Return to Question

Early dissatisfaction with the ranger led to many attempts at revision. A widespread belief that the class was underpowered often met with the counterclaim that of the original two subclasses, one (Hunter) was viable or even quite good, while the other (Beast Master) was awful. My question is how well some kind of "base" build competes with other martial classes.

In order to keep the comparison manageable, we'll stick with Player's Handbook subclasses. For the ranger, use the Hunter subclass with your choice of best option for each Ranger Archetype feature. For other martial classes, use your choice of best subclass. Assume everyone is a non-variant human. Characters should be assumed to have maxed out their attack stat at the earliest opportunity: 16 at 1st level, 18 at first ASI, 20 at second ASI.

Crucially, do not use feats. I realize that this probably hurts the fighter (?) more than other martials, but I'm trying to avoid things that have been covered elsewhere like how Great Weapon Fighting + Great Weapon Master + Polearm Master is better than every other build. If you wish, you can comment on differential benefits of access to feats.

I realize this is complicated by limited resources (e.g. fighters get one Action Surge per short rest, barbarians get 2 rages per long rest at start, more as they level up). Answers could address pedal-to-the-medal fully resourced boss fights, or average over the standard adventuring day of 6-8 encounters broken up by two short rests, or both. The ranger should be assumed to use Hunter's Mark whenever they can, whether that means having retained one 1st level slot for the boss fight, or doling it out throughout the adventuring day.

I also realize this is complicated by conditional effects, such as Colossus Slayer or Horde Breaker. Make your assumptions clear regarding how often this is used.

Early dissatisfaction with the ranger led to many attempts at revision. A widespread belief that the class was underpowered often met with the counterclaim that of the original two subclasses, one (Hunter) was viable or even quite good, while the other (Beast Master) was awful. My question is how well some kind of "base" build competes with other martial classes.

In order to keep the comparison manageable, we'll stick with Player's Handbook subclasses. For the ranger, use the Hunter subclass with your choice of best option for each Ranger Archetype feature. For other martial classes, use your choice of best subclass. Assume everyone is a non-variant human. Characters should be assumed to have maxed out their attack stat at the earliest opportunity: 16 at 1st level, 18 at first ASI, 20 at second ASI.

Crucially, do not use feats. I realize that this probably hurts the fighter (?) more than other martials, but I'm trying to avoid things that have been covered elsewhere like how Great Weapon Fighting + Great Weapon Master + Polearm Master is better than every other build. If you wish, you can comment on differential benefits of access to feats.

I realize this is complicated by limited resources (e.g. fighters get one Action Surge per short rest, barbarians get 2 rages per long rest at start, more as they level up). Answers could address pedal-to-the-metal fully resourced boss fights, or average over the standard adventuring day of 6-8 encounters broken up by two short rests, or both. The ranger should be assumed to use Hunter's Mark whenever they can, whether that means having retained one 1st level slot for the boss fight, or doling it out throughout the adventuring day.

I also realize this is complicated by conditional effects, such as Colossus Slayer or Horde Breaker. Make your assumptions clear regarding how often this is used.

While there have been many attempts to revise the ranger, the base class offers a lot of ways for the ranger to boost their damage. Paladins can spend a 1st level spell for a 2d8 smite, but ranger's can spend a 1st level spell for +1d6 extra damage on all weapon attacks for an hour.

I'd like to ask for a comparison of the ranger's DPR with other martial classes, but particularly the fighter. Some parameters:

• Characters should be assumed to have max out their attack stat (STR or DEX) as early as possible.
• Rangers, fighters, and paladins should be assumed to have the Dueling fighting style and using a longsword or a rapier. Other martial classes should use their most effective weapon.
• No feats.

These restrictions preclude extensive character optimization. Nonetheless, characters should be assumed to be optimizing tactically. A barbarian should be raging, a rogue should be sneak attacking, a paladin should be smiting (although that's a very limited resource), and a fighter should be action surging when possible. So this might require some comparison of first fight of the day, last fight before a short rest, and last fight before a long rest. Importantly, the ranger should be assumed to be making use of 3rd level subclass damage boosting powers when possible (Colossus Slayer, Slayer's Prey, etc.) and using Hunter's Mark whenever they have a 1st level spell slot available.

Comparing DPR at key levels/tiers of play would be helpful.

Early dissatisfaction with the ranger led to many attempts at revision. A widespread belief that the class was underpowered often met with the counterclaim that of the original two subclasses, one (Hunter) was viable or even quite good, while the other (Beast Master) was awful. My question is how well some kind of "base" build competes with other martial classes.

In order to keep the comparison manageable, we'll stick with Player's Handbook subclasses. For the ranger, use the Hunter subclass with your choice of best option for each Ranger Archetype feature. For other martial classes, use your choice of best subclass. Assume everyone is a non-variant human. Characters should be assumed to have maxed out their attack stat at the earliest opportunity: 16 at 1st level, 18 at first ASI, 20 at second ASI.

Crucially, do not use feats. I realize that this probably hurts the fighter (?) more than other martials, but I'm trying to avoid things that have been covered elsewhere like how Great Weapon Fighting + Great Weapon Master + Polearm Master is better than every other build. If you wish, you can comment on differential benefits of access to feats.

I realize this is complicated by limited resources (e.g. fighters get one Action Surge per short rest, barbarians get 2 rages per long rest at start, more as they level up). Answers could address pedal-to-the-medal fully resourced boss fights, or average over the standard adventuring day of 6-8 encounters broken up by two short rests, or both. The ranger should be assumed to use Hunter's Mark whenever they can, whether that means having retained one 1st level slot for the boss fight, or doling it out throughout the adventuring day.

I also realize this is complicated by conditional effects, such as Colossus Slayer or Horde Breaker. Make your assumptions clear regarding how often this is used.