Does that mean when the ranger gets to level 7 the beast companion can take both the attack action and the disengage action on its turn, provided it didn't somehow manage to attack on the rangers turn?
You missed the part that I also bolded in the class feature you quoted.
It takes its turn on your initiative.
It is a creature. It has its own turn during combat, complete with its own move and action. It's just on the same initiative as you and follows the directions you gave it on your turn. It's functionally the same as when multiple players' characters roll the same initiative.
Watch the Dragon Talk: Sage Advice on Mounted Combat with Jeremy Crawford. A controlled mount is the one thing in the PHB that has similar initiative as the ranger animal companion.
Crawford clearly states that the mount’s turn “overlaps” the rider’s turn. He is definitely not saying that one has to complete their turn before the other begins their turn. If mount and rider can do this then there is reason to interpret ranger and animal companion initiative in the same way.
One of my issues is how the Two-Weapon Fighting style that rangers have access to gets shut down by making commands to the companion.
Commanding the beast to Attack takes your action, thus you can't take the Attack action yourself to use TWF. At higher levels, when you can command with the bonus action, you'd still miss out on TWF due to having no available bonus action.
The only way this is justified is by the sheer amount of damage some beasts can do and how they do it. The giant poisonous snake is often regarded as one of (if not the #1) best companion due to its high AC, to hit and separate damage rolls. Your proficiency bonus is added to all of these, so the snake double-dips on damage from its bite and then its save-based poison.
I’ve been one to dislike the wording regarding the companion - does the ranger sacrifice his Action completely just to command the beast. Reading through this thread, particularly the comments of Frank & Silvva, I am finding a better understanding. I also think I see a solution to their differences.
Given Frank’s eloquent reasoning that the ranger and beast fight as a unit AND given Silvva’s logic regarding the beast having “its own turn” -
Perhaps the beast turn and the ranger turn (same initiative), 7th lvl and beyond, are as interchangeable as a Bonus Action and an Action. The barbarian can Rage and then Attack and the Rogue can Attack and BA Hide.
When the ranger/beast relationship is young (below 5th lvl) there is less unity of action; as was stated earlier auto-dodge is pretty good and the attack isn’t always that powerful. Levels 5 and 6 the synergy is improving - now each can attack the same round rather than one or the other (extra attack). From 7th lvl on, the beast gives advantage to one attack every turn due to the Help action.
Ranger/beast initiative count - beast is to Help
1st ranger attack w/advantage
2nd ranger attack
It would seem that the ranger could give advantage every round to anyone - guaranteed sneak attack to the rogue because the beast is Helping.
I'm not a fan of using JC's Sage Advice thrown into a rules discussions, but this is interesting to me for this case.
We now from the core books that specific beats general. Controlled mounted combat has a similar feel and mechanical application as the beast master ranger, in that, a controlled mount is kind of no longer an NPC, at least for the time it's being ridden while controlled during combat. The controlled mount still "has a turn". Each creature "has a turn" in combat. But my stance is the beast master and the beast companion share their initiative. They happen at the same time. This is the same as a controlled mound, in my opinion. JC speaks to this in a video, briefly.
He speaks about how the controlled mount has it's turn but the two turns overlap. He says the "controlled mount moves on your turn" and how that is easier to coordinate with. It "becomes an action extension for the rider". This is how the beast works. And I think the wording states this indirectly when it talks about the ranger's turn, the beast's turn, and how they are all jumbled up from a "general" sense. This is a specific thing that supersedes the general.
A controlled mount and beast master ranger are the only two instances of summoning or buddy abilities that specially say something like matches your initiative or changes to your initiative without saying something like it takes it's turn after yours or in the initiative order. The battle smith artificer ("takes it's turn after yours"), find steed spells ("rolls its own initiative"), find familiar spell ("rolls its own initiative"), conjure spells ("rolls its own initiative"), all say the creature have their own turn at a different point in the initiative order. Point of interest: many folks have the find familiar act on the spellcaster's turn to "simplify the mechanics". So why this whole subclass idea of a shared initiative is "crazy" is sad to me.
This is a fighting unit bolstered by skill, subclass focus, and even magic. I hate the interpretation that this is just a dumb robot-like animal. This is a part of the ranger. An extension of the ranger. It's "power" comes form the flexibility of the ranger and the beast acting as one on the battlefield.
Here here. What's the point of Beast Master otherwise? Spirit sure seems to be that they become a fighting unit. Imagine a knight jousting on a horse and the horse had to complete all its movement and actions before the Knight could adjust the aim of their lance or dodge or whatever (or vice versa). That's ridonk and also not any fun at all. Fun can be good.
(I also think of controlling an infernal war machine in BG:DiA. That is an extension of your turn.)
The mounted combat section also makes this distinction:
Mounting and Dismounting
Once during your move,you can mount a creature that is within 5 feet of you or dismount. Doing so costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. For example, if your speed is 30 feet, you must spend 15 feet of movement to mount a horse. Therefore, you can’t mount it if you don’t have 15 feet of movement left or if your speed is 0.
If an effect moves your mount against its will while you’re on it, you must succeed on a DC 10 Dexterity saving throw or fall off the mount, landing prone in a space within 5 feet of it. If you’re knocked prone while mounted, you must make the same saving throw.
If your mount is knocked prone, you can use your reaction to dismount it as it falls and land on your feet. Otherwise, you are dismounted and fall prone in a space within 5 feet it.
Controlling a Mount
While you’re mounted, you have two options. You can either control the mount or allow it to act independently. Intelligent creatures, such as dragons, act independently.
You can control a mount only if it has been trained to accept a rider. Domesticated horses, donkeys, and similar creatures are assumed to have such training. The initiative of a controlled mount changes to match yours when you mount it. It moves as you direct it, and it has only three action options: Dash, Disengage, and Dodge. A controlled mount can move and act even on the turn that you mount it.
An independent mount retains its place in the initiative order. Bearing a rider puts no restrictions on the actions the mount can take, and it moves and acts as it wishes. It might flee from combat, rush to attack and devour a badly injured foe, or otherwise act against your wishes.
In either case, if the mount provokes an opportunity attack while you’re on it, the attacker can target you or the mount.
You can only mount a creature on your turn. A controlled mount can move and act even on the turn that you mount it...which is only on YOUR TURN!!! Those words by themselves speak to the "turns" being one in the same.
My whole point in bringing up the mounted combat section is to provide some context that two "turns" can happen at the same time. A controlled mount or operating a vehicle would be two examples. The beast master ranger's beast companion would be the third example.
Yes, each creature has a "turn" in combat in the initiative order. This doesn't change with the controlled mount or beast companion. What does change ("exceptions based game" and "specific beats general" are in play here) is how those turns interact. They are symbiotic, overlap, are concurrent, and interweaved. This is the ease of play, power, and flexibility of the controlled mount and subclass ability over an independent mount or other kind of pet. Why not just tame a wolf or buy a mastiff or hawk? Beyond the benefits of the creature's getting buffed by the subclass (which folks still complain about), it is the true extension of and to the ranger provided through the beast via the subclass.
There are two other “specific beats general” “exception base rule” points of precedent within the game. One is from the Basic Rules and/or PHB under order of combat. “...The DM makes one roll for an entire group of identical creatures, so each member of the group acts at the same time.” So there are creatures acting at the same time. The second is from the little sidebar in the Mythic Odyssey of Theros book under chariots next to the magic chariot magic item. It says “...if multiple creatures are pulling the chariot, they all act on the same initiative...”
In several of the sites showing "leaks" of the Tasha's book we can see how they are wording the optional replacement feature at 3rd level for the beast master ranger.
They make the wording much clearer in this. It furthers my interpretation of the reading of the PHB 3rd level beast master ranger feature. This interpretation makes the beast master ranger wonderfully different to the other classes, subclass, and spells that have or create another "thing" under the player's influence.
It's important to remember that two creatures can have an identical Initiative and act at the same time. I interpret the ranger and beast companion as acting in tandem. Both can move at the same time. The ranger can use their action to command their companion at the same time. Past level 5, they can attack in tandem. Past level 7, the ranger can issue commands with a bonus action; letting the ranger get their normal move and, for the sake of argument, a double-move for the companion.
Unfortunately, because of technicalities, this style does not work that well with TWF. Ordering the companion to take an attack, by RAW, means the ranger hasn't taken the attack action and cannot use TWF. But by the same token, TWF is also a bit of a trap. It's useful early on but later falls off when compared to Dueling. It really needs extra magical damage to soar.
It’s official. Tasha’s only replaces the level 3 ability for the beast master. That means the level 7, 11, and 15 subclass abilities are unchanged. that means the beast and ranger combined are making 4 attacks at level 11! Average of 44 damage a turn.
Rapier Ranger = +9 to hit and (d8 + 2 +5)*2 damage
Beast of Land = +7 to hit and (d8 + 2 + 4)*2
The beast of the land also has a 20’ extra d6 damage and knock down effect. Plus AoO.
Does The Ranger when he gets lv3 and choose beast tamer is the first per imediatly here or does he need to spent first 8 hours?
No by default the ranger at 3rd gets a companion ...period. No need for 8 hours to be spent on the first one. They just get it and I would argue the class doesn't even rely on the dm's setting. the ranger picks what appears for the first one.
But
If the beast dies, you can obtain a new companion by spending 8 hours magically bonding with a beast that isn’t hostile to you and that meets the requirements.
So the second one needs to be settled on working with your dm to determine the bonding process.
As for the rest of this thread. it shows a how common poor understanding of game definitions and mechanics are for phb beastmasters. phb beast companions have a unique turn unlike anything else in the game .its even different from the new tashas. phb beasts have a full turn at the exact same time as the ranger. both the beast and the ranger have full turns (action, bonus action, and movement) However there are restrictions placed on certain uses. the restriction for commands to be given means the beast will only do things when commanded but that happens during the rangers turn not after. so there can be more sync between the two than most.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I see that, and I agree!
Does that mean when the ranger gets to level 7 the beast companion can take both the attack action and the disengage action on its turn, provided it didn't somehow manage to attack on the rangers turn?
There is precedent for multiple creatures taking their turns at the same time right in the combat section under initiative:
“The DM makes one roll for an entire group of identical creatures, so each member of the group acts at the same time.”
So do these identical creatures all go at the same time or take their turns on each other’s initiative?
Watch the Dragon Talk: Sage Advice on Mounted Combat with Jeremy Crawford. A controlled mount is the one thing in the PHB that has similar initiative as the ranger animal companion.
Crawford clearly states that the mount’s turn “overlaps” the rider’s turn. He is definitely not saying that one has to complete their turn before the other begins their turn. If mount and rider can do this then there is reason to interpret ranger and animal companion initiative in the same way.
One of my issues is how the Two-Weapon Fighting style that rangers have access to gets shut down by making commands to the companion.
Commanding the beast to Attack takes your action, thus you can't take the Attack action yourself to use TWF. At higher levels, when you can command with the bonus action, you'd still miss out on TWF due to having no available bonus action.
The only way this is justified is by the sheer amount of damage some beasts can do and how they do it. The giant poisonous snake is often regarded as one of (if not the #1) best companion due to its high AC, to hit and separate damage rolls. Your proficiency bonus is added to all of these, so the snake double-dips on damage from its bite and then its save-based poison.
I’ve been one to dislike the wording regarding the companion - does the ranger sacrifice his Action completely just to command the beast. Reading through this thread, particularly the comments of Frank & Silvva, I am finding a better understanding. I also think I see a solution to their differences.
Given Frank’s eloquent reasoning that the ranger and beast fight as a unit AND given Silvva’s logic regarding the beast having “its own turn” -
Perhaps the beast turn and the ranger turn (same initiative), 7th lvl and beyond, are as interchangeable as a Bonus Action and an Action. The barbarian can Rage and then Attack and the Rogue can Attack and BA Hide.
When the ranger/beast relationship is young (below 5th lvl) there is less unity of action; as was stated earlier auto-dodge is pretty good and the attack isn’t always that powerful. Levels 5 and 6 the synergy is improving - now each can attack the same round rather than one or the other (extra attack). From 7th lvl on, the beast gives advantage to one attack every turn due to the Help action.
It would seem that the ranger could give advantage every round to anyone - guaranteed sneak attack to the rogue because the beast is Helping.
Moshet Tanubis - Grave Cleric - Lvl 1 -- Mercer's Tavern
Asvala Vor - Barbarian/War Cleric - Lvl 2/Lvl 1 - Icewind Dale: Frostmaiden
I'm not a fan of using JC's Sage Advice thrown into a rules discussions, but this is interesting to me for this case.
We now from the core books that specific beats general. Controlled mounted combat has a similar feel and mechanical application as the beast master ranger, in that, a controlled mount is kind of no longer an NPC, at least for the time it's being ridden while controlled during combat. The controlled mount still "has a turn". Each creature "has a turn" in combat. But my stance is the beast master and the beast companion share their initiative. They happen at the same time. This is the same as a controlled mound, in my opinion. JC speaks to this in a video, briefly.
https://youtu.be/99tX6tmc73Q?t=1162
He speaks about how the controlled mount has it's turn but the two turns overlap. He says the "controlled mount moves on your turn" and how that is easier to coordinate with. It "becomes an action extension for the rider". This is how the beast works. And I think the wording states this indirectly when it talks about the ranger's turn, the beast's turn, and how they are all jumbled up from a "general" sense. This is a specific thing that supersedes the general.
A controlled mount and beast master ranger are the only two instances of summoning or buddy abilities that specially say something like matches your initiative or changes to your initiative without saying something like it takes it's turn after yours or in the initiative order. The battle smith artificer ("takes it's turn after yours"), find steed spells ("rolls its own initiative"), find familiar spell ("rolls its own initiative"), conjure spells ("rolls its own initiative"), all say the creature have their own turn at a different point in the initiative order. Point of interest: many folks have the find familiar act on the spellcaster's turn to "simplify the mechanics". So why this whole subclass idea of a shared initiative is "crazy" is sad to me.
This is a fighting unit bolstered by skill, subclass focus, and even magic. I hate the interpretation that this is just a dumb robot-like animal. This is a part of the ranger. An extension of the ranger. It's "power" comes form the flexibility of the ranger and the beast acting as one on the battlefield.
Here here. What's the point of Beast Master otherwise? Spirit sure seems to be that they become a fighting unit. Imagine a knight jousting on a horse and the horse had to complete all its movement and actions before the Knight could adjust the aim of their lance or dodge or whatever (or vice versa). That's ridonk and also not any fun at all. Fun can be good.
Yes!
(I also think of controlling an infernal war machine in BG:DiA. That is an extension of your turn.)
The mounted combat section also makes this distinction:
Mounting and Dismounting
Once during your move, you can mount a creature that is within 5 feet of you or dismount. Doing so costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. For example, if your speed is 30 feet, you must spend 15 feet of movement to mount a horse. Therefore, you can’t mount it if you don’t have 15 feet of movement left or if your speed is 0.
If an effect moves your mount against its will while you’re on it, you must succeed on a DC 10 Dexterity saving throw or fall off the mount, landing prone in a space within 5 feet of it. If you’re knocked prone while mounted, you must make the same saving throw.
If your mount is knocked prone, you can use your reaction to dismount it as it falls and land on your feet. Otherwise, you are dismounted and fall prone in a space within 5 feet it.
Controlling a Mount
While you’re mounted, you have two options. You can either control the mount or allow it to act independently. Intelligent creatures, such as dragons, act independently.
You can control a mount only if it has been trained to accept a rider. Domesticated horses, donkeys, and similar creatures are assumed to have such training. The initiative of a controlled mount changes to match yours when you mount it. It moves as you direct it, and it has only three action options: Dash, Disengage, and Dodge. A controlled mount can move and act even on the turn that you mount it.
An independent mount retains its place in the initiative order. Bearing a rider puts no restrictions on the actions the mount can take, and it moves and acts as it wishes. It might flee from combat, rush to attack and devour a badly injured foe, or otherwise act against your wishes.
In either case, if the mount provokes an opportunity attack while you’re on it, the attacker can target you or the mount.
You can only mount a creature on your turn. A controlled mount can move and act even on the turn that you mount it...which is only on YOUR TURN!!! Those words by themselves speak to the "turns" being one in the same.
My whole point in bringing up the mounted combat section is to provide some context that two "turns" can happen at the same time. A controlled mount or operating a vehicle would be two examples. The beast master ranger's beast companion would be the third example.
Yes, each creature has a "turn" in combat in the initiative order. This doesn't change with the controlled mount or beast companion. What does change ("exceptions based game" and "specific beats general" are in play here) is how those turns interact. They are symbiotic, overlap, are concurrent, and interweaved. This is the ease of play, power, and flexibility of the controlled mount and subclass ability over an independent mount or other kind of pet. Why not just tame a wolf or buy a mastiff or hawk? Beyond the benefits of the creature's getting buffed by the subclass (which folks still complain about), it is the true extension of and to the ranger provided through the beast via the subclass.
There are two other “specific beats general” “exception base rule” points of precedent within the game. One is from the Basic Rules and/or PHB under order of combat. “...The DM makes one roll for an entire group of identical creatures, so each member of the group acts at the same time.” So there are creatures acting at the same time. The second is from the little sidebar in the Mythic Odyssey of Theros book under chariots next to the magic chariot magic item. It says “...if multiple creatures are pulling the chariot, they all act on the same initiative...”
In several of the sites showing "leaks" of the Tasha's book we can see how they are wording the optional replacement feature at 3rd level for the beast master ranger.
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2020/10/27/ranger-beast-master-tashas-cauldron-of-everything-official-fix/
They make the wording much clearer in this. It furthers my interpretation of the reading of the PHB 3rd level beast master ranger feature. This interpretation makes the beast master ranger wonderfully different to the other classes, subclass, and spells that have or create another "thing" under the player's influence.
It's important to remember that two creatures can have an identical Initiative and act at the same time. I interpret the ranger and beast companion as acting in tandem. Both can move at the same time. The ranger can use their action to command their companion at the same time. Past level 5, they can attack in tandem. Past level 7, the ranger can issue commands with a bonus action; letting the ranger get their normal move and, for the sake of argument, a double-move for the companion.
Unfortunately, because of technicalities, this style does not work that well with TWF. Ordering the companion to take an attack, by RAW, means the ranger hasn't taken the attack action and cannot use TWF. But by the same token, TWF is also a bit of a trap. It's useful early on but later falls off when compared to Dueling. It really needs extra magical damage to soar.
Yep!
It’s official. Tasha’s only replaces the level 3 ability for the beast master. That means the level 7, 11, and 15 subclass abilities are unchanged. that means the beast and ranger combined are making 4 attacks at level 11! Average of 44 damage a turn.
Rapier Ranger = +9 to hit and (d8 + 2 +5)*2 damage
Beast of Land = +7 to hit and (d8 + 2 + 4)*2
The beast of the land also has a 20’ extra d6 damage and knock down effect. Plus AoO.
Does The Ranger when he gets lv3 and choose beast tamer is the first per imediatly here or does he need to spent first 8 hours?
No by default the ranger at 3rd gets a companion ...period. No need for 8 hours to be spent on the first one. They just get it and I would argue the class doesn't even rely on the dm's setting. the ranger picks what appears for the first one.
But
So the second one needs to be settled on working with your dm to determine the bonding process.
As for the rest of this thread. it shows a how common poor understanding of game definitions and mechanics are for phb beastmasters. phb beast companions have a unique turn unlike anything else in the game .its even different from the new tashas. phb beasts have a full turn at the exact same time as the ranger. both the beast and the ranger have full turns (action, bonus action, and movement) However there are restrictions placed on certain uses. the restriction for commands to be given means the beast will only do things when commanded but that happens during the rangers turn not after. so there can be more sync between the two than most.