Why is it that the game designers seemingly hate the idea of a ranger having an animal companion as apposed to a summoned creature (spirit). To me it defeatst he purpose of being a beast master. Summoning an ally just boils it down to another spell which is cast for free. And if anyone says it's to mimic Drizz't's ability with Guenevyr, it should be noted that the panther is an unusual figurine of wonderous power and not a standard animal companion. Thoughts? Has anyone made any changes to their own game? If anyone ever saw the movie Beastmaster, he had actual animals to help him on his adventure. Oh and don't get me started on having to use my own actions to get the beast to do something.
I mean... I think the easy school of thought is that players want to form a bond with their companions. In 3e and earlier, you went out, found a wolf (or whatever), and made friends with it. And then, you had a wolf companion. Which was, at best, a mid fighter with about twenty hit points. Sounds cool at level 3, but at level 9, you're suddenly babysitting your companion nonstop, because it's made of glass, and if it dies, your whole world comes crashing down. So in 5e, they replaced physical companions with spirits who could be re-summoned if they were killed, so you didn't have to halt the game, bury your pet, and go find another one every other session.
As to using your own actions to get the beast to do something, that's an action economy thing.
I'm perfectly fine with the Primal Companion mechanic. It doesn't say they are obviously supernatural and thus it can be used for a mundane animal, just flavor it as such and it works great.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
There should have been animal specific healing/resurrection in the original and not just for companions but mounts as well. (shapeshifters/polymorphism would need to be excluded). There are ways to keep them up but they aren't obvious to everyone and requires build/party choices.
Part of good stories is the uniqueness of characters that includes pet companions. Having working stat blocks provides uniqueness to you animal choice. And anyone playing a 14 ranger could use the traits to make a good pc team of "one."
I would like to add alot of dms added rules to the 8 hours bonding that weren't present in the mechanics. So it could just be 8 hours after death a new companion arrives to take the old ones place. (Wich also could be a good story. ) resurrection,death saves etc are other story follows through possibilities.
But in the end a spirit and a real companions fulfill different plots and wotc has no business telling me wich plots to prefer. I prefer 2014. Even with the action cost it was superior for ranger design IMO.
Why is it that the game designers seemingly hate the idea of a ranger having an animal companion as apposed to a summoned creature (spirit). To me it defeatst he purpose of being a beast master. Summoning an ally just boils it down to another spell which is cast for free. And if anyone says it's to mimic Drizz't's ability with Guenevyr, it should be noted that the panther is an unusual figurine of wonderous power and not a standard animal companion. Thoughts? Has anyone made any changes to their own game? If anyone ever saw the movie Beastmaster, he had actual animals to help him on his adventure. Oh and don't get me started on having to use my own actions to get the beast to do something.
I mean... I think the easy school of thought is that players want to form a bond with their companions. In 3e and earlier, you went out, found a wolf (or whatever), and made friends with it. And then, you had a wolf companion. Which was, at best, a mid fighter with about twenty hit points. Sounds cool at level 3, but at level 9, you're suddenly babysitting your companion nonstop, because it's made of glass, and if it dies, your whole world comes crashing down. So in 5e, they replaced physical companions with spirits who could be re-summoned if they were killed, so you didn't have to halt the game, bury your pet, and go find another one every other session.
As to using your own actions to get the beast to do something, that's an action economy thing.
Just give it the Kenny Feat. Every time it dies, a replacement spawns the next morning in camp. Don't ask where it comes from......
I'm perfectly fine with the Primal Companion mechanic. It doesn't say they are obviously supernatural and thus it can be used for a mundane animal, just flavor it as such and it works great.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
There should have been animal specific healing/resurrection in the original and not just for companions but mounts as well. (shapeshifters/polymorphism would need to be excluded). There are ways to keep them up but they aren't obvious to everyone and requires build/party choices.
Part of good stories is the uniqueness of characters that includes pet companions. Having working stat blocks provides uniqueness to you animal choice. And anyone playing a 14 ranger could use the traits to make a good pc team of "one."
I would like to add alot of dms added rules to the 8 hours bonding that weren't present in the mechanics. So it could just be 8 hours after death a new companion arrives to take the old ones place. (Wich also could be a good story. ) resurrection,death saves etc are other story follows through possibilities.
But in the end a spirit and a real companions fulfill different plots and wotc has no business telling me wich plots to prefer. I prefer 2014. Even with the action cost it was superior for ranger design IMO.