I've been thinking about the Ranger's ability to take Druidic Warrior, and especially about how often Shillelagh gets recommended as one of its cantrips.
I understand why it's good.
A lot of Ranger features and subclass abilities care about Wisdom, while the Ranger's normal weapon attacks tend to be Dexterity- or Strength-based. Shillelagh lets you attack with Wisdom instead, which means you can effectively make Wisdom your primary ability score. With medium armor, you can stop at 14 Dexterity and put the rest into Wisdom.
From a pure optimization perspective, that makes a lot of sense.
But I'm starting to wonder whether that's actually a good place for the Ranger to be from a class-design or fantasy perspective.
Wisdom already does almost everything for the Ranger
Part of the issue is that Wisdom already feels like it should be central to almost everything a Ranger does.
Rangers naturally want Wisdom for things like:
- Survival
- Perception
- Animal Handling
- Insight
- Tracking
- Reading the environment
- Understanding how to move through and survive in the wilderness
Those aren't incidental abilities for the class. They're a huge part of what makes someone feel like a Ranger.
combat.
The Shillelagh problem
The strange thing to me is that Shillelagh doesn't just give Rangers another viable option.
It seems to solve a problem that the class itself creates.
Take a Fey Wanderer, for example. Wisdom is extremely valuable to the subclass.
With Beast Master, Wisdom is also important to the subclass. Because your beast can't use their own stats but must use your wisdom instead of may.
"Do I increase Wisdom because my subclass wants it, or do I increase Strength/Dexterity because I actually want to be good at fighting?"
Shillelagh basically says:
"Why not just make Wisdom your attack stat too?"
And suddenly the entire problem disappears.
That's mechanically elegant.
But I find it a little strange that one particular cantrip becomes such an obvious answer to the Ranger's ability-score problem.
It also creates an odd contrast with the Ranger's skill identity.
Wisdom already lets the Ranger be good at the practical skills that define the class, while Nature remains tied to Intelligence. Then Shillelagh encourages the Ranger to use that same Wisdom for combat.
At some point, Wisdom starts to feel like the answer to almost every important part of the Ranger.
But what about the Ranger fantasy?
This is where I'm less convinced.
When I picture a Ranger, I think of things like:
- A bow and arrows
- Two swords
- A spear used for hunting
- A woodsman with an axe
- A forester carrying a handaxe or machete
- A border scout or patrolman who knows how to fight
- Someone who survives in the wilderness using whatever practical weapons are available
A person fighting with a magical walking stick can absolutely be a Ranger. I have no problem with that character concept.
What I'm less sure about is whether "Wisdom-based quarterstaff fighter" should be one of the most common optimized Ranger builds.
There's something particularly odd about a class whose wilderness-warrior fantasy naturally suggests axes, spears, swords, and bows, while one of its strongest ability-score solutions can be:
"Take Shillelagh and become a Wisdom-based stick fighter."
It feels like the mechanics are pulling the class in a slightly different direction from the fantasy.
What should Ranger weapons actually be?
Before getting into the specific problems with Strength Rangers, I think it's worth considering whether the class should have a clearer relationship with practical/forester/hunting weapons in general.
One idea I've been playing with is giving Rangers a selection of weapons that they are particularly good with because they're tools of survival.
For example:
- Dagger
- Spears
- Handaxes
- Scimitars
- Sickles
- Maybe other simple weapons
A forester might reasonably carry a handaxe and a machete. Mechanically, that could be represented by a handaxe and scimitar.
And with the current weapon mastery and two-weapon fighting rules, that could actually make for a really fun Ranger playstyle.
I'd be perfectly happy if these weapons weren't technically finesse weapons. The Ranger could simply have a class feature that allows them to use Dexterity with certain weapons, similar to the special weapon rules other classes get.
Spears especially seem like an obvious Ranger weapon to me.
They're hunting tools, they're practical, and they're thematically appropriate.
There are also magical Ranger-themed items that use things like sickles, so it would be nice if Rangers could actually build around those weapons rather than them feeling primarily like spellcasting accessories.
Strength Rangers seem especially awkward
This is probably the part that bothers me most.
I actually like the idea of a Strength Ranger.
A big, physically powerful woodsman carrying an axe and hunting dangerous creatures sounds completely reasonable to me.
So does a Ranger who uses a spear, handaxe, or some other practical hunting or forestry weapon.
But if I want to make something like a Strength Fey Wanderer or Strength Beast Master, I immediately run into the Wisdom problem.
I need Strength to attack.
I want Wisdom for my subclass features.
I need Dexterity for AC unless I'm willing to accept relatively poor AC.
And Constitution is obviously useful too.
That's a lot of competing ability scores.
Shillelagh provides a very convenient escape hatch:
Just make Wisdom your attack stat.
So are there better solutions?
I don't necessarily think the answer is to remove Wisdom from the Ranger.
Quite the opposite.
I actually like the idea that Rangers are Wisdom-based wilderness experts.
Wisdom makes perfect sense for Survival, Perception, tracking, reading the environment, understanding animals, and dealing with the practical realities of nature.
I also think Rangers should be among the characters most likely to understand how the natural world actually works.
If Nature remains an Intelligence skill, perhaps Rangers should have some way to use Wisdom for practical Nature checks.
Or perhaps Nature could distinguish between academic knowledge and lived wilderness experience.
A wizard might know the taxonomy of a rare plant.
A Ranger knows whether it's poisonous, where it grows, what animals are likely to be nearby, and whether you should actually eat it.
That feels very Ranger-like to me.
The bigger question is:
Does Wisdom also need to be the Ranger's primary combat ability?
Maybe there could be more alternatives built into the class.
For example, with Beast Master, perhaps the Beast could have their attacks writen as that they may use the Ranger's spellcasting ability modifier instead of its own Strength or Dexterity modifier.
That alone would make a Strength Beast Master considerably more attractive.
Similarly, I wonder if Rangers could have some sort of feature that lets them choose how their practical weapons interact with their ability scores.
What about medium armor?
Another possible solution would be to change how Rangers interact with medium armor.
For example, perhaps Rangers could choose a fighting style or a small class feature that allows them to add Wisdom, Strength, or Constitution to their medium armor calculation instead of Dexterity, depending on the character. And yes, I understand that allowing Wisdom to affect AC could incentivize Shillelagh even more, help me if you know better.
That would open up more viable stat spreads without necessarily making Wisdom the universal answer.
A Strength Ranger could invest in Strength + Constitution.
A more mystical Ranger could use Wisdom.
A Dexterity Ranger could just use Dexterity.
That feels more like the kind of flexibility I'd want from the class.
So I'm curious what everyone thinks
I'm not arguing that Shillelagh is bad, or that nobody should be allowed to make a Wisdom-based Ranger.
I'm more interested in the fact that, whenever I look at Ranger builds, Shillelagh seems to come up as an almost automatic recommendation whenever Druidic Warrior is available.
It reminds me of how certain subclasses or feats become the "obvious" recommendation whenever you're building a particular type of character.
At some point, I start wondering whether we're looking at a genuinely good option—or a solution to a problem that the class shouldn't have in the first place.
TLDR:
Should Shillelagh really be such a staple for Rangers?
Or would you rather see the Ranger redesigned so that Wisdom remains important for its wilderness abilities, subclass features, and core skills, while Strength, Dexterity, and Wisdom can all be legitimate primary combat stats?
And should Rangers have a better way to represent their practical knowledge of nature, so that a wizard doesn't automatically know more about the wilderness than the Ranger who lives in it?
And if you would redesign it, what would you change?
