Revised Ranger Natural Exploerer

[Callin]

When does it apply? Only in Natural Terrain or is it an all the time ability?

[Trum4n1208]

I thought it was implied natural terrain only. That's how I'd run it as a DM and how I'd use it as a player.

[Theodoxus]

I thought it was implied natural terrain only. That's how I'd run it as a DM and how I'd use it as a player.

This is how I houseruled it (though I think the one player who was excited by the revision decided to go Druid instead because of it...)

But my premise is that the Ranger shouldn't out-do the Rogue in urban settings. Let the Rogue keep his city schtick and the Ranger can keep his wilderness schtick.

Where it gets a little hinky is deciding how much wilderness or civilization is required to activate the ability... For example, the ruined city outside the Tomb of Diderius (in Rise of Tiamat) I ruled as urban, despite being in ruins, because it was a more desert like setting where the wilds hadn't overtaken it - critters inside wouldn't be rustling leaves or hiding behind trees, but much like a living city, be peeking from behind windows and around columns.

It was a call that could have gone either way (and I could have been convinced of the opposite take, had anyone pushed me on it) but that's how I ruled it at the time.

[MasterMercury]

I rule it as everywhere, not just natural settings. If a ranger is good at walking over difficult terrain, and is always prepared for danger, why can't he do that in a town or a dungeon? If anything, a ranger used to the wild is probably going to be more on edge in a bustling city than in a forest.
To be fair, part if the reason I ruled it this way is so there's no argument wehether it's on or off. I'm not a lazy DM, but I'd rather focus on my job than focus on whether my ranger has advantage on initiative.

[TheBirba]

But my premise is that the Ranger shouldn't out-do the Rogue in urban settings. Let the Rogue keep his city schtick and the Ranger can keep his wilderness schtick.

Exactly which Rogue feature doesn't work in a natural setting?

[Quintessence]

I always saw it as all areas, basically constantly active.. No reason to gimp it honestly.

[djreynolds]

We were fighting at an outpost, and I wasn't allowed to use it. I was shooting at attackers. I think it will become very DM dependent.

[Firechanter]

Exactly which Rogue feature doesn't work in a natural setting?

Exactly this.
* No other class has a feature I'm aware of that only works in a specific type of terrain. Or do they?
* I don't even know how you could misinterpret the rule text: "you ignore difficult terrain." Period. Plain and simple.
* Seeing how most adventures see their critical parts played out in dungeons, castles, temples etc., limiting this ability that way would demote it to pure fluff again, a ribbon, a non-ability.

Why in the world is the notion so widespread that Rangers and only Rangers cannot have cool things?
Can a Druid only Wildshape in natural terrain?
Can a Rogue only Sneak Attack in the city?
Can a Cleric only channel divinity in churches?
NO!

[Arkhios]

When does it apply? Only in Natural Terrain or is it an all the time ability?

http://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/09/28/ranger-revised-faq-insights/

[Firechanter]

http://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/09/28/ranger-revised-faq-insights/

To cut to the chase:


@mikemearls are the first 3 bullets of natural explorer an “always on” feature or are these only in the natural world?

— Lati Pexie (@LatiPexie) September 23, 2016

Always on. #WOTCstaff https://t.co/wEaWs8Elvw

— (((Mike Mearls))) (@mikemearls) September 23, 2016

[MrStabby]

Yeah, it would be a pretty lame ability if it made you better at fighting people only where there were no people to fight.

[Trum4n1208]

To cut to the chase:


@mikemearls are the first 3 bullets of natural explorer an “always on” feature or are these only in the natural world?

— Lati Pexie (@LatiPexie) September 23, 2016

Always on. #WOTCstaff https://t.co/wEaWs8Elvw

— (((Mike Mearls))) (@mikemearls) September 23, 2016

Fair enough, that works for me.

[Callin]

Thanks for the tweet!

[Theodoxus]

Exactly this.
* No other class has a feature I'm aware of that only works in a specific type of terrain. Or do they?
* I don't even know how you could misinterpret the rule text: "you ignore difficult terrain." Period. Plain and simple.
* Seeing how most adventures see their critical parts played out in dungeons, castles, temples etc., limiting this ability that way would demote it to pure fluff again, a ribbon, a non-ability.

Why in the world is the notion so widespread that Rangers and only Rangers cannot have cool things?
Can a Druid only Wildshape in natural terrain?
Can a Rogue only Sneak Attack in the city?
Can a Cleric only channel divinity in churches?
NO!

Difficult Terrain - You're ok with the ranger to simply be able to waltz around in spells that create difficult terrain, because magic? Sorry, not buying it.

As for the rest of the Natural Explorer - despite MM's clarification, the point is the ability is far too strong for first level without some kind of modification.

Barbarians get the initiative bonus at 7th level. Rangers get it at first? As part of a whole slew of things? This isn't power creep, this is bloat, pure and simple.

Those of us who have expressed concern on the development have done so precisely because of this bloat, not because we don't want Rangers to have nice things - that's a specious argument at best.

A Ranger 1/Barbarian X is a better Barbarian than a Barbarian X+1... Makes no sense.

So that's why we think maybe, perhaps, they should retune that aspect of the ability. If it means, as the ability says, it works in natural surrounds, so be it - and yes, as a DM, I can make that call. And now you know why I make that call. You don't play at my table, you don't have to worry about my rulings. But there might be other folks out there curious and possibly swayed by the argument.

[Arkhios]

we think maybe, perhaps, they should retune that aspect of the ability. If it means, as the ability says, it works in natural surrounds, so be it - and yes, as a DM, I can make that call. And now you know why I make that call. You don't play at my table, you don't have to worry about my rulings. But there might be other folks out there curious and possibly swayed by the argument.

Isn't it funny that all this arguing is happening over an UNFINISHED product? Often when game developers design something, they start out strong, only to tune down if necessary, based on feedback they get. This is true with D&D Lead Designers. They've said it themselves!

[LordVonDerp]

Difficult Terrain - You're ok with the ranger to simply be able to waltz around in spells that create difficult terrain, because magic? Sorry, not buying it.


Just because it's magic doesn't mean skill can't let you overcome it.

[MrStabby]

Barbarians get the initiative bonus at 7th level. Rangers get it at first? As part of a whole slew of things? This isn't power creep, this is bloat, pure and simple.


Yeah, this is ridiculous, just like the thief being able to hide as a bonus action at level 2 instead of level 14 like the ranger does. Or dash as a bonus action at level 2 instead of level 8.

A thief is clearly better at being a ranger than a ranger is.

[Zalabim]

Difficult Terrain - You're ok with the ranger to simply be able to waltz around in spells that create difficult terrain, because magic? Sorry, not buying it.
Yes, a lot of people are okay with it. This ability could be moved around though. Land's Stride used to be level 8 and a movement boosting ability is normally acquired later than level 1. It's not usually relevant at level 1, but it's not overpowered or inappropriate. A Ranger who teams up with a Druid will very much appreciate having it right from first level, and will appreciate that it actually works consistently instead of having to slow down for Entangle and ask if Plant Growth (instantaneous) counts as magical or not.


As for the rest of the Natural Explorer - despite MM's clarification, the point is the ability is far too strong for first level without some kind of modification.

Barbarians get the initiative bonus at 7th level. Rangers get it at first? As part of a whole slew of things? This isn't power creep, this is bloat, pure and simple.
As for the rest of Natural Explorer, it's all abilities the ranger already got in the right terrain at level 1 except for advantage on initiative and advantage on attacks against enemies that haven't taken a turn yet. In exchange, they no longer get expertise on every Int and Wis skill related to their terrain (potentially 7 skills as a level 1 half elf ranger). The advantage on initiative, for the barbarian, comes along with the ability to counter surprise by raging as well. If this is overpowered, making it situational doesn't balance the class. The ranger should have some distinction in combat at level 1, as everyone else has, so if it's not this, it has to be something else. The advantage on attacks is a very minor benefit, so I don't know what could be less objectionable that can be tried. I actually think there's a question whether the ranger should get the expertise back, perhaps at a later level like the bard gets them.

[Ugganaut]

I rule it as everywhere, not just natural settings. If a ranger is good at walking over difficult terrain, and is always prepared for danger, why can't he do that in a town or a dungeon?

Completely agree. The initiative and ignore difficult terrain features are a skill set(alertness, responsiveness, balance etc), not based on location. Rogue's aren't exactly out-done in any rogue area. They sneak attack. To get the jump on someone(surprise), the ability is Stealth, not initiative. Rogues can expertise in that at level 1.
As TheBirba stated, there are no rogue abilities that state "urban settings only", and for the same reason.

[Ugganaut]

Difficult Terrain - You're ok with the ranger to simply be able to waltz around in spells that create difficult terrain, because magic? Sorry, not buying it.
He can't waltz through natural settings because its natural, its just thats where he learned to be sure footed, agile etc. With all the various obstacles in the wilderness, he learned how to navigate it, not letting it slow him down. Magic that creates difficult terrain, creates an obstacle, and he's learned to move around obstacles swiftly. He can't ignore any spell that creates difficult terrain, because they usually come with other effects. He's not immune to the restrain of Entangle, or getting slices by Blade Barrier, concentration is broken/knocked prone by Earthquake, damage from Evard's Tentacles. He can move through those obstacles quickly, because he's spent so much time doing it, but he can't ignore any of the other effects, and gains no advantage on saves against them.

The issues with Initiative I understand to a degree, I think it should be moved into the level 8 section with Dash, to match the other wilderness warrior(Barbarian). I also don't see this as too powerful either, and don't see it as "Rogue should have this not Rangers". Rogues excel at surprising people with a knife in the back, that's Stealth, not initiative. There are other ways to get Advantage, like stealth(which lvl 1 Rogues can Expertise in), that the First Strike of the Ranger doesn't worry me. Advantage doesn't stack, you have it or you don't. If a Rogue wants to dip into Ranger to get this, good luck to them - in some scenario's, they'll have advantage on one attack that they might not otherwise have had because they weren't stealthed. Its not nothing, but its not OP in my opinion.

[DKing9114]

Difficult Terrain - You're ok with the ranger to simply be able to waltz around in spells that create difficult terrain, because magic? Sorry, not buying it.

As for the rest of the Natural Explorer - despite MM's clarification, the point is the ability is far too strong for first level without some kind of modification.

Barbarians get the initiative bonus at 7th level. Rangers get it at first? As part of a whole slew of things? This isn't power creep, this is bloat, pure and simple.

Those of us who have expressed concern on the development have done so precisely because of this bloat, not because we don't want Rangers to have nice things - that's a specious argument at best.

A Ranger 1/Barbarian X is a better Barbarian than a Barbarian X+1... Makes no sense.

So that's why we think maybe, perhaps, they should retune that aspect of the ability. If it means, as the ability says, it works in natural surrounds, so be it - and yes, as a DM, I can make that call. And now you know why I make that call. You don't play at my table, you don't have to worry about my rulings. But there might be other folks out there curious and possibly swayed by the argument.

The ranger gets the initiative bonus at first level, because the class favors ambush tactics-that's the aspect the stalker conclave supports. The barbarian's level 7 feature is clearly better suited for countering ambushes, as it allows him to act faster and break surprise.

There are always ways to mix and match classes to combine features-Assassin 3/Ranger 2 is positively lethal in the ambushes I've mentioned (advantage on Initiative rolls, advantage on attacks to creatures who haven't gone yet, 2D6 sneak attack damage, critical hit if the enemy is surprised), and can then take the hide action at +6(expertise)+Dexterity mod, so at least a +9 to his roll. Hell, if the DM allows it, he could simply just stay hidden, pull back, continue tracking his enemies, and hit them again later on when he initiates combat again. Assassin 3/Ranger 5 with the Hunter conclave could make three critical hits in the first turn of combat, and if he casts pass without trace to prepare he might have +20 to stealth.

There are plenty of others-mix Assassin and a dex based Vengeance Paladin, and your build is focused on auto-critical hits with smites. Add two levels of fighter to any Assassin build and you can make multiple critical hit attacks in your first turn; mix warlock and another charisma caster to get extra spells which you can cast with your high level, short rest pact magic slots; take three levels of sorcerer specifically for the metamagic to bypass the restrictions of another caster class; improve your tank by adding at least one level of barbarian for the rage. Honestly, all this does is give the ranger enough low level benefit to justify a dip.

As to the original concern regarding using natural explorer inside a city, I see no issue with a ranger being constantly alert in an urban area just as he would be in the wild. A GM might rule that his perception checks don't pick up on certain cues (the rogue, but not the ranger, realize that this area is too quiet), but rapid reflexes and footwork shouldn't depend on location.