What is the opposite of a fan boy? LOL! I’m here to strike a balance with them.
Why would anyone want to further the online discord that rangers suck. If they do, why do they so many people try to reinforce that knowledge while so many other people enjoy playing them and think they’re great?
Also, beast masters, if nothing else, are still a vanilla ranger from levels 1 through 10. Ranger's are doing quite a bit in those levels as a martial, healer, and controller caster. Beast masters have one of the beast single target damage outputs of all of the ranger's at levels 11+. And the PHB beats masters can have stealth and perception skills surpassing that of a rogue. Spiders, wolves, frogs, panthers, and crabs are all great controllers. Snakes, wolves, and panthers are great for damage. And any flying beast will make a beast master the best wilderness explorer of all the rangers (which are better than bards and scout rogues) with beast sense and speak with animals.
I know everyone wants the "pet" with a name that spends the whole campaign with the party, but unfortunately the WotC team decided to make it a long rest recharge ability. That's what it is. A long rest ability. The RAW (and I hate quoting RAW) is "If the beast dies, you can obtain another one by spending 8 hours magically bonding with another beast that isn’t hostile to you, either the same type of beast as before or a different one." The rule says nothing about local beasts, native beasts, or DM choice. So yes, a AoE spell can take out your beast. If it does, it has done massive damage to the entire group, and the wizard might be dead too. If the effect only targeted the beast, that is great! What a great use of a long rest ability!
The DM has the final say on what animals are or are not available, let alone friendly. If you want something easy, go buy one and play with it for a day as you bond with it. If you want something a bit more...wild...then it's a quest. A friendly blood hawk or wolf isn't likely to just walk up to you and sit down for a mutual meditation. Doing so breaks whatever suspension of disbelief (or verisimilitude, if that's your thing) the group is currently trying to reach.
But it doesn't have to be a big quest. Maybe there's a half-wolf, like Balto, running stray in town. Maybe there's a raptor with a broken wing that can't fly, but your magical healing will fix that and set you two on the path together. Maybe you come across a wild panther and pull a thorn from its paw or free it from a hunting trap. It's the kind of thing that could easily be a quick scene or montage in a session, or even run between sessions if that's how your players prefer to roll.
What is the opposite of a fan boy? LOL! I’m here to strike a balance with them.
Why would anyone want to further the online discord that rangers suck. If they do, why do they so many people try to reinforce that knowledge while so many other people enjoy playing them and think they’re great?
Then don't type outlandish things like letting the ranger pick whatever companion they want wherever they are. You can still recognize the limitations of the class and archetype while also being a fierce advocate for it. These are not mutually exclusive options.
Your current trajectory is coming perilously close to the fair and balanced view of Fox News; that its blatant partisanship somehow creates a fair and balanced mainstream media. And that's just patently false.
What is the opposite of a fan boy? LOL! I’m here to strike a balance with them.
Why would anyone want to further the online discord that rangers suck. If they do, why do they so many people try to reinforce that knowledge while so many other people enjoy playing them and think they’re great?
Then don't type outlandish things like letting the ranger pick whatever companion they want wherever they are. You can still recognize the limitations of the class and archetype while also being a fierce advocate for it. These are not mutually exclusive options.
Your current trajectory is coming perilously close to the fair and balanced view of Fox News; that its blatant partisanship somehow creates a fair and balanced mainstream media. And that's just patently false.
Fox?! 🤮 Fair enough.
I will use the words of Dan Dillon when he was asked, on a podcast about beast master rangers, what happens if they (the beast) dies.
What is the opposite of a fan boy? LOL! I’m here to strike a balance with them.
Why would anyone want to further the online discord that rangers suck. If they do, why do they so many people try to reinforce that knowledge while so many other people enjoy playing them and think they’re great?
Then don't type outlandish things like letting the ranger pick whatever companion they want wherever they are. You can still recognize the limitations of the class and archetype while also being a fierce advocate for it. These are not mutually exclusive options.
Your current trajectory is coming perilously close to the fair and balanced view of Fox News; that its blatant partisanship somehow creates a fair and balanced mainstream media. And that's just patently false.
Bolded for relevance. This. All day. This goes the other way too. People that have many negative things to say about ranger design can still be a fan. Plenty of us still love the ranger and would play one in a heart beat. I'm one of them.
People don’t seem to hold other class’s abilities up to this same high standard.
I could go on and on about my various dislikes for monks, barbarians, non AT rogues and sorcerers. ;) But this is a Ranger thread. I don't think there are unfair standards at play here.
The ranger is not the only class to get dumped on. The monk is already at the table, saving a seat.
What is the opposite of a fan boy? LOL! I’m here to strike a balance with them.
Why would anyone want to further the online discord that rangers suck. If they do, why do they so many people try to reinforce that knowledge while so many other people enjoy playing them and think they’re great?
Then don't type outlandish things like letting the ranger pick whatever companion they want wherever they are. You can still recognize the limitations of the class and archetype while also being a fierce advocate for it. These are not mutually exclusive options.
Your current trajectory is coming perilously close to the fair and balanced view of Fox News; that its blatant partisanship somehow creates a fair and balanced mainstream media. And that's just patently false.
Fox?! 🤮 Fair enough.
I will use the words of Dan Dillon when he was asked, on a podcast about beast master rangers, what happens if they (the beast) dies.
“Get another one,” -Dan Dillon
'Tis good advice. I always love hearing what he has to say.
People don’t seem to hold other class’s abilities up to this same high standard.
There are things to dislike about every class. Every single one. And paladins not being great at range or sorcerers having a limited spell selection or barbarians being lacking in the skill department doesn't change anything about the ranger or the monk.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
One of the best pets (flying snake) can be transported in egg form relatively easily. Nothing says you can't have a spare non-compnion animal around. Rangers also have abilities that make it easier to find. Having a hawk just for animal messenger is a good idea. If all else fails resurrection type spells is an option.
And most hate on it but there is more support for the death loophole than most people are willing to admit. Most nay Sayers focus on the singular granting of a pet but ignore that it was a specific event in time. "Another" is the key because of its independence of the original value. It also doesn't break the game too badly because of the action economy rules basically making it mostly useful as only a backup.
One of the best pets (flying snake) can be transported in egg form relatively easily. Nothing says you can't have a spare non-compnion animal around. Rangers also have abilities that make it easier to find. Having a hawk just for animal messenger is a good idea. If all else fails resurrection type spells is an option.
And most hate on it but there is more support for the death loophole than most people are willing to admit. Most nay Sayers focus on the singular granting of a pet but ignore that it was a specific event in time. "Another" is the key because of its independence of the original value. It also doesn't break the game too badly because of the action economy rules basically making it mostly useful as only a backup.
So your defense of the subclass rests on an egregious reading of the rules to milk as much as you can out of the class? Yeah, no. One pet only.
Losing your animal and having to replace it is not some fun, automatic thing. It can be a huge feel bad if you're set on one animal and have to find a different one. No other class has ample opportunities to permanently lose a part of their kit that they most likely built RP around. Doesn't matter if you can get a new one if the old one had a deep connection to your character.
Frankly, all of these defenses of the feature are incredibly flimsy either because of how circumstantial they are or because they rely on readings of the rules so generous that you can only call it cheese.
And most hate on it but there is more support for the death loophole than most people are willing to admit. Most nay Sayers focus on the singular granting of a pet but ignore that it was a specific event in time. "Another" is the key because of its independence of the original value. It also doesn't break the game too badly because of the action economy rules basically making it mostly useful as only a backup.
"If the beast dies, you can obtain a new companion..." - that seems pretty clear to me. If A, then B. If not A, then not B.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The language is and setup is clear you get one at lvl3. Pet dies. Your are granted a another. total 1 again. Resurrection happens at personal cost . You now have an exception to a general rule. Now 2 existing viable pets. It still takes an action to command to attack. And a command to move. Probably not Rai. But even the design makes it hard to abuse. Because you can't command it with turn limitation. I don't like it or its cheazy doesn't acount for what it means. I don't like coffee-locks . I don't like infinite hp druids. Both exist and if they cause game problems, you either say I'm changing the rules for my game or you find a creative way to challenge them.
Frankly I've never had to use it because of planning ahead but I've never seen a decent argument against the wording. Obtaining the pet is a single event . Its death is a specfic event granting a +1. The Resurrection dose not cancel that out in the A B logic sequence. If A then B then C. A Still happened to create c 1-1+1+1. To deny the Resurrection is inconsistent rules interpretation.
And if a player abuses it pets still need to be willing to be resurected.
The language is and setup is clear you get one at lvl3. Pet dies. Your are granted a another. total 1 again. Resurrection happens at personal cost . You now have an exception to a general rule. Now 2 existing viable pets.
What you now have is one animal companion and one resurrected animal.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
So your defense of the subclass rests on an egregious reading of the rules to milk as much as you can out of the class? Yeah, no.
My defense of the subclass is that pets are powerful. "my pet companions dying is a problem" is a bad argument for proving the class is faulty.
Companions are adventurers like the rest of the party putting their lives on the line. If you don't like being with out a companion then Plan ahead. If they died and it upsets you Resurrect it and go on with the same pet or get a new one. Just like when a regular pc dies.No loophole needed. One of the coolest dnd 5e things I've heard of was when a dm let's dead companions come back as sprits during conjur animals.
Pre tashas it was one of 2? ways to get blindsight at level 3. Throw in fog cloud or darkness and most enemies are hurting. Add Beast sense all the better.
Companion pets are also the best access to poison harvesting. Even if the pet dies you can still get extra damage if you're saving poison. Not only that but you can share potentially adding 3d4 to every pc's weapon attack in the first round of combat.
Having a flying snake above the combat fly down bite and then fly away to safety is fun.
Several other utility options were also available. PP over 20. Digging speeds. Flying Mounts. All possible.
Good tactics make creative play fun.
Having a turn when a pc goes down is fun.
Having a party members life saved because a low hp companion stood its ground is fun.
When a companion encourages party team work its fun. A druid will foam at the mouth to cast awakening on companions.
I enjoy having a companion to cover my dump stats.
I enjoy not needing hunter's mark to maintain damage. Now I'm setup to use other spells
Frankly, if it didn't share ranger actions it would be op. Early play testing revised ranger confirm this.
What's not fun is when people say you're weak and don't you dare try to use your full potential when it puts you on par with other classes. Don't you dare play the way I feel you shouldn't.
The problem isn't the mechanics they can be worked with.
I've never had an in-game problem with beastmaster. Only on the internet have I seen problems.
What's not fun is when people say you're weak and don't you dare try to use your full potential. Don't you dare play the way I feel you shouldn't.
The problem isn't the mechanics they can be worked with.
I've never had an in-game problem with beastmaster. only on the internet have I seen problems.
No one is telling you not to play the game how you want to play it. Don't distract this thread by making your opposition look like they're making a personal attack when no one was doing as such.
If you've never had a problem with the beastmaster that's awesome for you. That doesn't mean the opinions on the internet you see are not also based on experiences. Are you seriously going to try and devalue all negative ranger opinions you've come across on the internet in one fell swoop like that?
Several times in the history of the game wizards has had to issue community wide advice because of misunderstanding or a majority of the community parsing the rules wrong. Sometimes they errata it to match the community.
Even the exact amount of player dissatisfaction is hard to pin down.
The point of the discussion is to find those spots.
I was merely pointing out the strict interpretation is a direct correlation to satisfaction. This is particularly disturbing when its strict because of opinion rather than precedent Or game affect analysis.
My main issue is when layers of restriction are added when not actually part of the game rules. Example saying that beastmasters are intended to have the same pet the whole campaign and if they can't the Sub-class is broken and I should agree.
As for thread distraction, I listed off several benefits to phb beastmaster that made it highly desirable at up until tasha's release. Some are still unmatched. I listed counter arguments to some of the most common objections.
My greatest issue is the people who say the ranger and/or the beast master are terrible, but then use the most harsh and punishing interpretation of their abilities possible. The whole PHB ranger class is not as clearly written as the others for some reason. It is open to interpretation by its very nature. It’s written very oddly compared to the others in the PHB. Don’t rain down hate with no solution. I am a fanboy.
Snakes, wolves, and panthers are great for damage.
wolves and panther's suck at damage tho, where it is at is the fastieth dinosaur from ebberon: rising from the last war or the giant poisonous snake, both having the best attack bonus, fastieth is the best at damage without poison and the snake is the best with the poison, and giant frogs are undoubtedly the best controllers out of all of them since they inflict the restrained condition automatically on a hit without an save allowed for the target that the target has to use an action to escape from or have disadvantage on attack rolls
also really do not agree on the sentiment that they are an easily replaceable once per long rest abillity, most of the truly fun and interesting pets are not very easy to come by and 8 hours means you cannot be bonding with the beast while you are completing a long rest (unless the thing really likes naps, in that case sleeping next to it might be considered an pretty appropriate part of the magic bonding ritual), at most it is an investment like the wizard's spell book, its raw numbers are really impressive and will outdo most of the party but it is fragile and will need some resources to protect it. If you have one of the two beasts i just mentioned with an dexterity score of 18 training it in use of light armor and giving it some studded leather barding will yield you an beast with an armor class of 16 + proficiency bonus, something that should keep up with or even outdo most of the martials, 'and you might want to have an ally invest in the aid spell and/or somebody with the inspiring leader feat and/or an circle of the shepherd druid or an twilight cleric, since all of these could significantly increase the hit points you have to work with without being taxing on the party's resources, and an allied bard or paladin could help fix its poor saves, you want that thing to survive so that it can deal 1d8 + 6 damage with an +8 bonus to attack at 3rd level or dealing 1d4 + 6 + (3d6 + 2, half on a DC 11 con save) damage on a hit with a +8 bonus, it is genuniely worth the investment especially the new variant that can be activated without any sacrofice to the number of attacks you make yourself but with an much lower attack bonus and much lower damage, the companion is undeniably potent yet undeniably fragile, that is its fatal flaw that tasha's cauldron fixed and in the process made the subclass a tad boring
Stats wise also inferior to casing the new Summon Beast.
except for its hit points, the old beast companions have much better stats than the summon beast spell, higher armor class, higher attack value, same damage output depending on what pet you choose, and even then the new spell will slow down in terms of hit points due to the ranger's slow spell progression, and even still that does not have any bearing on the effectiveness of the beastmaster ranger since the summon beast spell does not even require you to use your action, an beastmaster can have both their companion and the spell active at the same time without any issue, heck having both the spell and your pet active on the field is great since it means that you can better benefit from the pack tactics feature, if anything it is just more fun
the utility of the forms available is inferior to just casting conjure animals.
the thing about conjure animals is that YOU do not decide what creatures appear, the DM does, and what the DM says appears will not always be what you needed or wanted, the beast is reliable, and might have a tone of neat tricks like blind sight, tremmorsense, burrowing speeds that also create tunnels, whatever, you know what your pet can do, it is reliable
also i think there is a really good fix to the vanilla beastmaster nobody has suggested yet: allow the ranger to have a number of companions equal to your wisdom mod, as your pets can only do anything useful in combat when you use you action to tell them to do so, having multiple will not break the game (or at least not the action economy and your total damage output) by any means and will allow you to invest in pets that have utility benefits without having to worry about not having a damage dealing pet and lets you have a backup in case of an stray fireball hitting your companion
I don’t think the wolf and panther suck at damage. You’re correct that the giant poisonous snake and fastieth have the best damage output, however. And that to-hit bonus is amazing! Could a ranger just use the fastieth stat block and call it a panther, dog, lizard, or whatever?
The PHB classes are losing ground mechanically. Tasha’s is a little power creepy. The PHB beast master can use a little love in the mechanical department, but the Tasha’s variant swings really hard that direction, taking away some of the flavor, mechanical benefits, and exploration utility in favor of a big big big boost in combat effectiveness.
The PHB version: At level 3 a fighter with a longbow is hitting for (7.5) 1d8 + 3. A wolf is hitting for (9) 2d4 + 2 + 2. A panther is hitting for (7.5) 1d6 + 2 + 2. The wolf has pack tactics, and both have a knock down effect. At level 10 a fighter with a longbow is hitting for (9.5) 1d8 + 5. A wolf is hitting for (11) 2d4 + 2 + 4. A panther is hitting for (9.5) 1d6 + 2 + 4.
What is the opposite of a fan boy? LOL! I’m here to strike a balance with them.
Why would anyone want to further the online discord that rangers suck. If they do, why do they so many people try to reinforce that knowledge while so many other people enjoy playing them and think they’re great?
The DM has the final say on what animals are or are not available, let alone friendly. If you want something easy, go buy one and play with it for a day as you bond with it. If you want something a bit more...wild...then it's a quest. A friendly blood hawk or wolf isn't likely to just walk up to you and sit down for a mutual meditation. Doing so breaks whatever suspension of disbelief (or verisimilitude, if that's your thing) the group is currently trying to reach.
But it doesn't have to be a big quest. Maybe there's a half-wolf, like Balto, running stray in town. Maybe there's a raptor with a broken wing that can't fly, but your magical healing will fix that and set you two on the path together. Maybe you come across a wild panther and pull a thorn from its paw or free it from a hunting trap. It's the kind of thing that could easily be a quick scene or montage in a session, or even run between sessions if that's how your players prefer to roll.
People don’t seem to hold other class’s abilities up to this same high standard.
Then don't type outlandish things like letting the ranger pick whatever companion they want wherever they are. You can still recognize the limitations of the class and archetype while also being a fierce advocate for it. These are not mutually exclusive options.
Your current trajectory is coming perilously close to the fair and balanced view of Fox News; that its blatant partisanship somehow creates a fair and balanced mainstream media. And that's just patently false.
Fox?! 🤮 Fair enough.
I will use the words of Dan Dillon when he was asked, on a podcast about beast master rangers, what happens if they (the beast) dies.
“Get another one,” -Dan Dillon
Bolded for relevance. This. All day. This goes the other way too. People that have many negative things to say about ranger design can still be a fan. Plenty of us still love the ranger and would play one in a heart beat. I'm one of them.
I could go on and on about my various dislikes for monks, barbarians, non AT rogues and sorcerers. ;) But this is a Ranger thread. I don't think there are unfair standards at play here.
The ranger is not the only class to get dumped on. The monk is already at the table, saving a seat.
'Tis good advice. I always love hearing what he has to say.
There are things to dislike about every class. Every single one. And paladins not being great at range or sorcerers having a limited spell selection or barbarians being lacking in the skill department doesn't change anything about the ranger or the monk.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
One of the best pets (flying snake) can be transported in egg form relatively easily. Nothing says you can't have a spare non-compnion animal around. Rangers also have abilities that make it easier to find. Having a hawk just for animal messenger is a good idea. If all else fails resurrection type spells is an option.
And most hate on it but there is more support for the death loophole than most people are willing to admit. Most nay Sayers focus on the singular granting of a pet but ignore that it was a specific event in time. "Another" is the key because of its independence of the original value. It also doesn't break the game too badly because of the action economy rules basically making it mostly useful as only a backup.
So your defense of the subclass rests on an egregious reading of the rules to milk as much as you can out of the class? Yeah, no. One pet only.
Losing your animal and having to replace it is not some fun, automatic thing. It can be a huge feel bad if you're set on one animal and have to find a different one. No other class has ample opportunities to permanently lose a part of their kit that they most likely built RP around. Doesn't matter if you can get a new one if the old one had a deep connection to your character.
Frankly, all of these defenses of the feature are incredibly flimsy either because of how circumstantial they are or because they rely on readings of the rules so generous that you can only call it cheese.
"If the beast dies, you can obtain a new companion..." - that seems pretty clear to me. If A, then B. If not A, then not B.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The language is and setup is clear you get one at lvl3. Pet dies. Your are granted a another. total 1 again. Resurrection happens at personal cost . You now have an exception to a general rule. Now 2 existing viable pets. It still takes an action to command to attack. And a command to move. Probably not Rai. But even the design makes it hard to abuse. Because you can't command it with turn limitation. I don't like it or its cheazy doesn't acount for what it means. I don't like coffee-locks . I don't like infinite hp druids. Both exist and if they cause game problems, you either say I'm changing the rules for my game or you find a creative way to challenge them.
Frankly I've never had to use it because of planning ahead but I've never seen a decent argument against the wording. Obtaining the pet is a single event . Its death is a specfic event granting a +1. The Resurrection dose not cancel that out in the A B logic sequence. If A then B then C. A Still happened to create c 1-1+1+1. To deny the Resurrection is inconsistent rules interpretation.
And if a player abuses it pets still need to be willing to be resurected.
What you now have is one animal companion and one resurrected animal.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
My defense of the subclass is that pets are powerful. "my pet companions dying is a problem" is a bad argument for proving the class is faulty.
Companions are adventurers like the rest of the party putting their lives on the line. If you don't like being with out a companion then Plan ahead. If they died and it upsets you Resurrect it and go on with the same pet or get a new one. Just like when a regular pc dies.No loophole needed. One of the coolest dnd 5e things I've heard of was when a dm let's dead companions come back as sprits during conjur animals.
Pre tashas it was one of 2? ways to get blindsight at level 3. Throw in fog cloud or darkness and most enemies are hurting. Add Beast sense all the better.
Companion pets are also the best access to poison harvesting. Even if the pet dies you can still get extra damage if you're saving poison. Not only that but you can share potentially adding 3d4 to every pc's weapon attack in the first round of combat.
Having a flying snake above the combat fly down bite and then fly away to safety is fun.
Several other utility options were also available. PP over 20. Digging speeds. Flying Mounts. All possible.
Good tactics make creative play fun.
Having a turn when a pc goes down is fun.
Having a party members life saved because a low hp companion stood its ground is fun.
When a companion encourages party team work its fun. A druid will foam at the mouth to cast awakening on companions.
I enjoy having a companion to cover my dump stats.
I enjoy not needing hunter's mark to maintain damage. Now I'm setup to use other spells
Frankly, if it didn't share ranger actions it would be op. Early play testing revised ranger confirm this.
What's not fun is when people say you're weak and don't you dare try to use your full potential when it puts you on par with other classes. Don't you dare play the way I feel you shouldn't.
The problem isn't the mechanics they can be worked with.
I've never had an in-game problem with beastmaster. Only on the internet have I seen problems.
That's my defense of beastmaster.
No one is telling you not to play the game how you want to play it. Don't distract this thread by making your opposition look like they're making a personal attack when no one was doing as such.
If you've never had a problem with the beastmaster that's awesome for you. That doesn't mean the opinions on the internet you see are not also based on experiences. Are you seriously going to try and devalue all negative ranger opinions you've come across on the internet in one fell swoop like that?
Several times in the history of the game wizards has had to issue community wide advice because of misunderstanding or a majority of the community parsing the rules wrong. Sometimes they errata it to match the community.
Even the exact amount of player dissatisfaction is hard to pin down.
The point of the discussion is to find those spots.
I was merely pointing out the strict interpretation is a direct correlation to satisfaction. This is particularly disturbing when its strict because of opinion rather than precedent Or game affect analysis.
My main issue is when layers of restriction are added when not actually part of the game rules. Example saying that beastmasters are intended to have the same pet the whole campaign and if they can't the Sub-class is broken and I should agree.
As for thread distraction, I listed off several benefits to phb beastmaster that made it highly desirable at up until tasha's release. Some are still unmatched. I listed counter arguments to some of the most common objections.
My greatest issue is the people who say the ranger and/or the beast master are terrible, but then use the most harsh and punishing interpretation of their abilities possible. The whole PHB ranger class is not as clearly written as the others for some reason. It is open to interpretation by its very nature. It’s written very oddly compared to the others in the PHB. Don’t rain down hate with no solution. I am a fanboy.
wolves and panther's suck at damage tho, where it is at is the fastieth dinosaur from ebberon: rising from the last war or the giant poisonous snake, both having the best attack bonus, fastieth is the best at damage without poison and the snake is the best with the poison, and giant frogs are undoubtedly the best controllers out of all of them since they inflict the restrained condition automatically on a hit without an save allowed for the target that the target has to use an action to escape from or have disadvantage on attack rolls
also really do not agree on the sentiment that they are an easily replaceable once per long rest abillity, most of the truly fun and interesting pets are not very easy to come by and 8 hours means you cannot be bonding with the beast while you are completing a long rest (unless the thing really likes naps, in that case sleeping next to it might be considered an pretty appropriate part of the magic bonding ritual), at most it is an investment like the wizard's spell book, its raw numbers are really impressive and will outdo most of the party but it is fragile and will need some resources to protect it. If you have one of the two beasts i just mentioned with an dexterity score of 18 training it in use of light armor and giving it some studded leather barding will yield you an beast with an armor class of 16 + proficiency bonus, something that should keep up with or even outdo most of the martials, 'and you might want to have an ally invest in the aid spell and/or somebody with the inspiring leader feat and/or an circle of the shepherd druid or an twilight cleric, since all of these could significantly increase the hit points you have to work with without being taxing on the party's resources, and an allied bard or paladin could help fix its poor saves, you want that thing to survive so that it can deal 1d8 + 6 damage with an +8 bonus to attack at 3rd level or dealing 1d4 + 6 + (3d6 + 2, half on a DC 11 con save) damage on a hit with a +8 bonus, it is genuniely worth the investment especially the new variant that can be activated without any sacrofice to the number of attacks you make yourself but with an much lower attack bonus and much lower damage, the companion is undeniably potent yet undeniably fragile, that is its fatal flaw that tasha's cauldron fixed and in the process made the subclass a tad boring
except for its hit points, the old beast companions have much better stats than the summon beast spell, higher armor class, higher attack value, same damage output depending on what pet you choose, and even then the new spell will slow down in terms of hit points due to the ranger's slow spell progression, and even still that does not have any bearing on the effectiveness of the beastmaster ranger since the summon beast spell does not even require you to use your action, an beastmaster can have both their companion and the spell active at the same time without any issue, heck having both the spell and your pet active on the field is great since it means that you can better benefit from the pack tactics feature, if anything it is just more fun
the thing about conjure animals is that YOU do not decide what creatures appear, the DM does, and what the DM says appears will not always be what you needed or wanted, the beast is reliable, and might have a tone of neat tricks like blind sight, tremmorsense, burrowing speeds that also create tunnels, whatever, you know what your pet can do, it is reliable
also i think there is a really good fix to the vanilla beastmaster nobody has suggested yet: allow the ranger to have a number of companions equal to your wisdom mod, as your pets can only do anything useful in combat when you use you action to tell them to do so, having multiple will not break the game (or at least not the action economy and your total damage output) by any means and will allow you to invest in pets that have utility benefits without having to worry about not having a damage dealing pet and lets you have a backup in case of an stray fireball hitting your companion
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
I don’t think the wolf and panther suck at damage. You’re correct that the giant poisonous snake and fastieth have the best damage output, however. And that to-hit bonus is amazing! Could a ranger just use the fastieth stat block and call it a panther, dog, lizard, or whatever?
The PHB classes are losing ground mechanically. Tasha’s is a little power creepy. The PHB beast master can use a little love in the mechanical department, but the Tasha’s variant swings really hard that direction, taking away some of the flavor, mechanical benefits, and exploration utility in favor of a big big big boost in combat effectiveness.
The PHB version: At level 3 a fighter with a longbow is hitting for (7.5) 1d8 + 3. A wolf is hitting for (9) 2d4 + 2 + 2. A panther is hitting for (7.5) 1d6 + 2 + 2. The wolf has pack tactics, and both have a knock down effect. At level 10 a fighter with a longbow is hitting for (9.5) 1d8 + 5. A wolf is hitting for (11) 2d4 + 2 + 4. A panther is hitting for (9.5) 1d6 + 2 + 4.