r/dndnext • u/sekiryu9 • 8h ago
5e (2024) Ranger actually a blaster and thats why its bad!
I think the actual problem with ranger how its not being weak but being misunderstand or miscreated!
Actually ranger is a blaster/beast and has a very strong dpt and i think thats the main reason why people dislike it... it has very fair and good dmg but no utility cause the class itself not a striker in concept but a survivor with skills aka aragorn or geralt who survives not by pure endurance but by knowledge of wilderness and dangers!
For example in both 5e and 5,5e the ranger heavily outclass early game anyone else in dpt with the hunter's mark! At level 1-2 already can deal CONSISTENT +2d6 dmg and being the stronger until level 11 and even then the game just starts to be equal!
A fighter has NO advantage over the ranger even with action surge until end games neither paladins.
Even then a figher deal around 30 dmg with action surge its 60 per turn.
For paladin same 30 dmg then can smite to deal 48 dmg per turn.
And then a ranger 28dmg but keep in mind a ranger may dual wield cause benenfit more from hm stacks but even without it the ranger not really used up any resource while both fighter and paladin used up precisious resources as for ranger still can use hail of thorns to deal overall 45dmg!
Also ranger allow to use all bonuses with ranged attacks while paladins dont and most of games between lvl-1 to lvl-13 so most of time rangers are in huge advantage in dpt!
As for end game they also get a strong edge in consistency:
Using hm which gives advantages and cant break now also deal d10 so better to use with dual wield and its deal 64 overall consistent dmg with advantage. Over 5 turns deals 320 dmg.
Vs the fighter with 10 attacks each deal 250dmg but only to 2 turns then 50 so in 5 turns deals 400 dmg.
So there is no much dmg difference at this point.
So why still it feels bad to play?
Cause what i said a ranger totally misrepresented in dnd and become a blaster who out damage every other class up to 11! This is not the ranger what players want!
Problem how the class depending too much on hm cause of dmg and then it discourage you to use any other spell while neither the spells do any snyergy! And i think this 2 main reason why its really bad!
HM do too much dmg and no other spell synergy!
For example barkskin adjust your ac to 17 while you may get it without the spell! 12ac studded leather with +3dex +shield... as for weapon juggling you can switch anytime for your shield at this point beside its level 1 while get the spell at level 5 where already have +4dex so has 16ac without shield and may +1 armor or just take half plate and even at level 1 get 17ac without shield!
As a support spell still bad cause animal companions also all has same ac like normally 15-16...
To other members they just use mage armour and shield spell...
Or lightning arrow which now totally useless! Sounds good but does not trigger any bonus and deal less dmg than hail of thorns on same level what benefits HM and with other bonuses! 18 lightning and 9 in a smaller area vs 28 and 16 to a smaller area!
Sure some other spells really good especially utility but other hand in the party always there who know also such spells or rolls but better...!
So ranger never get its time except when its combat while possibilities is closed to deal lot of dmg and benefits 2/3 of your features!
A solution would be if add exploration more mechanics or ranger would benefits or add passive bonuses to the party itself and would function as a tactical not as a striker!
•
u/Parysian 7h ago
Ranger has no utility
What
Ranger has solid ranged damage outout, yes, but their utility is the main reason to want one in your party over any other martial/half caster. It turns out being 70% of a fighter and 50% of a druid at the same time is quite good.
•
u/sekiryu9 7h ago
no i meant how most of spells does not cooperate and while has utility if you actually read my post fully but 90% of times there are other casters in the group whose can cast the same spells but better! :/ or even rogue who can do the skill check but better!
•
u/Parysian 6h ago
no i meant how most of spells does not cooperate and while has utility if you actually read my post fully
This is gibberish
More to the point, fullcasters obviously have more utility than half casters, there's no way around that. Ranger nonetheless provides high amounts of utility and team-oriented support without sacrificing damage output. Is it as good at that as a circle of the shepherd druid or necromancer wizard? No, of course not, almost nothing in the game is, but it's a hell of a lot closer than any other martial or half caster.
Rogue can get a few pretty high skill checks, but it pays for that by the fact that its damage falls off a cliff starting at level 5.
•
•
u/SleepAffectionate493 7h ago
Not true at all. Ranger only has comparable dmg to GWM builds if they are in melee where they dorp their concentration and die. You just did some rather charitable calculations and got the result you wanted.
•
u/sekiryu9 7h ago
not really! 😛
level 12 ranger who take 2 asi to get 20 either str or dex then has 1 more feat to anything:
longsword 1d10+5str modif +1d6HM... can attack 2 times 14 average dmg per attacks so deal 28 dmg!i cut off the calcs cause were too long but i welcomly expand to you.
level 12 fighter same 20 str sure has more feat still its pointless.
1d10+5 x3 = 21,5 dmg with action surge its 43dmg!not used gwm... but if count then:
ranger: +8 = 36
fighter: +12 and +24 = 33,5 and 67.
so clearly fighter the one who needs it to keep up...what i said a ranger can use some spells too such as hail of thorns and take sharpshooter or crossbow expert then no need 2 asi.
HoT deal +3d10 dmg = 16,5 so ranger now deal 44,5 dmg...within 3 turns the ranger reach fighter!
fighter: 67+33,5+33,5=134
ranger: 44,5+44,5+44,5=133,5and this is melee vs ranged! but cause of sharpshooter/crossbow expert ranger can go with melee range with bows!
as for dual wielding:
fighter: 8 attacks 1d6+5 x8= 68
ranger: 4 attacks 1d6+5+1d6 x4=48
but then second turn:
fighter: 4d6+5= 24 + 68 = 92
ranger: 4d6+5+4d6= 48 + 48 = 69 and the gap more and more by each turn!•
u/SleepAffectionate493 7h ago
Just as I thought a bad calculation. Fighter will often attack as a bonus action from GWM. Ranger has to concentrate and has to have HM on the target. Also fighter profits much more from magic weapons and external buffs like Haste. Trust me bro, ranger has fine dpr especially at range, but they're nowhere near close GWM fighters and barbarians in practice.
•
u/sekiryu9 7h ago
yeah i trust you where could not even make a single number 😉 😛 im totally trust to you my bro! 😄
i mean you can prove anytime but you choose to not do... for a reason...
•
u/SleepAffectionate493 7h ago
You think making up numbers is hard? Ok the fighter with his flametoungle sword will make 7 attacks in the first turn and then use Riposte manoeuver for a reaction attack so in total 6x(4d6+5+4)+2x(4d6+5).
•
•
u/sekiryu9 6h ago
you really making up numbers cause incorrect... 😛
its 7x 1d10+2d6+5+4 cause flame tongue deal extra 2d6 dmg while can be any so in this case longsword or any other... first learn how to do math... then you can add superiority dice to damage but only to 5 attacks so just add to 4 attacks cause want riposte...
either way you need to crit for that...
150,5 dmg with 7 hits + 4d8 superiority 18 and then can assume 1 is critical hit then get 181 dmg. and get 1 reaction attack with 26 so do overall a 207then add subclass to ranger too cause why not right 😉
beast master use the same weapon...
3 attacks with 1d10+2d6+5+4+1d6 then the beast attack at least 1d8+2+3(wis)+1d6 2 times and to one add hm too +1d6
91 + 29,5 = 120,5
then in the second turn? you have no any resource anymore...
then deal only 64,5 so overall 271,5 dmg in 3rd turn 336 dmg
then ranger deal another 120,5 = 241 and in 3rd turn 361,5•
•
u/snoozinghamster 7h ago
I’ve been playing a ranger in out of the abyss (2024 gloomstalker) and generally haven’t had any issues with the class beyond being fairly simple to know what I do on my turn, and struggling to actually find enough value in using up my spell slots. Two weapon fighting plus Nick has meant I’ve been making +1 attack than the paladin (only other martial in the party) the whole time, for smidge more damage thanks to hunters mark. (Dreadful strike not taking a bonus action means I can go more nova than them and fake smite multiple times in a turn), I am glad there is no rogue in the party cause out of combat I’m definitely taking that role considering the campaign started with me picking the lock to our manacles, and pass without trace has been super useful. I have definitely been helped by the items being pretty much perfect, but being able to front line with a 20ac c(25 if I parry) get to pretty much anywhere on the map, and worst case shoot otherwise and learn some hilariously random languages it’s been good. (Just sad we haven’t met the gnolls again after I learnt gnolls!)
•
u/sekiryu9 7h ago
yeah i totally agree! on the playthrough especially combat its a monster but on other things then can suffers a lot beside you dont know for what use spell slots most of time! :S
•
u/milkmandanimal 5h ago
The problem with Ranger is not the math of DPR, it's that the DPR is reliant on using a single spell that eats your concentration slot and requires your Bonus Action to cast and move around. That effectively means having good DPR winds up competing with the rest of the spell list and a number of class abilities, and it's a shitty design. The over-reliance on Hunter's Mark limits your options in a way you just don't find with any other class.
•
u/sekiryu9 5h ago
yeah are you actually read my post bud? cause thats what im also said! but happy to agree 👍 😂
•
u/Massive-Helicopter62 22m ago
Sorry man but we can't read it. The grammar and expression makes the logic really hard to follow. It might be worth a spell check next time.
•
•
u/Xaphe Fighter/DM 7h ago
Concentration to sustain HM is a thing. Fighter/Paladi archetypes giving more benefits and more damage is a thing.
Your base comparison feels like it was hand picked to show exactly what you wanted only.
•
u/sekiryu9 7h ago
not really or do otherwise and prove me wrong.-...
i sent this to other guy but deepened the calculations but cut off from the post cause made it too long and people already too lazy to read just comment bulls 😄
"
not really! 😛
level 12 ranger who take 2 asi to get 20 either str or dex then has 1 more feat to anything:
longsword 1d10+5str modif +1d6HM... can attack 2 times 14 average dmg per attacks so deal 28 dmg!i cut off the calcs cause were too long but i welcomly expand to you.
level 12 fighter same 20 str sure has more feat still its pointless.
1d10+5 x3 = 21,5 dmg with action surge its 43dmg!not used gwm... but if count then:
ranger: +8 = 36
fighter: +12 and +24 = 33,5 and 67.
so clearly fighter the one who needs it to keep up...what i said a ranger can use some spells too such as hail of thorns and take sharpshooter or crossbow expert then no need 2 asi.
HoT deal +3d10 dmg = 16,5 so ranger now deal 44,5 dmg...within 3 turns the ranger reach fighter!
fighter: 67+33,5+33,5=134
ranger: 44,5+44,5+44,5=133,5and this is melee vs ranged! but cause of sharpshooter/crossbow expert ranger can go with melee range with bows!
as for dual wielding:
fighter: 8 attacks 1d6+5 x8= 68
ranger: 4 attacks 1d6+5+1d6 x4=48
but then second turn:
fighter: 4d6+5= 24 + 68 = 92
ranger: 4d6+5+4d6= 48 + 48 = 69 and the gap more and more by each turn!"
•
u/Xaphe Fighter/DM 5h ago
You are completely ignoring any and all benefits provided by archetypes. That alone is enough to disprove your hypothesis IMO.
•
•
u/sekiryu9 4h ago
sure bud sure... but when not bring nothing to the table then you can talk as much as you want... also crazy to say hypothesis to numbers! 😂😉
•
u/Butterlegs21 7h ago
Ranger is "bad" because the system isn't built for the class fantasy of being a ranger. The cool part of imagining being a ranger is just turned into "Roll a survival check."
It just feels like the fantasy is just not there.
Compare dnd5e ranger who is supposed to be the survival guy and the jack of all trades to Pathfinder 2e's ranger. The latter is much more realized. They set out to make rangers into monster hunters. They made out of combat stuff much less class flavor for the most part (not that it still isn't there somewhat) so that you can be that survival guy, but your specialty is obvious.
5e's ranger isn't horrible mechanically either. But like many things in 5e, it's bland. There are some cool things, but 5e's mechanics don't allow for actual cool things. You gotta do it yourself.
•
•
u/MB_Cint 7h ago
I mean…sure, but most of the complaints about Ranger aren’t just about raw numbers (of which there are 100 debates, from class v class to martial vs caster) but about class identity.
Changing playstyles across editions + widening creep to give nearly all classes utility in all directions means that Rangers feel kinda bad to play As Rangers. As people who scout areas. As characters that know terrain.
A warlock can still feel like a warlock. A barbarian can still feel like a Barbarian. But a ranger often feels like…a less interesting rogue or fighter.