They should have done one of two things with Favored Foe, either: 1) It's just an extra die of damage once per round at will, starting at D4, up to D8. 2) "You gain the Hunters Mark spell, it does not count against your spells known, you may cast it without using a spell slot your proficiency bonus times per long rest".
I have to agree with the dude’s post complaining about the crappier hunters Mark. Honestly, making it not have to require concentration on a ranger fixes an issue the ranger has with competitions for concentration spells. Hunters Mark or something like it should be the bread and butter of any ranger just like divine smite is the bread and butter of any Paladin. That’s just my personal thoughts though.
I think the reason scaling down abilities is easier is due to playtesting: If an ability is very strong, it gets used all the time, and you get to see the potential problems with the concept. You get feedback like "when you use this in situation x, the damage is higher than ... ", or "when using this to multiclass with a rogue, I can do blaha blaha" (And we all know the power of blaha blaha) A weak or balanced ability doesn't get the as much attention from players trying to optimize with multiclassing, racial feature etc, and potential problems might remain undiscovered for the printed version.
I feel like there would be less backlash for Favored Foe if other Ranger spells were changed. A number of Ranger's concentration spells are "1BA, on your next attack do XYZ." If those were instead something more akin to Booming Blade, "Make an attack and do XYZ" then rangers could use their long term concentration spells more freely and not need to reapply whenever they want to do something else.
That conversation is why i love this channel. I skimmed through a lot of the videos that came through right after Tasha's, and there were so many people talking about how this or that class or feature was super powerful and OP, and then when they discussed why, it was clear they hadn't actually thought at all about how these features actually played in combination with other features. Forgetting that you only have one bonus action a round is a classic version of this.
Bonus action clog is one of the reasons why I think monk is so terrible and why so many subclasses fail to fix it. It's not a coincidence that the best monk subclasses tend to be light on bonus action usage and ki points (Open Palm and Mercy).
I saw a reddit post recently where someone was theorycrafting the use of arcane ward on the abjurer with vampiric touch on themself. They completely overlooked the fact that each action taken to replenish the arcane ward cuts into the time the vampiric touch can be used, and armor of shadows to replenish your ward only gives 2 hp back to the ward per casting. Awful theorycraft.
I'm glad someone's called out Todd cuz every video I occasionally watch with him in it has me wonder how much he actually knows about the game. Seriously, I would be a billionaire if I got a penny for each time a dev, particularly Chris, had to explain or clarify a rule to him.
Like others have said, the comments on the D&D official video are amazing. I'd love seeing Treantmonk Reacts videos. Reaction videos usually seem like a lazy way to make content but I want to hear more of Chris's opinions.
Hexblade Warlock had such a simple fix to the problem of 'we don't want people to dip, but we also don't want to screw over the single-classers who start from level 1', too. Just make their CHA-substitution ability only usable 1/turn until level 3, where it becomes unlimited.
@@recless8667 A dip that requires 2 or 3 levels to make work is much, MUCH less problematic than a dip that requires 1 level to work. Paladin 2 or War Mage 2 are some of the most OMG X-BOX HUEG dips in the game, yet they're still fairly uncommon dips. Fighter 2 comes with a load of goodies for squishy wizards, yet how many of them actually go that route?
@@DaDunge I understand why they didn't make it an invocation, because it screws over level 1 Hexblades who plan to take the class straight with no multiclassing. Much like how level 1 Bladesingers are unplayable as Bladesingers. That said, it is just one level and it's not the end of the world if they either put points in another melee stat or just resign themselves to EB spam until they reach level 2. But that's what they were thinking. Of course, if that was what they were thinking, there were ways around it. Making the CHA-attacks 1/turn until level 3 makes 1st and 2nd-level Hexblades playable while making Hexblade much less attractive as a dip.
Also Favored Foe works fine with Dual Wielding AND you can proc it after the hit of a concentration spell (like lighting arrow), losing the conc for the spell and start concentrating at the feature in the same attack (also you can add the damage too). You can activate the feature after seeing the hit. Works well with bonus action users too. My only concern is the interaction with Foe Slayer but I think Favored Enemy is the "better" choise in this case
I think the problem with the problem with how they changed Favored Foe is tha they did not do what they said they would do. He specfically said it's easier to scale things back because that way they don't have to mess with the core mechanics of the feature. When they made the final version favored foe they did quite the opposite of that, they fundamentally changed what it was people liked about the UA version. I think most people would've been fine if they'd simply "scaled back the numbers" but they added concentration back onto it, which is why peolpe are upset.
Thoughts from the video: Favored Foe is so much more flexible than Hunter's Mark, I totally agree with you. ALSO it can be SUPER useful to not even bother PREPARING Hunter's Mark and get both an extra spell slot and an extra prepared spell essentially. In my home game my wife is doing this with her Swarmkeeper and it's changed how the Ranger plays immensely. (Biggest being exactly as you suggested having more flexibility with being able to use Pass Without a Trace between combats, leading to more surprise rounds and such when the entire party is at like 25 with their Stealth rolls). Blind Fighting! Oh my god BLIND FIGHTING. Give it to a melee Drow with some way of getting extra damage dice (swarmkeeper, gloom stalker, etc) is all I'm going to say here. Thrown Weapons, yeah I generally agree. Only ever seen Thrown Weapons shine when there's an Artificer in the party to give Returning Weapon from low levels. Oh gods Hide in Plain Sight was sooooo bad. Yeah I'm sure Laura Bailey saw this and went "Oh come on where was this campaign 1!" for Beastmaster. Also absolutely I could see Beastmaster+Druidic Warrior being very popular for Small Rangers as it lets you focus in on Wisdom. Hoping to see your thoughts on the new Subclasses for Ranger soon!
@@milanmarkovic2721 they don't have to prepare daily to have the spells and have to take the spells at level up but yes technically the clunky phrasing is "take it as a known spell using up knowledge slots"
And more HP, because a average damage Fireball was nearly double their HP total at the level you get fireball. Even on a successful save, a Sorc/Wiz could easily one-shot the pet via friendly fire. I'm pretty sure the HP is wrong in the new stat blocks, it looks to me like they forgot to add the CON Mods
@@recless8667 they definitely forgot the con mod. And phb pet having 80 hp at max level is completely useless. If all I’m changing is the hp then it would have to be the stat block hp for the pet + (it’s con mod+ 4 per ranger level). They won’t get one shot in early levels and they are relevant late game. Having them take hits is little different than a Druid at the same level. The designers also left off hit die for pets which was a bad oversight.
And yet Hexblade dips got even better in Tasha, helloooo mini Warcaster invocation with no prereqs. Wizards, go home. You're drunk. Let the rangers have nice things.
9:45 I imagine this entirely comes down to the lack of feedback they get on "underpowered" abilities compared to the flood of feedback they get from "overpowered" features.
Pretty easy DM houserule for Favored Foe: At 6th level, it no longer requires concentration. Makes it still usable late game, avoids it being good for "dips" in multiclassing.
Another thing about favoured Foe is that it applies to any damaging attack roll. This means you can use it on an attack roll cantrip from Druidic warrior. Swarmkeeper also works like this, giving you a potential 6d8 produce flame if both are used. It's not as much damage as using your weapons, but the role play option is there.
The best part of the new ranger options isn't even the mechanical improvements imo. It always bugged me how limited our options in beast pets were. So even if you accepted the hand you were dealt as a ranger in the mechanical sense, you still get screwed over when you say "I want a pet lion" and the by-the-book DM tells you 'no.'
It's also worth mentioning that the new beasts have the stats handed to you with the feature, instead of asking you to go look in some other book. It's much more elegant, and especially nice for players who don't have ready access to creature stat blocks. This is a theme for the designs in Tasha's and a very positive change IMO.
The thing I find funny is during the initial playtesting of 5e back when it was still called DnDNEXT, the Ranger actually HAD as Tasha's style statblock choice which could be reflavored and, apparently, even had the bonus action control thing built in. However the grognards that preferred older editions...and the audience WotC was trying to get back after they lost them with 4e...wanted to be able to directly pick their creature...which resulted in the designers basically saying "we have no way to balance that, not knowing what creature you'll pick so..." and redesigned the Beast Master Ranger into what was in the PHB...
I actually like that their wisdom is importent because it shows how imprtant that part of your character is for communicating with your beast and connecting with it
My first character ever was a 5e ranger. I picked the mountains as my favored terrain. It quickly became a meme. "You're SURE they didn't go into the mountains?" "What to you mean I don't my bonus in the mountain cave? We're literally inside a mountain, if anything it should be doubled"
It does remove a predisposition to concentrate on it through an entire combat though. That same commitment to Hunters Mark makes many sit and wonder why you even have spells like Ensaring Strike, Entangle, Searing Smite or Zephyr Strike. Sure, they're tools for different situations but Rangers at my table always feel a sensation of loss by letting their Hunters Mark fade, especially given that they've spent a valuable spell slot on it.
Favored foe part: "It's easier for us to publish something op then scale it back vs the other way around" which translates to "We throw shit out there then the players use what is broken a lot so we see the problems with it, but they don't use the garbo tier at all so we never notice those issues; we're too in our own heads to see the emergent game play mechanics or we don't understand how our game actually works at the table."
Nah, man. D&d might be a passion for you, but it's business for them - and thank God, because we get a great game. They need testing feedback. They dangle some bait. Testers participate. Game improves. It's a similar cycle to a lot of product development. Most players never see the UA cycle. They only see the end result, which is usually positive.
@@ChristnThms yea but they'll never be able to get enough testers to be able to match the sheer brute numbers of the entire player base. They'd bankrupt themselves trying to get enough testers to test every single possibility, but the players are legion and they'll do it just as a statistical certainty. And the internet is a thing, so when the broken combos get discovered they get broadcast to the community.
@@jypsridic I don't think the emergent gameplay features are THAT opaque. When's the last time a major theorycrafter or CharOP guide writer like Treantmonk was utterly taken off guard by a discovery by the community base? The whole 'we'll never get enough testers, some things will slip by' is just an excuse for laziness.
@@maltheopia What do you think the staff size is and budget for one of these books? I can assure you that it is smaller than you think. Why they don't hire experts as their playtesters is beyond me, probably the same reason video game devs don't, which I believe is because they're looking for the normal gameplay experience so as to keep the books tailored to the general audience and be able to keep attracting new players.
Can we talk about how weird the HP for Beast of the Land/Sea/Sky is? D8 HD (avg 5HP per HD), +2 CON, only 5HP per level? That means the book assumes an average roll on a D8 of 3. Beast of the Sky is D6 (avg 4 per HD), +1 CON, only 4HP per HD I would immediately house rule it as 7HP/5HP per HD as a DM, I'm 100% sure they forgot to add the CON Mod when they wrote the stat block and will fix it in an errata.
The part where you added commentary over the video of Crawford was hilarious. I'm looking forward to your build video. Also, the Fey Wanderer looks fun also.
@@TVMAN1997 Well, he is clueless for one, and a tittering goofball for another. He reminds me of my six-year-old kid brother when I first discovered D&D back in the 70s-- enthusiastic as hell, but trying to get him to wrap his head around the rules was utterly hopeless, coz you know, maths!
@@carlosdevoto798 just seems happy to be playing dnd, besides we all had the moments when we start theory crafting ideas without thinking it through. It happens to all of us
The only problem i have with todd is that he seems averse to asking crawford tough questions. Like 'what about half the classes their shitty capstone abilities? what about the 4 elements monk? what about the ranger? he seems too buddy buddy with the designers for my liking
Wow, I didn't even think about that bad part of natural explorer. When it works negating a challenge is way worse than having tools to overcome that challenge, negation entire challenges never adds fun. You can definitely apply this idea to all aspects of game design.
My problem is that Ranger is the base class that needed the most buffs and yet it's the only one whose optional features are replacements instead of enhancements.
Beastmaster is now one of the best tanks in game - druidic warrior, sentinel, hill dwarf has on lvl 20 244 HPs (+6 times 1d8+5 temporary HPs), his beast has 105, he shares spells (doubles heals, buffs,...), heals beast for up to 105 HPs with only 1 spell slot out of combat. He also can become one of the best damage dealers in game. With GWM, he can use (already after lvl 11) his beast to charge twice for twice bonus dmg and also 2 chances to knock enemy prone. Then he engages this prone enemy and attacks him twice with -5/+10 feature. If you are able to get haste somehow (maybe from chronurgy wizard), you could share it with your beast which would lead to 3 attacks witch charge from beast + 3 attacks with greatsword (apart from speed bonus and AC bonus for both).
As someone who's played a lot of mtg in the past, idk why things like expertise and extra attack are not treated as keyword abilities. Why have multiple ways to describe the same thing? Why not have an index of the keyword abilities in a phb, it wouldn't be very long and it would cut out the redundant wordings of things like expertise (there are at least 2 abilities that this same thing). They could have extra attack 1 though X and expertise 1 though X (where expertise X is the sum of all instances of expertise). Most people already refers to expertise this way.
arent they (mtg wizards of the coast) even living under the same roof ? the first time i tripped over ruling issues like: meele "Weapon Attack" =/= "Meele Weapon" Attack i thought it would be nice to have keywords in phb
Favored Foe lasts 1 minute. But also only works on 1 target at a time. So with a proficiency bonus of 2. You can use it on 2 targets per day. Hunter's mark can be moved from target to target
I'm fairly certain it's a reference to Car Talk, an old radio talk show where people called in with car problems to talk to some mechanics. It was like Delilah but listening to them didn't give you cancer
You make some very good points about favoured foe. I was incredibly frustrated by it at first, but now I can see that it does have some okay uses. One thing I would still like to change is the damage scaling, instead of going to 1d6 and then 1d8 change it to 2d4 and then 3d4. Just to make it a little better at higher levels
Custom lineage-small race: your w/e you want flavor wise. pick darkvision, will help simplify things when you and your beast can see in similar situations when attacking. 15+2 wisdom. 8 intelligence and charisma. 15 constitution, resilient constitution later for more Hp and concentration proficiency. 14 dex. Good for medium armor and getting you past level 1 offensively. 10 strength, you’re probably gonna swim or climb eventually. feat- fey touched. Free misty step once per day, most rangers do t have access to teleportation. 1st level enchantment spell, dissonant whispers. level 2 pick up Druidic warrior. Primal savagery first pick for cantrip to have a decent and scaling wisdom based attack. level 3 get your beast, choose land beast, enjoy riding up and snaking someone for possible 1d6+1d8+4 at this level, and a chance to prone the target to give your savagery advantage. Note that new favored foe does not specify weapon attacks, so your attack cantrip can enjoy the extra die. level 4, get warcaster to improve your concentration saves. You may also now ride up to a creature, deal your beast damage as a bonus action. If the target is forced prone, cast dissonant whispers for the chance you AND your beast to make opportunity attacks at advantage as it crawls away at half speed. Your primal savagery may be used because of warcaster. Great damage, and scales decently for the rest of your ranger career. You and the best share the same turn, so you get your reactions back at the same turn each round. This also scales well with rogues or Paladins allies, anyone with a great single damage spike really.
It seems like Favored Foe is not designed to increase the ranger's burst damage, but rather increase their damage over time. It just gives you a chance to have the benefits of Hunter's Mark without any of the restrictions attached to it. You'll also eventually be able to use it more often than Hunter's Mark. As for overpowered UA, I think its less about the tuning of features and more about providing as many options to as many tables as possible. Think about it like this: if a player approaches their DM with some *truly* overpowered homebrew nonsense, the DM can direct them to the UA which is more powerful than the published material, but not absurd like some of the stuff that finds its way into homebrew materials. But, if a DM feels like the UA is too powerful, they can just say that their table is officially published content only and leave it at that. Not only does this give DMs options on how powerful they want their players to be, it also slows the inevitable power-creep of "crunch" books that you talked about a few videos ago.
A nice use for martial versatility is to snag dueling at level 2 since it applies to thrown weapon attacks and melee weapon attacks, and besides the dart most thrown weapons have a melee option. This means you don’t lose damage if you’re in close range with an enemy and the loss of the free draw doesn’t matter because you’re only making one attack per round and you have your free object interaction. Then you’re gonna get to level 4 in this class and be able to swap it out for thrown weapon fighting in preparation for level 5 where you do need the free draw feature. Then later on if you got a returning knife from an artificer or the DM making some custom loot, you could switch back to dueling. Also if you had a fighter dip or the fighting initiate feat, you could get both which would grant a +4 to damage, making your thrown daggers hit as hard as a greataxe. (6.5 + mod damage on average)
One of my players made a Ranger for the campaign I’m running, I decided to build one with him and I’m really glad TCOE came out cause it helps the ranger so much.
Another easily overlooked aspect of favoured foe I don't see mentioned often is that it works with spell attacks. So it supports your wisdom focused druidic warrior ranger a whole lot better. Also opens up multiclassing options like the star druid's archer form.
designers not wanting to give different classes the same ability is the reason why an arcane trickster is better and theoretical magic than a wizard. Its really annoying.
@@vaporalight3670 a level 20 wizard with 20 int has +11 on arcana checks. My level 6 AT with 16 int and expertise has +9. If I didnt increase my int further, at level 20 it would be +15. Wizards should be the ones who study magic, in all of its forms, and thus should be ones with the highest arcana by default. Instead, rogues get expertise, and rune knights with the storm rune get advantage on arcana for no reason.
@@milanmarkovic2721 I wasnt talking about casting and focuses. I was talking about finding random scribblings, making an arcana check, and arcane tricksters and rune knights (not eldritch knights - storm rune gives adv o narcana checks) having a higher and better chance of successfully determining what that is and what it does. An arcane trickster, for whom magic is a hobby at best, and a rune knight, for whom arcane knowledge is a side effect. These two know arcane scribblings better than a wizard who has studied magic for years.
Huzzah! Was totally hoping for a new beast master build! As I was watching this video, I thought, maybe a caster-ish based ranger; that or a shileileigh build? I look forward to the video!
Comparing this to a twilight clerics ACE channel divinity is like comparing apples and oranges. It is a very BAD point he is making here to try and dis the temp hp.
Considering how new Beast Companion is working I'm really exited to try out the Beast Master with net now. Taking Crossbow Expert feat will mitigate firat major net con of being unable to throw it without disadvantage and will also provide us with bonus action attack after the use of the net. Now we have the second net problem: it steals our extra attack... Not a problem. We can't use it for attack, but we still have it, so we will sacrifice it to make our companion to attack. And if our net will hit both our crossbow attack and beast attack will have an advantage. Really fun and thematic synergy in my opinion
I absolutely love the changes. Favored foe has utilities with non magical combat, and even works with racials like dhampirs bite. More spells with prime awareness. Talk to plants and beasts, and so on. All around more flexibility and less time being anchored by hunters mark. Invisibility...for FREE almost. RP moments where you are seen, they blink, and you disappear from sight. I absolutely love the new ranger. Never goin back.
Favored enemy depends so much on your DM to making it valid. If they are in it to make it really important then great but it takes a lot of communication. Favored foe is just a better option in comparison imo. Also like treant said, really great as a way to conserve your spells for the big fights and use this for the small skirmishes
Foe hunter can be used on the same turn as a concentration spell. Bns action spell, hail of thorns/lighting arrow. Action to attack twice. First attack hits, concentration spell goes off. Second attack hits, activate foe hunter to deal damage and start concentrating again. Not to mention how well it works with horizon walker/monsterslayer bonus action features.
I loved the pictures - do you have list of where they all came from? Sort of a credits list - I think I saw some DnD 4th Ed and Pathfinder in there. Great pictures and great video. Thanks :)
Also, note that favored foe works with spell attacks not just weapon attacks unlike Hunter's mark., meaning it applies to cantrip attacks from druidic warrior, meaning that a WIS focused ranger just gota little bit more viable.
@@shawnpeterson2523 I'm seeing 2 interesting ideas. The first is the one that Chris mentioned with the Beastmaster. The other is the Fey Ranger from Tasha's, using the fact that they get to use their WISmod on CHA skills. This potentially turns the Ranger into an even better skill monkey than the Rogue or Bard, since he can effectively get double value from investing in WIS.
I'm so happy to see the beastmaster ranger changes. It's a class i've always wanted to play but it was so bad in it's first iteration that I avoided it. Now i've rolled up a level 1 ranger and I have a real choice when I get to pick my subclass, for me it's between Gloom Stalker and the Revised Beastmaster.
Thing is all the good ranger spells that increase damage are concentration. So, while i agree that favored foe is not just a shitty Hunter's mark, it makes all those spells worse than just FFing without spending a spell slot. Why would i take any damage boosting concentration spells when i have this? I wouldnt. Therefore rendering a lot of the rangers coolest spells worthless.
While I agree partially there is technically a concentration spell that works with favored foe, at least I think it does to a degree. The spell is Zephyr strike wich allows you to have advantage and an extra d8 of damage wich if hits would stack with favored foe that comes into play when you roll for damage I think this might work although would not be surprised if all DMs in the universe just said no
@@lobomaru9 i suppose if you are already concentrating on zephyr strike and make an attack that deals the extra 1d8, and in that same attack mark the enemy as your favored foe and deal the extra ff damage, you would drop concentration ZS and immediately start it of FF... that feels wrong, but at the same time i can't see why not...
I mean it’s like when people say that Paladins should only smite. Wrong! A lot of you smite spells or ensuring strike have utility. So it would follow that ensnaring strike and zephyr strike are still great spells. They give you extra stuff that hunters mark doesnt. Hunters mark already did the problem you are talking about and it was an operative ability
Great video and explanation, thanks! Ranger is still by far my favorite class, and though I had the UA effect big time I definitely think the new options allow for more versatility in their spellcasting. TBH I wasn't a fan of favored foe after it was published, but I do love that it does not require a spell and therefore preserves your resources to allow you to do other things with your spell slots. Overall, the new base class options did a great job of giving you more options to do MORE "ranger stuff" for free X number of times per day. The PHB version, IMO, had lots of abilities that would either never come up or not be used often enough, whereas these really make it FUN to play a ranger. Looking forward to your next video!
Ya know, Todd's job isn't playing DND, his job is public relations. He's a reporter, conducting an interview, in which he lays up a basic question giving his guest a chance to present info that not all viewers might have, or allowing them to address a misconception without calling out anyone in particular. He's meant to be an access point for the common viewer, not to come across as an expert. In this instance, your seeing him doing exactly his job, and doing it well
I think a lot of the conversation on Favored Terrain depends on players talking to their DM and knowing what game they're going in to, and DMs being capable of adjusting encounters that can counter the 'broad strokes' writing of the ability. For example, I'm playing a Gloomstalker/Scout MC for the main "survival guy" of the party in our Rime of the Frostmaiden campaign, and the Arctic Favored Terrain has been a massive buff to the party for key transportation, navigation, and survival scenarios like getting through blizzards doing Cone of Cold damage quickly. And if our DM has a frosty encounter ready for us and I say "now I can't get lost in this..." all it takes is one line, "Normally you wouldn't be lost in such a snowstorm, but this one's strange -- it must be a kind of magical effect." It's only slightly handwavy and it perfectly preserves the intended challenge of the event. However if your games are going to be unpredictable like AL, then yes I absolutely agree the Canny changes are welcome.
One thing I don't see people talking about is how the dueling fighting style actually works with the new animal companion now. Before, it wasn't that great because you would give up your extra attack and not attack with your bonus action. Now at level 5 dueling with a rapier and ±3 DEX gets you (1d8+3+2) X2, or 19 and an animal companion attack. Compare that to TWF with two short swords and you get (1d6+3) X2, or 13. So now, not only is your animal companion doing more damage, you are to and you don't even have to give up a free hand for it. Also, you get a kind of psuedo war magic that eldritch knights get at 7th level since you can use your bonus action to have your new animal companion attack. My favorite combination is casting a spell like entangle or spike growth and sending in the sky animal companion to fly over the altered terrain to hit and run.
Hey Chris aka Teantmonk, thanks again for a phenomenal video! I personally really like every one of the new Ranger Features and i think it got really buffed - we never testet the "revised UA version" of the Ranger as it is/was clearly extremly overpowered. And i'm really looking forward to your Beastmaster-video. I kinda hope to see a Wisdom-based Ranger with the new "Shillelagh-Fighting Style" and the "Crusher" Feat (+1 CON) accompanied by a beast of the Land for continous charging :D But until then i'll sit back an relax... ;) Thanks for all your great work!
Honestly you are right for favored foe for fight only. It is better for smaller fights and it frees slots for out of combat stuff. And some subclasses get a concentrationless version of favored foe.
Many say the Ranger was screwed here not because of the nature of the new options, but because they are mutually exclusive. Most of the other classes got their options in addition to what they had, rangers have to pick the new OR the old.. Old options may not have been great, but they were flavorful for the most part, and wouldn't have hurt to give them both. As for throwing fighting style I quite like it, it's effect can stack with other fighting styles depending on the weapon, and can add some fun options. Oh, and for the record, they DID say that the Dualist style did work with throwing weapons, as they are melee weapons. If you wanted archery with it then you could use Darts (as they are a thrown ranged weapon)
I'm surprised this Ranger received so much criticism. Unlike published Rangers of the past, this one is actually _understandable_ and doesn't require multiple reads just to get the gist of what its features actually do. I was happy to see that this version of the class can be used to make an effective wisdom ranger, like a wise sage of the forest protecting nature, or something along those lines. A sample build would be a beast master with druidic warrior (shillelagh and magic stone), 14 in DEX, medium armor, and ASIs go to Wisdom. There's nothing complicated here; it's just an easy way to build that wise ranger concept. One free casting of Speak with Animals at 3 combined with the potential to take Expertise in Animal Handling from Deft Explorer (not the "best" expertise skill, but fitting for a concept), allows this Ranger to be more effective than just about anyone when it comes to dealing with animals. And it's not like this Ranger will suffer for it. At level 3, it could have up to 19 AC in half plate with a shield and make two attacks on its turn, dealing 1d8+3 for its own attack (shillelagh, 16 WIS) and 1d8 + 4 for beast of the land's, both using spell modifier to hit. And creatures trying to escape from this pair provoke two opportunity attacks instead of just one, which is an interesting niche I've always enjoyed about Beastmaster. And regarding the small beast master riding its companion, things have never been better. Tasha's actually enables the player to create a Custom Lineage, if allowed by the DM, that would be small and have +2 Wisdom and Mounted Combatant starting at level 1. Thus you wouldn't even need to wait until level 4 or slow down your attribute progression to do this.
With the new changes, I've been mulling over playing one lately. Fey Wanderer interests me with the concentration free fey summon and the ability to retry fears and charms on enemies. Of course, ranger doesn't get a lot of fears and charms so you'll have to staple some on like with Shadowtouched (Cause Fear) or a race like Leonin or Aasimar.
Favored Foe: no concentration; Deft explorer: another expertise (maybe at lvl 6??); Additional ranger spells: dispel magic (maybe find familiar); all subclasses get a exclusive spell list; Beast master: printed errata to the lvl 7 ability "your companion's attacks are magical" --------BAAAM, all rangers become awesome.
I appreciate how fair you were about the actual mechanical usefulness of Favored Foe. That said, I think the problem I have with Favored Foe isn't its mechanical utility relative to Hunter's Mark or Favored Enemy, but its usefulness relative to other classes' features. This is one of the Ranger's core class features, it's one of the first things you get, and it even effects Foe Slayer at level 20. And that's a problem because 1) it is very similar in effect to an existing spell, so it doesn't feel unique 2) while it does have the silver linings you list in the video, I still couldn't call it more than a lateral move relative to hunter's mark, so in terms of power it's not really that much better than getting a few slot-free uses of Hunter's Mark per day, and I don't really feel great about that because 3) Both Favored Foe and Hunter's mark become less important as you level up. It's a core feature that becomes LESS worth using. By level 5 you've got Spike Growth to concentrate on. By level 13 you've got Guardian of Nature. I'm not wasting my concentration on +1d8 once per turn when there are Beasts to summon! Yeah, in a demanding campaign you'll run out of higher level spell slots or you'll need to save them for tougher fights later on and then favored foe looks like an acceptable thing to concentrate on. But in campaigns with little combat or low-difficulty combat, there will be days where Favored Foe (a core feature) isn't really worth using at all, and even in campaigns where you end up using it every day, god, that's such a low bar to clear. Other classes' core features aren't like that. When I use Action Surge or Sneak Attack or Wild Shape or Smite, it's not because I've run out of better things to do or because I'm saving my good abilities for later. I guess not every class feature needs to be as strong as those, but the Ranger's kind of *did* need to be as strong as those to make up for it being, well... the Ranger for all these years. You know what I've always thought was a kind of bland and simple feature? Divine Strike, the thing Clerics get at 8th level. I always thought it was fine, but kind of boring, and it often fails to make using your action to attack better than casting a spell. I'm never talking smack about it again, because it's better than Favored Foe. It's also limited to once per turn, but it starts at 1d8, it doesn't require concentration, its not restricted to one target or to a limited number of uses per long rest, and it scales to 2d8 at level 14, the same level when favored foe finally reaches 1d8. If they had copy pasted that as a level 1 feature for Rangers it would've been a bigger boost in power for rangers, even if it never scaled past 1d8, and it's not like it would've been overpowered either. That would have meant writing a replacement for Foe Slayer, but you could just remove the requirement that the attack target a favored foe. Let the ranger just add their wisdom modifier to an attack or damage roll once per turn regardless of who they target. Boom, problem solved. That wouldn't have been an interesting or thematic option for a ranger, and I would like something more creative than the above idea. And to be clear, I'm not saying that Favored Foe shouldn't have required concentration or that it should've been buffed to be obviously better than Hunter's Mark. I'm saying they shouldn't have bothered replicating Hunter's Mark at all. Do something different. It didn't even have to be strictly about improving damage. A control effect like the ability to conjure traps around the battlefield to hinder enemies could've been really useful and felt unique and thematic. The ranger on the whole is significantly better thanks to Tasha's. Even Favored Foe is a pretty big upgrade compared to Favored Enemy, and I have no doubt that a Ranger with these feature variants could contribute meaningfully to a party and be fun to play. I like both of the new subclasses a lot. But Favored Foe is my least favorite change because I just don't feel like it went far enough. Even though it's better than PHB Favored Enemy, it just doesn't feel impressive or special to me at all. I'm horribly ambivalent about it as a feature. I feel like I'm in the Jar of Dirt scene from Pirates of the Caribbean. "This is a mediocre feature." "Yes." "Is the mediocre feature going to help?" "If you don't want it, switch back to the PHB version." "No!" "Then it helps."
As someone whose first character was a Beastmaster Ranger (albeit a heavily modified one for the sake of not being dead weight) all of these options are super exciting to see. The campaign he was in might be over but it'd be fun to rebuild him for nostalgia's sake. Who knows, maybe there'll be one offs and mini arcs in the future.
I loved the UA concentration free mechanic as well but it was too easy to abuse. My fix: “you can cast Hunter’s Mark without expending a spell slot a number of times equal to half your Ranger level. At higher Ranger levels, you gain additional benefits. At level 9, the damage die increases to 1d8 and again to 1d10 to at level 13. At level 17, it no longer requires concentration.” Being able to stack 1d10 Hunter’s Mark, a concentration spell, and Foe Slayer at level 20 feels like a better capstone for Rangers in my opinion.
The reason for me why no concentration was important for the favored for ability was the ranger "strike" spells were what was relatively unique to the class and hunters mark usually ends up meaning people don't cast them. The reason it actually being the hunters mark spell was important was pretty similar. It's boring to just get two d6 extra damage all the time. But players will do that if given the option
Blind fighting would be amazing if your character got swallowed by a giant creature. You’re typically blinded while inside, yet the creature also can’t see you, so advantage/disadvantage cancels out. This lets you gain advantage, which will help you have a chance to reach the damage threshold that usually exists to force a save to get thrown up, if not kill the creature outright.
With the new Druidic Warrior feature I thought about making a high Wis Beastmaster who threw out cantrip attacks from behind his beast (chasing that old Druid companion feel), but once you hit 5th level extra attack and giving your beast one of those attacks just wins out in damage and versatility. Ranger still needs to be considered a martial class even if you use shillelagh to get there. My concept was an older man, private investigator tracking criminals with high Wis and Int with boosted skills and tracking ability relying on his animal companion for protection. It turned out ok, but I ended up just going dex based secondary Wis with Duelist fighting style instead. Walking swordcane with pull out rapier.
So, the primal companion can take any action (maul) in it's block when you use your bonus action. And you can forgo one of your attacks to let it take the attack action, which at level 11 does two attacks when it takes the attack action. This means for giving up one of your attacks and your bonus action, your pet can attack 3x, and you still have one yourself (or more if you go with fighter levels). But straight beastmaster ranger would normally do 4 attacks by level 11, and the pets are magical.
What a timley video, as I jsut started a Ranger in a new round with my friends. My thoughts on your thoughts: Tireless: While I somewhat agree that, at this level, the amount of Temp-HP is not that significant, the nice thing is, that these Temp-HP have no duration. I see this primarily as a way to start a combat with a slight buffer of HP on top. Favored foe: Even without the context of UA, this is simply bad. Favored for is a pure nerf on Hunter's Mark in most cases. The Problem are three fold: 1) due to concentration you cannot use it with the plethora of concentration spells a ranger has. Maybe this was meant to kinda free the ranger of taking Hunter's mark in the first place, but since hunters mark is in 95% of cases better it failed in my opnion. 2) the damage can only apply once per round, different from hunters mark, wich triggers on every hit, making the dice -scaling somewhat irrelevant, this also highly relativizes the "no-action" cost of FF, as you add 2d6 of potential damage with the bonus action. Also combat usualy lasts more then one round. Yes in a real scenario you will have to change target with additional bonus actions, but usually not every round. FF on the other hand potentially burns through your daily uses. (see 3)) There are basically two cases to consider here a) one big single enemy Marks do not have to be switched, hunters mark is the higher potential damage, since it can trigegr several tiems per round and starting the second round you can use your bonus action for other things, like extra attacks with feats. On high levels other spells might be better then both (guardians of nature/swift quiver) b) several smaller enemies Hunter mark has to be applied regularly with a bonus action, this can be annoying for some rangers (CM/PAM/DW) but FF burns through its uses. Battlefield control like spike growth may be better either way 3) you cannot switch your favored foe target, making the PB-Based uses per day extremely limited. Hunter mark may cost a spell slot, but is extremely efficient with this spell slot, as you can use a bonus action to designate a new quarry as long as you maintain concentration, favored foe takes a whole new use if you want/have to switch your favored foe. An additional problem is, that the favored foe ranger has to use favored foe to make use of his capstone, so if he runs out of uses for the day, the capstone does nothing anymore. To be fair, most campaings don'T hit level 20, favored enemy, and therefore foe slayer, was ciorcumstatial to begin with, and capstones to be "meh" is pretty much a big tradition at this point, but for me Favored foe just takes away from the ranger, and does not add. If any single one of these three issues woudl be fixed (no concentration, damage not limited to once per round, retgain a use when the prevous target dies) FF would be fine in my opnion, but in this state, I'd actually rather take Favoured enemy most of the time. I can see the use maybe on the new beastmaster, who is starved for bonus actions, and onyl attacks once per round anyway, but even then, they probably have even better stuff to concentrate on that benefits also the beast, thei either FF or HM. My new ranger will most likyl become a gloomstalker with a Longbow, wich means, lots of attacks starting level 3, and no apparent use of bonus actions before swift quiver, so I will take my chances with Favored enemy and speak lots of languages. sorry that this went rather rambly/ranty. Extended Spelllists: some really ncie options here, alas rangers only get so few spells.... Primal awareness: sounds amazing, I really like it Nature'S Veil: sounds amazing, I really like it. All in all I share your verdict that Ranger got pretty good deal in tasha's, except with favored foe. On level 1 it is nice, but I feel after that, it just doesn't add anything, either ebcause hunter'S mark is better, or you are concentrating on something else, I'd rather have the language from Favored enemy actually. but nevertheless, keep up the good work, as always chris, as discussion snd discourse is the foundation of growth.
Nah, I do think it was a point that Treantmonk missed in his video. Yes, Favored Foe is better than nothing. But so was Favored Enemy. And I think that if you're playing in T2 onwards, Favored Enemy is better. And Favored Enemy was considered THE ribbon ability of 5E D&D, second only to Favored Terrain.
@@maltheopia what makes me a little sad is, that I really liekd the ideas in the revised ranger, taht was dropped. Classically the ranger did more damage to their favored foes, wich was reintroduced there, while this is circumstential, I found it very fitting. An if the new "natuiral explorer" would have been tied to a favoured terrain it would have been realyl rangery in my opnion. Sure, still circumsential, but if those circumstances came to be, it would feel great.
this is why i personally think releasing stuff overpowered first is easier. when something is released strong, it’s much easier to tell what is strong about it. additionally, more people will be excited to play with the stronger feature which means the community will understand how it works in practice better so they can easily assess what makes it strong. if you release something weak, nobody will want to play it which means it’ll be hard to figure out what parts are undertuned and what parts are actually pretty good as there isn’t any data on it. it’s hard to tell if somethings completely balanced - so it’s good to atleast bump if a bit to the OP side to generate discussion and easily create plans on how to tune it back. this isn’t because it’s better to be OP on release than balanced, but it’s better to be OP on release than UP. obviously tho wotc sometimes push this motto to a hyperbolic level.
Great analysis. I completely agree that people are overreacting to the Tasha class feature variants relative to the UA versions of these variants when they should instead be comparing the new abilities to the old PHB abilities they replace. So yeah, the "UA Effect" is a real thing. My Gloom Stalker with the Sharpshooter feat never felt "less than" even without these new abilities, particularly from levels 1 through 10, which are the levels that see the most play. Every single one of these new class feature variants will be a welcome addition since they're replacing abilities that I never use anyway.
One thing to consider is that the beast of the sky can possibly carry a kobold. If I'm using the right table, a beast of the sky can lift a 45 lb object.
Apparently I'm in the minority, because I thought Favored Foe was a wonderful upgrade from favored enemy. Admittedly, I never thought a concentration free hunters mark was a good idea balance-wise, so I wasn't expecting it.
I love the new favored foe. At 2nd level you get two spells, and there's quite a few good ones competing for that spot too. Having a slightly worse version of one of those for free is still really nice. Plus, you get it a level earlier then hunter's mark too
I'll be honest, I've had a problem with favored enemy for about 20 years now, and that problem is nicely summed up in the video. I don't want to guess at character creation whether or not my character will be shit or OP based on dominant creature type; Witcher-style "prepare for the hunt" is faaaaar more reliable than "practiced at killing boars" or "has experience hunting goblins." Favored terrain? Same issue. Last time I played a BM Ranger I picked Forest for my favored terrain and an IRL year later we hadn't stepped foot in a forest once since the very first session. My favored enemy? It came up like twice in that amount of time. And on top of that I had a single Ice Storm take my animal companion from full health to 1HP in the first turn; your animal companion does 0 damage if it's bleeding out on the ground next to the fighter and barbarian.
@UCqP8UDK6W0n6RXWib_7XYHg I wasn't saying it would be OP to be just on a standard ranger. The issue comes in when you combine it with other options, and would largely depend on build and level. For instance, assuming a 16 Dex, a 5th level rogue using crossbow expert could reasonably expect to be getting 4 hits in three rounds of combat, and assuming they are able to sneak attack each round, they would average about 18 damage per round. A Fifth level human ranger with a 16 Str polearm master and magic Initiate for hex, could reliably expect to get 6 hits in 3 rounds, for about 28 points of damage per round. This is assuming a roughly 66% hit chance(which is admittedly a little high, but it makes the math easier). The rogue pulls even at eleventh level, and is doing better above that. This is obviously simplified and not taking into account other abilities, and doesn't even get into the shenanigans possible with a single level dip into ranger for the free hunters mark adding onto other build options.
I am playing a ranger (soon to be a beast mastrer) with Tasha's class features. I am using all of the Tasha's features except favored foe. Favored enemy suits my backstory better. I will use beast of land when I hit level 3.
