Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Einlanzer Aug 18, 2015 13:31:14	I've seen a lot of thoughts (mostly complaints) about the Beastmaster ranger, but now that the game has been out a while I'm wondering about opinions of the hunter ranger. To me, it seems (superficially at least) that it makes for a pretty good archer but a rather mediocre melee fighter, mostly due to how Whirlwind is pretty much inferior to both Volley and Extra Attack. They also have a pretty lame level 20 ability.  Thoughts?
#2 Xeviat-DM Aug 18, 2015 14:24:03	They do seem to have more spells that favor archery, but I think they'd work as a rather decent melee character. Go with two-weapons, first round cast hunter's mark, then on subsequent rounds you'll be dealing something like 2d6+3 with each attack and then your level 3 hunter ability for extra damage (horde breaker or colossus slayer, depending on the focus of your campaign).   As for whirlwind vs. volley, I think you can get surrounded by 3+ enemies easily. Whirlwind doesn't benefit twfing, though.
#3 ShinQuickMan Aug 18, 2015 14:47:55	Generally speaking, Hunter Rangers aren't well regarded as far as combat is concerned. Doubly so for melee Hunters. That's even before considering whether they're at all that much better in other facets to account for having unimpressive abilities in battle.
(Reply to #3) Yunru	ShinQuickMan wrote:
#5 ShinQuickMan Aug 18, 2015 15:27:11	Again, generally speaking. Early levels isn't the only criteria being judged here, if the OP is anything to go by.
#6 strider13x Aug 18, 2015 18:55:49	so you want the Ranger to be a better fighter than... the Fighter? so all those utility spells are meaningless because youre 3 points behind the Fighter (again, class name... Fighter). got an idea, how about play a Fighter instead. or an Oath of Ancients Paladin Outlander instead. *rant over*   overall i agree with Mearls feelings from his recent article, the Ranger needs its own schtick. I would have used something like Sneak Attack against targets with no adjacent allys or make Hunters Mark more like paladins Smite as well as heightened awareness and perception  (truesight at high levels?), but i feel the PHB version is underrated.
#7 ShinQuickMan Aug 18, 2015 19:08:07	... no one said they had to be better fighters than fighters. Missing the forest for the trees there strider.
#8 Einlanzer Aug 19, 2015 6:16:14	I just saw this somewhat confusing tweet from Mearls regarding Volley on something I thought had been cleared up previously:   @mikemearls Hunter's Volley. Could you make 20 attacks against 3 targets in a single turn with this? @gaaran00b you looking at the ranger class ability? @gaaran00b got it - no, the ability allows 1 attack per target. You'd need to use multiple actions to double up. @mikemearls am i not allowed to use my extra attack with this? @gaaran00b Not to duplicate volley - volley uses your entire action, not just one attack. IIRC, you can volley + extra attack, not 2x volley   So, in other words, you can use extra attack with Volley and Multiattack, just not to do another Volley or Multiattack. This doesn't really seem to match up with how the rules are written, though, so is Mearls just wrong here, or have we all been doing this incorrectly?
#9 Einlanzer Aug 19, 2015 6:19:16	More generally, my opinion is that hunters are hurt primarily by their level 11 ability and their level 20 ability. At the very least, they should have gotten both Whirlwind and Volley instead of just one of the two, as even together they are not typically as potent as an Extra Attack.   But I think the biggest problem is just that the class is a bit of a conceptual mess.
#10 strider13x Aug 19, 2015 6:39:30	I don't know, shin, but in the game I run the Ranger outdamages the Fighter and the Paladin consistantly. The Fighter has staying power and the Paladin has Smite, but the Hunter has them on a round to round basis. I guess what I'm saying is I don't see the complaint.
#11 Yunru Aug 19, 2015 9:17:05	Mearls is both wrong and also self-confessed "not the rules guy". As he himself said it uses your entire action. Extra attack is only when you take the Attack action, of which Volley does not.
#12 Xeviat-DM Aug 19, 2015 10:57:47	Before 5E was announced, I was working on my own retooling of 3E D&D, stealing some ideas I liked from 4E. I had decided on the same 12 classes being used in 5E, and was trying hard to make sure each class had a wholly unique mechanic. The Ranger's mechanic ended up being their pet. The ranger would have been a class that had two sets of actions and dealt in coordinating the two or spreading out their attacks. For those who didn't want a pet, they could choose a falcon-type pet that would still offer its sensory skills and would have the ability to harrass an opponent (think hunter's mark), but wouldn't act as an individual unit.   The trouble with the ranger conceptually is that they don't have their own thing unless you make the pet their thing. WoW figured this out, and gave their Hunter a pet. You don't have to focus upon it, but it's there.
#13 Einlanzer Aug 19, 2015 13:21:30	Xeviat-DM wrote:
#14 Illithidbix Aug 19, 2015 16:48:05	Rangers seem to spike early. Fighting Style at level 2, Spells (mostly Hunter's Mark..), then Colossus Slayer/Hordebreaker at level 3 IMO makes them competative with Fighters at that point. However there seems to be kinda a dead zone from level 5 with the Extra Attack until level 17 when you get Swift Quiver.   Whilst Hunter's Mark is a real boost to two-weapon fighting... it also is a bit awkward to use because it requires a bonus action to apply, and to re-apply which of course stops you using your bonus action for an off-hand attack.
(Reply to #13) Xeviat-DM	Einlanzer wrote:
#16 Einlanzer Aug 20, 2015 14:30:17	Xeviat-DM wrote:
#17 Macv12 Aug 20, 2015 18:16:02	Hunters are fun. They've got some interesting features that make them feel cool. Specializing in hunting certain kinds of enemies, while still generally being able to excercise those same features in various situations, is a neat concept. Some of it falls flat in execution, however.   Multiattack cannot be used in certain situations. A fireball is best used against several enemies, but it's still useful against one. Stunning Strike is best used on a single enemy, but can be useful against many. Multiattack is moot if there aren't enough targets. You need at least 3 in range, or you just used Extra Attack. If you're a dedicated dual wielder or crossbow expert, you need 4 targets. All in a one bubble. It's especially odd if you're specialized in taking down giant or solo targets. Why did I get this multiattack again? I slay trolls for a living...   I wish the base class had a little more meat, and more interestingly constructed exploration benefits. The current ones are pretty blah. Of course exploration is really nebulous, which is the problem of making a class centered on "exploration" itself, rather than skills or assisting allies or something. I personally think the ranger needs many more spells known and more to choose from, to tailor their exploration abilities to what's going on (or maybe make a Battlemaster-style maneuver system, but for navigation and exploration), then in the space you made by not requiring fuzzy or niche stuff (Hide in Plain Sight) as main class features, give them some more grounded things.
#18 Zardnaar Aug 21, 2015 5:03:54	THe classic rangers ofr years had bonus damage vs certain types (1E/3E) or a bonus to hit certain types of things (2E). Kind of got washed away in 4E and turned into a DPS machine.
(Reply to #8) Azzy1974	Einlanzer wrote: