What action can the beastmaster's primal companion take outside of combat? I got into a discussion with my DM when we were having a session the other day about whether my wolf pet could open doors or not, I claimed that since he had the same level of intelligence as our barbarian companion, he should have been able to do it, but my DM ruled it out (which was fine for me). But it got me thinking what kind actions the primal companion can and cannot take outside of combat and if the shape of the primal companion has any effect on it's capabilities mechanically (all beasts that walk are called beasts of the land). If my companion had been a chimpanzee he would have had no problems with opening doors. What are the rules in this case?
Frankly, the rules don't say. The Primal Companion feature just says 'you summon a companion which will use one of these 3 stat blocks. In combat it functions like this. Here is how to revive it/swap it out.' I'd say the fact that the feature specifies that in combat the creature can only do X, Y, and Z means that outside of combat those restrictions don't apply, and it has access to the same range of actions as any creature, within the limits of its stat block. But that's technically an extrapolation, so it's really up to DM interpretation.
I am a firm believer that the PHB action economy implies a more free thinking creature than tashas (or one/5eR). I run each type with their own benefits and downsides.
The PHB creates room for longer lasting commands and free ranger action commands (as long as they are not specifically listed as exceptions) As its a normal creature in service to a ranger.
Tashas on the other hand is a creature solely dependent on the ranger (a magical leach) it has its action economy completely destroyed and replaced with a new set that defaults to dodge.
but as pocket mouse stated the room for interpretation allows bad faith arguments for both dms and players.
An older thread but… I think in the OP’s case I would agree with both the DM and the player - given the lack of hands the wolf couldn’t open a shut door ( one that was ajar it could) but a chimp companion with hands could have. The rules don’t make things clear on what can and can’t be done on purpose - they let the DM and player sort that out with a few listed exceptions.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What action can the beastmaster's primal companion take outside of combat? I got into a discussion with my DM when we were having a session the other day about whether my wolf pet could open doors or not, I claimed that since he had the same level of intelligence as our barbarian companion, he should have been able to do it, but my DM ruled it out (which was fine for me). But it got me thinking what kind actions the primal companion can and cannot take outside of combat and if the shape of the primal companion has any effect on it's capabilities mechanically (all beasts that walk are called beasts of the land). If my companion had been a chimpanzee he would have had no problems with opening doors. What are the rules in this case?
Frankly, the rules don't say. The Primal Companion feature just says 'you summon a companion which will use one of these 3 stat blocks. In combat it functions like this. Here is how to revive it/swap it out.' I'd say the fact that the feature specifies that in combat the creature can only do X, Y, and Z means that outside of combat those restrictions don't apply, and it has access to the same range of actions as any creature, within the limits of its stat block. But that's technically an extrapolation, so it's really up to DM interpretation.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
I am a firm believer that the PHB action economy implies a more free thinking creature than tashas (or one/5eR). I run each type with their own benefits and downsides.
The PHB creates room for longer lasting commands and free ranger action commands (as long as they are not specifically listed as exceptions) As its a normal creature in service to a ranger.
Tashas on the other hand is a creature solely dependent on the ranger (a magical leach) it has its action economy completely destroyed and replaced with a new set that defaults to dodge.
but as pocket mouse stated the room for interpretation allows bad faith arguments for both dms and players.
An older thread but… I think in the OP’s case I would agree with both the DM and the player - given the lack of hands the wolf couldn’t open a shut door ( one that was ajar it could) but a chimp companion with hands could have. The rules don’t make things clear on what can and can’t be done on purpose - they let the DM and player sort that out with a few listed exceptions.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.