Honestly if you ignore the possible poison milking, I don't really get why you would ever take PHB over Tasha's.
If I were a ranger, I want a companion that I'm not having to babysit to be effective. Tasha lets you have a companion who you can easily revive with a 1st level spell slot (Which honestly should have just been an option as well, since it's such a good QoL that actually fixes at least some of the issues), and change your companion out for different purposes without having to kill the original.
Need to scout an area out? Get sky form and have it fly around for the day. Going underground or something underwater? Then you can take land or sea forms. If you want blindsight, you can take the fighting style still.
Can the PHB version be used? Sure, but it's quite punishing if you mess up so it isn't good for new players. It sucks for you to invest a bunch of characterization in having an animal companion tied to your backstory, only for it to die easily in a few rounds.
Again there is no promise in the rules that a primal companion can scout. Every defined instance requires player action. If your dm still let's you you still can't dash or hide to get away (if caught) because only dodge is allowed.
As for blindsight 10' range isn't going to compare to the 30' or 60' foot available from the phb. Having the fighting style option mitigates some risk but does nothing for ranged builds.
Thirdly dnd is about the interaction between narrative and mechanics to tell a shared story. That is why just writing it in our heads isn't enough. I had a player once who said his backstory involved killing a king does that mean he should just be allowed to leverage it for the current campaign? If it was so important to backstory why would you not rush to the nearest druid or cleric? Why would you not make it your goal to aquire the power to help your friend? Why would you not work together as friends instead treating it as "babysitting"? This is not about forced narratives or if it is you better have agreed with a dm willing to tell the story that way.
When everyone tells you that you are wrong, you are most likely wrong. The smart thing is to review your opinion, and understand why almost no one thinks like you. The stupid thing is to insist in a stubborn way.
All the arguments you raise, and that different people have been refuting, do not really make the PHB beast master any better. They don't even put him on the same level. But they are also completely circumstantial arguments, based on situations, game types, etc... that are not general.
Can you make a specific build with a magic item and I don't know what it feats and, in addition, it combos with another one from the party? Do you do an awesome build for I don't know what setting where a specific type of challenge abounds? OK, perfect. But all this is so circumstantial that it cannot be taken as an argument.
The PHB's Beast Master is worse. There is consensus on that and tiresomely turning it over and over is not going to change that fact. No need to be so stubborn, my friend. You just need to understand what everyone is telling you. If so many people are telling you one thinh, it must be for a reason. Not everyone will be wrong except you, right?
There hasn't been a single refute of any of my points. (Beyond my snarky bonus action spells one)It has all been vague "everyone knows it's bad" statements.
I haven't even claimed tasha's is bad.
The truth is phb beastmaster covers things Tasha's can't. I have not even claimed setting or equipment privileges or special rulings.
The truth is myself, inquisitive encoder, quindranaco's, treantmonk have all said there's value in the phb version. How about dan dillon from the dnd team? The stubbornness is from the people who refuse to acknowledge other opinions and playstyles. This fictional consensus doesn't exist. Even then peer support is not a justification.
Very well I didn't realize I needed to explain basics of play. I figured using basic inferences were a requirement of playing 5e. Since I have to assume such, I will think on the best way to represent information for people who cannot answer the most basic question that started this.
Can a phb beastmaster do things Tasha's can't?
Blindsight at 3rd level isn't enough for you.
Grappling on land with spikegrowth isn't enough.(note beast of the sea 5' movement)
Better keen senses otions isn't enough.
Sure footed isn't enough.
Skill expertise isn't enough.
A better ac calculation. adding Instead of replacing.
Character level attack and skill increases isn't enough.
Poison harvesting and saved damage for later isn't enough.
Being able to attack "in combat" without the ranger isn't enough.
Why am I the one who is stubborn when there are people who cannot say "yes a phb beastmaster can do things Tasha's can't".
How is this diatribe not a point? How has that been any of that been refuted? Again this will take some thought to explain if this basic concept cannot be understood.
Having a beast with blindsight doesn't give you blindsight. There's no option to share senses with your beast. Poison is the weakest damage type in 5E due to the sheer number of creatures that are resistant or immune to it, which includes a lot of boss type monsters. In both the PHB and Tasha's, the companion's skills, AC, and attacks increase based on the character's proficiency bonus, the PHB companion does not have an advantage there. Grappling sets the target's speed to zero, so it has no interaction with spike growth unless you are dragging them through the effect, in which case your companion is taking damage as well. As for the rest of your "better options", if you want them on a companion you're stuck with an animal that's going to be sub-par in most other respects: what beast even has skill expertise? Empty claims of "well you could have this and that would be better" is still not making a point. What actual animal companions are you using? You're limited to a critter with a CR of 1/4 or lower, there's not a whole lot of power options on that list.
Every phb beast proficient in a skill gets proficiency added( functional expertise)
A wolf starts with keen senses passive perception 21. Most of the 72 compatible creatures have keen senses and or perception proficiency or blindsight.
By the way beastsense and fogcloud are ranger spells.
Same with ac tasha's is a formula,phb is an additon. Barding, spells and more can give new ac calculation beastmaster is superior then.
Poison damage works on 60% of creatures with legendary actions. That means mathematically you only reduce its final value by 40% at most. Plus it's rarely actually wasted if you're saving it for creatures you know it works on.
The blindsight point is terrible...you can't even intrinsically communicate with your beast when its out of sight/hearing range so its sight is next to worthless for you.
Poison is the single most resisted damage in the game and has a ton of immunities. Plus lots of things are immune to the poisoned condition as well.
Grappling on spike growth is about the only thing you mentioned that even relatively useful and thats if the creature grappled doesnt just decide to wreck the crap out of your beast that you can't get back for 8 hours.
Overall all of your points are now here...but pretty bad IMO.
This thread is starting to remind me of the tale of the fool on the hill.
Specifically this <<Why am I the one who is stubborn when there are people who cannot say "yes a phb beastmaster can do things Tasha's can't".>>
Has anyone actually told you that the beastmaster PHB can't do things other than Tasha's? What they're telling you is that those things are situational at best, and practically useless at others.
And above all, what we are telling you is that none of those things can overcome the biggest problem of the PHB beast master, which is his action economy. That aspect is so bad that for the beastmaster PHB to even match Tasha's, it would have to allow you to do something spectacularly useful. Not situational tidbits that one beast or another can give you (and only one or two per beast, not all of the ones you mention with with a single beast).
That is the refutation of your arguments, which you have already been told ad nauseam. If it were one or two people, I could understand that you remained immovable in your position. But boy, is that a dozen forum members have already passed by here and they are all telling you the same thing.
Yes, right, and that you have to find the beast you need. If you want the crab, but there are no crabs where you are, you're screwed. If you're in a dungeon, you're screwed. In short, if the animal dies, you're screwed. You can summon Tasha's again with no problem. And continue with your adventure.
Yes, right, and that you have to find the beast you need. If you want the crab, but there are no crabs where you are, you're screwed.
Absolute nonsense. A PHB Beastmaster no more needs to find their animal nearby than a Mercy Monk needs to find a mask. The subclass miraculously provides it.
Yes, right, and that you have to find the beast you need. If you want the crab, but there are no crabs where you are, you're screwed.
Absolute nonsense. A PHB Beastmaster no more needs to find their animal nearby than a Mercy Monk needs to find a mask. The subclass miraculously provides it.
"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."
Where does it say the creature magically appears? Even if you wanted to interpret it as subtext or something (which would not be true either), it tells you "that isn't hostile to you". How is it going to be hostile or friendly if the class magically gives it to you? That makes no sense.
RAW you have to meet the creature, it has to be non-hostile, and you have to spend 8 hours to bond with it.
Yes, right, and that you have to find the beast you need. If you want the crab, but there are no crabs where you are, you're screwed.
Absolute nonsense. A PHB Beastmaster no more needs to find their animal nearby than a Mercy Monk needs to find a mask. The subclass miraculously provides it.
He was referring to what happens if it dies (see the preceding post). It seems like when you take the subclass it just appears. But if you lose it, the subclass feature specifically says what happens:
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.
This thread is starting to remind me of the tale of the fool on the hill.
Specifically this <<Why am I the one who is stubborn when there are people who cannot say "yes a phb beastmaster can do things Tasha's can't".>>
Has anyone actually told you that the beastmaster PHB can't do things other than Tasha's? What they're telling you is that those things are situational at best, and practically useless at others.
And above all, what we are telling you is that none of those things can overcome the biggest problem of the PHB beast master, which is his action economy. That aspect is so bad that for the beastmaster PHB to even match Tasha's, it would have to allow you to do something spectacularly useful. Not situational tidbits that one beast or another can give you (and only one or two per beast, not all of the ones you mention with with a single beast).
That is the refutation of your arguments, which you have already been told ad nauseam. If it were one or two people, I could understand that you remained immovable in your position. But boy, is that a dozen forum members have already passed by here and they are all telling you the same thing.
Simple reasons exist for asking that question because if you can't even acknowledge the features you have.....it shows:
1. Potental Bias.
2. We can't build off of those principles to solve the problems.
3. You could have a problem Sticking to one topic. I would like to avoid jumps in logic and misrepresented facts(both intentional and accidental). established foundational elements are helpful.
3. getting a feel for your tactical understanding and willingness to change approach.
4 understanding "situational" leads into how phb beastmaster ranger controls the situation in their favor. Increasing survival and combat values.
I will gladly address action economy and death. Healing, tactics but it will take charts and data and simulation.(I am not an excel expert nor a professional presenter). Time is needed to boil down in a presentable manner, since you do not accept the value of the most basic features.
This is hard because, Presently I do not believe two conversation participants can even admit bigger numbers are good. They also can't count the number of positive comments present only negative ones.
Yes, right, and that you have to find the beast you need. If you want the crab, but there are no crabs where you are, you're screwed. If you're in a dungeon, you're screwed. In short, if the animal dies, you're screwed. You can summon Tasha's again with no problem. And continue with your adventure.
Why would you stick with a crab when better environmentally appropriate animals are near by? Why didn't you heal it? Stabilize is a medicine check.
Save its corpse and Resurrect it when naratively appropriate. Then choose which to keep and which to release(or keep both assuming your dm understands the pet deathloophole)
Also,You do realize that changing your tashas beast actually destroys the previous one. Same with being unable to touch its corpse.(eaten, disintegrate,scouting defeat, ect. Right? Even if you use a spell slot for Resurrection you get the beast back but you still are at the same place as a ranger that used a slot to avoid damage.
Yes, right, and that you have to find the beast you need. If you want the crab, but there are no crabs where you are, you're screwed. If you're in a dungeon, you're screwed. In short, if the animal dies, you're screwed. You can summon Tasha's again with no problem. And continue with your adventure.
Why would you stick with a crab when better environmentally appropriate animals are near by? Why didn't you heal it? Stabilize is a medicine check.
Save its corpse and Resurrect it when naratively appropriate. Then choose which to keep and which to release(or keep both assuming your dm understands the pet deathloophole)
Also,You do realize that changing your tashas beast actually destroys the previous one. Same with being unable to touch its corpse.(eaten, disintegrate,scouting defeat, ect. Right? Even if you use a spell slot for Resurrection you get the beast back but you still are at the same place as a ranger that used a slot to avoid damage.
Permanent knowledge, epic boons all gone.
So now the party has to spend spells to keep both you and your pet alive? Tashas you are at least using your own slots....PHB you are stealing slots away from the party as a whole to keep your subclass going. This is bad design.
Epic boons? The Level 20+ feature? Really what relevance does that have with 99.99999% of parties?
Overall the vast majority of players will do vastly better with Tashas Beastmaster as it offers much more flexibility, action economy, and player choice.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Again there is no promise in the rules that a primal companion can scout. Every defined instance requires player action. If your dm still let's you you still can't dash or hide to get away (if caught) because only dodge is allowed.
As for blindsight 10' range isn't going to compare to the 30' or 60' foot available from the phb. Having the fighting style option mitigates some risk but does nothing for ranged builds.
Thirdly dnd is about the interaction between narrative and mechanics to tell a shared story. That is why just writing it in our heads isn't enough. I had a player once who said his backstory involved killing a king does that mean he should just be allowed to leverage it for the current campaign? If it was so important to backstory why would you not rush to the nearest druid or cleric? Why would you not make it your goal to aquire the power to help your friend? Why would you not work together as friends instead treating it as "babysitting"? This is not about forced narratives or if it is you better have agreed with a dm willing to tell the story that way.
When everyone tells you that you are wrong, you are most likely wrong. The smart thing is to review your opinion, and understand why almost no one thinks like you. The stupid thing is to insist in a stubborn way.
All the arguments you raise, and that different people have been refuting, do not really make the PHB beast master any better. They don't even put him on the same level. But they are also completely circumstantial arguments, based on situations, game types, etc... that are not general.
Can you make a specific build with a magic item and I don't know what it feats and, in addition, it combos with another one from the party? Do you do an awesome build for I don't know what setting where a specific type of challenge abounds? OK, perfect. But all this is so circumstantial that it cannot be taken as an argument.
The PHB's Beast Master is worse. There is consensus on that and tiresomely turning it over and over is not going to change that fact. No need to be so stubborn, my friend. You just need to understand what everyone is telling you. If so many people are telling you one thinh, it must be for a reason. Not everyone will be wrong except you, right?
There hasn't been a single refute of any of my points. (Beyond my snarky bonus action spells one)It has all been vague "everyone knows it's bad" statements.
I haven't even claimed tasha's is bad.
The truth is phb beastmaster covers things Tasha's can't. I have not even claimed setting or equipment privileges or special rulings.
The truth is myself, inquisitive encoder, quindranaco's, treantmonk have all said there's value in the phb version. How about dan dillon from the dnd team? The stubbornness is from the people who refuse to acknowledge other opinions and playstyles. This fictional consensus doesn't exist. Even then peer support is not a justification.
You haven't actually made any points. You made some claims without actually demonstrating how to do any of those claims, which is not the same thing.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Exactly you have to actually make points for people to refute
Very well I didn't realize I needed to explain basics of play. I figured using basic inferences were a requirement of playing 5e. Since I have to assume such, I will think on the best way to represent information for people who cannot answer the most basic question that started this.
Can a phb beastmaster do things Tasha's can't?
Blindsight at 3rd level isn't enough for you.
Grappling on land with spikegrowth isn't enough.(note beast of the sea 5' movement)
Better keen senses otions isn't enough.
Sure footed isn't enough.
Skill expertise isn't enough.
A better ac calculation. adding Instead of replacing.
Character level attack and skill increases isn't enough.
Poison harvesting and saved damage for later isn't enough.
Being able to attack "in combat" without the ranger isn't enough.
Why am I the one who is stubborn when there are people who cannot say "yes a phb beastmaster can do things Tasha's can't".
How is this diatribe not a point? How has that been any of that been refuted? Again this will take some thought to explain if this basic concept cannot be understood.
Having a beast with blindsight doesn't give you blindsight. There's no option to share senses with your beast. Poison is the weakest damage type in 5E due to the sheer number of creatures that are resistant or immune to it, which includes a lot of boss type monsters. In both the PHB and Tasha's, the companion's skills, AC, and attacks increase based on the character's proficiency bonus, the PHB companion does not have an advantage there. Grappling sets the target's speed to zero, so it has no interaction with spike growth unless you are dragging them through the effect, in which case your companion is taking damage as well. As for the rest of your "better options", if you want them on a companion you're stuck with an animal that's going to be sub-par in most other respects: what beast even has skill expertise? Empty claims of "well you could have this and that would be better" is still not making a point. What actual animal companions are you using? You're limited to a critter with a CR of 1/4 or lower, there's not a whole lot of power options on that list.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Every phb beast proficient in a skill gets proficiency added( functional expertise)
A wolf starts with keen senses passive perception 21. Most of the 72 compatible creatures have keen senses and or perception proficiency or blindsight.
By the way beastsense and fogcloud are ranger spells.
Same with ac tasha's is a formula,phb is an additon. Barding, spells and more can give new ac calculation beastmaster is superior then.
Poison damage works on 60% of creatures with legendary actions. That means mathematically you only reduce its final value by 40% at most. Plus it's rarely actually wasted if you're saving it for creatures you know it works on.
The blindsight point is terrible...you can't even intrinsically communicate with your beast when its out of sight/hearing range so its sight is next to worthless for you.
Poison is the single most resisted damage in the game and has a ton of immunities. Plus lots of things are immune to the poisoned condition as well.
Grappling on spike growth is about the only thing you mentioned that even relatively useful and thats if the creature grappled doesnt just decide to wreck the crap out of your beast that you can't get back for 8 hours.
Overall all of your points are now here...but pretty bad IMO.
This thread is starting to remind me of the tale of the fool on the hill.
Specifically this <<Why am I the one who is stubborn when there are people who cannot say "yes a phb beastmaster can do things Tasha's can't".>>
Has anyone actually told you that the beastmaster PHB can't do things other than Tasha's? What they're telling you is that those things are situational at best, and practically useless at others.
And above all, what we are telling you is that none of those things can overcome the biggest problem of the PHB beast master, which is his action economy. That aspect is so bad that for the beastmaster PHB to even match Tasha's, it would have to allow you to do something spectacularly useful. Not situational tidbits that one beast or another can give you (and only one or two per beast, not all of the ones you mention with with a single beast).
That is the refutation of your arguments, which you have already been told ad nauseam. If it were one or two people, I could understand that you remained immovable in your position. But boy, is that a dozen forum members have already passed by here and they are all telling you the same thing.
Yes, right, and that you have to find the beast you need. If you want the crab, but there are no crabs where you are, you're screwed. If you're in a dungeon, you're screwed. In short, if the animal dies, you're screwed.
You can summon Tasha's again with no problem. And continue with your adventure.
Absolute nonsense. A PHB Beastmaster no more needs to find their animal nearby than a Mercy Monk needs to find a mask. The subclass miraculously provides it.
"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."
Where does it say the creature magically appears? Even if you wanted to interpret it as subtext or something (which would not be true either), it tells you "that isn't hostile to you". How is it going to be hostile or friendly if the class magically gives it to you? That makes no sense.
RAW you have to meet the creature, it has to be non-hostile, and you have to spend 8 hours to bond with it.
He was referring to what happens if it dies (see the preceding post). It seems like when you take the subclass it just appears. But if you lose it, the subclass feature specifically says what happens:
Simple reasons exist for asking that question because if you can't even acknowledge the features you have.....it shows:
1. Potental Bias.
2. We can't build off of those principles to solve the problems.
3. You could have a problem Sticking to one topic. I would like to avoid jumps in logic and misrepresented facts(both intentional and accidental). established foundational elements are helpful.
3. getting a feel for your tactical understanding and willingness to change approach.
4 understanding "situational" leads into how phb beastmaster ranger controls the situation in their favor. Increasing survival and combat values.
I will gladly address action economy and death. Healing, tactics but it will take charts and data and simulation.(I am not an excel expert nor a professional presenter). Time is needed to boil down in a presentable manner, since you do not accept the value of the most basic features.
This is hard because, Presently I do not believe two conversation participants can even admit bigger numbers are good. They also can't count the number of positive comments present only negative ones.
Why would you stick with a crab when better environmentally appropriate animals are near by? Why didn't you heal it? Stabilize is a medicine check.
Save its corpse and Resurrect it when naratively appropriate. Then choose which to keep and which to release(or keep both assuming your dm understands the pet deathloophole)
Also,You do realize that changing your tashas beast actually destroys the previous one. Same with being unable to touch its corpse.(eaten, disintegrate,scouting defeat, ect. Right? Even if you use a spell slot for Resurrection you get the beast back but you still are at the same place as a ranger that used a slot to avoid damage.
Permanent knowledge, epic boons all gone.
So now the party has to spend spells to keep both you and your pet alive? Tashas you are at least using your own slots....PHB you are stealing slots away from the party as a whole to keep your subclass going. This is bad design.
Epic boons? The Level 20+ feature? Really what relevance does that have with 99.99999% of parties?
Overall the vast majority of players will do vastly better with Tashas Beastmaster as it offers much more flexibility, action economy, and player choice.