Beasts are a very thin category of creatures in DnD. Most of them share extremely similar abilities, just scaled up for CR. This potentially makes Beast Master Rangers and any spell caster using "Summon Animals" or another "beast" flavored spell kind of underwhelming.
Rather than make beasts their own category in the future, maybe it would be better to define them as what they are not? Like, no aberrations or celestials, and they must have an intelligence below 6. Then, with the limited CR ratings, there could be way more for "summoner" or "beast master" archetypes to play with.
I might even consider this as a homebrew rule at my own table if any of the players go Druid or Ranger.
I think beast have plenty of good potential. I think the original 5e design showed that more beast designs were intended. (via creation tools or future stat blocks.) but were then curbed because of the druid class inherent power level. there was also an the early focus on demon and undead style adventures where beast got pushed to the sides.
It seem like there should be more beast with triple attack but lower damage or unique senses or skills several places reference beasts with saving throw proficiency even though none exist and the few times they tried it there was a lack of interest or active controversy to avoid ( see Craigcat, tryessym or mule )
I tend to find that opinion is only a portion of the community and not a complete view. the positive version of the same thread had a lot more active participation until a small group created the opposite thread and that one took a lot longer to gain any traction.
I think beast have plenty of good potential. I think the original 5e design showed that more beast designs were intended. (via creation tools or future stat blocks.) but were then curbed because of the druid class inherent power level. there was also an the early focus on demon and undead style adventures where beast got pushed to the sides.
It seem like there should be more beast with triple attack but lower damage or unique senses or skills several places reference beasts with saving throw proficiency even though none exist and the few times they tried it there was a lack of interest or active controversy to avoid ( see Craigcat, tryessym or mule )
I think beast have plenty of good potential. I think the original 5e design showed that more beast designs were intended. (via creation tools or future stat blocks.) but were then curbed because of the druid class inherent power level. there was also an the early focus on demon and undead style adventures where beast got pushed to the sides.
It seem like there should be more beast with triple attack but lower damage or unique senses or skills several places reference beasts with saving throw proficiency even though none exist and the few times they tried it there was a lack of interest or active controversy to avoid ( see Craigcat, tryessym or mule )
That is really specific to the Conjure Animals spell, and more an issue of that spell's somewhat janky mechanics.
Im talking about more broadly, with things like charm animal, speak with animals, Beast Master Ranger, polymorph, etc.
I think you intended to quote wildbills post.The "creature types" thread is very similar to what you are trying to discuss and participation would be welcome. I even posted the definitons of beasts and monstrosities to show how vague the understanding of each category is.
the tryessym is just one example of a changed type that reduces the usefulness of spells like beast sense. beast sense used on a tressym was amazing. summoning a tressym(or lots) could be amazing as a situational problems occur. checking a banquet for poison or mage spies. summoning a craigcat for fighting a evil caster. even simple things like creatures with blind sight can be useful given the right circumstances. ravens and mimicry can be fun and create interesting problem solving. there should be as many varied beasts features as there are in our world.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Beasts are a very thin category of creatures in DnD. Most of them share extremely similar abilities, just scaled up for CR. This potentially makes Beast Master Rangers and any spell caster using "Summon Animals" or another "beast" flavored spell kind of underwhelming.
Rather than make beasts their own category in the future, maybe it would be better to define them as what they are not? Like, no aberrations or celestials, and they must have an intelligence below 6. Then, with the limited CR ratings, there could be way more for "summoner" or "beast master" archetypes to play with.
I might even consider this as a homebrew rule at my own table if any of the players go Druid or Ranger.
See this thread: https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/class-forums/ranger/131230-conjure-animals-a-wolf-too-far
for a rethink on that idea.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
I think beast have plenty of good potential. I think the original 5e design showed that more beast designs were intended. (via creation tools or future stat blocks.) but were then curbed because of the druid class inherent power level. there was also an the early focus on demon and undead style adventures where beast got pushed to the sides.
It seem like there should be more beast with triple attack but lower damage or unique senses or skills several places reference beasts with saving throw proficiency even though none exist and the few times they tried it there was a lack of interest or active controversy to avoid ( see Craigcat, tryessym or mule )
Here is another thread I started about some of the issues with beasts. https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/class-forums/ranger/130115-creature-types-errata-and-rangers
I tend to find that opinion is only a portion of the community and not a complete view. the positive version of the same thread had a lot more active participation until a small group created the opposite thread and that one took a lot longer to gain any traction.
That is really specific to the Conjure Animals spell, and more an issue of that spell's somewhat janky mechanics.
Im talking about more broadly, with things like charm animal, speak with animals, Beast Master Ranger, polymorph, etc.
I think you intended to quote wildbills post.The "creature types" thread is very similar to what you are trying to discuss and participation would be welcome. I even posted the definitons of beasts and monstrosities to show how vague the understanding of each category is.
the tryessym is just one example of a changed type that reduces the usefulness of spells like beast sense. beast sense used on a tressym was amazing. summoning a tressym(or lots) could be amazing as a situational problems occur. checking a banquet for poison or mage spies. summoning a craigcat for fighting a evil caster. even simple things like creatures with blind sight can be useful given the right circumstances. ravens and mimicry can be fun and create interesting problem solving. there should be as many varied beasts features as there are in our world.