[5E] [OOC] JM's A Bit of Trouble (Closed)

[jmucchiello]

Have fun.

 

[Zadolix]

Sorry for the delay guys, I've had such a busy week/weekend. I've just levelled up and gained action surge, I took the average HP instead of rolling so 6+3 which puts me on 23 max HP now.

Does the HP I gain from levelling up get added to my current HP by the way?

 

[jmucchiello]

Yes

 

[TallIan]

I've updated Perin. Not too much hassle to deal with the problems that I noticed, I've just gone ahead with the same build sans lance (when it becomes relevant) so his dps will drop a smidgen - hardly a huge crisis. Especially how the UA ranger puts a lot of the beast-master's power into the companion, unlike the PHB version which tried to keep the actual character as the main focus.

Either way its an interesting experiment for this coming up in any of my games and how I'll handle any wannabe beast-masters.

 

[EarlyBird]

Is it Beastmaster as in the 80's film and a lot of different creatures. Or does he just get the one companion upgraded?

 

[TallIan]

Is it Beastmaster as in the 80's film and a lot of different creatures. Or does he just get the one companion upgraded?

You choose one companion at level 3 and keep it until it dies.

The PHB was built actively trying to avoid making the Beastmaster two PC's in one, keeping the companion weak and requiring direct input from the PC to do much (ie PC has to use action to make companion attack). The companion doesn't scale well as you level up - which IMO is the main problem with it - it doesn't get any more HD, and its ability scores remain the same. So the upgrade is quite poor.

The UA version tries to make the companion much tougher and better at the expense of the PC. Eg the beastmaster doesn't get the Extra Attack feature, because the companion can attack on its own. So the upgrade requires you to use the companion fully as it is most of the power in the class.

When I first envisioned the character he should have been a mounted archer, but the PHB companion was too weak (though in retrospect probably would have been fine for the duration of this game) and the UA version doesn't give the PC the crucial Extra Attack to make fighter types not rubbish.

So with the UA ranger in mind I built the character to be a lancer, charging both companion and character into melee, with a devastating opening attack with a lance and the companion doing his own attacks. Then I noticed that the lance has disadvantage on targets within 5' of you, so the character and companion couldn't both be in effective range at the same time.

So Simply dropping the lance and using a saber, seems like the simplest solution

 

[EarlyBird]

I see. I was thinking of having the Beastmaster PHB ability become a feat a character could take. Them not hampering them to much, because as an archtype it isn't very exciting.

The only change would be to allow them to train up to a certain HD and thus become the Beastmaster of the 80's LOL

Something i guess to use in my own homebrew.

 

[TallIan]

That could be a fun concept, though I think in practice it’ll be a bit crappy - at least for the others players.

It’s suffer from the same problem as summon/animate builds. Even characters with familiars tend to draw a lot of play time.

Could work well with a small party though.

I really like the idea of a beast master but it really is hard to pull off, having both beast and master work as a single character without being twice as powerful (two attacks, twice as many hp, two chances to pass saves, etc)

 

[Thateous]

But at the end of the day the only way the build would be overpowered is if they were full casters. Martial characters don't reach the level of crazy a full caster does. If hogging play time is an issue make the beast just do average damage to minimize rolls.

 

[jmucchiello]

Personally, I don't get the "hogging play time" issue. I never heard anyone complain "that fighter with 4 attacks per round takes up too much time compared to my wizard who does 12d8 damage a round."