Rangers are KILLING One D&D (here’s why)

#dnd #dungeonsanddragons #onednd

In this video we explore the changes to One D&D and explain why some of the ones that might seem too good or broken might actually be totally fine and try to get to the truth!

Fixing the WORST Part of D&D:

Check out my Channel Page:

Create your first character:

How to be a better DM:

How to be a better Player:

Roll20 Tutorial:

[m_capsa]

I am surprised people are saying the light property is broken. What does it really do? It allows a few characters who use light weapons to have access to their bonus actions. That's the only difference. So basically rogues can cunning action and fighters can second wind. I can't see that making a big difference.

[klimptone]

One of the major complaints in 5e is that choices are too limited when creating an optimal (or even just viable) martial build, it basically breaks down to Great Weapon Master build, Sharp Shooter build or Polearm Master build. This change to light weapon fighting just evens the playing field a bit to shake up the meta and give players more viable options. I think it's insane to say it's broken, this is literally WotC fixing things!

[Siennarchist]

The worst part of all this is that the ranger wasnt even buffed given that the nerf to sharpshooter hurts them so so badly

[luiztomikawa]

The characters that mainly would benefit from two weapon fighting are the ones who also have a lot of use for their Bonus action, like rogues, monks, (And in the case of the Ranger most subclasses that have a companion or a summoning spell usually relies on bonus action to use the summoned beast) so making sure you benefit from both your class features like cunning action, martial arts or the animal companions is quite good!


The ranger itself now looks very solid, I see lots of people freaking out about the lost of "flavor" in the lack of the natural explorer features... but c'mon people, those were literally the features that made the ranger so bad in the first place, they were features that only worked in a specific environment and creatures, they locked your character in a very narrow niche, and if the party went any other direction now the other spell casters or any other class would outshine your ranger in exploration because you lost all those class features. Now The ranger can just get expertise in Survival and Nature and be an Expert on any environment and creatures.


Plus with the new feats of making survival or nature checks as a bonus action, having your two weapon attacks reliant on your Attack action only, allows the ranger to attack at its heart content and still use his expertise mid-combat without feeling like it is having to choose one or the other! (Plus, you probably will pick two weapon fighting style and be using hunter's mark, so you will be doing great damage.)

[guydude]

They honestly aren't broken. They need to be buffed still along with other martial classes. This ranger upgrade is a net good but they need to buff martials significantly more so

[TheAzCorner]

Peeps calling out any buffs to martials are really gonna call 'realism' while the Wizard throws a Magic fireball at the Dragon?

[dylanhyatt]

Putting the martial classes on a par with the magical can't be a bad thing, For me though, as a DM, the encounter building math is broken and not even the formula used in WoTC published material. I've ported over to Pathfinder 2e because encounter building is so simple a reliable (while running 5th, I had big bad boss encounters taken down in a few rounds, and minor encounters lead close to TPK). However, will certainly look at D&D 5.5 ? 6 ? when it comes out.

[donngreitontordilla]

GREAT take. I think balance is an important part of the game, but there are better things to focus on without also losing sight of game balance.

[tokenamblyopiac]

Enjoyed the video but I would suggest turning down the backing track/using something a bit more subtle. Found it a bit hard to focus on your voice which was a shame because you were making some good points. Subscribed.

[Ryuujiish]

the one thing that people keep ignoring about the ranger's hunter conclave cahnges is the lvl 11 multiattack feature... they replaced volley and whirlwind attack into a readied conjure barrage.... thats just disgusting... what a disrespectful nerf.

[sohkaswifteagle]

100% agree with your video.

But you forgot 1 aspect... the classes, the spell and everything else around that light weapon extra attack. The rule do not exist in a vacuum and need to be taken in comparison with everything else.
The damage output of your attack do not only depend on light weapon dealing 1d6, so that is 3.5 average damage.
If you are a hunter that extra attack will probably benefit from the new concentration free hunter mark so the average damage is now 7 damage for that extra attack.
The rogue if he miss with his first attack, can apply his sneak attack dice to that second attack, but since sneak attack got hugely nerf (no longer application on reaction attacks during someone else turn), allowing for this extra attack make perfect sense so in the end it could be balanced.
And even that sneak attack nerf everyone is crying about, might make perfect sense, once you notice that Great weapon master and Sharpshooter no longer give that -5/+10 power attack bonus. If the martial that use to deal 90 sustain damage per round get nerf to 60 sustain damage per round, the rogue who use to REQUIRE is reaction to double his sneak damage in order to reach that 90 sustain damage, if he is now reduced to 60 damage by not being able to reaction sneak attack, it's fine.
Sure the fact that thematically, if I lay an ambush and ready my action to attack my victim, I want my sneak attack on my attack. it's an AMBUSH. So maybe the wording need to be redone, so sneak attack applies only ONCE PER ROUND instead of once on your turn? This way we avoid the double sneak attack that is no longer required (since power attack got removed) but my rogue can still ready action ambush his target.
But then we didn't saw the new rule about ready action. Maybe ready action allow the action to be made AS IF DURING THE PLAYER TURN. So sneak attack will apply even on ready action
Same goes for booming blade rogue. It is a cool concept that my arcane trickster can booming blade sneak attack his target, but with the new wording it no longer applies. But who know how the booming blade spell will be updated? maybe the booming blade will allows the attack action to be taken during it cast, allowing for ability that proc from the attack action, to proc from booming blade spell.
We have a small sample of the rule, we cannot judge much. The best we can do during the survey is telling WotC: Hey WotC with the current rule set (3/4 5e and 1/4 OneDnD) ready action and booming blade sneak attack no longer work, We believe those should work together because they are extremely thematic and fun. Please can you rewrite sneak attack so it works with booming blade and ready action, or make sure when you rewrite ready action and booming blade they are rewritten in such a way to allow sneak attack to work with them.

We didn't saw spell yet, but spell are by definition NOVA BURST. I mean my sorcerer can only cast meteor swarm once per day. Sure he can up cast disintegrate and cast it once at level 8, twice as a level 7 and twice as a level 6 spell... at level 20, in his entire day, if I took no multi class with non spell caster (so no fighter 2 for armor and action surge to cast 2 disintegrate same turn)
But he still deal less damage then a 5e fighter/paladin build doing action surge and divine smith burst round with great weapon master.

[wiph]

Sounds like you noted that the stat doesn't get added to the attack roll with the offhand attack, but it's only the damage they don't add it to

[thecookiemeister]

I’m pretty sure the light weapon change still falls short of a Greatsword, considering with a greatsword you only need the one shot to hit.

[benm]

I am surprised people are complaining about the changes to the Light weapon property. I don't think I have come across anyone saying that yet.

Personally I think the changes are great. Past level 5 (for characters with extra attack) the damage output (with the two weapon fighting style) sits nicely between 1 handed weapons (with the dualing fighting style) and 2 handed melee weapons (with the great weapon fighting style).

Sure it is a bit strong (when using the TWF style) from levels 1-4, but that has always been the case (although to a lesser extent).

[kori]

new TWF is a good change. Just waiting on the Monk playtest to really dig into what I want.

[dilsoncamacho]

IMO two weapon fighting is broken. Not because of balance but because of bad writting. One can technically use two weapon fighting and dueling fighting style at the same time (and two weapon fighting fight style too) or even juggle to have two weapon fighting and one extra attack with polearm master feat at levels 5+ ever other turn (might even be some way to optimize this to get it every turn)... They legit have to change stuff so that a player needs to wield 2 weapons at the same time and/or can't sheathe a weapon as part of an attack.

Also, a dual wielder feat allows for two weapons being drawn instead of 1... but is it as a interaction or does that include on attacks too? Heck, they have a bunch of stuff to rewrite there.

[johnhurley]

The way I had to stare for 30 seconds to make sure thise wasn't Adam Savage

[broke_af_games]

Honestly, I would rather see them not add more attacks and just treat dual fighting as something similar to versatile. In five torches deep I found the most elegant dual fighting example was rolling damage twice and picking the better of the two.

[Boopers]

Melee are seeming a bit weak compared to range in general from what I'm seeing

[atrashedpanda]

Please try to remember everything they release is used as it says. However remember they always state to use the rules more as a guide to make your game fit right for you