D&D 5E Beasts of the Earth

[Iry]

I have a player who is interested in using a Beast of the Earth, from the UA Class Variants. He wants the appearance to be an Ape. Both are size medium and both are beasts, so that checks out.

He wants to give his ape armor, a shield, and a weapon. I thought I would crowdsource some discussion on the topic. Should the armor cost four times as much like barding even though the ape is roughly humanoid? Can it use a shield? Would you allow it to learn proficiency in armor, shields, or weapons?

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

I would probably write up a new stat block called Beast of the Trees for ape-like creatures.

Otherwise every beast master in your game is going to choose "ape" for the extra AC from a shield. That's something I wouldn't want in my game.

 

[Charlaquin]

I have a player who is interested in using a Beast of the Earth, from the UA Class Variants. He wants the appearance to be an Ape. Both are size medium and both are beasts, so that checks out.

He wants to give his ape armor, a shield, and a weapon. I thought I would crowdsource some discussion on the topic. Should the armor cost four times as much like barding even though the ape is roughly humanoid? Can it use a shield? Would you allow it to learn proficiency in armor, shields, or weapons?

The beast of the land’s statblock is what it is, you can describe it any way you want. Thats the assumption the feature is balanced around. So, if your player’s beast is an armored ape that’s fine, but it’s just cosmetic. Functionally, its stats are still the same as any other beast of the land. If they want an animal companion with a stat block that can be modified with barding and the like, that’s what the PHB beastmaster companion is for.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I have a player who is interested in using a Beast of the Earth, from the UA Class Variants. He wants the appearance to be an Ape. Both are size medium and both are beasts, so that checks out.

He wants to give his ape armor, a shield, and a weapon. I thought I would crowdsource some discussion on the topic. Should the armor cost four times as much like barding even though the ape is roughly humanoid? Can it use a shield? Would you allow it to learn proficiency in armor, shields, or weapons?

No.

Several reasons:

* The AC of the beast of the earth is a class feature, it is part of the balance and cannot be changed.

* No matter what form the beast of the earth takes, it remains a beast of the earth, it is not actually an ape.

* Whilst an ape could certainly hold a shield, it would not understand how to use it to defend itself in combat - in game terms it is not proficient. Nor could a real world ape be trained to use it as anything other than a club or projectile. Which brings up another issue - a real world ape is certainly able to throw things in combat, but a BotE does not gain that ability, even if they happen to look like an ape.

* Animals that can wear armour - warhorses - have extensive training from a very young age. In effect "Warhorse" is a class that grants armor proficiency. You cannot put barding on a cart horse and expect it to do anything other than panic. A BotE in the form of a horse would not be able to wear barding because it is not proficient.


If your player is determined to have an armoured ape companion, and you don't want to simply say "no", then I suggest you use the sidekick rules instead of BotE.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

* No matter what for the beast of the earth takes, it remains a beast of the earth, it is not actually an ape.

* Whilst an ape could certainly hold a shield, it would not understand how to use it to defend itself in combat - in game terms it is not proficient. Nor could a real world ape be trained to use it as anything other than a club or projectile. Which brings up another issue - a real world ape is certainly able to throw things in combat, but a BotE does not gain that ability, even if they happen to look like an ape.

So, if the player's ape is not actually an ape, and actually a beast of the earth pretending to be an ape, what is a beast of the earth when it isn't dressed up?

Does that mean that the fake ape can't grab a book from a bookshelf? Can it be trained to use a club? Can it be trained to give an enemy the finger? Can it pick lice out of its master's head? Can it grab a bucket of water to splash on a fire?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

So, if the player's ape is not actually an ape, and actually a beast of the earth pretending to be an ape, what is a beast of the earth when it isn't dressed up?

It is a special type of magical beast. Says so in the description.

Does that mean that the fake ape can't grab a book from a bookshelf?

It would be allowed to pick up objects, since there is no specific rule preventing the BotE from doing so, whatever it's form. (However, the BotE does not gain any specific climbing ability).

Can it be trained to use a club?

No, it can only use the attack listed in it's stat block.

Can it be trained to give an enemy the finger? Can it pick lice out of its master's head?

Yes and yes. Like it's shape, these are cosmetic.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

It is a special type of magical beast. Says so in the description.

It would be allowed to pick up objects, since there is no specific rule preventing the BotE from doing so, whatever it's form.

No, it can only use the attack listed in it's stat block.

Yes and yes. Like it's shape, these are cosmetic.

So, does one describe the natural state of that "special type of magical beast?" What does it look like? Where can one be found? How does it naturally behave? Is it a mimic that can only change form when not bound by a ranger?

So a BotE pretending to be a pony can also give an enemy the finger?

I'm not sure those things are "cosmetic." Giving an enemy the finger can have real, in-game effects. If a character with red hair who walks into a town full of red-head hating ruffians, is having red hair merely cosmetic? Moreover, if a PC is infected by poisonous lice, the ability to remove them effectively is not cosmetic at all, but is instead a life-saving ability.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

He wants to give his ape armor, a shield, and a weapon. I thought I would crowdsource some discussion on the topic. Should the armor cost four times as much like barding even though the ape is roughly humanoid? Can it use a shield? Would you allow it to learn proficiency in armor, shields, or weapons?

This is a question I had to field surprisingly often in 3.5 (or maybe not so surprisingly, given, y'know, druids). What's true there is even more true in 5E: The creature does not have any weapon or armor proficiencies. The rules do not have any provisions for giving it weapon or armor proficiencies. It doesn't earn experience to gain levels in a proficient class, and can't use downtime to train. So you can give an ape this equipment, but it won't have any idea how to use it, and if you try to dress it up in armor it's probably just going to pitch a fit until you get it off again.

I would encourage you to go beyond the bare stat block and let the companion do reasonable "ape stuff" not listed there. Throw a rock? Sure. It's an improvised attack without a proficiency bonus, but I see no in-universe reason why it can't happen. Wearing armor and wielding weapons, though, isn't ape stuff. I very rarely see apes do that outside Andy Serkis films.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

This is a question I had to field surprisingly often in 3.5 (or maybe not so surprisingly, given, y'know, druids). What's true there is even more true in 5E: The creature does not have any weapon or armor proficiencies. The rules do not have any provisions for giving it weapon or armor proficiencies. It doesn't earn experience to gain levels in a proficient class, and can't use downtime to train.

I would encourage you to go beyond the bare stat block and let the companion do reasonable "ape stuff" not listed there. Throw a rock? Sure. It's an improvised attack without a proficiency bonus, but I see no in-universe reason why it can't happen. Wearing armor and wielding weapons, though, isn't ape stuff. I very rarely see apes do that outside Andy Serkis films.

But the Beast of the Earth uses a monster stat block. If you look at other monster stat blocks, they don't list proficiency either. The orc's stat block doesn't list its proficiency with battle axes or scale mail armor. Does that mean an orc is not proficient with them?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

There is no "natural" state, BotE are not natural creatures. That's what "magical" means.

I would encourage you to go beyond the bare stat block and let the companion do reasonable "ape stuff" not listed there. Throw a rock? Sure.

No. This is why beastmasters can still have actual animals as companions. If you want your animal companion to be able to do "ape stuff", you have an ape companion, not a BotE.