🧿Ranger Foundation

Redesigning the ranger class from the ground up is going to be a core part of the next book. Follow the Kickstarter project, so you don't miss out.

What are the foundational mechanics of the ranger?

Exploration, kind of?

The class suffers from three critical issues:

1. Foundational Abilities - Barbarians have rage, Paladins have smite, Rangers have a level 1 spell that is ideal for a session no one has ever played. (Seriously, when was the last time you were within 90 feet of a creature you wanted to be more capable of tracking for an hour?) Without core features, there's nothing subclasses can build on.
2. Competing Archetypes - There are strong opinions about what the ranger should and should not be. I'd split these camps into three groups:
   1. Beast Companion
   2. Commando of the Wilds (No Magic)
   3. Warrior Empowered by Nature's Magic
3. Play Satisfaction - The ranger isn't the best at anything, their signature abilities have minimal player agency, and the class has poor scaling:
   1. Bards are better Jack of All Trades
   2. Druids are better at nature magic
   3. Fighters are better at melee combat
   4. Fighters are better at ranged combat
   5. Paladins have better spell slot usage
   6. Rogues are better at stealth
   7. Warlocks are better at pets

The common theme in every ranger vision is the survivalist nature of the class. If you need to survive, you want a ranger.

The current iteration of D&D is a bit shallow on the Exploration pillar at many tables. This compounds the poorly built ranger exploration features. 5E removes the agency from the player with requiring choices starting at level 1 that can't be changed (natural explorer) and 5.5E gives them expertise instead and loses the theme.

The ranger's kit is also extremely dependent on bonus actions. This becomes especially problematic with 5.5E as Hunter's Mark isn't really optional anymore.

Core Features

What should the ranger get at level 1 that can support everything we talked about? What should be their core identity?

There is a lot of interest in being able to specialize in fighting certain foes, however, the challenge is keeping it useful. If you choose a foe that you never see, such as an ooze, you won't get any benefit from the feature. You need a way to be able to change your foe, and even if you don't fight your foe it should still be a useful feature.

When you pick the ranger, you should get a feature that:

• Is always good, sometimes amazing
• Gives you, the player, the agency
• Doesn't require a bonus action
• Provides clear identity fitting both the theme and mechanics

Prey Preparation was my answer. You always have a +1 to your attack rolls against creatures. When you fight creatures of your prey preparation type, you get extra damage which scales, doesn't require your bonus action, and triggers whether you use a weapon, spell, or something else.

Prey Preparation has a survivalist theme, but is combat focused. What about the Exploration pillar?

Expertise is the rogue and bard's thing. Giving it to the ranger cheapens expertise and doesn't get to the heart of what the ranger should be. The ranger should be dependable. They don't need to be able to get the highest rolls, they need to get the most consistent rolls. A unique way of doing this is giving the ranger "elven accuracy" on their survival checks. As long as the ranger doesn't have disadvantage on the check, they will get "super advantage".

Thinkdm did an excellent write up of the math if you'd like to dig in:

How Strong is Elven Accuracy?

Elven Accuracy gives you “super advantage” via a mechanic that lets you select the best of three dice rolls when you have advantage on an attack. This is widely regarded as a very stron…

ThinkDMthinkdm

These two features become the foundation of the ranger.

In the next post I'll address the competing archetypes: Beast Companion, Commando of the Wilds, and Nature's Warrior.

I've been playtesting the ranger redesign for several months. Here are the sessions if you'd like to see how it has evolved over time: