Ranger Spells: Ensnaring Strike vs. Hunter's Mark

[Rhaegar14]

Hello Playground. On Saturday, my D&D group is starting a new campaign. I'm playing a Halfling Beastmaster Ranger riding a Panther, and planning to go two-weapon fighting (DM has ruled that I can get my bonus action attack with the one weapon attack I get starting at 5th level). We are starting at 4th level. The rest of the party is an Evoker Wizard, Eldritch Knight Fighter, Lore Bard, and Tempest Cleric.

I get three spells known. For two of them, I have chosen Goodberry and Speak With Animals. Speak With Animals allows me to talk to my mount and coordinate more tightly if necessary (also fluff), and the fact that this will largely be a wilderness campaign means that being able to magically create food for the whole party will be useful (none of us are Outlanders). Plus, Goodberry has a very high ratio of healing per spell slot if we need to top off between fights and don't have time for a short rest.

For my third spell, I am having trouble choosing between Hunter's Mark and Ensnaring Strike. Ensnaring Strike has the useful utility of entangling the target, but the prospect of eating two OAs already makes getting away from me hard, and Hunter's Mark will last longer and add more to my damage. So, Playground, I am asking you for opinions: which spell should I take?

[Paeleus]

What's the rest of the party? I'm inclined to say Hunter's Mark as is, but feel that more info is needed for the best possible answer.

[Rhaegar14]

The rest of the party is an Evoker Wizard, Eldritch Knight Fighter, Lore Bard, and Tempest Cleric.

Already covered that. :-P

[iTreeby]

hunter's mark is better for you to deal damage to multiple enemies over the coarse of a fight and for tracking escaped combatants. Restraining strike can help with a flyer set up sneak attack for your rogue and imposes disadvantage on dex saves which certain casters may appreciate. I would go with hunter's mark because it increases your damage more. Restraining strike is only good vrs one thing.

[SharkForce]

i have a hard time imagining ensnaring strike being useful on a regular basis (at low levels, you definitely won't have the DC to make it reliable, and it is single target. at high levels, you probably won't have the wisdom anyways). i have a hard time imagining you not being able to find use for hunter's mark, if not always then at least on occasion.

[Rhaegar14]

My one big concern with Hunter's Mark is that because I'm a melee Ranger, my Concentration is way more fragile than an archer's would be. I'm afraid that even if I cast it it won't last long. Still, at the very least, it's a boost to my ranged damage if I need that.

[Paeleus]

Oh wow. Gotta love working long nights. Apologies m8. Hunters Mark it is.

[SharkForce]

you also get better tracking and perception against it (important against some targets), which is helpful. but yeah, particularly because you already have a use for your bonus action, it won't be amazing in melee... but at range, it should be very useful.

[PoeticDwarf]

Hello Playground. On Saturday, my D&D group is starting a new campaign. I'm playing a Halfling Beastmaster Ranger riding a Panther, and planning to go two-weapon fighting (DM has ruled that I can get my bonus action attack with the one weapon attack I get starting at 5th level). We are starting at 4th level. The rest of the party is an Evoker Wizard, Eldritch Knight Fighter, Lore Bard, and Tempest Cleric.

I get three spells known. For two of them, I have chosen Goodberry and Speak With Animals. Speak With Animals allows me to talk to my mount and coordinate more tightly if necessary (also fluff), and the fact that this will largely be a wilderness campaign means that being able to magically create food for the whole party will be useful (none of us are Outlanders). Plus, Goodberry has a very high ratio of healing per spell slot if we need to top off between fights and don't have time for a short rest.

For my third spell, I am having trouble choosing between Hunter's Mark and Ensnaring Strike. Ensnaring Strike has the useful utility of entangling the target, but the prospect of eating two OAs already makes getting away from me hard, and Hunter's Mark will last longer and add more to my damage. So, Playground, I am asking you for opinions: which spell should I take?
Ensnaring strik is a nice spell at lower levels (low saves) and at higher levels your beast has also this ability (lv. 15 BM feature). But Hunter's Mark is a very, very good spell and the best spell for a ranger. Go for Hunter's mark and take later Ensnaring strike. (absorp elementals from elemental evil is also a nice spell, but that's another story).

[Shining Wrath]

Hail of Thorns gives you a one-time boost to a ranged attack. It is not as useful as Hunter's Mark which gives you sustained damage, but HoT does have the advantage of doing d10 to the target and everyone near the target. If you're doing a wilderness adventure packs of animals are a pretty common encounter, and being able to break up the pack is a good thing.

[Chronos]

For a ranged ranger, I'd go with Ensnaring Strike, because it's all kinds of useful for your enemy to be unable to move when they can't reach you. For melee, though, stick with Hunter's Mark. A melee enemy (which most of them are) wouldn't want to move anyway if you're already next to it.

[Giant2005]

I wouldn't recommend either spell - take Beast Bond instead. Against AC 18 and with 2 attacks (When you get to level 5), Hex will increase your damage by 4.2 per round on average. Against that same AC (And again at level 5), Beast Bond will increase your damager per round by an average of 4.29. It doesn't sound that different but that 4.2 is all you will ever get out of Hex (until level 15 at least), but every time your proficiency bonus goes up and your companion gets stronger, the difference between Hex and Beast Bond will increase too.
Beast Bond is simply a superior spell unless you care a lot about the other effects of Hex.

[tieren]

Also keep in mind that ensnaring strike can fail to do anything while eating your spell slot.

If the target makes the save nothing happens, no extra damage, no restraint, nothing.

I second the recommendation for beast bond over either, but if between just those two go hunters mark. You can get resilience (Con) or warcaster to help with the concentration checks later if they are a problem, but mark is a bonus action cast so you can get it up for at least one of your attacks pretty easy, keep it up a couple of rounds even and you are way ahead of ensnaring strike.

[Rhaegar14]

I wouldn't recommend either spell - take Beast Bond instead. Against AC 18 and with 2 attacks (When you get to level 5), Hex will increase your damage by 4.2 per round on average. Against that same AC (And again at level 5), Beast Bond will increase your damager per round by an average of 4.29. It doesn't sound that different but that 4.2 is all you will ever get out of Hex (until level 15 at least), but every time your proficiency bonus goes up and your companion gets stronger, the difference between Hex and Beast Bond will increase too.
Beast Bond is simply a superior spell unless you care a lot about the other effects of Hex.

Beast Bond is not useful at all if I need ranged damage though. I'm leaning melee but I do want to be capable at range when necessary. Beast Bond also eats a full action, while Hunter's Mark is just a bonus. Beast Bond might be a better pick than Speak With Animals, though; at least, for the specific reasons I want it (improved coordination with the Beast Companion when splitting up).

[coredump]

Fog CLoud ccc cc c