So, I'm trying to make a Ranger with a blood hawk companion, but I'm torn between two options, because I'm not sure which one would technically be better in a campaign. What would be better, simply being a Beast Master, or choosing a different subclass altogether and having a blood hawk Sidekick, from TCoE? Let me know what you guys think, and put your reasoning down in the comments!
So, I'm trying to make a Ranger with a blood hawk companion, but I'm torn between two options, because I'm not sure which one would technically be better in a campaign. What would be better, simply being a Beast Master, or choosing a different subclass altogether and having a blood hawk Sidekick, from TCoE? Let me know what you guys think, and put your reasoning down in the comments!
Not to be difficult, but this question makes no sense. Here's another question.
Which would be better. Playing a beast master ranger or playing a beast master ranger with a sidekick?
A sidekick is not just a little flavor. It is a powerful ally. One which could even be played as its own PC. Now if you said, which would be better. A beast master with a blood hawk companion or a monster slayer with a blood hawk, then that would be a question.
No, I'm saying either being a Beast Master, or being a different Ranger subclass (Gloom Stalker, Horizon Walker, etc.) while having a blood hawk Sidekick.
Yes. I hear you. That is not an equivalent comparison in any way shape or form though. A beast master is a subclass. A sidekick adds to the party. Any character is going to be "better" with a sidekick as it is a straight up buff compared to a character that doesn't have a sidekick. Any subclass with some kind of companion has that companion's strengths calculated into the subclass to do what it is supposed to in its own way and when held up against other subclasses.
It's like saying, which one is better. An evocation subclass wizard or a different subclass wizard but with a wand of fireballs?
Basically sidekick rules are adding another character. some of The party xp would be taken out for the xp. Or the dm should increase the challenge of the encounter to balance it out.
Now if you are planning on using alot of bonus action spells or abilities, (huntersmark, zephyr strike, ect.) say keep phb ranger. Phb pets can take alot more independent actions for scouting and protection.
If you want you don't have alot of bonus action options tasha's is better. They stick by the ranger and revive easier.(but I never had that as a problem)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hello,
So, I'm trying to make a Ranger with a blood hawk companion, but I'm torn between two options, because I'm not sure which one would technically be better in a campaign. What would be better, simply being a Beast Master, or choosing a different subclass altogether and having a blood hawk Sidekick, from TCoE? Let me know what you guys think, and put your reasoning down in the comments!
Ren
Not to be difficult, but this question makes no sense. Here's another question.
Which would be better. Playing a beast master ranger or playing a beast master ranger with a sidekick?
A sidekick is not just a little flavor. It is a powerful ally. One which could even be played as its own PC. Now if you said, which would be better. A beast master with a blood hawk companion or a monster slayer with a blood hawk, then that would be a question.
No, I'm saying either being a Beast Master, or being a different Ranger subclass (Gloom Stalker, Horizon Walker, etc.) while having a blood hawk Sidekick.
Ren
Yes. I hear you. That is not an equivalent comparison in any way shape or form though. A beast master is a subclass. A sidekick adds to the party. Any character is going to be "better" with a sidekick as it is a straight up buff compared to a character that doesn't have a sidekick. Any subclass with some kind of companion has that companion's strengths calculated into the subclass to do what it is supposed to in its own way and when held up against other subclasses.
It's like saying, which one is better. An evocation subclass wizard or a different subclass wizard but with a wand of fireballs?
Ah, gotcha. Thanks, dude.
Ren
Basically sidekick rules are adding another character. some of The party xp would be taken out for the xp. Or the dm should increase the challenge of the encounter to balance it out.
Now if you are planning on using alot of bonus action spells or abilities, (huntersmark, zephyr strike, ect.) say keep phb ranger. Phb pets can take alot more independent actions for scouting and protection.
If you want you don't have alot of bonus action options tasha's is better. They stick by the ranger and revive easier.(but I never had that as a problem)