It's a common misconception that "ranger" comes from "ranged weapons" or some such thing, but it's actually from "ranging over the land". The defining characteristic of rangers is not archery, it is *movement*. So ultimately, bows and related things, even beasts and related things, are all just optional icing on the cake that is "a dude who roams through the wilds and kicks butt out there".

@AlphaOmega1237

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah the big problem with that idea is that half the damaging spells on their spell list only work with bows and arrows while the other half have no such restrictions requiring melee weapons. Building a Ranger without the ability to use ranged weapons effectively is like building a paladin without effective melee attacks. Technically possible, but doing so requires ignoring your abilities to such a degree you are inherently hampering yourself for no good reason and could probably achieve your goal better by just picking a different class.

@travisrameysadler9924

2 жыл бұрын

I don't think anyone thought that ranger means "range" but as trackers they are natural hunters so a bow is in the kit... the problem is that fighters are better with bows than they are... Bows aren't the icing they are how they put out DPS, and they do better with bows than anything else, still being not great at it. Their defining characteristic is not movement, it is survival in the "range" they inhabit. Tracking, knowledge of the local flora/fauna (for hunting or herbalism), skinning, relationship with the wildlife (such as communicating) there isn't as much movement involved save that they know how to navigate safely and quickly and should communicate best routes to the party.

@travisrameysadler9924

2 жыл бұрын

@@AlphaOmega1237 I agree... yr better off playing a fighter with a bow and giving your character the title of ranger.

@alderstifen7738

2 жыл бұрын

​@@AlphaOmega1237 Ranger's being in close combat works mostly fine, besides the problems that arise from the class itself. They have 6 spells over 5 levels that are restricted to ranged weapons, but it's not that big a deal to choose not to use them. It's less a Paladin choosing not to use melee attacks and is more a Paladin forgoing using healing spells. It's a built in part of the classes spell list but choosing not to use it doesn't gimp you that hard. There are much worse things for Ranger's than not using their bow lmao.

@brendenhawley2225

2 жыл бұрын

In which case, they can use a few more mobility powers, maybe a extra five feet of movement every four levels rounded up might actually fit quite well, rangers are faster than you.

I had a full-Vampire Swarmkeeper ranger, who lived in seclusion due to others being usually terrified of him. But in nature he learned to control Mosquitos, who would collect blood for him to keep him alive.

@MintE2805

Жыл бұрын

Woah that’s cool

@finchbird2419

Жыл бұрын

Mosquitoes. Vampire popcorn

@glaciallemon1360

Жыл бұрын

@@finchbird2419 more like a beanboozled because you don't know what kind of blood

@bryceduyvewaardt8136

Жыл бұрын

As someone who strongly dislikes mosquitoes and finds vampires can have “final-boss-itis” with being so strong without a form of minions besides bats, the mosquito-master idea is really clever and I respect it enough to want to use it somewhere in a campaign now ✨

@LupineShadowOmega

Жыл бұрын

@@glaciallemon1360 They aren't actual mosquitos, they're spiritual beings that you can choose the form of. So one assumes that the swam master gets to choose what the swarm goes after.

I was in a mafia campaign once and the DM let our ranger homebrew urban as his favored terrain. This way he was actually useful in a low nature campaign

@connormcconnell7805

8 ай бұрын

A lot of people will allow people to reflavor the cavernous sewers of cities as the underdark terrain

@destructionindustries1987

7 ай бұрын

That campaign sounds interesting

@pranakhan

6 ай бұрын

They opened up that option in the 2nd ed. Rangers Handbook, connected originally to a kit called The Stalker. A flavorful option for more city-focused games, that can still express the archetype of the Ranger in a different way

I feel like the ranger is made for solo D&D adventures as it is a mixture of multiple classes: Rogue = sneak and avoid damage, druid = cast spells and heal, and fighter = attack/defense in combat. This makes them great at surviving alone, but that's rarely the goal in a D&D game, as you're part of a party.

@celuiquipeut6527

10 ай бұрын

Rangerr is just a melee dps dealer that had druidic spell as a half caster. Just like paladin was the same with cleric. 5th esition forgot that and just screwed them over. Lol

@beedoesthings8037

10 ай бұрын

It’s really just meant for true adventuring/dungeon delving/camping in the woods every session campaigns.

@balancebreaker1561

9 ай бұрын

They're pretty much lonewolves in almost every representation there is of rangers/hunters, in videogames, movies, etc

@osirisatot19

9 ай бұрын

If you're tracking something or someone, I can understand a Ranger being useful; if you're just wandering around getting into adventures then they aren't really that useful.

@DerexWolfheart

8 ай бұрын

@@celuiquipeut6527not restricted to melee at all

Rangers are like the professional adventurer they’re based on Aragorn and a lot of their role in the party is being the jack of all trades you don’t excel anywhere but you can help with literally everything

@Grogeous_Maximus

2 жыл бұрын

The problem is that the Bard is already D&D's jack of all trades. The Ranger is all over the place as far as flavor (and often ability) goes. My impression in that most groups end up houseruling to make the Ranger feel as cool as it ought to be.

@bubbasbigblast8563

2 жыл бұрын

The problem is that you're Aragorn in a world where the rest of the Fellowship gets to fight the Balrog.

@fusionart4377

2 жыл бұрын

They aren’t based on Aragorn… Aragorn is based on the ranger class

@llewtree3013

2 жыл бұрын

@@fusionart4377 lotr came out in 1954 dnd didn’t come out till 1974

@The_Yukki

2 жыл бұрын

@@fusionart4377 Exactly why the books came out in 1954 and the movie came out in 2001, while 5e came out in 2014... Something doesn't add up. Even if we were to take OG dnd as supposed inspiration for Aragorn... a) ranger wasn't even a thing back then b) '1e' came out in 1974, after the books came out.

Back in the day, I ran a campaign with ONLY ranger PCs. They had to find and re-establish an ancient world-wide teleporter network. Each player focused different ranger skill sets. Great fun was had by all.

@callmecrimson4806

Жыл бұрын

Everyone has their own backstories/reasons for traveling, and everyone is good in many areas, but some specialize. sounds like a lot of fun.

@Rygat

Жыл бұрын

a former dm i ran with had a similar theme, everyone started as a level 1 ranger and you had to get 'hired' and train into the other classes. So, if you wanted to be a wizard, you'd find a wizard that's looking for an apprentice and you learn to be a wizard and poof, your now a XRanger/1Wizard

@Bacteriophagebs

Жыл бұрын

Some classes work best in groups, and some only work if they're the only one (or maybe two) in the group. You might think an all-rogue group would be a problem in combat because you have no tanks and no AoE...until your party starts sneak-attacking in pairs--one dodging, the other attacking, then switch--and killing _everything you throw at them_ in a couple of rounds, _if that._ Then, when you start shoving big groups and swarms at them, they just run and hide and either ambush the swarms until they've whittled them down or avoid them entirely. And traps are, of course, useless. And out of combat is even worse when everyone in the party is morally flexible and great at stealth, theft, deception, etc. And it only takes one of them taking a level of ranger to make wilderness-oriented stuff a breeze, too. Don't let your players all be rogues, is what I'm saying, unless they like easy mode or you really like a challenge. All bards is also pretty rough.

@aaronsirkman8375

Жыл бұрын

@@Bacteriophagebs See, if only you'd watched some episodes of of Leverage beforehand.

@mondaysinsanity8193

Жыл бұрын

@@aaronsirkman8375 thank you for reminding me of that show

I think an Archeologist subclass would be sick. Being able to appraise ancient items and being able to decode old texts and symbols, being the trap specialist. It may also work with rogue but i think a ranger subclass with base rogue features like evasion and stuff would be cool.

@Dragonette666

Жыл бұрын

Antiquarian and I'd have it be rogue with a little MU or Cleric. Mainly they would get divination spells and maybe some protection. I wouldn't give them evasion but I'd let them have stuff like escaping bonds.

@Jfk2Mr

Жыл бұрын

​​​@@Dragonette666and a lot of bluff to make "this item has some ritual significance" go through instead of admitting that he has no idea what is the purpose of that item?

@jonasscheftner8545

11 ай бұрын

that sounds interesting to me it would fit both quite well. the rogue would be more of the indiana jones type and the ranger more like an actual archeologist that is more about the ecavation. would make for great duos with the two. the ranger finds the place and the rogue gets more useful when they actually have found it.

@anotherthing

10 ай бұрын

Doesn't that exist in Pathfinder? It honestly makes sense as a party addition since it wold fit in with your typical dungeon diving adventure. Most dungeons aren't new constructions in D&D or any fantasy based tabletop game. There's typically a history that goes along with them. Having someone along that knows history, lore, and various other aspects behind the creation of dungeons makes perfect sense. It's interesting that when there's a modern setting or sci-fi setting involving delving in to an ancient ruin, there's always this type of character that is part of the group but rarely is there one in fantasy settings. Stargate had Daniel Jackson, for example.

@dr.mantistoboggan7078

9 ай бұрын

Indiana Jones conclave

In context of Ranger's Apprentice, the feature that let's you be pretty much invisible until your next turn makes a lot of sense.

@scoutswell

5 ай бұрын

John Flannagan ? Awesome book series

@Doomsword0

2 күн бұрын

The series I'm basing my character on and why I'm playing a ranger. I base all of my ideas about rangers on those books

I think a TON of why ranger doesn't feel good is because of this misconception of what ranger originally was supposed to be. A lot of people think Legolas is supposed to be the archetype of a ranger, but he's not. Legolas is the archetype of the elf. It was Aragorn that was the ranger. He was the one who was able to figure out how to navigate around middle earth. It's supposed to be like the fighter, but with certain focus on survival and utility over brute force. They were even the original class that had access to dual weilding as a feature. I think the better examples of rangers in recent fiction are the scouts in attack on titan. They quite literally surveyed the land and specialized in fighting a particular enemy, the titans.

@sentientfrowner7428

Жыл бұрын

Ooh that AOT ranger plot is now my proprty

@MrJudestarnault

Жыл бұрын

Aragorn is known as Strider, wich is synonymous with ranger.

@alinkinthechain

Жыл бұрын

Aragorn is the OG Ranger. He is the Ranger that all other Rangers were based off of. WotC did the class dirty

@braedenaldridge8452

Жыл бұрын

Absolutely love this comment. It matches my thoughts exactly

@norsethenomad5978

Жыл бұрын

Legolas was def a high level fighter with archery fighting style. I was going full melee with a Battle Master, then decided to pick up a long bow and took sharpshooter, and now I can pin seven targets in a row with pinpoint accuracy from 600 feet away. Then I got my fighting changed to archery fighting style, took two levels in rogue as well and Wait. I made a fucking stealth archer AGAIN

Rangers shine in themed campaigns, if the dm has a certain sort of climate or region in mind and communicates with the ranger what it is then they get to shine with their terrain abilities. rime of the frostmaiden for example is very well suited for rangers. Lots of beasts to talk to, not getting lost is super important in the survival aspects of the game and in general rangers are easy to theme into that adventure. I find them very adaptable.

@Foliash

2 жыл бұрын

Funnily Rime of the Frostmaiden is exactly what I thought of to. Im itching to run it as my next campaign and I can only imagine how awesome a ranger would be in that setting.

@EvilShadow7777

2 жыл бұрын

Tomb of Annihilation has a similar vibe too. Jungle/Forest everywhere? Well, you pretty much get to use natural explorer everywhere! It changes in ruin settings depending on DM interpretation but the limited scope of environments helps.

@jgnapoleao5682

2 жыл бұрын

I love themed campaigns for this very same reason. It's so fun to build a character having a theme and playing it feels much more pleasing because you don't run very often in the "my class features don't work here" situation

@JoshuaSmith-hl1xj

2 жыл бұрын

Curse of Straid is good for the favored enemy feature, just select undead.

@sersmiles1635

2 жыл бұрын

being in a desert campaign and NEVER getting lost in it is great.

After considering the similarities between Clint Eastwood's spaghetti westerns and Kurosawa's samurai epics, I had also come to the conclusion that the ranger class was the logical fantasy/ D&D equivalent. They are a natural fit for both western and the wandering samurai/ ronin themes.

I do love the idea of the Cowboy Subclass. As that's literally how I play my Horizon Walker Ranger, as a far traveling magical cowboy who can teleport all over the place with a rifle. Also YOU DIDN'T MENTION HORIZON WALKER AT ALL?! One of the most unique Ranger subclass options!

@pyrojack8230

4 ай бұрын

Depending on what book it's in, he may just not know about it

@derrickhaggard

4 ай бұрын

@@pyrojack8230 It's in Xanathar's Guide to Everything.

@orangeball8872

3 ай бұрын

If ethereal step had a longer duration people would play ranger for this subclass alone

Rangers probably make perfect NPCs that assist the party from location to location. They could be like Officer Jennys and all be related but specialize in the region you find them in.

@strangeyoungman

2 жыл бұрын

That's more or less how I employ them. I have a Ranger who is effectively a "Horse Girl".

@TheRationalPi

2 жыл бұрын

That would actually be a really cool way to run a Ranger as a player character as well. Instead of playing an individual Ranger, you play whatever member of the Ranger order happens to be in the region the adventurers are traveling to. The DM could also give the player a little extra information about the area between sessions, so when the party visits unfamiliar territory they have a local to give them the lay of the land.

@franciscoguinledebarros4429

2 жыл бұрын

A mix of officer jenny and Minecraft villagers (how they have biome variants)

@firekirby123

2 жыл бұрын

As was mentioned in the video, they also make *really* good travelling companions in games that take place primarily in a single biome. Think a Sherpa type character familiar with the tundra of Icewind Dale in Rime of the Frostmaiden, or an escaped slave in the taken in and trained by Myconids in the Underdark during Out of the Abyss. It's just one of things where, instead of making the character before the campaign and hoping you get to use your situational abilities, you need to _talk with your DM_ and see if there's a central environment to the campaign that the party is going to be sticking around, so that they'll be able to fully utilize all of their flavorful, nature-y abilities. Stuff like this is why it's just... _so_ important to talk with your DM during a Session 0. It can turn a class that's not really all that good in most situations to an absolute MVP and natural leader/guide for the campaign. (bonus points if you work out an arc with the DM to have your ranger captured or incapacitated at some point in the campaign, so the party has to try and manage without all of your insane survival skills in an extremely hostile wilderness they're completely unfamiliar with for a couple sessions)

@OneColdRepublican

2 жыл бұрын

That sounds like a fun concept, a ranger organization that assist the player in multiple places. All you need to do is call and the nearest ranger will be sent to help assist you in that area.

The issue with rangers in 5E, is that 5E has put so much effort into bypassing the "survival and exploration" pillar of the game. You probably choose a ranger (and probably with the Outlander background) because you enjoy the idea of wilderness survival gameplay. Hunting, tracking, all that stuff. Then low and behold the abilities you get mean the DM just says "OK you do it, pooff, it's done, let's move on" and you skip over all the ranger-y activities and it barely features in your campaign as a result. Not every table enjoys travel, exploration and survival gameplay - and that's fine, because it is easy to skip that if you want. But 5E has sooo many abilities and spells to bypass it that it becomes really hard to focus on for the tables that DO like it.

@saldiven2009

Жыл бұрын

Even if you don't skip that phase of the game, the base rules for the ranger are too limiting with requiring you to be in your favored terrain or chasing your favored enemy to get a benefit.

@jasonhawkins6888

Жыл бұрын

​@@saldiven2009 Yeah, but I'm not sure if limitations are a bad thing. Is Ranger too limited in scope? Or is every other class to powerful?

@saldiven2009

Жыл бұрын

@@jasonhawkins6888 Personally, I think ranger is too limited. For example, the fundamentals of tracking something are largely the same, regardless of what you are following, but knowing a lot about the behavior of a specific animal helps you know better where to look for tracks when trailing an animal. (Like, foxes a notorious for being clever when attempting to avoid a pursuing predator.) IMO, a Ranger should have a constant bonus to all tracking attempts and an additional benefit with a favored for. Currently, they are no better than anyone else with Survival proficiency at tracking anything not a preferred enemy. Additionally, these restrictions to when a Ranger can use their core defining abilities are not restrictions you see in other classes, despite there being no balance reason to include such restrictions.

@jasonhawkins6888

Жыл бұрын

@@saldiven2009 you make a good point. And I think I like your ideas BETTER than Tasha's. It make sense and doesn't have the anime feel that the WOTC fixes have.

@LupineShadowOmega

Жыл бұрын

@@saldiven2009 Agreed. It should be free proficiencies for being a Ranger or maybe a wisdom skill focused Jack of All Trades, then Expertise for the rolls that line up with your specialties.

The Cowboy Code of Conduct is really cool. Kinda halfway between Paladin and ranger. 1. Live each day with honesty and courage. 2. Take pride in your work. Always do your best. 3. Stay curious. Study hard and learn all you can. 4. Do what has to be done and finish what you start. 5. Be tough, but fair. 6. When you make a promise, keep it. 7. Be clean in thought, word, deed, and dress. 8. Practice tolerance and understanding of others. 9. Be willing to stand up for what’s right. 10. Be an excellent steward of the land and its animals.

I came up with a few buffs to Ranger that helped make them avoid being too overspecialized, such as increasing the amount of favored terrains and foes they can have, as well as some specific buffs to subclasses.

I’d love a Ranger class like “explorer” that gives you multiple favored terrains and terrain-related buffs

@almitrahopkins1873

Жыл бұрын

Play 2nd. That was covered in the Complete Book of Rangers.

@mattlewandowski73

Жыл бұрын

@@almitrahopkins1873 Being an old first edition player back in the 80s, I generally did not like second as so much of it was practically quoting first edition, then telling you to buy more books, but that was one of the few things I liked about second edition, they really hit it out of the park with that and a couple other second ed "background supplements" I still use a few of them as the lore and flavor aspects of my games. By the time it became all "esoteric prestige classes" the writers forgot what the core classes where.

@almitrahopkins1873

Жыл бұрын

@@mattlewandowski73 Player vs Environment got a much heavier emphasis in 2nd. It really saw the Ranger and Druid come to the front of the pack.

@Rabijeel

Жыл бұрын

That is up to every GM to make out of the "Favoured Enemy/Ground" himself - so he can adapt and balance it for his Theme and Mechanics.

In 5e at least, Rangers fill the "Half-caster Druid" role, as a Paladin is to Clerics and an Artificer is to Wizard.

@The_Yukki

2 жыл бұрын

artificer isn't wizard-halfcaster, their spell lists are way too different and thematics don't match up at all, not to mention Artificers aren't exactly martials outside of 2 subclasses (rest focuses on using cantrips instead of swinging a sword/shooting). What further reinforces the point is how artificers multiclass with other casters. Unlike Ranger or Paladin, they don't add half their level rounded down, instead adding half-level rounded up, which leads to some fun things like 1 lvl artificer 19 lvls wizard. Now I'd love to have an actual wizard half-caster, a Magus, smack with a sword and pack a spell into that smack etc. Give then wizard-like spell prep, a spellbook and I can think of like 3 subclasses of the top of my head, one focused on your 2hander big smack no idea about the name. 2'nd let's call Spell Breaker, and make it 'sword and board' with focus on defence against magic (perhaps magic resistance as subclass feature later on) and... arcane archer (not the sad excuse fighters got, though if you wanna keep that one, let's call it Eldritch Archer).

@danielhuelsman76

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder what a half-caster bard would be.

@The_Yukki

2 жыл бұрын

@@danielhuelsman76 Pathfinder 1e had something close to this, a "skald" who had some bard spells, and ability to inspire rage giving allies weaker version of barbarian's rage (it's either weaker or shorter I can't remember)

@danielhuelsman76

2 жыл бұрын

@@The_Yukki I was thinking of a Dancer archetype off the top of my head.

@0_Body

2 жыл бұрын

@@The_Yukki I want Magus DM: We have Magus at home The Magus at home *Wizard: Bladesinging

Ranger is a great class. Its a tool box you put your own stuff into. Its also very good given campaign regions.

To touch on Ranger's spellcasting, recent additions to their spell list include Revivify and Greater Restoration, which, alongside Healing Spirit, gives them a surprising amount of healing they can pump out. Combined with the Pearl of Power to add some additional spell slots and the Moon Sickle (which like Druids, Rangers can also attune to!) Rangers can absolutely work as a party healer and dedicated support class.

you're honestly so correct in making the ranger cowboy subclass, and honestly with most rangers i've played i've leaned into the cowboy/bounty hunter flavour because, at least to me, THAT'S the archetype rangers should be based off of, as much as you can't find that in a lot of typical fantasy (though it's super present in westerns, modern settings, and sci fi). my current ranger is a beast master with a velociraptor companion, but she's less of a nature fanatic and more of a bounty hunter using her innate elven connection to nature to justify the more druidic aspects of the class. i defs would love to see a lot more rangers work with this concept (or even just similar bounty hunter concepts), and hopefully even in 5.5 or 6e the ranger comes into its own as much more of a hunter type of class than just a nature detective.

@whitelasagna6786

2 жыл бұрын

Funny that you say nature detective. That's literally what my ranger is. A detective who moved into the woods. He's also a dhampir.

@Shalakor

2 жыл бұрын

You could argue the whole meta of "Adventurer" as a career path in D&D settings leans into bounty chasing mindset, since that's by-and-large the role they fill in society. Which makes Rangers having a hard time shining in such a context make both more and less sense at the same time.

@gamergirl209

2 жыл бұрын

I mean, my ranger is drake warden so it's basically how to train your dragons

@slyfer60

Жыл бұрын

What about Scout.

@marky046

Жыл бұрын

My new 5/2 gloomstalker/fighter is ex military, ex blackops and currently a hitman/mercenary. (reroll after first ever char died) Using his tracking and stealth skills (and action surge lol) to dispose of any single target in a swift burst. And if that doesn't do the trick, he's skilled in two-weapon fighting and will be picking up battlemaster for reaction maneuvers. also get a homebrewn Shadowback Cave-Gorilla spirit, direwolf statblock with ape moveset to use with Summon Beast. it was his old ranger compagnion when he was in the ranger squadron in the military. and my DM rules that my spells are prepped instead of known. (because a ranger is all about preparing for situations) Planning to play him as a blunt, straight forward, can't lie to save his life kinda character. Bit more resilient, bit less intelligent. :D My old gnome warlock maybe hit 3 eldritch blasts in his entire 7 level lifespan, so i'm hoping to be a little more useful in battle this time. :')

There is a book series that I've read called "The Ranger's Apprentice" and that is what I think of when you talk of ranger. Basically they are a multiclass of fighter and rogue with a sprinkle of survival skills. I believe that is what they should have done with ranger, a survivalist with a heavy emphasis in playing a stealth fighter. In that series the main character is taught to dual wield, specialize in the bow, how to camoflage, how to survive, and most of all how to kill your enemies silently. Basically Fighter/rogue.

@charlieflo1118

Жыл бұрын

Amazing series

@benjaminwalker9369

Жыл бұрын

good books

@gandalftheantlion

Жыл бұрын

@@charlieflo1118 hell yeah it is!

@yellow125

Жыл бұрын

Those books are great.

@Mr.Brothybear

Жыл бұрын

A man of culture

I once played a wizard-ranger. He was basically a scholar wizard that travels around adventuring picking mushrooms as a hobby. You know, foraging, bushcraft, etc while also studying magic. haha I just realised he was basically a wizard dooms day prepper. I could have played druid but I wanted to be able to cast fireball :P

I love the vampire idea you presented. I’m thinking about maybe changing the subclass to drakewarden and flavouring the draconian companion to be the red bat that his mom sent to him.

I've always seen the ranger archetype as a career adventurer. Someone who goes around doing odd jobs that no one else is willing to; be it for pay, glory, or just because it's the right thing to do. That's why they're so versatile. They're trained to get the job done. It's a weird archetype to fit into because it includes everyone from bounty hunters to caravan guides to vigilantes to monster hunters. Rangers are strange because their archetype IS what a dnd adventuring party does. The fellowship enlisted Aragorn because he does what they're doing for a living. That all said, I've always loved the idea of a cowpoke ranger and I adore your subclass. I'll be sure to try it out!

@AveragePearEnjoyer

Жыл бұрын

That's a cool idea, just a generic adventurer class that is kinda okay at everything. The thing holding rangers back for me is that they are specifically druid-adjacent. Having two naturey classes makes less sense to me than having to religiony classes. Clerics are more about healing and defense (exceptions exist) both on the character sheet and in the fiction, as well as generally seeming to be more focused on worship, while paladins are more about going out and smiting evil. Having a druid who protects nature with magic and turning into animals and a ranger who protects nature with magic and a bow and arrow is just dumb to me. Rangers are bound, again, in fantasy, and on the character sheet to their forest just like a druid, or just how a cleric is bound to their temple, but notably, how paladins AREN'T I feel like if a paladin said "so there is this quest..." They would be getting handfuls of holy water put in their hands as they got pushed out the door before they finished their sentence. Ranger needs to be redefined to be like that. Specifically different functionally and in motive from druids. But they aren't. Half their features want them to be tied up in their backstory defending their tundra from oozes and elementals. I have no idea how to do that. Honestly the class should be scrapped and the spare parts go to fighter and rogue and druid subclasses. Hunter roguish archetype with hunters mark, beast master fighter archetype, and a hard to name explorer/survivalist druid circle with martial weapon proficiency and maybe extra attack at level 6 like valor college bards. It sounds weird because rangers are so firmly established but it makes sense game design wise.

@lightworker2956

Жыл бұрын

In the real world, kings used to literally hire rangers to make sure their lands were safe and free from poachers etc. So yes, career adventurer is an apt description.

@korvincarry3268

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, rangers are just built to be a typical adventuring party all in one, so it has all the things, but isnt so tailored to each like other characters. Theyre very built for all around utility and ability, but because most parties have someone who just does things better, ranger feels weak as hell. I think a good homebrew option for rangers is that, on a long rest, they can switch their favored foe and environement to another, whether it be ahead or the one theyre currently in. That way, it is still locked in, but they already have the knowledge of the land and just need some time to acclimate and/or refresh their mind and body for whats ahead. That way the rangers MAIN ABILITIES that are incredibly situational and may barely come up throughout an entire campaign can actually be useful. Maybe at a certain level (or campaign), the ranger unlocks more foes and environements to favor, like the feywild, shadowfell, etc etc, any of the not-natural places. Id also introduce books or "veteran" npc's that can inform the ranger on different foes and environments for a roll of some kind indicating how many days this knowledge is held and can be used like favored foe and such. I find itd make it the most fun class for a beginner to play then. They get a little bit of ability in everything and can learn to balance their spells, inventory, actions, etc etc. Then, they can roleplay and interact with the world to learn about it, both in game and out of game. Then showing a new player a monster sheet wouldnt be immersion breaking, itd be their character studying. Explaining a region wouldnt be the dm talking to the player, but a character or book explaining it to the character. I think then ranger would be super fun to play

@AveragePearEnjoyer

Жыл бұрын

@@korvincarry3268 except they have low-ish AC, middling HP, few defensive abilities, and near zero crowd control/AOE. They are a mix between rogues without sneak attack and druids with hardly any known spells or spell slots, and paladins with lower AC who can't smite or use aura of protection. And that's pretty much it.

@Mendoza-yi6qk

Жыл бұрын

@@AveragePearEnjoyer without multiclassing or the swarmkeeper subclass(the best ranger subclass by far) they fall of but if you play a campaign or one shot between Level 1 to 6 they do their job pretty good.

I heard the swarm of animals and I thought bats, and I thought of constantly saying in combat “it’s morbin time”.

@marocat4749

Жыл бұрын

It should be canon XD

@herman1francis

Жыл бұрын

Goosebumps

@RashidMBey

Жыл бұрын

Com-bat, you say? *takes an aluminum bat to the shins*

@foxsecret

Жыл бұрын

​@@RashidMBeyi will BATter you to death for that?

Two very important things 1 I think it's worth remembering or at least considering because you brought it up and it's a great point is that are characters are characters first and classes are much like guidelines that give us bonuses so long as we adhere to them. We too often forget that characters tump class. Second point I would like to make is that rangers are not only just protectors of an area because that could very well fall on the shoulders of The druids as well! Rangers however can also be seen as guides people who are a combination of rogue and trailblazer that guides people or pilgrims or refugees or whatever have you through areas and all around the land. Rangers are defined by where they have been and they have a tendency to utilize that knowledge. An equivalency might be someone who's a frontiersman, or a well-versed pioneer or trapper

Pointy Hat: "Why are you playing a ranger then?" Minsc: "Am I a joke to you?"

I'm having a lot of luck playing a ranger in a Drow campaign. "The Underdark" being a RAW favored terrain is real good when the entire campaign is expected to be in the Underdark, and both Drow and Elves are the same favored enemy too!

@jayxhuit6000

Жыл бұрын

Elves all being elves? Yep that sure helps

@AshEshyr

Жыл бұрын

i think one of the core parts of enjoying playign a ranger is making sure with your DM the setting you'll be spending most of your time in so you can choose a favoured terrain that is actually useful rather than something you spend the whole campaign wishing "well I wish I knew we'd be spending so much time in this type of area before I made my character"

@caseygage4171

Жыл бұрын

Ranger in Icewind Dale, favored terrain is artic.

@twostocked

Жыл бұрын

Gloomstalker in eternal darkness? Yea not bad

@danielthueson7350

Жыл бұрын

Love the Drow. My favorite of all. Lloth 2024 YA!!

I honestly enjoy the cowboy idea, but while I was watching this I realized you could easily adjust the tracking ability to be able to track any humanoids, essentially turning them into something like a bounty hunter or detective. I'd love to explore its versatility!

@aaronsirkman8375

Жыл бұрын

I played a wood elf Ranger for a while who was exactly that; professional bounty hunter, part time gambler, full time alcoholic (which is fine, since he used that to replace an addiction to much harder drugs). He used the old Revised Ranger rules, so he actually did extra damage to his favored enemy of Humanoids. And, considering we were based in a city, there were plenty of humanoids around to fight. Sadly, as the campaign was coming to an end, he died of a papercut. Well, the whole group did.

@jasonreed7522

Жыл бұрын

​@@aaronsirkman8375how does one die to a papercut? (Barring the IRL answer of it gets infected)

@aaronsirkman8375

Жыл бұрын

@@jasonreed7522 First, have you seen "Read or Die?" Second, it was a whole lot of papercuts...from a Living Spellbook. After we made our way up the library tower fighting flying automatons spamming mini fireballs.

@stormy_does_stuff

11 ай бұрын

​@@aaronsirkman8375 Oof Now THAT must've been upsetting

@aaronsirkman8375

11 ай бұрын

@@stormy_does_stuff It was rough, but our DM was moving away, so it was a good way to end that campaign. We actually ended up starting another campaign once he got settled in, which was probably our longest running single campaign.

I've had a lot of fun multi-classing rangers, they're so versatile you can make them fit in with most character concepts

Ranger in woods: yeah Party: we are going to city Ranger: *you* are going to city

Gloomstalker is incredibly underrated. It gives you the ability to become basically invisible in the darkness, even to creatures that have darkvision. It’s amazing when you are attacking at night, or if you’re inside someplace, just blow out the candles. Although it’s somewhat situational, it pairs well if you’re into multiclassing some sort of stealth character.

@AddyLatter

Жыл бұрын

Play a tiefling gloomstalker. Use your thaumaturgy to dim lamps. Kick ass.

@Draliseth

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for the suggestion. Looking to make a character like Miguel O'Hara still struggling on what to multiclass.

@RGNRK-ms8rk

Жыл бұрын

Idk what your sources are for that but pretty much every optimisation youtuber will tell you they are busted af

@HunterTracks

Жыл бұрын

You know what the funny thing is? Xanathar quips about it being useless for rangers to hide in the dark because most monsters have darkvision... Despite the fact that Xanathar wouldn't actually be able to see said ranger if they were actually hiding from him.

@lionelwhiskerknot

Жыл бұрын

Gloomstalker Shadow Monk and you can pop out of shadows and run across water and up walls. Pretty much the ultimate spy, infiltrator, or sniper.

I would say the rangers one thing is “survivalist”. So the way to tackle that is with lots of varied skills. Focusing on the skills is hard because you fall behind in combat impact. But if you have a DM that gives moments in the adventure for the ranger skills to shine it’s great.

@QuesoCookies

2 жыл бұрын

I've yet to play a campaign where survival mechanics even existed, because any time it was attempted, accounting for things like hunger or navigation or even encumbrance bogged the gameplay down too much. Subsequent failures to find food leads to exhaustion and TPKs from random goblin troops just due to bad luck. Navigation failures just prolong travel times, which forces the DM to come up with new random encounters they weren't prepared to have. In the best case, survival mechanics prohibit narrative progress. In the worst, they create catastrophes just from dumb luck, which lead to dissatisfying outcomes for the players. So it's best to ignore them. But when you ignore them, there's not a way for a ranger to shine. On the other hand, not ignoring them, the ranger makes those mechanics inconsequential, unless they're not in their favored environment, so the survival mechanics may as well have not existed or the player may as well have not played a ranger. The survival mechanics are badly designed, which makes designing a class around them consequently bad.

@cubedg6611

Жыл бұрын

I feel like making Rangers a survivalist that could pick from abilities list like the ones that battle masters have or the eldritch invocations list would be a way to make it work. That way you can have both combat AND survival stuff that’s relevant to combat, exploration, or RP as the player wants, as opposed to having a bunch of exploration stuff that isn’t relevant in certain campaigns

@Niveous23

Жыл бұрын

I kinda like the idea of a ranger either being a generalist survivalist or a niche survivalist. But I also believe in common sense growth. Like whichever one you'd pick, the more knowledge and experience you get, the more you can branch into the other one.

@yargolocus4853

Жыл бұрын

I like the idea of a survivalist. You could lean into it really hard by making a character archetype that will never feel hopeless, no matter what. Survivalist could be the same thing for... well, surviving, as the Investigator class is for investigation in pathfinder 2e. For those uninitiated, Investigator is a mundane martial class with information gathering and anticipation abilities that bend reality to achieve the level of foresight and experience we normal people wouldn't be able to rp. Abilities like pulling out any consumable that you "prepped" beforehand, planning out stratagems for combat or just plain out fabricating real info. The same way Survivalist could produce effects that result in increased tenacity in harsh environments, without having to actually explain the science behind it. (or better, let the players come up with fun explanations on how you manage to undo banishment to another dimension without magic)

@blackgriffinxx

Жыл бұрын

I think using survivalist as a guide. We could fix the class issue over all. A survivalist is a master of the land they are staying in . So if we do some editing to Natural Explorer and Favored Enemy. Favored Enemy -it let you learn about a target to hunt it better so the more you fight a type of creature. The better you get at doing it and you learn about it. Same for Natural Explorer . the longer you stay in a type of land the better you get at staying their. I'll add guns (includes blowgun), polearm and throwing to fighting styles as their are many ways to hunt (giant yo yo).

Great analysis. I do disagree that the Tasha optional abilities are less ranger-y, because a Ranger is the archetypical skilled survivalist that uses all of the tools of the trade as well as improvisational skills to cross wild stretches of land and be able to overcome the obstacles, whether monster or terrain. Canny's ability to give expertise and new skill buff this. The extra spells from Primal Awareness buff this. Extra movement and speed options, temp HP and exhaustion recovery, temporary invisibility (ok out of character concept, this should have given something like a Pass Without Trace flat buff to stealth) all contribute to this archetype. Most of the "ranger bad" rhetoric stems from the oft forgotten 3rd pillar of D&D, exploration. I'm convinced WotC does not like going outside

This is gonna be super helpful, I actually need a cowboy type set of enemies for a cowboy area my party’s approaching. I’m hoping to integrate the Ranger Lich into that as well. Thanks mate!

One thing I'd like to quickly point out about the Primal Companion Feature (the replacement feature for the Beast Master subclass) is that, unlike the Ranger's Companion Feature which requires you to use your full action for it to attack, you can command the primal companion to take an action using your Bonus Action, meaning you and your companion can both attack on the same turn right off the bat. Subsequently, you can still make two attacks and have your companion attack on the same turn once you get your Extra Attack at level 5, and further more once you hit level 11 your companion can attack twice when it takes the attack action (the Primal Companion feature only replaces the level 3 feature for the Beast Master keeping the other features unaffected for the most part), meaning you can get 4 attacks in every turn.

@JoshuaSmith-hl1xj

2 жыл бұрын

I think he knows that, it's just those are optional features a he assumes not every table will use them. I knew one dm years back that never allowed the Xanathar book for the longest time.

@PlusOne2Crit

2 жыл бұрын

He literally mentions that in the video.

@firekirby123

2 жыл бұрын

Drakewarden also gets this, it's just really nice to be able to do more with your companions. It's really sad they've still yet to even errata this into base Companion to streamline it with all the other "summoner" style subclasses that command with bonus actions.

@digifreak90

2 жыл бұрын

@@firekirby123 True, I'd only mentioned the revamped Beast Master because he was already talking about that subclass.

@AnaseSkyrider

Жыл бұрын

I'd also like to remind everyone, since this is a mistake I see sometimes, that the Primal Companion is still a creature with a regular action economy, but it specifically acts DURING your turn, rather than in its own initiative or after yours (like some companions/familiars do). Your companion has only 1 action per round. The option to command it by giving up one of your attacks does not let you also command it with a bonus action. It's simply an option you have for when your bonus action is used up by something else, such as when casting a spell, to get your companion to use its action.

when you talked about the swarm, I basically thought of a swarm of nightmarish crows based on illusion and necromancy spells not so far away from your own twist 🥰

@Abxiximab

2 жыл бұрын

Hmm- that opens an interesting question: does a swarmkeeper's swarm even have to be real or can it be illusonary or imagined? Gives me the idea of a severly alcoholic dwarf ranger who is often close to delirium tremens and sees those epinymous white mice or crawling bugs... and can somehow direct his hallucinations to affect others.

@obiwankenobi9439

2 жыл бұрын

Murder of Crows*

@Drekromancer

2 жыл бұрын

@@Abxiximab That sounds wonderfully deranged and thoroughly based. I encourage you to develop this character!

@Drekromancer

2 жыл бұрын

@@Abxiximab Side note: now you've got me thinking about a crack addict with latent, uncontrolled illusion/conjuration powers, that causes him to manifest the bugs he feels crawling under his skin.

@bobyhappy2992

2 жыл бұрын

@@Abxiximab I was largely inspired by Carmina from Dead by Daylight... :( I like your idea of a hunter of questionable sanity that hunts down his target wherever they are and could drives them crazy In my mind this type of ranger would be more spell focus...like a witch/druid but he could enhanced his combat ability with incomplete beast forms, twisting his body into a deadly weapon just for the hunt the swarm could be illusions/imaginary or animals raised from the dead there is a lot of possibility ^^

Please do more of the underwater basket weaving joke, i have never laughed so hard 😂

Absolutely love the idea of Gregori - im definitely using him!

As a Ranger lover, a cowboy conclave sounds amazing! Excellent idea, Antonio! Also, I think you'd be a great D&D Horror Story narrator!

@Drekromancer

2 жыл бұрын

This made me come up with a list of cool Cowboy Conclave names: _The Spurs_ _Hell's Horsemen_ _The Gumption_ _Frontier Justice_ _The Dusters_ _The Deputy's Chosen_ _The Songbirds_ (For a party of ranger/bard multiclasses) _The Knuckledusters_ (Ranged/melee brawlers) _The Lead Company_ _Los Diablos_ _Bad Tidings_ Feel free to add more, and let me know what you think!

@clarehidalgo

Жыл бұрын

Well the Texas *Rangers* were a staple of Wild west mythology

Final Fantasy 7, you spend most of the game one step behind a celestial you're trying to track down. One level in ranger with celestials as your favored enemy would make finding Sephiroth and Jenova a lot easier. I hate that almost everything ranger gets, multiple other classes get better versions of at the same level or lower.

@lucasm.3864

2 жыл бұрын

Pro: you find Sephiroth early. Con: you find Sephiroth early.

@Sephiroth517

2 жыл бұрын

Why you so mean, what have I done to you ?

@MK_ULTRA420

2 жыл бұрын

@@Sephiroth517 You've done a lot of bad things but personally I don't mind since your world would be a lot more boring without you.

@Chef_Alpo

Жыл бұрын

@@Sephiroth517 I laughed the first time I saw you remove Aeris from the game

I enjoy ranger atm (and actually really really like OneDND Ranger) and personally, my sort of "core of what a ranger is" has always been "The pique survivalist" With a little druid and a little martial... obviously, lots of characters can be survivalists, and druids embody that too, but i think of druids as "protectors of nature" and rangers as "survivalists" they're the ones who get hired to guide you through the sketchy jungle, the one who can survive in the wilderness forever, the hunter, the apex predator. Idk, that's what I've always thought of them.

I started watching a bunch of videos about rangers on KZread BECAUSE I wanted to build a ranch hand/ cowboy ranger, so when you started talking about ranger cowboys I yelled "YEEES!" so loud my roommate came to see what was going on 😂 so thank you for helping me flesh out the idea I've been playing with!

You just described 2 of my favorite things. Cowboys and vampires. I now want to make a cowboy vampire ranger who uses a graveyard as his farm.

@callmecrimson4806

Жыл бұрын

instead of cows, it's been his/her family's solemn duty to keep the restless souls/ zombies living there (a cursed graveyard) in check. eventually one (or more escaped), and now they are traveling to bring the souls back in/ end the threat to his family. (favored enemy is undead i guess? Or have them go for any undead as their favored foe in combat?)

The Ranger is a legacy class that was designed to assist in hex crawls. This from a time when you actually had to venture into the wilderness to find your dungeon.

@TheKrossRoads

Жыл бұрын

I was looking for this comment. Back in ye olde days Ranger had a niche: they found and guided the party to the orc encampment and kept bellies full on the way there. Nowadays, there are so many ways to subvert these two mechanics, the Ranger really has no purpose. And I'm not saying the minimizing of those mechanics in modern D&D is a bad thing, either. Most groups found them tedious pace-killers. Just ask the mayor where the orcs are coming from, buy ten gold of rations, and you're fighting greenskins in under a minute. So what's a class to do when their niche is all but removed from the game? You can demote it to a subclass. Either have it be a flavor of Fighter with an animal companion and bonuses to outdoorsy things, a Druid with more martial skills rather than casting, or even a Rogue that hunts by climbing trees and sneak attacking animals in a prairie.

@tigriscallidus4477

Жыл бұрын

@@TheKrossRoads or just make it a background.

@ValisFan3

Жыл бұрын

If your campaign is heavily survival based like Dark Sun, then rangers could mean the difference between life and death for your party.

@shorewall

Жыл бұрын

@@TheKrossRoads I think making a nature or beast flavored subclass for other classes is a great idea. We already have the Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster, which are Spell flavored fighters and rogues. We have summoning focused Druids, which takes the Beastmaster's thunder, and Fighters can be better archers as well. The Ranger Class has just been left behind.

@geroni211

Жыл бұрын

@@ValisFan3 But if you are playing a survival campaign, DnD is a horrible system for it.

Top-Notch stuff, as always! (My heart goes out to your editor, who had to re-watch THAT scene from 'I am Legend') :,(

One Swarmkeeper I've been wanting to play is a sailor that died at sea but was saved by a sea god (or some other ocean being). And now he is a mercenary with new powers and school of piranhas that surround him. It's cool in my head, he'll throw a harpoon and then the blood from it will cause the piranhas to swarm.

I like to think of Rangers as special-forces (Dutch from the movie Predator, Rambo, both of the main characters from the movie The Hunted, etc.) They infiltrate behind the lines, living off the land, remain undetected, while carrying out missions. The main modification I would make to the PHB version of the Ranger is grant Natural Explorer (additional terrain type) more frequently. Instead of just 6th & 10th Level grant additional terrain type at level 4 and every two levels thereafter. It makes sense as at low levels they specialize in the areas they came from but as they adventure (and travel the world) they learn to apply their skills in more and more environments.

@Chaosmancer7

Жыл бұрын

They work incredibly well in that situation... but the problem is that this is a game where you work as part of a group. that's part of what makes Hide in Plain Sight such an annoying feature. It makes you, specifically, very good at hiding and not moving... which is great if you are planning an ambush... that none of the other party members are around for...

@MrReset94

Жыл бұрын

And you'll keep Favorite Enemy as it is? Underwhelming and mostly situational? Favored Foe is not much better since it requires concentration like most of the spells in your spell list. Ranger should be a non-magical martial class focused on hunting, moving around better, surviving nature and such.

@yarnosh

Жыл бұрын

@@Chaosmancer7 I mean, it's no different in that regard than a rogue trying to do his thing with the paladin going CLANK CLANK HERE COMES THE TANK

@Chaosmancer7

Жыл бұрын

@@yarnosh A little, but the ranger seems almost designed for solo play, in a very strange way. And while a rogue can figure some way to utilize the Paladin's clatter, little you can do with the Rangers ambush besides make the enemy think the party -1 is ambushing them. Which is kind of sucky

@yarnosh

Жыл бұрын

@@Chaosmancer7 The ambush scenario seems pretty niche. That's certainly not the core M.O. of a Ranger. My Ranger has been hugely useful to he party navigating through wilderness, especially in favored terrain, of which he has two now. And the flying beast companion is indispensable for scouting especially with Beast Sense. And if you role play survival (like need to hunt food for the party) and don't want to cheese it with a druid casting Goodberry every day. I dunno, I have zero problems playing a Ranger with a party. He's just so versatile. Ha's made the finishing shot on more than his share of encounters... It's going to depend a lot on the setting. Like if it's a more old school dungeon crawl, a Ranger won't be of much use.

With a single dip into Life Cleric, Rangers can be one of the best (if not taking the top spot) out-of-combat healers in the game. Goodberry is absolutely insane, giving you a flat 40 HP to divide among your entire party for a single first-level spell slot. Right before you finish your long rest, pump every spell slot into making berries, and you’ll be set for the day.

@The_Yukki

2 жыл бұрын

Berries last for 24h, so even if your dm doesn't allow longrest casting (I can see why, it does feel like an oversight in the rules) you can do it right before long rest with your leftover slots and have them essentially for the next day.

@lucasm.3864

2 жыл бұрын

@@The_Yukki Either way, that’s probably the best healing you can get out of combat. The only reasons you’d need to take a short rest is for the party to get back other resources.

@tekbox7909

2 жыл бұрын

@@The_Yukki Its not an oversight. It was specifically stated in a post that it works and is intended

@The_Yukki

2 жыл бұрын

@@tekbox7909 oh I know about the post, it doesn't change the fact it can come off as cheesing. I'd probably allow it at my table, but I can see why someone would not.

@NiminaeOld

2 жыл бұрын

It's just ironic though because I think "healer" was not the point of the class. And every aspect of the ranger can be done better by other classes. I still enjoy playing them though.

Most of the ranger specific buffs to specific animals or terrain could be a background.

I had personally homebrewed a similar subclass to the cowboy idea that was fit for something more "pirate" themed. I had named it the Gunslinger. They would have an affinity for flintlock pistols, more specifically, drawing from the Ranger's belt of flintlocks to create opportunities for big burst damage. I hadn't fully worked this out but, to account for the animal taming side of things, I would allow this class access to some aquatic life, more specifically, dolphins or any sea mammals really, to help guide the ship the ranger inhabited. The ranger spells that tie to their ranged weapons would also apply here

Love your videos but there are a few things to mention: 1. Favored Foe does damage only on one attack per round and takes up concentration which is also bad. 2. The optional feature for Beastmaster makes them work off your bonus action to attack instead of your action (similar to other subclasses that gain a companion now like Battlesmith for Artificer). This was just some corrections, now for things that aren’t that. 1. Everyone claims that Ranger is a mixture of Fighter and Druid. This makes sense given Paladin similarly being a mixture of Fighter and Cleric. But given what abilities they are granted and that they get more skill proficiencies, I would argue it’s more Rogue and Fighter. The main Druid flavoring comes from some shared spells, a class feature that is shared by one Druid subclass (Circle of The Land), and plenty of flavor word choice that one can easily conflate for Druid including a fighting style that grants them two Druid cantrips. 2. Rangers have always been bases namely on Aragorn and the Dunedain Rangers (not Legolas). Other similar archetypes for Rangers (besides cowboys) would be things like Bounty Hunters (to the point that Star Wars 5e, a conversion of 5e renamed the class to Scout and have different bounty hunters as examples for subclasses), Skirmishers, and other sorts of martially proficient, yet skilled individuals like the IRL Texas Rangers. 3. Rangers aren’t exclusively good in using ranged weapons anymore with the advent of spell equivalents to more prominent ranged options. Thank goodness for things like Ashardalon’s Stride, Searing Smite, Elemental Weapon, and so on. I think Drizzt Do’Urden, of the novels in the Forgotten Realms, is to blame for sticking the archer/beastmaster archetype to Ranger. 4. Ranger with it’s initial features came out to be so bad because WotC tried to build it around the “Exploration Pillar” of the game. Unfortunately, that pillar doesn’t get used. But kinda fortunately, it would have probably been a bad time for people since Ranger was the only class that had a feature that even worked with that pillar (Natural Explorer). You could argue that Expertise from Rogue (especially Scout Rogue) or Bard or the Skill Expert/Prodigy feats could assist, but that wasn’t apart of intended design. WotC did more to fix Ranger with Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, but only so much. I hope all of this didn’t come off as nitpicky and negative. I love your videos and just wanted to poke through some commonly parroted points mentioned in the video. And the subclass is pretty good!

@Ditidos

2 жыл бұрын

I agree, I always felt that rangers being spellcasters seemed weird, al least as a core thing. I can see it getting magic in multiple subclasses.

@ULTIMATZEKROM

2 жыл бұрын

He also forgot the Hunter Subclass, unless that's what he meant when he said "Monster Slayer" subclass.

@woomod2445

2 жыл бұрын

Ahhhh the "Exploration pillar" i don't even disagree with it as a pillar! But it's the area where i feel like every character has zero abilities and is totally incompetent at. Party fights an adult dragon? meh. 30 ft. wall? WATCH OUT GUYS!

@loganjblack

2 жыл бұрын

Also he described the capstone wrong. It's not adding wisdom to all damage rolls against favored enemy, its being able to add wisdom to an attack or damage roll once per turn against a favored enemy.

@loganjblack

2 жыл бұрын

@@ULTIMATZEKROM he forgot hunter. Monster Slayer is it's own subclass.

"The Lone Ranger", is probably the best example for a cowboy/ranger subclass, right down do the silver bullets and tragic back story

@randlebrowne2048

Жыл бұрын

The Lone Ranger was literally a Texas Ranger that was forced to go anonymous and fight outside of the law (due to corruption).

Your cowboy idea has made me want to try ranger for the first time. That sounds like a fun spin on it I never thought of before. Thanks for that. Another good video

The whole bit about larping as Aragorn is true. Part of why it happened in the first place. Same with Gygax basically inserting monks into 1e because he liked kung Fu movies. That said, my personal belief is that rangers can fill a viable niche. That niche being wilderness survival. It's just that the modern playstyle isn't interested in the old school formula of trekking through a wilderness back and forth between town/stronghold and the dungeon.

Pointy hinted at this but; I really like the concept of rangers, it just isnt very good as a player class in almost all campaigns - it does however fit very well as an npc. Most NPCs stay one place the majority of the time, and thus it makes sense that they specialize in the area and maybe the creatures around it. The new optional features does something to mitigate this flaw in the class, but as they said, it often takes away from the vibe of the class

The Tasha's options make the ranger much more fun and on equal footing to other classes. Gloom Stalker is a beast too!

@georgeuferov1497

Жыл бұрын

They were more or less on equal footing to other classes from the beginning, people were just bitching about ribbon features being too ribbon

@WolfHreda

10 ай бұрын

​@@georgeuferov1497Tasha's was an absolute necessity. Ribbon features are nice, but ribbons are just that. They're decoration. And having half of your features be dependent on where you are is a serious handicap when you're not in that environment. Take the Tomb of Annihilation campaign. Forest would work alright for much of Cult, but inside the tombs, you get nothing. Deft Explorer is so much better, since it gives you Expertise in one of your skills. Favored Enemy is alright for survival/exploration/roleplay. But it's next to useless in combat. Favored Foe is so much more useful overall, because the extra damage simulates your knowledge of fighting such creatures, and it basically gives you a light Hunter's Mark without using actual spell slots.

@LittleCrowYT

4 ай бұрын

The xanathar subclasses were amazing for ranger and honestly should've been the base subclasses

Great video, on my first proper campaign I played a grumpy drow ranger that worked as a scout/spy for the drow queen, loved playing him and he even scored our druid tiefling as a girlfriend by the end. Made my DM never underestimate rangers ever again by almost one shotting several of his boss monsters (Ill admit sharpshooter and elven accuracy feats with zephyr strike was involved... I regret nothing). Rangers can be a lot of fun to play but they need more help and leniency from the DM than other classes

My BF is currently playing a circle of spores/swarm keeper multi class tortle called Sherm, who grows mushrooms on his shells and keeps wasps. And the synergy between both subclasses is so amazing

The pseudo-vampire swarm ranger concept is so cute, I love it! Definitely an inspiration for a new character.

Oh my god you are right cowboys perfectly fit the idea of a ranger. I think in general the concept of rangers fits better with some later exploration age roles. Frontiersman, trappers/furriers, expedition style explorers and big game hunters. Honestly think these roles can help solve the fix of being tied to a specific location. Why should rangers be tied to one type of place or creature? You should be focused on adapting to different environments & surviving in them. You should have different genres of tools to choose from, things that use arrows or bolts, Blackpowder weapons. Hell why not even have them focused on unconventional weapons Environmental /ensaring weapons I.E. bear/wolf traps, bolas, Nets, Bombs, tripwires, lassos, whips. Most importantly we should change how we look at how they are specialized in dealing with flora, fauna and fungi. Big game hunters specialize in larger enemy classes, keeping track any enemy they have wounded, once they've got you there's no escape. They specialize in making weapons deal more damage if left in an opponent. Imagine a whaler with a harpoon or filling an ogre with barbed crossbow bolts. Trappers/furriers are much more easily identify the roaming habits of creatures & tracks, have much better options for stealth, are great with poisons, get much better use of the corpse of creatures and make more valuable items from them. Explorers are a master of all tracking and can identify most creatures and if not they can likely classify them. They are master gathers and can easily determine the safety & edibility of flora and fauna. They know many languages and are better at attempts to communicate to those who they do not understand the language of & better at interpreting all except thieves cant. Frontiersman are masters at surviving and enduring harsh environments of any kind. They don't need to eat as much or as often, they can prepare food to make it take longer to spoil. They can obtain drinking water from sources most can't. They gain bonuses to perception and are better at hitting targets from far range. They are far better at climbing & surviving falls. Injuries affect them less and and can preform special actions at rest (and sometimes combat) to remove poisons, stop bleeding create splints to restore normal function. Btw I encourage anyone that has them to comment further ideas.

@mlgcheeto7886

2 жыл бұрын

I agree with what you said and I feel like that's what they are trying to do with some of the new optional abilities and me personally I always saw rangers as explorer to me that's how they felt

@Ditidos

2 жыл бұрын

Well, I would say that rangers are also good tribals and ice age arquetypical people if rage is not a big thing to their character, not necesarily more exploration age things exclusively. But I can definetly see it. After all the monk was originally based on martial arts movies and now is arguably the weeb class, so not every class is for typicall fantasy medieval settings.

@evantyler8647

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah, I think the fronteirsmen idea really exposes the true nature of the ranger. The reason why all the ranger ideas focused on protecting a spot of nature or something feel like druids, not rangers, is because that IS what a druid is, not a ranger. The vibe of the ranger is someone who survives and thrives in the wilds, and knows how to use it to their advantage.

Swarmkeeper is so cool. I never thought of doing a kind of vamp/not vamp character with bats, but it sounds like so much fun. My first thought was doing a wood elf hermit with pixies for a swarm. I know, “had to leave my forest because bad guys” is the most basic ranger backstory ever. But hey, if it ain’t broke right?

Irony - the ad that came up right after he started talking about the cowboy conclave was about a cowboy riding a hippo. It took me a moment for me to realize it was an ad.

10:55 Legolas is a fighter though. Aragon is the ranger. I do have to say that I played a ranger in a oneshot in one specific mountain range. It was almost OP. The DM had to nerf him as he could literally know where the quarry went, where to find food, get extra damage track things with advantage. He is a beast on survival campaigns focused on one specific terrain. DM needed his tracking and gave me optional features on top of that. So I guess I ended up playing a bit roided ranger. I have to say though, combat wide, a bit underwhelming. Okay damage, and after the first round (Gloom Stalker) it felt like you did almost nothing. Then again the nova turn one probably skewed that perception.

@armorclasshero2103

2 жыл бұрын

Last i checked aragorn never cast spells

@Sharkakaka

2 жыл бұрын

@@armorclasshero2103 no, but he does take herbs from the wild and turn it into a remedy for frodo to slow down the poison of that cursed sword (like a healing spell), made sure to cover the fellowship's trail (like the pass without trace spell) and other things that if you think for 5 minutes can be replicated with a spell

@armorclasshero2103

2 жыл бұрын

@@Sharkakaka you actually can't do lotr in d&d at all. those were skill checks at best.

@vonwaxy9941

2 жыл бұрын

@@armorclasshero2103 The magic system in Tolkein's work is not very well defined. Basically only the gods, demigods (like Gandalf and Sauron), and elves can do "magic" with some exceptions. Aragorn is know to have "healing hands" which can be considered magical but also could not depending on who you ask. Also keep in mind that rangers didn't always have magic in D&D.

@armorclasshero2103

2 жыл бұрын

@@vonwaxy9941 in what edition did ranger not have magic?

Keep in mind, the "optional" stuff is from Tasha's revised ranger cuz folks didnt like the ranger

@ghoulofmetal

Жыл бұрын

Yeah it is basically a new optional base class.

I think a great setting for a Ranger is a magic forest which moves. The character has to constantly patrol the forest, making sure the animals are all coping with the mobile trees. They retain access to their preferred terrain/location, they get to resolve conflict with a variety of different people, animals and monsters not used to a roaming magical forest being their neighbour. And it can go anywhere the DM needs or just find somewhere to be inert for a while. Obviously forest can be replaced by a different terrain.

@Moonlit_Snowflake

3 ай бұрын

That sounds like a perfect campsite. Is there an excessively large tree in the middle that completely happens to be perfectly shaped to have doors, windows, flooring, and even planks installed?

@beatrixwickson8477

3 ай бұрын

@@Moonlit_Snowflake there sure is now! Lol

Personally I think Ranger should be redefined around the concept of a survivor. No mater the situation they will survive, frozen wasteland, tossed into the abyss, or even lost in the feywilds? The Ranger stands the best chance of survival. Have the abilities remade so instead of having favored enemies and terrain, allow them to study them to catalog and gain those bonuses. Make it more of the prepared survivor.

Super impressed by the effort you put into these - the art is also phenomenal btw

Lets be honest here, IF the Ranger can navigate Walmart on black friday morning then he's hands down MVP.

@shorewall

Жыл бұрын

He'll have to use his dual wielding shortswords to make it out alive. :D

Playing a ranger/beastmaster in a non D&D setting where: 1. animal companions have their own turn in combat so not using up the PC's action. 2. Giving orders mid combat to a trained companion is a free action as long as its single word like "stay" "fetch" "get'em" or by pre trained hand signals. 3. Animal companions are a "ressource" that can be improved by buying additional ranks that give access to modules to get the unique beast you want. A large undead flying mount that can use healing magic? Costly but possible.

I guessed every twist on classes so far, but I was thinking the twist was defending a type of creature. insead of hunting it. and you totally got me this time. I lost 2 dollars, also, the other guess was plants. Becuase I made the guess, I gotta go make it now. Ranger gets a peracetic plant that acts like an limb, natrual armor, gives em summon creature for birds , that crawl out of the tree limb,

The optional abilities come from Tasha's Cauldron of Everything, where the really bad abilities (excluding Foe Slayer for some reason) from the Player's Handbook were overhauled so that ranger became actually good. My interpretation of the ranger design philosophy is that they're supposed to be self-sufficient generalists. What they can do (outside of the exploration/tracking stuff that everyone skips) _can_ be done better by other classes. Fighters are better for sustained damage, spellcasters are better for burst and control, rogues have an easier time becoming stealthy, and anyone with Healing Word is a better support. However, rangers have attacks and duration spells for sustained damage. They have control and area-of-effect spells. They may sneak as good as any rogue. They have Cure Wounds or Goodberry for a sticky situation. I think this design philosophy fits the flavour of a secluded loner in the wilderness rather well. And before anyone brings up bard, they have two subclasses that let them be a martial at all and most of their main-class features are based on song of rest, a clear support ability, and bardic inspiration, which literally requires an ally to be used at all. Like their 2nd level feature suggests, they are jacks of all trades for skills and out-of-combat RP, while rangers are jacks of all trades mechanics-wise. Mechanically, bards are support-oriented spellcasters.

@Mendoza-yi6qk

Жыл бұрын

The Bard is the with the cleric the best support class. The Ranger is more someone that can do multiple things that a party lacks. Stealth you have pass without a trace. Control spells that require concentration like spike growth. Healing and goodberrys if the healer run out of healing spells. But mostly most people play the ranger kinda wrong. He isn't supposed to be sneaky or a tank and still people think he is.

Seems like the rules for Favored Terrain and Enemy just need to be adjusted so that the Ranger can change their picks throughout the campaign. For example, if the Ranger's party moves into a new terrain, the ranger should be able to study that terrain over several days, and become familiar with it. This would make it their new Favored Terrain. And the same should hold true for an enemy. If the party has been tracking or fighting orcs for a few days, the Ranger should have the option to be studying the enemy, and after some time, it becomes their new Favored Enemy.

@beedoesthings8037

10 ай бұрын

Another optional class feature, Familiar Terrain: You can spend several days (and probably gold because 5e loves that for some reason) to study and familiarize yourself with a new terrain or environment. Once you have done this, you gain the favored terrain benefits for that specific location, and any locations similar to it. This way you can get specific with the “one specific place” theme of the ranger, it can continue to be useful, and you can use your knowledge gained their elsewhere. Not like ranger needed more optional class features, but it’s an idea.

@ArchonXzero

8 ай бұрын

I would adjust the favored Terrain to be a regional thing, versus just a particular terrain type. So instead of say woods.. I would say more of a geological region (or tropical, or sub tropic, or tundra) which would include all terrain features in that region (woods, hills, rivers, mountains). An tie in a level tiered unlock for that ability that allows something similar to a Familiar Terrain aspect that requires a ritual like prep time (ie do some hiking around an quickly survey it) you could use in other places outside of your favored terrain in order to gain the same benefits.

I think the favored enemy feature would make for a cool background feature available to all classes. If you wanted to be a dragon slaying fighter, giant felling barbarian, or demon banishing Paladin, you’d have a bonus to hunting down that specific creature type. I think that’d be pretty cool.

Ive thought of a couple homebrew changes to rangers but also the magic system as a whole, to be able to change the main stat you derive your magical prowess from. Ex a wisdom ranger who gets his knowledge of magic and beasts from experience versus the intelligence ranger who gets his knowledge of magic and beasts from studying and such seeing as rangers can be everything from monster hunters to zookeepers

What I'm gonna do eventually is, when they come out officially, mechanically play a plasmoid swarmkeeper ranger, but play it as an amorphous swarm of rats that are somehow smart and coordinated enough to keep a humanoid shape most of the time, and have the swarmkeeper swarm be The Rats That Make Up The Character

@royaloreo1275

Жыл бұрын

What kind of trouble will they get themselves into?

@fernandotrevinocastro1018

Жыл бұрын

The rat king

I played a Horizon Walker with all the Tasha's Couldron replacements, and it transformed the "forest dweller with a bow" into a scout into the unknown of the other realms, those 'less situational' options characterize more as a tracker with a lot of ability to adapt to new enviorments It was so cool

Currently playing a ranger in an Eberron campaign (Currently level 5) and the way I got them out of the proverbial forest is a survivor mission. For context, Eberron's main nation Khorvaire is fresh out of a hundred year war. During this time, my characters family and other members of age from his conclave were conscripted and scattered to the wind. So, with the war now over, my ranger and a fair few of the other older members of the conclave have left to look for survivors or any mementos.

I was thinking of a ranger with a bat swarm recently, so the character you presented was just WAY too cute, and I love Gregori!

I am a ranger player, it has always been my favorite class, matched only by paladin and sorc. My favorite recent ranger was a thri-kreen named Justin Case (my dm just sort of let us play setting specific races in any campaign). The whole deal with Justin Case was that he was a classic hard-boiled noir detective, whisked away into the feywild. He was best in urban terrain, but his tracking proficiency was genuinely super helpful for the main story. He also had a bit where he would thri-kreen broadcast his detective-film internal monologue all the time, which was a real hit with the party.

@RedBlitzen

Жыл бұрын

I've actually also made a Thri-kreen ranger! Tazvan the Chitspeaker. Even though I mostly made him to prove/test that fun characters could be made in my own setting I feel like he'd be fun to play. In an attempt to keep this short classes (especially full caster classes) in this world are basically the only thing that's made it possible for civilization to exist (that's how many monsters are here) so each of the handful of nations in the known world guard the secrets of training people into their classes like the state secrets they are. Meanwhile Tazvan became a ranger by accident while traveling with a ranger he'd found lost in the desert. His life mission is to gain enough glory in his people's eyes that he can found a new clan of Thri-kreen that he can teach his new knowledge to. He's a violent, naked, bug-man surviving in a wilderness incredibly infested with monsters who's telepathic voice buzzes and sounds insect-like. I'd really like to play him someday.

@SuperMCFreak

9 ай бұрын

There was a mimic NPC in one of the games I played in named Justin Case

Her: "He's probably thinking about other girls." Him: "If Kirby's copy-abilities were D&D-classes, Archer would be Ranger and Ranger would be Gunslinger."

I’ve been poking around with the idea of a Swarmkeeper Ranger who’s a toy maker. His swarm is basically his worlds version of LEGO minifigs that somehow gained sentience through undisclosed reasons.

You have achieved such high numbers because your content is both highly informative and your editing is hilarious. Humour is brilliant throughout all your uploads Great eork well done!

2:43 Favoured enemy was *really* good in 3.5 and PF 1e. So, Wizards nerfed it because they hate fun. 6:05 Like most 5e capstones, this is completely underwhelming and does nothing but incentivise crossclassing.

@GlacialScion

Жыл бұрын

The capstone is +WIS to the attack or damage roll, which is better than just damage. ... ... But it can only be applied once per turn to one attack. People think it's trash tier when it's actually exponentially worse than they assume it is. Lol.

@the13inquisitor59

Жыл бұрын

@@GlacialScion Yep. Compare that to 'you can one-shot a favoured enemy that has taken any damage'.

@LadyCini

Жыл бұрын

Eff Wizards for nerfing my class!

@giraffedragon6110

Жыл бұрын

@@GlacialScion exactly, my ideal fix for it is to instead a feature you get at 4th level, it’s PER attack made, AND based off the proficiency bonus. I understand putting it at 4th level seems… odd. But I have 3 reasons for it 1). Any earlier (say level 2) and people would just use it as a dip like with fighter and action surge. 2). Any later like say level 6-9 it might never see play in a campaign or session. 3). Putting it at 4 creates incentive and rewards players for going into 5th level for the extra attack.

@MogofWar

Жыл бұрын

The Level 20 Capstone is really a feature that should be just be built into the Level 1 Favored Enemy ability.

Ranger is a case of 'It was really strong in previous systems, make it Melee Kirby". They OVER corrected for the shenanigans, and now they're basically offering you a different class without rebuilding it from the dirt up. The Beast Master is the main victim- by pushing what made Ranger unique to a subclass, and then neutering that subclass further, they reduced the fun of the class overall

@The_Yukki

2 жыл бұрын

I have no idea how good they were in previous editions, but if they were strong, they certainly weren't overcorrected, Ranger is in fact the best martial class in the game.

@lanterns_glow

2 жыл бұрын

@@The_Yukki You could effectively ignore any terrain, your beast was a second character which had it's own action economy and could even be Multiple instances of itself with the right build, and overall you were just kind of unparalleled. 5e overcorrected with bounded accuracy and limiting the general power scope to 20 levels, while reducing the general power of everything across the board. This is why CR is a joke until it matters for abilities, and most of those abilities barely go over 1- by the tine they're useful, you're facing things that laugh at them.

@geekpeak5052

2 жыл бұрын

@@The_Yukki wahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahhahaahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. R u mad u do know paladins are martials right?

@The_Yukki

2 жыл бұрын

@@geekpeak5052 Let me guess... "Spell slots? More like Smite slots" Paladins are fine, but the fact they are essentially forced to be melee, and have access to a pretty weak spell list is what makes them worse than rangers. Lvl 6 aura kinda nutty tho, I'll give you that. Too bad unlike rangers to make use of that they have to actually have decent charisma, unlike rangers with their ability to not put anything into wisdom and still perform well (though you don't really want to dump wisdom given it's best stat in the game, by proxy of being tied to perception, but expertise can make up the difference.)

@GearGearRingLeader

2 жыл бұрын

Which edition?

Fun fact: the official translation to spanish (at least in Neverwinter Nights, the 2002 videogame) is Explorer. So... I guess Rangers are like Cowboys.

I once turned a ye olde ranger into a city park ranger. He wasn't great at the outdoors, having been a city kid most of his life, but he knew his way around parks, lawns, formal gardens, mazes, and hedgerows. When taken out of the city, he was kinda decent at grasslands, but he was in his element in towns. I'm also inspired by this video to come up with a beekeeper ranger. It'd be trickier than the batboy ranger because bees need time to get used to an area, but I imagine the ranger has a wagon with his hives and has a portable hive he can carry on his back. Ideas...

I think my favorite ranger I’ve played was a Warforged Swarm Keeper Berserker Barbarian multi class he was an animated Scarecrow who was animated because a witch cursed the land he was on and the cursed land killed the farm owner so motives by anger and “for da birds” will he strike down every coven

Firstly love the cowboy conclave idea, more so now becasue I'm running an old west themed one shot, also really love the swarmkeeper idea~ i might have to steal it.. anyway! brilliant work as always your such a gem keep at it!

Great video! Your comment about the “wouldn’t it be cool to play Aragorn” conception of the class actually makes a lot of sense

The shear amount of glee and happiness that washed over me as you said “Cowboys” was pure bliss.

My favorite dnd character I ever played was a ranger, She was a Tiefling with an unfortunate placement of her horns being where her eyes should be making her blind, raised by a hermit wizard in the forest who's familiar was a crow. When the wizard died she mourned but at some point found herself able to see via the crow, over time crows just seemed to gravitate towards her as she practiced archery using their sight. Just a fun little swarmkeeper concept it had the added bonus of the watchers dark gift cause it was a curse of strahd campaign

My biggest frustration with the 5e Ranger: Rangers are the iconic dual wielders, more so than Fighters. Yet mechanically, they are one of the WORST of the marital classes to use it. Dual wielding takes a bonus action, but so does Favored Foe, Hunter's mark, ANYTHING beast master, Drakewarden or summons in general. Not sure if this frustration is against Rangers or how 5e does Dual wielding actually. Barbarians and Paladins would gain a lot from good dual wielding. Dual-wielding Barbs is also rather iconic too.

@isaacgleeth3609

Жыл бұрын

Rangers are not iconic dual wielders. Drizzt do'Urden is. The fact he is a ranger is irrelevant. He could have been a barbarian, and people would still make their Drizzt clones.

@marks2807

Жыл бұрын

I think wotc was afraid of making the 4E two weapon ranger again who where way op with up to 30 attacks in a turn at max level. So they depowered two weapon fighting to the point that it is too weak to use.

@atashgallagher5139

Жыл бұрын

@@marks2807 My DM allows me to get an extra off-hand attack with action surge as a fighter, which is still stupidly underpowered but hey it's better than one off hand attack and four or six main hand attacks.

@me-42by42

Жыл бұрын

Favored Foe doesn't use a bonus action.

@bdk336

Жыл бұрын

I think the problem is how 5e does dual wielding personally. The fact that dual wielding both eats the bonus action and also nerfs the second attack without a feat makes it pretty underpowered without heavy investment.

I always saw rangers as two things either the martial counterpart to druids like paladins are to clerics, or a skilled hunter with magic. The two rangers I played so far I really enjoyed one was a human Gloom Stalker (would be now a reborn instead of a human because that was basically his backstory) in a Curse of Sthrad campaign where he thrived, and another one was a Totem Barbarian Beast master ranger Multiclass, which I still play in a modern day ish campaign (although I might be having more fun with it because the DM lets me use the two spells the Totem barbarian gets as rituals at will instead, making me utilize my beast as a better familiar a lot more... but then again primal awareness does give that spell as well and lets you cast it once for free)

The thought of ranger=cowboys has always stuck with me. My thought was whip with hand-crossbow for position and moblity. And if another class should have a gun archetype besides fighter, it should be ranger.

We actually remade the ranger class and focused on them being survivalists-since the idea of the ranger is that they kinda know how to live on the land.

@greenstarlover1

Жыл бұрын

I remade ranger to be basically the party's scout - I made the useless primeval awareness ability a passive footnote that comes with your favored enemy, and it ACTUALLY tells you what type of creature you're sensing (great for RP), and replaced the original ability with one that pretty much breaks stealth (advantage on perception checks for a number of minutes equal to your level, and you cannot be surprised during it), but it's only limited to once per day. I always envisioned the ranger to be the first one in the party to notice an enemy approaching. Also rogues needed a class to counteract against.

6:01 correction, you can add it your attack roll OR damage and only ONCE per turn against your favored enemy. Secondly you missed level 14's Vanish which lets you do the hide action as a bonus action and also not allow you to be tracked unless you do so intentionally or by magical means. Basically what the rogue gets at level 2, only worse.

I can't believe how good the ranger with dampier idea was! So cool!

Ranger have a special place in my heart because my elven ranger (Shava Siannodel) was the first D&D character I made and really connected with.