Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Asisreo" data-source="post: 7986054" data-attributes="member: 7019027">That's true, isn't it? A BM ranger can give a rogue sneak attack without exchanging an action. They can also keep up with the damage output of most other characters. They have a bonus to damage and attack rolls up to +6, and AC that can go up to 24 with barding. A beastmaster's companion also gets +6 to skills they're proficient in. Like Stealth and Perception. Don't they also get magical damage and the ability to share spells? Oh wait, the damage is bad. And the beast might die. If a class doesn't have high damage, they're trash tier. It's why PHB rangers are so bad, right? It's why hunter's mark is so essential. My question is: if you wanted a high damage dealer, why not choose a rogue? That's because Rangers aren't a damage class. They're an exploration class and, I guarantee you, the best one there is. The BM Ranger gives a very large boost to the exploration side of D&D while staying competitive damage-wise. But D&D no longer is Dungeons and Dragons. Now it's D-talking-with-NPC's & D-fighting. No more traveling in highly dangerous wilderness, they are all now nice mountain trails that might get difficult if you forget your trailmix. That's my largest criticism with GM's playstyles. Nobody ever explores because nobody prepares exploration, so classes that excel with exactly that like BM Rangers and Land Druids are seen as either weak or trivializing something that the DM forgot to make a fun challenge anyways.</blockquote>

Verification