Should Hunter's Mark be a spell, a class feature, or a memory?

[RedGeomancer]

I am working on a potential replacement for Hunter's Mark. I am not allowing TCoE Favored Foe. Favored Enemy is staying in some version, perhaps including the +2 damage bonus from UA Revised Ranger.

I have a version of Hunter's Mark as a spell, and a version of Hunter's Mark as class feature. In both cases I am leaning into the non-combat benefits of Hunter's Mark, allowing you to track/find your target easier. Unlike the official Hunter's Mark spell, it can be cast on a creature you can't see in order to help you find them. It lasts a lot longer, but is not transferable to a new target.

The options I am considering are:


Make Hunter's Mark a class feature.
Retain Hunter's Mark as a spell and disallow Favored Foe.
Remove Hunter's Mark as a spell and disallow Favored Foe.


I present the proposed rules on new Hunter's Mark as a spell and a class feature first, then discuss how I got here and why I think one of these options are justified.

Hunter's Mark (spell)

1st-level divination
Casting Time: 1 bonus action
Range: Self
Components: V
Duration: 24 hours

You choose a creature and mystically mark it as your quarry. The creature must be one that you are successfully tracking, hold something of (a possession or something from the creature's body such as hair, fur, blood, or scales), or can see within 90 feet. Until the spell ends, you deal an extra 1d6 damage to the target whenever you hit it with a weapon attack, and you have advantage on any Wisdom (Perception) or Wisdom (Survival) check you make to find it.

You may maintain the mark for another 24-hour period by casting the spell again before the duration expires. If the creature is no longer alive or on the same plane of existence as you, the spell fails and you do not expend a spell slot. You may have a number of creatures marked at one time up to your spellcasting ability modifier (minimum of 1).

Hunter's Mark (1st level class feature)

As a bonus action, you choose a creature and mystically mark it as your quarry. The creature must be one that you are successfully tracking, hold something of (a possession or something from the creature's body such as hair, fur, blood, or scales), or can see within 90 feet. The target is marked by you until it dies or is on a different plane of existence from you. Until the mark ends, you deal an extra 1d6 damage to the target whenever you hit it with a weapon attack, and you have advantage on any Wisdom (Perception) or Wisdom (Survival) check you make to find it.

You can't use this feature again until you finish a long rest. You may have a number of creatures marked at one time up to your Wisdom modifier (minimum of 1). You may end the mark on one or more creatures early (no action required), suffering one level of exhaustion when you do so.

Should Hunter's Mark be a spell, a class feature, or a memory?

Hunter's Mark is an oddball. It's basically a class feature in the form of a spell. Hunter's Mark is the 5e version of 4e's Hunter's Quarry. This was a class feature, although from what little I know of 4e, spell powers weren't much different from other powers, they were just…spells. Meanwhile, Favored Enemy, a class feature that provided a damage boost to certain adversaries going back to AD&D, appears in 5e with no damage boost.

Hunter's Mark is widely seen as a tax, a forced choice that eats into the ranger's limited spells known and spell slots. Favored Enemy has been a source of complaint since 5e was published, and the interaction between Favored Enemy and Hunter's Mark seems to infect all attempts at fixing them. The UA Revised Ranger (2016) Favored Enemy gave +2 damage to favored enemies, rising to +4 at 6th level. UA Class Features introduced Favored Foe as a replacement for Favored Enemy. UA Favored Foe was literally the Hunter's Mark spell, available one level early, cast without using a spell slot and without concentration up to Wisdom modifier times per day. Tasha's introduced a slightly modified version of Favored Foe. It requires concentration, does slightly less damage (at lower levels, but scales with level), and can be activated on a successful attack without using a bonus action. It also is a one-target-one-combat trick--it lasts for 1 minute (rather than 1 hour) and can't be transferred to a new target.

Introducing a class feature that so closely resembles a spell really raises the question as to whether this always should have been a class feature. Hunter's Mark is basically the 5e version of 4e's Hunter's Quarry. This was a class feature, although from what little I know of 4e, spell powers weren't much different from other powers, they were just…spells. Maybe Hunter's Mark, instead of being a spell, should always have been a class feature usable a certain number of times per day.

On the other hand, a case could be made for doing away with Hunter's Mark entirely as just too 4e-ish. It's worth noting that *every* ranger subclass gets some kind of damage boost at 3rd level. (This didn't used to be true for Beast Master, but the welcome fixes in TCoE now grant a damage boost in the form of a bonus action attack from your companion.) So if every subclass gets a conditional extra attack (e.g. Horde Breaker) or a conditional or unconditional damage rider (e.g. Colossus Slayer for conditional damage, Monster Slayer for unconditional damage), why *also* have a spell or class feature that pumps damage?

The talk online is that Hunter's Mark is better than Favored Foe. Some contrarians have discussed when Favored Foe might be more useful than Hunter's Mark, but I think in most cases Hunter's Mark is better. While the final analysis of course depends on fighting style, number of rounds of typical combat in your campaign, and how likely you are to face multiple combats/combatants in the duration of a Hunter's Mark, the only real advantage I see for Favored Foe is effectively getting "extra spell slots" that can be used for a weaker version of Hunter's Mark.

Is Favored Foe better than Favored Enemy? WotC has published several revisions to Favored Enemy, with the UA Revised Ranger's Favored Enemy effect coming closest to previous editions (flat bonus to damage against favored enemies). But UARR never became official, and in TCoE Favored Enemy got turned into "Hunter's Mark Lite". Although people complained about Favored Enemy, it was flavorful, and if, as a player, I had to choose between


Favored Enemy + paying the Hunter's Mark tax;
Favored Foe + paying the Hunter's Mark tax; or
Favored Foe alone (saving spells known/spell slots for spells other than Hunter's Mark)


I would choose (a) every time.

So, now, as a DM, I'm trying to decide what to do with Hunter's Mark.

If Hunter's Mark is removed (converted to a class feature or removed entirely), Hunter's Mark would also be removed from the spell list for Oath of Vengance Paladins. The most likely solution is replacing it with Hex from the warlock's list.

[RogueJK]

the only real advantage I see for Favored Foe is effectively getting "extra spell slots" that can be used for a weaker version of Hunter's Mark

You're forgetting that much like Hex, Favored Foe works on all attacks, not just weapon attacks. Hunter's Mark (both the original and your proposed replacement) only applies to weapon attacks.

Therefore, Favored Foe remains the superior (actually only) option between the two if a Ranger character is primarily relying on non-weapon attacks, which is very possible considering post-Tasha's Rangers have access to attack cantrips through the Druidic Warrior fighting style, and multiclass Rangers have access to attack cantrips and attack spells from other classes.

Take, for example, my Swarmkeeper/Stars Druid, who relies primarily on Thorn Whip, Guiding Bolt, and Archer Form spell attacks. Hunter's Mark is of no use to that character, since they don't make weapon attacks.

[KorvinStarmast]

If Hunter's Mark is removed (converted to a class feature or removed entirely), Hunter's Mark would also be removed from the spell list for Oath of Vengance Paladins. The most likely solution is replacing it with Hex from the warlock's list. Since I have not played a ranger with the Tasha's set up, I'll just say this.
It worked fine as a spell in the Rangers I did play.
I am not sure that HM is what needs fixing for rangers.

[Man_Over_Game]

I'm always of the position that a choice that has to be made is a choice that needs to be taken away.

Hunter's Mark is an "Almost Always" kind of pick. It's the lie that Hunter's Mark is optional that seems stupid to me. That, and the fact that almost every good Ranger feature spend your Bonus Action, on the class that is historically known for Dual-Wielding the most. As-is, Barbarians dual-wield better than Rangers do, unless you're somehow making it to 4 rounds beating up on the same target.

Personally, the Ranger would be a lot more thematic and streamlined if Hunter's Mark was just a baseline Ranger feature. Hell, practically every Ranger subclass uses the same HM mechanics, even if the wording was slightly changed. If you made HM essentially the Ranger's version of Rage, and the subclasses modified it like Barbarian subclasses do, nobody would bat an eye. In fact, they'd probably wonder why the hell the game wasn't like that from the start.

Your example of a Hunter's Mark feature is exactly how I'd do it, just expand it to 2-per-Short-Rest and I think you would be set. I'd still probably remove the need for a Bonus Action, maybe exchange it for half your movement.
The subclasses would need to be finagled a bit to work around it, but that's actually a pretty easy conversion, all things considered.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Honestly, my biggest worry about making some sort of hunter's mark analogue into a class feature like you suggested is the Monster Slayer subclass.


Slayer's Prey
Starting at 3rd level, you can focus your ire on one foe, increasing the harm you inflict on it. As a bonus action, you designate one creature you can see within 60 feet of you as the target of this feature. The first time each turn that you hit that target with a weapon attack, it takes an extra 1d6 damage from the weapon.

This benefit lasts until you finish a short or long rest. It ends early if you designate a different creature.

[RedGeomancer]

Personally, the Ranger would be a lot more thematic and streamlined if Hunter's Mark was just a baseline Ranger feature. Hell, practically every Ranger subclass uses the same HM mechanics, even if the wording was slightly changed. If you made HM essentially the Ranger's version of Rage, and the subclasses modified it like Barbarian subclasses do, nobody would bat an eye. In fact, they'd probably wonder why the hell the game wasn't like that from the start.

What do you have in mind with that? This was kind of my option to just remove Hunter's Mark entirely and rely on the HM-like features of the subclasses. But it sounds like you're proposing keeping HM, but having subclasses modify it somehow. Would that involve changing all the subclasses?


Your example of a Hunter's Mark feature is exactly how I'd do it, just expand it to 2-per-Short-Rest and I think you would be set.

Why 2/SR rather than the usual paradigms of WIS/LR or proficiency bonus/LR?

Reducing it to 1/LR as I have limits it use, but leans into HM being a commitment. "I will find and kill you!"

[Man_Over_Game]

Why 2/SR rather than the usual paradigms of WIS/LR or proficiency bonus/LR?

Reducing it to 1/LR as I have limits it use, but leans into HM being a commitment. "I will find and kill you!"

Consistency. It's the same reason the modern Druid subclasses all use Wild Shape, which is a 2/SR resource.

If it's going to be a main mechanic, it has to be available almost to the point of overuse. You don't see Fighters running out of Attack Actions, do ya?

I'd reduce the damage down to a +2 or a +3. Cutting down on dice rolls in lieu for solid numbers, especially from very consistent features, makes the game run smoother. It also makes it easier to balance/scale without using those damn 1d4s.


What do you have in mind with that? This was kind of my option to just remove Hunter's Mark entirely and rely on the HM-like features of the subclasses. But it sounds like you're proposing keeping HM, but having subclasses modify it somehow. Would that involve changing all the subclasses?

Yes, it would. For instance:


Honestly, my biggest worry about making some sort of hunter's mark analogue into a class feature like you suggested is the Monster Slayer subclass.

Could just change it into something more thematic. "When you deal damage with your Hunter's Mark feature, and the target is not a Beast or a Humanoid, double that damage" (the last part cuts down on excessive rolling and allows the potential for HM scaling if its needed). I think that's a lot more interesting than a generic 1d6 damage.

And it's really thematic in combat. Your buddies deal with the cultists while the Monster Slayer deals with the demon they just summoned. Reminds me of the Castlevania TV show.

More importantly, this showcases exactly how you can reframe the Ranger to be something better. Something good and consistent, where all Rangers are both unique and similar, and none of them feeling bitter about casting the same HM spell the 3rd time that day instead of the Ensnaring Strike they've been looking forward to.

And that was like, a slapdash solution. It's not that difficult to do or understand. Imagine how much better things can be if you just spent 15 minutes on each subclass's level 3 feature and figuring out how to convert it.

Whatever the solution is, though. I must implore you: NO MORE BONUS ACTIONS. Nerf everything you need to in order to make sure that stays true, pretty please with cherries on top.

[RedGeomancer]

You're forgetting that much like Hex, Favored Foe works on all attacks, not just weapon attacks. That includes spell attacks. Hunter's Mark (both the original and your proposed replacement) only applies to weapon attacks.

Therefore, Favored Foe remains the superior (actually only) option between the two if a Ranger character is primarily relying on non-weapon attacks, which is very possible considering post-Tasha's Rangers have access to attack cantrips through the Druidic Warrior fighting style, and multiclass Rangers have access to attack cantrips and attack spells from other classes.

I didn't pick up on that alteration. Honestly, though, that makes me like Favored Foe even less from a design perspective, even if it makes it more desirable from a player perspective. But that's a matter of taste.

[Yakk]

In my attempt to fix HM and the Ranger, at 1st level, the Ranger get a Primal Aspect feature. They pick a Primal Aspect. Aspect of the Hunt boosts HM (you add 1 to ranger level for spellcasting feature purposes, you get HM known for free, it gets progressively better), Aspect of the Pack gives a Tasha's beast companion, etc.

(Basically, a 2nd subclass, like the Pact Boon of the Warlock).

Rangers have a problem in that at level 1, they are the only class in the game that is dominated completely in a fight by other classes, namely the Paladin, Fighter and Barbarian. Those 3 classes can literally do everything that the Ranger can in the combat pillar (d10 HD, martial weapons, light/medium armor) and have additional abilities. The Ranger is a "fighter lite" at level 1.

FF at least does something. FF gets 2 uses/day and a crit damage boost. Beyond that, compared to fighter fighting styles:
FF vs Duelist: +0.5 damage
FF vs TWF: Two chances to land 2.5 damage vs 3 damage
FF vs GWF: +1.17 damage.
FF vs Archery: +2.5 damage vs +2 to hit.

Still not great, but at least it is something.

A core issue (to me) is that HM works better on Fighters than on Rangers. A Gloom 3/Fighter(AT) 12 gets 8 HM taps on their first turn, producing 8d6 damage from it, and then 3d6 every round after. A Gloom 15 gets 3 (with a reroll), producing 3.5d6 damage from it, and then 2.5d6 every round after (.5 is a crude estimate of the value of the reroll attack Gloomstalker gets).

Warlock Hex at least scales with their own EB, which keeps up taps with a fighter. And the auto-scaling of spell slots makes the duration boost a freebie; they can cast it, take a short rest, and go on about their adventuring day with it on "for free".

Meanwhile, HM doesn't synergize with the Ranger's kit much at all.

---

Make HM different than Warlock Hex. The FF "once per turn" is actually a good idea; scale the HM damage die, and make it go off at most once per turn. Maybe make the damage boost flat, and make it boost crits for free.

So

Hunter's Mark (spell)

1st-level divination
Casting Time: 1 bonus action
Range: Self
Components: V
Duration: 1 hour (concentration)

You choose up to your wisdom bonus (min 1) creatures and mystically mark it as your quarry. You can choose any creature you can individually see, the creature that left a specific set of tracks, by the owner of a possession, a piece of the creature such as hair, blood or scales, or a creature you had marked with this spell when you started casting it that is on the same plane of existence.

Until the spell ends, once per turn you may add +1d4 to an attack roll, wisdom(perception), or wisdom(survival) check you make against any of the creatures. In addition, the first time a weapon you are wielding deals damage to a creature marked by this spell on your turn you deal extra damage equal to your proficiency modifier.

At higher levels: If cast with a 2nd level or higher slot, the duration increases to 24 hours. If cast with a 3rd level or higher slot, this spell does not require concentration, but casting this spell again ends the previous casting regardless.

---

I think, balance wise, this is close to Hex, but now mechanically very distinct.

[Stangler]

Couple thoughts.

Tracking is not something that comes up a lot in my experience as it takes some work to make a fun game of it. Not finding things is fairly boring and I don’t think punishing groups without the ability makes sense so the conclusion is inevitable.

Hunter’s mark is cool but it really crowds out other options while also being important in establishing the power level of the Ranger. Don’t make Ranger weaker.

[Gtdead]

I've always viewed Hunter's Mark as a reason to not get Crossbow Expert which frees the spot for Alert, my favorite feat in the game. The annoying part is that it's concentration, and it shoehorns the Ranger into a specific playstyle, where everything else seems suboptimal. It's why I'm a vocal proponent of lowering the level requirement for Vanish to lvl 6.

Vanish provides advantage and allows the Ranger to compete in DPR with just SS, while letting him concentrate on something else. It's a playstyle that I always enjoyed on Rogues (AT in particular), even if it's not the most reliable thing in the world.

I think with this simple change, Mark can just stay as it is, ranger will at long last become the PWT bot that he deserves to be and everything will be fine. His bonus action economy will be healthy at the very least.

[Person_Man]

So what’s the math on how much damage a RAW Ranger deals with and without RAW Hunters Mark, and how does that compare to a Fighter using a two handed weapon, or other baseline attacks? And how does that compare to the other options you’re proposing?

I’m very open to the Ranger, a notoriously weak class, getting more stuff. But how much extra damage, and how often they can use it, is important. I don’t think they need a huge default +X damage to basically all attacks all the time. But I can see the argument for tweaking the damage output, or removing the Concentration requirement (assuming its Ranger exclusive and the Lore Bard or other subclasses can’t use it too).

[Segev]

My current best suggestion is to have Favored Enemy grant bonuses to certain spells. Remove concentration requirements when they target favored enemies, or let them apply the bonus damage every time they hit a favored enemy with e.g. smite spells, not just the first time, etc.

Maybe let them pick one such spell they can learn and cast once per day at first level, without a spell slot, and let it be a bonus spell for them later on.

[Gtdead]

So what’s the math on how much damage a RAW Ranger deals with and without RAW Hunters Mark, and how does that compare to a Fighter using a two handed weapon, or other baseline attacks? And how does that compare to the other options you’re proposing?

I’m very open to the Ranger, a notoriously weak class, getting more stuff. But how much extra damage, and how often they can use it, is important. I don’t think they need a huge default +X damage to basically all attacks all the time. But I can see the argument for tweaking the damage output, or removing the Concentration requirement (assuming its Ranger exclusive and the Lore Bard or other subclasses can’t use it too).

I compared some ranger builds, along with my proposed change (lower vanish level requirement), with a subclassless fighter with CE+SS at lvl 11.


https://ibb.co/sJpb6rC
https://i.ibb.co/gFbmPCd/Ranger.png (https://ibb.co/sJpb6rC)

PS. Not sure why I can't embed it.
Edit: Nvm fixed it

[Man_Over_Game]

So what’s the math on how much damage a RAW Ranger deals with and without RAW Hunters Mark, and how does that compare to a Fighter using a two handed weapon, or other baseline attacks? And how does that compare to the other options you’re proposing?

I’m very open to the Ranger, a notoriously weak class, getting more stuff. But how much extra damage, and how often they can use it, is important. I don’t think they need a huge default +X damage to basically all attacks all the time. But I can see the argument for tweaking the damage output, or removing the Concentration requirement (assuming its Ranger exclusive and the Lore Bard or other subclasses can’t use it too).

A LOT of Fighter damage comes from the subclasses, too. The Battlemaster subclass, for instance, gives roughly 40-90 damage per day, assuming 3 encounters with a SR between them and he's using GWM. Arcane Archer averages about +60, if I remember correctly, with Samurai around +40.

Needing a roll of 7 or higher on a normal attack roll means that GWM gives about +2 damage compared to about the 11 damage a Fighter normally does, for 13 average damage. Double that from Extra Attack. Then double it again from Action surge once.

So before subclasses are considered, Rangers gotta keep up with ~+26 damage per encounter at level 5 from class features. +1d6 on every Ranger attack would require 7 attacks to keep up. Basically, even if Rangers applied Hunter's Mark to every possible attack, they'd only catch up with the baseline fighter after 3 rounds of combat, just from how powerful Action Surge is.

With Dual-Wielding, though, that changes it to two turns and one attack (assuming no BA spent for HM), which sounds pretty reasonable.

Even if you increased the HM damage and made it a flat number, like +5 damage, you're looking at two turns before the non-DW Ranger balances with the Fighter, with the DW Ranger balancing in the middle of the second turn.

What this tells me is that we can afford to be extremely lucrative with how much damage can be used here.

[DarknessEternal]

Are you prepared for every weapon user to dip Ranger 1? That's what making it a class feature will do.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Are you prepared for every weapon user to dip Ranger 1? That's what making it a class feature will do.

Indeed. It'll be the new Hexblade; the Cool Kid's dip. Except for the fact that it requires a 13 in both Dexterity and Wisdom, making it impractical for Paladins, and annoying for Barbarians. Oh, but no issue for monks, but they honestly need the help regardless.

[RedGeomancer]

Are you prepared for every weapon user to dip Ranger 1? That's what making it a class feature will do.

Do you think that's what TCoE Favored Foe does? Not a rhetorical question.

[DarknessEternal]

Do you think that's what TCoE Favored Foe does? Not a rhetorical question.

1d4 once per round << 1d6 per attack.

[Witty Username]

So what’s the math on how much damage a RAW Ranger deals with and without RAW Hunters Mark, and how does that compare to a Fighter using a two handed weapon, or other baseline attacks? And how does that compare to the other options you’re proposing?

I’m very open to the Ranger, a notoriously weak class, getting more stuff. But how much extra damage, and how often they can use it, is important. I don’t think they need a huge default +X damage to basically all attacks all the time. But I can see the argument for tweaking the damage output, or removing the Concentration requirement (assuming its Ranger exclusive and the Lore Bard or other subclasses can’t use it too).

It depends on the build:
Crossbow Expert, Pole-arm Master, and Two-weapon fighting builds actually lose damage using hunter's mark because of the bonus action use.
For actual numbers: (Edit: assumed level 5)
XBE & TWF: (1d6+dex) * 3 + 1d4(Favored Foe) vs. (2d6 + dex) * 2, assuming 16 dex about 21 damage vs 20 damage
PAM: (1d10 +str) * 2 + 1d4 + str +1d4 vs (1d10+1d6+str) * 2 w/ 16 str avg 25 damage vs 24 damage
if you don't like FF in the calc 16 str/dex works slightly in favor of HM but the tune is back once we get to 18 str/dex

RAW Ranger with these is about the same as the fighter equivalent until about 11th level.
Assuming neither are using resources.

[Man_Over_Game]

It depends on the build:
Crossbow Expert, Pole-arm Master, and Two-weapon fighting builds actually lose damage using hunter's mark because of the bonus action use.
For actual numbers: (Edit: assumed level 5)
XBE & TWF: (1d6+dex) * 3 + 1d4(Favored Foe) vs. (2d6 + dex) * 2, assuming 16 dex about 21 damage vs 20 damage
PAM: (1d10 +str) * 2 + 1d4 + str +1d4 vs (1d10+1d6+str) * 2 w/ 16 str avg 25 damage vs 24 damage
if you don't like FF in the calc 16 str/dex works slightly in favor of HM but the tune is back once we get to 18 str/dex

RAW Ranger with these is about the same as the fighter equivalent until about 11th level.
Assuming neither are using resources.

Although don't forget to account for the Fighter's damage feature, Action Surge. It's kinda skewed adding a Ranger feature but no Fighter features.

[Man_Over_Game]

It depends on the build:
Crossbow Expert, Pole-arm Master, and Two-weapon fighting builds actually lose damage using hunter's mark because of the bonus action use.
For actual numbers: (Edit: assumed level 5)
XBE & TWF: (1d6+dex) * 3 + 1d4(Favored Foe) vs. (2d6 + dex) * 2, assuming 16 dex about 21 damage vs 20 damage
PAM: (1d10 +str) * 2 + 1d4 + str +1d4 vs (1d10+1d6+str) * 2 w/ 16 str avg 25 damage vs 24 damage
if you don't like FF in the calc 16 str/dex works slightly in favor of HM but the tune is back once we get to 18 str/dex

RAW Ranger with these is about the same as the fighter equivalent until about 11th level.
Assuming neither are using resources.

Although don't forget to account for the Fighter's damage feature, Action Surge. It's kinda skewed adding features from one class without the other.

[MrStabby]

My view is that hunters mark damage is boring. Having more damage can be covered by simpler features or other spells and doesn't need the tax.

What I would like is a stronger class feature that emphasises the Persuit.

To me Hunters Mark should also let you mark and see an invisible target, and should raise your speed whilst moving towards the target. There are cooler, more rangers things that I think the class needs more than d6 damage.

[Witty Username]

Although don't forget to account for the Fighter's damage feature, Action Surge. It's kinda skewed adding features from one class without the other.

Yes, but I included the caviot of neither using resources.
Action surge is 1/rest meaning once in a combat.
So most of your day it will be basic damage.
Is once bonus damage better than an Favored Foe mark, depends on how long the target lasts.
That's Prof/long rest so again most of the day will be basic damage.

We are looking for a baseline not a direct comparison.

[Man_Over_Game]

Yes, but I included the caviot of neither using resources.
...
So most of your day it will be basic damage.


Once per combat, not once per day. And HM uses a Long Rest resource, technically that's more of a 1/day mechanic.

Even if you only dealt 20 damage with an Attack Action as a Fighter, that's still 6 attacks with Hunter's Mark before they balance.

The Fighter is massively ahead on turn 1, and you might outdamage him by turn 4.

It's important for DPR calculations to specify encounter durations, since those play a huge factor in damage rates.

It's hard to get a good estimate when it can be ignored when the best weapon damage class in the game can double it's damage in the first round, in a game where Rogues get +1.25 damage per level.

[PhoenixPhyre]

My proposal: (parenthesized things are variables I'm not committing to)

1. Add a class-wide, scaling "Ranger Die" (name not set, because naming is hard). Starts out at a d4, goes up by one step at each tier boundary by class level. By itself, it does nothing. But features tie into it. This is basically a "Martial Arts Die".
2. Change Favored Foe to include "you can add your ranger die to any ability check involving your favored for or saving throw prompted by an enemy with that type." Effectively a micro-bless.
3. Change Favored Terrain to be "you can add your ranger die to any ability check or saving throw required as part of navigating your favored terrain; in addition, you and your party can travel an distance equal to (function of die size) per hour in your favored terrain."
4. At third level, add a feature to each sub-class:

Hunter: Once per turn when you make a weapon attack, you can roll your ranger die and treat the d20 roll as being higher by that amount. This can turn a regular hit into a crit; any die roll above 20 is a crit. 2/SR, you can extend this bonus to all allies within 30' for (one round).
Beastmaster: You and your animal companion deal extra damage equal to your ranger die when you hit an enemy with an attack. WIS/LR, you can extend this bonus to all allies within 30' for (one round).
Gloomstalker: Once per turn, you can reduce an enemy's saving throw, attack roll, or ability check against one of your abilities by your ranger dice. This acts like the hunter feature and can turn a crit into a miss. WIS/LR, you can use it on an ally's behalf as a reaction.
Monster Hunter: ??

All: When you use your 3rd level feature on one of your favored foes, roll the die twice and take the better of the two.

Probably needs lots of adjustment, but the point is to tie it all together while making the first two less binary.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Honestly, at this rate Phoenix, you might as well eliminate the Monster Slayer entirely. Mainly because you keep accidentally stealing their abilities.


Supernatural Defense
At 7th level, you gain extra resilience against your prey's assaults on your mind and body. Whenever the target of your Slayer's Prey forces you to make a saving throw and whenever you make an ability check to escape that target's grapple, add 1d6 to your roll.

Though I suppose that you could give your version of the Monster Slayer a way to declare any creature a favored enemy X times per day, or something like that.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Honestly, at this rate Phoenix, you might as well eliminate the Monster Slayer entirely. Mainly because you keep accidentally stealing their abilities.



Though I suppose that you could give your version of the Monster Slayer a way to declare any creature a favored enemy X times per day, or something like that.

Monster Hunter is the one I know the least well. I think the idea of giving them a way to alter their Favored Enemy on the fly would work.

The goal is to have non-spell resources that can enhance the team as a whole (like an offensive version of the Paladin's Aura).

[Mjolnirbear]

Honestly, I'd model it partly on bardic inspiration. Every bard can do something unique with it. Same, I guess, with rogues and cunning action.

So imagine there's a baseline Hunter's Mark version. Non-spell. Maybe a short rest resource. Once per turn when you hit with a weapon attack you do 1d4 extra damage.

Then:

Beastmaster: on any turn you and your beast both attack, both of you benefit from the extra damage.

Hunter: you may use hunter's mark on every attack, provided every attack is against a different enemy.

Gloomstalker: you may use it on every attack, provided you are lightly or heavily obscured (whichever one is most balanced) from your target.

Monster Hunter: the die of your hunter's mark increases with each size your target is larger than you.

Fey Wanderer: your hunter's mark also applies to spell damage.

Swarmkeeper: basically already has free HM.

Most rangers kind of already have bonus damage features, as was said elsewhere. But if it were built on a common base like hunters mark, it might have been easier to incorporate features. Like the last person damaged by your hunter's mark automatically becomes easier to follow, or a Hex-like feature where, say, they have disadvantage on survival or stealth or grapples. Every ranger would benefit from HM in every fight, but HM would get awesome in their particular circumstances unique to the subclass. Both generalists and specialists.

Warlock boons and pacts could likewise offer bonuses that increased a base Hex class feature. The fiend pact gets THP when it kills something affected by Hex. The Archfey applies the Hex die to saving throws for enchantment effects he casts.

[Seclora]

I think part of the problem with Ranger is class identity. It's not fundamentally a damage dealer. Most of their spells are utility, as are most of their core class features, for better or worse. Trying to improve the damage Ranger deals is just not going to fix the class. What it should have is utility features to support a party.

If we were to get rid of Hunter's Mark, I would give them a flat bonus die on weapon attacks starting somewhere around tier 3, to help their damage stay relevant, to replace the current spell's main use. It's not going to break things, and it's high enough to prevent multiclass shenanigans. This won't give them as much damage in the lower tiers, but they can always use some of the smite spells and their various class features to cover a lot of the gap.
More important, I think is an expanded function of Favored Enemy that I call Marked Foe. Giving Rangers an bonus on all attack rolls you make against your Favored Enemy equal to your Wisdom Modifier. Then, at Tier 2, Marked Foe causes this bonus to be shared with allies attacking creatures you hit on your turn. This is allows you to designate targets for your allies while also ensuring that your Favored Enemy Choice is relevant in combat. Couple it with the ability to change one of your Favored Enemy's on a Long Rest, and you become a reliable combat support for your party. Move Foe Slayer down to Tier 3, and have it apply to all attacks against your Marked Foes. For a Capstone that doesn't suck, make all attacks against the target either have a heightened crit range (19-20) or let you use a reaction to turn a Nat 1 against one of your Marked Foes into a hit, or both if you feel like ranger needs even more help.

In a large group, a high level Ranger becomes effectively one of the most damaging members of the party(beloved by Fighters, Monks, and Warlocks), but even in a small party they'd serve as a leader and shot caller first, and a damage dealer second. This role is far more in line with the archetypical rangers: Aragorn and Drizzt. I've never read Salvatore's novels, but I usually see him being portrayed as a voice of reason and general team player. Aragorn is a jack of all trades, who's more interested in the well-being of his friends and helping them to achieve their missions than in his own glory. It seems fitting that the design of the class should reflect that concept.

Something like:

Favored Enemy[modifies Favored Enemy]: You can alter one of your Favored Enemy choices as a part of a Long Rest. All Humanoids count as a single type, Humanoid. When you Attack one of your Favored Enemies, add your Wisdom Modifier to your attack roll. At 14th level, you can add your Wisdom Modifier to your damage rolls against your Favored Enemy as well.
Marked Foe[replaces Foe Slayer]: Starting at 6th level, when you hit one of your Favored Enemies, allies who can hear you gain a bonus on attack rolls made to hit that creature equal to your Wisdom Modifier. This bonus lasts until the start of your next turn.
At 14th level, your allies can also apply this bonus to their damage rolls.
Slayer’s Mark: At 20th level attacks against your Favored Enemies have a crit range of 19-20. In addition, you can use your reaction to allow an ally to reroll a Natural 1 on their attack against one of your Marked Foes.

[Witty Username]

Once per combat, not once per day. And HM uses a Long Rest resource, technically that's more of a 1/day mechanic.

Even if you only dealt 20 damage with an Attack Action as a Fighter, that's still 6 attacks with Hunter's Mark before they balance.

The Fighter is massively ahead on turn 1, and you might outdamage him by turn 4.

It's important for DPR calculations to specify encounter durations, since those play a huge factor in damage rates.

It's hard to get a good estimate when it can be ignored when the best weapon damage class in the game can double it's damage in the first round, in a game where Rogues get +1.25 damage per level.
A few things:
1. It sounds like your party short rests between every combat. The my play group doesn't really have the patience for that, they tend to go 2-3.
2. Even if you call once per combat, it does not change that most turns the Fighter won't be action surging. The Ranger won't have Hunter's Mark up either a majority of the time, when they are concentrating on another spell, have no spell slots left, or other stuff.

This is what I mean about a base line, the Ranger has got the good weapons, the good fighting styles, and extra attack. That puts it in line with the other martial classes.

Action surge, Favored Foe, and Hunter's Mark, and whatever else amounts to minor differences with the Fighter.

And Ranger's get weird stuff like spike growth and pass without trace that can have radical effect on the scene.

[Stangler]

Ranger compares very well to fighter at level 5 or so. The problem with Ranger is really about level 6 and after where it doesn’t have good enough class abilities, their spell progression is undermined by concentration and action economy issues, the level 10/11 boosts are weak compared to fighters, paladin and artificer.

Fighter progression is all about getting the Pam/gwm or ss/xbow combo on line ASAP which just makes action surge that much better, then the big boost at level 11. This progression is synergistic.

If someone is looking to really change the class there’s plenty of room to provide a bonus around level 7 and level 11. Free hunter’s mark at 11 would still be weaker than improved smite and extra attack for fighter.