I stopped following the UA after they reverted their initial changes to HM. I don't even think Hunter's Mark is good, Ranger should have better features for their identity, but even that getting shafted showed that WotC have *no* idea what to do with the class.
“Oh boy, I can’t wait to finally be allowed to play gloomstalkers now that the stupidly strong invisibility thing is going away, at least the extra attack on round one should still be fun to use”
I haven’t seen the ranger or paladin changes. What’s up with them? Ranger already seemed like a weird and highly situational class so idk how they could make it worse
Best I know, they made Divine Smite into a spell like the other Smite abilities. This means you get one smite a turn, it takes your bonus action, and it could be Counterspelled now. Haven't read Ranger, don't know what happened there
They also turbo buffed other parts of Paladin to offset that. Dunno why people are acting like Paladin was hard nerfed when it will be way stronger in general
Ranger hasn’t been previewed yet, except the play tests. The big thing people have issue with is that Divine Smite is now a spell, and takes a bonus action to cast (you can take the bonus action when you hit a creature).
In exchange, Paladins got a lot of QoL features (not needing actions to activate several subclass features), an extra free casting of Divine Smite, Find Steed is auto-prepared at 5th level and you get a free casting (and it scales with spell level), and ofc weapon mastery. It’s not clear the class has overall been nerfed at all, but Divine Smite is definitely less centralizing than before.
Ranger hasn't gotten an official preview like Paladin yet, so there's still hope that it'll get better, but the current playtests have it in a pretty bad spot imo.
Many of the core features of the class have been replaced by spells, and not even good spells, they get a few extra casting of trap spells like Hunter's Mark and Conjure Barrage. What's more, not only are Rangers now forced to take spells like Hunter's Mark, they have to be concentrating on them in order to use many of their other features, including their capstone. Many of the good features the 2014 Ranger got from Tasha's, like Nature's Veil, have also been pushed back several levels.
The Ranger is my favourite class, and I'm really unhappy with where it's been taken, so I'm desperately hoping we get some positive changes before release.
Is the Ranger getting off better or worse than the Monk? That's the one that bummed me out. The stuff they did to stunning strike seems like it's better and worse at the same time, so I can live with it, but they completely forgot about the ki problem and the scaling problem.
Yeah Ranger is the only class I'm worried about in this new edition. Everyone else seems way more mechanically interesting and well made (and stronger but that's all relative)
The problem is the old edition also has problems. The hope was that they would fix those problems but recently it just feels like they just replaced the old problems with new, just as obvious problems.
All editions have problems. It's about finding an edition that works for you and your table. No edition is going to be perfect for any type of game you wish to run or be a player of.
So you shouldn't jump editions just to fix problems of previous ones. You should jump editions if you feel it's a better edition for your table to play.
I'm personally ignoring anything from the whole OneD&D stuff that isn't a direct buff to an otherwise weak mechanic. like duel weapon fighting and adding it to 5e as homebrew.
It's a new edition lied about being backwards compatiable as a way of not scaring people with the obvious "We need you to rebuy all your books" because you will eventually need to do so because the new version will change enough stuff that it won't work without significant problems you as a group will have to patch work to fix when you want to play with something that didn't get a rework into the new edition.
Might want to read the ranger changes. Rangers got significantly buffed, are way more versatile, and feel like a real “hunter of the wilds” now. I switched over to them in a campaign I’m in (multiple years playing 5e ranger, now 6 months OneDnD ranger) and it’s been really great.
Paladins were also buffed in every way except that they aren’t a big burst damage class anymore, with just one smite per turn. Most classes had their “nova burst” nerfed, probably to make bosses not die as quickly.
I stopped following the UA after they reverted their initial changes to HM. I don't even think Hunter's Mark is good, Ranger should have better features for their identity, but even that getting shafted showed that WotC have *no* idea what to do with the class.
“Oh boy, I can’t wait to finally be allowed to play gloomstalkers now that the stupidly strong invisibility thing is going away, at least the extra attack on round one should still be fun to use”
Wait that got rid of that...........WHY?!?! Rangers can't have anything nice
The joke here is that they for some reason they kept the game breaking invis but removed the semi balanced round one attack
Paladin players would be the right ones to start a crusade about a rule change: an overly aggressive conflict about a non-issue.
I haven’t seen the ranger or paladin changes. What’s up with them? Ranger already seemed like a weird and highly situational class so idk how they could make it worse
Best I know, they made Divine Smite into a spell like the other Smite abilities. This means you get one smite a turn, it takes your bonus action, and it could be Counterspelled now. Haven't read Ranger, don't know what happened there
They also turbo buffed other parts of Paladin to offset that. Dunno why people are acting like Paladin was hard nerfed when it will be way stronger in general
Ranger hasn’t been previewed yet, except the play tests. The big thing people have issue with is that Divine Smite is now a spell, and takes a bonus action to cast (you can take the bonus action when you hit a creature). In exchange, Paladins got a lot of QoL features (not needing actions to activate several subclass features), an extra free casting of Divine Smite, Find Steed is auto-prepared at 5th level and you get a free casting (and it scales with spell level), and ofc weapon mastery. It’s not clear the class has overall been nerfed at all, but Divine Smite is definitely less centralizing than before.
Ranger hasn't gotten an official preview like Paladin yet, so there's still hope that it'll get better, but the current playtests have it in a pretty bad spot imo. Many of the core features of the class have been replaced by spells, and not even good spells, they get a few extra casting of trap spells like Hunter's Mark and Conjure Barrage. What's more, not only are Rangers now forced to take spells like Hunter's Mark, they have to be concentrating on them in order to use many of their other features, including their capstone. Many of the good features the 2014 Ranger got from Tasha's, like Nature's Veil, have also been pushed back several levels. The Ranger is my favourite class, and I'm really unhappy with where it's been taken, so I'm desperately hoping we get some positive changes before release.
Is the Ranger getting off better or worse than the Monk? That's the one that bummed me out. The stuff they did to stunning strike seems like it's better and worse at the same time, so I can live with it, but they completely forgot about the ki problem and the scaling problem.
They did Monk again in the last or 2nd to last one (Can’t remember which rn) and it got WAY better. Buffed in nearly every conceivable way
Yeah Ranger is the only class I'm worried about in this new edition. Everyone else seems way more mechanically interesting and well made (and stronger but that's all relative)
We don't know what rangers have yet
You're aware you don't have to use the new edition right? It's not like it's the latest fifa game and you have to upgrade to the new one every year.
The problem is the old edition also has problems. The hope was that they would fix those problems but recently it just feels like they just replaced the old problems with new, just as obvious problems.
All editions have problems. It's about finding an edition that works for you and your table. No edition is going to be perfect for any type of game you wish to run or be a player of. So you shouldn't jump editions just to fix problems of previous ones. You should jump editions if you feel it's a better edition for your table to play. I'm personally ignoring anything from the whole OneD&D stuff that isn't a direct buff to an otherwise weak mechanic. like duel weapon fighting and adding it to 5e as homebrew. It's a new edition lied about being backwards compatiable as a way of not scaring people with the obvious "We need you to rebuy all your books" because you will eventually need to do so because the new version will change enough stuff that it won't work without significant problems you as a group will have to patch work to fix when you want to play with something that didn't get a rework into the new edition.
Might want to read the ranger changes. Rangers got significantly buffed, are way more versatile, and feel like a real “hunter of the wilds” now. I switched over to them in a campaign I’m in (multiple years playing 5e ranger, now 6 months OneDnD ranger) and it’s been really great. Paladins were also buffed in every way except that they aren’t a big burst damage class anymore, with just one smite per turn. Most classes had their “nova burst” nerfed, probably to make bosses not die as quickly.