Ranger/Champion Alternative

[paladinn]

So the thought occurred to me (yes it happens).. The Ranger base class, at least as in Original 5e (weird to think like that - thanks Tasha's), has always been considered one of the worst classes. Most of the power of the class comes from its subclasses, some of which are really disconnected from the base class, at least in focus.

At the same time, while the base Fighter class at least has some potential, the "basic" Fighter subclass, the Champion, is often considered.. not good. Most of what it adds to the base class is lackluster at best.

There are players, believe it or not, who aren't attracted by tactical play and don't want to cast spells: they just want to fight. My thought was to use much of the Hunter ranger subclass in place of the champion features. Call it a Slayer or whatever. As I mentioned, the hunter subclass features are pretty disconnected from the ranger class, and would work as well or better on a fighter!

So we take the fighter chassis pretty much as-is (with one exception). Here are the subclass features:
L3 - Horde Breaker or Colossus Slayer (choice) (Horde Breaker is a lot like Cleave)
L7 - MultiAttack Defense
L10 - 2nd Fighting Style
L13 - allow Whirlwind Attack, Volley or Indomitable (choice)
L15 - Evasion or Uncanny Dodge
L18 - Survivor or Feral Senses (choice)

The choices at L3, 13 and 15 likely depend on the fighting style; melee fighters might prefer differently than archers. The L7 feature should work for either.

Not sure at L18 which might be better for this concept, so I'd leave it to the player.

I think it's not OP, and should be "exciting" enough to make being a "plain" fighter more appealing, and you still get all the benies baked into the base fighter class.

Thoughts?

[Pildion]

So the thought occurred to me (yes it happens).. The Ranger base class, at least as in Original 5e (weird to think like that - thanks Tasha's), has always been considered one of the worst classes. Most of the power of the class comes from its subclasses, some of which are really disconnected from the base class, at least in focus.


I've always thought that base PHB Hunter Ranger was fine, its BeastMaster that is awful. It was the go to archery build for the Ranger and puts out good damage with SharpShooter\XBE, and the ranger spells are good for kiting\control.

That said, I don't think this swap for the Champion Fighter to give it some more fun stuff to do would be terrible, it doesnt look like it would overpower the subclass any, It still wouldn't touch Battle Master or Rune Knight haha.

[paladinn]

I've always thought that base PHB Hunter Ranger was fine, its BeastMaster that is awful. It was the go to archery build for the Ranger and puts out good damage with SharpShooter\XBE, and the ranger spells are good for kiting\control.

That said, I don't think this swap for the Champion Fighter to give it some more fun stuff to do would be terrible, it doesnt look like it would overpower the subclass any, It still wouldn't touch Battle Master or Rune Knight haha.

Ranger subclasses aren't bad.. it's the core class that kind of sucks. That's why there have been 3-4 alternative renditions of it.

The subclasses totally work for a Fighter. I bet some of the other subclasses would be cool as fighters too. And the extra ASI's, extra attacks and fighting style? Yes please!

[Leon]

Core's not bad, sure has a couple of naff features but on the whole its a pretty good baseline.

[Kane0]

Yeah Hunter Fighter sounds fine to me.

[CTurbo]

Champion should have been mixed into the Fighter base class. That would have been great. The features are terrible, just terribly boring when compared to Battlemaster and EK.

Maybe mix Hunter into the base Ranger class if you feel it's lacking?

[paladinn]

Champion should have been mixed into the Fighter base class. That would have been great. The features are terrible, just terribly boring when compared to Battlemaster and EK.

Maybe mix Hunter into the base Ranger class if you feel it's lacking?

IMO, there needs to be an option for players who just want a straight-up fighter. Not a tactical exercise, not spellcasting, just fighting. Packing all the current Champion features into the base Fighter would make the base pretty convoluted, especially when adding subclass features.

The Hunter subclass features don't really have much to do with the purpose of the Ranger class (if there is a clear purpose anymore). But they would work really well for a Fighter subclass; and for players that just want to fight, it would be quite a bit more engaging than the "terribly boring" Champion subclass.

There's nothing that says we can't have both a Hunter Ranger and a Hunter Fighter. But we might want a different name for the Fighter. I'm still thinking Slayer might be good.

[Witty Username]

Hunter is a very situational subclass, so balance issues are likely not a concern porting to fighter. I would say there aren't really any flavor issues either as Hunter is the most generic of the Ranger subclasses and has no connection to magical effects (fun fact, I actually think Hunter not getting bonus spells is a feature, not a bug for this reason). Unorthodox, but there shouldn't an issue with it.

As for Ranger, the base class is the worst read in the entire game and since its useful features are primarily from spell casting it is a pain to navigate and understand Ranger. But, Ranger has high performance capacity when handled by a skilled builder and player. This has caused Ranger to be underrated do to this lack of clarity. I would argue that this is what the optional features provide, clarity to the rangers abilities and favored play styles.

I would argue that monk is an example of the opposite, the monk is very straightforward to understand and its themes lead to conceptual clarity. This leads players to grok the monk easily. However, monk has limited options and nearly all of its features cost resources causing it to suffer in terms of actual effectiveness. Hence it is overrated.

[paladinn]

Yeah Hunter Fighter sounds fine to me.

Anything you might suggest to make this a better alternative for a generic/plain/basic fighter and/or champion replacement, sir?

[Sindeloke]

Personally, I think Evasion comes way too late on the hunter, considering when everyone else who gets it gets it, so I'd take the opportunity to make it a defensive alternative at 7. Seems perfectly functional either way, though.

[paladinn]

Personally, I think Evasion comes way too late on the hunter, considering when everyone else who gets it gets it, so I'd take the opportunity to make it a defensive alternative at 7. Seems perfectly functional either way, though.

Thanks! Given the rather sorry state of the Champion, I've made "this" this default "generic" fighter for my game. If you don't have an archetype already in mind, with this you can play anything from Robin Hood to Sir Galahad to Conan.

I don't think evasion comes all that late since it really is, first and foremost, a rogue feature. You don't play a straight-up fighter if you are wanting to duck-and-cover; but it is a nice option.