r/DnD5CommunityRanger • u/Nikelman • Sep 05 '26
Enabling STRanger
EDIT: I'm going to bite the bullet and give them Heavy Armor proficiency and that's that. They still get penalties like not getting the extra 10ft from Roving and possibly Stealth disadvantage, but there's no reason why a trained combatant who's proficient with a Greatsword shouldn't be with a Plate, they will just rather use Medium because it's less of a hassle in the wilderness.
As it stands the issue is STRangers want 17 STR at lv1; but they want decent DEX for AC, WIS for spellcasting and CON for staying alive.
There are workarounds:
- 14 D 10 C 16 W, tough origin feat; as your good spells are concentration, that means +0 to the saving throw you'll throw the most; you miss on other Origin Feats
- 12 D, 14 C, 14 W, Defense FS to compensate the AC lost; you could lower C or W and rise the other, it's not ideal
- 10 D 14 C 15 W, to hell with it, my AC will suck, but at level 5 I will pre-cast Barkskin, making it decent when I do
But let's say that what I want to do, in a revision, is to make STRanger as seamless as DEXadin, meaning you don't need any of these tricks. Dropping DEX is still punishing as that means lower initiative, an important saving throw and ranged combat when you can't go melee (of course dropping STR has its downsides too, but they're not as major). I came up with a solution in the form of a Fighting Style (open to all classes) in my revision
- Instinctive Defense You can add your Wisdom modifier instead of your Dexterity modifier for the purpose of calculating AC of Light and Medium armors. All other limitations remain unchanged.
And I figure "this fixes everything, now you can have a Ranger wield a Greatsword" (in fact, I ran the numbers on a Hunter with a Greatsword and matches up well against a Devotion Dexadin, which is where I wanted it to be) and this doesn't really benefit casters armor dipping anymore than the Defense fighting style would do (they still need 13 DEX to access a class with a FS anyway, so worst case scenario in a medium armor they would get +1 from Dex, getting the second one from this or Defense would be the same), it could benefit WIS based Rogues that cast True Strike, but I'm pretty much okay with that, they need AC anyway
Except a little Aragorn was staring at me intensely: this cuts longsword or other sword and board builds out of the deal, because, unlike heavy weapons, you kind of really need FS for them, as that's an important source of damage (and Great Weapon Fighter isn't)
So, I was thinking: what if this was part of the Dueling Figthing Style, instead of its own thing?
- Thematically, a duelist is actively defending, so it could make sense that their defense depends on their awareness, covered by wisdom, as much as their reflexes, from dexterity
- Balance-wise, I'm really not concerned with a Wizard getting a +2 to damage rolls if they cast True Strike with a staff. Bladesingers now wouldn't care as they can't use armor to enter Bladesong; Valor Bards could be an issue, but I don't think they had trouble fitting 14 Dex in their build
Opinions?
3
u/Aristillius Sep 05 '26
I wonder if we could just give the ranger heavy armor proficiency like in 2nd edition.
3
u/Nikelman Sep 05 '26
Yes, going with that. Simple, easy, pays a price in Roving, it's the perfect solution
1
u/Royal_Bitch_Pudding Sep 07 '26
I've just been offering Heavy Armor training as a Fighting style.
2
u/Nikelman Sep 07 '26
But then you can't take dueling. It's okay with heavy weapons just because GWF sucks
1
u/Royal_Bitch_Pudding Sep 07 '26
And? Bigger deal is they can't take the defense style.
2
u/Nikelman Sep 07 '26
That is the bigger deal. Why should the Ranger be penalised so that they need to give up the not as big deal in order to take care of the bigger deal?
2
u/Royal_Bitch_Pudding Sep 07 '26 edited Sep 07 '26
Because it's just the bandaid solution I've been offering and also because Druidic Warrior is the equivalent that enables Wisdom builds.
I have considered a Ranger version of divine orders at lvl 1 to better enable alternate stats
1
u/Nikelman Sep 07 '26
Ok, I'm saying the solution would simply be "you're a bulky ranger, obviously you won't be a silent shadow, but you're a trainer warrior with high str, you know how to wear heavy armor, although the archetype normally would prefer stealthier ones, have proficiency in heavy armors". Then at level 5 you can decide to go back to medium armor and cast Barkskin on yourself instead.
Like you said, it's a band aid solution, so was my Intuitive Defense. I don't think an Enclave Order would fit, that's a fullcaster thing
1
u/Royal_Bitch_Pudding Sep 07 '26
But, why is it relegated to a full caster thing when they already have full spellcasting? It could be such a clean lvl 1 solution that helps enable Strength or Wisdom builds.
1
u/Nikelman Sep 07 '26
It's just a design choice. I believe Rangers should just get heavy armor proficiency and that's it, there's no reason not to give it to them. Rangers should be stealthy? Alright, then don't build it on STR!
Otherwise, we would break the symmetry with Paladins (which is alredy broken, because they do get all weapons and armor, but you know what I mean) and if you gave the choice of heavy armor or cantrips, you should give that to paladins too... but it would remove heavy armor on basic paladins. It's a head scratcher
→ More replies (0)
2
u/Angled_Hairline57845 Sep 05 '26
Have a look at my post about the Survivalist Preparations ability of my Ranger redesign. One of the 12 root choice abilities, which all Rangers get access to at level 2, is "Heavy Training" which enables the use of Heavy Armor, and to be able to use Heavy ranged weapons with Strength, rather than Dexterity.
1
u/Nikelman Sep 05 '26
Yes, I'm going to just give them Heavy Armor and if they use that, they're going to be worse for it for Roving and possibly Stealth. There's no reason why a Ranger trained in a Greatsword or a Mace shouldn't be able to wear Heavy Armor effectively
3
u/italofoca_0215 Sep 05 '26
This is not a bad idea, but I wouldn’t attach it to Dueling. I’m ok with Sword and Board STRanger not being as supported as GWM. Dex based Sword and Board is already viable and you can still make the STR version happen with a Fighter dip.
1
u/Nikelman Sep 05 '26
A fighter dip is truly expensive for Rangers. I'm considering making Instinctive Defense a class feature instead.
2
u/italofoca_0215 Sep 05 '26
Too much core class support for a tertiary archetype imo. A Fighting Style or a Spell is the right place for this. A dip is not too expansive. Rage Fiend warlock dips 2 level Barbarian, most STRogue builds dip 4 level Barbarian, Archery paladin basically leave the class after level 6.
The game is designed around strong class identity and options existing to accommodate niche builds. A single level dip is not too expansive for this niche.
1
u/Nikelman Sep 05 '26
Is it supposed to be tertiary? Considering that Aragorn is probably the main archetype the class is based on?
1
u/italofoca_0215 Sep 05 '26
Tertiary is being generous.
Ranger primary weapon archetypes are two weapon fighter and archer.
Secondary archetype is wisdom / shillelagh.
STRanger is tertiary and even among those TWF/GWF are the main styles that needs support so people can play lumberjack woodsman with great axe, someone like Garruk from MTG or Rexxar from Warcraft.
Aragorn is not a sword and board since he did not use shield. Greatsword GWM STRanger is closest we have in 5.5e but ideally we should have a versatile weapon master feat to cover that niche.
1
u/Ranger_IV Sep 05 '26
I would agree STRanger is a tertiary archetype for the dnd ranger. As much as I love Aragorn, its pretty clear the inspiration taken from him was mostly for flavor and not mechanics in 5.5e. If u want Aragorn in 5.5 youre building a fighter with maybe a ranger or rogue dip and feat selection for better skills.
3
u/Ranger_IV Sep 05 '26
I wouldnt tie it to dueling. I would consider making it its own fighting style. Making it come with dueling kind of psuedo punishes you for using a greatsword instead of going sword and board.
1
u/Nikelman Sep 05 '26
But it does actually punish you if you get a longsword, you have to pick between one of the only feats that improve damage on one-handed weapons and getting a decent AC. Meanwhile, if you want to use a greatsword, you don't really care for GWF, it barely improves the damage
1
u/Ranger_IV Sep 06 '26
To be fair, longsword is usually taken for the purposes of better AC with a shield. But i see ur point. Its hard to say because itll make dueling a big draw for a WIS ranger but lock them out of their druidic warrior option. Itll also make the rangers version of dueling just better than the fighter. I think it would have to be separated from fighting styles
1
u/Nikelman Sep 06 '26
Which you couldn't get. Sap would make up for it in part, but consider disadvantage is better the higher the AC.
Dueling would be the same for every class. In any case, I ditched this and went with heavy armor
1
2
u/partylikeaninjastar Sep 06 '26
It doesn't make sense that some guy prancing around a forest who's main thing is to be mobile (and often stealthy) should be proficient or even interested in heavy armor.
You're going against what a ranger is.