and is greed, requiring multiple bonus actions and your concentration to maintain. I think the ranger is a lot better now than it was at the 2014 release, but the over reliance on Hunter's Mark at higher levels kills the vibe for me. Honestly, if they lost concentration from hunter's mark instead of not being able to fail a con check for it, I wouldn't have any complaints worth mentioning, to be fair. As it stands, if you ever want to use your concentration on anything else, you lose 3 higher level class features entirely, including your capstone.
I actually do kinda agree with Monty's comment that everyone wants something different from the ranger, and honestly that could've been an amazing way to go with the class that the creators didnt even seem to consider. The new Druid gets to choose between a more martial and spellcaster path at level 2 now. They can choose "Magician" which gives them nature/arcana bonuses and improves cantrips. Or they can go "Warden" to get medium armor and shields. Then at later levels they can further specialize between the two. While im not crazy about this for Druids, i think it would.have been AMAZING for rangers. Since rangers flavor and mechanics are already somewhat of a mix between a fighter/rogue/druid, it would be amazing to see some selections at the current HM levels that allow you to choose different boosts to those areas. Maybe the "Hunter" path gives you the current HM features with perhaps some bonuses to tracking. Or a "Wildsmaster" specialization gives you spellcasting buffs, maybe your nature/elemental spells are better, or you get the once per day spells that tasha's gave with the primal awareness optional feature. Maybe some kind of rodueish path makes you better at sneaking and infiltration. There were so many options that WotC could have implemented without trying to pigeonhole players into using HM. I honestly think that the reason people are angry with the new ranger is less specific than HM still using concentration, and more to do with a lack of player agency in building your ranger with creative freedom. Sorry, rant over. Lol😅
Yay Ranger is better, wait everyone is better and Ranger is now probably in last. It’s like improving your track time by 5 seconds and thinking you’re gonna at least place in the top 5 in the next meet only to find out everyone who your 5 second improvement would have put you a head of has actually improved as well.
Ranger does fine mathematically. You can dislike the thematics, or the structure, or the Hunter's Mark stuff, and that's fair but DPR is pretty good. Well on par with people like Fighters. The weakest class in combat, at least for damage, is probably Rogue. Ranger does skills pretty well and utility spells which give it advantages, while maintaining solid damage.
@@DeadmanwalkingXI sadly d&d isn’t just a combat simulator. Also all those dpr numbers are based on best build, best situations. Losing concentration, having your marked target die, and other factors rapidly drop their dpr. Concentration usually isn’t a big deal but their best damage build is melee. And yes, their lack of clear theme, weak HM features, and lack of a reason to not multiclass is why I rank them as last in 2024. Base Rogue didn’t see much improvement, but a rogues dpr is highly dependent on sub class and what items they have. Also even if cunning strikes is honestly net zero as an improvement it adds choice to every turn and that alone can be fun.
@@lamarwashington2718 For Concentration, it's important to remember that you have a shitload of Hunter's Marks per day...if you lose Concentration you can just re-cast it. Sure, that's your Bonus Action, but that still applies Hunter's Mark to 3 attacks the next turn after losing Concentration...same basic math with needing to swap targets. Hunter's Mark on 3 attacks isn't as good as on four, but it's hardly game-breakingly bad. And this is an issue that applies to the Paladin build it's being compared to as well. And if you want to talk non-combat, Rangers are probably the single best martial after the Rogue outside combat. They're notably better outside of combat than a Paladin due to better features and spell list for that purpose and have a definite leg up on Monks, Barbarians, and most Fighters as well. Like, Rangers have more Expertise than anyone other than Rogues and Bards, a really solid list of utility spells including a lot of Rituals, and with Fey Wanderer can be good at social stuff as well as the survival things. That's on top of the climb/swim speed, languages and other stuff. Their non-combat utility game is really strong. You can easily dislike them the most, that's purely subjective, but saying they're last in any objective sense is odd. They're very much on par with most builds in damage, and better than a lot of those builds outside combat.
@@DeadmanwalkingXI hmmm, you don’t realize you did this weird thing that I mostly see people do when comparing athletes. You created a box in which to compare them, so that the Ranger could shine. It’s not my job or desire to convince you 2024 Ranger is in last place amongst the classes. If you can’t see that for yourself that’s fine. Enjoy the game.
I’m starting a 3-20 5.24 game in November and I haven’t even seen the PHB yet, but the first house rule I’ve decided to use is to make Hunter’s Mark concentration free at 13.
I'm somewhat disappointed with the ranger. It’s the class I’m the least exited to play, because it feels like a reprint instead of an update to the class. (Seriously: Go to the "2024 Ranger vs. 2014 Ranger: What's New" article on DnD Beyond and take a shot every time they mention “Tasha's” and you won't make it to the end of the page.) You can probably build a character, that does okay damage, because you still get Weapon Mastery, a Fighting Style and Extra Attack, but those aren’t exclusive to the Ranger and beyond that there are too few features that make me want to pick it over other classes, especially since most of what actually new revolves around Hunter’s Mark, which still has the same issues as the 2024 version. It's just frustrating to see that the class only got gimmicks instead of an actual useful new feature, despite needing one. I don’t want this to turn into a long rant, there are just so many things wrong with the Ranger, that I could write an essay about it, but you probably already know something went wrong, when a common reaction in the community to class changes is: “Okay, how do we homebrew this?”
I like the idea of Ranger being a Physical caster with Barrage and Volley becoming staple Damaging skills like fireball. Maybe the tuning is not there, but the idea is pretty great. Specially if it scaled better with your weapons.
![เขามัทรี - เอ็กซ์ ศุภกฤต - จอนนี่มิวสิค [ Official MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/AS9ufKuQIVs/mqdefault.jpg)
“Err on the side of positivity” is both my new favorite Kelly quote and also solid life advice. I’m making a T-shirt.
Agreed
Does anyone else think that the weapon mastery going to be more clutter to keep track of between all the weapon attacks of all the characters
@carlosmarroquin3019 it most likely will, but it probably won't be worse than 4e was. I liked 4e a lot, so I speak from experience.
As DMs, we'll have to come up with an easy way to track it. Personally, I put colorful paper clips on Initiative cards to track conditions, but I know not everyone uses index cards to track Initiative.
Kelly has good wisdom. I live my life by his advice that housework helps anxiety.
I think it's funny that they're still saying that Hunter's Mark is suboptimal as a focus of a class feature when you just did a 17 level paladin build and honestly would be using Hunter's Mark for a good chunk of it. And this is on a paladin Ranger just has a better Hunter's Mark, the new style is the old style, two weapon fighting elf Ranger just like Legolas.
Hunter's Mark should have been made a class feature instead of a spell. Much like other classes that apply their effects when you hit an enemy with an attack. Starting with a low amount of damage per hit and scaling with hunter level, or something along those lines. This also would let them do more fun and unique things with it like giving extra effects like Rogue's sneak attack. If anything, it makes more sense for Hunter than it does for Rogue. Or set them up to be the ranged smite class with nature themed smite attacks based around hunter's mark.
Ranger definitely needed more time to cook.
Agreed
Actually they did kinda do that. A lot of the Ranger spells now work like the new Smite spells and some have lost concentration as well. I do agree though that they probably should've made it a feature cause I want to feel like the Barbarian Ranger multiclass is at least an excitable option.
"applied on hit instead of consuming a bonus action and scales with ranger level" is already how the Tasha's Favored Foe feature works (d4 at lv1, d6 at lv6, d8 at lv14). They should've leaned into it (by making it apply on every attack instead of once per turn) and dropped Hunter's Mark as a spell entirely. I fully agree that Favored Foe/Hunter's Mark should have more options (perhaps some general and some tied to subclass) for alternate effects on their marked targets (like maybe the gloomstalker ranger could have the target save every turn against a creeping blindness or something). Maybe rangers could use a reaction to consume the mark and gain some kind of benefit (immediately attack it or something). It would've gone a good way towards giving the Ranger a cool class identity, but now we'll have to wait another half decade for them to pull another Tasha's and give us a satisfying class.
Exactly, they did that for the Vengeance Paladin and their 'Abjure Enemy' feature. On top of the fact, they also got a level 1 concentration free spell that boosts damage lol
I agree. My ranger doesn't cast spells...
Minor note, fey wanderer damage is once per round per target, so if you get past the first enemy the second one takes it too, particularly good for hordes
So it beats Gloomstalker quite hard.
Not certain I agree, its more versatile, but hunter has a better specialization for both hordes and single target depending on how you build it if we are speaking damage
That being said, they get wisdom to a ton of charisma stuff so I do think they are overall better even if not in combat
@@hamc7112Hunter shifts into neutral after 6th level. It's a shame it has little to offer beyond the early levels. The other subclasses feel pretty evenly balanced amongst themselves.
@@elementzero3379 do agree with that yeah
Outside of campaigns where you know you are going constantly against hordes, I don't find it particularly memorable
All other three feel really good tho
And HM does not, so you are either sacrificing the damage of one or the other
I think around level 11 or 13, the ranger should be able to either get a concentration free hunter's mark, or be able to apply it as part of their attack. Like the new paladin's vow of emnity.
Said the same thing ...
Im going to homebrew it so you can hold Concentration on Hunter's mark as long as you keep concentration on different RANGER spell ... rather than not loosing it by damage.
Yeah lets give them an emanation on level 6 that boosts their and their allies saving throws based on wisdom.
WotC really dropped the ball on paladins and esp rangers it feels like they redesigned the warlock, then they were bored so the paladin took some of the changes from warlocks (and gutting DS) and last they couldn't be bothered with the ranger so they made it a dex/wisdom combination of warlock and paladin.
@@mpetrov2402Paladin DPS hasn’t been gutted. Paladin’s Nova-ing down targets is what got changed, their DPS is far more sustainable now and they can still do a ton of damage on crits and whatnot.
@@keeganmbg6999 read what I wrote again.
As for NOVA damage Valor bards and Eldritch knights can do similar burst to a 2014 Paladin for multiple combats and not just 3 rounds (assuming lvl 11 paladin, smiting every hit).
@emulationemperor8924 Honestly, stop looking purely at dps. Rangers can do a lot more than just damage.
Dwarf 13th level gloomstalker.
13 str, alert origin feat, expertise in perception and investigation, sharpshooter at 4th level, max dex at 8th level, great weapon master at 12th level.
As a scout: darkvision 180ft, invisible to darkvision, tremorsense, double prof bonus to perception and investigation.
As an explorer: +10 ft speed, climb and swim speed equal to land speed, access to longstrider and water breathing.
As an ambusher: Advantage to init rolls, +10 init ( 5 dex + 5 alert ), can switch initiative with any party member.
As an archer: 2 atks/turn: 2d8+22 piercing + 2d6 force HM, + 1d8 psychic + frighten every creature in a 10ft radius that fails a will save.
Atks ignore half and three-quarters cover and have a 600ft max range with no disadvantage.
Postitive Critique as requested:
I feel like getting the free casts of Hunter's Mark is a decent change because even though it still requires concentration, there's much less of a penalty in dropping Hunter's Mark to cast a different spell requiring concentration. And now you can freely use other spells without having to even consider saving a spell slot or two for casts of hunter's mark. You can have Hunter's Mark up, drop concentration to cast Zephyr Strike using a spell slot then cast Hunter's Mark the next turn without using a spell slot. It's not perfect but it does add flexibility with casting different spells.
If you cast spike growth and then all the enemies get passed it or spread out to the point where it's no longer needed, you can drop concetration and switch to a free cast of Hunter's Mark until a better opportunity for a spell comes up. It gives you a little extra damage at any point as a fallback option, which is a nice change.
At least some of the other Ranger smite-style Spells which used to require concentration to augment a single attack no longer require concentration. So there aren't many competitors any more.
You can also cast it on the same turn as an action spell thanks to the new spellcasting rules.
@@broomemike1 Yes, I really like the loss of concentration on those spells, Hail of thorns is still meh, but Lightning Arrow is pretty good. However, I feel like they will almost never see the light of day because they are both based on the Ranger using ranged weapons but the two-weapon fighting ranger is so much better than the ranged ranger now.
@@agilemind6241 Maybe... But don't rule out having both options available. You can still use ranged attacks when you're closing in distance or need to use AoE options. It's more of a trap to see yourself ONLY using melee. Rangers should adapt based on the circumstances.
This is kind of where I'm at. It's not necessarily about having it up 100%, but it's there when you need or want it. Which I think a lot of people are missing and focusing on it being up 100% of the time. Hey, you now get free castings of it (which with the new rules you can now cast other leveled spells using the free castings on the same turn), and it's no longer a huge resource cost to drop it when you really need to and reapply it when it matters. It frees up quite a bit of spells slots, and only applies when you want or need it to. It is a nice option to have in reserve, and shouldn't really ever be your main focus.
My issue is Rangers were slowly lifted to where they were with Tasha's. They still didn't have a strong theme, but they at least worked as a class, and you didn't feel like a worse archer fighter. However, the ranger class still was severely limited in bonus action economy and concentration. They have now given a "theme" to the ranger that is built around hunters mark. However they didn't give it enough scaling for me to really want to use it throughout, so I am again, like in 2014, left feeling like I am missing class features. Also, if I do choose to utilize HM, I am switching it every turn because most enemies that are focused fired do not last more than a round. So now the stress on BAs and Concentration is more stressed than ever. Further, with all of the many many new and easy ways to knock someone prone you will frequently have disadvantage. Unfortunately, without DM intercession, I think Ranger feels like a trap. I think, at minimum, removing HM concentration after level 6 is required, possibly also increasing damage scaling. Of all the classes, I think Ranger was done the most dirty.
I actually think the Bonus Action economy is the bigger problem, particularly for the Beast Master. Although I think the solution there is to let them command the companion as a free action, but in general power wise the Ranger is actually doing mostly fine. I think the better solution is to move the 2 new features down a couple levels and make them apply to more than just Hunter's Mark. Feats and spells will let you scale already as the Ranger has really good spells, but they'll be trapping new players into thinking HM is your only option.
@@malmasterson3890 IMO the major problem with 2024 Ranger is the general nerfing of ranged combat. Longbow is basically dead because it's Weapon Mastery is really lame, and there are no good feats to enhance it as SS is basically a waste of your time. Then you have all the new proning-effects which will land you with disadvantage if you try to use ranged weapons. In contrast two-weapon fighting is mega-buffed so you can make 3 attacks per turn and have a BA free for Hunter's Mark.
I think I would have preferred loosing the Gloomstalker if it meant the base class worked well.
@malmasterson3890 I agree the Bonus Action economy is the issue. 2024 Beast Master can sacrifice 1 attack to make the beast attack, but that hardly helps. Although I heartily disagree with a concentration free Hunter's Mark. I think transferring it without the use of an additional Bonus Action would be a nice upgrade.
@@agilemind6241 Making it so SS could get around prone effects in addition to cover would've been a nice add on to compensate. That said, I do disagree a little bit as Heavy Weapon Master is actually a solid option, but of course once you get CBE the.Heavy Crossbow will just be better, so perhaps we need a new Bow specific feat.
Swapping Spells over a Long Rest was the best buff, instead of at level up. They got a good variety of Rituals.
Yeah, but what's the point of more spell options when you're stuck concentrating on HM all of the time. And casting a ritual breaks concentration.
@@coltonhorton4225Use the Spells you like.
@@coltonhorton4225 just dont use HM then
@coltonhorton4225 Rituals are for out of combat utility. There are plenty of situations where you'll want to have another concentration spell over HM, as Ranger has a really good spell list.
@@coltonhorton4225 Concentration sucks.
Hunters mark will be one of the most homebrewed part of anything in this edition.
I've already talked with my DM last weekend, and as always, HM will have no Concentration requirements.
The obsession WOTC has with concentration on Hunters's Mark is ridiculous. Especially considering the Rangers spell list
Hunters mark is accessible via Fey Touched and Vengeance Paladin, I think that was the issue here.
But still easily solved by giving the Rangers base class a bypass to Conc
@@kbeazy_3050They do get to bypass concentration, but not until level 13, which is why it's so fucking stupid. That upgrade needed to come at like level 6 at the latest.
Yep, my basic homebrew would be to have the free cast hunters mark be concentration free.
I would also go further and give hunters mark an upcast version too that does more damage to make the concentration version attractive to use also… but yeah, this base version of hunters mark sucks and needs home brewing to make it worthwhile.
Rangers in D&D suffer from identity crisis for two reasons.
1st is that no one in 10 years of this edition really designed things for exploration. 5e exploration is one survival check and that's it.
2nd issue is that everyone has a different idea, and no version of 5e Ranger has fulfilled it. I've played a Ranger for 7 years, in one campaign, and my DM is very intentional about including survival and exploration because we all enjoy it. But even then we tweaked the hell out of the Ranger.
Rangers in D&D use magic, that's just the way it is. When you stop trying to think of Aragorn or Drizzt, and just think of what a magical druidic/nature magic warrior is, you are still unsatisfied with the 5e Ranger. Most spells are concentration or archery themed, they don't hit hard, move the best, control the battlefield well, or excel anywhere.
I love their ability to contribute here and there, but that's me, I don't need the spotlight. If they are a fighter who has become entangled in nature magic, their class and subclass should reflect that.
Last part of your comment is the crux of the ranger identity issue. They don't need to excel at anything, that's the key part they are moderately good at everything and a lot of people don't like this playstyle cause they feel robbed of the spotlight. If you want a spotlight play a paladin they are now truly the main character. The issue with this to me at least is a lot of people who don't like the ranger aggressively weighing in whenever the ranger is being altered and muddying the waters with unreasonable expectations.
First point is on point. Second point is why I think Ranger subclasses should diverge waaay more than other class/subclass splits.
Well said. My biggest issue has been that Ranger really has no features unique to it and push an identity. So it just feels bland or empty.
To your first point, I think that was a big shortcoming of the RotFM adventure rules as written. It's one of my favorite stories with a fantastic environment begging for environmental survival and exploration, but the larger game outside of RotFM had very poor, but established, rules for it and WotC probably didn't want to provide rules that worked just for that adventure but undercut the core guidelines. I think they should have done that anyway, but they are pretty easy to homebrew/find alternatives online. I highly recommend that adventure, despite it being very polarizing online lol
What they really need is explorer class features that can be applied in all circumstances, but also feel flavorful and like a survival expert. Deft explorer is great but incredibly bland. The natural explorer option of the revised ranger (UA) had a really great version of it, where you didn't choose a terrain, but instead can ignore difficult terrain, have adv on initiative rolls, and the "travel for 1 hour or more and your group gets" section.
Also I disagree with comments on how Ranger doesn't need to feel standout. Every other class stands out, not just paladin. Ranger doesn't know its identity, because theyre trying to hard to merge the three classes (druid, fighter, rogue) rather than using those classes to create something new - where you can tell it's a mix of those classes, but it feels entirely unique as well.
I'm playing a Fey Wanderer ranger in a 1-20 campaign where we're currently level 19 (I did multiclass into Rune Knight fighter after level 13). My biggest issue is that almost every ranger spell worth casting is concentration. Same as paladin spells. But they at least removed concentration from the smite spells.
They've removed Concentration from some Ranger spells, as well. We agree that this design sucks, but it is still possible to build a pretty good spell loadout with this Ranger.
In Treantmonk's Ranger video (isn't yet public as of today), Chris talks about this and lists all of the Concentration-free spells he'd like to prepare. The list included more spells than any Ranger could ever prepare. So, while it's an annoying design, at least it doesn't kneecap the Ranger.
I do agree with the Dudes that the ranged (bow/crossbow/musket) Ranger is now far less appealing, given how melee combat has been buffed.
Rangers as imagined in DnD exist on a spectrum with fighter at one end and druid at the other. The problem isn't that different people have different ideas on where the Ranger sits on that spectrum, it's that its on that spectrum at all, rather than possessing a unique mechanical identity of it's own.
Why would that be a problem? The Paladin can be thought of as Fighter/Cleric and it doesn't have any resulting issues.
@bigdream_dreambig I disagree. The paladin absolutely DOES have identity issues, especially when compared to war clerics and eldritch knights. I think they simply benefit from being a cultural darling of the player base, due to having mechanics that naturally lend themselves to the epic main character hero archetype in a way that Rangers dont.
1e rangers had a 50% chance to suprise monsters, and later on got magic-user spells in addition to druid spells.
I don't like any class being inextricably tied to a specific spell that becomes its entire identity. It has been my thought that Rangers are wilderness survivalists, guides, and explorers who serve as the buffer between civilization and the wild. They are the quintessential roving warriors who study nature and exploit it to survive the wilderness and combat threats to civilization. When I think of a ranger, I think of a hybrid of a Witcher and a Druid. They're trained in nature, animals, monsters, martial combat, and primal magics.
Just changing it from a spell to a feature would have done wonders. Action Surge is the most notable feature of a Fighter. Bardic Inspiration is the big part of Bards. Wildshape for Druids.
Hunter's Mark could have been a fun feature every Ranger got, and each subclass could have given unique ways to bend it. Like Druid Wildshape, Hunter's Mark could be different between a Hunter and a Gloomstalker. For Beast Master, make it work for the pet too. Gloomstalker, allow advantage to hide from your marked target. Hunter, up the damage once per turn, which is crazy vanilla but at least unique.
It shouldn't just be a spell. It should be a fun feature that is exciting to build around -- not just a boring d6 of damage and, "Oh, you can track them better... you know, if the target escapes after you've used it on them.
100% this. I've been saying the entire time that Witcher, bounty hunter, wilderness guide, and trapper are all quintessentially Ranger. They're not necessarily magical (definitely not as a core concept), they're trained specialists. They're survivalists and detectives and tamers of wild beasts. Just like Rogue is the one you send in to pick locks and disable traps, Ranger is the one who can locate and interpret forensic evidence (tracks, scat, refuse, blood, etc.), guide the party through perilous terrain, extract useful materials from their environment (healing salves, poisonous mushrooms, food, clean water). Hunter's mark is such a narrow pigeonhole for the entire class, and it doesn't even capture the class identity.
The new Ranger is just... "Play a Barbarian and refluff the rage".
@@justinsmart581 I think Hunter's Mark should be replaced with a feature that gives you a small fey, beast, or celestial spirit as a companion in the form of an animal bound to you. They take initiative immediately after you and don't require an action to give it commands. They have one action, and no bonus action. They can use that action to attack, dodge, dash, disengage, help or hide. The damage starts at 1d6 + Wis mod force damage and increases like a cantrip ( 2d6, 3d6, 4d6). It's HP is Ranger level * 2 + Wis Mod + PB. If it's HP is reduced to 0, you can expend a spell slot to summon it as a bonus action. AC is 10 + PB. A land form would have +2 AC plus a single melee mastery property added to its attack, a flying form would have flyby plus a flying speed of 60 ft, and a water form would give you water breathing plus a swim speed equal to your walking speed. You determine its appearance. As you level up, it can increase in size and become a mount.
Now, subclasses would also modify the companion further. For example, the Drakewarden from Fizban's could give the companion a breath attack. The Hunter companion would gain an extra attack. The Gloom Stalker companion would gain advantage on stealth checks. When a Fey Wanderer gets an opportunity attack, the companion can attempt to knock the target prone.
I’ve always felt that way with EB and warlocks. The difference is EB Is fantastic from both a thematic and mechanical perspective so it gets more of a pass
I love that rangers now have access to all the fighting styles. This opens up strength based builds. I could see hunter with the great weapons master feat using a cleave weapon along with the horde breaker trait to get four attacks with a potential fifth bonus action attack with a critical hit or kill.
What fighting style did you want that didn't benefit strength rangers before? I don't see how that helps, especially when they killed what was already the weakest fighting style (great weapon fighting) by making it unbelievably weak5
@@limaTheNoobProtection would be a good choice now. Defense was always solid though.
@@limaTheNoob Tbh great weapon fighting has been dead for ten years. The change in the new great weapon fighting is barely noticeable, changing your average greatsword damage from 4.2 to 4.0 is such a minor nerf that you wont realyl even notice it, and is a fair trade off for speeding up combat by removing all those constant rerolls (not that you should ever pick that fighting style with either version of it in the first place).
@@Klaital1 what is that 4.2? That seems off, greatsword gained 1.33 damage from it, and now it fell to 0.6 or something. It's not a big number, but they could have buffed it by making the increase better, but no, they haaaad to nerf it. Before, there was a niche for it, which is magical weapons that add dice to each hit. Now, it's uber dead and there's no saving it. More trap options to the game.
@@limaTheNoob Ah sorry that was per die, my bad, so it changed from 8.4 to 8.0. Which is still less than half a point per attack. Previously if you rolled a 1 or 2 you rerolled it which averaged to 3.5, so it was 3.5 + 3.5 + 3 + 4 +5 + 6 divided by 6, or 4.2 average result on the dice, whereas now it's 3 +3 +3 +4 +5 +6 divided by 6 or 4 average result on the dice.
I just can't wait till you guys start making class guides and stuff! This is so exciting!
14:44 ah, I guess now we know whom Colby of D4 fame was so mysteriously referring to earlier in his paladin video :D
I feel too many comments I've seen about the 2024 ranger are conflating "I don't like this class" with "this class is weak". Any class with access to heavy weapons and spellcasting as a baseline can not be a weak class, period. The new spellcasting rules means that casting hunter's mark without using a slot means you can cast a spell with your action, your bonus action clog is all but non-existent now due to the nick property and beastmaster being able to give up one of those nick attacks to have their beast attack if they need to reapply hunter's mark. I think people also forget that levels 9, 13, and 17 also give you brand new spell levels as the MAIN feature, and the hunter's mark perks are just a bonus. There's a reason full spellcasters get less class features compared to the martial classes, new spell levels ARE a class feature, they just don't show up on the chart. Personally, I think rogue is in a much shakier spot than the current iteration of the ranger, absolutely the worst class in the game if we're talking mechanics. If you don't like hunter's mark, that's fine, but saying that ranger is a bad class because you personally don't like the spell is just disingenuous. The class is good.
It's crazy how much the PF2e Ranger accomplishes everything you want. The core is your Hunt Prey, which provides bonuses to tracking and searching as well as your range on ranged attacks. You get Survival by default, with core actions and exploration abilities that make you do all the things that being a survivalist is good at, with class/skill/general feats to build on that even more. Your subclass builds on your Hunt Prey, whether you are the Flurry for multiattacking with a bow or two weapons (both are supported), the Precision do deal extra damage once per turn, or the other one that isn't very good but like helps with learning creature stat blocks and increasing your AC against your prey and stuff.
If you want spellcasting, you take Warden feats to get some focus spells. If you want an animal companion, you take companion feats. If you want to be an urban ranger, adjust your stats and take certain skill feats. Bow ranger, dual wield ranger, and great weapon ranger are all viable and strong.
When a friend was trying to get me into PF2e a couple years ago he told me to build a ranger to see how it feels. I was amazed at how PF2e allowed the freedom to build whatever style of ranger I wanted and it simply felt good. DnD5e can't seem to figure out what they want the ranger to be and I almost wish they had simply left the class out until they found a solution.
@@GrecoRomanNinja They really needed to embrace more class feats and class choices. They got close during D&D NEXT. People love Invocations and Metamagic and Maneuvers.
Tbh, 5E Ranger should have Nature based Invocations like the Warlock does. I think that would fix a lot of the issues in the class design.
"Just cover the Overview" - 38 minutes long video :p
Like it :)
This one went longer than any of the others… lots of people have opinions and we felt we needed to address them.
@@DungeonDudes yeah thats true from what i read and heard last weeks
Really appreciate the thoughtful discourse in your video, and the way that you point out the math and the changes to the class in the wider context of the whole system (feats, spells, weapon masteries).
The class is still a very viable damage dealer, and the fact that half the subclasses (beast master and fey wanderer) get a concentration free summon in the battlefield means rangers can have a summons and have hunters mark up. Other ranger subclasses, like the drakewarden and swarm keeper, also continue the theme of extra bodies in the battlefield.
I wish they’d done some things differently, but most of my critiques have to do with style and changes to the meta of archery in general, not in the power of the class.
@@DungeonDudes true but definitely homebrewing alot of stuff on rangers the other classes so far and general rules on reviews i haven't homebrew alot of changes for them but so far monk and ranger are going to be a pain (mostly hunters mark definitely changing that to not require concentration and if the party agrees guving them 3 so they can switch bow to others once again thats if the party agrees to it) and some things in monk out of all the campaigns i have ran ranger by far is the biggest problem out of all them homebrewing monk is challenging but not a pain unlike ranger but i still go through with it to make it fun for everybody
It seem like every class or subclass received a feature or spell update that took away concentration for one of their spells or abilities and the ranger got boned.
And cleric.
And rogue
@@redeyejedi9940 there is a reason
There definitely seems to be a need to have either done a consistency re-read/edit, or maybe explained the difference somewhere in the book itself, likely in a call out text box in either the classes that don't follow the rule, or in the general character creation chapter.
Actually quite a few Ranger spells did lose concentration. Ones that will genuinely be very useful.
What I would have liked to see for Ranger in regards to hunters mark:
Hunters Mark scales like a damage dealing cantrip (2d6 at lvl 5, 3d6 at 11...)
At lvl 7, ou apply Hunters Mark to 2 targets with one cast.
Also, (not sure at what level) you can fire two arrows at once (hitting 1 target twice, or two separate targets) a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, per long rest. (Both arrows apply hunters Mark damage.)
OR, for Melee, you get an extra swing (to a second target within 5 feet) a number times equal to your proficiency bonus, per long rest.
Thank you. I always love your content.
28:37 I like how Everquest Rangers have Bane Humanoid, and you can hunt Poachers. That felt on brand.
*Edited* There are interesting interactions that are still worth noting. Because Ranger gets Hunter’s Mark casts for free without using a spell slot… you can actually use it round 1 along with another spell. Long Bows I believe are compatible with Great Weapon Master. Additionally, a number of spells had their concentration removed, like ensnaring strike I believe. Lightning Arrow is still a bonus action so you can’t drop it round 1, but you can still do a lot of great casting.
So you can open with Hunter’s Mark and then your 1 spell slot per turn if needed, and then in subsequent rounds additional spells. There’s still strong combos if you look beyond the focus on Hunter’s Mark.
I think Monty is very right about the fact no one is ever super happy with Ranger. It was my first class in 3.5e. Find Familiar really needs to be a default part of the class list. It's almost worth starting with Magic Initiate: Wizard for Find Familiar. Having Find Familiar would fix the problem of people wanting a pet but not be a Beast Master. It worked in BG3. Do you have any idea how many enemies my Cat Familiar has killed? Just by doing a paltry 2 damage? And then Boo is even more ridiculously strong.
Also, looking at Poisoner, and the fact the save DC can be based on your DEX... While it would be expensive, in a campaign where money isn't really an issue... That would 100% be worth it for Ranger. I always wanted to do a poisoner build.
At upper levels Piercer plays really well with the permanent advantage. You're always crit fishing at that point so the extra damage on a crit is nice.
And while Spike Growth is superior for crowd control, once you get down to single targets, is it really that much better? One thing I learned in Baldur's Gate is... Spike Growth means NOTHING when enemies jump. I was so excited when I got Halsin and then threw down a Spike Growth in Moonrise Towers and had like 10 enemies in it... They all used Jump and ignored it. And realizing that... in my DMing once enemies are aware of a Spike Growth... They all start using Jumps to minimize the damage.
You can't weasel around Hunter's Mark. You can weasel around a lot of alternatives. I think though with Ranger... it's all about thinking of how to build and compound your damage along side Hunter's Mark. If you can set something up with Ensnaring Strike (Concentration Removed) and Hunter's Mark, you have a lot going on. I think ultimately one of the worst things WotC did was removing a lot of the Skill Expertise that Ranger had in early Playtests. Ranger I feel should be a hybrid skill-monkey and ranged support. And when think of it as that, it makes more sense. It's not as much about big damage numbers, but sustained support and utility.Paladin is tanking, damage, and face of the party, while Ranger is flexible with support, crowd control, and skills.
If only Ensnaring Strike had its concentration removed, if only Lightning Arrow wasn't nerfed...
27:44 this is pretty much exactly what the real issue is with rangers, yeah getting only hunter's mark stuff for certain levels feels weird but that isnt why people dislike rangers, its because people have all these character concepts they want the class to embody and DnD design team doesn't (and them being the most popular fantasy ttrpg probably can't) actually stick with a concrete class fantasy and just kind of dilutes a lot of things into one pot, which ends up feeling bland to people. I think that if they moved the hunter's mark buffs entirely to the hunter (they do get hunter's lore which is really nice) and maybe gave rangers even some ribbon features instead of those at the respective levels people would have been happier. As it stands though, they're kind of close to just letting subclasses take the burden of the *insert specific character fantasy here* but as it stands for the rangers, no dice in 5.24e.
This is surprising tbh since their barbarians, for example, actually are concretely different from just a generic angry guy as actually usually being kind of these primal warriors who embody the wild itself, and that was reinforced even in 2024 as apart from frenzy, all other classes have this identity along with the rage boosting certain checks actually also embodying this feeling which is cool, and something rangers (who quintessentially are the opposite, man with all the tools available to them going in reverse into the wild) can take a note of.
Maybe next time hunter's mark is just a class feature instead of a spell so it doesn't have to be competing with concentration.
As for the good bits of the ranger, this is by far the best hunter has been which is really cool, in terms of glow ups till like level 10 a hunter is going to feel excellent, if a little simple
2014 Barb: Hulk Smash
2024 Barb: I am Groot
Shout out to hunters mark for still requiring concentration, so people still don’t want to play ranger.
In a world of ADHD somebody gota concentrate
Lol 😂
Of course it’s still scuffed 😂
Honestly the ranger would have done stupid damage if it wasn't concentration xd. So I get why they made in concentration.
@@LoudYapperfacts. Not to mention multiclass options. Busted.
I do. I very much do.
I wonder if it would be better if Ranger were a subclass of Fighter. Kind of like how Eldritch Knight blends some wizardry into the Fighter, the Ranger could add some druidry.
Yep agree
That's exactly how it started way back. But it's such a popular theme I think it is ok as a class. WotC just need to decide what a ranger is in their game rather than trying to be lots of different archetypes of ranger at once. They'll piss off someone, but at least they'll have made a clear choice about direction.
I felt like a big issue playing my first big campaign as a ranger was, that while I was supposed to be one of the most versatile classes being a half caster, I still ended up feeling like I had no variety in options on what to do on my turn. The painfully low number of spells known if you don't play a subclass that has conclave spells as a feature and over reliance on concentration spells ended up making me throw out one concentration spell and then Just attack for the rest of combat as casting further spells never felt like significant value compared to just attacking, especially considering the partys fighter and druid still outdid me big time in both.
Hunters mark as a class defining feature is conceptually cool as the ranger didn't really have one before whereas other classes had recognisable features like divine smite, rage or metamagic, but the anti synergy with the rangers kit in concentration and bonus action economy hurts a lot, not to mention the lack of lategame scaling.
Houseruling hunters mark to require no concentration as a low mid lv class feature and giving it upcast potential as a high lv class feature might help the ranger to keep up with other classes, and at the very least make him feel more inherintly synergistic and fun to play
That is how pretty much every character that isn't a full spellcaster plays if you want to be optimal, it's not really anything unique to rangers. The versatility comes mostly in out of combat utility.
@DungeonDudes it’s my bday tomorrow I hope you guys have the energy to do another one today for an early gift. I just got into DND and looking forward to the new rules
Congratulations in advance.
@@jugglejunk thank you brother!
same here! Which class do you want?
@@AlmestrandMusic WARLOCK!!!
Any time i play a ranger i never used hunters mark, i usually had better things to do with my bonus actions, especially when playing drakewarden
Yes, THIS
The new best master can use on of their attacks to command their beast and their beast can benefit from hunters mark
Drake warden will very probably get the same changes
welcome to 5e where summons or companions have no will of their own and can not participate in a fight without direct orders.
@@svartrbrisingr6141 unless you're unconscious, in which case they act on their own.
@@Reapor234 which is stupid. But its typical of 5e and its horrible rules that need dms to fix. The Bethesda treatment as i like to call it. Why make something that works if others will fix it for you?
Are we getting new videos every day this week? You guys are beasts with the content.
I think if they were set on making the class revolve around hunters mark, a more appropriate progression would have been something like: 9th level - hunter's mark no longer requires concentration, 13th level - hunter's mark now does 1d8 damage, 17th level - hunter's mark now does 1d10 damage, 20th level - you have advantage on all attacks against your hunter's mark.
I think the rangers flavor is fine appealing to different fantasies is what subclasses do, people are mad at Ranger because they keep making it bad
Honestly, i think a great alternative to HM would have been to treat it like the old fey wanderer did with its level 11 feature. Give rangers the option to either cast HM normally with concentration, or reduce the duration from 1 hour, down to 1 minute and not have concentration.
This would keep you from having 1 hour/8 hours/24 houra of free damage for a single spell slot, to having the option to cast it once per combat. The cost of a spell slot each combat would balance the power out very well on a half-caster, especially if theyre using another spell slot to use a concentration spell. If they dont want to do that, they can conserve resources by either casting HM normally for the increased duration, or uaing another spell. Either way, it gives the player more options.
If i DM for a ranger under the new books im definitely using this rule, and asking for it if I play one.
Yeah. Their 13th level feature really should have been to be able to cast HM conc free but it only lasts a minute.
You guys absolutely NAILED this video. Thank you. Thank you so much for listening.
"They oddly missed the mark." Ha! Good one, Monte. I see what you did there.
I actually think Ranger needs a couple more ranged Smite-lite options for spell slots 1 and 2. Something a bit more interesting than Hail of Thorns like Sniper Shot - 1 reaction immediately after you hit a target with a ranged weapon attack. 2d6 damage (of the same type as the weapon). You do 1d6 additional damage if the target is one of your Favoured Foes.
Basically makes it so that the Ranger gets some better damage and cool flavour.
Playing a ranger in our current campaign. I was so disappointed when I saw the updates to the ranger class because I love the thematic of the class.
We’ve homebrewed ranger to make it more viable. HM no longer requires concentration, at 7 when the ranger cast HM they learn the immunities, resistances, and vulnerabilities of the monster, at 13 you can change the damage type of your HM damage, and capstone is that you can end your HM on a creature and deal max damage to it.
This feels really good to me as it makes the ranger the class that knows how to take down an enemy and can hit them where it hurts.
This random paragraph on the internet is better than what we got lol.
@@AndrewThoesen dude, it feels to me that the team that did the ranger was completely isolated from the rest of the design team and told, “think 4.5e.” I don’t understand how the current iteration made it into an official publication.
Is my memory correct that HM is now force? So your level-13 fix is no longer relevant. I'm also unsure that the "max damage" capstone is good enough. 🤔
@@bigdream_dreambig the idea behind it is that the ranger can learn the vulnerability of a monster and then change the HM damage to deal that type of damage. So an enemy that is vulnerable to cold damage would now take 2dx (forgot to mention scaling) rather than 1dx. The capstone might still be underpowered but if you score a crit against an enemy and target its vulnerability, you could decide to max out all that damage rather than rolling at the cost of a 1st lvl spell slot.
@@jacoboverstreet8553 🤔
I'm binging on your 'changes in 2024' videos. I love how you break stuff down and make it easier to understand.
As for the Ranger, part of the issue is that Aragorn set the bar really high. Another issue is that Travel, the one thing that Rangers really should excel at, is the most-overlooked pillar of the game.
Lean on Hunters Mark for the class but add flavour per subclass. Off the top of my head…
Gloomstalker = Adv on your HM if you or the target is in dim light or darkness
Fey Wanderer = You can teleport up to 30ft to within 5ft of your HM
Beast Master = Your beast can deal the extra HM damage
Hunter = You know the vulnerabilities/ resistances of your HM
I don't think that's good enough for Fey Wanderer. They get so many unlimited teleports that yet one more -- and this one limited in its destination -- seems lackluster.
As a huge ranger fan myself, I'm just disappointed. The roleplay, flavor of the class just isnt there unlike the monk, rogue, fighter etc. where you feel like you're contributing more than just extra damage each hit.
@@bigdream_dreambig I cant disagree with you. I didnt give those ideas proper thought to be honest. I was just trying to offer a solution that provides a bit more flavor
So much YES! Every time Monty says "I just feel like..." and what comes next, is the exact critique and pain points I have. Previous vid it was with the Warlock who should've gotten more spells on their table instead of putting it in Magical Cunning.
I think one of the big problems with the ranger has always been that they don't focus enough on what the ranger should excel at -- survival and adaptability to any environment they find themselves in. While that should include martial prowess and possibly some spellcasting, those should not be the primary focus of the class. Also, forcing a choice for favored enemies and favored terrain should never have happened. Rangers should have all terrains as their favored terrain. They should be able to favor whoever they're currently dealing with.
" Rangers should have all terrains as their favored terrain."
This is it, right here. Nobody when they talk about party composition is like, "man, we REALLY need a ranger". But look at the Natural Explorer features and think about that applied to ALL travel and... its actually kind of tempting. Being able to long rest or explore at lower levels without nasty surprises actually has some value.
The thing is: Survival is not a big aspect is the vast majority of DnD Campaigns. So basing the class around that would not work greatly. And even then: The rouge would probably still be better at survival and stuff due to expertise and reliable talent.
@@AndrewThoesen But I, the player, enjoy those nasty surprises! Why would I want to avoid them?!
But being serious: given the choice between:
A: 4 Clerics
B: 3 Clerics and a Ranger
I would choose A every day of the week.
I agree about adaptability. Regardless of which character you think of when you think of a fantasy ranger, one thing almost all of them have in common is that they are _versatile,_ sometimes to the point of being a jack-of-all-trades (Link from The Legend of Zelda being a good example). And yet, for some reason, WotC keeps designing rangers to be specialists.
@@IgnavumFortuna Wilderness and long distance travel has never had a set of rules that make it fun in any way. In the wilderness you are either lost or not-lost. Being lost is not fun. Slowly dwindling supplies as you stumble around lost is not fun. Those reasons and many others are why long distance travel through wilderness is usually hand-waved in D&D.
I mean, the difference between Ranger and Warlock is that EB is actually good and less taxing to use.
A non-concentration, high damage Cantrip vs a concentration 1st level slight damage increase spell on a half caster class.
It's not a competition on what is worse when it's centered around it.
Here's how I changed it for my campaign:
Level 5 : Ranger's Ire
At 5th level, Hunter's Mark no longer requires concentration. Also, you get 1 free casting of Hunter's Mark at your highest leveled spell slot available, regain expended use upon finishing a Long Rest. That's in exchange of no more "semi-PB amount of free casting per day".
This means that the Ranger, effectively, at level 9 gets 8 hours of Hunter's Mark during the day as a 3rd level spell and it's active for 24 hours at level 17 as a 5th level spell.
No shenanigans of advantage at level 17 though, it stays its usual "base" spell otherwise.
Also, level 20, it doesn't go up to d10. I changed the capstone to :
Foe Slayer : When attacking, you can choose to add your Wisdom modifier to both Attack and Damage rolls.
Is that Wisdom add from Foe Slayer on top of the normal Strength/Dexterity bonus you usually get?
"When attacking, you can choose to add your Wisdom modifier to both Attack and Damage rolls" That actually feels thematically accurate since they're supposed to be a wise, tracking, weakness-exposing killer.
@@inkubus6192 Yeah, that's on top of it. I based it off the Monk and Barbarian capstone features that they just get a+4 score/max score boost to their DEX/WIS and STR/CON respectively. So Rangers which are wildeness experts... gets to have their strikes to be at their mightiest.
I mean, it still sucks that Rangers are MAD (multi ability dependent), but if you roll stats early and get to use 20 in both WIS and DEX or STR... you're getting quite nasty.
Was this based on the 2024 Base class or the Tasha's version or the U.A. playtests or...?
Rangers also get to prepare spells now. I love playing ranger because they are the "i do a little bit of everything" character. And preparing spells lets me bring less used, niche spells to the table.
I dont even understand why hunter's mark is a thing. It's a spell that doesn't function like a spell, has a huge impact on action economy, and scales poorly. Spells like hail of thorns, lightning arrow, conjure barrage, summon beast, and summon fey are all way more interesting and flavorful.
Ditch the spell completely and adjust ranger to have increased damage on successive attacks against a target--essentially focus firing you become more and more lethal. Have this damage scale with ranger level, giving more incentive to stay last level 5.
Also, i know it's high level but the advantage on all attacks against a marked target devalues all vex weapons at that point, so at least short bows and short swords.
to bad lightning arrow, summon beast, and summon fey are bad spells and conjure Barrage is one of if not the worst spells in the game.
Beast masters share the same bonus action clunkiness as the War Cleric. I would have been happy if just that would have been cleaned up.
Concentrating on Summon Beast was more thematic than HM, so I never experienced said clunkiness. Unfortunately, I just feel mocked now, since the only buff to the subclass is that the companion can now apply the HM damage if you use HM - introducing a Bonus Action clusterfuck that wasn't there before! I will still ignore HM, but that's now a 4th HM feature that I'll be frustrated about the existence of, leaving me with such a sour taste that I can no longer find any excitement in playing a Beast Master Ranger, despite it being strictly buff (but in a way that I don't appreciate). Ironically, Beast Master Ranger is great if I just ignore the 4 HM features, but my satisfaction would be much higher if those 4 features hadn't been included (even without being replaced by anything).
Class and subclass features tied to HM have recreated the issue that WotC otherwise alleviated by removing Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer, which where ineffective ribbon features that gave the class a bad reputation even though it could actually perform quite well without said features doing anything for you.
Honestly, Beastmaster should've had it that your beast auto attacks the Mark without input from you. That way you can Mark a target, then use your Action to do something else necessary and still have your beast do something.
4:00 SNOW ZOMBIES GOES HARD
You should see Dead Snow
Crikey!
Love the Steve Irwin comment as someone who is from Down Under.
There's a road here named after him!
Sharpshooter feat changes make an archer build less satisfying but WOTC want Rangers to be up close and personal, dual wielding.
Drakewarden is still do-able though. Get a ring of Feather Falling, and you can eventually be a High Altitude, Low Opening (HALO) drop trooper with your drake!
Rangers are still fun to play, so that's what really matters at the end of the day.
I'm loving these class change summaries from you guys.
Keep them up!
What I'm thinking is at level 7 allow the ranger to concentrate on Hunters mark and 1 additional spell, concentration can still be lost, but at least a second spell is now available.
Literally made that:
Level 7: Improved Favored Enemy
You don't lose concentration on hunter's mark if you cast another spell that requires concentration and you can concentrate on hunter's mark and another spell at the same time. If at any time while concentrating on both spells you are forced to make a saving throw to maintain concentration, roll for each spell separately.
That was literally my idea. Came here to suggest that but you beat me to it!
Yep and if that feels too strong we could even make it a limited list.
Level 7 is already a great level for Rangers, it’s a subclass feature level!
@@michaeldejean3742 you're right level 6 is better for this.
Feels like Drungar (Ranger 5/Druid X) is going to be the optimal play for a Ranger (if you can call just Ranger 5 being Ranger play) - Conjure Minor Elementals from the Druid with the Dual Wield Ranger four attacks (Normal 1 + Extra 1 + Nick 1 + DW 1). The Spell Slot scaling is great for CME, so preferable to go Ranger 5 (three Spell Slot levels) over Fighter (zero Spell Slot levels) here for the Spell Slot progression.
On the other hand, a Wizard with Scorching Ray does this better as a nova and without the delay of five levels while being simpler (at will is weaker, though).
If you want to go really overboard you can use a Valor Bardlock (Warlock 2/ Valor Bard X) with Dual Wield Feat, a Light Nick weapon (plus extra Light weapon to be drawn), and a shield, to have 5 attacks at level 6 at will (Eldritch Blast 2 + Normal 1 + Nick 1 + DW 1) scales to 6 attacks at 11, and 7 attacks at 17. While still having the same Spell Slot scaling of the Druid/Ranger for CME (Ranger 5 loses two Spell Slot levels, as does taking Warlock 2), but better Spell Level scaling for the Bard vs the Druid (Bard loses two levels to Warlock 2, Druid loses five levels to Ranger 5). Plus, Bardlock is SAD (Charisma main stat only) rather than the Drunger MAD (Dex and Wis both main stats).
The changes to Conjure Barrage are no joke. It's 5-40 (avg 22.5) damage to everything in a 60 foot cone you want to hit. No friendly fire like the previous version. It's the one thing that tempts me into at least going to level 9 in Ranger. Also, the Ranger having access to ritual casting is really going to help it cast exploration spells without burning spell slots. I just wish they would have been given some more spell slots maybe tied to those spells.
With that said, I am going to expand on Monty's statement of the issue with the Ranger. I agree that many people want many different things from the Ranger. I disagree that designing such a class is impossible or even difficult. The Warlock came out of this process just fine and it has options galore for many different builds.
@Rushbolt43 absolutely. I'm sick of every TTRPG making the Ranger just "Aragorn: The Class" when that should have never been the gold standard for what a ranger is. The reason so many have different ideas on what a ranger is, is because there are so many different characters in media *AND REAL LIFE* with Ranger in their name/title. But for whatever reason they refuse to take inspiration from those sources and so you have a class which does not mechanically support the idea of what a ranger is for anyone who hasn't seen or read Lord of the Rings.
It would not be some massive undertaking to give the class at least 1 internal class feature that lets you build your character into more of a Monster Hunter, Trapper, Scout, or Ronin. Or if they won't do that, at least give us subclasses based on other media instead of just making stuff up like the Fey Wanderer and Swarm Keeper.
@@Rushbolt43 the Conjure Barrage change is nice but you're forgetting that by level 9 Fireball isn't as overpowering as it used to be. An AoE spell that only deals damage and is less powerful than Fireball isn't that significant. As for Rituals, the only ones you have that could help with exploration are Speak with Animals, Beast Sense, Locate Animals and Plants, and Commune with Nature. Those options ain't great, particularly because Magic Initiate is an origin feat so pretty much everyone can have Find Familiar, and Commune with Nature is most players will never even to a high enough level to cast Commune.
> I agree that many people want many different things from the Ranger.
Now I feel like Rangers should have something like the Warlock. Be something way more customizable.
@@M9Seradon The level progression for being a half caster does make it tough to design effective damage spells for those classes, but just looking at this as a third level spell it is much better than the 2014 version of 3d8 damage and friendly fire. My point about the rituals is that you can now do these things without spending a spell slot. That was not an option in 2014. I'm not saying these are perfect solutions, but they were steps in the right direction.
My first DnD character was an elven ranger with a long sword, and dagger, excited to try out that character build with the new rules.
I think a lot of people _think_ they want the Ranger, but really, they want the Scout Rogue.
Or a druid
@@vicentebahamondez196 I wonder what a wilderness-themed Fighter subclass would look like? That isn't like a Barbarian, I mean.
@@clarkside4493 Just roll a fighter and take the specialist origin feat and pick perception and survival. And then finish it out with all your other extra feat picks however you want.
@@ApocalypticSigns Even so, a dedicated subclass might alleviate some frustration.
I agree a dedicated fighter subclass and then remove ranger
Great video dudes! I am watching this at 1.30am on my limited phone network and it has been very worthwhile hahah
On the positive side, Duke from One Shot Questers will still have reasons to make videos poking fun at Rangers! 😅
Ngl I've not played that many different characters in DnD yet (only like 6/7 between campaigns and one-shots) but hearing about that Heavy Crossbow + Spike Growth build has got me super excited to play a Ranger whenever I make my next character. Swapping around between that and Hunter's Mark, with the Beast Master pet as well, sounds kind of awesome to me
Someone may have mentioned this already, but the World of Warcraft Hunter's Mark currently puts a debuff on your (primary) target that increases all damage you do to them by 20%, I believe. It does help with tracking the target, too, and I think it stays on the target until they either die or you recast it elsewhere.
With four attacks a turn that's 4d6 extra damage, or a "free" guiding bolt every turn if you hit all attacks
Rangers should be at its core, the master survivalist who’s fully in tune with their surroundings and who always gets their mark. Here’s my rework if y’all want inspiration-
* Deft Explorer - Proficiency and advantage on perception and survival. If you are already proficient in either skill you also gain an additional proficiency from the ranger list. In addition learn 2 languages - 1
* Spellcasting 1/2 rounded up - 1
* Marked Foe - Know hunters mark automatically. In addition you can cast hunters mark once per long rest without a spell slot or concentration. You can do this as a 3rd lvl spell at ranger lvl 9 and 5th lvl spell at ranger lvl 17 - 1
* Fighting style - 2
* 2x weapon mastery - 2
* Rover - +10 movement speed - 2
* Primal Powers - starting at 3rd lvl you gain the ability to expend some of your primal power as special ability. You expend a corresponding spell slot as directed to perform the listed effect. You gain a new primal power at 5,7,9,11,13,15, and 17 - 3
* -PP Unseen Sight - Spend a 1st lvl spell slot as an action to see invisible things and see into either the ethereal plane, feywild, or shadowfell for 10 minutes - 3
* Subclass choice - 3
* Feat - 4
* -PP Predatory Wave - Spend a 2nd lvl spell slot as an action to cause each creature in a 10ft radius of you to become frightened on a failed WIS save. While frightened they must spend their reaction, action, and bonus action to dash and movement to move away from you. This lasts until the end of the creatures next turn - 5
* Extra attack - 5
* Expert explorer - Expertise on perception and survival and expertise on 2 skills you are proficient. If you’re already an expert in perception or survival, select another skill to become an expert in - 6
* Unyielding March - Can’t be affected by non magical difficult terrain and you gain a climb, crawl, and swim speed - 6
* Uncanny Recovery - When ever you expend hit die, roll 1d4 per hit die and regain that much hp. In addition, you can spend a number of hit die as an action equal to your Wis mod - 6
* -PP Natures Veil - Spend a 2nd lvl spell slot to make yourself and everything you’re wearing/carrying invisible until the start of your next turn - 7
* Subclass feature - 7
* Tireless - You loose a lvl of exhaustion on a short rest. - 8
* Extreme Conditioning - Gain fire and cold resistance. If you already have a permanent source of such resistances then select from acid and poison. - 8
* Feat - 8
* -PP Predatory Gaze - Spend a 3rd lvl spell slot as an action to paralyze a non undead creature within 30ft with fear if they fail a WIS Save until the end of your next turn - 9
* Unerring Mark - Expertise in weapon attacks against hunters mark target. - 10
* -PP Elemental Invulnerability - Spend a 3rd lvl spell slot as a reaction when you take damage of a type you have resistance to. Give yourself immunity to that type including the triggering damage until the end of your next turn - 11
* Subclass feature - 11
* Feat - 12
* -PP Mend Flesh - Spend a 4th lvl spell slot as a bonus action to heal someone you touch 15 hit points, reattach a limb if it was removed in the past minute, or reattach a head if it was removed within the past round and revive them to 0hp but stable. In addition at the end of every round the target regains 1d8 hit points for 1 minute - 13
* Unstoppable Strikes - Your attacks can’t be disadvantaged, In addition hunters mark attacks are made with advantage - 14
* Predatory Awareness - When you use your marked foe ability and when you transfer the effect to a new target, choose one of the following to learn about the target. (1) CR, alignment, and able to speak/understand any language it does; (2) AC and damage vulnerabilities; (3) to hit bonus and save DC; (4) damage resistance and immunity; (5) high and low stat; (6) speed and sense types. For the full duration of your marked foe ability, you also detect one of the following creature types and their direction within 600 feet; aberrations, celestials, dragons, elementals, fey, fiends, giants, monstrosities, and undead - 14
* -PP Wilds Ward - Spend a 4th lvl spell slot over 8hr to give a huge or smaller thing or 200 foot cube area within 60ft the effect of antipathy/sympathy for 10 days - 15
* Subclass feature - 15
* Feat - 16
* -PP Forewarning - Spend a 5th lvl spell slot as a reaction to your d20 test or an attack against you to give yourself advantage on d20 tests and +5 AC for 1 hour - 17
* Primeval Perception - You gain 60ft truesight, blindsight, and tremorsense - 18
* Epic Boon - 19
* Foe Slayer - You can add your wisdom modifier to either the attack roll or damage roll of an attack. You can make this decision after knowing if it would be a hit or not - 20
I think Hunter's Mark should be a class feature, but I always wondered if Rangers could get "Invocations" like the Warlock, where you get Ranger abilities that can modify your Hunter's Mark or gives you better ways to explore/track, or give like primal features to boost your physical abilities.
I've played Ranger more often than any other class, and tbh I usually don't even bother taking Hunter's Mark, so to have a first level concentration spell that doesn't scale become practically the entire focus of the class is bafflingly awful.
What's even more baffling was how well the Tasha's changes helped improve the Ranger, only for them to somehow double back and make it worse again. Looking forward to a new edition of Tasha's to save us Ranger mains I guess...
Every time I played a ranger I would do math to see if HM was worth it and generally it never was if I had anything else to do with my BA or concentration. Which made me very confused when I heard people say how HM was a main for rangers and even more confused when wotc decided to make it a core part.
wait, I'm confused, in what way do you think the 2024 Ranger is a step back from Tasha's? Like half of this video is dedicated zo talking about how it basically is the same Ranger we see in Tasha's with a couple QOL improvements.
@@Mike_Hogsheart Not all of the Tasha's improvements were imported over. Primal Awareness, which gave you extra spells prepared, is gone. Land's Stride, which let you ignore difficult terrain and have advantage on saves against plants, is gone. You get Nature's Veil, which lets you turn invisible as a BA, 4 levels later now. All fairly small stuff, sure, but the only new Ranger features gained in return are bonuses to HM
@Mike_Hogsheart also for certain subclasses favourite foe was a better hunters mark because you didn't waste BA. And with backwards compatibility and beast master for those it still would be
@@faithfullyfaithless Well, it's certainly not true that the new Ranger only got HM features. They also get massive improvements to spellcasting (more spells prepared, the ability to switch spells on a long rest, access to Spellcasting at level 1 and better progression when multiclassing) as well as Weapon Masteries and additional Expertise
Now that I think of it; the ideal species for the 2024 Ranger seems to be the Thri-Kreen from Spelljammer.
They have unarmored defense that goes up to AC 18 with your DEX modifier, also with advantage to Stealth already built in, darkvision and no need to sleep; making them perfect to keep watch during a long rest, telepathic speech; allowing them to communicate without making any noise as well as effectively making verbal spell components unnoticable, and four arms that can wield a shortsword, scimitar, and two hand crossbows at the same time!
I don’t understand. In the earlier video with Crawford he said they changed things so you didn’t feel bad if you don’t take something. How is HM anything but that. You can’t use class and subclass features if you don’t have HM up, which means you can’t use a ton of money other really cool spells .
Unironically the only explanation that makes sense to me is that Ranger was the last class they worked on but they just ran out of time before they could come up with something that aligns with their stated goals. Hence why this edition's ranger really kinda just feels like Tasha+ more than a rework
@@all_thescienceit's more like they didnt think it was necessary since they'd already reworked the Ranger in Tasha's.
Hunters mark was reworked to work like in 4e but people hated on it so they had to revert it at the last minute and now all reverted hunters mark feature don’t work and hunters mark just can’t be concertation free
I want to love the Ranger. I like the outdoorsy feel. I just want the damage to keep up or the utility to keep up. I dont want to be a burden because I like the role. I would like to see a Beastmaster that can recruit animals by using Speak With Animals and then have a pack similar to what a necromancer can do.
Would someone who has the new 2024 PHB reply to let me know if bards still start off with weapon proficiency in rapier at level 1?
Valor bards do
Sadly no. You need the sword bard subclass.
I remember hearing from Treantmonk that they no longer have rapier proficiency :(
@@jeffreybogard2713But taking the valor bard is at 3rd level.
You are proficient in simple weapons.
Positive Critiques: Wis Rangers are more viable than ever, and may be better than Dual Wielders with Shillelagh scaling better, Dueling Fighting Style and Polearm Master Feat.
Also, you could potentially be a swichter between melee and ranged with Crossbow Expert and Nick property. With these, at 17th level, you will be able to make 5 attacks with Swift Quiver
That timing on the upload xd
Huh
Would've loved an earlier version of Feral Senses that gave 10 feet of blindsight, which then got upgraded to 30 feet at Level 18.
Also, when I think of Rangers in fiction, some are loners, and others like the Scout Regiment in Attack on Titan are like elite special forces type specialists. That would've been a neat subclass to see developed.
I can kind of see both good and bad so far I’m holding my judgment on the Ranger update until I actually get to play it
Btw, lvl 20 paladin with divine and mark wielding a GS with GWM and smiting at max level is dealing 48.75 DpR while a dual wielding ranger using shilelagh on a club and a scimitar and a beast of the land deals 52.275 DpR. Basically, stock beast ranger out dpses paladin
I really thought that with the 2024 rules I wouldn't need homebrew glow ups to the classes anymore... But the Ranger will be the exception.
btw, my simplest ranger "fix" is:
Move "Relentless Hunter" from lvl 13 to lvl 9, move the capstone from 20 to lvl 13 and add (Whenever you cast hunters mark without a spell slot, you can choose to do so without concentrating on it with the duration of 1 minute)
And finally, give rangers the same capstone as the new monk.
I think a possible middle ground with hunters mark could’ve been that you can concentrate on an additional (different) spell while also concentrating on hunters mark-so you can use another spell but still have that risk of losing concentration
Two big missed points on spells:
1. Shillelagh is INSANE for rangers now, especially with Polarm Master. Let's you be SAD (Wisdom), with a shield, and comparable damage to the dual weilding.
2. The ranger can easily pick up Divine Favor with a 1 level dip, and do the same combo the Vengeance Paladin can.
But yeah I think the problem with the class is that the designers chose to use spells as if they were class features. But if look at the exclusive spells they aren't actually very good or don't really make sense as a spell. If they were going to go with this direction, the spell list needed a lot more love (and hunter's mark needed to be concentration free).
How would a ranger pick up divine favor? I can only think of multi classing which would make the rager MAD again
@@giltigt Divine Favor is a first level spell, so I think you can get it either through "Magic Initiate" or "Fey Touched".
@@DaMuetze it’s a paladin only evocation spell and it was removed from the war domain spell list. Evocation is not allowed though fey touched or shadow touched so unless I’m missing something else a paladin dip is the only way to get it.
@@giltigt ah okay, thank you for the clarification. I thought it was an enchantment spell
@giltigt correct, but these are two seperate thoughts. A 1 level dip isn't a high cost, and if you're playing something like fey wanderer, you already wanted a good charisma. I would only really consider the dip if I'm trying to do a "max damage" build but I think it ends up being very potent at all levels of play in that scenario. Lots of thematic opportunities too.
Beast master = bonus action to make your pet attack, but at 7th level your pet can also Help action at the same time.
using this bonus action reduces your attacks by 1, but fear not, if you are a high elf you get true strike, meaning you get bonus damage on 1 attack per round.
At lvl 11 the beast can hit twice, still help and you can add 2d6 to your main shot that again has advantage.
Since everything stacks on your wisdom this also allows you to just pick Guide background, grab Magic initiate with Shillelagh, Guidance and Feary fire.
Shillelagh also took a boost, the dice becomes larger, so when your pet dies grab a staff and double-attack with D10s or D12 on a 1handed weapon.
While you are wisdom based you open up to feats like Fey touched (giving you a lvl 2 spell at lvl 4), Bless, Silvery barbs, and other stuff.
Once you hit lvl 11 just multiclass into cleric or rogue depending on your wishes.
My thoughts to fix Hunter's mark:
Remove concentration for Ranger's specifically. Its just silly. Sorcerer's have new ability's that don't require concentration, Divine favor the paladin's doesn't require concentration, and there aren't a lot of other ways to really boost the damage of the ranger, so getting an extra d6 on 3 maybe 4 attacks is not broken in the least bit. Average amounts to 9-12 extra damage?.... oh no!....
Allow the ranger to mark a new target when the first target dies as a REACTION not a bonus action. This enables them to leave that bonus action open for the numerous other things they can do.
Bump the damage for the *capstone* ability from 1d10 to 2d12. That might seem like a mega damage boost, and it is. But we are talking about a 20th level character here. And if a DM is capable of running a campaign with a 20th level wizard or sorcerer, they can handle a high damage ranger.
Thoughts on my fixes? Thats gonna be my homebrew fixes anyway because I agree overall its a very cool class and I want people to be excited about it. Hunters Mark just needed a little more time to cook in the oven.
I’d rather have the capstone be not a damage increase to HM, but yeah if it’s gonna be damage buff ur right it needs to by WAY more than 1d6 -> 1d10 also I love the idea of switching HM as a reaction
I would rather remove the marking of a new target from the action economy completely: just make it part of the first attack against that creature. (This is largely because the Fey Wanderer's defining feature -- Beguiling Twist at level 7 -- uses up their reaction.)
I haven’t seen anyone bring it up in the reaction videos I’ve seen to the Ranger, but (obviously speaking for myself), the Tales of the Valiant Ranger nailed what I was hoping 5.5’s Ranger would be, and since they’re cross compatible, that’s what I’m playing in our next campaign.
I haven't played a ranger, but other people in my D&D group have so I will be interested to hear their thoughts. My biggest issue is that hunter's mark is a bonus action and that conflicts with other things the ranger might want to do especially the Beastmaster. The Beastmaster would either have to cast Hunters mark/move hunter's mark or command their beast companion to do things. Also, hunter's mark being only 1d6 until the late levels is just not strong enough. This is frustrating because you now have free casting for hunter's mark that will go unused. On the plus side, I like the idea that favored enemy and natural explorer are not tied to specific use cases and have more utility.
You ca. In command your beast with one of your attacks and your beast also benefit from hunters mark
Excelent video!!
Something that improved on the new ranger: being able to change one prepared spell per long rest.
About dual wielding, still no reason to stick to ranger past lvl 5. Even the 17th lvl feature seems almost pointless if you are dual wielding using a shortsword with Vex.
I agree it's a buzzkill to nerf Sharpshooter damage, but I agree with the mechanical style of ranged dealing less damage than melee *because* being ranged typically means you're going to take less damage because you're not rushing into the throng of the battle, you're on the outskirts peppering them. Melee dealing more damage makes sense since you're risking getting surrounded, taking hits from multiple sources, essentially being on the front-lines.
I still feel like there should be ranged options for improving damage, but I agree with the idea of having it not be as optimal as melee.
See my issue with that is that it treats "taking damage" as a bad thing. Sure from your character's perspective it is bad, but from a game-play point of view taking damage does nothing to reduce your character's ability to function and it increases the drama & excitement of the game. From a strategic point of view, you actually want the enemies to spread damage across the party as that reduces the chance of any one character going down. There's a reason PCs focus-fire on enemies, if enemies focus-fire on PCs 5e combat gets a lot more deadly.
Since you can cast Hunters Mark without a spell slot as a Ranger, you can cast any other spell that is an Action as long as it isn't concentration.
For example, Hunters Mark + Conjure Barrage
25:48 Hard disagree. A lot of the options that were removed wouldn't have hurt anything if they had remained, and even been tweaked for better utility. Losing them strips the Ranger of a ton of it's flavor.
I started a character about 2 years ago in a campaign as a standard (+1 to all scores) human Champion Fighter who had a sailor background. She used two weapon fighting from the start at level 1 with shortswords. After a couple of levels, I had her multiclass into Ranger since she was consistently helping the party navigate their travel throughout the campaign. After that, I had her pick up the Dual Wielder feat and the Drakewarden subclass (the latter for cool story reasons but also feels pretty good to play). Now with the new rules update, I can't help but feel extremely lucky that all of the upcoming changes will benefit the exact type of character I play. 😄
How come every time these videos upload I'm always watching the Drakenheim series also I bet Kelly and Monty are both pleased and kinda disappointed with the ranger a little bit
As it stands, my use of Hunter's Mark is as a fallback spell when I either run out of spell slots for other things, or I don't want/need to bother casting another spell for that encounter. Sort of supporting that train of thought is that the Ranger's HM-related features come at the same levels that they get new spell levels (13 and 17) ... levels where the Paladin still gets nothing other than those new spell levels.
Ranger is probably stronger than its ever been, especially at lower levels. The problem is that it forces you to be a dual weilding Hunter's mark combatant to be viable.
One thing to note about the free casts of Hunter’s Mark is they allow you to cast another leveled Spell with your action (Fey Wanderer’s Summon Fey maybe) which is pretty cool.
Not a fan of the new ranger. They fixed only a few things about the class that bother me, while stripping out a lot of the flavor from class features and making other things worse.
I hate that half of your class features now depend on using Hunter's Mark, since that locks out out from using actually interesting spells that require concentration unless you want to go full support.
Then, there's the fact that you're often using your bonus action to cast/move it, which fights with subclass features that want to use your bonus action every turn (Beast Master, Drakewarden, Horizon Walker).
It's gonna have to be the same 'ol homebrew as before for me...
So you can cast Hunter's Mark without spell slots several times in a day. This actually synergizes with the other Ranger spells, since we can now cast 2 in that round.
So it has been buffed in that way.
I think you could change the "can't break concentration" feature to "I don't need to concentrate on it."
I like the ranger, and I think the changes to dual wielding are good. I love Tireless as a feature, but the class as a whole suffers from slow progression. They've got so much stuff to give the ranger and they're afraid to have more than one thing per level. Invisibility doesn't come until 14. Blindsight doesn't happen until 18. All their good toys are so back loaded they may never get to use them. Hunter's Mark should no longer require concentration starting around L9, and it's progression through the whole class should be about making things easier to hit. I'd like to see an increase to attack rolls much earlier in the game. I would love to see Hunter's Mark gain the functionality of sharpshooter or see invisible at higher levels, where your marked target can't benefit from cover or invisibility. I don't need it to do more damage necessarily, I just want it to be worth keeping.
Drop the hunter's mark/favored enemy gimmick. Give Ranger the Skirmish ability (Scout 3.5e) where they move X amount of distance and can then deal Yd6 bonus damage on their attacks.
I actually made a short rest "Vanguard ranger " homebrew around this very idea!!
@@m.otoole7501 Where can I find it?
Sharpshooter should be changed to provide profiency to damage like GWM does, but change the ignore cover to ignore half-cover and downgrade three-quarters cover to half-cover.
You guys summed it up perfectly. Rangers are just worse, Paladins.
I would argue they are on par because they have ranged options when Paladins don't. But with how bad ranged is now with Sharpshooter being nerfed into irrelevance ...
Why don't paladins have ranged options, again?
Kudos to you two for not taking the normal negative stance. It's okay to recognize the issues with things without saying " ugh it's ruined it's the worst thing ever". If an egg recipe has some odd choices, I simply adjust things to my liking and say "well these things were weird about this recipe but overall it was good with some adjustments."
So... At lower levels before you didn't have class features outside of specific conditions start at lower levels. Now, you don't have class features at higher levels if you do not want to cast a spell that fell off level 5-8 levels ago and is greed, requiring multiple bonus actions and your concentration to maintain.
I think the ranger is a lot better now than it was at the 2014 release, but the over reliance on Hunter's Mark at higher levels kills the vibe for me. Honestly, if they lost concentration from hunter's mark instead of not being able to fail a con check for it, I wouldn't have any complaints worth mentioning, to be fair. As it stands, if you ever want to use your concentration on anything else, you lose 3 higher level class features entirely, including your capstone.
I actually do kinda agree with Monty's comment that everyone wants something different from the ranger, and honestly that could've been an amazing way to go with the class that the creators didnt even seem to consider.
The new Druid gets to choose between a more martial and spellcaster path at level 2 now. They can choose "Magician" which gives them nature/arcana bonuses and improves cantrips. Or they can go "Warden" to get medium armor and shields. Then at later levels they can further specialize between the two. While im not crazy about this for Druids, i think it would.have been AMAZING for rangers.
Since rangers flavor and mechanics are already somewhat of a mix between a fighter/rogue/druid, it would be amazing to see some selections at the current HM levels that allow you to choose different boosts to those areas. Maybe the "Hunter" path gives you the current HM features with perhaps some bonuses to tracking. Or a "Wildsmaster" specialization gives you spellcasting buffs, maybe your nature/elemental spells are better, or you get the once per day spells that tasha's gave with the primal awareness optional feature. Maybe some kind of rodueish path makes you better at sneaking and infiltration.
There were so many options that WotC could have implemented without trying to pigeonhole players into using HM. I honestly think that the reason people are angry with the new ranger is less specific than HM still using concentration, and more to do with a lack of player agency in building your ranger with creative freedom.
Sorry, rant over. Lol😅
Yay Ranger is better, wait everyone is better and Ranger is now probably in last. It’s like improving your track time by 5 seconds and thinking you’re gonna at least place in the top 5 in the next meet only to find out everyone who your 5 second improvement would have put you a head of has actually improved as well.
Ranger does fine mathematically. You can dislike the thematics, or the structure, or the Hunter's Mark stuff, and that's fair but DPR is pretty good. Well on par with people like Fighters.
The weakest class in combat, at least for damage, is probably Rogue. Ranger does skills pretty well and utility spells which give it advantages, while maintaining solid damage.
@@DeadmanwalkingXI sadly d&d isn’t just a combat simulator. Also all those dpr numbers are based on best build, best situations. Losing concentration, having your marked target die, and other factors rapidly drop their dpr. Concentration usually isn’t a big deal but their best damage build is melee. And yes, their lack of clear theme, weak HM features, and lack of a reason to not multiclass is why I rank them as last in 2024. Base Rogue didn’t see much improvement, but a rogues dpr is highly dependent on sub class and what items they have. Also even if cunning strikes is honestly net zero as an improvement it adds choice to every turn and that alone can be fun.
@@lamarwashington2718 For Concentration, it's important to remember that you have a shitload of Hunter's Marks per day...if you lose Concentration you can just re-cast it. Sure, that's your Bonus Action, but that still applies Hunter's Mark to 3 attacks the next turn after losing Concentration...same basic math with needing to swap targets. Hunter's Mark on 3 attacks isn't as good as on four, but it's hardly game-breakingly bad. And this is an issue that applies to the Paladin build it's being compared to as well.
And if you want to talk non-combat, Rangers are probably the single best martial after the Rogue outside combat. They're notably better outside of combat than a Paladin due to better features and spell list for that purpose and have a definite leg up on Monks, Barbarians, and most Fighters as well.
Like, Rangers have more Expertise than anyone other than Rogues and Bards, a really solid list of utility spells including a lot of Rituals, and with Fey Wanderer can be good at social stuff as well as the survival things. That's on top of the climb/swim speed, languages and other stuff. Their non-combat utility game is really strong.
You can easily dislike them the most, that's purely subjective, but saying they're last in any objective sense is odd. They're very much on par with most builds in damage, and better than a lot of those builds outside combat.
@@DeadmanwalkingXI hmmm, you don’t realize you did this weird thing that I mostly see people do when comparing athletes. You created a box in which to compare them, so that the Ranger could shine. It’s not my job or desire to convince you 2024 Ranger is in last place amongst the classes. If you can’t see that for yourself that’s fine. Enjoy the game.
I’m starting a 3-20 5.24 game in November and I haven’t even seen the PHB yet, but the first house rule I’ve decided to use is to make Hunter’s Mark concentration free at 13.
I'm somewhat disappointed with the ranger. It’s the class I’m the least exited to play, because it feels like a reprint instead of an update to the class. (Seriously: Go to the "2024 Ranger vs. 2014 Ranger: What's New" article on DnD Beyond and take a shot every time they mention “Tasha's” and you won't make it to the end of the page.) You can probably build a character, that does okay damage, because you still get Weapon Mastery, a Fighting Style and Extra Attack, but those aren’t exclusive to the Ranger and beyond that there are too few features that make me want to pick it over other classes, especially since most of what actually new revolves around Hunter’s Mark, which still has the same issues as the 2024 version. It's just frustrating to see that the class only got gimmicks instead of an actual useful new feature, despite needing one.
I don’t want this to turn into a long rant, there are just so many things wrong with the Ranger, that I could write an essay about it, but you probably already know something went wrong, when a common reaction in the community to class changes is: “Okay, how do we homebrew this?”
I like the idea of Ranger being a Physical caster with Barrage and Volley becoming staple Damaging skills like fireball. Maybe the tuning is not there, but the idea is pretty great. Specially if it scaled better with your weapons.