D&D (2024) Ranger 2024 is a bigger joke than Ranger 2014:

[Minigiant]

Skills are something commoners don't start with, but each skill represents a professional level capability. Even the least skilled PCs start with 4 skills. Add in armor and weapon proficiency, and most PCs would be elites

I'd argue that skill proficiency is basic apprentice level proficiency.

Commoners lack that but skilled craftsmen and experts would have it plus Reliable talent.

PCs are experts who dull their skills to focus more on adventuring stuff.

 

[Rocker26a]

But that wasn't the point being made?

I mean. It was the point I was making. The initial question was about power-gaming multiclass combinations, and the reasons why a given occupant of a world might not immediately rush to achieve the pinnacle of power. Not everyone can, not everyone wants to.
It came out of a point about Ranger spellcasting, but that was like 5 messages after I made that first reply. I wasn't constructing a thesis statement about the topic in aggregate.

or it isn't something that can be taught.

That's how I personally would consider the idea of Rangers not requiring spell components for their spells. It's just how their spellcasting works, similar to Warlocks and their unique spell slots. I wouldn't really think of it as a "technique".

Rangers have been around in the setting for a LONG time.

It's a minor point, but. What setting? The Forgotten Realms? D&D is a system, you don't have to adhere to what makes sense for the lead setting, or any other specific setting. WOTC are going to of course, but. They're going to do a lot of other stuff for reasons I don't care about too.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I'd argue that skill proficiency is basic apprentice level proficiency.

Commoners lack that but skilled craftsmen and experts would have it plus Reliable talent.

PCs are experts who dull their skills to focus more on adventuring stuff.

The PHB argues against that.

PG 159: "Skilled hirelings include anyone hired to perform a service that involves a proficiency (including weapon, tool, or a skill): a mercenary, artisan, scribe and so on. Minimum pay for those Skilled hirelings is 2 gp.

Then on page 187 it tells us during downtime that if you are crafting (which requires only proficiency in a tool) you can maintain a modest lifestyle without having to pay the 1 gp per day or half the cost of a comfortable lifestyle (also 1 gp). The section on practicing a profession says that if you can afford modest 1 gp per day, or comfortable 2 gp a day, if you are part of an organization that can provide you employment, like a temple or a guild. Just having proficiency in performance gives you a wealthy lifestyle of 10 gp per day.

So, if you are working on a personal crafting project, you can still afford half of a skilled hirelings pay per day, which is likely you squeezing in other work around your personal project. If you are just working, and part of a guild (and therefore not needing to deal with not finding steady work) then you get 2 gp per day. Which gets you comfortable, which is the merchants and skilled tradespeople.

Experts would be even more expensive, and beyond this level of skill, which is just baseline proficiency.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I mean. It was the point I was making. The initial question was about power-gaming multiclass combinations, and the reasons why a given occupant of a world might not immediately rush to achieve the pinnacle of power. Not everyone can, not everyone wants to.
It came out of a point about Ranger spellcasting, but that was like 5 messages after I made that first reply. I wasn't constructing a thesis statement about the topic in aggregate.

That's how I personally would consider the idea of Rangers not requiring spell components for their spells. It's just how their spellcasting works, similar to Warlocks and their unique spell slots. I wouldn't really think of it as a "technique".

But, this is the classic problem with how DnD's magic system must function. Ranger's have Cure Wounds, if a cleric makes a scroll of Cure Wounds... Rangers can use that scroll to cast Cure wounds, as can Divine Soul Sorcerers or Celestial Warlocks. The spell has to function the same, not only because it has all the same requirements, all the same components, and the same effect, but because it doesn't matter who makes the scroll. A wizard who takes Gift of the Metallic Dragons and adds Cure Wounds to their list can use their wizard spell slots to cast the spell, and make a scroll for a Ranger or a Druid just as easily as for a Cleric.

Warlocks don't have different spellcasting, they have a different power source. I mean, you are still casting Cure Wounds even if you use a 9th level slot, the mechanics of the casting and the requirements for the casting don't change, just the power behind it. Pact magic just always has the power turned up to 11, it doesn't change the casting process.

It's a minor point, but. What setting? The Forgotten Realms? D&D is a system, you don't have to adhere to what makes sense for the lead setting, or any other specific setting. WOTC are going to of course, but. They're going to do a lot of other stuff for reasons I don't care about too.

Can you name a single setting where Rangers are considered a "new thing" or a "new class"? IT doesn't matter which setting you look to, as long as you have multiple generations of elves and dwarves, then you generally have every class existing for hundreds of years, because the setting is 10,000 years old and there was an ancient empire of great power XXXX years ago. It has nothing to do with the lead setting, it is all of them.

 

[Minigiant]

The PHB argues against that.

PG 159: "Skilled hirelings include anyone hired to perform a service that involves a proficiency (including weapon, tool, or a skill): a mercenary, artisan, scribe and so on. Minimum pay for those Skilled hirelings is 2 gp.

Then on page 187 it tells us during downtime that if you are crafting (which requires only proficiency in a tool) you can maintain a modest lifestyle without having to pay the 1 gp per day or half the cost of a comfortable lifestyle (also 1 gp). The section on practicing a profession says that if you can afford modest 1 gp per day, or comfortable 2 gp a day, if you are part of an organization that can provide you employment, like a temple or a guild. Just having proficiency in performance gives you a wealthy lifestyle of 10 gp per day.

So, if you are working on a personal crafting project, you can still afford half of a skilled hirelings pay per day, which is likely you squeezing in other work around your personal project. If you are just working, and part of a guild (and therefore not needing to deal with not finding steady work) then you get 2 gp per day. Which gets you comfortable, which is the merchants and skilled tradespeople.

Experts would be even more expensive, and beyond this level of skill, which is just baseline proficiency.

The point was a commoner isn't a skilled hireling.

The lifestyle rules also don't make sense.

+2 on a d20 rolls is not a high enough bonus to count for routine competency. Too much room for failure

 

[Rocker26a]

not only because it has all the same requirements, all the same components,

Spell scrolls specifically don't require any components.

Warlocks don't have different spellcasting, they have a different power source.

So okay, pretend I said that then.

It has nothing to do with the lead setting, it is all of them.

I mean, I agree, so I have no idea why you brought settings up. That's what I was expressing confusion over.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The point was a commoner isn't a skilled hireling.

And a 1st level adventurer isn't a commoner.

The lifestyle rules also don't make sense.

+2 on a d20 rolls is not a high enough bonus to count for routine competency. Too much room for failure

Do you see anywhere where it says that working a 40 hr week or crafting an item takes a d20 roll? Because I don't.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Spell scrolls specifically don't require any components.

So if you are casting from a scroll you do not need verbal components?

So okay, pretend I said that then.

But then your argument makes no sense. It would be like saying that the parts of a car move differently because you have a V8 engine instead of a V6 or a V12. They still all move the same, regardless of the power source, they just move FASTER.

 

[Rocker26a]

So if you are casting from a scroll you do not need verbal components?

Yes, I think that's accurate.

But then your argument makes no sense. It would be like saying that the parts of a car move differently because you have a V8 engine instead of a V6 or a V12. They still all move the same, regardless of the power source, they just move FASTER.

I don't really care about this discussion. You got anything else?

 

[Staffan]

A big issue is that the ranger has much of the same problem as the classic thief. Much of their utility lies in overcoming particular challenges: wilderness stuff for rangers and locks & traps for thieves. But for those things to be relevant, you need to have those things in your adventure. And then what do you do if you don't have a ranger/thief around? So those things can't be showstoppers, but that reduces the perceived utility of a ranger/thief. And to compensate, you need to load them up with other things. Rogues these days have generally found a nice spot being sneak attack machines with some nice mobility options, but rangers are still trying to find their niche.