If you take a feature that replaces another feature, you gain no benefit from the replaced one and don’t qualify for anything in the game that requires it.
Sorry to bring this up, but has there been any official word about the Tasha's primal companion getting the PHB beast master's level 7, 11, and 15 features or not?
Not thoughts, wishes, or feelings, but an actual official word.
So the Primal Companion replaces the feature Ranger's Companion. None of the other features get replaced so yes the Primal Companion gets the lvl 7, 11, and 15 features. Both features summon a beast companion, and the other features refer to your beast companion.
The last part of the little sentence that only the cleric and ranger have in Tasha’s says “...and don’t qualify for anything in the game that requires it.” It sure seems like the the levels 7, 11, and 15 abilities require the ranger’s companion feature as they specifically mention the “beast companion” which only the ranger’s companion feature gives.
The Primal Companion feature isn't specifically described as an optional feature, and isn't listed in the optional features section, so I'm not sure that that condition would apply. It just seems to be something that any Beastmaster can choose to swap for, it's not even clear on when you can do it; you could potentially swap for the feature after losing a vanilla beast companion, rather than waiting to level up.
As for whether it applies to other rules that trigger for a beast companion, I'd say it does; beast companion isn't the name of the vanilla feature and the primal companion is both a companion creature and a beast.
It seems to be an example of a rule that isn't quite as clear as it could be, but I can't imagine it's intended to replace most of the sub-class as the new companions aren't that strong, they just function a bit differently (easier to replace if killed, scale a bit differently etc.).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
No there has been no official word because there is no need for it. Your interpretation is based on being overly pedantic about Primal vs. Beast.
From the PHB Beastmaster:
Ranger's Companion
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.
The PHB Beastmaster says that you get a new companion. Not a new beast companion. Does that mean that if you have to replace your pet, that the new one won't qualify for the abilities at 7, 11, 15, because it's simply a companion and not a beast companion? Of course not. No one has ever questioned that and it would be incredibly silly to.
The Primal Companion was designed as a replacement option for the Beast Companion. Both are Ranger companions and therefore qualify for the rest of the companion based features.
Tasha's has never received official errata and the SAC hasn't had any official entries added since it released, so 0% of Tasha's has had any official clarity offered. The closest we have - which doesn't address your question at all - is that some Tasha's rules content has occurred again in subsequent books, like Artillerist Artifiers' requirement to cast a spell through a focus propagating to Spirits Bards. If this continues. clarity on any such book could be used as precedent for Tasha's.
I suggest keeping an eye on Fizban's, Witchlight, and Strixhaven; we know adventure module content can contain rules that set useful precedent. For example, it's genuinely impossible to parse the statblocks in Tasha's, as they have no alignment and the Monster Manual says a statblock without an alignment listed isn't a statblock, but Candlekeep Mysteries explains how to parse a statblock with no alignment in it (the DM overrides the statblock and assigns an alignment, as all creatures must have one). Applying such precedent isn't actually RAW (the CM rule isn't RAW binding on the general game, making the Tasha's statblocks illegal until further notice), but it's incredibly useful for homebrewing in a way that's highly likely to match the RAI.
That is all within the same ability. Which is replaced.
The later level abilities specifically state “beast companion”. Very clear.
I think we all know what we all think and feel about the way it works, I’m just asking based on what the words actually say.
I don't think you quite understood what I was getting at Frank.
If the Tasha's Beastmaster Primal Companion doesn't qualify for the later level abilities, then neither does the Companion of the PHB Beastmaster if they have replaced a dead one. Why? Because the PHB Beastmaster refers to this new companion as simply a companion. Not a beast companion. If you are going to hold Tasha's Beastmaster to using a feature that summons a differently named companion then so does the replacement function of the PHB Beastmaster. A "companion" is not the same as a "beast companion". There is no difference in logic when saying the "primal companion" is different than the "beast companion" because it uses the word primal instead of beast and therefore doesn't qualify for abilities that call for a beast companion.
So if you're going to go around questioning whether the Tasha's Primal Companion qualifies for these things, then you also need to be asking the same question for when the PHB ranger has a replacement companion.
That is all within the same ability. Which is replaced.
The later level abilities specifically state “beast companion”. Very clear.
I think we all know what we all think and feel about the way it works, I’m just asking based on what the words actually say.
I don't think you quite understood what I was getting at Frank.
If the Tasha's Beastmaster Primal Companion doesn't qualify for the later level abilities, then neither does the Companion of the PHB Beastmaster if they have replaced a dead one. Why? Because the PHB Beastmaster refers to this new companion as simply a companion. Not a beast companion.
This is false, and Frank is correct. Here are all the moving pieces, presented adjacent to one another, with emphasis and explanation added by me.
If you take a feature that replaces another feature, you gain no benefit from the replaced one and don’t qualify for anything in the game that requires it.
PRIMAL COMPANION 3rd-level Beast Master feature, which replaces the Ranger's Companion feature
Explanation: As both of the rules above emphasize, a Beast Master who has Primal Companion does not have Ranger's Companion. The two features are mutually exclusive.
RANGER'S COMPANION At 3rd levei, you gain a beast companion
Explanation: Ranger's Companion provides a beast companion. If you don't have Ranger's Companion, it can't provide you with one, by definition.
PRIMAL COMPANION You magically summon a primal beast, which draws strength from your bond with nature.
Explanation: Primal Companion provides a primal beast. If you don't have Primal Companion, it can't provide you with one, by definition.
Important note: we have established at this point that a Beast Master Ranger has a primal beast, but does not have a beast companion.
The level 7 to 15 benefits of the Beast Master subclass only apply to beast companions. A primal beast isn't a beast companion and a beast companion isn't a primal beast. Since you claimed otherwise, here's the L7 benefit for reference.
Beginning at 7th levei, on any of your turns when your beast companion doesn't attack, [...]
Explanation: as you can see, you have to have a beast companion for the L7 ability to work.
The level 7+ features specifically call out for a beast companion.
The PHB beastmaster ability is called Ranger's Companion. It summons a beast companion. When your beast companion dies you summon a new companion. Not a beast companion. They just say companion. So does a companion summoned by the Ranger's Companion ability qualify for the level 7+ features even though it is not called a beast companion?
These abilities don't call for "a companion summoned by the Ranger's Companion features". They call for the beast companion and don't mention Ranger's Companion at all. But now you have a companion instead. Seems to me like being this pedantic about these beastmaster features has only served to prove the PHB beastmaster is even more punishing to getting new companions than previously thought.
The level 7+ features specifically call out for a beast companion.
The PHB beastmaster ability is called Ranger's Companion. It summons a beast companion. When your beast companion dies you summon a new companion. Not a beast companion. They just say companion. So does a companion summoned by the Ranger's Companion ability qualify for the level 7+ features even though it is not called a beast companion?
These abilities don't call for "a companion summoned by the Ranger's Companion features". They call for the beast companion and don't mention Ranger's Companion at all. But now you have a companion instead. Seems to me like being this pedantic about these beastmaster features has only served to prove the PHB beastmaster is even more punishing to getting new companions than previously thought.
I’m not for or against anything in particular. I’m just saying the words are what they are.
The example you keep giving is all within the same ability at level 3 so would imply to itself.
The original question was if there has been any official word to help streamline whatever the intention may or may not be.
If we assume the later abilities do apply to the primal companion, then the primal companion gets weaker at level 7. So either way you run it it’s unclear at best.
The Primal Companion does not get weaker at level 7. Exceptional Training may not mesh as cleanly with the action economy of the Primal Companion, but it doesn't detract from what it can do. It simply gives more options for what you can do with your bonus action command.
And the level 11 and 15 abilities work just as well with the mechanics of the primal companion.
I think it's abundantly clear what the intention is. They printed an alternative companion option for the beast master. Why in the world would they make it so that it doesn't work with the other subclass features? And a DM would have to be a complete fuzzball to get sucked down this pedantic rabbithole and even be confused as to whether or not to rule in favor of their player's features working.
I agree with HeironymusZot - I think you're reading into it in a way that isn't the intent at all.
I mean, it's your game and you can limit the beast master ranger however you want, but I think it's important to look at both the intent and wording. The intent was to make the companion more palatable, and they changed the name of the companion from beast companion to primal beast to avoid confusion at the table as to whether you were using the optional content or not. To me the relevant wording is this:
"The Beast Master in the Player’s Handbook forms a mystical bond with an animal. As an alternative, a Beast Master can take the feature below to form a bond with a special primal beast instead."
and
"3rd-level Beast Master feature, which replaces the Ranger’s Companion feature"
It doesn't say it replaces the level 7, 11, and 15th level abilities of the beast master ranger, it only replaces the 3rd level ability. Which means the other abilities are still intact. Why would they replace the 3rd level ability and make the following 3 abilities which make up the core of the subclass irrelevant and useless without saying so? If that were the case, they would have said either something like:
"3rd-level Beast Master feature, which replaces the 3rd, 7th, 11th, and 15th level Ranger's Companion features."
or at least
"3rd-level Beast Master feature, which replaces the Ranger's Companion features."
Like I said, it's your game so you can neuter the primal companion if you want, but why would you? The entire point of the replacement feature is to improve the beast master ranger in play, which received a ton of complaints from the release of the PHB onward, and make it easier and more effective to use at the table. Why would you turn around and gimp it again?
I agree with HeironymusZot - I thing you're reading into it in a way that isn't the intent at all.
I mean, it's your game and you can limit the beast master ranger however you want, but I think it's important to look at both the intent and wording. The intent was to make the companion more palatable, and they changed the name of the companion from beast companion to primal beast to avoid confusion at the table as to whether you were using the optional content or not. To me the relevant wording is this:
"The Beast Master in the Player’s Handbook forms a mystical bond with an animal. As an alternative, a Beast Master can take the feature below to form a bond with a special primal beast instead."
and
"3rd-level Beast Master feature, which replaces the Ranger’s Companion feature"
It doesn't say it replaces the level 7, 11, and 15th level abilities of the beast master ranger, it only replaces the 3rd level ability. Which means the other abilities are still intact. Why would they replace the 3rd level ability and make the following 3 abilities which make up the core of the subclass irrelevant and useless without saying so? If that were the case, they would have said either something like:
"3rd-level Beast Master feature, which replaces the 3rd, 7th, 11th, and 15th level Ranger's Companion features."
or at least
"3rd-level Beast Master feature, which replaces the Ranger's Companion features."
Like I said, it's your game so you can neuter the primal companion if you want, but why would you? The entire point of the replacement feature is to improve the beast master ranger in play, which received a ton of complaints from the release of the PHB onward, and make it easier and more effective to use at the table. Why would you turn around and gimp it again?
The very fact that four different people can pull bits of the words from the combined rules to make two separate and convincing arguments only makes the original question more pressing.
The Primal Companion does not get weaker at level 7. Exceptional Training may not mesh as cleanly with the action economy of the Primal Companion, but it doesn't detract from what it can do. It simply gives more options for what you can do with your bonus action command.
And the level 11 and 15 abilities work just as well with the mechanics of the primal companion.
I think it's abundantly clear what the intention is. They printed an alternative companion option for the beast master. Why in the world would they make it so that it doesn't work with the other subclass features? And a DM would have to be a complete fuzzball to get so caught up down this pedantic rabbithole as to even be confused as to whether or not to rule in favor of their player's features working.
Listen, i’m not arguing a position here. If you play level seven ability word by word then it limits the primal companion’s options.
The very fact that four different people can pull bits of the words from the combined rules to make two separate and convincing arguments only makes the original question more pressing.
Sure, if you completely disregard the intent and dig into the weeds we can have disagreements about just about anything, yep. This isn't 4e with very specific language coding... 5e is much more loosy goosy. But I've never ever seen or heard of anyone limiting the primal companion that way until this thread. Doesn't make a lick of sense to me. But hey, however you think it should be played at your table - I don't imagine anyone would play one with the knowledge that none of the beast master features are usable beyond level 3.
The Primal Companion does not get weaker at level 7. Exceptional Training may not mesh as cleanly with the action economy of the Primal Companion, but it doesn't detract from what it can do. It simply gives more options for what you can do with your bonus action command.
And the level 11 and 15 abilities work just as well with the mechanics of the primal companion.
I think it's abundantly clear what the intention is. They printed an alternative companion option for the beast master. Why in the world would they make it so that it doesn't work with the other subclass features? And a DM would have to be a complete fuzzball to get so caught up down this pedantic rabbithole as to even be confused as to whether or not to rule in favor of their player's features working.
Listen, i’m not arguing a position here. If you play level seven ability word by word then it limits the primal companion’s options.
The bonus action stuff is useless, but the level 7 ability for the primal companions attacks to be magical is very important.
So upon further inspection it seems that the commands you get at level 7 are simply redundant with what the Primal Companion can already do with a bonus action command. This is in no way limiting what the primal companion's options are. Limiting would mean taking away options or restricting when they can be used. This does not happen at all. The command options may be redundant, but all that means is the primal companion is ahead of the beast companion in that department and doesn't need something to catch up.
If you think that the Primal companion is limited in comparison to the Beast companion because it cannot bonus action command and attack in the same turn, well then you're omitting one very important fact which is that the PHB ranger is sacrificing one of their own attacks to make that happen. It's a complete wash, and the Primal Companion still gets to benefit from the most important part of the feature which is the magical damage.
And remember, level 7 also makes your companion's attacks magical. This in no way limits the primal companion either.
LOL! Listen, you two. We’re on the same side. I am pro ranger to the point of being ridiculous. I am very generous with intent. Just se my thoughts on hide in plain sight, natural explorer, and primeval awareness. I just don’t want the optional features to suffer from what the same frustrations as the core features.
The primal beast does lose some flexibility with the level 7 ability using the silly RAW actual words.
The later level abilities don’t work with the primal beast option using silly RAW.
I’m asking, wishing, and hoping for some clarification SAC or otherwise, to avoid all of this, past, present, and future.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Sorry to bring this up, but has there been any official word about the Tasha's primal companion getting the PHB beast master's level 7, 11, and 15 features or not?
Not thoughts, wishes, or feelings, but an actual official word.
So the Primal Companion replaces the feature Ranger's Companion. None of the other features get replaced so yes the Primal Companion gets the lvl 7, 11, and 15 features. Both features summon a beast companion, and the other features refer to your beast companion.
The last part of the little sentence that only the cleric and ranger have in Tasha’s says “...and don’t qualify for anything in the game that requires it.” It sure seems like the the levels 7, 11, and 15 abilities require the ranger’s companion feature as they specifically mention the “beast companion” which only the ranger’s companion feature gives.
The Primal Companion feature isn't specifically described as an optional feature, and isn't listed in the optional features section, so I'm not sure that that condition would apply. It just seems to be something that any Beastmaster can choose to swap for, it's not even clear on when you can do it; you could potentially swap for the feature after losing a vanilla beast companion, rather than waiting to level up.
As for whether it applies to other rules that trigger for a beast companion, I'd say it does; beast companion isn't the name of the vanilla feature and the primal companion is both a companion creature and a beast.
It seems to be an example of a rule that isn't quite as clear as it could be, but I can't imagine it's intended to replace most of the sub-class as the new companions aren't that strong, they just function a bit differently (easier to replace if killed, scale a bit differently etc.).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
No there has been no official word because there is no need for it. Your interpretation is based on being overly pedantic about Primal vs. Beast.
From the PHB Beastmaster:
The PHB Beastmaster says that you get a new companion. Not a new beast companion. Does that mean that if you have to replace your pet, that the new one won't qualify for the abilities at 7, 11, 15, because it's simply a companion and not a beast companion? Of course not. No one has ever questioned that and it would be incredibly silly to.
The Primal Companion was designed as a replacement option for the Beast Companion. Both are Ranger companions and therefore qualify for the rest of the companion based features.
That is all within the same ability. Which is replaced.
The later level abilities specifically state “beast companion”. Very clear.
I think we all know what we all think and feel about the way it works, I’m just asking based on what the words actually say.
Tasha's has never received official errata and the SAC hasn't had any official entries added since it released, so 0% of Tasha's has had any official clarity offered. The closest we have - which doesn't address your question at all - is that some Tasha's rules content has occurred again in subsequent books, like Artillerist Artifiers' requirement to cast a spell through a focus propagating to Spirits Bards. If this continues. clarity on any such book could be used as precedent for Tasha's.
I suggest keeping an eye on Fizban's, Witchlight, and Strixhaven; we know adventure module content can contain rules that set useful precedent. For example, it's genuinely impossible to parse the statblocks in Tasha's, as they have no alignment and the Monster Manual says a statblock without an alignment listed isn't a statblock, but Candlekeep Mysteries explains how to parse a statblock with no alignment in it (the DM overrides the statblock and assigns an alignment, as all creatures must have one). Applying such precedent isn't actually RAW (the CM rule isn't RAW binding on the general game, making the Tasha's statblocks illegal until further notice), but it's incredibly useful for homebrewing in a way that's highly likely to match the RAI.
I don't think you quite understood what I was getting at Frank.
If the Tasha's Beastmaster Primal Companion doesn't qualify for the later level abilities, then neither does the Companion of the PHB Beastmaster if they have replaced a dead one. Why? Because the PHB Beastmaster refers to this new companion as simply a companion. Not a beast companion. If you are going to hold Tasha's Beastmaster to using a feature that summons a differently named companion then so does the replacement function of the PHB Beastmaster. A "companion" is not the same as a "beast companion". There is no difference in logic when saying the "primal companion" is different than the "beast companion" because it uses the word primal instead of beast and therefore doesn't qualify for abilities that call for a beast companion.
So if you're going to go around questioning whether the Tasha's Primal Companion qualifies for these things, then you also need to be asking the same question for when the PHB ranger has a replacement companion.
This is false, and Frank is correct. Here are all the moving pieces, presented adjacent to one another, with emphasis and explanation added by me.
3rd-level Beast Master feature, which replaces the
Ranger's Companion feature
At 3rd levei, you gain a beast companion
You magically summon a primal beast, which draws
strength from your bond with nature.
The level 7+ features specifically call out for a beast companion.
The PHB beastmaster ability is called Ranger's Companion. It summons a beast companion. When your beast companion dies you summon a new companion. Not a beast companion. They just say companion. So does a companion summoned by the Ranger's Companion ability qualify for the level 7+ features even though it is not called a beast companion?
These abilities don't call for "a companion summoned by the Ranger's Companion features". They call for the beast companion and don't mention Ranger's Companion at all. But now you have a companion instead. Seems to me like being this pedantic about these beastmaster features has only served to prove the PHB beastmaster is even more punishing to getting new companions than previously thought.
I’m not for or against anything in particular. I’m just saying the words are what they are.
The example you keep giving is all within the same ability at level 3 so would imply to itself.
The original question was if there has been any official word to help streamline whatever the intention may or may not be.
If we assume the later abilities do apply to the primal companion, then the primal companion gets weaker at level 7. So either way you run it it’s unclear at best.
The Primal Companion does not get weaker at level 7. Exceptional Training may not mesh as cleanly with the action economy of the Primal Companion, but it doesn't detract from what it can do. It simply gives more options for what you can do with your bonus action command.
And the level 11 and 15 abilities work just as well with the mechanics of the primal companion.
I think it's abundantly clear what the intention is. They printed an alternative companion option for the beast master. Why in the world would they make it so that it doesn't work with the other subclass features? And a DM would have to be a complete fuzzball to get sucked down this pedantic rabbithole and even be confused as to whether or not to rule in favor of their player's features working.
I agree with HeironymusZot - I think you're reading into it in a way that isn't the intent at all.
I mean, it's your game and you can limit the beast master ranger however you want, but I think it's important to look at both the intent and wording. The intent was to make the companion more palatable, and they changed the name of the companion from beast companion to primal beast to avoid confusion at the table as to whether you were using the optional content or not. To me the relevant wording is this:
"The Beast Master in the Player’s Handbook forms a mystical bond with an animal. As an alternative, a Beast Master can take the feature below to form a bond with a special primal beast instead."
and
"3rd-level Beast Master feature, which replaces the Ranger’s Companion feature"
It doesn't say it replaces the level 7, 11, and 15th level abilities of the beast master ranger, it only replaces the 3rd level ability. Which means the other abilities are still intact. Why would they replace the 3rd level ability and make the following 3 abilities which make up the core of the subclass irrelevant and useless without saying so? If that were the case, they would have said either something like:
"3rd-level Beast Master feature, which replaces the 3rd, 7th, 11th, and 15th level Ranger's Companion features."
or at least
"3rd-level Beast Master feature, which replaces the Ranger's Companion features."
Like I said, it's your game so you can neuter the primal companion if you want, but why would you? The entire point of the replacement feature is to improve the beast master ranger in play, which received a ton of complaints from the release of the PHB onward, and make it easier and more effective to use at the table. Why would you turn around and gimp it again?
The very fact that four different people can pull bits of the words from the combined rules to make two separate and convincing arguments only makes the original question more pressing.
Listen, i’m not arguing a position here. If you play level seven ability word by word then it limits the primal companion’s options.
Sure, if you completely disregard the intent and dig into the weeds we can have disagreements about just about anything, yep. This isn't 4e with very specific language coding... 5e is much more loosy goosy. But I've never ever seen or heard of anyone limiting the primal companion that way until this thread. Doesn't make a lick of sense to me. But hey, however you think it should be played at your table - I don't imagine anyone would play one with the knowledge that none of the beast master features are usable beyond level 3.
The bonus action stuff is useless, but the level 7 ability for the primal companions attacks to be magical is very important.
So upon further inspection it seems that the commands you get at level 7 are simply redundant with what the Primal Companion can already do with a bonus action command. This is in no way limiting what the primal companion's options are. Limiting would mean taking away options or restricting when they can be used. This does not happen at all. The command options may be redundant, but all that means is the primal companion is ahead of the beast companion in that department and doesn't need something to catch up.
If you think that the Primal companion is limited in comparison to the Beast companion because it cannot bonus action command and attack in the same turn, well then you're omitting one very important fact which is that the PHB ranger is sacrificing one of their own attacks to make that happen. It's a complete wash, and the Primal Companion still gets to benefit from the most important part of the feature which is the magical damage.
And remember, level 7 also makes your companion's attacks magical. This in no way limits the primal companion either.
LOL! Listen, you two. We’re on the same side. I am pro ranger to the point of being ridiculous. I am very generous with intent. Just se my thoughts on hide in plain sight, natural explorer, and primeval awareness. I just don’t want the optional features to suffer from what the same frustrations as the core features.
The primal beast does lose some flexibility with the level 7 ability using the silly RAW actual words.
The later level abilities don’t work with the primal beast option using silly RAW.
I’m asking, wishing, and hoping for some clarification SAC or otherwise, to avoid all of this, past, present, and future.