Opinions on Revised Ranger?

[CircleOfTheRock]

So, I had, for a while, been pretty sure that the Revised Ranger (https://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/downloads/UA_RevisedRanger.pdf/) (specifically, but not necessarily, the Beastmaster) was pretty much balanced - despite being Unearthed Arcana, to the point where I’ve allowed it in a game not yet begun. But I’ve started seeing posts around indicating that actually, no - the Revised Ranger is something that should be steered clear of more, even, than Coffeelocks. (I’m aware that the Coffeelock may or may not be broken

So I’d like to ask Giant in the Playground at large - why is the Revised Ranger (and specifically the Beastmaster) broken - or not?

[Mortheim]

I've played revised beastmaster for half year and i can't say that i outshined our kensei or divination wizard, but i was not building optimal. Beastmaster can deal good damage, but if he loses pet - it will take 8 hours to summon or you won't have, like, 1/2-1/3 of damage. I would allow it only for player who isn't aiming at optimisation.

[Spacehamster]

Perfectly balanced and what the ranger should of have been from the release. :)

[clash]

I agree. The revised ranger is being played alongside a monk rogue cleric and bard right now and send fairly balanced with the test of the team

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Overall it's good, but I feel it might be a little much in the first couple of levels. I wouldn't change the abilities much, but I might spread them out a bit more - it's very front-loaded.

[Blackbando]

Overall it's good, but I feel it might be a little much in the first couple of levels. I wouldn't change the abilities much, but I might spread them out a bit more - it's very front-loaded.

To be fair, one could say the same for a lot of 5e's classes. I don't disagree, though.

As for my thoughts on RR, I think it's perfectly fine, and actually don't understand where a lot of the stigma comes from. I do think having all humanoids as a favored enemy is a little silly, and I would've preferred them choosing favored terrain compared to just having all terrains favored, but I wouldn't call it broken. Just merely needs a few small tune-ups.

[jas61292]

It's horribly bloated in the early levels, and way too good as a dip because of that. Furthermore, it is actually a step backwards from the base ranger in every way except for combat. It's exploration abilities are just worse. And favored enemy doing damage is both unnecessary, and horribly unbalancing for a lot of campaigns, where one creature type makes up the majority of enemies, especially since it lets you just pick humanoids.

Really, it's a poor effort to rewrite a class completely when only a few minor things about it ever had issues.

[Mortis_Elrod]

I’ve seen nothing in it that breaks the game.

Is it frontloaded ? Yes. But so is nearly every other class.

Exploration ? Kind of solves it. Might be the real issue here. It makes the part of the game trivial most of the time.

But it’s not perfect by any means. Past level 8 there’s a strong case to finish off in a different class, usually rogue.

I understand that people will talk about the damage output but that usually just depends on what you compare it to.

[Tanarii]

It's horribly bloated in the early levels, and way too good as a dip because of that. Furthermore, it is actually a step backwards from the base ranger in every way except for combat. It's exploration abilities are just worse. And favored enemy doing damage is both unnecessary, and horribly unbalancing for a lot of campaigns, where one creature type makes up the majority of enemies, especially since it lets you just pick humanoids.

Really, it's a poor effort to rewrite a class completely when only a few minor things about it ever had issues.
I agree with everything you said, except in regards to Natural Explorer specifically.

They made that worse by removing the "expertise" ability. But they also made it better by allowing all the other awesome exploration benefits apply in any natural terrain. At first I focused on the former, but then I realized the latter is actually far more useful to a Ranger.

The change to Natural Explorer is probably the one thing that should be ported out of the Revised Ranger and used with the PHB Ranger. Better yet, keep the "expertise" feature on a selected-terrain basis, and make the other benefits any natural terrain. That's all it'd really take to "revise" the PHB Ranger.

[Theodoxus]

It's front loaded - yes, but to me, the only really bad design decision, and one I've moved (not removed, just moved) is the advantage on Initiative at 1st level. That's a 7th level barbarian ability, given to all rangers, and ranger dips, for free.

In my 'revised, revised ranger', I moved it to 3rd level - although I could see where it's only effective in their chosen terrain at 1st level.

[MagneticKitty]

I've played a revised ranger beastmaster I've gone pretty far on the optimization side for about half a year. My character is a kobold with a wolf partner and mounted combat. The beast still feels squishy, so I've tried to highten my ac and take hits for it, making us a durable team with 3 attacks at advantage all the time at lv 9. Right now our bard, wizard and blood Hunter outshine me in damage unless I'm fighting humanoids or dragons.. but I also can catch up to things well with my wolf speed wise.
My team mates call my character a blender... So I dunno. Also the DM has called me scary. Hahah.
One thing with beastmaster is that the beasts power scales with proficiency, making crits not mean much for them but giving them higher average damage .

[ImproperJustice]

It’s a worthwhile update to the PHB Ranger.

I am honestly astounded that anyone would think it’s explored abilities are worse than the PHB version.
I can’t think of a single D&D campaign I have ever played in (25 years experience), where we stayed in one single terrain type the entire time.

PHB primeval awareness is worthless and gets more worthless when dealing with your favored enemy.

No. The Revised version is vastly better and comparable to other martial classes. I think people got ao used to the class’ poor performance that they might feel it is overpowered when it atarts doing as well as other martial classes like it should.

The only tweak I would consider is making the new better primevil awareness work so many times per wisdom mod per long rest.

Also, I have no problem with all humanoids as a favored enemy. Bandits and marauders follow similar patterns, similar social structures, and similar behaviors that a Warden of the Wilds, trained in hunting down such foes would be able to apply across the board.
Ie: small humanoids will use pack tactics and ambushes, larger more intelligent foes will do the same but are more eager to close into melee, etc....
All of the above will build strongholds near a source of fresh water with a good view of the surrounding land, etc...

[GlenSmash!]

It's front loaded - yes, but to me, the only really bad design decision, and one I've moved (not removed, just moved) is the advantage on Initiative at 1st level. That's a 7th level barbarian ability, given to all rangers, and ranger dips, for free.

In my 'revised, revised ranger', I moved it to 3rd level - although I could see where it's only effective in their chosen terrain at 1st level.

My sentiments exactly.

[Rowan Wolf]

I think that the revision is a good foundation for the class, while it may be a bit frontloaded, th he core ranger feels underwhelming as much of the higher level abilities (spellcasting aside) can be a gained (or suppassed) by multiclassing. Though that may be part of the point multiclassing may just be a tricky point of balance for the team as delaying iconic abilities feels bad, but dips cherry pick the best of low tier abilities to replace lackluster capstones.0

Though I would like to see more support for a two weapon fighting ranger in the spell list and 'domain' spells for all conclaves.

[MrStabby]

It's front loaded - yes, but to me, the only really bad design decision, and one I've moved (not removed, just moved) is the advantage on Initiative at 1st level. That's a 7th level barbarian ability, given to all rangers, and ranger dips, for free.

In my 'revised, revised ranger', I moved it to 3rd level - although I could see where it's only effective in their chosen terrain at 1st level.

I like the advantage on initiative early on as a ranger. When I think of which class should have access to this I do tend to think ranger before barbarian. Level 1 too easy for a dip? Maybe. I am not sure that a class getting something that another class gets later is a good argument for something being overpowered though. Rogue getting cunning action so many levels before the ranger gets their worse version does not make the rogue overpowered. A fighter getting a fourth ASI six levels before a wizard doesn't make the fighter overpowered.

I don't think that the dip potential of ranger is just due to the class being front loaded. I think there are two further factors. One is few conflicts and the other is little overlap.

I compare with say the rogue. First two levels get sneak attack, cunning action and expertise. I would rate this at least as highly as the first two levels of ranger. The issue is that this can't easily apply to everyone. Sneak attack won't work with pole arms for example. You are probably not wearing heavy armour either and so on. Or barbarians and rage. There is a conflict in dipping it in any class that wants to use spells or not attack with strength. In fact the class with the least conflicts is fighter - wide choice of fighting styles and action surge can apply to any class. Unsurprisingly Fighter can be dipped easily.

By little overlap I mean you get features that are tough to get otherwise. Faster speed as a monk might give can come from race or a feat for example.

I don't think the issue is that the class itself is front loaded (paladin and hexblade spring to mind as being worse for this) but rather it's abilities compliment other classes very well.

I am in favour of the revised ranger but with a couple of reservations. I think the power level is about right, for combat anyway, but slightly disappointed that the abilities haven't really explored the ranger theme so well.

I don't find it surprising that a version of a class that has gone through two or three more development and feedback cycles should be viewed more positively.

On the downside the class does now step on the toes of the Paladin as an effective half caster class.

[mephnick]

It's poorly made and that why it hasn't been released yet. It is too strong outside of Beastmaster and came with a bunch of unimaginative combat buffs for a class that needed zero help in combat, especially with the introduction of XgtE. It barely helped the exploration pillar of the base class in some ways and actually weakens it in others. They really missed the mark. The PHB Ranger is totally fine and extremely useful if you play classic DnD and don't just warp between narrative scenes.

[ProseBeforeHos]

Observations on revised ranger in no particular order:

1) Being able to take "humanoids" as a catch all group of enemies and gain a damage bonus against all of them is too good. There's no good reason to take anything else.

2) Primeval awareness breaks a lot of tracking/searching aspects of DnD (esp. if you pick humanoid) in the same way that good-berries breaks the survival aspect.

3) Overall the class is much stronger and more satisfying to play than PhB ranger (which is easily the weakest base class).

4) Beast master especially is handled very well, 1000x better balanced than the trash in the PhB.

5) The class is super front loaded, even more so than PhB ranger. A single level dip gives you advantages on initiative checks, advantage on attacks and favored enemy vs. humanoids. tw levels gives you a fighting style and hunter's mark.

So what to do with the UA ranger?

1) Disallow multi-classing. You either start ranger and stick with it or you don't get to be a ranger (this prevents "dipping").

2) "Humanoids" is too broad and powerful. Allows UA rangers who pick "humanoids" to pick two humanoid races like the PhB ranger. Otherwise unchanged.

3) Just remove primeval awareness. It was a never a very well thought out ability.

4) Assume all the new Hunter sub-classes in XGTE (Horizon Walker/Gloom Stalker/Monster Hunter) get the 'extra attack' feature at level 5.

Finally consider the following:

1) Adding these spells to the 'Hunter' subclass:
3 - Hunter's Mark
5 - See Invisibility
9 - Nondetection
13 - Locate Creature
17 - Hold Monster


(no reason why hunter should be the one subclass without them...)

2) Banning the sharpshooter feat (it's pretty broken when combined UA "auto advantage").

Damn shame UA ranger didn't get a release in XGTE. God knows how long we're gonna have to wait now...

[mephnick]

3) Just remove primeval awareness. It was a never a very well thought out ability.

I changed the PHB version to be used Wis Mod per day (like the Paladin ability) and show direction, but not location or number. I think it's a good compromise that makes the ability useful.

[Chaosmancer]

In terms of combat, had a Revised Beastmaster in the game up to level 20.

Her personal damage was never much within the group dynamic, even with a feat adding her prof bonus to all her damage and fighting a favored enemy.

Her companion was the same story, until plot demanded her companion get a massive power boost. The damage never exceeded bounds, but together they had the second largest effective hp pool in the group. Largest was the moon druid with a few extras.

So, all in all, I never noticed anything too powerful. I did notice something else though. I allow ranger spellcasting to work like every other divine/primal caster, so they can prepare new spells every day. Outside of a few key spells (Hunters mark, pass without trace, cure wounds) she almost never felt a spell was worth casting. Perhaps it was just the campaign style, or the party dynamics (I did have a lot of rogues in the party) but it did feel notable when they cast Lightning Arrow and seemed to say "wait... That's it?" because the spell wasn't worth the additional resources

[KRSW]

Personally, I think where the ranger struggles is not having a class identity that is outlined by a mechanic like rage or sorcery points. I think the Revised Ranger doesn't really offer much in that department other than Beast Master, which I think is too powerful. It also doesn't make sense thematically or mechanically for a ranger to have orcs and aasimar grouped into the same favored enemy.

The beast companion getting the favored enemy damage bonus in addition to proficiency and STR/DEX is a lot, later in the game the ranger's companion would be doing as much per attack as a regular martial character. Say a wolf companion of a 12th level character (7th level ranger/5th level fighter) would be getting +8 to two attacks and deal 2d4+8 per hit and 2d4+12 to any humanoid if that is what they chose. They would also have 19 armor class, proficiency and advantage on all saves(while it can see you) and if you take the average HD(5) something around 66 hit points. AND two skills on top of its perception and stealth, you know what other classes get two skills just from the class, most other classes.

The thing that really gets to me though is the level 11 feature. Why in the world does an animal companion get a whirlwind attack and no other actual fully martial character get this.

To me, that by itself is not balanced, the companion here is not optimized at all because there is no choices for the pet besides the base animal, the wolf choice not really impacting this that much. The fact that any beast master will have that but can also optimize their own character with things like being high elf for booming blade or green-flame blade or multiclassing for extra attack and some other stuff is pretty dumb in my opinion.

Anyways, I think the new base ranger features are decent though they don't really add anything unique, but I hate the new favored enemy humanoid thing. The beast master in my opinion is pretty overpowered and doesn't even need feats to be overpowered.

[Boci]

To me, that by itself is not balanced, the companion here is not optimized at all because there is no choices for the pet besides the base animal, the wolf choice not really impacting this that much. The fact that any beast master will have that but can also optimize their own character with things like being high elf for booming blade or green-flame blade or multiclassing for extra attack and some other stuff is pretty dumb in my opinion.

Multiclassing for extra attack could work, but I don't think booming blade will, or rather, it does, but you can't use coordinated attack, since that requires the attack action so BB won't trigger it.

[KRSW]

Multiclassing for extra attack could work, but I don't think booming blade will, or rather, it does, but you can't use coordinated attack, since that requires the attack action so BB won't trigger it.

You are right, but since the companion is not on the same initiative as you it doesn't always workout in a way that you can use the reaction attack. it is a minor optimization point but I think it is still valid.

[xen]

I am playing in 2 games; both have a revised ranger. One game is high magic homebrew world (elf horizon walker), the other is Yawning Portal (Tabaxi Hunter). Both are single classed and currently 6th level. The Hunter did not take humanoids as favored enemy and rarely uses spells. She took beasts and something else and favored enemy hardly ever comes up. She is a decent archer but nothing to write home about. Usually overshadowed in combat by other characters (6 player group), but that's mostly due to player choices; she still contributes and does fine.

The horizon walker is optimized for 2 weapon fighting and took humanoids in a humanoid heavy game. He wields 2 katana's and holds his own in combat.

Neither feels overpowered. I have also played with PHB rangers and they were very underwhelming. Just my anecdotal two cents.

[GlenSmash!]

I changed the PHB version to be used Wis Mod per day (like the Paladin ability) and show direction, but not location or number. I think it's a good compromise that makes the ability useful.

I like it. In fact I would love to see Revised Ranger that follows this example and has other compromises on abilities.

Looks like I won't get it this year though.