When I first heard BG3 was working with WoTC in implementing changes to the ranger, I expected a sneak peak into the alterative class features to come in the Tasha's Book. Tasha's came out last month and the changes are not remotely similar. They are not even close.
I get quite confused with how much variance Larian adds to BG3 away from 5e beyond GM interpretation and rulings which are required for the game to function. If a whole classes cannot be replicated in 5e tabletop, you have likely diverged to far from home.
Rangers wasn't ever bad in 5e. Its had a few base class feature that weren't useful which turned players off on the ranger. They did fine damage and have get utility due to their great spell list. The alterative class features in Tasha's properly repalce all the bad features with useful features that have real mechanical benefits. I don't understand the need to diverge so far from 5e in this case.
Wish Larian was more clear on whether this is a game built on 5e or simply inspired by the world of D&D. I get lost in what their vision is for the D&D title they begged WoTC to give them rights too.
This first post is currently short. Will have some follow up in the thread later. Been a long work day. I will have more to say with regards to the beast master in particular. My first run and current rerun were beast masters.
