D&D (2024) What type of ranger would your prefer for 2024?

[CleverNickName]

(Checks the poll results)
I'm starting to understand why it's so hard for Wizards of the Coast to "get it right."

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

I am not shocked.

However that doesn't dispute the fact that 5e doesn't provide the spot and escape DCs of a whirlpool.
Or the stats of an electromagnetic whirlpool nor how to design one.

Why an electromagnetic whirlpool? What is that from? Sounds planar. Might there be exploration options and challenges outside the Material Plane for higher level characters? What else the DMG have? Let's see...

• DMG is filled with all kinds of planar hazards and complications starting on pgs.45-67. Planar portals, Astral Plane challenges like finding Color Pools and surviving Psychic Wind; Ether Cyclones on the Etheral Plane; Feywild situations like like Fey Crossings, Memory Loss, Time Warp; Shadowfell Despair; then there are hazards in a bunch of the Outer Planes.

These are all things that can be used for exploration challenges at higher level. That is important because the game also says that these are the kinds of places that high level heroes may be exploring. Sure, there can be more. But the DMG is a starting point. That said, with their stated desire to make higher level encouters more challenging maybe the new 2024 DMG will add more ideas.

What it comes down to is that you don't need a detailed subsystem for one class in one book. The designers just need to add options that are appropriate for the adventures and regions in question. Other books can have local exploration opportunities appropriate for those regions. For example:

• Out of the Abyss has Underdark travel, exploration, and foraging rules starting on p.18.
• Tomb of Annihilation has local exploration challenges starting on p.38.
• Ghosts of Saltmarsh has Environmental stuff starting on p.202. Whirlpools are on p.206, by the way.

And finally, they have already admitted that the DMG got the least amount of attention during D&D Next. Hopefully they are able to do better in the 2024 book. Cheers!

 

[Minigiant]

Why an electromagnetic whirlpool? What is that from? Sounds planar. Might there be exploration options and challenges outside the Material Plane for higher level characters? What else the DMG have? Let's see...

• DMG is filled with all kinds of planar hazards and complications starting on pgs.45-67. Planar portals, Astral Plane challenges like finding Color Pools and surviving Psychic Wind; Ether Cyclones on the Etheral Plane; Feywild situations like like Fey Crossings, Memory Loss, Time Warp; Shadowfell Despair; then there are hazards in a bunch of the Outer Planes.

These are all things that can be used for exploration challenges at higher level. That is important because the game also says that these are the kinds of places that high level heroes may be exploring. Sure, there can be more. But the DMG is a starting point. That said, with their stated desire to make higher level encouters more challenging maybe the new 2024 DMG will add more ideas.

What it comes down to is that you don't need a detailed subsystem for one class in one book. The designers just need to add options that are appropriate for the adventures and regions in question. Other books can have local exploration opportunities appropriate for those regions. For example:

• Out of the Abyss has Underdark travel, exploration, and foraging rules starting on p.18.
• Tomb of Annihilation has local exploration challenges starting on p.38.
• Ghosts of Saltmarsh has Environmental stuff starting on p.202. Whirlpools are on p.206, by the way.

And finally, they have already admitted that the DMG got the least amount of attention during D&D Next. Hopefully they are able to do better in the 2024 book. Cheers!

My point is that one shouldn't design 2 classes, the ranger and druid, and a whole section of one of the pillars of the game around 3 skills that really don't do much, have few examples of how to use, has little to no obstacles past level 5, and require additional adventure books to expand.

That would be like taking traps out the DMG and forcing players to buy each adventure book to get one trap in each.

Because that's how wilderness adventure is in 5e. You have to buy the adventure books to get the rules.

 

[Clint_L]

The concept of an entire class built around a particular play environment ("wilderness") is always going to be a hard nut to crack in a game as wide-ranging as D&D. No other class is themed around a particular adventuring environment. The upshot is that rangers' wilderness skills always have to be tertiary, because the class has to be competitive wherever the party winds up, and other classes have to be viable when the party does venture into the wilderness.

 

[Minigiant]

The concept of an entire class built around a particular play environment ("wilderness") is always going to be a hard nut to crack in a game as wide-ranging as D&D. No other class is themed around a particular adventuring environment. The upshot is that rangers' wilderness skills always have to be tertiary, because the class has to be competitive wherever the party winds up, and other classes have to be viable when the party does venture into the wilderness.

This is why hard coded class features are so important. Just "Skill" doesn't inform neither DM nor Player how Nature, Survival, or Animal Handling could be used in dungeon or urban environments nor how hard they should be.

For example in another popular RPG Vampire the Masquerade.

Gangrel and Nosferatu can be both seen as ranger or druid adjacent classes. Ministry if you squint.

But VTM is mostly an urban game. However via described powers Animalism, Protean, and Obfuscate are more that just useful in a city.

My first attempt at a spellles ranger was to more or less copy Disciplines and let rangers take ranks in them to get powers.

• Ambush
  1. HIPS
  2. PWOT
  3. invisiblity
  4. ????
  5. Invisible Fighting
• Animalism
  1. Speak with Animals
  2. Charm/Enrage/Sleep Animals
  3. See through the eyes and ears of animals
  4. Turn monster into raging beast
  5. Summon animals
• Earth
• Fortitude
• Plants
  1. Find healing plant
  2. Remove disease or poison
  3. Speak to Plant
  4. ???
  5. Summon Treant
• Speed
• Strength
• Water

 

[le Redoutable]

... and Find The Path as a spell like ability ?

 

[nevin]

This is why hard coded class features are so important. Just "Skill" doesn't inform neither DM nor Player how Nature, Survival, or Animal Handling could be used in dungeon or urban environments nor how hard they should be.

For example in another popular RPG Vampire the Masquerade.

Gangrel and Nosferatu can be both seen as ranger or druid adjacent classes. Ministry if you squint.

But VTM is mostly an urban game. However via described powers Animalism, Protean, and Obfuscate are more that just useful in a city.

My first attempt at a spellles ranger was to more or less copy Disciplines and let rangers take ranks in them to get powers.

• Ambush
  1. HIPS
  2. PWOT
  3. invisiblity
  4. ????
  5. Invisible Fighting
• Animalism
  1. Speak with Animals
  2. Charm/Enrage/Sleep Animals
  3. See through the eyes and ears of animals
  4. Turn monster into raging beast
  5. Summon animals
• Earth
• Fortitude
• Plants
  1. Find healing plant
  2. Remove disease or poison
  3. Speak to Plant
  4. ???
  5. Summon Treant
• Speed
• Strength
• Water

I'd have argued vehemently with you a few years ago, but my current campaign that I'm playing not dming has completely changed my perspective. I've never seen such lazy reliance on skill checks even within the party while role playing. I've come to see vague generic skills as the ultimate crutch and something that needs to go away. Skills just seem to turn into a funnel that channels all ideas into them and limits creativity. I'm ready to go back to the old explain to me what you try and I'll give you an ability check number.

 

[nevin]

... and Find The Path as a spell like ability ?

find the path was always supposed to be limited by the granting powers own knowledge. If they don't know it's a wasted spell but lets be honest it should never have been a spell and definitely not an ability. Hit the delete button with me......

 

[Charlaquin]

I'd have argued vehemently with you a few years ago, but my current campaign that I'm playing not dming has completely changed my perspective. I've never seen such lazy reliance on skill checks even within the party while role playing. I've come to see vague generic skills as the ultimate crutch and something that needs to go away. Skills just seem to turn into a funnel that channels all ideas into them and limits creativity. I'm ready to go back to the old explain to me what you try and I'll give you an ability check number.

The bolded works great in 5e in my experience.

 

[Reef]

The bolded works great in 5e in my experience.

Works fine for me, as well. But I don’t see a problem in using it with skills (as well as just abilities). Tell me what you want to do, and I’ll tell you what ability or skill to roll. And I allow the players to suggest alternative skills if they can justify narratively how it works.

To me, that works much better than trying to fill up pages with lots and lots of tightly defined skills and DCs. But that’s just my experiences.