D&D 5E Ranger: The Pack Leader (+)

[doctorbadwolf]

Hey there folks!


Inspired in part by the Druid UA, including where it fails, I have figured out a lot of what I dislike about the Beastmaster ranger!

Now, this is the main kind of ranger I want to play in D&D. It’s what makes the ranger more interesting than a Druid with fighter levels or an arcane Trickster with primal spells.

Now, I’m kinda hoping they put an options in the new ranger to swap the other level 1 features for a base class beast companion that can be empowered with spell slots and is there to be involved in most of what you do.

But barring that, we have the subclass structure.

So what needs to work differently?

• For each attack that the beast makes to not cost ranger actions, only some. That is, similar model to hunters mark, where you BA to aim the thing, and then get dice of extra damage until that target dies, and then use a BA against to re-aim it.
  • Alt: let the beast just have an attack action, make that the baseline assumption, and work from there.
• Beast needs a scaling statblock with variable choices so the player can feel like their “panther” is different from my “wolf”
• Let spell slots fuel beast, from ranger spells that are made to make the ranger and 1 or more ally stronger, to the ability to share the effect of a spell that targets self with your beast
• A mount option
• A Pack Tactics fighting style to further lean into being part of a team

Example beasts would be air, land, and sea.
Then you would have a choice in each statblock like “Pack Hunter, Protector, Scout” or “Raptor, Messenger, Scout”, etc.
lastly you’d pick maybe two special traits? Pounce, trample, pack tactics, hamstring, grapple

Odd but popular stuff like big spiders and snakes might merit their own statblock, alongside air, land, and sea.

 

[DeviousQuail]

Hey there folks!


Inspired in part by the Druid UA, including where it fails, I have figured out a lot of what I dislike about the Beastmaster ranger!

Now, this is the main kind of ranger I want to play in D&D. It’s what makes the ranger more interesting than a Druid with fighter levels or an arcane Trickster with primal spells.

Now, I’m kinda hoping they put an options in the new ranger to swap the other level 1 features for a base class beast companion that can be empowered with spell slots and is there to be involved in most of what you do.

But barring that, we have the subclass structure.

So what needs to work differently?

• For each attack that the beast makes to not cost ranger actions, only some. That is, similar model to hunters mark, where you BA to aim the thing, and then get dice of extra damage until that target dies, and then use a BA against to re-aim it.
  • Alt: let the beast just have an attack action, make that the baseline assumption, and work from there.
• Beast needs a scaling statblock with variable choices so the player can feel like their “panther” is different from my “wolf”
• Let spell slots fuel beast, from ranger spells that are made to make the ranger and 1 or more ally stronger, to the ability to share the effect of a spell that targets self with your beast
• A mount option
• A Pack Tactics fighting style to further lean into being part of a team

Example beasts would be air, land, and sea.
Then you would have a choice in each statblock like “Pack Hunter, Protector, Scout” or “Raptor, Messenger, Scout”, etc.
lastly you’d pick maybe two special traits? Pounce, trample, pack tactics, hamstring, grapple

Odd but popular stuff like big spiders and snakes might merit their own statblock, alongside air, land, and sea.

I think the land, air, and sea base types is the wrong way to go about it. Instead, the beasts should be based on what they do. With the druid wildshape UA I suggested protector, predator, and trickster. I think those work here as well.

Protectors are tankier, predators are the damaging option, and tricksters control the battlefield. Each one comes with sub-options similar to the Tasha's summoning line. Predators could have the option of pounce or pack tactics, tricksters could have webs or blinding spit, protectors could have movement negation or reactive defenses, etc. You can stick a sea and air option on each one as well.

Two other stat blocks I thought about were Steadfast (work horses, sled dogs, camels) and Infiltrators (Cats, rats, insects). Haven't put those together though so not sure if they work on paper.

 

[Emberashh]

I don't believe the Beastmaster should be a Ranger. It should be its own class because its a distinct trope unto its own and is deep enough that it just gets robbed by having to share design space with a bunch of different things that aren't all that related to it unless you squint.

If you wanted to go down a direct adaptation of the literary Beastmaster, itd actually be a Psionic class.

My own interpretation in the game Im writing is that is going to be a "martial" Summoner class, with the idea being that, relative to the other Summoners, it bridges the gap between the Horde powered Necromancer, Conjurer, or Seraphite and the more Self empowered Battlemage.

The Beastmaster will, by the end game, have control over a small group of whatever beast (ie, you're own Dragon horde), but the main idea will be similar to how the Drakewarden in 5e works, with you raising a chosen beast as you adventure which serves as your central class feature.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I think the land, air, and sea base types is the wrong way to go about it. Instead, the beasts should be based on what they do. With the druid wildshape UA I suggested protector, predator, and trickster. I think those work here as well.

Talking to my wife lead me to the same conclusion, except my current thought now is: messenger, mount, pack Hunter, protector, prowler, and scout.

Protectors are tankier, predators are the damaging option, and tricksters control the battlefield. Each one comes with sub-options similar to the Tasha's summoning line. Predators could have the option of pounce or pack tactics, tricksters could have webs or blinding spit, protectors could have movement negation or reactive defenses, etc. You can stick a sea and air option on each one as well.

Two other stat blocks I thought about were Steadfast (work horses, sled dogs, camels) and Infiltrators (Cats, rats, insects). Haven't put those together though so not sure if they work on paper.

I like those ideas. For me, I think (right now at least) I’m thinking the above basic blocks that determine your base AC, hit die, what sizes you can be, etc, then, for each block you have:

Choose special sense

Choose special movement

Choose special action (usually attack)

Choose minor trait/quirk

So to get a wolf, you make a protector or pack hunter, grab keen senses (smell and hearing), swift (fast but no climb or swim speed, maybe can dash as bonus and ignore difficult terrain while dashing), pack attacks (target falls prone on failed save with every attack), and special trait could be social animal which gives it Insight and Persuasion prof.



I’m also working on a “Bane-Craft” replacement for favored enemy, and a “Purposeful Wanderer” replacement for Natural Explorer, which gives Wanderer’s Knacks. Banes are offensive tactics that do things like shutting down regen, or making it hard to fly without falling, etc.

Knacks are more wide ranging in purpose, often exploration or defense oriented.

both features can be beefed up with spell slots, including stuff that requires spending a slot at the end of a long rest.

Anyway, an alt BM would have beast-related knacks available to further customize it, probably.

 

[Clint_L]

So, I liked the templates version of BM from Tasha's and thought it a huge improvement. But several of my young players told me they didn't like how generic the creatures felt, and they wanted to feel like their beast was a specific animal, like Trinket in Critical Role. So I wonder if there is some way to combine the old version with the new, perhaps by starting with a specific animal type and then adding templated improvements, rather than the reverse.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

• Beast needs a scaling statblock with variable choices so the player can feel like their “panther” is different from my “wolf”

Example beasts would be air, land, and sea.
Then you would have a choice in each statblock like “Pack Hunter, Protector, Scout” or “Raptor, Messenger, Scout”, etc.
lastly you’d pick maybe two special traits? Pounce, trample, pack tactics, hamstring, grapple

Odd but popular stuff like big spiders and snakes might merit their own statblock, alongside air, land, and sea.

I think the land, air, and sea base types is the wrong way to go about it. Instead, the beasts should be based on what they do. With the druid wildshape UA I suggested protector, predator, and trickster. I think those work here as well.

Protectors are tankier, predators are the damaging option, and tricksters control the battlefield. Each one comes with sub-options similar to the Tasha's summoning line. Predators could have the option of pounce or pack tactics, tricksters could have webs or blinding spit, protectors could have movement negation or reactive defenses, etc. You can stick a sea and air option on each one as well.

Two other stat blocks I thought about were Steadfast (work horses, sled dogs, camels) and Infiltrators (Cats, rats, insects). Haven't put those together though so not sure if they work on paper.

I don't know if land/air/sea and your options are mutually exclusive. Having a Land Predator or a Sea Protector seems like a good way to add some variety to the sameness of the basic land/air/sea categories.

So, I liked the templates version of BM from Tasha's and thought it a huge improvement. But several of my young players told me they didn't like how generic the creatures felt, and they wanted to feel like their beast was a specific animal, like Trinket in Critical Role. So I wonder if there is some way to combine the old version with the new, perhaps by starting with a specific animal type and then adding templated improvements, rather than the reverse.

The specific -> template thought is a good one. @doctorbadwolf 's special categories which fall outside the basic templates (e.g. spider, snake) is interesting too.

Lots of great ideas between the three of you!

 

[Stormonu]

So, I liked the templates version of BM from Tasha's and thought it a huge improvement. But several of my young players told me they didn't like how generic the creatures felt, and they wanted to feel like their beast was a specific animal, like Trinket in Critical Role. So I wonder if there is some way to combine the old version with the new, perhaps by starting with a specific animal type and then adding templated improvements, rather than the reverse.

Yeah, I feel like the template in Tasha's is a cop-out to fixing the subclass. The animal companion should feel like its the actual animal, not some generic combat block. The difficult part is along the lines of "how do you make a weasel companion and make it as valuable as an attack elephant?" and I don't know if there is a simplified answer to that.

Overall, if you can use the subclass to represent the Beastmaster, Grizzly Adams, Lassie, Turner & Hooch, Every Which Way But Loose and that sort of thing, I think that'd work. The big problem is that an animal companion isn't just an off-hand attack, its a whole 'nother character - but it needs to be able to survive (and be helpful in some way) with D&D's constant combat encounters and hp depletion schema.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

My idea would be to create 3-4 templates (Protector, Harrier, Predator, Swarm) who increases based on the PCs proficiency bonus (like the summon spells from Tasha's). You then add those template to a beast of CR 1/4 or less.

So the Beastmaster can have the beast of their choice, with a smooth leveling: a protector wolf, a swarm of rats, a harrier shark or a predator bear, etc

 

[Sacrosanct]

I've actually got packmasters (what I call them) as part of the rogue tree, and not martial tree. I did this because I have it where your beast can apply your sneak attack damage rather than you (if all other conditions of sneak attack are met). I'm finding this is a good way to make attacks from your beasts really count rather than to be a secondary attack.

 

[bedir than]

My campaign world features animal companions heavily, so I'll be tracking this thread.

I need to unlock more ways to use the animals.