Honestly, at this point I believe that WotC design philosophy has changed enough that I think its about time for a 5.5e release. I know that topic is filled with various opinions and I don't want to get into that discussion here. Every group/person has their own sense of "balance" and I personally think that most casters should have spells known/prepared list. Also yeah, I do dislike how some of these "variant features" are just being used to fixed parts of 5e without acknowledging it. Do I like the idea of players having more choices to make their characters, of course, but this just feels like it's doing patchwork for a larger issue.
Also, I did double check on the saving throw/skills for the beast companion. It doesn't gain the prof bonus to all skills and saving throws like I thought, but only gaining the bonus if the beast is already proficient in those skills/saving throws; "Add your proficiency bonus to the beast’s AC, attack rolls, and damage rolls, as well as to any saving throws and skills it is proficient in."
The Tasha's optional beast master 3rd level ability DOES allow the beast to add the ranger's proficiency bonus to ALL ability checks and saving throws the beast makes.
It's meh. I think a lot of newer players miss the fact that D&D isn't an MMO—not everything has to be "viable" or even "balanced." There's a lot of talk about "party composition," "tank/healer/DPS," and all that. It doesn't matter. MMOs are fun, but they're not D&D. D&D is all about roleplaying a character and having fun, and the Beast Master isn't so underpowered as to be unfun. If you're a power gamer, yeah, you should pass on it, but if not, go for it! Is it underpowered? Yeah, a bit. Is that a game-breaking problem? Absolutely not.
Of course, but when talking on DDB or social media, since roleplaying diverges so greatly between groups, this is just about all they have to talk about, and when that happens, as in most scenarios, humans exaggerate.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
All hail the great and mighty platypus.
Resisting is simply standing in front of the tide and pushing at it. Even if you endure at first, you will eventually break down. Adapting, by contrast, is turning into a fish.
-me
Rangers are not underpowered. They’re just exploration-oriented.
I think you’re correct. Combat is mostly able to be calculated, contrasted, and compared, where many other portions of the game aren’t. Especially “white room”, single target, perfect scenario calculations.
The new pets are alright, but the replacement ability should have been an errata, and I’m a fan of the PHB subclass.
The whole thing. The Primal Companion optional feature includes the pets. The feature is designed to work with those pets. We've talked about it plenty before and I know you like the OG Beast Master, but I think it is a headache. At level 3, either you or the pet attacks. At level 5, you still only have 2 attacks between the two of you. Chances are you'll be doing more damage than the pet so your pet won't be making many attacks. At level 11 the subclass starts to work alright but up until then it's just painfully discouraging to play. Moving the pet attacks (and other actions) to the ranger's bonus action opens things up so much. The ranger can take the attack action for two attacks, the ranger can cast spells, or the ranger can take really any other action and still have the pet attack. This is such a better design than what was in the PHB. The PHB Ranger pets were as squishy as a wizard with 10 con which was real dumb. The new pets (with the exception of the air one) have 25% more much needed HP. The air one has flyby by default though so that helps it survive a bit.
Right. Agreed. Tasha’s is a little power creepy, so the BMR needed the boost beyond the core 3 world. I do like the flexibility of the bonus action command, no verbal needed, ANY action, Undeniable clarification that the beast ask on the ranger’s turn, and both the beast and ranger taking a full attack action.
Does anyone think it was a little over tuned the in opposite direction? I’m sure the intent is that it’s balanced by using the spell attack of the ranger, even factoring that in it is potent.
I voted that the beast master ranger is great and balanced. I think the ranger class, more than any other, is subject to DM interpretation, interaction, and inclusion for the class to perform its best. Think of fighters and warlocks in games that don’t take many short rests or fire based classes (light cleric, red draconic sorcerer, etc.) stuck in a game that takes place in hell. I also think that most people interpret the rules for the ranger class and beast master subclass incorrectly. Anytime someone wants to use the revised ranger instead, there is a correct interpretation of the PHB ranger that does the same thing. I encourage you to read the class and subclass(es) for yourself, talk with your DM ahead of time, and actually play the class for yourself.
I agree and double down on this statement. I got a lot of use out of the original ranger's abilities. Probably more than I would the Tasha's stuff. The original worked and wizards continued to defend it. The key is a complex understanding of the game. Many people were too strict on using its original abilities because it required long chains of understanding. It also had a vocal group of haters (I believe due to the class not fitting their personality or ideology rather than actual play). This put wizards in a tough place because any change would piss-off a group. So they largely avoided addressing it. Notice no mention of sage advice for rangers. when there were a ridiculous amount of questions. Death loophole, feats, training, down time, pet concentration, magic items, Poison harvesting (And its own group of haters), the hide action, the term "related". However now that there are more options (aka summons, other pet classes, and tasha's alternate) out there it might put them in a place to actually talk about it. As for the expanded spell list, I actually don't need it. Rangers are shorter on slots anyway. Just the new spells is enough for me. also, I think they are long overdue for a animal specific resurrection spell. It would be useful for many classes and rp themes.
I agree that most of the ranger abilities were fine but I do appreciate the alternates. The Beast Master is different though. The original beast master was not mechanically sound. There were some gimmicks that might have worked and made it less awful but honestly none of those made sense or were intended. Tasha's fixed the Beast Master. I know there are still plenty of people that liked the original, but I have no idea how.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
My bad, I thought you were referring to the PHB Beast Companion's saving throws, not the new tasha's beast companions.
My Homebrew | Background | Feats | Magic Items | Races | Spells | Subclass | Homebrewery
To see my more recent homebrew creations, please check out my content on Hombrewery.
Of course, but when talking on DDB or social media, since roleplaying diverges so greatly between groups, this is just about all they have to talk about, and when that happens, as in most scenarios, humans exaggerate.
All hail the great and mighty platypus.
Resisting is simply standing in front of the tide and pushing at it. Even if you endure at first, you will eventually break down. Adapting, by contrast, is turning into a fish.
-me
Rangers are not underpowered. They’re just exploration-oriented.
My homebrew setting: https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/story-lore/94809-wakai-a-setting-inspired-by-japanese-folklore-and
This account is kinda old and I haven’t used it in a while
I think you’re correct. Combat is mostly able to be calculated, contrasted, and compared, where many other portions of the game aren’t. Especially “white room”, single target, perfect scenario calculations.
Is the beast master good?
Are you using dmg poison harvesting?
Are you you using dmg modifying a monster rules(adding a skill prof doesn't change pet cr)?
Are you using magic items on your pet (and its possibly it concentration)?
Are you using team work? (healers + other boosts)?
Are you using downtime rules for pet and ranger (traveling = free time)?
Are you using other pets? (most others are not incompatible)?
Are you playing tactical?
the answers to these questions determines how powerful the ranger is.
So I changed my vote because of Tasha's. Using the Beast Master Pets provided in Tasha's makes the Beast Master a very good option.
The pets or the new optional replacement ability?
The new pets are alright, but the replacement ability should have been an errata, and I’m a fan of the PHB subclass.
The whole thing. The Primal Companion optional feature includes the pets. The feature is designed to work with those pets. We've talked about it plenty before and I know you like the OG Beast Master, but I think it is a headache. At level 3, either you or the pet attacks. At level 5, you still only have 2 attacks between the two of you. Chances are you'll be doing more damage than the pet so your pet won't be making many attacks. At level 11 the subclass starts to work alright but up until then it's just painfully discouraging to play. Moving the pet attacks (and other actions) to the ranger's bonus action opens things up so much. The ranger can take the attack action for two attacks, the ranger can cast spells, or the ranger can take really any other action and still have the pet attack. This is such a better design than what was in the PHB. The PHB Ranger pets were as squishy as a wizard with 10 con which was real dumb. The new pets (with the exception of the air one) have 25% more much needed HP. The air one has flyby by default though so that helps it survive a bit.
Right. Agreed. Tasha’s is a little power creepy, so the BMR needed the boost beyond the core 3 world. I do like the flexibility of the bonus action command, no verbal needed, ANY action, Undeniable clarification that the beast ask on the ranger’s turn, and both the beast and ranger taking a full attack action.
Does anyone think it was a little over tuned the in opposite direction? I’m sure the intent is that it’s balanced by using the spell attack of the ranger, even factoring that in it is potent.
I agree and double down on this statement. I got a lot of use out of the original ranger's abilities. Probably more than I would the Tasha's stuff. The original worked and wizards continued to defend it. The key is a complex understanding of the game. Many people were too strict on using its original abilities because it required long chains of understanding. It also had a vocal group of haters (I believe due to the class not fitting their personality or ideology rather than actual play). This put wizards in a tough place because any change would piss-off a group. So they largely avoided addressing it. Notice no mention of sage advice for rangers. when there were a ridiculous amount of questions. Death loophole, feats, training, down time, pet concentration, magic items, Poison harvesting (And its own group of haters), the hide action, the term "related". However now that there are more options (aka summons, other pet classes, and tasha's alternate) out there it might put them in a place to actually talk about it. As for the expanded spell list, I actually don't need it. Rangers are shorter on slots anyway. Just the new spells is enough for me. also, I think they are long overdue for a animal specific resurrection spell. It would be useful for many classes and rp themes.
I agree that most of the ranger abilities were fine but I do appreciate the alternates. The Beast Master is different though. The original beast master was not mechanically sound. There were some gimmicks that might have worked and made it less awful but honestly none of those made sense or were intended. Tasha's fixed the Beast Master. I know there are still plenty of people that liked the original, but I have no idea how.