jonalfarlinga
First Post
Many threads have been started by people dissatisfied with the 5th ed Beast Master Archetype.
While dreaming up ways to improve the beast master, I came up with the idea that the companion could be thought of as simply another weapon for the ranger. Scimitar, longbow, or wolf, which one do want this round? The more I thought about it the more convinced I became that that is exactly what the designers intended. It explains why the companion always occupies a ranger attack action, and why the beast has such low hit points. Also, by the lack of summon monster spells, I get the feeling the devs wanted to limit players to controling one character 95% of the time. Removing the independence of the companion fits right in with that.
But most of the beasts available as companions don't bring exceptional attacks, especially at high levels, once the ranger gets magic weapons and ability increases. True, the CR 1/4 beasts have attacks that are comparable to weapon damage attacks (panther = 1d6 and 1d4), but their strength bonuses tend to be lower than the PC's Str/Dex and they don't improve with level.
How would you change the beast master to better fit this design philosophy? I'm thinking the beast should get ability bonuses when the ranger does, and ensure that magical collars and such to boost the companion are a part of the game world. Further, and this I expect will be controversial, I would remove the illusion that the beast is a separate entity in combat; the beast only attacks when the ranger gives up an attack and may use as many of the ranger's attacks as desired. The beast uses the ranger's reaction if it makes an opportunity attack. This change would free the beast up to get more powerful attacks. The Hunter archetype makes the ranger a utility and defense character, perhaps the Beast Master should be a DPR monster with some out of combat utility.
While dreaming up ways to improve the beast master, I came up with the idea that the companion could be thought of as simply another weapon for the ranger. Scimitar, longbow, or wolf, which one do want this round? The more I thought about it the more convinced I became that that is exactly what the designers intended. It explains why the companion always occupies a ranger attack action, and why the beast has such low hit points. Also, by the lack of summon monster spells, I get the feeling the devs wanted to limit players to controling one character 95% of the time. Removing the independence of the companion fits right in with that.
But most of the beasts available as companions don't bring exceptional attacks, especially at high levels, once the ranger gets magic weapons and ability increases. True, the CR 1/4 beasts have attacks that are comparable to weapon damage attacks (panther = 1d6 and 1d4), but their strength bonuses tend to be lower than the PC's Str/Dex and they don't improve with level.
How would you change the beast master to better fit this design philosophy? I'm thinking the beast should get ability bonuses when the ranger does, and ensure that magical collars and such to boost the companion are a part of the game world. Further, and this I expect will be controversial, I would remove the illusion that the beast is a separate entity in combat; the beast only attacks when the ranger gives up an attack and may use as many of the ranger's attacks as desired. The beast uses the ranger's reaction if it makes an opportunity attack. This change would free the beast up to get more powerful attacks. The Hunter archetype makes the ranger a utility and defense character, perhaps the Beast Master should be a DPR monster with some out of combat utility.