@@Mr.Brothybear Ranger, unless you can cooperate with your DM, is not so awesome. Imagine getting like 'Favored Terrain: Forests' and 'Favored Enemy: Goblins' and you spend the entire campaign on the sea or in caves... with perhaps a pity goblin tossed your way.
@@TarossBlackburn Tasha's Cauldron of Everything added some replacement features for Ranger that make the class much less dependent on dealing with certain monsters, or being in certain environments. Instead of Favoured Enemy, you can have Favoured Foe. If you hit an enemy with an attack, you can make it your favoured foe and deal an extra d4 (later a d6, then d8) of damage to it for a minute. Instead of Natural Explorer with it's favoured terrain stuff, you can have Deft Explorer. Expertise in one skill, and learn 2 extra languages (to make up for losing the languages from Favoured Enemy) at level 1, at level 6 your speed goes up by 5, and you gain a swim/climb speed equal to your walking speed. At level 10 you can use an action to give yourself 1d8+WIS temp HP, and you exhaustion level (if you're exhausted) now drops by one point after short rests. Instead of Primeval Awareness, you can have Primal Awareness, which just gives you extra spells (that you can cast without a spell slot once per long rest) at certain levels. Speak with Animals at 3, Beast Sense at 5, Speak with Plants at 9, Locate Creature at 13, and Commune with Nature at 17. And then Hide in Plain Sight can be swapped to Nature's Veil. Instead spending a minute camouflaging yourself for a +10 to Stealth checks while standing still, now as a bonus action you can straight up go invisible until the start of your next turn. I've been playing a Ranger with these replacement features, and I think they make the Ranger play much better in your average campaign.
@@delusional4041 Yes. Post-Tasha’s it is easy to build a ranger that is VIABLE without constantly relying on the DM’s whims, but it also sands down the already pretty weak class aesthetics to do so, just letting you trade out a highly situational but also highly *customizable* and *interesting-narrative-tie-in-heavy* features for generic equivalents. And while they buff Ranger to the point of viability, and even under the PHB rules a good DM should be able to balance things to make sure the ranger can have fun and feel useful, even with the buff they aren’t a particularly *powerful* class and most roles you can build them to fill another class can do as well if not better.
I was wondering if he was going to spot the FMA reference. He did. He went back. And his reaction was the right one. And so far we have Fighter, Artificer, and Warlock being a better Ranger than Ranger.
Armorer Artificer is literally Samus Aran the Iron Man as a subclass. yes it is every bit as fun as it sounds, and if you add paladin into it for some reason you can even play "not Warhammer 40k"
I know I technically can't make it duo to the size of the mech, maybe a dm will late me homebrew, but I want to make an artificer cavalier on a robot horse.
Honestly Rangers recently got a rework which makes them go from extremely situational to second highest DPT in the game DPT standing for damage per turn
yeah and some of the newer subclasses for them are pretty fun, I've tried the Drakewarden Subclass from the Fizban's book and it lets you become a more powerful dragonborn with a drake companion that goes from small to large over the course of your levelling
Yeah, the new Beast Master is one of my favourite classes to play. When you get Summon Beast at level 5 and can control 2 creatures besides yourself and make 4 attacks per turn? *chef's kiss
@@lifed1533 Yeah, they got Primal Companion (a replacement for Ranger's Companion) in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything. It works mostly like the Battle Smith's Steel Defender, but it's actually slightly better because it's more versatile. Every day you get to pick a Land, Sea or Air for your companion, so when the Battle Smith has to work out how his companion is going to avoid sinking to the bottom of the ocean in an aquatic adventure, the Beast Master just calls up a sea lion instead of a wolf or an eagle.
My first ever dnd session, my characters gonna be an artificer Irish accented war veteren with a clockwork mouse familiar The few one off's we've done have been super fun too so I can't wait to properly get into this
Battle Smith is so much fun. My current character is a Kenku Battle Smith artificer, and his steel defender has more kills than most of the party, and it's a metal tiger. And I have the most ac, sitting at 18! IN LEATHER ARMOR. Which we used a mechanical scarab to engineer the ability to give the fucker WINGS. Artificer is so fun. Easily my favorite class
artificer is my all time favorite class or my second favorite but i absolutely love it and it’s definitely my favorite character i’ve played was an artificer
Someone somewhere has got to have done like a Swarm Keeper Ranger that took Magic Initiate as well or something or multiclassed into Sorcerer to RP Shino from Naruto Shippuden
I am sure someone has already stated but rangers got a "rework" in Tasha's, they're pretty good now actually. The monk has assumed the position the ranger had in the past.
Actually ranger is quite good with the variant rules from Tasha’s cauldron and some specific subclasses, i’d say its fun and strong enough but cant compare to certain classes
Hello Krimson I was wondering if you knew that The D&D minis on the table actually tell additional story if you watch the videos in the order of the playlist on Jocat's channel.
If you like jocat he also has a series for all the monster hunter world weapons. Just make sure to watch them in order on his playlist for best viewing imo
Rangers have a very mixed history in 5e. Already during playtest you had people who hated the fact that they were a half-caster and a lot of it's design was affected by some missteps done in early 5e design. At launch, I'm going to say that Ranger's weren't as bad as half the internet claims, but they had some really wonky and situational class features and only a single playable subclass. And Hunter was a decent subclass. But other subclass, the Beast Master was unplayable mess as it was written, which of course disappointed anyone who wanted a pet class option. Then with a sourcebook called Tasha's Cauldron of Everything was released, which included a number of variant options for ranger that offered replacements to the wonkier class features and also an alternate option for Beast Masters that made their Beast companion actually usable. While it can be argued that some issues remain, Tasha's options are generally seen as a succesful fix, but the internet still goes a bit after the ranger (also I think most of Jocat's D&D videos precede the release of Tasha ). Ranger has also gotten some cool subclasses over time, like Drakewarden which is a second pet subclass for them that gets a drake as a pet, Swarm ranger where you can command a swarm of something (insert all the Not the bees jokes) and my personal favorite: Gloomstalker that is so edgy that they become invisible to creatures with darkvision. Also the one artificer subclass that isn't mentioned here allows the Artificer to become Fantasy Iron Man.
For a second there, I thought you were going to miss that thing at Alchemist. Ranger is basically just underpowered, or was, idr. Its features just doesn't mesh too well with the system, and it being bad is basically a meme at this point
"YOU GO TO HELL, SIR! HOW DARE YOU?!" You expected an alchemist video WITHOUT a reference to FMA? It could have been worse. Dunking on rangers: Up until this point a ranger would have to decide whether the character or the animal companion would take its turn to do something, and 99/100 times the ranger doing something was always better. BECAUSE of Artificer and its "use a bonus action to make your steel defender do useful shit" working so well in playtests, and because this is what the community had been home brewing for years now, WotC gave Ranger the ability to do this too as an "alternate rule" in the Ranger section of Tasha's Cauldron of Everything, along with animal companions that actually scale with you. Except, most of those animal companions are still inferior to most other "companion" type creations (like the steel defender and its ability to self repair, be immune to several CCs and poison, and a whole host of other things), so Ranger STILL gets dunked on regularly. But hey, at least you have a bow. Seriously though, ranger isn't BAD, it's just the beast master version that is lacking. Especially with Tasha's, there are a lot of subclasses which make Ranger more than "acceptable" and one might even say, "good". Possibly even "great", but that might be stretching things. The two tier trouble though is: 1. The community has hated Rangers so long, and warns others against taking ranger all the time, that few people play it. 2. For basically every thing that Rangers can do, there's a comparable alternative in another class. And while the subclass may possibly maybe be inferior kinda, the class as a whole is just strictly better because its features are just that much more impactful. So it's like "Yeah, my subclass is 70% as effective relative to yours, Ranger, but my class is 40% better than yours, so it evens out."
Problem with ranger is many of it's abilities are very situational. It is great in the right type of campaign, but in most cases a fighter, or rogue can do what the ranger is trying to do better.
"Hating Ranger" is really a meme birthed by the fact that, MECHANICALLY (as in, game rules), it used to be the weakest way to play an Archer character despite being portrayed as the "Go to" Archer Character ("RANGEr"), with also the Beastmaster Subclass being the first "Pet" (and one of the worst of the game due to it's design). EVERY subsequent subclass with a pet was better designed to avoid the Beastmaster's flaws It's kinda like ... you CAN play a Dumb (low Intelligence) Wizard ... just wont be effective mechanically speaking .... The base class got better in recent publications, and some newer subclass are REALLY cool (I've seen a Swarmkeeper Ranger flavour is "Swarm" abilities (normally some kind of insects) as murders of crows..... that was badass as FUCK ....) (The person that said "Hating Ranger" is the "Hating Dragoon" of DnD is not that far off .... the meme got just blown out of proportion) Also Artificer RULES. I'd love to play a "totally not a tech-priest" Kobold Artificer one day :D Why Kobold ? Why NOT Kobold !
Rangers are much better now then they used to be, all the abilities that were only useful like 10% of the time are now given the option to swap them with much more all around useful skills. They were also given very cool Subclasses including one that gives you a pet dragon. Beast Master is also much better now. WOTC saw how much shit Ranger got and fixed it, its now the best Archer in the game instead of Fighter being the best archer.
I think Ranger gets dunked on a little bit too much. It really has just become the class stereotype, other examples including dumb barbarian, edgy rogue, and horny bard. Ranger on its own may not be the best but if you talk to your dm about the setting even the "useless" abilities will come to help. I think if you choose mountains for your favored terrain the dm should find a way to put you into the mountains at some point. That's just the opinion of a teenage forever dm though so maybe not altogether worth paying attention to.
People keep dunking on Rangers... until you trivialize an encounter and then suddenly everybody hates you cuz you don't actually suck (even pre Tasha). Way more interesting than "all I do is swing my sword" Fighters anyway. Like seriously, martial subclasses that suddenly gain spellcasting are generally on the top of those lists... and Rangers are that by default, but please disregard me for the butt end of the old joke.
Everyone hates 5e ranger. They recreated it's 2 Player Handbook conclaves and they still suck. The only conclave worth being a part of is Hunter and you could just be a fighter at the same level and do it better
Personally... And this is a personal opinion, I understand there are people that enjoy those classes... Ranger and Monks shouldn't be full classes. They'd be better served as sub-classes. Ranger is inconsistent and unless you're using the Revised version, its features are so setting specific that it makes them inferior to other options. And Monks... I just think Monk has always been a stupid concept to create a whole class around. Both classes would be better as Fighter sub-classes. Maybe even a Cleric sub-class for Monk where you use the power of enlightenment and higher understanding to power your fists. Again, this is just me. Both classes are beyond bland in my eyes.
old rangers were trash. like unusuable trash. new modified ranger with better subclasses is amazing. Gloomstalker or even old style "hunter" with new variant ranger features really strong even beastmaster updated to fit in better. ranger was bad... and jocat specificly mentions that "og" ranger is terrible at his ranger video.
![Krimson KB Reacts: Jocat's A Crap Guide to D&D [5th Edition] - Races](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZIeGz-d0VCY/mqdefault.jpg)
![Krimson KB Reacts: Jocat's A Crap Guide to D&D [5th Edition] - Races](/img/tr.png)
Remember, others may cast magic, but I cast G U N
You mean Techno-Magic Missle?
@@wildranger5833 Naw, just literal Mage Bullet
"I cast lead"
Wizard: I cast Fireball!
Sorcerer: I cast Earth Tremor!
Artificer: I cast *Hot Lead*....
mine does all the time. lol
Krimson: Wow, Jocat really hates Ranger!
No, D&D hates Ranger
Is it weird I'm only just finding out about all This "The Ranger is Bad" stuff?
@@Mr.Brothybear
No, it’s because people just pick any other class, so there’s no reason to talk about Ranger.
@@Mr.Brothybear Ranger, unless you can cooperate with your DM, is not so awesome. Imagine getting like 'Favored Terrain: Forests' and 'Favored Enemy: Goblins' and you spend the entire campaign on the sea or in caves... with perhaps a pity goblin tossed your way.
@@TarossBlackburn Tasha's Cauldron of Everything added some replacement features for Ranger that make the class much less dependent on dealing with certain monsters, or being in certain environments.
Instead of Favoured Enemy, you can have Favoured Foe. If you hit an enemy with an attack, you can make it your favoured foe and deal an extra d4 (later a d6, then d8) of damage to it for a minute.
Instead of Natural Explorer with it's favoured terrain stuff, you can have Deft Explorer. Expertise in one skill, and learn 2 extra languages (to make up for losing the languages from Favoured Enemy) at level 1, at level 6 your speed goes up by 5, and you gain a swim/climb speed equal to your walking speed. At level 10 you can use an action to give yourself 1d8+WIS temp HP, and you exhaustion level (if you're exhausted) now drops by one point after short rests.
Instead of Primeval Awareness, you can have Primal Awareness, which just gives you extra spells (that you can cast without a spell slot once per long rest) at certain levels. Speak with Animals at 3, Beast Sense at 5, Speak with Plants at 9, Locate Creature at 13, and Commune with Nature at 17.
And then Hide in Plain Sight can be swapped to Nature's Veil. Instead spending a minute camouflaging yourself for a +10 to Stealth checks while standing still, now as a bonus action you can straight up go invisible until the start of your next turn.
I've been playing a Ranger with these replacement features, and I think they make the Ranger play much better in your average campaign.
@@delusional4041 Yes. Post-Tasha’s it is easy to build a ranger that is VIABLE without constantly relying on the DM’s whims, but it also sands down the already pretty weak class aesthetics to do so, just letting you trade out a highly situational but also highly *customizable* and *interesting-narrative-tie-in-heavy* features for generic equivalents. And while they buff Ranger to the point of viability, and even under the PHB rules a good DM should be able to balance things to make sure the ranger can have fun and feel useful, even with the buff they aren’t a particularly *powerful* class and most roles you can build them to fill another class can do as well if not better.
I was wondering if he was going to spot the FMA reference. He did. He went back. And his reaction was the right one. And so far we have Fighter, Artificer, and Warlock being a better Ranger than Ranger.
I hadn't seen the video before, so when you said "FMA reference", I just thought you meant the drawing of Al. Nooooo, he went LOW BLOW.
Also rogue with scout.
Ranger is a better ranger than fighter... with Tasha and specifically gloomstalker... and only with CBE + SS... and only till level 8
Armorer Artificer is literally Samus Aran the Iron Man as a subclass. yes it is every bit as fun as it sounds, and if you add paladin into it for some reason you can even play "not Warhammer 40k"
I've actually considered an armorer artificer/psi rogue as an Anthem Cypher/Javelin Pilot combo.
@@TaranTatsuuchi one of these days i wanna make a Titanfall build that is just a Tabaxi Monk/Artificer multiclass.
I know I technically can't make it duo to the size of the mech, maybe a dm will late me homebrew, but I want to make an artificer cavalier on a robot horse.
RIP Armorer, the one subclass he didn't mention, which basically makes you Iron Man
In the case of Slibs The Splashy, probably more like Green Goblin.
Funny thing that, because one Armorer class gives you the War Machine armor, and the other gives you the Plastic Ghost armor.
You have to admit, the "closer bond with your pets" bit is clever.
Paladin: "BY THE POWER OF THE HOLY LIGHT!!" 😇
Wizard: "BY THE POWER OF THE ARCANE!!" 🔥
Artificer: "BY THE POWER OF... GUN!!" 🔫
Ranger has been updated, and has improved but thanks to how long the changes took it leave a lotta people left salty that they played the OG version
Honestly Rangers recently got a rework which makes them go from extremely situational to second highest DPT in the game
DPT standing for damage per turn
yeah and some of the newer subclasses for them are pretty fun, I've tried the Drakewarden Subclass from the Fizban's book and it lets you become a more powerful dragonborn with a drake companion that goes from small to large over the course of your levelling
Yeah, the new Beast Master is one of my favourite classes to play. When you get Summon Beast at level 5 and can control 2 creatures besides yourself and make 4 attacks per turn? *chef's kiss
@@prophetisaiah08 wait beastmasters received an update?
@@lifed1533 Yeah, they got Primal Companion (a replacement for Ranger's Companion) in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything. It works mostly like the Battle Smith's Steel Defender, but it's actually slightly better because it's more versatile. Every day you get to pick a Land, Sea or Air for your companion, so when the Battle Smith has to work out how his companion is going to avoid sinking to the bottom of the ocean in an aquatic adventure, the Beast Master just calls up a sea lion instead of a wolf or an eagle.
there is even a Artificer subclass that, basicly, turn you in to Iron Man. I am not joking, you basicly get a mark suit.
My first ever dnd session, my characters gonna be an artificer
Irish accented war veteren with a clockwork mouse familiar
The few one off's we've done have been super fun too so I can't wait to properly get into this
Battle Smith is so much fun.
My current character is a Kenku Battle Smith artificer, and his steel defender has more kills than most of the party, and it's a metal tiger. And I have the most ac, sitting at 18! IN LEATHER ARMOR.
Which we used a mechanical scarab to engineer the ability to give the fucker WINGS. Artificer is so fun. Easily my favorite class
the ranger jabs are so well timed in his vids and they are not wrong sadly.
@@dacomputernerd4096 yeah it did at that, but like Jocat shows id still rather go with the other options.
artificer is my all time favorite class or my second favorite but i absolutely love it and it’s definitely my favorite character i’ve played was an artificer
There are some neat Ranger Subclasses like the Swarm Keeper which turns you into a living hive of bugs and other creepy crawlies
Someone somewhere has got to have done like a Swarm Keeper Ranger that took Magic Initiate as well or something or multiclassed into Sorcerer to RP Shino from Naruto Shippuden
The three subclasses:
Potioneer
Robot dog
And *G U N*
2:15
There's ouch, and then there's taking a sledgehammer to the kneecaps
Explanation?
@@ericharrison4067 Basically the girl gets experimented on by her father and fused with her pet dog into a horrifying abomination
You can have a dragoon in dnd by using the battle master subclass for fighter but it is more of a final fantasy 4 style dragoon than XIV
For anyone who didn't get the "closer bonds with your pets" joke, I envy you.
I am sure someone has already stated but rangers got a "rework" in Tasha's, they're pretty good now actually. The monk has assumed the position the ranger had in the past.
Artificers are either making all the cool si-fi or magical fantasy crap that carries a party or end up blowing them up
I imagine Ranger might be an unfortunate victim of overcorrection, because back in 4e they were the highest DPS.
the only gripe i have about that video is the fact he completely ignored armorer
Actually ranger is quite good with the variant rules from Tasha’s cauldron and some specific subclasses, i’d say its fun and strong enough but cant compare to certain classes
Hello Krimson I was wondering if you knew that The D&D minis on the table actually tell additional story if you watch the videos in the order of the playlist on Jocat's channel.
Technically the Gunbreaker is an artificer. At least I think so…
If you like jocat he also has a series for all the monster hunter world weapons. Just make sure to watch them in order on his playlist for best viewing imo
Warforged + artificer = badass
1:08 Tiny box Tim!!! markiplier misses you!
There's a Crap Guide to Dungeon Master that might be a good finisher for this series
Liked for Jocat, subbed for krimson
I've been looking for this one
If you don’t get the Tchaikovsky Overture joke, play Ratchet and Clank and attack with the RYNO V.
Anyone ELES think that Ranger DUMPED JoCat right before prom (or left him at the Altar) and broke his heart?
Ranger outside of certain situations, is only good for RP purposes IMO.
Rangers have a very mixed history in 5e. Already during playtest you had people who hated the fact that they were a half-caster and a lot of it's design was affected by some missteps done in early 5e design.
At launch, I'm going to say that Ranger's weren't as bad as half the internet claims, but they had some really wonky and situational class features and only a single playable subclass. And Hunter was a decent subclass. But other subclass, the Beast Master was unplayable mess as it was written, which of course disappointed anyone who wanted a pet class option.
Then with a sourcebook called Tasha's Cauldron of Everything was released, which included a number of variant options for ranger that offered replacements to the wonkier class features and also an alternate option for Beast Masters that made their Beast companion actually usable. While it can be argued that some issues remain, Tasha's options are generally seen as a succesful fix, but the internet still goes a bit after the ranger (also I think most of Jocat's D&D videos precede the release of Tasha ).
Ranger has also gotten some cool subclasses over time, like Drakewarden which is a second pet subclass for them that gets a drake as a pet, Swarm ranger where you can command a swarm of something (insert all the Not the bees jokes) and my personal favorite: Gloomstalker that is so edgy that they become invisible to creatures with darkvision.
Also the one artificer subclass that isn't mentioned here allows the Artificer to become Fantasy Iron Man.
I feel attacked. I like playing Ranger.
Though admittedly, I'm more into the roleplay and story aspect of D&D than big numbers and killing things.
For a second there, I thought you were going to miss that thing at Alchemist.
Ranger is basically just underpowered, or was, idr. Its features just doesn't mesh too well with the system, and it being bad is basically a meme at this point
We don't hate ranger but 5E and WoTC hate rangers
"YOU GO TO HELL, SIR! HOW DARE YOU?!" You expected an alchemist video WITHOUT a reference to FMA? It could have been worse.
Dunking on rangers: Up until this point a ranger would have to decide whether the character or the animal companion would take its turn to do something, and 99/100 times the ranger doing something was always better. BECAUSE of Artificer and its "use a bonus action to make your steel defender do useful shit" working so well in playtests, and because this is what the community had been home brewing for years now, WotC gave Ranger the ability to do this too as an "alternate rule" in the Ranger section of Tasha's Cauldron of Everything, along with animal companions that actually scale with you. Except, most of those animal companions are still inferior to most other "companion" type creations (like the steel defender and its ability to self repair, be immune to several CCs and poison, and a whole host of other things), so Ranger STILL gets dunked on regularly. But hey, at least you have a bow.
Seriously though, ranger isn't BAD, it's just the beast master version that is lacking. Especially with Tasha's, there are a lot of subclasses which make Ranger more than "acceptable" and one might even say, "good". Possibly even "great", but that might be stretching things. The two tier trouble though is:
1. The community has hated Rangers so long, and warns others against taking ranger all the time, that few people play it.
2. For basically every thing that Rangers can do, there's a comparable alternative in another class. And while the subclass may possibly maybe be inferior kinda, the class as a whole is just strictly better because its features are just that much more impactful. So it's like "Yeah, my subclass is 70% as effective relative to yours, Ranger, but my class is 40% better than yours, so it evens out."
You should react to Pointy Hat. He has really good dnd content
Revised ranger is pretty good though (Also 2 more to go. Remake of barb and dungeon master)
Problem with ranger is many of it's abilities are very situational. It is great in the right type of campaign, but in most cases a fighter, or rogue can do what the ranger is trying to do better.
"Hating Ranger" is really a meme birthed by the fact that, MECHANICALLY (as in, game rules), it used to be the weakest way to play an Archer character despite being portrayed as the "Go to" Archer Character ("RANGEr"), with also the Beastmaster Subclass being the first "Pet" (and one of the worst of the game due to it's design). EVERY subsequent subclass with a pet was better designed to avoid the Beastmaster's flaws
It's kinda like ... you CAN play a Dumb (low Intelligence) Wizard ... just wont be effective mechanically speaking ....
The base class got better in recent publications, and some newer subclass are REALLY cool (I've seen a Swarmkeeper Ranger flavour is "Swarm" abilities (normally some kind of insects) as murders of crows..... that was badass as FUCK ....)
(The person that said "Hating Ranger" is the "Hating Dragoon" of DnD is not that far off .... the meme got just blown out of proportion)
Also Artificer RULES. I'd love to play a "totally not a tech-priest" Kobold Artificer one day :D
Why Kobold ? Why NOT Kobold !
Rangers are much better now then they used to be, all the abilities that were only useful like 10% of the time are now given the option to swap them with much more all around useful skills. They were also given very cool Subclasses including one that gives you a pet dragon. Beast Master is also much better now.
WOTC saw how much shit Ranger got and fixed it, its now the best Archer in the game instead of Fighter being the best archer.
I'm a warrior main so you cab keep battle litany to your self for all i care, I crit just by existing XD
Monks make the best Rogues
Rogues make the best Rangers
Rangers make the best NPCs
I think Ranger gets dunked on a little bit too much. It really has just become the class stereotype, other examples including dumb barbarian, edgy rogue, and horny bard. Ranger on its own may not be the best but if you talk to your dm about the setting even the "useless" abilities will come to help. I think if you choose mountains for your favored terrain the dm should find a way to put you into the mountains at some point. That's just the opinion of a teenage forever dm though so maybe not altogether worth paying attention to.
I mean, WOTC hates ranger, he is just reporting about it :P
People keep dunking on Rangers... until you trivialize an encounter and then suddenly everybody hates you cuz you don't actually suck (even pre Tasha). Way more interesting than "all I do is swing my sword" Fighters anyway.
Like seriously, martial subclasses that suddenly gain spellcasting are generally on the top of those lists... and Rangers are that by default, but please disregard me for the butt end of the old joke.
Dis one is amazing but races is still better
Dungeon master crap guide reaction?
Everyone hates 5e ranger. They recreated it's 2 Player Handbook conclaves and they still suck. The only conclave worth being a part of is Hunter and you could just be a fighter at the same level and do it better
Personally... And this is a personal opinion, I understand there are people that enjoy those classes... Ranger and Monks shouldn't be full classes. They'd be better served as sub-classes. Ranger is inconsistent and unless you're using the Revised version, its features are so setting specific that it makes them inferior to other options. And Monks... I just think Monk has always been a stupid concept to create a whole class around. Both classes would be better as Fighter sub-classes. Maybe even a Cleric sub-class for Monk where you use the power of enlightenment and higher understanding to power your fists. Again, this is just me. Both classes are beyond bland in my eyes.
react to a crap guide to DND Races
old rangers were trash. like unusuable trash.
new modified ranger with better subclasses is amazing. Gloomstalker or even old style "hunter" with new variant ranger features really strong
even beastmaster updated to fit in better.
ranger was bad... and jocat specificly mentions that "og" ranger is terrible at his ranger video.
Third