I'm actually really curious what Beyond is gonna do for the newest UA, Sidekicks. Will it be new subclasses? An option in the monster creator? A whole separate thing?
Also, I love the idea behind it. Hell, I want to play a sidekick just because it seems so interesting.
Well, yes if every party member is entitled to a Sidekick, in practice, I think most DMs would limit sidekicks to 1 per party, however if you opt to go Beastmaster anyways now you have your 1/4 CR companion (let's say a Snake or Wolf) AND a CR 1 sidekick say... a dire wolf. Now you have Mama and Baby on your teams and have a small wolfpack. One that scales with ranger proficiency and one (being more accurate in the long run) and another that scales with attacks and HP.
Yeah...I'll probably just port these rules in for the Beastmaster and Chain Pact Warlock...see how it flows. I have a ranger, who is leveling to 3rd tonight, and has been thinking about beast anyways. Good timing.
I don't think the Sidekicks rules are meant for a particular class or player in particular. It's a set of rules for an entire party. They're for those people that are playing with 2 people and want to have more epic adventures than their characters could handle on their own. The beastmaster ranger is a character class that might have its issues, and this might solve some of those (either real or perceived) flaws in the class, but it's not the intent.
That said, I think the best option the DDB team could go for is to have an option in the Creatures tab "Sidekicks", where you can add any creature that's CR 1 or lower. After setting a creature in that tab, they might allow you to "alter" it via the classes provided to sidekicks, pretty much the same way that the Class system works for a player character. Then this in turn would alter the sidekick's information on the tab.
I sooooo want to play an Imp Spellcaster Sidekick. A Chain familiar freed from the bonds of a fiendish warlock takes up adventuring with the "good guys". Yes, please!
I had thought these rules might make having mundane mounts useful again (as opposed to pallies using summon Greater Steed). Using Sidekick on your faithful steed would let them survive low level AOE spells. Last Sunday, An Adult Green Dragon's Breath Weapon destroyed only the mounts in the cavalry unit we were guiding. Knights and mounts took half damage, but even the heavy warhouses melted under half damage. If the DM had allowed the Cavalry "Sidekick" status for the regiment's mounts, it would have been a less goofy encounter. I do feel the Sidekicks UA material solves some simple problems (such as the previous contained example) as players continue past 8th level.
As a DM, I wouldn't use this as a 'catch up' mechanic for alt PC characters. These rules would seriously hamper the CR calculations of encounters if all the players had a humanoid sidekick alt with them fighting. Action economy is annoying to calculate already, lol.
My table just finished Tresendar Manor in LMoP. Droop is becoming a cowardly expert sidekick. I'm looking forward to testing it with him. My question, though, is that I applied RAW when it came to HP. Goblins have 7hp @ level 2, but when I applied RAW, and bumped him to 3 b/c of the party's level, he ended up with 14hp. Should I just add the 4hp for the level-up to the 7 that he naturally started? Or 6+4+4 (level 1, 2, 3 [no CON])?
I don't see why this couldn't/shouldn't be used with beastmaster rangers. It helps to supplement what the base archetype lacks and give more substance to your animal companion. I also want to point out that this doesn't allow animal companions to do any more damage per attack than normal with the warrior class sidekick(the only ones animals can be without homebrew) unless you crit. The armor rating only goes up by 1 when it reaches the 10th level which isn't game breaking either. As far as humanoid or other intelligent NPCs go you could already give them PC classes to bolster them so this seems like a much easier way for a DM/GM to handle them. If one still believes this is too much power for sidekicks one could also decide that certain monsters(an alpha shadow mastiff guarding a villain's lair perhaps) would reasonably have these classes as well. This can help to even the field and make encounter's more dangerous if a villain crits on a 19 or at higher levels an 18 it can turn one attack into a more sever injury. This being said I am currently playing a homebrew campaign as a Shifter Druid who had a pet fox before these rules came out and my DM has been kind enough to allow us to test this in our next session. We have been talking about letting a friend who is not a player in the campaign, but has been joining us as a spectator of sorts, run him with his new class so as not to have him become a drone or fodder. If people have friends that have not played before, but are interested, this could be a good way to get their toes wet and learn without having to get too invested. Even if they decide that it isn't for them the party doesn't have to lose a member. I am exited to try this out and hope that it gets released into an official book after it is refined.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm actually really curious what Beyond is gonna do for the newest UA, Sidekicks. Will it be new subclasses? An option in the monster creator? A whole separate thing?
Also, I love the idea behind it. Hell, I want to play a sidekick just because it seems so interesting.
Immediate question is...doesn't this really jab at/nerf the BEASTMASTER Ranger?
Well, yes if every party member is entitled to a Sidekick, in practice, I think most DMs would limit sidekicks to 1 per party, however if you opt to go Beastmaster anyways now you have your 1/4 CR companion (let's say a Snake or Wolf) AND a CR 1 sidekick say... a dire wolf. Now you have Mama and Baby on your teams and have a small wolfpack. One that scales with ranger proficiency and one (being more accurate in the long run) and another that scales with attacks and HP.
I wish I know how to use it on dnd beyond without need to create a custom monster.
Mergim, Gnome Wizard, School of Conjuration, Clockwork designer! https://www.dndbeyond.com/profile/Mergim/characters/12817200
New Citizen of Golden Hills, Bytopia
Brasileiro, com orgulho!
Yeah...I'll probably just port these rules in for the Beastmaster and Chain Pact Warlock...see how it flows. I have a ranger, who is leveling to 3rd tonight, and has been thinking about beast anyways. Good timing.
Actually, if you limited sidekicks to beastmaster rangers, you could address one of the subclass' major shortcomings.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I don't think the Sidekicks rules are meant for a particular class or player in particular. It's a set of rules for an entire party. They're for those people that are playing with 2 people and want to have more epic adventures than their characters could handle on their own. The beastmaster ranger is a character class that might have its issues, and this might solve some of those (either real or perceived) flaws in the class, but it's not the intent.
That said, I think the best option the DDB team could go for is to have an option in the Creatures tab "Sidekicks", where you can add any creature that's CR 1 or lower. After setting a creature in that tab, they might allow you to "alter" it via the classes provided to sidekicks, pretty much the same way that the Class system works for a player character. Then this in turn would alter the sidekick's information on the tab.
Subclass: Dwarven Defender - Dragonborn Paragon
Feats: Artificer Apprentice
Monsters: Sheep - Spellbreaker Warforged Titan
Magic Items: Whipier - Ring of Secret Storage - Collar of the Guardian
Monster template: Skeletal Creature
I sooooo want to play an Imp Spellcaster Sidekick. A Chain familiar freed from the bonds of a fiendish warlock takes up adventuring with the "good guys". Yes, please!
I had thought these rules might make having mundane mounts useful again (as opposed to pallies using summon Greater Steed). Using Sidekick on your faithful steed would let them survive low level AOE spells. Last Sunday, An Adult Green Dragon's Breath Weapon destroyed only the mounts in the cavalry unit we were guiding. Knights and mounts took half damage, but even the heavy warhouses melted under half damage. If the DM had allowed the Cavalry "Sidekick" status for the regiment's mounts, it would have been a less goofy encounter. I do feel the Sidekicks UA material solves some simple problems (such as the previous contained example) as players continue past 8th level.
As a DM, I wouldn't use this as a 'catch up' mechanic for alt PC characters. These rules would seriously hamper the CR calculations of encounters if all the players had a humanoid sidekick alt with them fighting. Action economy is annoying to calculate already, lol.
Why can't we all just get along?
What are you talking about?
Extended Signature! Yay! https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/off-topic/adohands-kitchen/3153-extended-signature-thread?page=2#c21
Haven’t used this account in forever. Still a big fan of crawling claws.
My table just finished Tresendar Manor in LMoP. Droop is becoming a cowardly expert sidekick. I'm looking forward to testing it with him. My question, though, is that I applied RAW when it came to HP. Goblins have 7hp @ level 2, but when I applied RAW, and bumped him to 3 b/c of the party's level, he ended up with 14hp. Should I just add the 4hp for the level-up to the 7 that he naturally started? Or 6+4+4 (level 1, 2, 3 [no CON])?
I would just add the Hp to what he started with. Though 3hp won't make a huge difference in a level or 2.
I wonder if this is why they didn't go forward with the Beast Conclave ranger from earlier UA.
I don't see why this couldn't/shouldn't be used with beastmaster rangers. It helps to supplement what the base archetype lacks and give more substance to your animal companion. I also want to point out that this doesn't allow animal companions to do any more damage per attack than normal with the warrior class sidekick(the only ones animals can be without homebrew) unless you crit. The armor rating only goes up by 1 when it reaches the 10th level which isn't game breaking either. As far as humanoid or other intelligent NPCs go you could already give them PC classes to bolster them so this seems like a much easier way for a DM/GM to handle them. If one still believes this is too much power for sidekicks one could also decide that certain monsters(an alpha shadow mastiff guarding a villain's lair perhaps) would reasonably have these classes as well. This can help to even the field and make encounter's more dangerous if a villain crits on a 19 or at higher levels an 18 it can turn one attack into a more sever injury. This being said I am currently playing a homebrew campaign as a Shifter Druid who had a pet fox before these rules came out and my DM has been kind enough to allow us to test this in our next session. We have been talking about letting a friend who is not a player in the campaign, but has been joining us as a spectator of sorts, run him with his new class so as not to have him become a drone or fodder. If people have friends that have not played before, but are interested, this could be a good way to get their toes wet and learn without having to get too invested. Even if they decide that it isn't for them the party doesn't have to lose a member. I am exited to try this out and hope that it gets released into an official book after it is refined.