Are rangers just better fighters?

[Your memes end here]

Beast master ranger can just ignore dex and use knight for heavy armor and pick a weapon speciality

they miss out on battlemaster/champion skills but get 3 characters (familiar and companion they can buff to have 16 AC as well as a butt ton of hp and damage)

why would anyone play a straight fighter?

[Amix]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Indure:

Personally I think rangers are one of the strongest marital classes currently in EA, although pretty impossible to outclass a berserker in combat, currently.

That being said, the familiar is not going to hold up past the early levels so it can be taken out of the discussion. Pets on the other hand seem to get a lot of love. We know they will gain a powerful upgrade at least once, at level 5 and they will get custom pet armor to bolster them even more.

It will be interesting to see how ranger compares to fighter at later levels.

One of the strongest 'marital classes'?
Good to see you Indure. Ranger is least interesting Martial class. Fighter, Paladin & Barbarian comes with speciality. Ranger's role is scouting & roguish.

[Amix]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Indure:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Amix:

Why would anyone play as fighter?
For this. Once upon a time in Early access.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJJH1et99WY&ab_channel=AmixP

Besides the action surge, doesn't this just show exactly what ranger gameplay would look like minus the pet. It is more of gameplay showcase highlighting how OP potions and consumables are.

Nope. D&D 5e Battelemaster is unmatched in melee unless Larian weakened them.
Disarm, frighten & knock enemies in single turn & multi hits. No martial class can do that.
That was solo game play long ago. xD One can achieve even better results without potions. Just need companions.

[Indure]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από BlueBawlz:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Indure:

Personally I think rangers are one of the strongest marital classes currently in EA, although pretty impossible to outclass a berserker in combat, currently.

That being said, the familiar is not going to hold up past the early levels so it can be taken out of the discussion. Pets on the other hand seem to get a lot of love. We know they will gain a powerful upgrade at least once, at level 5 and they will get custom pet armor to bolster them even more.

It will be interesting to see how ranger compares to fighter at later levels.

paladin can outclass in damage

You are correct paladins can out damage a ranger, but generally speaking the paladin would need to spend quite a bit of resources to achieve it.

The math isn't perfect:
PALADIN:
2d6 (greatsword) + 3(AS) + 10 (GWM) = 20
@lvl 5: x2 attacks, so 40 damage
highest smite = 13.5 damage

Damage over a round is 40 damage average, potentially with 53-67 depending on amount of divine smites used. Using an additional smite on top of that would be 74 potential damage. This would use up 3 spell slots out of 6 in 1 turn though.

------------------------------------------------------------

RANGER:
2d6 (greatsword) + 3(AS) + 10 (GWM) = 20
@lvl 5: x2 attacks, so 40 damage
Hunters Mark = 3.5 damage x 2 = 7
Additional pet damage (raven) > 2d8 + 2 + curse =11 damage

Damage over a round is 58 damage. It should be noted that if the raven applies curse to the enemy then all players including the ranger would have advantage on all attacks which is an additional +4-5 to hit and double crit chance. Which if the math included accuracy into the DPR would lean the ranger to averaging higher numbers than what is being shown.

------------------------------------------------------------

The really scary marital class is berserker because it is throwing out 3 attacks every round and all of them are with advantage. Which is 60 raw damage without relying on any procs or damage compromises.

EDIT:
OOOOWWWWW I just found out you can give potions to animal companions which you could use to heavily break the math in favor of the ranger. Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4Xp-TC_6gg

[Indure]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Amix:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Indure:

Besides the action surge, doesn't this just show exactly what ranger gameplay would look like minus the pet. It is more of gameplay showcase highlighting how OP potions and consumables are.

Nope. D&D 5e Battelemaster is unmatched in melee unless Larian weakened them.
Disarm, frighten & knock enemies in single turn & multi hits. No martial class can do that.
That was solo game play long ago. xD One can achieve even better results without potions. Just need companions.

All martial classes except for rogue get 2 attacks at level 5, so they all multi-hit.

Shove is a bonus action so they all push.

Trip is a somewhat a unique feature, but unless they change it on release to reflect 5e, currently it gives no real benefit beyond automatic dex save fails. In fact, it hurts your range teammate's hit chance on prone targets. Also the ranger's bird and familiar bird can spam blind which nets similar results.

Disarm can also be good, but rangers bear can spam it every turn at level 5.

Frighten is mediocre but unique giving "A frightened creature has disadvantage on Ability Checks and Attack rolls while the source of its fear is within line of sight. The creature can't willingly move closer to the source of its fear." So you have that working for you.

[Eckoh]

Who would think different classes would play different.

Rangers have a different tool kit. It's not just about melee swings, not everything is about combat either.

Also 5 swings doesn't mean much when many things die in one or 2. This is a tactical game not hack and slash and you have a party, not just 1 toon.

[2LambBuna]

both can do the damage bit, either ranged or melee, but fighters can do it better. both in certain specs can chuck a bit of support about but nothing like a proper support. rangers can fulfil the scouting role, fighters cant.

[SqueezeMeNow]

I was having this thought in regards to a dual wield build I have continued to work on and evolve leading up to launch. When considering if I should splash Fighter or Ranger for their two weapon style, it feels like Ranger would be the better choice for sustained damage.

Hunter's mark just seems like an absurd option. You're trading a d6 + (0-5) damage, assuming your off hand would hit, for 1d6 extra damage on your standard attack, and all subsequent attacks. Then the spell is refunded if you kill the target with it cast on it? With no saving throw?! The only downside I can see at all is that it's concentration. Woof.

Pair that with rangers getting additional proficiencies for out of combat MC skill checks, as well as the option of picking up a resistance... damn rangers are a stacked splash.

[2LambBuna]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Your memes end here:

Beast master ranger can just ignore dex and use knight for heavy armor and pick a weapon speciality

they miss out on battlemaster/champion skills but get 3 characters (familiar and companion they can buff to have 16 AC as well as a butt ton of hp and damage)

why would anyone play a straight fighter?

im not a fan of heavy armour & str based rangers, you're losing your utility as a scout, which is the main thing they have over other martial classes. better to go medium or light armour and short swords with high dex for a melee build imo (bonus you'll be a decent archer also)

[(Farkon) 2m_anylootboxes]

Fighters can attack 8 times in one turn at level 11.

They get really powerful.

Best a ranger can do is 5.

[2LambBuna]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από (Farkon) 2m_anyloo̐̔͞tboxes:

Fighters can attack 8 times in one turn at level 11.

They get really powerful.

Best a ranger can do is 5.

but a ranger can solo scout ahead, see where enemies and traps are. It's not all about combat. i agree fighter is better for combat though

[ez game ez life]

yes and no, it depends

[Mosey]

They are both good, for sure, but your ranger is going to kiss dirt if you try and duel them. If you aren't trying to duel them, then what the heck are you even talking about?

I can't even fathom why you'd include the level 1 pet that never gets any better though. I feel like this has to be trolling, because that pets only job is to take one hit that would have otherwise been aimed at a party member that actually contributes.

[CDI Mario]

Usually its the opposite.
You want someone who can use a bow? Fighter is probably the best one. Just natively due to action surge and with a magic flavor ala arcane archer.
You want someone who can dual wield weapons and be flashy? Fighter.
you want someone who can cast spells and use a sword? thats a fighter subclass and its better than ranger because its not locked to the druid spell book.
Now, Do you want someone who has an integrated animal companion? Cavalier, Fighter subclass
... Do you want a half caster who can do everything ok at best? Theres the ranger.

[sevensided]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Mosey:

I can't even fathom why you'd include the level 1 pet that never gets any better though. I feel like this has to be trolling, because that pets only job is to take one hit that would have otherwise been aimed at a party member that actually contributes.

Tell me you haven't played beastmaster to lvl 5 without telling me you haven't played beast master to lvl 5.

With the way combat works, the Beastmaster with the pet is going to be a generally more useful character for the sake of adding more notable targets the enemy has to deal with. Plus you will have access to the various skills of a ranger, plus the field control spells rangers can get.

That said, for pure, consistent damage output, a battlemaster, with a single level of war domain cleric, is going to better than any ranger (save for Gloomstalker/Assassin in the opening round).

[Groucho]

a ranger with whirlwind attack can attack 8 times every round. or with volley they can make as many attacks in a round as targets can fit into a 10ft radius. clearly the better class.