So, I'm currently working on a homebrew to make Beast Master not...well pointless.
The primary issue as I can see it is that the Beasts don't tend to scale with level, and frankly they're outclassed by the conjure animals. So, I have the bare bones of something where the beast master starts with a beast of challenge rating 2 or higher (as that's the top of what conjure animals can conjure). I'd appreciate some thoughts on how they should develop as a subclass. I have a player who loves the concept and has a great character but let's be fair on this one the writers just failed flat out on Beast Master so want to create something that means they don't have to switch subclass or even multi-class.
The real value of phb beastmaster is the unique Traits. The value of tasha's beasmaster is it's simplicity and reliability. Neither are useless and with both the spectrum is covered IMO.
Conjure animals on the other hand is something else entirely it's uses are different. The summoned hoard of creatures has a very critical place in the ranger kit but it's not the "end all" spell or the problem many make it out to be. This seems like a mixed comparison as they are not even mutually exclusive.
Now to be fair a dm can homebrew better beasts as a reward and it's really no different than giving a magic item to another martial. This is within the exception based rules 5e established.
I could go more into details but it may not be what you're looking for. I believe this is a complex class with lots of interconnected pieces and few are invested the same way I am.
The real value of phb beastmaster is the unique Traits. The value of tasha's beasmaster is it's simplicity and reliability. Neither are useless and with both the spectrum is covered IMO.
Conjure animals on the other hand is something else entirely it's uses are different. The summoned hoard of creatures has a very critical place in the ranger kit but it's not the "end all" spell or the problem many make it out to be. This seems like a mixed comparison as they are not even mutually exclusive.
Now to be fair a dm can homebrew better beasts as a reward and it's really no different than giving a magic item to another martial. This is within the exception based rules 5e established.
I could go more into details but it may not be what you're looking for. I believe this is a complex class with lots of interconnected pieces and few are invested the same way I am.
So, I'm going to be brutal here. I've DMd a lot of games over the last twenty years and played a whole host of different TTRPGs. Trust me when I say that Beast Master as a subclass is absolutely underpowered. It should legitimately make the writers behind D&D ashamed that such a poor subclass ever made it into print.
In fact a Ranger Hunter subclass could simply take one level of Wizard have find familiar and take conjure animals and all of a sudden Beast Master is a pointless subclass as written. I've now seen it in play where my players have taken the Beast Master to be able to weave wonderful stories only to hit level six and grind to a screeching halt realising that they are the forever weak link in their team. This has happened on three separate occasions.
Let me explain why since you've either never played one or never understood the way the class is written:
The Ranger companion begins at Challenge Rating 1/4 or lower...sure you get to add proficiency bonus so it sort of grows with the ranger, but not by much. Out of combat said companion does not have the utility of a familiar (seeing through eyes, communicating telepathically etc). So the beast's tactical use or social use really isn't all that wide compared with a familiar (which a wizard could gain from Level 1 with Find Familiar). You can't, without expending a spell slot to cast Speak with Animals speak with the companion. This means sending it to scout the forest or wilderness ahead is a materially worse option than simply sending a familiar. Perhaps, it's even worse if you consider that you're in rolling foothills so won't be able to find a new wolf to commune with as a companion because they live in forests whereas a familiar can simply be found and retain the old form through the spell.
In combat, the companion must act on your initiative and utilising one of your actions at least at the lower levels (it doesn't get much better at level 7 or in Tasha's by using a bonus action). Compared with Conjure Animals where the beast forms can be immediately stronger than your animal companion due to sheer numbers (8 @ CR 1/4, 4 @ CR 1/2, 2 @ CR 1, 1 @CR 2) albeit with a lower AC and to hit modifier, the companion already falls down. Combine this with the fact that no action, nor bonus action is needed to command the conjured fey spirits and again this subclass disintegrates. Combine this issue with the fact that a familiar could theoretically cast Touch range spells in combat...thereby negating the need for a closer range with a target...yeah this is now looking bleak.
Now, since you brought in Tasha's let me put my bias front and centre: I think it's the worst of the core rules expansions published. As a DM I've found it messy and symbolic of the overall mess the writers have made. It's led to paralysis of choice in more than a few of my players. But, because of the bonus action limitations...it's still an issue...especially as you'd then have to factor in Drakewarden and we're back to Beast Master being a far less attractive choice.
Let me be clear though: I want Beast Master to be an attractive subclass. The stories that have come out of my players working with their companions have been genuinely amazing. I just wish they didn't always reach a point where they're looking in envy at other players and feeling they've got no choice but to either multi/dual class or ask to respec entirely. Make no mistake, it's a badly written subclass but an amazing concept. The fact that there are so many beast master homebrew variants speak to just how much the community want this archetype to work. I've just never come across such a paper thin subclass in any other TTRPG. As I say the writers of D&D should truly be ashamed of how little they've done to really rectify their mistakes with BM.
Now, we could get into the argument that a Beast Master could also Conjure Animals, but they are still lagging behind compared with say Hunter and the extra damage or attack options and that's only if we stick within PHB.
As a DM, I'm looking to ensure that I can make up for the significant and mind-boggling weaknesses of BM so that my players don't consistently feel that it's not an option beyond level 6/7.
What I should I suppose have asked for is what people attracted to the idea of the subclass are looking to do in story terms. The absolute minimum I would want to do is to start from level 3 with the commanding of the companion taking a bonus action (possibly later requiring no action at all). I've also considered making speak with animals a ritual for the Beast Master companion so that communication between the two is possible. I want to allow my players to tell stories through their characters and enable them to have more fun...I'm tired of seeing players stop enjoying the class because the mechanics of Beast Master are so poor in comparion.
Just play a ranged ranger, play a halfling, and choose pteranodon as your beast. Then ride it and blast people from above.
The Deidara strat
It takes an action to command the beast to move (including flying) meaning until you get your second attack or level 7 you're able to move, but not attack. A beast must also be trained to be ridden as a mount. So this kind of theory is going to be DM and group dependant.
But beyond that, characters don't always start in areas where Pteradons live and not all games will have dinosaurs or similar existing in that world/setting. A good subclass shouldn't need hacky workarounds in that way. More than that, what if the player isn't trying to powergame, but rather is trying to tell a story based on the bond between the ranger and their fox companion. Why should they be at a disadvantage because of the particular beast they chose?
With a poison beast and harvesting damage can be insane especially on an ambush with poison caltrops a hunting trap and cordon of arrows. Flying snake has no save. Add that poison to a whole quiver and damage is doing more than enough to match other subclasses. You can even pre-poison multiple melee weapons.
With a bat you can use beast sense and get insane blindsight for a darkness team-up(warlock or druid). Saving hp via defense.
With a wolf you have a passive perception of 21 so you can trade wisdom and take other things not dependent on it.
Flying Mounts are already discussed But you got it wrong moving is free.
Even "poor" choices have unique features like burrow speeds that can be taken advantage of.
By the way, the first pet the beastmaster gets the dm has no say. The ranger just picks(unless they fiat it, which isn't the class's fault. It's really a bad dm)
A second creature by its very nature gets you extra attunement (possibly allowing concentration), an extra reaction and an extra set of eyes. That alone has value.
Tashas gets a full restore with just a slot and an action. That is really big. Total hp alone is worth the slot.
A beastmaster and a familiar aren't mutually exclusive. I often take ritual caster on my rangers but the familiar can't provide the same benefits.
You give up a lot as a phb beastmaster but you can in return get features no other classes get. My time dming dming has taught me two things creativity is the most interesting part of rpgs and people with tunnel vision is the second.
Now how to quantify the above for a re-write. A new beastmaster would need to have such features. Picking beast Traits on a level that matches Infusions or invocations is what I would need to be interested in switching.
I have a goblin beast master, and I love to say he's a power house. He is also 2 level dip into stars druid because I got a staff of the woodlands for him early but my points I'm about to make still stand.
Tasha's has some flaws but the beasts companion is amazing(plus all the other abilities). First it does not take an action to move your beast, and it goes on your turn not after, which translates into, if you're mounted you now have great movement with your character and no opportunity attacks on you.
Second if you take no action to command your beast they dodge automatically as well as getting to move. So just the moment alone is terrific.
Third at level 5 the beast master gets 3 attacks, 2 for himself and one as a bonus action for the beast. Then at level 11 they get 4 attacks, 2 as an action and then 2 as a bonus action with the beast, that's more than a fighter at that level.
Fourth the flying beast has flyby, which is amazing. The labs pet has charge, and the water a grapple. So there's versatility there.
Add in done druid focus on wisdom get sheleighly or a bow, favor foe requires no action, boom there's a nice build. Go Shepard for summons, or stars for healing and it's a nice build.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So, I'm currently working on a homebrew to make Beast Master not...well pointless.
The primary issue as I can see it is that the Beasts don't tend to scale with level, and frankly they're outclassed by the conjure animals. So, I have the bare bones of something where the beast master starts with a beast of challenge rating 2 or higher (as that's the top of what conjure animals can conjure). I'd appreciate some thoughts on how they should develop as a subclass. I have a player who loves the concept and has a great character but let's be fair on this one the writers just failed flat out on Beast Master so want to create something that means they don't have to switch subclass or even multi-class.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
The real value of phb beastmaster is the unique Traits. The value of tasha's beasmaster is it's simplicity and reliability. Neither are useless and with both the spectrum is covered IMO.
Conjure animals on the other hand is something else entirely it's uses are different. The summoned hoard of creatures has a very critical place in the ranger kit but it's not the "end all" spell or the problem many make it out to be. This seems like a mixed comparison as they are not even mutually exclusive.
Now to be fair a dm can homebrew better beasts as a reward and it's really no different than giving a magic item to another martial. This is within the exception based rules 5e established.
I could go more into details but it may not be what you're looking for. I believe this is a complex class with lots of interconnected pieces and few are invested the same way I am.
So, I'm going to be brutal here. I've DMd a lot of games over the last twenty years and played a whole host of different TTRPGs. Trust me when I say that Beast Master as a subclass is absolutely underpowered. It should legitimately make the writers behind D&D ashamed that such a poor subclass ever made it into print.
In fact a Ranger Hunter subclass could simply take one level of Wizard have find familiar and take conjure animals and all of a sudden Beast Master is a pointless subclass as written. I've now seen it in play where my players have taken the Beast Master to be able to weave wonderful stories only to hit level six and grind to a screeching halt realising that they are the forever weak link in their team. This has happened on three separate occasions.
Let me explain why since you've either never played one or never understood the way the class is written:
The Ranger companion begins at Challenge Rating 1/4 or lower...sure you get to add proficiency bonus so it sort of grows with the ranger, but not by much. Out of combat said companion does not have the utility of a familiar (seeing through eyes, communicating telepathically etc). So the beast's tactical use or social use really isn't all that wide compared with a familiar (which a wizard could gain from Level 1 with Find Familiar). You can't, without expending a spell slot to cast Speak with Animals speak with the companion. This means sending it to scout the forest or wilderness ahead is a materially worse option than simply sending a familiar. Perhaps, it's even worse if you consider that you're in rolling foothills so won't be able to find a new wolf to commune with as a companion because they live in forests whereas a familiar can simply be found and retain the old form through the spell.
In combat, the companion must act on your initiative and utilising one of your actions at least at the lower levels (it doesn't get much better at level 7 or in Tasha's by using a bonus action). Compared with Conjure Animals where the beast forms can be immediately stronger than your animal companion due to sheer numbers (8 @ CR 1/4, 4 @ CR 1/2, 2 @ CR 1, 1 @CR 2) albeit with a lower AC and to hit modifier, the companion already falls down. Combine this with the fact that no action, nor bonus action is needed to command the conjured fey spirits and again this subclass disintegrates. Combine this issue with the fact that a familiar could theoretically cast Touch range spells in combat...thereby negating the need for a closer range with a target...yeah this is now looking bleak.
Now, since you brought in Tasha's let me put my bias front and centre: I think it's the worst of the core rules expansions published. As a DM I've found it messy and symbolic of the overall mess the writers have made. It's led to paralysis of choice in more than a few of my players. But, because of the bonus action limitations...it's still an issue...especially as you'd then have to factor in Drakewarden and we're back to Beast Master being a far less attractive choice.
Let me be clear though: I want Beast Master to be an attractive subclass. The stories that have come out of my players working with their companions have been genuinely amazing. I just wish they didn't always reach a point where they're looking in envy at other players and feeling they've got no choice but to either multi/dual class or ask to respec entirely. Make no mistake, it's a badly written subclass but an amazing concept. The fact that there are so many beast master homebrew variants speak to just how much the community want this archetype to work. I've just never come across such a paper thin subclass in any other TTRPG. As I say the writers of D&D should truly be ashamed of how little they've done to really rectify their mistakes with BM.
Now, we could get into the argument that a Beast Master could also Conjure Animals, but they are still lagging behind compared with say Hunter and the extra damage or attack options and that's only if we stick within PHB.
As a DM, I'm looking to ensure that I can make up for the significant and mind-boggling weaknesses of BM so that my players don't consistently feel that it's not an option beyond level 6/7.
What I should I suppose have asked for is what people attracted to the idea of the subclass are looking to do in story terms. The absolute minimum I would want to do is to start from level 3 with the commanding of the companion taking a bonus action (possibly later requiring no action at all). I've also considered making speak with animals a ritual for the Beast Master companion so that communication between the two is possible. I want to allow my players to tell stories through their characters and enable them to have more fun...I'm tired of seeing players stop enjoying the class because the mechanics of Beast Master are so poor in comparion.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
Just play a ranged ranger, play a halfling, and choose pteranodon as your beast. Then ride it and blast people from above.
The Deidara strat
"Anyone can smith at the cosmic anvil, yet only I can forge a weapon as good as thee."
My Homebrew Please click it, they have my family.
It takes an action to command the beast to move (including flying) meaning until you get your second attack or level 7 you're able to move, but not attack. A beast must also be trained to be ridden as a mount. So this kind of theory is going to be DM and group dependant.
But beyond that, characters don't always start in areas where Pteradons live and not all games will have dinosaurs or similar existing in that world/setting. A good subclass shouldn't need hacky workarounds in that way. More than that, what if the player isn't trying to powergame, but rather is trying to tell a story based on the bond between the ranger and their fox companion. Why should they be at a disadvantage because of the particular beast they chose?
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
With a poison beast and harvesting damage can be insane especially on an ambush with poison caltrops a hunting trap and cordon of arrows. Flying snake has no save. Add that poison to a whole quiver and damage is doing more than enough to match other subclasses. You can even pre-poison multiple melee weapons.
With a bat you can use beast sense and get insane blindsight for a darkness team-up(warlock or druid). Saving hp via defense.
With a wolf you have a passive perception of 21 so you can trade wisdom and take other things not dependent on it.
Flying Mounts are already discussed But you got it wrong moving is free.
Even "poor" choices have unique features like burrow speeds that can be taken advantage of.
By the way, the first pet the beastmaster gets the dm has no say. The ranger just picks(unless they fiat it, which isn't the class's fault. It's really a bad dm)
A second creature by its very nature gets you extra attunement (possibly allowing concentration), an extra reaction and an extra set of eyes. That alone has value.
Tashas gets a full restore with just a slot and an action. That is really big. Total hp alone is worth the slot.
A beastmaster and a familiar aren't mutually exclusive. I often take ritual caster on my rangers but the familiar can't provide the same benefits.
You give up a lot as a phb beastmaster but you can in return get features no other classes get. My time dming dming has taught me two things creativity is the most interesting part of rpgs and people with tunnel vision is the second.
Now how to quantify the above for a re-write. A new beastmaster would need to have such features. Picking beast Traits on a level that matches Infusions or invocations is what I would need to be interested in switching.
I have a goblin beast master, and I love to say he's a power house. He is also 2 level dip into stars druid because I got a staff of the woodlands for him early but my points I'm about to make still stand.
Tasha's has some flaws but the beasts companion is amazing(plus all the other abilities). First it does not take an action to move your beast, and it goes on your turn not after, which translates into, if you're mounted you now have great movement with your character and no opportunity attacks on you.
Second if you take no action to command your beast they dodge automatically as well as getting to move. So just the moment alone is terrific.
Third at level 5 the beast master gets 3 attacks, 2 for himself and one as a bonus action for the beast. Then at level 11 they get 4 attacks, 2 as an action and then 2 as a bonus action with the beast, that's more than a fighter at that level.
Fourth the flying beast has flyby, which is amazing. The labs pet has charge, and the water a grapple. So there's versatility there.
Add in done druid focus on wisdom get sheleighly or a bow, favor foe requires no action, boom there's a nice build. Go Shepard for summons, or stars for healing and it's a nice build.