Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Revised Ranger update
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 7483416" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>I'm not sure how disruptive a rewrite would be, after all, I don't think it has been disruptive for the UA to exist, nor the numerous homebrew ranger options. </p><p></p><p>Sure, getting an "official" new class would be different in tone, but I don't think it would necessarily be terribly disruptive. </p><p></p><p></p><p>As for why some of those options are bad, Fighting Styles are too early and aren't designed to handle that much mechanical wieght. Spells are already a precious resource and highly limited for low level rangers especially (the most important levels since the majority of people will play them). Feats are optional rules, but they are the best candidates for this. However, it would by necessity be a Beastmaster exclusive feat to be robust enough to alter the class. We only just recently got racial feats and I don't think we are seeing Class feats coming down the pipe and if we did they would still be broader than a subclass feat which is what this would end up being if it was to be useful enough. </p><p></p><p>And then, depending on what changes you make exactly, it is going to be a feat, costing resources, that essentially errata's the rules for the Beastmaster, which would immediately raise the question of why not just alter the class publicly instead of trying to do it sneakily and costing us resources. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Guess I just feel like if you are going to change it, change it. Don't see a whole lot of point in "only kind of changing it". </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Very few spells actually get beasts, remember most of the conjuring spells bring forth Fey Spirits that simply look like beasts. This would be a hard-line reading of RAW but it is important, same with familiars in most cases. </p><p></p><p>So really, it is a fighting style that assists you if you are the type to allow random wild animals to follow and fight for the party, or if you have a Beastmaster Ranger. I don't know about your table obviously, but at mine most wild animals don't end up getting befriended by the party and fighting alongside them. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm wondering about WoTC's position. They are the people who would publish it after all. Their position seems to be that everything is fine with the Ranger, in which case why would they publish spells and feats designed specifically to fix the Beastmaster? </p><p></p><p>And, since the spells and feats would likely make the Beast more powerful and therefore better suited to combats it is already going to get involved in (remember, Vex was only able to keep Trinket fully out of combat due to a unique magic item) even people who don't want the companions in combat are going to want them, as a precaution. At least, that is my perspective on it. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Um.... that is because the Champion fighter doesn't have a mechanic for hiring henchmen? </p><p></p><p>I'm kind of confused what you think I was talking about if you think the Champion Fighter needs to get involved.As I understand there was a large tradition of torch-bearers, men-at-arms, and other low level henchman types getting hired by players in 1e or 2e and sometimes even used as minesweepers for dungeon traps. Hence why I was comparing the disposable beast with that style of play. Champion Fighter has absolutely zero mechanical support for that.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 7483416, member: 6801228"] I'm not sure how disruptive a rewrite would be, after all, I don't think it has been disruptive for the UA to exist, nor the numerous homebrew ranger options. Sure, getting an "official" new class would be different in tone, but I don't think it would necessarily be terribly disruptive. As for why some of those options are bad, Fighting Styles are too early and aren't designed to handle that much mechanical wieght. Spells are already a precious resource and highly limited for low level rangers especially (the most important levels since the majority of people will play them). Feats are optional rules, but they are the best candidates for this. However, it would by necessity be a Beastmaster exclusive feat to be robust enough to alter the class. We only just recently got racial feats and I don't think we are seeing Class feats coming down the pipe and if we did they would still be broader than a subclass feat which is what this would end up being if it was to be useful enough. And then, depending on what changes you make exactly, it is going to be a feat, costing resources, that essentially errata's the rules for the Beastmaster, which would immediately raise the question of why not just alter the class publicly instead of trying to do it sneakily and costing us resources. Guess I just feel like if you are going to change it, change it. Don't see a whole lot of point in "only kind of changing it". Very few spells actually get beasts, remember most of the conjuring spells bring forth Fey Spirits that simply look like beasts. This would be a hard-line reading of RAW but it is important, same with familiars in most cases. So really, it is a fighting style that assists you if you are the type to allow random wild animals to follow and fight for the party, or if you have a Beastmaster Ranger. I don't know about your table obviously, but at mine most wild animals don't end up getting befriended by the party and fighting alongside them. I'm wondering about WoTC's position. They are the people who would publish it after all. Their position seems to be that everything is fine with the Ranger, in which case why would they publish spells and feats designed specifically to fix the Beastmaster? And, since the spells and feats would likely make the Beast more powerful and therefore better suited to combats it is already going to get involved in (remember, Vex was only able to keep Trinket fully out of combat due to a unique magic item) even people who don't want the companions in combat are going to want them, as a precaution. At least, that is my perspective on it. Um.... that is because the Champion fighter doesn't have a mechanic for hiring henchmen? I'm kind of confused what you think I was talking about if you think the Champion Fighter needs to get involved.As I understand there was a large tradition of torch-bearers, men-at-arms, and other low level henchman types getting hired by players in 1e or 2e and sometimes even used as minesweepers for dungeon traps. Hence why I was comparing the disposable beast with that style of play. Champion Fighter has absolutely zero mechanical support for that. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Revised Ranger update
Top