Reposting this thread from DM'S ONLY. If a Mod would be so kind as to delete the original I'd appreciate it!
I think The Beastmaster class is fine, especially after level 7, but I find players tend to be disappointed until they can use help as a bonus action to give themselves advantage. So what I propose, without changing anything else, is customizable reactions for beast companions. At third level the beast master will pick one of the following "Instincts" for their beast:
Gaurd: Enemies provoke attacks of opportunity when attacking the beast' s master.
Protect: if an enemy within 5ft makes an attack aginst the beast's master, it may use its reaction to roll a d4+1. The total is added to the Masters AC.
Harass: an enemy's movement is halved if hit by the beast's attack of opportunity.
What do you think? Is gaurd too powerful? Do you have any other ideas for "Instincts"?
An idea had was just to have the companion default to using the Help action for its Ranger without any input from the Ranger (so, no need to blow an attack or a bonus action).
Also, as others have suggested on the Ranger 101 thread, I think that only the initial command should cost an attack - in other words "Kill that Goblin" requires the sacrifice of an attack, but the companion will continue attacking the target until it's dead without the Ranger having to spend further resources. Picking a new target would require the use of an attack again.
Guard will also cause the enemy to attack the animal companion which is exactly what you don’t want to happen. It would be better if the ranger has the Sentinel feat to protect the AC.
I'm curious what the response to your idea was at the DMs ONLY thread. Did they like it? Tweak it more?
I don't think anyone responded before it got deleted.
Honestly Blues, I no longer believe these tweaks are necessary. The Beast Master is a solid and tactically satisfying subclass. The problem isn't mechanical, its thematic. If the Beast was replaced with some sort of mindless drone, no one would have a problem with this class. To really make this class satisfying you have to put your pet at risk, and no one wants to do that.
If you are wanting to float this idea to your DM, go for it! Just don't give him a hard time if he's not in to it. A better route might me to ask your DM if you can flavor your pet as super natural. Maybe it is some sort of spirit guardian, or an avatar of the god/goddess of nature. The point is it can't really die even if "dies" in combat. Nothing would change mechanically.
I have a long defense of the Beast Master on the Giants on the Playground forum if you are intrested in finding interesting tactics to use in combat.
I am interested in reading more. Can you please post the link?
Also, what do you mean by "To really make this class satisfying you have to put your pet at risk, and no one wants to do that."? What examples have you seen in game or on Twitch/Youtube?
I'm really curious b/c I want to create a BM Ranger and thinking through how attached my character is supposed to be to her animal companion is part of the process.
Here is an example, you are an archer, your pet is a wolf.
By placing your Wolf between you and your target you force that target to make a choice; attack the wolf which isn't much of a threat, or potentially take damage from an opportunity attack. If it moves to try and reach you, hey free damage and a chance to knock it prone (from the wolf's bite attack), if it attacks the wolf it has wasted its action, an action that could have spent killing you or one of your teammates. That's truly awesome mitigation from a tactical stand point, but now your wolf friend who you've raised since it was a pup is dead. So you don't do that, you keep that Doggo next to you where it is safe.
Yes, totally. I see the tension between the utility of the companion versus the storytelling RP aspect of the companion. That's a question that some people don't care about, and some do . Hard to satisfy everyone, right? I need to think about this some more.
Here is an example, you are an archer, your pet is a wolf.
By placing your Wolf between you and your target you force that target to make a choice; attack the wolf which isn't much of a threat, or potentially take damage from an opportunity attack. If it moves to try and reach you, hey free damage and a chance to knock it prone (from the wolf's bite attack), if it attacks the wolf it has wasted its action, an action that could have spent killing you or one of your teammates. That's truly awesome mitigation from a tactical stand point, but now your wolf friend who you've raised since it was a pup is dead. So you don't do that, you keep that Doggo next to you where it is safe.
I'll see if I can find that old thread.
The last errata says the beast takes the Dodge action if it is not otherwise commanded. Now the enemy has to decide if they want to spend their action attacking the beast with disadvantage or try to get to the ranger. Even if the enemy decides to attack the beast, there is a very good chance they will miss. If the enemy tries to use a ranged attack against the ranger and the beast is in the way, the ranger gets half cover. This won’t be the best tactic in all situations but it will be effective in most and the beast is likely to be alive at the end of the encounter unless the DM is very lucky or is really out to kill your animal companion.
Hmmmm, I feel like the animal companion could really use more HD at mid to high levels of play, if for no other reason than that some many of the Ranger's features are tied to that presence of a helper/2nd attacker/field controller. If the animal companion (Anicompa for short) gets killed at beginning of an adventuring day, then a lot of the Ranger's abilities get ganked until the next long rest.
I would need to playtest the PHB Anicompa action economy to see how well that works.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Reposting this thread from DM'S ONLY. If a Mod would be so kind as to delete the original I'd appreciate it!
I think The Beastmaster class is fine, especially after level 7, but I find players tend to be disappointed until they can use help as a bonus action to give themselves advantage. So what I propose, without changing anything else, is customizable reactions for beast companions. At third level the beast master will pick one of the following "Instincts" for their beast:
Gaurd: Enemies provoke attacks of opportunity when attacking the beast' s master.
Protect: if an enemy within 5ft makes an attack aginst the beast's master, it may use its reaction to roll a d4+1. The total is added to the Masters AC.
Harass: an enemy's movement is halved if hit by the beast's attack of opportunity.
What do you think? Is gaurd too powerful? Do you have any other ideas for "Instincts"?
An idea had was just to have the companion default to using the Help action for its Ranger without any input from the Ranger (so, no need to blow an attack or a bonus action).
Also, as others have suggested on the Ranger 101 thread, I think that only the initial command should cost an attack - in other words "Kill that Goblin" requires the sacrifice of an attack, but the companion will continue attacking the target until it's dead without the Ranger having to spend further resources. Picking a new target would require the use of an attack again.
Guard does seem a bit too powerful.
Guard will also cause the enemy to attack the animal companion which is exactly what you don’t want to happen. It would be better if the ranger has the Sentinel feat to protect the AC.
@WhiskeyJack8044
I'm curious what the response to your idea was at the DMs ONLY thread. Did they like it? Tweak it more?
I don't think anyone responded before it got deleted.
Honestly Blues, I no longer believe these tweaks are necessary. The Beast Master is a solid and tactically satisfying subclass. The problem isn't mechanical, its thematic. If the Beast was replaced with some sort of mindless drone, no one would have a problem with this class. To really make this class satisfying you have to put your pet at risk, and no one wants to do that.
If you are wanting to float this idea to your DM, go for it! Just don't give him a hard time if he's not in to it. A better route might me to ask your DM if you can flavor your pet as super natural. Maybe it is some sort of spirit guardian, or an avatar of the god/goddess of nature. The point is it can't really die even if "dies" in combat. Nothing would change mechanically.
I have a long defense of the Beast Master on the Giants on the Playground forum if you are intrested in finding interesting tactics to use in combat.
I am interested in reading more. Can you please post the link?
Also, what do you mean by "To really make this class satisfying you have to put your pet at risk, and no one wants to do that."? What examples have you seen in game or on Twitch/Youtube?
I'm really curious b/c I want to create a BM Ranger and thinking through how attached my character is supposed to be to her animal companion is part of the process.
Here is an example, you are an archer, your pet is a wolf.
By placing your Wolf between you and your target you force that target to make a choice; attack the wolf which isn't much of a threat, or potentially take damage from an opportunity attack. If it moves to try and reach you, hey free damage and a chance to knock it prone (from the wolf's bite attack), if it attacks the wolf it has wasted its action, an action that could have spent killing you or one of your teammates. That's truly awesome mitigation from a tactical stand point, but now your wolf friend who you've raised since it was a pup is dead. So you don't do that, you keep that Doggo next to you where it is safe.
I'll see if I can find that old thread.
Yes, totally. I see the tension between the utility of the companion versus the storytelling RP aspect of the companion. That's a question that some people don't care about, and some do . Hard to satisfy everyone, right? I need to think about this some more.
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?578714-A-defense-of-Beast-Master-options-and-tactics
Lots of really good points on both side of the argument here. I still haven't played as a Beast Master but I have DMed for 3 now.
The last errata says the beast takes the Dodge action if it is not otherwise commanded. Now the enemy has to decide if they want to spend their action attacking the beast with disadvantage or try to get to the ranger. Even if the enemy decides to attack the beast, there is a very good chance they will miss. If the enemy tries to use a ranged attack against the ranger and the beast is in the way, the ranger gets half cover. This won’t be the best tactic in all situations but it will be effective in most and the beast is likely to be alive at the end of the encounter unless the DM is very lucky or is really out to kill your animal companion.
Hmmmm, I feel like the animal companion could really use more HD at mid to high levels of play, if for no other reason than that some many of the Ranger's features are tied to that presence of a helper/2nd attacker/field controller. If the animal companion (Anicompa for short) gets killed at beginning of an adventuring day, then a lot of the Ranger's abilities get ganked until the next long rest.
I would need to playtest the PHB Anicompa action economy to see how well that works.