So, I've been thinking about this for a while. How balanced would a ranger home-brew class be if it incorporated Primal Companion as a core class feature? Say they get the feature at 1st level alongside Favoured Foe and it can be altered depending on the subclass (EG. Beastmaster can create a monstrosity, Swarmkeepers have fey swarms, etc)
Firstly I think this is better suited to the either the ua or homebrew threads. Try and keep it in mind for future reference. But maybe I am over thinking it.
Now ranger is a broad archetype and there are lots of ways to conceptualize it. As such making one narrative a part of mechanics for one seems like it would be heavily pushed back on. Now people have different desires and such sub-types could be separated and folded into other classes with a pet class on its own. That would leave you without a ranger class at all. It might resolve some ideological conflicts. Many ranger discussions are "heated" debates
To be honest I think it's fine as a subclass. Even if you don't take beastmaster you still have summon spells making any ranger a "animal team"
If it were a core feature the "buget" would probably be mis balanced to where it's too weak to be effective or too strong to allow other ranger features to have the strength to feel like a ranger ability.
I love rangers but I don't want a pet. I don't care what it can or can't do, I don't want one. And if I did, I wouldn't want to have to keep track of changing stats for the thing. Makes the class even less accessible for beginners.
It’s a very nice and interesting idea. It would require lots of tests because Rangers have plenty competition for their bonus action usage, but it’s quite cool.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So, I've been thinking about this for a while. How balanced would a ranger home-brew class be if it incorporated Primal Companion as a core class feature? Say they get the feature at 1st level alongside Favoured Foe and it can be altered depending on the subclass (EG. Beastmaster can create a monstrosity, Swarmkeepers have fey swarms, etc)
Firstly I think this is better suited to the either the ua or homebrew threads. Try and keep it in mind for future reference. But maybe I am over thinking it.
Now ranger is a broad archetype and there are lots of ways to conceptualize it. As such making one narrative a part of mechanics for one seems like it would be heavily pushed back on. Now people have different desires and such sub-types could be separated and folded into other classes with a pet class on its own. That would leave you without a ranger class at all. It might resolve some ideological conflicts. Many ranger discussions are "heated" debates
To be honest I think it's fine as a subclass. Even if you don't take beastmaster you still have summon spells making any ranger a "animal team"
If it were a core feature the "buget" would probably be mis balanced to where it's too weak to be effective or too strong to allow other ranger features to have the strength to feel like a ranger ability.
I love rangers but I don't want a pet. I don't care what it can or can't do, I don't want one. And if I did, I wouldn't want to have to keep track of changing stats for the thing. Makes the class even less accessible for beginners.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
It’s a very nice and interesting idea. It would require lots of tests because Rangers have plenty competition for their bonus action usage, but it’s quite cool.