New Ranger | 2024 Player's Handbook | D&D

[@icaromota1277]

"you are now as a ranger able to command your beast with a bonus action" The same one I use to cast Hunter's Mark? The main ability the class revolves around now?

[@waltercosta2067]

yeap

[@bradleyrichard9283]

Should just be able to use hunters mark as part of an attack action

[@SophiaAphrodite]

You only need to cast it once then concentrate. You act like you have to recast it multiple times. people complain about EVERYTHING

[@magnusflodberg6162]

@@SophiaAphrodite If the enemy dies you need your BA to move HM to a neew target

[@jamal8757]

@@SophiaAphrodite when your target get down u can, with a bonus action, choose a new target

[@gratuacuun8366]

Level 20: Cleric: I summon *GOD!* Fighter: *Takes out whole squad by themselves with 8 attacks* Wizard: *Casts Wish to rewrite reality* Druid: *Becomes an immortal forest god* Paladin: *Turns into an angel* Ranger: Hey guys, look! I can do an average of 4 more damage a round!

[@codiethompson3401]

Worse: it’s actually 2 points on average 😅

[@gratuacuun8366]

@@codiethompson3401 I was being generous and call it 4 because of extra attack. 😀

[@tylersmith7509]

Valid, but the Fighter capstone isn't that great either. Not by itself. On the whole it is 8 attacks, but the cap stone is only 1 more attack (2 more with action surge, twice a day). But ~12 more damage per turn is a lot better than 2 (or 6, if Hunter's Mark is cast at 5th level).

[@gratuacuun8366]

@@tylersmith7509 Wouldn't it be twice each short rest? So depending on how many short rests, it can scale.

[@tylersmith7509]

@@gratuacuun8366 short rests, in my experience, are very dependent of the DM and the type of adventure. Most of the time it is 1 extra attack and 2 times two extra attacks.

[@Unendarkened]

How did this pass playtesting? Did the spell list actually cut out the massive number of concentration spells that compete vs hunters mark? Why oh why.

[@ShadGray]

It didn't pass playtesting. They just moved forward with it anyways.

[@TEGRULZ]

It couldn't pass through a massive hole in the ground let alone play testing, they just took all of the feedback they saw and trashed it. But the fact is, this started with them trying to make SWIMMING AND CLIMBING level dependent. I have no idea how a Ranger is so complicated for these people, but it has broken them.

[@tylersmith7509]

This is a very valid point, it makes no sense to have a long list of concentration spells if hunter's mark is going to prevent you from using them.

[@yuvalgabay1023]

I can't believe as a lvl 20 ranger i get the aswome ability of +2 to dmg Truly wotc out did them self

[@SmaugBoi]

That's how I feel about the rogue assassin change

[@robf88]

So if you can up at it to get more dice.....let's say at 5 level and it's 3d6 Now that's 3d10 that would now be plus 6 damage per attack now.

[@yuvalgabay1023]

@@robf88 ohhh wow exciting. Need to wast my very limited 5th lvl spells for .extra 6 dmg wowowowoowowow.

[@varunvijay9293]

I don't even want hunters mark to be a thing now, I want stuff like entangling strike etc to be more viable but now they've designed it so that hunters mark is the only viable option

[@robf88]

​​@@yuvalgabay102318 extra damage if you get 3 attacks via BM or 3 attacks via two weapon fighting. I know still underwhelming but there are builds....

[@Space_VVizard]

Ranger needs to be an exploration themed mirror of the paladin to be successful. Focusing the entire class around a level 1 concentration spell with no scaling(until levels 13,17, and 20) is simply not it. Give the ranger a climb and swim speed. Let them choose two expertise skills between Nature, Perception, Stealth, and Survival. And them give them the other two they don't choose at a higher level. Give them the paladin smite feature, but instead of nova damage it is damage plus status effects, such as blinded, restrained, exhausted, or frightened. Or prone, disarming, or shoving, like a battle master. Make it so that these conditions don't get saves. Eldritch smite has a no save prone, swords bard has a no save shove, I don't wanna hear people saying this is broken or OP. For the frightened, restrained and blind just make it so it lasts for one round instead of a save. Instead of Divine Smite call it Nature's Fury. Now the ranger has a resource to expend that isn't chewing up their bonus action, so it can play much nicer with beast master, gloom stalker, etc. At the end of the day, so what if it ends up being over tuned? Rangers have been dog water for a long, long time, while paladin has been S tier. Give the ranger some love.

[@Sambrostar]

Absolutely agree, love the ideas of ranger being based on conditions like blinded, restrained, frightened and exhausted. I still think Ranger's can use Hunter's Mark, but just make a free action without concentration or something.

[@Space_VVizard]

@@apollosungod6673 hence why I said "has been", because it's been S tier for a decade now.

[@Space_VVizard]

@@apollosungod6673 I agree. The paladin nerfs will not be run at my table. Looks like I'm going to have to do a lot more picking and choosing as a DM than I hoped for.

[@gorgit]

No save exhausted might be a taaad unfair. After 3 hits the enemy is effectively useless, after 4 basically dead.

[@Sambrostar]

@@gorgit obviously ways to balance it. An example might be that they gain 1 level of exhaustion each time they are hit and fail a save, and they cannot have more levels of exhaustion than the spell level of the Hunters Mark, for example.

[@AndrewThoesen]

The only explanation is that at some point Jeremy played in a group where a Ranger PC bullied him and he decided the class would never be playable again.

[@Koranthus]

lot of grown adults whining about concentration in these comments, weird

[@trealosgaming3345]

Ranger has always been playable and it sounds like most of you all cant be creative in how to use it.

[@wizkid5555]

​@@trealosgaming3345 I mean, JC even pointed out that Ranger has *always* been the lowest rated class in terms of satisfaction.

[@ghostkill221]

I just think the removal of onhit stuff feels meh. Ranger was always THE onhit build.

[@gorgit]

​@@Koranthus You call it whining, I call it laughing at the sheer stupidity. How can you get paid for designing THIS? 💀💀💀

[@josiahtaylor2246]

"Just play a Fighter with a bow, it's better!" -JoCat Still true today.

[@trealosgaming3345]

Eh, lets put a lv1 2024 ranger vs a lv1 2024 fighter. If the ranger goes melee and has nick weapon mastery, that first turn attack suddenly is an extra d6 to 2d6 damage depending on the weapon/ fighting style choosen. Rangers are far more than guy with bow and spells. JoCat is a low creativity person honestly.

[@terence9867]

​@@trealosgaming3345 You knew that he doesnt actually think that, right?

[@turtley8581]

@@trealosgaming3345 yeah but most of that seeming good on paper is just because ranged dps got nerfed so hard with the 2024 handbook lol

[@Louis-ef4eb]

​@@trealosgaming3345let's put a 2024 character vs another 2024 character...LET'S NOT. 😂 is anyone going to use this?

[@DonceGT]

I'm sad that it still applicable

[@Nerd704]

What an abysmal design. Seriously basing that much of the class around hunter's mark when it prevents you from using at least half of your spell list because it eats concentration and they balanced the class around the idea that hunter's mark is always up...

[@westoncraig7384]

Exactly! My biggest complaint playing ranger is that you can never use a concentration spell bc your class is built around maintaining concentration on a 1st level spell that just isn’t good/fun enough to be worth it after a while. Not only is it mechanically boring, but it removes a ton of roleplaying flavor that would be introduced from the other spells.

[@LangyMD]

Maybe the new Ranger spell list doesn't have any other concentration spells?

[@elementzero3379]

​@@LangyMDThat would potentially be great for the Ranger, but does it seem likely? These guys think Hunter's Mark is too good to remove Concentration, and that it's a fitting centerpiece for an entire class.

[@Nerd704]

​@@westoncraig7384 Hunter's mark is a pretty fun combat way to make ranger damage different than the other martials. It's just horribly implemented. It costs a bonus action only provides at most 3d6 extra damage if you dual wield and doesn't scale into the later levels (that amount is gained at level 5). Compare it to sneak attack or smite. Smite does all it's damage at once and scales up. Sneak attack can be pretty much consistently obtained. HM requries you to basically swear off all the other cool things your class spells let you do because the whole spell list is concentration heavy. Even single turn effects like lightning arrow require concentration. So now you want to lightning arrow something? You not only spend the spell slot resource but also have to spend another spell and bonus action to get HM back up again. Like a "I target you specifically" buff is pretty flavorful and at least as good as sneak attack and smite but the limitations are insane. And warlocks get a just better version of it.

[@gardenagnostic4138]

they did to ranger with Hunters Mark what old warlock's issue was with Eldritch Blast. Eldritch Blast was so good and its upgrades were so prominent that you were nerfing yourself as warlock by using any other cantrip. in the new warlock version, the invocation upgrades that make it slow or extend the range or whatever apply to ANY cantrip now, not just eldritch blast, which opens up a lot more options! thats awesome and ive ALWAYS wanted that! then for ranger they...lock you into Hunter's Mark in the exact same way???? By upgrading it throughout the class?? Like they didnt learn at all??? Imagine how much your nerfing yourself by saying nah i want to concentrate on Swift Quiver or Barkskin or Beast Bond or Magic Weapon instead; all your hunters mark stuff is going to waste because youre not using it

[@WokedOx]

Did he just say that my level 20 ability that i spent so much time working for.... increases my damage to a single enemy im concentrating on... by 2

[@wolfaru]

Keep in mind that stacking with the advantage you already get from having them as your target of Hunter's Mark meaning it's bumping up to a d10 and you already have a much greater chance of critting

[@life-destiny1196]

The level 20 Ranger ability is roughly as good as a fighting style, only on the target of Hunter's Mark. Thank you very cool. I guess if you're doing Swift Quiver--j/k that's concentration. WOTC really does seem to overvalue die size increases. Remember when they thought the Martial Arts die bump was gonna be enough for Monk?

[@M9Seradon]

@@wolfaru that feature is also a joke. Weapon mastery and the rest of the Ranger toolkit already give easy access to advantage as early as lvl 1. Waiting until lvl 17 to give you advantage for using a dud of a spell is a humongous slap in the face.

[@blakenoir7890]

yeah... and level 18 is amazing, you get something a warlock in 5e gets at level 2.

[@matthewmenendez7302]

@@wolfaru the issue is we already had the ability to cast hunters mark, this base class feature is useless. Sure i can cast it for free but its not providing something new till 13th level. The base class feature should of been something like the blood hunter. Making sacking a spell slot to deal extra elemental damage that scales. Maybe later levels you can get some insightful fighting mechanic to get weaknesses to optimize the damage type. Get more types as you level up, get advantage on knowledge on creatures or monsters that you previously selected. Just remove the blood hunter flavor and slap it on and would feel like the ranger has something truly there own that mechanically is satisfying to use

[@matthewmiller1847]

"We are looking at features to make sure they are the right action economy. Sometimes removing the action cost all together" *makes paladin Channel Divinity options apply on an attack* *also keeps hunter's mark a bonus action AND concentration*

[@wilverine5557]

And commanding an animal companion on a BA

[@gersonbruno8463]

@@wilverine5557 instead of animals having their own initiative action and bonus actions

[@fullmetalpotato1258]

​@@gersonbruno8463 commanding a familiar or a mount you ride is a free action. Commanding the animal companion could have been too if its gonna compete with using hunters mark

[@MekkaYGO]

So we all agree to homebrew no concentration hunters mark.

[@mitchellenderson7194]

Allowing it at my table, and buffing the Hunter’s Mark damage to go from 1d6, up to 3d6 at capstone.

[@KevinVideo]

Just like the Tasha's upgrade for Favored Foe, which was concentration, and shouldn't have been. I just use the 2019 UA for "Class Feature Variants". It reads: "You can call on your bond with nature to mark a creature as your favored enemy for a time: you know the hunter’s mark spell, and Wisdom is your spellcasting ability for it. You can use it a certain number of times without expending a spell slot and without requiring concentration-a number of times equal to your Wisdom modifier (a minimum of once). You regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest. When you gain the Spellcasting feature at 2nd level, hunter’s mark doesn’t count against the number of ranger spells you know."

[@wavecycle]

Or uses concentration (with free casting) but no action to relocate

[@FawkesOnline]

I would just use Favored Foe but with better scaling damage tbh

[@izenheimreborn6390]

Upcasting, higher damage scaling, no concentration, free action to switch. My reasoning is that rangers are the class that stack abilities such as spells, class features, weapon bonuses, and ally buffs to use every die in your set

[@aidanweaver1744]

Why didn't they just make hunters mark a feature instead of just free casting a spell? They're making it such a necessity yet limiting it so much. You could just make it a feature so that 1. Doesnt need concentration and 2. Make it genuinely unique

[@KevinVideo]

Agreed. It should have been something similar to the monk's unarmed strike.

[@TheDragonRuler-]

They did the same thing with Smite which everyone also disliked except to a class which was already weak

[@aduinoch]

Because some other things grant it it as a spell. (Oath of Vengeance Paladin, 2 sub races from Eberon, and the Fey Touched feat)

[@joshuazemanek5809]

They tried it in the UA process... but whatever people said made them undo it.. so blame the masses with a megaphone

[@ArturoGonzalez-st7xj]

It appears they are doubling down on spells for halfcasters and not even good spells. just look at what they did to the paladin divine smite feature.

[@OneShotQuesters]

So.....Am I making jokes that the Ranger still sucks? Or the party doesn't need him until level 10?

[@Rajunganclips]

eyy

[@yuidragongirl.1396]

F in the chat for Ranger 😭

[@Person-u5y]

This needs more likes!

[@darkswordgamer9496]

RIP

[@jefferystafford9657]

Why is wotc so afraid of making Rangers stronger?

[@i.am_berserk]

"The ranger is now a completly new class" *Proceeds to describe the Tasha's Options for the Ranger*

[@westoncraig7384]

Yep.

[@RamlethalTheWamwethalUwU]

You mean aside from the SEVERAL new options they gave it? You mean aside from the new stat locks and growths for the beast master? You mean aside from the new features on the fey wanderer and gloomstalker? You mean aside from the almost complete rework of the hunter?

[@i.am_berserk]

​@@RamlethalTheWamwethalUwU i mean the how they kept it the same just a little bit buffed, like Tasha's did

[@Baraz_Red]

Well, both sides of the statement here are a bit true : the core parts of the revised Ranger is very Tasha's ... and the Beast Master is Tasha's... except the spell-combo part! The Gloom Stalker is truly different (and needed it!). And it is just poking fun a bit at the statement in the interview. :P

[@okayhellohihowyadoin]

Oh no I don’t like this at all. They way overvalued hunters mark.

[@Hous3ofpros]

im still crying that hunter’s mark STILL requires concentration. the free uses are great but come on a paladin doesnt have to concentrate on their aura, why does a ranger have to concentrate on their core class feature. its dumb af.

[@vortigern7021]

what is even worse the Paladin doesn't have to concentrate or even cast a spell for their improved Divine Smite.

[@Hous3ofpros]

@@vortigern7021 EXACTLY

[@ArturoGonzalez-st7xj]

could be worse, like having to use your bonus action every time you want to deal HM damage :D

[@Hous3ofpros]

@@ArturoGonzalez-st7xj i mean, if u got high damage ur kinda doing that anyway to switch it around 😂 but v true that’d be crazy

[@nicholassteele1367]

They absolutely missed the "mark" with this one. So very disappointed. To sum up: -They presented Tasha's optional features as brand new features. -Made a bunch of new features centered around Hunter's Mark, making it feel like a required use for the Ranger, without buffing it in the levels ranger will mostly be played in. -Nerfed gloomstalker while leaving in the most problematic feature (invisible to creatures that rely on darkvision). I don't understand this at all. -Made a couple minor tweaks to features that are more lateral changes. They seem to be trying to funnel ranger characters into one playstyle. This is just a worse version of other classes. Just play a fighter/druid or a warlock. Warlock got so much love and the ranger just got the shaft.

[@Thomas-zt7dm]

Have you heard any news on how often they'll be able to do dread ambush? Honestly its basically free casting zephyr strike except it also comes with a free attack. The ranger multiclass is going to go insane though.

[@Sambrostar]

Fighter/Druid subclass is just a better Ranger, and I dunno if that subclass would even be a highly viable build.

[@SirAron]

So you are telling me, instead of taking the opportunity to make Hunter's Mark a Class Feature without concentration. They keep it useless at higher levels and even claim that the lvl 20 cap stone ability is a damage increase of 2 points at average only if you use a spell that gets out scaled at that lvl. Feels like they on purpose choose to ignore the community on that one. No concentration needed after lvl 5. No dmg scaling for up casting. Triggers once per turn. And slowly scales from 1d6 to 1d8 than to 1d10 that was the better version, and they decided to make it useless.

[@SlvrSwrd92]

I thought hunters mark was whenever you hit with a weapon attack?

[@matheusfiorelli8829]

@@SlvrSwrd92 they nerfed it in UA 6, there was a once per turn

[@Sambrostar]

Hunter's Mark should scale with the die size, even if you can use it as a 2nd level spell for free when it improves, then again as a 3rd level spell at capstone. Or the damage begins at 2d6/3d6, so potentially could maximize damage to 7d6 as a 5th level upcasted. And more targets at higher spell levels, so you don't have to waste your bonus action to change targets often!

[@TrixyTrixter]

@@Sambrostar that is way to much for a 1st level spell. As a feature you are just taking the rogues main thing and giving it to ranger but better.

[@Sambrostar]

@@TrixyTrixter Not necessarily, Rogue doesn't have to bonus action concentrate to gain the effect of their sneak attack, but Rangers wouldn't have to get advantage on their attacks. Additionally, to get 7d6 damage, you'd have to expend a very limited 5th level spell slot, which we don't know how many Rangers actually get. Just expending a 1st level spell so you can deal 3d6 extra damage at, say, level 15-20 would be a very nice and reasonable feature.

[@elainelefey]

Tasha, can I copy your homework? Yeah, just change some things, so it's not obvious.

[@vortigern7021]

I would have rather they just copied and pasted Tasha's

[@secretlyditto7716]

@@vortigern7021ME TOO

[@vlrze]

Full list of fighting styles? Nice! I can't wait to take archery from a bigger pool.

[@jacobtrost5048]

lmao that's exactly what I said

[@vortigern7021]

you can get blind fighting, then get a whopping 20 feet extra blind sight at level 18.

[@btmikey1925]

"Gloomstalkers do a lot of psychic damage!" Ah yes. Forgot how crazy powerful a single d8 of damage is

[@KevinVideo]

Especially a limited number of times per long rest.

[@Feian83]

Considering that the ranger’s capstone changes a d6 to a d10, one single d8 can account for “a lot.”😂

[@btmikey1925]

@@Feian83 Lol! Yeah, guess I should look at ranger in a vacuum. Let me just ignore the other class's capstones like the +4 Str and Con that Barbarians get or the 4th attack that fighters get. Also should probably ignore the fact that arcane casters can warp all known realities at that level too. You're right! 5d8 damage for the entire day is good! 🤣

[@Feian83]

@@btmikey1925 see? You just welcomed the perfect ranger mentality 😂

[@jonstokes1832]

Don’t forget the extra attack

[@PenatiLorenzo]

If the whole class is built on Hunter's Mark how are we supposed to be able to use any other spell if it is concentration? Also the buffs are at 13/17 for a 1d10 dmg? Are you realy going to concentrate on Hunter's Mark in Tier 2 and 3 of play? Such a disaster of a class, just make it concetration free at lvl 13 and the class is at least decent. Like this is atrocious for a class. So sad because I like almost every other change we got to see thus far in all other classes.

[@steven_r33d]

just make a house rule that hunter's mark doesn't require concentration. It looks like that's what everyone else is doing.

[@TommieCobb]

Hunters mark still requires concentration. Why is this single spell, still the core class mechanic of the class? Why isn't it a class feature? Why does it require concentration? No other classes core feature requires concentration.

[@Qyshawn]

I think the idea is that they also made ranger a primary caster now? So you have much more spell slots to work with

[@johnnyspillowfort377]

Yeah, I think they are trying to make it like Smite, but that doesn't take a "known spell" slot. Honestly if I want an animal companion or nature magic I could play a Warden Druid.

[@Aranesque]

at the very least, if they insist SO much into making the core class mechanic, why can't rangers become exceptionally good at it? Give us improvements with the spell as we level up. Remove concentration at certain level, or the use of bonus action, give us more damage die or anything that makes it worthwhile using the free slots they are giving us.

[@johnnyspillowfort377]

Wait, hang on at 10:00 they give you free castings of it, and at lvl 13 damage doesn't break concentration. Ok, so they are only making it a spell so you can't stack concentration. Why?? Why kneecap the rest of the class for this one spell??

[@Mrryn]

​@@QyshawnAnd? Now you have to choose between losing out on around half your class features to concentrate on good spells like the new Conjure and Summon spells, or be stuck maintaining concentration on a level 1 spell (that potentially only deals a single d6 of bonus damage per turn based on the last UA version) just to actually get mileage out of your class. All while also losing out on your bonus action casting/switching targets that you need for other class features, notable commanding your freakin' beast companion meaning they still haven't fixed one of, if not the, main issue with Beast Master ranger despite 10 years of feedback and a year-long+ playtest to fix it - action economy.

[@alexg.9498]

So we all agree that we are gonna make our own Ranger if a player at our table wants to play one

[@trealosgaming3345]

I will play it as the phb wants cause it is honestly broken if built right(which i have done by accident often). Once this comes out it makes my Warlock/ranger way more broken than expected. It went from a slow melee, to being able to deal 4d6 plus modifiers on turn 1 if you take the nick weapon mastery. Early level rangers can suddenly become damage dealers far faster than a fighter. Yea you may have to recast hunters mark but nick suddenly makes that bonus action free to do so.

[@pedroropio6970]

Yeah, but that's exactly the problem. You have to build it "right" or else you'll just feel incredibly auto-nerfed if you want to play a STR ranger, or if you wanna send your pet in while you use a long bow.

[@carlosforma5978]

If your class only swings in the extremes (broken, unplayable trash in almost any build, OP in that one or two specific builds), it's still a trash class. I hate that, because I always loved the Ranger class identity and to play as a Ranger. But my excitement to play Ranger has been running on the nostalgia fumes for years because the developers seem to hate anything that translate the class fantasy into anything usable.

[@carlosforma5978]

Honestly, I'm wanting to make a level by level progression homebrew for Ranger, basing it more around 3e Ranger and translating Flavor Text into mechanics. But I'm not entirely sure of which levels represent what in general character progression, so I'm a bit hesitant. I guess I'll start by writing in some note app.

[@ManubibiWalsh]

@@pedroropio6970 if you wanna play a STR-based class just go Paladin/Barbarian… You can’t play a ranger and expect them to be a tank. And yeah, the point is building them in a way that works for you. Always been. You can’t grab a character that’s based on dexterity and expect them to be proficient at strength-based actions. Or you can, but then the whole character will suck. Play a Paladin 🤷🏻‍♀️

[@ZiadCharif]

Capstone for Ranger: +2 damage, meanwhile wizards are a fireball machine gun... Ehh, for my table I'll probably just homebrew it that it is a free action to cast, and/or doesn't need concentration, that feels better as a cap stone feature.

[@elementzero3379]

How dare you?! I will not be wasting my time casting Fireballs! I'll be turning the Ranger into a Dragon so he can feel cool. This Ranger is such a disappointment. ☹️

[@Pavel-wj7gy]

Even with a free action no concentration, hunters mark is not going to catch up at level 15+.

[@hyperlink6547]

@@Pavel-wj7gy yeah like. im a 20th level ranger, i can either cast hunters mark for 2 extra d10 if i hit both of my attacks. Or, i can spend my action to cast Steel wind Strike, for triple that damage on 5 different creatures!!! AND i still have my BA to command my beast companion. this capstone feature is literally worthless.

[@zoloaftermidnight]

You can't even blame your unearthed arcana feedback for this because EVERYONE ALREADY VOICED THEIR COMPLAINTS FOR THIS!

[@mitchellenderson7194]

Okay, so let me throw my thoughts in: • REMOVE CONCENTRATION FROM HUNTER’S MARK. There are a million words in the English language, yet through no combination of them can I accurately string together how badly I hate this. There are tons of great options in the Ranger list as-is that require concentration, and are better than an extra d6 of damage that only I can benefit from. Ashardalon’s Stride, Summons, Swift Quiver, Flame and Lightning Arrows, Tree Stride, Guardian of Nature, Stoneskin, Wind Wall, even Ensnaring and Zephyr Strike at level one! I’m okay with making Hunter’s Mark central to the class, but for the love of the gods and all that is holy, it needs more! • The level 20 ability *actually* makes me angry. Like, imagine you’ve played an expansive campaign with a party of your friends and have kept your Ranger alive and pushed them to the apex of their abilities, and all you get is an average damage boost of 2 while you have Hunter’s Mark up. Does that feel like an open slap in the face to anyone else, or just me? • For a completely rebuilt class, I’m seeing a LOT of features plundered from Tasha’s. They were cool features and all, but this isn’t the same Ranger anymore. Maybe it’s time we move on past them. • Hunter rework actually sounds really cool, interested in trying it out to see how it feels. Same with Beast Master. • I always thought Gloom Stalker was more Underdark aligned than Shadowfell. Not that I mind; I actually like the idea of subclasses geared towards certain planes. It opens up my creativity to things like Horizon Walkers geared toward the Astral Plane, Clockpunks geared toward Mechanus, Avengers from the Upper Planes, or Demon Slayers diving into the Abyss. Overall, 5/10. Homebrew will fix Rangers for us again down the line.

[@jamiehuebsch]

This is the first class revision that looks terrible, I sincerely liked all the others up to this one. How WotC keeps basing the Ranger's combat around a single bad 1st level spell in spite of receiving at least 4 passes of feedback now that is heavily disliked, I will never understand. Hunter's Mark sucks and is not fun to use. Stop forcing Rangers to use it just to keep up with other classes damage. Of course it's too late now since these books are already printed in a warehouse somewhere.

[@nicholassteele1367]

Agreed. They could've just made it a feature like favored foe from tasha's only remove concentration. Make it a scaling feature like sneak attack so that it isn't too strong for a one level dip. Add tracking advantage. Done. No reason to overcomplicate it like they have. There also isn't a need to limit it's use besides once per turn.

[@ademas2010]

Ive never used it in any other form of the class, and I usually just dual class anyways and just pump up my survival skill and other relivent skills as the campaign goes on cause half the stuff for magic is done by the crazy wizard or sorcerer's anyways. Or the edge lord druid.

[@twitwit99]

Having Pass Without Trace remain up is way too important to use hunters mark a lot of the time.

[@Tryson101]

I have played many rangers because I like freedom motif they have. I have used Hunter's Mark less then 10 times. There are better spells to concentrate on for both damage and flavor. Now many of the higher level feature are based on that one spell!?!? I honestly don't care that much about damage equality, this hinders my character's freedom. I hate the idea of multi-classing normally, but for this Ranger...

[@shetoldmeto]

I feel like Hunter's Mark would have been a great feature if they just simply stated, "Whenever you roll initiative, target one creature you can see..." and simply run the regular Hunter's Mark rules after that except for concentration. Even the apply to another creature effect once that creature goes to 0 HP. Then you don't have to worry about spell slots, concentration, or anything similar. It would retain its identity of focusing one creature and wouldn't be overpowered.

[@nicholassteele1367]

To steal a line from The Waterboy: "Oh no, we suck again!" 😑

[@WalterRiggs]

Rangers rule. But I gotta wait 20 levels before Hunters Mark damage increases? Weak

[@trise2033]

...if you ignore that using Hunter's Mark also makes that target your Favored Enemy, with all of those fun benefits.

[@waltercosta2067]

@@trise2033 what are the benefits mechanically?

[@jefferystafford9657]

Ranger sucks sadly

[@M9Seradon]

@@trise2033you seem to be misunderstanding, but there is no favored enemy feature to give you benefits on a tagged target. All you get is a d6 and advantage at 17 (lol), unless you're in one of the few subclasses that cares but still only gets minor boons to it.

[@Dighpo]

Wait, you don't want +1 average damage as a level 20 capstone??? Why???

[@justsomedude8617]

"One of our misses in the 2014 ranger is we had some really nice flavorful abilities having to do with different environments or different types of creatures that didn't really deliver a reliable, concrete game experience" Which is exactly why we have scrapped those abilities entirely, and in their place we have made the ranger's theme about dealing an additional d6 of damage to one creature, once per turn.

[@ВладимирБолотов-ъ3э]

And instead quite logical expert in couple environments we get a tarzan, who is just worse version of good magician in plainly everything. Why we have warrior, who is just english Dreadnought and this cripple with 1d6 extra damage on every attack. And if they nerf/remove sharpshooter, then ranger will deal about negative amount of damage!

[@nonashubeltaine2861]

I didn't think it could of been done. But they made Ranger even worse to play now. I just don't have anymore words.

[@Sambrostar]

Yeah I'm wondering if the 2014 version is actually better in this case. I would just homebrew every 2024 ranger feature out of existence at this point, any monkey could do a better job than WotC ever could with this class.

[@fredcole6844]

Druid: A full spellcasting class. We wanted to give druids that didn't want to cast spells something to do with their spell slots (ie: wildshape / summon a animal friend). Ranger: A full martial class with limited spellcasting abilities. We gave you a spell you are required to use to do any damage at all, which takes your concentration slot up permanently. And don't forget to be excited about the enhanced spell list. Seems like Ranger is still a dip only class :(.

[@swartzwalker]

It's really disappointing that the Hunter's Mark feature requires concentration and uses a bonus action to cast. It seems like it would be the equivalent for a Rogue to have to use concentration and a bonus action to use sneak attack.

[@acember]

Sneak Attack damage scales up...

[@malezar5444]

Fighters: "If I miss, I just hit" Wizards: "I can counterspell, and if it doesn't work, I don't use my spell slot" Paladin: "Everyone around me gets lots of bonuses because I am awesome!" Ranger: "I get +2 to damage, am I useful yet guys?"

[@Koranthus]

ah yes, compare the fighters epic boon feat to a separate hunters mark feature upgrade that you don't list. just dont forget they get blindsight and advantage on marked targets and also you did the math wrong its more than +2 at every change in the hunters mark progression.

[@DuDleyAllDay]

@@Koranthus He's specifically comparing lvl 20 capstone features.... all they needed to do was give the Ranger 24 Wisdom and Con like the barbarian, even THAT would be better than an avg +2 dmg per hit at lvl 20 when the Barbarian gets a garuanteed +2 damage per hit lol and they dont have to maintain concentration on an outscaled trash lvl 1 spell

[@TraunaFish]

Pros: We now have a version of the ranger on par with the old 2014 classes. Cons: I guess we wait till 2034 to get a ranger on par with the other 2024 classes. Class is entirely dependent on a single first level concentration spell, as soon as you try to do anything else with concentration most of your class features disappear. :( :(

[@5AMACE]

No, this is a worse than 5e ranger. In 5e, ranger overcomes the likes of rogue and fighter easily only being surpassed by paladin among the martials, but this one struggles to keep up with it's old self and isn't even a contender for the others.

[@michaelkellermann6949]

Well they will fix it in about 6 to 8 years with TCoE 2

[@camerongct]

@@5AMACE Ranger overcomes fighter? In what circumstance?

[@vortigern7021]

no, they will do another revised ranger to fix it like before.

[@vortigern7021]

@@camerongct conjure animals.

[@MeatbagSlayer]

Looks like dad burned the food. Ranger bros are not eating tonight.

[@BorzoiByDaylight]

IM SOBBING ALL I WANTED WAS A BETTER RANGER NOT THIS 😭😭😭

[@supervado7962]

What's so annoying about the ranger being one of the worst classes mechanically is they're the most iconic class in lore and media. Aragon, Drizzt, The Witcher, John Snow, Katniss, etc. When people think of a hero in an adventure a Ranger is the 1st image that comes to mind and they get shafted constantly. Animal companion should be part of the core class with the beast master getting extra benefits, hunter's mark should scale throughout the class or not require concentration, climb and swim speed should be much earlier, they should have an arcane archer type subclass that makes them a clear front runner for best ranged weapon user

[@AndrewThoesen]

It’s because mechanically, the exploration/survival/tracking parts of DND are so weak.

[@Manahyde]

Minsc as well, THE D&D char most used in modern advertising

[@alemar1122]

The Witcher is an Eldritch Knight... Aard = Thunderwave , Quen = Shield , Igni = Firebolt , Yrden = Slow , Axii = Charm Person

[@supervado7962]

@@alemar1122 I was more referring to the monster hunter aspect. It's not 1:1

[@Day-eb9po]

​@@supervado7962 Yeah, like, I have a joke that Indiana Jones is a ranger in every way that matters. I think his closest 5e equivalent is rogue/fighter though? And really, that's the problem with this ranger. Basically any "ranger" in media would be better replicated with a different class. Who marks a single target as their main deal? A lumberjack?

[@comradewarners]

The problem with relying so much on hunters mark as a feature is as you get higher levels hunters mark isn’t really that good. Also the buffs they added are added really really late. I played a Tasha’s Ranger from level 1-11 and I stopped using hunters mark really early in the campaign. What’s the point of having a bunch of good Druid concentration spells when they are basically telling us, “use the utility Druid spells out of combat and hunters mark in combat. We even gave you free uses of Hunter’s mark! USE IT!!” That’s so boring to me. Would much rather entangle or spike growth.

[@50layersofshrek83]

I believe they changed hunters mark in the playtests so that the damage scales.

[@RulesLawyerDnD]

Spike growth.....hahaha

[@JuckiCZ]

In last UA you could see, that HM scales at lvl 9 to 2d6 and at lvl 17 to 3d6, so I hope they didn't tune it down again. But with my Tasha's Rangers (And played many) I never ever took HM spell, because there were so many better concentraiton options available.

[@comradewarners]

@@JuckiCZSo I saw that in the playtest, but the way he was talking about it in this video made it seem like it was the old version. I guess we will see.

[@RulesLawyerDnD]

@@JuckiCZ wow....I didn't know

[@M9Seradon]

I hate to say it but this was disappointing. Giving up on letting the Ranger have a unique exploration feature so it actually feels like a Ranger and shoving a bunch of expertise down it's throat is sad, but then you tell us that all it's combat improvements are minimalistic buffs to Hunters Mark, and it's clear that this Ranger (outside of Weapon Mastery) is directly inferior to the Tasha's variant of the 2014 Ranger.

[@Kurse_of_Kall]

The subclasses all got significantly combat improvements, also you are massively undervaluing Weapon Mastery which is new in the 2024 version.

[@M9Seradon]

@@Kurse_of_Kall "all"? Last I checked they actually nerfed Gloomstalker, and Fey Wanderer -in their own words - was almost entirely unchanged. Weapon Mastery is a universal feature and therefore fits as more of a QoL change than a standout feature for the 2024 Ranger.

[@clarkside4493]

So, are we still having to pick between casting _Hunter's Mark_ and telling our beast to DO something on round 1? I mean, I'm liking all the changes so far, but that one thing staying is very frustrating.

[@gersonbruno8463]

you can still command your beast with your action, if you have extra attack, both of you can do it while marking someone. but yes, they could have their own initiative and actions/BA ;c

[@clarkside4493]

@gersonbruno8463 DndBeyond's article says Bestial Fury will share your _Hunter's Mark_ damage with your beast. I hope that is _in addition_ to your 2 beast attacks per command that it originally provided and not in place of it.

[@MaMastoast]

@@clarkside4493 The two are gonna compete for your bonus action, also your beast can apparently only benefit once per turn... Because why make it simple

[@ryanstoyan8980]

So like do y'all just hate ranger?

[@pokemon30326]

Man this is the second time today Im watching two dudes deliver lies and disappointment.

[@oscarfellini6500]

Q: If the DM describes a helmet on the ground in front of my Ranger do I (A.) Roll to kick it, and (B.) If successful do I break my toe or do we proceed like nothing's happened?

[@Critrol]

you don't proceed like nothing's happened, my dude. You give a manly cry of frustrated anger first, THEN continue like nothing happened.

[@robertgauthier8876]

You have to break your toe for real.

[@ishigami04]

Hope this class get some love. The playtest was a pain in my heart, so i really want it to be good in the final book Cross my heart that if the Ranger doesn't get cool features I'm just making a homebrew version of the class for my group

[@andrewdowns3673]

Same. I think Dungeon Couch made an alt. Ranger vid a year or so ago; was so good.

[@ishigami04]

I actually have one made by my own inspired by the 3.5/pathfinder 1e Ranger that is both powerful and tematic IMO. My version is in the Portuguese language, because it's my native idiom, but I'm going to take a look in the Dungeon Coach version. TYSM! ​@@andrewdowns3673

[@Aranesque]

If it's like the last playtest, I'll probably homebrew the ugly bits. My main issue was adding terrains again and not giving you upgradeable free hunters mark (either free uses at max cast level or making it no-concentration or something worth using it past level 5)

[@mkdynasty272]

Same here

[@jefferystafford9657]

Just move to DC20 instead of 5e

[@DeadLight63]

Too much focus on Hunter’s Mark. If it really was designed as the identity or bread and butter of the Ranger, it either needed better and earlier scaling, or not requiring concentration. Rangers have access to really great spells, but are pigeonholed into Hunter’s mark if they don’t want their damage to fall off a cliff. These changes don’t fix that, and if anything make them worse. Two extra expertise skills at level 19 are neat, but what exactly is that supposed to accomplish? Most campaigns don’t go that high, and even if they do, Expertise is honestly pretty easy to get past that point. I could see this being awesome at 8th or 10th level, 19 is just too late.

[@TheComicWonder]

You get the expertise at 9th level, he phrased it wrong. Still not an exciting class though unfortunately

[@killerchansey4938]

They really said we're just gonna use the Tasha's Ranger. The only new things they actually gave Ranger were a few more expertise and languages, a feature that keeps from breaking concentration on hunters mark and the new most pitiful capstone. They're REALLY banking on people not reading any of the other books

[@killerchansey4938]

Like updating a die from a D6 to a d10. How about you add your Wisdom modifier to attack and damage rolls. Maybe make a number of attacks a critical hit a number a times a day equal to your WIS modifier. Like what are they smoking?

[@yuvalgabay1023]

​@@killerchansey4938what you don't like doing extra 2 ish dmg per attack?

[@deffdefying4803]

@@yuvalgabay1023 compared to the old capstone which was +WIS (thus potentially +4 or even +5) to either damage or attack rolls.

[@capy-karma186]

Did anyone else notice that they also made no mention of Primal Awareness or Primeval Awareness? Is that just gone now?

[@killerchansey4938]

It's just gone now ​@@capy-karma186

[@madwookie9844]

You guys could've easily had Favored Foe from Tasha's Cauldron, since you copy pasted from the book and didnt change it much if at all for Ranger, work as the "Hunter's Mark" ability you guys have setup with the following improvements: It no longer requires concentration. Regain uses on a short or long rest. Possibly a damage buff such as: lvl 1 1d4, lvl 4 1d6, lvl 8 1d8, lvl 14 1d10, lvl 20 1d12. (just spitballing that, not definitive) That's it, that was all that really needed to happen. You already had uses equal to your proficiency bonus which is great as it would automatically build with you. And without concentration you could mark multiple creatures if you want for 1 minute to deal extra damage to them, which means: *You no longer have your bonus action and concentration eaten by a very mediocre spell when there are much better options in the Ranger spell list, not to mention your beast commands as Beastmaster also require a bonus action now.* *OR* you could have combined the two still have the Hunter's Mark thing but it does not require concentration and the damage improves MUCH sooner not *starting* to improve at 13th level, and being able to mark multiple creatures if you wish too. These changes are nice but they are very much *not* sufficient when compared to all the other classes and subclasses thus far, you guys *really* dropped the ball with this one. I still look forward to the rest but man this was a real blunder.

[@elvenscout]

Honestly. Plus FF was only 1x/turn. could start it at 1d6 and easily scale it up to 5d6, which is only half of what a rogue gets at level 20. Or like you said, make it HM a class feature instead that you can only use # times per day with your prof bonus, have it scale to 1d6, 1d8, 1d10, 1d12 at 5, 9, 13, 17 (levels we get our prof bonus at), and include the original Favored Enemy advantage to Wisdom rolls for the creature to track it, and on Intelligence checks to recall information about them if they've been marked in the last day. Or something along those lines. Like bring back the nature and survival master vibes at least. If they're worried about concentration - make it so it's only no concentration if they use the free cast, not the spell slot, which is cast at lowest level (still 1 hour long). Literally such an easy fix. Starting off you only get 2 casts per LR that have no concentration. It's like a variant attack form of wild shape, which now also levels up. It's just wild they're basically making the class unplayable due to concentration. Esp if like others mentioned, they didn't even playtest this version. at all. and they ignored the feedback given. It's blatant disregard. I blame WOTC and HABRO for constantly firing their employees though. it's always the good employees they fire, like the entire crew that worked on BG3. All gone. (I genuinely hate it here)

[@thecactusman17]

10:10 "you still require concentration on the spell (Hunters Mark). This is important so it doesn't stack with other things that require concentration." Unless Hunters Mark has undergone a massive redesign and is now a Fireball level insane option this is a terrible decision made with bad logic. A Ranger concentrating on a level one spell in Tier 3 and 4 play is making an extremely poor decision on how to use their limited class resources.

[@Pavel-wj7gy]

As an option, they could make hunters mark a toggle for narrative purposes but for combat they could mimic the superiority die mechanic, eg five d6 attacks until short rest if the hunters mark is applied. That would solve the problem of "we are afraid hunter's mark will stack with other spells".

[@jacobtrost5048]

For real. I just don't understand what other spells they're so afraid of Hunter's Mark stacking up with. Like does it really matter if your Lightning Arrow does an extra 1d6 damage because of Hunter's Mark?

[@Elkay_J]

So now, not only will we still not cast hunters mark at high levels, but now we don't get class features either. Since they are all based around a 1st level spell. My disappointment with the new handbook has peaked

[@diobrando1545]

If wizards don't do the ranger justice,it's going to be really bad

[@waltercosta2067]

@@williamhargreaves7046 yeah, me too

[@sambro6657]

They ruined it

[@joshuasmith9061]

it's bad

[@Megawaps]

They already did.

[@punkasaurian3055]

This is a confusing statement

[@thesistersofbattle]

They could have hit the Mark with making a better Ranger, if they weren't too busy concentrating on something else.

[@_somerandomguyontheinternet_]

*ba dum tss*

[@KillerKam211]

I am so confused on why Relentless Hunter and Precise Hunters are at levels 13 and 17 rather than 5 and 13? It looks like rangers are the only class that doesn't get a feature at 5 besides extra attack. Precise Hunter also seems like Studied Attacks for the Fighter (level 13) but redressed for Hunter's Mark.

[@daltondee5666]

Don’t care if the print run is delayed. Fix the Ranger. It doesn’t need another 2014 repeat. And for the love of everything make hunters mark a class ability that scales

[@licilicky]

I like most of the changes but the upgrades to Hunter's Mark comes in really late for no reason... Like making it's concentration be unbreakable by damage is nice but... level 13? That sounds like a 6th or 7th level feature. Then having advantage on attacks against marked creatures is also really good but come on, level 17? Wizards get Wish and Rangers get advantage on one creature. This sounds like a level 11 or 13 feature. Don't even get me started on the damage increase from d6 to d10. You could make it just a d10 from the beginning and I don't think anybody would be blown away. You'd maybe get a "Oh nice!" Regardless, that at Level 20 must be an actual crime.

[@DHTheAlaskan]

Hunters Mark should be a class feature without being spell or require concentration that should scale accordingly. Many Ranger spells compete for concentration. Why add more to the pile?

[@anormalcrab8909]

Not making hunters mark a base class feature that doesn’t use spell slots and dosent require concentration is a huge missed opportunity to allow rangers to not only be stronger but let them use more of their spells

[@shinigamigaming2941]

Sad, I never used Hunter's Mark. I preferred Expeditious Retreat, because I was a dual wielding axe/hammer throwing Dwarf with a Boar named Pig. I needed the extra movement speed over damage.

[@arsenicuma5200]

Hunters mark improvements are so very late in the levels You could've easily get concentration thing on level one and it would've been fine

[@nothere7467]

This the hardest I ever been blue balled before. Brand "new" class was the biggest lie I've been told next to my dad saying we can go to McDonald's as a kid.

[@woof7611]

so hunter's mark is all over Ranger now, but how are those buffs helpful to a beast master or drake warden or any Subclass that is using their bonus actions on other things?

[@tylersmith7509]

At least in Unearthed Arcana the beast companion also benefits from Hunter's Mark's extra damage.

[@ruckleschtik5227]

I don't get why they view Hunters mark being non concentration as problematic when Radient strikes exists

[@Shimbot1323]

Great, the one thing that should be a mechanical feature of the ranger, Hunter’s Mark, is still a spell, which prevents you from using any other spells during combat. All the other features of ranger suck, because very few tables use the exploration pillar. Ranger is my favorite class, btw.

[@theddexaggerator7884]

Same

[@jacobtrost5048]

lmao I constantly have to remind myself, "No no, Aragorn is a ranger, Drizzt is a ranger, you LOVE rangers, I promise..."

[@GrandSythe1]

The reliance on hunters mark has me worried. How fun this is to play will directly rely on how the new spells work.

[@shinigamigaming2941]

I will be homebrewing it to be a free action, not require concentration and give them a much better cap limit.

[@cbilici]

This is literally the litmus test to see if they can finally learn all their lessons.

[@zarbonthedestroyer7232]

They failed.

[@AndrewThoesen]

No lol

[@thegamesforreal1673]

And they failed the test... spectacularly so.

[@cbilici]

@@thegamesforreal1673 I really want to read the spell descriptions and everything in context but yeah... I think they might have.

[@slammurai6492]

Sad to see them double down on making Favored Foe just a Hunters Mark tool. Love the concept of being an expert in fighting a specific monster type and would rather that get improved and expanded upon rather than just "You get some free Hunters Marks :)" Also give ranger melee specific spells for the love of god

[@Mr_Maiq_The_Liar]

The output of huntersmark over the course of an entire fight isn't significantly greater than divine smite. It's like WOTC thinks a spell should have concentration just because it has a duration and not because concentration actually improves the spell

[@LordKristivas]

The cost of a bonus action to make your beast attack is why the Beastmaster is always going to be the lesser subclass. The capstone is astoundingly lackluster. Hunter's Mark should not have been a spell. Neither should Divine Smite. What are you guys even thinking?

[@willvasser7253]

If you’re going to make a class reliant on a spell. (First off don’t I thought they learned from the Warlock and eldritch Blast) that spell cannot require concentration. Also with the hunter removing options is not a buff

[@jacobtrost5048]

The thing I don't get is that they keep saying, "this is basically all completely new," but then it's the same exact Hunter with the options "focused." And like for Beast Master, when he described the "Share Spells" feature it was basically identical to the 2014 version, but the other guy reacted like it was brand new. I just don't understand.

[@Aranesque]

If they're gonna build up on the last playtest like most of what we've seen so far... I REALLY hope they make using Hunters Mark worth while. They give you tons of benefits at high levels but you only get free castings at minimum level making it useless past level 4. If you're gonna concentrate on something, there are tons of better options. Either upcast my free uses or give it a no-concentration upgrade past certain level. That would fix a lot.

[@waltercosta2067]

still concentration, no way around it, at level 13 damage can't break that concentration, at level 20 damage goes up a bit, that's it, that's the whole worthwhile HM changes

[@WS-le4dv]

It sounds to me like hunters mark is a core way to up the damage for the ranger and that your subclass is where you find further sources of damage to stack ontop. The beast master will get their beast companion, gloom stalker and fey wanderer do extra psychic. I haven’t gotten to the part about the hunter but I assume they will have something as well. I’m disappointed they didn’t take my advice and turn hunter’s mark into a feature instead of relying on it being a spell but it’s whatever. If I ever have a ranger player I’ll just house rule that they don’t have to concentrate on it starting at the level they can’t lose concentration if the class feels like it’s not performing well.

[@JazzyBassy]

I really hope that they make Hunter's Mark able to be cast on tracks of a creature, as well as allowing Bonus Action Study and Search to assess/find your mark. I really want the latter "Ribbon" part of that spell to actually do something "Rangery" rather than the spell just be used for boring damage. Free concentration-less uses on Favored enemies would be nice too to get some of that flavor back.

[@nicolaslandgraf7317]

That sounds super cool, even if it's not built in I would talk it out with the DM, I don't think is something OP and would be really on theme. I will 100% add it to every game a DM moving forward.

[@JazzyBassy]

@@nicolaslandgraf7317 I’ve playtested this house rule in campaigns for over a year since they were building Hunter’s Mark to be a class feature in the UA. All my ranger players loved it. PF2e has a similar mechanic for Ranger called Hunt Prey and it’s as free as my house rule. Starting combat with it on from tracking a quarry means that your bonus action in the first turn of combat is free for whatever you want. If you are tracking an invisible creature and combat begins, the Bonus Action Search is super handy.

[@andrewdowns3673]

Hunter's Mark should be a class feature and not a spell. It should just be a damage boost like sneak attack (though not stackable) plus tracking enemies.

[@ishigami04]

​@@andrewdowns3673i absolutely agree. That was a feature of the class in past editions and similar games

[@rydry2741]

That sounds like a survival check for investigating tracks. As a DM, I would include proficiency with the check if it’s not already there. Study and bonus action don’t go together. understand something new in a moment is more of a realization.

[@matthewdavis9966]

Jesus Christ… they still s*** the bed with Hunter’s Mark… no one is going to want to concentrate on something that gives 1d6 extra damage beyond Tier 1. What a huge misstep…

[@Selene18]

While I am excited for all these... Ranger still needed more love. Like.... we have to wait until level 13 for OUR Hunter's Mark to be better?!! And damage only goes up by 2 at level 20?! 20?! No No.

[@sovelis7727]

"At 13th level, concentration can't be broken on hunter's mark. Still have to concentration on it - This is important so that you can't stack it with other things." Right, god forbid we can stack an extra 1d6 on attacks against one target with another concentration spell. Meanwhile, paladins get an extra 1d8 on all their attacks at level 11.

[@ChuckFinnley944]

For the love of god, just make Hunter’s Mark a class ability. If you’re going to give the class special interactions with the spell, LEAN INTO IT. Give every subclass a unique bonus to it. Basically all of the subclasses have some kind of feature when you first choose them to add a little damage to one attack and a special effect on top of that. They usually require a bonus action too. Wrap it all up in there, “when you attack your Marked target do X too.” Incorporare it into the class so that it can be a unique selling point just like Smite is for Paladins.

[@deadpoolrwbyfan8419]

This is the one I’m really interested in. The 1st playtest ranger needed some flavor, the 2nd was just a travesty. And the proposed Gloomstalker changes were abhorrent.

[@robf88]

Really. I think all you need to do with gloomstalker is just take away the extra 1d8 approach on the third attack.

[@JensenGKP]

Can I ask why you think the second playtest version was a travesty? It is functionally the same as the first, but with added flavor to Deft Explorer and a nerfed Favored Enemy. Is it really just because of the Hunters Mark changes?

[@RulesLawyerDnD]

Gloomstalker was OP in 5E. I hope it either gets a overhaul or just not in this book so they might have more time to fix it and balance it.

[@flatturtle07]

Best Master pet vs sidekicks... What's stronger? I always felt the pet should be stronger than sidekicks.

[@RulesLawyerDnD]

@@flatturtle07 depends on the situation

[@rdchris6556]

I think ranger is the most anticipated class. Monk previously was, but given the nearly unanimous approval of the previous UA, i think we can feel pretty confident of its direction.

[@waltercosta2067]

monk feels great, ranger on the other hand, they've dropped the ball, yet again, it's unbeliveble

[@TEGRULZ]

It may have been the most anticipated, and the most misused by WoTC. At least we don't have to call this 5.5E

[@wreckedgamerqq5001]

Wow, they really went out of their way to just gloss over the Beastmaster without going into any real depth or detail. “It gets better as you level up.” Well technically so did the 2014 one but it scaled poorly. I’m glad for the bonus action command and the eventual sharing of spells but something of substance would have been nice.

[@lupusprimealpha6198]

80% of players never see lvl 9 and above. Wotc: lets put all the ‘okay’ ranger stuff after lvl 10. that will show em!

[@jaselumena1889]

Of all the awesome concentration spells that ranger gets, they decided to focus on Hunter's Mark, which got nerfed hard in the playtest and never did anything interesting to begin with (compared to the other cool spells they get). Hoping the at least remove its concentration requirement.

[@cr4bbed]

I really hope it's not too late to make changes. The Ranger really needed to be improved, especially it's reliance on concentration. They did not do this, and instead made it nigh impossible to concentrate on anything else other than hunters mark. This class would be a lot better (as many have already said) if hunters mark was a free class ability and not concentration. If rogues can do piles of d6 of damage each turn, it should be easy to for a ranger to do an extra d6 per attack with some added features. I feel that if ranger had focused maybe on something like nature/hunting flavored invocations that give hunters mark the eldritch blast treatment, along with giving rangers more optional features to choose from, this would allow players to form more of their own unique identity for their ranger, instead of being stuck as a lackluster fighter with some druid flavor tossed in.

[@krezon3138]

I like the idea of the subclasses buffing hunters mark in their own unique ways. But it doesn't sound like gloomstalker and feywanderer do anything for it. Am I missing something?

[@daneroberts1996]

Subclass-specific HM effects is such a neat idea. I’ve been wishing recently that sorcerer subclasses got specific uses for metamagic and this is a very similar idea. Maybe I can use that idea by home brewing my own own subclass effects or finding someone else’s?

[@joemeenie]

Sorcerer cap: summon a dragon. Ranger cap: d10 baebyyy!

[@TyronMakeka]

My play circle can't help but compare the Ranger to the Paladin as they are both classes that embody the martial aspect of a full caster counterpart (cleric and druid) While the Paladin has an evocative and powerful mechanical identity, for the Ranger that's far less the case, something I hope will be rectified.

[@JensenGKP]

What about the Ranger is lacking when compared to the Paladin? Not disagreeing, just curious where you stand on it.

[@waltercosta2067]

@@JensenGKP fun mechanics, paladin's got smite, auras, lay on hands, radiant damage on every attack just there, a horse that can eventually fly, on top of weapon mastery and spells (that ranger's got), look at the differences, and those two classes should've been on par with eachother, but they are very far appart

[@deffdefying4803]

@@JensenGKP imo it's the flavour and the usefulness within the pillar it's designed for. Ranger is supposed to be for the Exploration Pillar yet can only explore good in up to three environments, and only after an hour of already exploring. They are supposed to be expert hunters, but can only gain skill check advantage on up to 3 (or 6 if you are hell-bent on hunting humanoids) creature types. However, the flavour is all there. With Tasha's (and thus PHB24's) Ranger, the features are more frequently useful, but feel more like "hunter who walks a lot" than "frontiers' guardian". And unless Nature's Veil gets some juicy flavour text to link it with nature, it feels arcane to just turn invisible. Like that feels like what an arcane caster would do.

[@SkaalKesh]

@@JensenGKPTo me, it simply feels that flavorwise and mechanically, you could just play a Battlemaster Fighter Scout Rogue multiclass and get everything the Ranger has unique to it. A d6 extra damage every turn, ability to tell immunities, resistances, and vulnerabilities, expertise, good tracking ability, fighting styles, a climb and swim speed. Everything. There is no mechanical uniqueness to the ranger that can't be replicated with a vey basic multiclass.

[@Ockto_]

BG3 was a godsend. Since it dropped I've already been in 2 campaigns where everyone's unanimously agreed that, "yeah were just gonna change ranger to how it is in BG3, with some tweaks since BG3 only goes to lvl 12."

[@danlehman4646]

"Don't forget to pre-order our first new sourcebook releasing Q4 2024 where we introduce a totally new subclass, The Ranger! We promise it is fixed this time! ;)"

[@Abelhawk]

Literally the ONLY THING that will make this class work is if they added like 15 new Ranger-specific spells that are different types of awesome arrows and stuff.

[@SpaceCoon92]

If they do this and refrain from making the spells require concentration, this class (and everyone complaining about the changes) will be a completely different story

[@Milo__M]

Tasha's Ranger with the added class framework bonuses like weapon masteries and spellcasting adjustments. I'm afraid that without them clarifying how often a day you can use Tireless and Vanish it's most likely still the nerfed version that uses Wisdom for uses. Also saying "the ranger is basically a whole new class, and you'll see that be the case if you've played a ranger in the last 10 years" makes no sense when 2024 Ranger is just TCE's Ranger Revised. The quality of life improvements are nice but it's not really that much of a change for the Ranger. Can't wait to read more into the subclasses, where I assume more of the class' power will reside. Getting the feeling that 2024 Ranger will still need homebrew adjustments to help it keep up with other classes. Fingers crossed though

[@vortigern7021]

yeah, its tied to your wisdom. Confirmed on DND beyond article.

[@Milo__M]

@@vortigern7021damn, I really hoped they woulda changed that from the playtest 🥲

[@Manahyde]

How to design Ranger: Make it the best at martial ranged combat. Make it at least on par with the offense of other martials, aside from maybe rogue, when dual wielding. Give it a broad favored enemy type and terrain, then forget you gave them these options because 85% of the time they will be flavor only and should not be taken into account when deciding how much more to give the ranger. Give the ranger an animal companion that can act independantly. Make ranger the best at survival checks and build on survival checks for aditional options in and outside of combat. Make the ranger on par with rogue at stealth. Treat the spellcasting ability as a nice buff to what the ranger can already do, casting spells is not the forefront identity of the ranger. Make the ranger the seondary crafter of the group, right after artificer, and let them create traps, poisons, food, special ammo. Also have them be able to craft certain items from certain types of monsters. Give hunter's mark exclusively to the Hunter subclass

[@DHTheAlaskan]

​@@Quixotic4Legolas was a fighter anyways

[@NathanielMosk]

So you want to increase Ranger's focus on using utility spells, which are mostly concentration, and then you make the defining feature of Rangers Hunter's mark...a concentration spell. My hopes were so high with how good the other classes looks, that was a mistake. I've played ranger for years now, next campaign with this sourcebook will be when I finally switch to something else I guess.

[@aldrinsaclolo]

I realized the reason why I love the Ranger class is because I can relate to them being the neglected middle child

[@Felrohan]

A free concentration spell to prevent you from casting other concentration spells Y'all really missed the mark on this one. Not as terrible as Divine Smite, but yikes. How hard would it have been to say "when you use a designated charge of Hunters Mark, it requires no concentration. If you choose to cast this spell using a spell slot, it then requires concentration." Or even adding an option to upcast it for an additional 1d6 per leveled spell slot above the first. My mind is blown that WotC continues to rush to get this PHB out during the 50 year anniversary, just for the novelty of it. Meanwhile, they're sacrificing quality.

[@elementzero3379]

I'm disappointed that the Ranger is still built around Hunter's Mark. It's an okay low-level spell; but who is concentrating on low-level spells in mid- to high-levels? Sigh. Yet again, I'll have to decide whether the Ranger needs houserules to use its features. I'll have to run math and examine spell lists to determine whether concentration-free Hunter's Mark will be too much. Alternatively, I'll have to decide whether all these Hunter's Mark features need to be replaced. Very disappointing. EDIT: It's always possible that they've redesigned most of the Ranger spells to no longer require Concentration. Does that seem likely, though, from the guys who believe Hunter's Mark is this strong and relevant?

[@jplays338]

If you want a DMing tip for homebrew, simply don't try to balance things perfectly like that. Your tables will not perfectly break the power balancing, and if they do, it's fun for people to be OP at times. If you were the player, would you think it would be broken to simply make your class alot better at what it's supposed to do, and doesn't?

[@elementzero3379]

@@jplays338 Running math isn't a problem for me. It's imprecise, but it helps get things into the right ballpark. Haven't seen just how integrated Hunter's Mark is, and how many buffs are tied to it, making it a Concentration-free feature will almost definitely be too much. Imagine how it would feel to play a Rogue next to that. I'll get a feel for it once we have the book. It's a shame. I otherwise like what they've done.

[@TrixyTrixter]

@@elementzero3379 the rogue that rolls 5d6 sneak attack once per turn? While the ranger roll 1d6 once per turn? What are you smoking with this comparison and can I have some?

[@noctxpyre]

2024 Ranger is now the 2014 Monk

[@carlosmarroquin3019]

That's so wrong lmao

[@gabrieldevore4859]

I was so excited to hear that rangers would get an improved hunters mark, but damn that was underwhelming

[@DramakilzU]

So this is my take on Hunters Mark as a core Ranger feature: I like the free uses of the spell to help Ranger keep up with martial damage, but requiring concentration is the biggest gripe that was also an issue with Favored Foe. Why use any other Ranger concentration spell when your core feature requires concentration? I have a possible fix for this: keep HM ounce per turn, d6 damage, upcast increases duration; but remove the requirement for concentration when Ranger reaches 6th level, and buff the damage to 1d8 at 14th, and then again to 1d10 at 20th. Simple and opens Ranger up to using their other spells.

[@NChase459]

I’m kind of disappointed. I like the changes that they brought over from Tasha’s and that they gave a bunch of good changes related to hunter’s mark, but it still always requires concentration. This means that you almost never get to use other combat concentration spells like zephyr strike and hail of thorns.

[@edgeofnothing67]

those arent concentration anymore

[@echonation3964]

So could I cast polymorph on myself and my beast also get turned so we have two giants apes 👀

[@Shovelchicken]

Cool, free hunters mark. It doesn’t require concentration anymore so it’s actually worth casting… right?

[@razzy6593]

Unfortunately… it’s still requires concentration…

[@Ti_Fire]

Ok here is the fix. Hunters mark for free (Proficiency Bonus) times per day. No concentration required. At level (whatever. 7, 9 who cares) creatures that are friendly to you also benefit from hunters mark. Everything else stays the same. Boom. Synergy. Damage. Done.

[@DimiusG]

"A person who ranges far and wide." Thank you Jeremy lol. This, in my mind is what a Ranger is. Someone like Aragorn or Drizzt. Too long have my friends thought rangers needed to be constrained to use of bows. While I get that interpretation and playstyle, never once have I played a ranger that wasn't melee-based.

[@DimiusG]

@@Quixotic4 Or honey badgers, watch out!

[@jennifergrundy4096]

Same here. My ranger can also use a bow, but I prefer being able to do both.

[@RobWeld57]

1: Hunter subclass becomes base class features 2: Hunter’s specialty lvl 1 spell; Zephyr Strike, Hunter’s Mark or Entangling Strike has free castings with non concentration 3: Generic traveling spells always prepared (goodberry, Leo’s hut, etc.) 4: Give them the cantrips for free or an option with the Hunter picks as apart of base 5: let them pick a any school of magic to add to there list when picking spells 6: if it’s too much pick any 3 options of the 5 to add to Ranger. 7: boom! A better Ranger!