D&D 5E Beast Master Primal Companion Still Frustrating at level 10+

[doctorbadwolf]

So this weekend my friend ran a level 10 “1-shot” in his homebrew setting loosely inspired by Exandria.

I played a Forest Gnome Beast Master Ranger using Primal Companion with a musket, the Gunner feat, Skulker, and level 1 bonus feat of Squat Nimbleness. We rolled stats so I had a 30 Dex, 14 Str, 16 con, 16 Wis. rolled hot dice had me at 100hp, rather than the static 84. We each had 3 magic items, and I grabbed +1 Half Plate, corpse slayer musket, and a homebrew mithral longsword (2d6 extra crit damage, finesse). I was not a weak character, by any means.

I chose the beast of the land, flavored as a giant Fox. My DM has lore that the giant foxes of the forest I’m from have the ability to make themselves and a bonded companion nearly invisible (pass without trace, targeting only the two).

So every possible advantage, basically. The fox still almost died twice, and made maybe 3 attacks. Useful as a mount, because it’s independent but does what I want, has good saves, and can take the Dodge action without me commanding it. Sometimes it’s useful to have it attack in place of one of my attacks, especially from level 11 on, since it then can do 2 attacks for one of mine, but that still doesn’t allow me to give any other commands using one of my attacks.

And I can’t heal it, other than taking healing spells which my only reason to take is for the beast. I also am not any better at healing it between fights than I am at healing anyone else. And I still have to wait until a long rest to get him back if he falls. And it has no self-heal.

Like why not just model it after the damn steel defender for the artificer? And if not that, give it more HP or easier action economy than the steel defender.

If I ever play a BM Ranger from low level in a real campaign, I will either use the revised Ranger, or work out a homebrew version that mirrors the Battlesmith artificer.

 

[Weiley31]

Don't know if it will help much or if your DM would allow it, but when it comes to Animal Companions of any type for Ranger/Druids/Whatever PC has ones, I just use the rules for the Revised Ranger's Beast Conclave's Companion's Bond, no matter if it's a regular trained animal or Tasha's Primal Companion stat block. And IIRC, you use a free action, Verbal, to command said Animal Companion to attack.

 

[Stormonu]

Well, the Beast of the Land does have hit dice, so conceivably it should be able to heal itself with a short rest - did short rests not come up?

Likewise, I'm assuming most of the hits the beast took were hits the ranger wasn't taking instead; that is sort of giving your character an extra 50 hit points to work with (as long as the enemy isn't using area attacks). Note also that the artificer also only gets D8 for hit points, not D10 like the Ranger. I always ask people who send their animal companions into combat and then get upset when they die, "If you didn't want to risk it dying, then why did you send it into a fight in the first place?"

I don't doubt that it still felt weak, but the animal companion is a feature that's basically an extra arm and bonus hit points. Wouldn't want the companion to outshine the character, but certainly want it to feel like it's worthwhile. Personally, I haven't been enamored with the 5E Ranger's companion myself, but I haven't found the magic bullet to fix the feel of the companion either.

<EDIT: I'm further confused - the Beast of the Land from Tasha's has this:
If the beast has died within the last hour, you can use your action to touch it and expend a spell slot of 1st level or higher. The beast returns to life after 1 minute with all its hit points restored.>

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Well, the Beast of the Land does have hit dice, so conceivably it should be able to heal itself with a short rest - did short rests not come up?

They rarely do. Nor do they help with losing my entire subclass for the rest of the fight, at least, because the DM threw a fireball and the companion has half the HP of the rogue.

Likewise, I'm assuming most of the hits the beast took were hits the ranger wasn't taking instead; that is sort of giving your character an extra 50 hit points to work with (as long as the enemy isn't using area attacks).

Area attacks are a significant part of combat, not an afterthought. And since I’m playing a very stealthy archer with high acrobatics and athletics, it’s definitely not saving me from attacks that often.

Note also that the artificer also only gets D8 for hit points, not D10 like the Ranger.

And the artificer gets a lot in exchange. Especially the Battlesmith compared to the BM.

I always ask people who send their animal companions into combat and then get upset when they die, "If you didn't want to risk it dying, then why did you send it into a fight in the first place?"

I’m sorry but this is absurd. The better question is, why give the option of a combat companion, whose features are primarily about fighting, such insufficient defenses that it isn’t practical to take it into fights?

I don't doubt that it still felt weak, but the animal companion is a feature that's basically an extra arm and bonus hit points. Wouldn't want the companion to outshine the character, but certainly want it to feel like it's worthwhile. Personally, I haven't been enamored with the 5E Ranger's companion myself, but I haven't found the magic bullet to fix the feel of the companion either.

I’d say that even with the note you’ve made below, the BM companion is quite weak, and not in any danger of outshining a mundane dog with a sidekick class.

<EDIT: I'm further confused - the Beast of the Land from Tasha's has this:
If the beast has died within the last hour, you can use your action to touch it and expend a spell slot of 1st level or higher. The beast returns to life after 1 minute with all its hit points restored.>

Huh. Guess that’s what I get for relying on dndbeyond’s character sheet. That does solve one of the main problems I’ve seen with the BM.

 

[Seramus]

You can use your Bonus Action to make the beast take ANY action.

You can completely heal your beast with any spell slot if you have 1 minute to spare.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Don't know if it will help much or if your DM would allow it, but when it comes to Animal Companions of any type for Ranger/Druids/Whatever PC has ones, I just use the rules for the Revised Ranger's Beast Conclave's Companion's Bond, no matter if it's a regular trained animal or Tasha's Primal Companion stat block. And IIRC, you use a free action, Verbal, to command said Animal Companion to attack.

Yeah I’ve thought about that. I may look at it. This DM prefers companions to go on thier controller’s turn, but that’s easy to just slightly alter. Not much difference between that and “shares your initiative but goes after you”.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

You can use your Bonus Action to make the beast take ANY action.

Yes? How does that solve the action economy problem for a very bonus action dependent class? Or the other problems?

You can completely heal your beast with any spell slot if you have 1 minute to spare.

Yes, I’m aware.

 

[Seramus]

Yes? How does that solve the action economy problem for a very bonus action dependent class? Or the other problems?

Yes, I’m aware.

Your OP gave me the impression you were not using either ability. Seemed worth mentioning.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Your OP gave me the impression you were not using either ability. Seemed worth mentioning.

Ah, ok.

To clarify, the frustration is mostly about how easily the beast is taken out during a fight. @Stormonu pointed out that I had missed the ability to bring the primal companion back by spending a spell slot as an action. That helps, especially since once back it can then move and attack, meaning I can still do dmagage in a turn where I need to do that. I do still think that it could use either more HP or something like absorb elements or evasion or something.

edit: also, the action economy, which is also just a general Ranger problem, alongside concentration, that makes the Ranger’s Spellcasting pretty frustrating.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Okay, so it's not as much that the BM is frustrating, though damage mitigation would be simpler and more user friendly than several ways to heal the thing. It's more that the Ranger has multiple intersecting points of frustrating limitation, and the BM is just the subclass that illustrates this dynamic most clearly.

So the frustrating mechanical conflicts within the Ranger's design (or in the general design of 5e that seems to hit the Ranger harder than many other classes) are:

• Very limited Spellcasting, with a spell list that speaks to versatility but can't really deliver due to the tiny amount of spells known (I feel like I'm using a 1/3 caster that traded cantrips for more spell slots, at low level, and I'm not sure I think the trade was worth it). Ritual casting would help, or simply more new spells known as you level than is the case. Tasha's helps a bit, in that I've got 3 more spells than I'd have without it, but it's not comparable to prepared casters.
  • I'd simply fix this by having Ranger have the same number of spells known (or a few more) as the paladin has spells prepared. Or make the Ranger a prepared caster, so their toolkit is much more broad than it currently is.
• Nearly every offensive spell, and most of your other spells besides, are concentration. You cannot nova like a paladin, and you can't even buff the team offensively, which feels like something the ranger should be good at. The PHB Ranger even has to spend spell slots (and concentrate I think), in order to use one of it's exploration powers that isn't a spell!
• The action economy is pretty bad. The ranger is hyper reliant on the bonus action, and few subclasses mitigate this at all. Favored Foe does in theory, but it is pretty much always less powerful than casting hunter's mark.
  • In the case of the BM, you need to use your bonus action to cast your bread and butter combat spells, to command the beast to attack, to use some ranger class features, and several of your best support spells. The melee ranger simply cannot be a dual wielding beast master.
  • One benefit the BM does have, is that you can have the beast attack in a round where you cast an action spell. Of course, I feel like most ranger subclasses get their main damage buff even when using a turn to cast an offensive spell, but I could be wrong.