D&D 5E Convince me that the Ranger is a necessary Class.

[Micah Sweet]

Im pretty sure you've expressed that you get the idea of immersing yourself, though now I suppose I'll have to second guess that.

You can pretend something is natural and normal in a fantasy world and still see it as supernatural from the perspective of the game. If a person for example wanted to play a character devoid of supernatural elements (like a fighter or rogue per their descriptions), it helps to separate what is possible in the real world from what isn't.

Please let this issue go. You win, if that's what you want.

 

[Emberashh]

The point, as its not being made clear enough, is that you fundamentally limit where you can go when you insist on basing whats mundane or not on the real world.

One of my personal ideas for a Ranger capability is sending messages on the wind. Sure, that's an impossible magic thing in the real world.

But it doesn't have to be that. You can position it as just a normal thing. Of course you can do it. Thats how this world works. Not everyone can do it, you have to learn.

The fundamental problem with doing something like the Ranger, but really any of these Martial type concepts, justice is that these are high fantasy worlds.

We do not have to make everything magic or supernatural. Being unwilling to treat these things as just being mundane parts of that world is just terribly unimaginative. And that pays awful dividends when it comes out of the game.

How many times have people complained about 5e and how everything that isn't lame and weak is just magic? How boring is that? How dull?

Its not like this is just arbitrary, either. There is a line, and we're not talking about saying punching rivers and cleaving mountains being "mundane" or "uncanny" things.

But something like tracking by your ear to the ground? Sending a message on the wind? Chucking a pebble into the woods, and provoking a nearby dragon to stampede into your enemies?

All extraordinarily thematic things that do not need to be magic nor supernatural to justify their existence.

I make it a point here because closing off your imagination like that means you're not going to be able to conceive of something better.

You can justify the Ranger more when you can let go of that, and the weak take 5e uses, to broaden what the class can be and can do.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

Ranger and Rogue fullfill the same niche that I have had legendary game designers argue that Robin Hood is a rogue.

If the paragon of ranger is not your class, it is extraneous.

Rogue now covers the skirmisher concept so I would be okay of folding the ranger abilities into it and the stereotypes as sub classes.

Then again my favorite ranger was the 4e version, because i have always preferred the deepwoods sniper version for my rangers.

So I'm asking.

Is the Ranger a necessary Class?

I don't think so. You can make a ranger with a rogue or a fighter.

 

[Tonguez]

The point, as its not being made clear enough, is that you fundamentally limit where you can go when you insist on basing whats mundane or not on the real world.

One of my personal ideas for a Ranger capability is sending messages on the wind. Sure, that's an impossible magic thing in the real world.

But it doesn't have to be that. You can position it as just a normal thing. Of course you can do it. Thats how this world works. Not everyone can do it, you have to learn.

The fundamental problem with doing something like the Ranger, but really any of these Martial type concepts, justice is that these are high fantasy worlds.

We do not have to make everything magic or supernatural. Being unwilling to treat these things as just being mundane parts of that world is just terribly unimaginative. And that pays awful dividends when it comes out of the game.

How many times have people complained about 5e and how everything that isn't lame and weak is just magic? How boring is that? How dull?

Its not like this is just arbitrary, either. There is a line, and we're not talking about saying punching rivers and cleaving mountains being "mundane" or "uncanny" things.

But something like tracking by your ear to the ground? Sending a message on the wind? Chucking a pebble into the woods, and provoking a nearby dragon to stampede into your enemies?

All extraordinarily thematic things that do not need to be magic nor supernatural to justify their existence.

I make it a point here because closing off your imagination like that means you're not going to be able to conceive of something better.

You can justify the Ranger more when you can let go of that, and the weak take 5e uses, to broaden what the class can be and can do.

okay can you both take this discussion back over to the Magical Martial Thread , we really dont need it spilling over in to this one

(for what its worth and as much as I'm all for extraordinary Skill use , I specifically abandoned the other thread to avoid this specific incidence of headbutting)

 

[CleverNickName]

So I'm asking.

Is the Ranger a necessary Class?

In my opinion, it's just as necessary as the paladin, monk, and barbarian. Which is to say: Nah, not really. It could be made a subclass of Fighter and the game wouldn't suffer for it.

 

[Minigiant]

*if you're an ignorant hole person.



It isn't supernatural, however. Not in Middle-Earth.

Questions of magic and the supernatural should IMO be asked from the perspective of the players/audience, not the characters in the world. Our perspective as consumers and/or participants is what matters, and the only perspective we have is real life.

Doesn't matter.

When translated to D&D, advanced skill usage is straight up magic spells

 

[Kurotowa]

For all the talk about the class's roots as an Aragorn expy, I'm amazed no one has brought up the dark elf in the room. By the time of 3e the Ranger had mutated significantly under the influence of Drizzt. The emphasis on dual wielding and animal companions both come from him.

And that's the point, really. None of the D&D classes are static. For all that many of them started as copies of specific literary characters, they've evolved over time and developed their own identities as D&D classes, first and foremost. When I read the first page of a new fantasy novel and it describes a character dual wielding swords in studded leather armor and with an animal companion, I immediately know I'm reading about someone's D&D Ranger. It has its own profile, now.

 

[Emberashh]

Doesn't matter.

When translated to D&D, advanced skill usage is straight up magic spells

How many times have people complained about 5e and how everything that isn't lame and weak is just magic? How boring is that? How dull?

 

[Remathilis]

*if you're an ignorant hole person.



It isn't supernatural, however. Not in Middle-Earth.

I'll make sure to tell Issac Asimov that.

 

[Remathilis]

In my opinion, it's just as necessary as the paladin, monk, and barbarian. Which is to say: Nah, not really. It could be made a subclass of Fighter and the game wouldn't suffer for it.

Sure, it would. First, you take twenty levels of abilities and crunch them into five, and then you are removing any of those classes subclasses special abilities to boot.

Put your money where your mouth is: design me a fighter that can emulate a warrior of shadow monk in only 5 subclass levels. No feats. Let's see how little a shadow-monk suffers...