D&D 5E Favored Enemy needs a simple Damage +2

[Minigiant]

I do have one issue with the Beastmaster though. And it's kind of a big one: The class is TERRIBLE for verisimilitude. So I'm this animal trainer and I've got this half-tamed wild beast who presumably likes me to some extent. The thing...sits idly by while foes attack it? Lacks any sort of loyalty when the person who feeds it is threatened? Just kind of...runs away from everything? Attacks when I order it, but then the next round when I don't it just kind of...sits down and sleeps?

Well it isn't just sitting there. Its still keeps up its defence. It still makes opportunity attacks.

It just doesn't take actions. Which is good as you don't want your beast buddy doing things without your consent.

Think of it in party terms. Do you really want an ally with a wolf who runs around and attacks things without his permission? I dong even stay in houses with improperly trained dogs. This could be a Zehir dang snake.

Plus any good DM wouldn't have some monsters attack the AC until it does something. Why punt the dog who is just growling over one of the 3 guys with blades or the 2 guys with sparkling death fingers. No one is targeting my snake.

 

[CapnZapp]

Plus any good DM wouldn't have some monsters attack the AC until it does something. Why punt the dog who is just growling over one of the 3 guys with blades or the 2 guys with sparkling death fingers. No one is targeting my snake.

Sigh.

Now you're saying *the DM* is bad if the wolf dies? You're actually trying to make DM's feel bad for Wotc failings?

Is there no end to this blind defense?

If you won't see that any stray fireball will kill the wolf, and how that sucks the fun out of the class, I will have to assume you've never played the game, or that you're trolling.

Why do you even do this? What makes you unable to see the that is the Beastmaster? Why defend something you do not have to defend.

Just accept not all subclasses were made right and move on.

 

[CapnZapp]

The issue is "What people want" vs "What works"

• You can't give the ranger a fully controllable bear with scaling stats who can tank a giant while the ranger slashes another giant.
• You can't have the ranger deal crazy damage to favored enemies.
• You can't give the druid, a wlidshaping full caster, an animal companion.
• You can't let a spellcaster PC be invisible, flying, and controlling illusionary self and shooting fireballs.

We tried that before. They didn't work.
Some things may need a tweak but some suggest tweaks forget the flaws of the past. You can do them at your tables but the RAW got it mostly right.

Sorry but you've lost focus on the most important thing here: fun.

Lots of designs can work, but if they're no fun, they're still worthless.

 

[Coredump]

Well it isn't just sitting there. Its still keeps up its defence. It still makes opportunity attacks.

It just doesn't take actions. Which is good as you don't want your beast buddy doing things without your consent.

Think of it in party terms. Do you really want an ally with a wolf who runs around and attacks things without his permission? I dong even stay in houses with improperly trained dogs. This could be a Zehir dang snake.

True, but not the point.

You can already tell the AC exactly where to move... it would be even easier to tell it to Attack, or Distract (help), or Defend, or any number of 1-2 word commands that any decently trained animal would know.
Make simple directions a free action (like directing movement already is) and the AC becomes much more usable, and all of your concerns also go away.

Plus any good DM wouldn't have some monsters attack the AC until it does something. Why punt the dog who is just growling over one of the 3 guys with blades or the 2 guys with sparkling death fingers. No one is targeting my snake.

Again, even if true, not the point. This is the big boon of taking this subclass..... it should have a lot more going for it than 'it probably won't get attacked'. It really needs to be *useful*...

 

[Stalker Comic]

1) Conjure volley has nothing to do with being an archer, no more than Flame Strike. Its just an area effect spell with a cute twist.
2) All 3 of those are 5th level spells, the bard gets to cast two of them and.... wait until tomorrow I guess.
3) Bard has to wait till lvl 3 to get longbow
4) Has to wait until lvl 6 to get Extra attack
5) Has to wait until lvl 10 to get hunter's mark.
6) Ranger gets +2 to hit from Archery
7) Ranger gets +d8/turn from Collosus slayer, (and the +d6 per attack with Hunter's mark)
8) In case someone gets close, AoO against Ranger is at disad
9) Ranger can shoot every enemy in a 4x4 or 5x5 grid (depending on how you read the rule), *every* turn.

Yeah.... I can't see a Ranger being too worried about a Bard archer....

Conjure Voley spell >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ranger's Voley level 11.
8d8 damage in 20 feets radius VS 1d8 +5/+8 damage in 10 feets radius

Bard can use Tree Stride for Flee too.

A Ranger before level 17 can not abuse their voley shots because we have not learned Swift Quiver and level 17 Bard can use 7 Conjure Volley per day, Ranger only 1.

 

[Stalker Comic]

Not really. Again, the steed is intelligent and acts independently. The stupid wolf literally does nothing unless you tell it to - it cant help as a bonus action. You have to trade out an attack to make it attack, help, etc. The horse is less accurate, but deals more damage since it gets to attack again if it knocks the target prone with trample. Also its prone DC is 15 vs the wolf's 11. The steed will also tend to have more HP for a decent while if your DM rolls, since you can keep cycling steeds until you get one near max, then continue summoning that particular one.

The linked thread also conveniently ignores two weapon fighting, colossus slayer, sharpshooter and great weapon master, and its math is off since he grants the wolf an extra +2 damage for some reason (its 2d4+2 at base, so 2d4+4 at 3rd level, not 2d4+6 like he assumes).

Lets not forget you threw away your colossus slayer and other actually good class features to have a slightly better dog, which anyone can plunk down 30gp for (and presumably also acts independently). The paladin gets the steed ON TOP of the other stuff. Find Steed is the icing on their cake. The wolf IS the beastmaster's cake. It shouldn't even be remotely close which is better, but it sadly is. The fact that its debatable shows the subclass needs work.

Also, again, the ranger is a jerk for continuing to bring poor trusting animals to get fireballed. If the steed gets "killed" it really DOES go to run and play with the other ponies on a farm upstate (mount olympus or whatever) until you throw another 2nd level spell to resummon.

Correct.

 

[Stalker Comic]

Okay, what am I missing... how are you casting a 5th level spell 9 times a day...???

With the Bard copying ranger spells.
I'm not talking about the Ranger here.

 

[Minigiant]

Sigh.

Now you're saying *the DM* is bad if the wolf dies? You're actually trying to make DM's feel bad for Wotc failings?

Is there no end to this blind defense?

If you won't see that any stray fireball will kill the wolf, and how that sucks the fun out of the class, I will have to assume you've never played the game, or that you're trolling.

Why do you even do this? What makes you unable to see the that is the Beastmaster? Why defend something you do not have to defend.

Just accept not all subclasses were made right and move on.

My point is if you don't put your pet in danger nor attack with it, your DM shouldn't have monsters attack it.

My snake doesn't die because I don't have it in the midst of every battle. It is usually protecting the mage and only gets damaged when the mage is targeted by ranged AOE.

Granted Slippery the snake tends to do jack squat in big battles. I milk him for poison. I set him up for flanks vs squishy VIPs with the rogue. And since both I and the fighter have sentinel feat, we can do mean triple teams.

The animal companion isn't useless. They aren't battle buddies like many wanted.

Sorry but you've lost focus on the most important thing here: fun.

Lots of designs can work, but if they're no fun, they're still worthless.

Fun for who?

Druids with 4 complete turns and flying invisible super mages were fun only to the guys playing them at tables I've been on or heard of.

 

[Sailor Moon]

Lots of designs can work, but if they're no fun, they're still worthless.

Wow! You just described my feelings on the previous edition perfectly.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

1) Yay, so does a 75gp riding horse. Or get an Elk animal companion, or giant lizard, heck, you could even get a Warhorse.
2) That does not make it 'better'
3) That does not make it 'better'
4) How many paladins do you know 'wasting' a prepared spell on Find Steed, "just in case" it dies....??
5) That makes no sense
6) So yes, if you DM makes up new rules... it changes things. Of course, the DM could also allow for different Companions.

Those animals arent intelligent (6 Int), cant communicate telepathically up to 1 mile, cant speak, and more importantly, arent smart enough to give you a free "help" action every turn. It's better than a normal horse, unless you get stuck somewhere with no food lol, as the body disappears. What makes the beastmaster's pet so frustrating is while a bought mastiff can attack on its own (or at least, isnt specifically forbidden), the beastmaster's pet can't. Skeletons and zombies made through animate dead also get independent actions, and those also arent the bulk of a subclass feature! I think there's probably a middle ground for the beast to do something without going back to 3rd edition's druid summoner madness. Maybe act as a bonus action at 11th level, so you can shoot twice and have the wolf help/bite/whatever.

lets keep going

7) the Steed has average HP, the Companion has Max, or more if the Ranger is high enough level

The steed can also have whatever gets rolled. You can dismiss it and fish for another. Once you get a keeper with high hit points, you can continue to summon it. It will eventually have less HP than the ranger's wolf at upper levels however.

8) The Companion gets to add the Ranger proficiency to its attacks... and damage... and saving throws...and its skills... and it frickin' armor class.

It mainly gets it to attack, AC and damage. What that does is keep the beast attack on par with just attacking yourself (2d4+2 vs your d8+dex rapier or bow). Assuming you take 2 weapon fighting as your style you can have the wold attack once, or you attack twice. So a damage loss. At level 20 the wolf is hitting for 2d4+7, on par with you and your 20 stat and a +2 weapon. Except the wolf doesn't have a magic attack, so will be dealing half damage vs a lot of things. Also, though relatively rare, there are some things you simply don't want to bite (fire elementals or oozes). And that's ignoring feats like sharpshooter, which will make it an even worse idea to give up an attack have the beast attack.

The rule states it adds it to trained skills and saves. Wolves have no trained saves (which I agree is pretty dumb). So they are at base ability score on saves. So +2 vs those fireballs.

9) Ranger can use Beast Sense on the companion.
Now, I can agree that the Companion or Beastmaster could use some improvements... but comparing it to Steed just doesn't wash.

And the paladin has telepathic communication. Not quite as good, but nothing to sneeze at.

Again, the point is its CLOSE enough. For a good chunk of the campaign, it functions in the same ballpark as the beast companion. When you consider the opportunity cost, the steed is miles better. The ranger really needs colossus slayer or hordebreaker from the hunter subclass features to keep their damage respectable at upper levels, otherwise they have to burn hunters mark every fight to not quite keep up with the paladin's extra d8 radiant.