I want to go on record (as a VERY vocal defender of the PHB ranger class and beast master subclass) that the leaks we are seeing online today about TCoE can NOT be correct. The damage output of the beast master would be off the charts!
Besides the clickbait title, and the fact that you think this suddenly makes rangers soooo much better (I thought you loved favored enemy?), I'm assuming that you have no evidence that the leaks are not incorrect.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
2. If only through more options and further customization, yes! I do think this book will make the ranger “better“.
3. I do enjoy the favored enemy ability. I enjoy all of the abilities in the range class. Why are you bringing it up?
4. No. I do not have any direct evidence. But if the level 11 beast master ability remains unchanged, and the leaked level 3 ability variant is correct, then the ranger and beast will be making a total of 4 attacks at level 11, two each. Which is a lot. Which is the point of this thread.
4. No. I do not have any direct evidence. But if the level 11 beast master ability remains unchanged, and the leaked level 3 ability variant is correct, then the ranger and beast will be making a total of 4 attacks at level 11, two each. Which is a lot. Which is the point of this thread.
Assuming, as I do, beasts are to be more or less regular (if possibly fantastic) animals and not semi-uplifted monsters capable of attunement 2 of those attacks face significant limitations in terms of (by then common) resistances. Still very good, but nothing I’d consider proof any of this “can’t be correct”.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
4. No. I do not have any direct evidence. But if the level 11 beast master ability remains unchanged, and the leaked level 3 ability variant is correct, then the ranger and beast will be making a total of 4 attacks at level 11, two each. Which is a lot. Which is the point of this thread.
Assuming, as I do, beasts are to be more or less regular (if possibly fantastic) animals and not semi-uplifted monsters capable of attunement 2 of those attacks face significant limitations in terms of (by then common) resistances. Still very good, but nothing I’d consider proof any of this “can’t be correct”.
At level 7 the beasts attacks are now magical to overcome resistances per the player’s handbook.
4. No. I do not have any direct evidence. But if the level 11 beast master ability remains unchanged, and the leaked level 3 ability variant is correct, then the ranger and beast will be making a total of 4 attacks at level 11, two each. Which is a lot. Which is the point of this thread.
Assuming, as I do, beasts are to be more or less regular (if possibly fantastic) animals and not semi-uplifted monsters capable of attunement 2 of those attacks face significant limitations in terms of (by then common) resistances. Still very good, but nothing I’d consider proof any of this “can’t be correct”.
At level 7 the beasts attacks are now magical to overcome resistances per the player’s handbook.
1) I guess I should really start reading the errata.
2) that’s incredibly weird and unintuitive.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
4. No. I do not have any direct evidence. But if the level 11 beast master ability remains unchanged, and the leaked level 3 ability variant is correct, then the ranger and beast will be making a total of 4 attacks at level 11, two each. Which is a lot. Which is the point of this thread.
Assuming, as I do, beasts are to be more or less regular (if possibly fantastic) animals and not semi-uplifted monsters capable of attunement 2 of those attacks face significant limitations in terms of (by then common) resistances. Still very good, but nothing I’d consider proof any of this “can’t be correct”.
At level 7 the beasts attacks are now magical to overcome resistances per the player’s handbook.
1) I guess I should really start reading the errata.
2) that’s incredibly weird and unintuitive.
Why? Several subclasses get magical attacks around levels 6 or 7.
4. No. I do not have any direct evidence. But if the level 11 beast master ability remains unchanged, and the leaked level 3 ability variant is correct, then the ranger and beast will be making a total of 4 attacks at level 11, two each. Which is a lot. Which is the point of this thread.
Assuming, as I do, beasts are to be more or less regular (if possibly fantastic) animals and not semi-uplifted monsters capable of attunement 2 of those attacks face significant limitations in terms of (by then common) resistances. Still very good, but nothing I’d consider proof any of this “can’t be correct”.
At level 7 the beasts attacks are now magical to overcome resistances per the player’s handbook.
1) I guess I should really start reading the errata.
2) that’s incredibly weird and unintuitive.
Why? Several subclasses get magical attacks around levels 6 or 7.
Well, yes, subclasses that have access to magic or mystical powers. Again, I’m assuming beasts are still mundane animals (that don’t have class levels themselves). Animals with excellent training, but animal training that makes their claws or fangs magical - to me anyway - crosses from excellent to weird. It’s not like rangers can train themselves to make magical attacks either.
Well, I can see why something like this was done. Animals that stay mundane creatures with mundane abilities suffer at higher levels. That doesn’t make this particular solution any less weird though. Why not give the ranger a spell to cast on their faithful comrade instead, for instance?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
4. No. I do not have any direct evidence. But if the level 11 beast master ability remains unchanged, and the leaked level 3 ability variant is correct, then the ranger and beast will be making a total of 4 attacks at level 11, two each. Which is a lot. Which is the point of this thread.
Assuming, as I do, beasts are to be more or less regular (if possibly fantastic) animals and not semi-uplifted monsters capable of attunement 2 of those attacks face significant limitations in terms of (by then common) resistances. Still very good, but nothing I’d consider proof any of this “can’t be correct”.
At level 7 the beasts attacks are now magical to overcome resistances per the player’s handbook.
1) I guess I should really start reading the errata.
2) that’s incredibly weird and unintuitive.
Why? Several subclasses get magical attacks around levels 6 or 7.
Well, yes, subclasses that have access to magic or mystical powers. Again, I’m assuming beasts are still mundane animals (that don’t have class levels themselves). Animals with excellent training, but animal training that makes their claws or fangs magical - to me anyway - crosses from excellent to weird. It’s not like rangers can train themselves to make magical attacks either.
4. No. I do not have any direct evidence. But if the level 11 beast master ability remains unchanged, and the leaked level 3 ability variant is correct, then the ranger and beast will be making a total of 4 attacks at level 11, two each. Which is a lot. Which is the point of this thread.
Assuming, as I do, beasts are to be more or less regular (if possibly fantastic) animals and not semi-uplifted monsters capable of attunement 2 of those attacks face significant limitations in terms of (by then common) resistances. Still very good, but nothing I’d consider proof any of this “can’t be correct”.
At level 7 the beasts attacks are now magical to overcome resistances per the player’s handbook.
1) I guess I should really start reading the errata.
2) that’s incredibly weird and unintuitive.
Why? Several subclasses get magical attacks around levels 6 or 7.
Well, yes, subclasses that have access to magic or mystical powers. Again, I’m assuming beasts are still mundane animals (that don’t have class levels themselves). Animals with excellent training, but animal training that makes their claws or fangs magical - to me anyway - crosses from excellent to weird. It’s not like rangers can train themselves to make magical attacks either.
All Rangers have access to magic.
And most rangers can make magical attacks.
Their beasts are explicitly supposed to be non-magical beasts, just well-trained.
They can learn to cast spells to attack with. They can't make their attacks magical.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
4. No. I do not have any direct evidence. But if the level 11 beast master ability remains unchanged, and the leaked level 3 ability variant is correct, then the ranger and beast will be making a total of 4 attacks at level 11, two each. Which is a lot. Which is the point of this thread.
Assuming, as I do, beasts are to be more or less regular (if possibly fantastic) animals and not semi-uplifted monsters capable of attunement 2 of those attacks face significant limitations in terms of (by then common) resistances. Still very good, but nothing I’d consider proof any of this “can’t be correct”.
At level 7 the beasts attacks are now magical to overcome resistances per the player’s handbook.
1) I guess I should really start reading the errata.
2) that’s incredibly weird and unintuitive.
Why? Several subclasses get magical attacks around levels 6 or 7.
Well, yes, subclasses that have access to magic or mystical powers. Again, I’m assuming beasts are still mundane animals (that don’t have class levels themselves). Animals with excellent training, but animal training that makes their claws or fangs magical - to me anyway - crosses from excellent to weird. It’s not like rangers can train themselves to make magical attacks either.
All Rangers have access to magic.
And most rangers can make magical attacks.
Their beasts are explicitly supposed to be non-magical beasts, just well-trained.
They can learn to cast spells to attack with. They can't make their attacks magical.
However you want to flavor it, at level 7 ”...the beast’s attacks now count as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.” Call it what you will.
Spells deal magical damage and ranger’s have spells that deal damage.
TCoE expands the ranger spell list to include the spell magic weapon, among others. If using those optional rules.
4. No. I do not have any direct evidence. But if the level 11 beast master ability remains unchanged, and the leaked level 3 ability variant is correct, then the ranger and beast will be making a total of 4 attacks at level 11, two each. Which is a lot. Which is the point of this thread.
Assuming, as I do, beasts are to be more or less regular (if possibly fantastic) animals and not semi-uplifted monsters capable of attunement 2 of those attacks face significant limitations in terms of (by then common) resistances. Still very good, but nothing I’d consider proof any of this “can’t be correct”.
At level 7 the beasts attacks are now magical to overcome resistances per the player’s handbook.
1) I guess I should really start reading the errata.
2) that’s incredibly weird and unintuitive.
Why? Several subclasses get magical attacks around levels 6 or 7.
Well, yes, subclasses that have access to magic or mystical powers. Again, I’m assuming beasts are still mundane animals (that don’t have class levels themselves). Animals with excellent training, but animal training that makes their claws or fangs magical - to me anyway - crosses from excellent to weird. It’s not like rangers can train themselves to make magical attacks either.
All Rangers have access to magic.
And most rangers can make magical attacks.
Their beasts are explicitly supposed to be non-magical beasts, just well-trained.
They can learn to cast spells to attack with. They can't make their attacks magical.
However you want to flavor it, at level 7 ”...the beast’s attacks now count as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.” Call it what you will.
Spells deal magical damage and ranger’s have spells that deal damage.
TCoE expands the ranger spell list to include the spell magic weapon, among others. If using those optional rules.
I’m calling it weird, is all. My personal opinion doesn’t exactly make any noticeable difference, and I’m not trying to get anyone to agree with it. Rangers can apparently train their dog or other animal to bite or claw or punch in a way that bypasses resistances to non-magical attacks, which - in my case - requires a stretch of the imagination that’s a bit excessive in the first place. They also can’t train themselves to do the same for some reason, which begs the question how they understand how to train an animal to do just that. That’s all I’m saying. As for getting Magic Weapon added to their spell list, that’s great (not being sarcastic, I mean that. The Ranger class spellcasting ability can seriously benefit from a bit of a boost). It’s just not training or an innate ability or anything like that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Now include a single battlemaster maneuver each round (do note some subclasses add a entire additional attack 2d6+5). Fighter: (2d6 + 5 )* 3 + 1d10 = 41.5. Overall Fighter, 124.5.
Yeah Ranger wins overall, however any sort of Fighter subclass that grants a damage boost (mainly BM, Echo Knight, and Samurai) will easily surpass it. I don't think this is game breaking, it's a bit above par, but not by enough to really matter.
Edit: After all you still have too worry about your precious pet dying, although the hit points are probably buffed. In addition the fighter benefits more from any sort of damage increase (magical weapons, feats, etc.), and has action surge, so I'd call it even.
From the leaked page I saw, this is such a big improvement to the Beast Master. I know you like it, but mechanically it was a pain for a lot of us.
While the beast master already did fairly decent damage, these changes are fantastic and much needed. The OG Ranger's levels 3 and 4 were so annoying. Having to pick who attacks was really poor design, especially because the ranger did more damage. Then, from levels 5-10, you still had to pick who attacked. The ranger still does more damage unless he/she didn't have a magic weapon. So for the first 7 levels as a beast master, if you're trying to deal the most damage possible, the ranger is attacking and the pet is hanging out. That was just such awful design. Starting at level 11, you can actually start attacking with your pet if you can keep it alive. Command it to attack twice, you attack once. Hooray. At 17, your pet attacks twice, you attacked once, and then using your bonus action you rock swift quiver to attack two more times for an absolute ton of damage per round. On par with a GWM barbarian. It's crazy! Sadly, it fell off pretty bad when you don't have swift quiver up.
Contrast that with the variant rules from the leak. Now all pet actions are tied to your bonus action. It does create action economy issues and you're unlikely to rely on hunter's mark as much because you'll want to keep your pet attacking. Not a problem though. When you hit 3, right out of the gate, the pet is crushing it. Levels 5-10 also feel a lot better and you're doing some really nice damage and your pet is giving you a nice boost in that department too. No more having the pet just never attacking. Things get even better at 11 but then something kinda crappy happens at 17. You can't use swift quiver or you can't have your pet attacks. However, this is such a better complete design. Swift quiver is concentration and you'll only get one or two per adventuring day. It's a bummer saying goodbye to swift quiver but that does open up other options like Wrath of Nature. I think that's actually the thing I love most. Before you were a little punished for casting a spell using your action. The pet wouldn't do anything and you weren't attacking. Now, you can cast a spell like Wrath of Nature and then have your pet still attack. Such a good and fun design.
If the added HP from UA stays (I couldn't tell), I'll 100% be playing a Beast Master for my next character. They did such a fantastic job with these variant rules. I know you still may prefer the OG rules and you can still play with them. Everyone wins! Unless you have an OG ranger and a variant ranger in the same party because... well... variant ranger is going to be more effective.
I just heard a little something that the attack modifier for the beast’s attack will be the ranger’s spell attack modifier. That will “change” things quite a bit in terms of game balance if you are including hit chance into the damage output.
1. The beast’s attack bonus being tied to the rangers wisdom.
2. The beast making several attacks along with the ranger. It fits the class well. Like the hunter subclass and the ranger’s damage spells being powerful in situations where there are several targets.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I want to go on record (as a VERY vocal defender of the PHB ranger class and beast master subclass) that the leaks we are seeing online today about TCoE can NOT be correct. The damage output of the beast master would be off the charts!
Besides the clickbait title, and the fact that you think this suddenly makes rangers soooo much better (I thought you loved favored enemy?), I'm assuming that you have no evidence that the leaks are not incorrect.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Hello, Third! Welcome!
1. You took the bait!
2. If only through more options and further customization, yes! I do think this book will make the ranger “better“.
3. I do enjoy the favored enemy ability. I enjoy all of the abilities in the range class. Why are you bringing it up?
4. No. I do not have any direct evidence. But if the level 11 beast master ability remains unchanged, and the leaked level 3 ability variant is correct, then the ranger and beast will be making a total of 4 attacks at level 11, two each. Which is a lot. Which is the point of this thread.
Assuming, as I do, beasts are to be more or less regular (if possibly fantastic) animals and not semi-uplifted monsters capable of attunement 2 of those attacks face significant limitations in terms of (by then common) resistances. Still very good, but nothing I’d consider proof any of this “can’t be correct”.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
At level 7 the beasts attacks are now magical to overcome resistances per the player’s handbook.
1) I guess I should really start reading the errata.
2) that’s incredibly weird and unintuitive.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
At level 11:
Ranger with bow (d8 + 5)*2
Panther or UA beast of the land (d6 + 2 + 4)*2
Why? Several subclasses get magical attacks around levels 6 or 7.
Well, yes, subclasses that have access to magic or mystical powers. Again, I’m assuming beasts are still mundane animals (that don’t have class levels themselves). Animals with excellent training, but animal training that makes their claws or fangs magical - to me anyway - crosses from excellent to weird. It’s not like rangers can train themselves to make magical attacks either.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Damned if they do, damned if they don’t?
Well, I can see why something like this was done. Animals that stay mundane creatures with mundane abilities suffer at higher levels. That doesn’t make this particular solution any less weird though. Why not give the ranger a spell to cast on their faithful comrade instead, for instance?
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
All Rangers have access to magic.
And most rangers can make magical attacks.
Their beasts are explicitly supposed to be non-magical beasts, just well-trained.
They can learn to cast spells to attack with. They can't make their attacks magical.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
However you want to flavor it, at level 7 ”...the beast’s attacks now count as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.” Call it what you will.
Spells deal magical damage and ranger’s have spells that deal damage.
TCoE expands the ranger spell list to include the spell magic weapon, among others. If using those optional rules.
I’m calling it weird, is all. My personal opinion doesn’t exactly make any noticeable difference, and I’m not trying to get anyone to agree with it.
Rangers can apparently train their dog or other animal to bite or claw or punch in a way that bypasses resistances to non-magical attacks, which - in my case - requires a stretch of the imagination that’s a bit excessive in the first place. They also can’t train themselves to do the same for some reason, which begs the question how they understand how to train an animal to do just that. That’s all I’m saying.
As for getting Magic Weapon added to their spell list, that’s great (not being sarcastic, I mean that. The Ranger class spellcasting ability can seriously benefit from a bit of a boost). It’s just not training or an innate ability or anything like that.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
That's on average 38.
Greatsword Fighter (2d6 + 5 )* 3 = 36. Not going to try to account for Great Weapon Fighting that sounds like actual work.
Let's put that over 3 rounds, assuming first round is hunter's mark... because Hunter's mark.
First round
Ranger: BA Hunter's mark, (1d8 + 5 + 1d6) * 2 = 26
Fighter: (2d6 + 5 )* 3 = 36.
Second round
Ranger: Action (1d8 + 5 + 1d6) * 2 = 26, BA Beast, (1d6 + 2 + 4) * 2 = 19. (45 total)
Fighter: 36
Third round
Ranger: 45
Fighter: 36
Overall
Ranger 116
Fighter 108
Now include a single battlemaster maneuver each round (do note some subclasses add a entire additional attack 2d6+5).
Fighter: (2d6 + 5 )* 3 + 1d10 = 41.5.
Overall Fighter, 124.5.
Yeah Ranger wins overall, however any sort of Fighter subclass that grants a damage boost (mainly BM, Echo Knight, and Samurai) will easily surpass it. I don't think this is game breaking, it's a bit above par, but not by enough to really matter.
Edit: After all you still have too worry about your precious pet dying, although the hit points are probably buffed. In addition the fighter benefits more from any sort of damage increase (magical weapons, feats, etc.), and has action surge, so I'd call it even.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
From the leaked page I saw, this is such a big improvement to the Beast Master. I know you like it, but mechanically it was a pain for a lot of us.
While the beast master already did fairly decent damage, these changes are fantastic and much needed. The OG Ranger's levels 3 and 4 were so annoying. Having to pick who attacks was really poor design, especially because the ranger did more damage. Then, from levels 5-10, you still had to pick who attacked. The ranger still does more damage unless he/she didn't have a magic weapon. So for the first 7 levels as a beast master, if you're trying to deal the most damage possible, the ranger is attacking and the pet is hanging out. That was just such awful design. Starting at level 11, you can actually start attacking with your pet if you can keep it alive. Command it to attack twice, you attack once. Hooray. At 17, your pet attacks twice, you attacked once, and then using your bonus action you rock swift quiver to attack two more times for an absolute ton of damage per round. On par with a GWM barbarian. It's crazy! Sadly, it fell off pretty bad when you don't have swift quiver up.
Contrast that with the variant rules from the leak. Now all pet actions are tied to your bonus action. It does create action economy issues and you're unlikely to rely on hunter's mark as much because you'll want to keep your pet attacking. Not a problem though. When you hit 3, right out of the gate, the pet is crushing it. Levels 5-10 also feel a lot better and you're doing some really nice damage and your pet is giving you a nice boost in that department too. No more having the pet just never attacking. Things get even better at 11 but then something kinda crappy happens at 17. You can't use swift quiver or you can't have your pet attacks. However, this is such a better complete design. Swift quiver is concentration and you'll only get one or two per adventuring day. It's a bummer saying goodbye to swift quiver but that does open up other options like Wrath of Nature. I think that's actually the thing I love most. Before you were a little punished for casting a spell using your action. The pet wouldn't do anything and you weren't attacking. Now, you can cast a spell like Wrath of Nature and then have your pet still attack. Such a good and fun design.
If the added HP from UA stays (I couldn't tell), I'll 100% be playing a Beast Master for my next character. They did such a fantastic job with these variant rules. I know you still may prefer the OG rules and you can still play with them. Everyone wins! Unless you have an OG ranger and a variant ranger in the same party because... well... variant ranger is going to be more effective.
I just heard a little something that the attack modifier for the beast’s attack will be the ranger’s spell attack modifier. That will “change” things quite a bit in terms of game balance if you are including hit chance into the damage output.
That would buff the beast yes, however I wasn't taking hit chance into account (because I'm too lazy) so my results still remain the same.
Edit: Same with 01011000Lehrer's thoughts.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
I like the ideas of...
1. The beast’s attack bonus being tied to the rangers wisdom.
2. The beast making several attacks along with the ranger. It fits the class well. Like the hunter subclass and the ranger’s damage spells being powerful in situations where there are several targets.