Mike Mearls: Revising the Ranger (Again)

[djreynolds]

And they are boring.

Okay, I'm just spit balling

What if the ranger just got something akin to foe slayer, but instead of wisdom, ranger levels?

A ranger, once a turn, can add his half his ranger level to hit or damage versus favored enemy. It would avoid some cherry picking, because its not wisdom.

Obviously it encourage GWM and SS, but who cares. It just makes these feats stronger versus your favored enemy

[HappyDaze]

I'd even be happy if Favored Enemy interacted with Ranger Spells. For example, if the d6 bonus damage die from Hunter's Mark was instead a d10 when damaging a Favored Enemy. This could apply if it were a class feature instead of a spell as well.

[djreynolds]

I'd even be happy if Favored Enemy interacted with Ranger Spells. For example, if the d6 bonus damage die from Hunter's Mark was instead a d10 when damaging a Favored Enemy. This could apply if it were a class feature instead of a spell as well.

Awesome idea

[Arkhios]

I'd even be happy if Favored Enemy interacted with Ranger Spells. For example, if the d6 bonus damage die from Hunter's Mark was instead a d10 when damaging a Favored Enemy. This could apply if it were a class feature instead of a spell as well.

If Hunter's Mark was a class feature, I could see it somewhat like Divine Smite:

At it's basic level, it would be 1d4 extra damage for as long as you choose to focus on that target. Whenever you hit, you may expend a spell slot to increase the damage as follows:
1st-level slot (1d6)
2nd-level slot (1d8)
3rd-level slot (1d10)
4th-level slot (1d12)

if the target is a favored enemy, you roll one extra die.

[Sigreid]

I think the biggest problem people have with Ranger is the types of campaigns people run. If you're running a campaign where the environment is as much an enemy as the mobs, then a ranger can be invaluable. Defeating the environment is what they do. If the environment is just scenery, they're just a less effective EK, with nature spells. Though I do think natural explorer should apply in any environment, or at least any non, urban one.

[Kane0]

Doesnt help that you can get close to the same effect from a background.
I think thats pretty telling in how inportant a factor it is, despite being noted at one of the three ‘pillars’

[Morty]

Making rangers the wilderness survival specialist is not going to work because it's a skill, not a class feature. Not only does it make rangers arbitrarily better than someone who just took proficiency and even expertise in it, but it's going to peak at level 5. The existing revised ranger in UA already bypasses a lot of challenge in the wilderness at level one, just by existing. Can't get lost, find a lot of food, remain alert for danger... that's a stroll in the park.

[Trustypeaches]

I think the biggest problem people have with Ranger is the types of campaigns people run. If you're running a campaign where the environment is as much an enemy as the mobs, then a ranger can be invaluable. Defeating the environment is what they do. If the environment is just scenery, they're just a less effective EK, with nature spells. Though I do think natural explorer should apply in any environment, or at least any non, urban one.

Vanilla Rangers are hardly better at navigating the wilderness than a Druid and are worse than a Scout Rogue outside their favored terrain.

[Sigreid]

Vanilla Rangers are hardly better at navigating the wilderness than a Druid and are worse than a Scout Rogue outside their favored terrain.

That's why I house rule their features to work in all terrains. Yes, anyone can survive/navigate in the wilderness with the right skills, but keeping the movement rate up in completely unexplored areas is not a common ability.

[Tanarii]

Doesnt help that you can get close to the same effect from a background.
I think thats pretty telling in how inportant a factor it is, despite being noted at one of the three ‘pillars’

Wanderer doesn't give nearly the advantage that Natural Explorer does. Notable, the effects don't overlap entirely. Having both provides benefit.

It's a common mistake for folks to think that they're the same, usually due to not understanding how the activities while adventuring works. Using wanderer to forage means you'll automatically be getting surprised.

[TIPOT]

I think the biggest problem people have with Ranger is the types of campaigns people run. If you're running a campaign where the environment is as much an enemy as the mobs, then a ranger can be invaluable. Defeating the environment is what they do. If the environment is just scenery, they're just a less effective EK, with nature spells. Though I do think natural explorer should apply in any environment, or at least any non, urban one.

I think the main problem with that though is how it's a passive benefit. Players would probably be happier if it just gave advantage on survival checks instead if the laundry list of things it currently does.

Instead of the feature giving the ranger the limelight it actually takes it away by making it so easy it's not worth doing or at least talking about. If the bard got the ability to auto roll a 20 on charisma checks by default then you might skip over social interactions in a similar way.

[stoutstien]

I think the main problem with that though is how it's a passive benefit. Players would probably be happier if it just gave advantage on survival checks instead if the laundry list of things it currently does.

Instead of the feature giving the ranger the limelight it actually takes it away by making it so easy it's not worth doing or at least talking about. If the bard got the ability to auto roll a 20 on charisma checks by default then you might skip over social interactions in a similar way.

The scout rogue should have been the chassis for Rangers. It's simple effective and thematic

[Morty]

I've played scout rogue, and it was very disappointing. If it's going to be a chassis for anything, it could probably use some better features than "run away quicker".

[Snails]

I think the biggest problem people have with Ranger is the types of campaigns people run. If you're running a campaign where the environment is as much an enemy as the mobs, then a ranger can be invaluable. Defeating the environment is what they do. If the environment is just scenery, they're just a less effective EK, with nature spells. Though I do think natural explorer should apply in any environment, or at least any non, urban one.

The Ranger has always been steeped in Mother-May-I abilities, and I cannot see that a little tweaking with that approach will satisfying enough to the general audience.

Most players care more about moments of feeling effective and getting tastes of glory more than mechanical efficiency and average damage output over the course of the day.

Favored Enemy is super-efficient when it applies, but it is just not glamorous to feel above average when fighting the right enemies and below average when fighting the wrong ones. By number crunching tallies, it might come out to be okay, but that does not make players happy.

The Ranger just does not compete at the same theatrical level with a Paladin who can say "Oh lookie, I rolled a 20. I will obliterate this enemy with a Smite now! BOOOOOM!!!" And, unlike the Ranger, the Paladin abilities always work well -- tossing on extra damage when you want it and healing is always going to be handy. How the Paladin is constructed is simply more fun and more reliable as a package.

[Sigreid]

The Ranger has always been steeped in Mother-May-I abilities, and I cannot see that a little tweaking with that approach will satisfying enough to the general audience.

Most players care more about moments of feeling effective and getting tastes of glory more than mechanical efficiency and average damage output over the course of the day.

Favored Enemy is super-efficient when it applies, but it is just not glamorous to feel above average when fighting the right enemies and below average when fighting the wrong ones. By number crunching tallies, it might come out to be okay, but that does not make players happy.

The Ranger just does not compete at the same theatrical level with a Paladin who can say "Oh lookie, I rolled a 20. I will obliterate this enemy with a Smite now! BOOOOOM!!!" And, unlike the Ranger, the Paladin abilities always work well -- tossing on extra damage when you want it and healing is always going to be handy. How the Paladin is constructed is simply more fun and more reliable as a package.

I think it's the feeling thing. Someone in our group always wants to play a ranger, and not the same person. Other people seem to think it's a crime against D&D the way it works.

[Sindeloke]

Most players care more about moments of feeling effective and getting tastes of glory more than mechanical efficiency and average damage output over the course of the day.

Well, most people who post on internet message boards, anyway. According to hearsay the Champion fighter is very popular in the wider fanbase among people who aren't hyperoptimizing complexity-obsessed weirdos like ourselves.

(See also: Oberyn's take on racial design, which I consider gospel but which is probably somewhat offputting to people like 2d8HP).

I'm working on one my self mine if I read over your?

Sure. Ranger changes (just base and beastmaster; other subclasses have minor tweaks to tie into the beast a bit more but they could easily remain as-is under this modification) and build-a-beast menu (this is the like... third version, I can't find the one we're currently using, but it'll get the point across). The Watchful Beast is there as an option for people who are super not into the animal companion, since its basic effect is to give back the passive fighting style that Ranger's Ally otherwise replaces. Skirmish replaces Hunter's Mark to buoy the ranger's theme of scouty, guerilla warrior; it also has the virtue of being both easier for the player to use and easier for smart enemies to shut down. Scouting Action gives bonus hiding at an appropriate level and the new Vanish consolidates the other meaningful pieces of Vanish and Hide in Plain Sight into something straightforward and legitimately useful. Wild Fortitude helps hang onto spell concentration in melee and survive long treks and dangerous environments.

One of the things I consider a priority in class design is that the class should feel complete by level 11 or so - you should be able to do all the things that make you feel cool and thematic without having to wait for a stage of the game most people won't reach. So no high-level ability should be central to the class's round-to-round performance (like bonus action hide or evasion, what the heck WoTC). But high-level abilities should still feel powerful and fun to work toward. Monk, paladin, barbarian, and wizard all do this particularly well imo, but baseline ranger is a mess. Thus I take monk/paladin save boosts and paladin 1/day Super Saiyan OP moment as inspiration for the ranger fix. Mearls obviously didn't address this at all since he didn't go into any high-level stuff, but I'd really hope it's something we'd see from an official fix if they got there.

[Snails]

Well, most people who post on internet message boards, anyway. According to hearsay the Champion fighter is very popular in the wider fanbase among people who aren't hyperoptimizing complexity-obsessed weirdos like ourselves.

IME it is the casual/non-optimizing players who favor a simple and reliable story about why this PC class will be cool to play. Yes, the Champion fits that bill perfectly. Clerics do not, for example, even though in terms of overall averaged effectiveness the class has been very strong since forever.

[Skylivedk]

If Hunter's Mark was a class feature, I could see it somewhat like Divine Smite:

At it's basic level, it would be 1d4 extra damage for as long as you choose to focus on that target. Whenever you hit, you may expend a spell slot to increase the damage as follows:
1st-level slot (1d6)
2nd-level slot (1d8)
3rd-level slot (1d10)
4th-level slot (1d12)

if the target is a favored enemy, you roll one extra die.

Hm, I like what you are getting at. The progression is way way too weak though. I thought of something similar, but where you take increase damage based on attacks or rounds attacking the same creature. It would give a really good hunter/stalker feel to the class and a unique mechanic.

That's why I house rule their features to work in all terrains. Yes, anyone can survive/navigate in the wilderness with the right skills, but keeping the movement rate up in completely unexplored areas is not a common ability.

Is that the phb or revised version you've done it with? What are the results so far? For the phb I'd say go go.

Well, most people who post on internet message boards, anyway. According to hearsay the Champion fighter is very popular in the wider fanbase among people who aren't hyperoptimizing complexity-obsessed weirdos like ourselves.

I've heard so and played with a player or two where it might have been a good fit... Today, I probably would have given them the UA brute instead. In my usual group even the barbarian is considered to be in the boring side of things.

(See also: Oberyn's take on racial design, which I consider gospel but which is probably somewhat offputting to people like 2d8HP).

Link please!

And thanks for sharing your revisions!

[Sigreid]

Is that the phb or revised version you've done it with? What are the results so far? For the phb I'd say go go.

We don't do much with UA though virtually anything published is fair game.

[Daghoulish]

-snip-

Your homebrew is pretty interesting but I have a few problems with it.
1-Armor proficiencys. As in, what do you mean by "armor"? Do you mean light,medium, and heavy? Just light? Some clarafication would be nice
2-Weapon proficiencys. Same problem, any seven weapon groups? what does that mean. Why did you change it from all simple and martial weapons?
3-cantips/stances. You didn't add any cantrips or stances, did you forget to add these or had you not gotten to it yet?
4-Beast Modification. I really like the build-a-bear type of pets you made here but I don't understand how these work. Do beasts get 1 of these every so often? Are beastmaster pets the only one who gets them? Is there no way for any beast beyond story/dm fiat to get a 5th tier ability? The highest the beastmaster gets is a 4th level one.
5-Modify Beast. I believe this is a homebrew spell and having a description of it would be helpful.

Otherwise I was presently surprised. Some of the other ranger homebrew's I've read tend to just give them a grab bag of the other classes rather than try to make them their own class. Also your Foe Slayer is pretty cool and thematic.

[Vogie]

Hard to list all, but basically the keyword is: alternate options.

At level 1, you can choose an alternate version of Favored Enemy, which he called "Hunter's Eye": instead of a kind of enemy, you can designate one individual within 100ft as your "enemy", either with a bonus action or by attacking them. You then have advantage on WIS (Perception) and WIS (Insight) concerning this individual, as well on checks made to discover or follow their tracks. As a Reaction, at the start of their turn, you can make one attack (melee or ranged) on them. You can do that half your Ranger level per long rest. At 6th level you get advantages on all saving throws against this enemy, and on the 14th you can make one additional weapon attack against them if you missed with a previous attack.

You can also choose an alternate version of Natural Explorer: get Expertise on Nature (if you have the skill), plus a bonus based on the terrain you selected:

• Arctic: resistance to cold damage
• Desert: resistance to fire damage
• Swamp: resistance to poison damage + immunity to disease
• Coast: swim speed equal to your land speed
• Mountain: climb speed equal to your land speed
• Grassland: 10 additional ft of speed.
• Underdark: learn Undercommon + darkvision (30ft) or undefined "blindsight" ability 5ft around you if you already have darkvision
• Forest: Expertise in Perception.

At lvl 2 you get the choice between:

• Regular spellcasting
• Mighty Slayer feature, which let you use a certain number of abilities (starting with 3 abilities) that you can use a certain number of time per long rest (starting with 3 times). One example: Adamantine Bones, which let you get (proficiency bonus x 5) temporary HPs. Crippling Blow (pseudo-stunning strike, cast aside as it's probably too powerful), Masterful Strike
• A pet that'd work somewhat differently from the current BM companion (and which would get boosted if someone with this feature chose BM as their subclass).

So I've just watched the stream, and I've noticed that some of the changes he's offered are fixes, but not really the right fixes. Monster Hunter already has a proto-Hunter's Eye/Mark feature, and most of the other subclasses have something similar - Hunter has Colossus Slayer, Horizon walker has it's force damage, PG has piercing damage, and just adding extra d6s or whatnot just is kind of... boring. He said it himself- it's also what many of the Warlocks do as well with Hex.

I like the Removal of the "Just ignore outside" version of the Natural Explorer (Outlander 2.0), but it's still kind of a "pick right or suck" choice. Nautical campaigns having easy access to swim speed is great... for the ranger only, and in that certain scenario. Everyone having a choice between speed vs perception, for example, is a meaningful choice, but throwing in Darkvision or resistance or climb speeds... it is too nuanced, IMHO. Compare this to a warlock, for example, who only gets their ribbon-style features, such as resistances later on, and it's always more thematic to the Patron than necessarily a part of the choice of the class. I would love to see something active... even if it's an eventual attunement to a place, so it can slowly change depending what biome you're in, or minor crafting, or something.

Actually crafting & foraging could be fairly interesting - Each long rest you gain a number of points based on Ranger level, which you can spend to find/craft Goodberries & other foods, arrows & ammunition, pelts, healing kits, et cetera... or even spend those points to find north, track animals, and so on. Call it "Rummage", "Reclaimer" or something like it. In essence, it could act like a less powerful but more diverse lay on hands.

I do think it'd be interesting if they did something the "Spellcasting, OR " feature at 2, providing either Spell casting, or a minor pet, or battlemaster maneuvers. That way it isn't "just a Paladin, but nature themed with either DW or Ranged options", but rather a Pet class, a martial class or a half-caster. Then the subclasses can then focus down on the themes - Beast Master could either have an additional or augmented pet alongside with a more martial maneuver build or a spell castery nova/support build.

[stoutstien]

Honestly Mike reminds me of one of my old economic professors.
The adamantly defended the free market theory. Then he would turn around and praise the theory of Central banking as a form of stop loss. 🤔
Rangers are fine but here are multiple fixes for a problem that we don't believe exists.

[strangebloke]

Honestly Mike reminds me of one of my old economic professors.
The adamantly defended the free market theory. Then he would turn around and praise the theory of Central banking as a form of stop loss. 🤔
Rangers are fine but here are multiple fixes for a problem that we don't believe exists.

The ranger isn't underpowered.

But it is unpopular.

So it isn't broken. But it might need a redesign anyway.

[Kane0]

After a few drinks I had a few idle thoughts I'd like to share:

- Make hunter's mark as a core feature, cut out the spell to make room for it. Alter the subclasses (especially the Xan's ones) to grant extra functionality to it. This becomes the 'defining ranger ability' like Fighter Action Surge or Paladin Smite. Change the name of the Hunter subclass to avoid confusion.
- Make Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer true ribbons, each helping the interaction/exploration pillar without removing gameplay. Trying to make these more than just flavor causes more problems than they're worth.
- The UA Primeval Awareness was good, let's use that.
- Change casting to be prepared like Druids, with subclasses adding free spells readied like domains and oaths. Leave room for a subclass to grant ritual casting
- Why does Feral Senses not grant blindsense?
- Throw out Foe Slayer, replace entirely. Don't base this on Favored Enemy/Natural explorer, base it on Hunter's Mark or something else.

- If Rogues are hiders, Rangers are seekers (predators, if you prefer). Give them a reverse cunning action, able to Search as a bonus action. Take away the knock-off hiding abilities of mid to late levels, we can use the space for more interesting stuff. The Ambuscade concept of the UA ranger is a good contender.
- If Bards are skilled casters, Rangers are skilled martials. Give them a bit of expertise like Bards get, but no jack of all trades or reliable talent
- If Paladins turn slots into damage, Rangers turn slots into accuracy. Give them a 'smite' ability that gives them a bless-like effect (for a turn instead of an attack to make the slot worth it)
- Give Rangers a bit of extra movement in there somewhere, like barbarians get at level 5. It syncs well with their other movement abilities.
- Add in a Skirmish option somewhere, as an option for the Hunter's Hunter's Mark sync could work.
- A touch of healing/support. The UA salves were a good idea.
- Arcane archer should always have been a Ranger subclass, not a Battlemaster ripoff. It syncs so much better thematically and mechanically.

[Sindeloke]

--some questions--

Thanks, I'm glad you like it!

As to your questions -

1/2. Armor and weapon proficiencies refer to other houserules we use. If I were to write this up and post it as a standalone fix (rather than just hastily cutting up a PDF my table uses in response to another Playgrounder's question), those would be unchanged from base ranger.

3. That's the hazard of reckless copy/paste. I do let players swap out ranger casting for combat maneuvers if they want a no-magic ranger, but it relies on a huge complicated homebrew subsystem that is way too unweildy to get into here and also very off-topic for this discussion. For the purpose of this discussion, I do give rangers cantrips (four, not five - again, bad copypasta), but it's mostly nature-y utility spells (dancing lights, guidance, produce flame). It's totally unnecessary and not related to balance or anything, just something we do because we think it's stupid a 1/3 caster can use magic at-will and a 1/2 caster can't.

4/5. These answers are related, as 'modify beast' is a ranger/druid spell that lets you give your beast (or any random bear you come across, if you like) a modification from the menu. Can be upcast, and the modifications have to add up to the spell level (so if you cast it at 5th you can give a level 5 modification, 2 level 2s and a 1, a 2 and a 3, etc). Like teleportation circle and other similar spells, if you cast it every day for long enough, you make it permanent. Otherwise the only way to upgrade your beast is through class features. Beastmaster gets the most, but there are a few others - at one point Horizon Walker can choose between a menu ability and a couple of planar-themed abilities (letting your beast emulate a blink dog or displacer beast etc), for example. Some subclasses emphasize the beast more, others less - City Stalker, in paticular, essentially assumes you have a Watchful beast, since you spend all your time in a dang city.

All subclasses do, at minimum, get a way to ignore "resists nonmagical b/p/s" for their beasts, though. It's themed according to the flavor (horizon walker's beast gets elemental 'planar' damage, gloomstalker gets to ignore resistance when hidden or obscured), but it's there. It's suprising how litlte else is actually needed beyond that, though, in actual play - the improved survivability and the intelligence to mostly understand other party members means the pet is only unable to contribute when the enemies go out of their way to control it. Which means they're not spending that hold monster on the fighter, so even then the beast is still being helpful.

(Side bonus: the pet control mechanic gives an actual use to versatile weapons. I didn't intend that when I wrote it down but it was a nice little bonus.)

[Willie the Duck]

The ranger isn't underpowered.

But it is unpopular.

So it isn't broken. But it might need a redesign anyway.

Similar situation with Champion, Berserker, or whatever. All the handy calculations showing how it is just fine won't make people feel it/buy it/ care what the analysis says. If people don't feel it holds up, then they won't play it.