Beast Companion as a Feat?

[Saeviomagy]

well this is what I'm thinking. You raise the wolf. The wolf you get starts as a Pup, CR 1/4 when you take the feat. This allows you to legally match the 1/4 the Beastmaster gets without assuming they rewrite the Ranger.

So you have two paths:

first path: CR 1/4, no Feat, ranger class, beastmaster
second path: CR 1/4, costs 1 feat, no ranger class

Third path - treat it as an NPC. If we're looking to game of thrones, then most of the characters have little to no interaction with their dire wolves. Of the ones that do, it's clearly not having a dire wolf pet that is what makes them special. Jon's animal bond isn't restricted to his pet at all.

Rather than adding a feat to have a pet, I'd like to see some rules about how training an animal works, some feats that improve that process, and probably a background. At present, it's all DM fiat with the exception of being a ranger, and the rules for that are just plain wierd.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Rather than adding a feat to have a pet, I'd like to see some rules about how training an animal works, some feats that improve that process, and probably a background. At present, it's all DM fiat with the exception of being a ranger, and the rules for that are just plain wierd.

This is something I support.

Background: Trainer - and then the sort of animal you train (i.e. canines, birds, hunting animals or whatever categorization works for your group) and the feature of the background is about being able to work with animals very well so that you just pay whatever gp cost for the animal and it does whatever you tell it to after you've worked with it for a couple weeks (within reason, of course)

I wouldn't personally want too specific of rules for training an animal, though, because I really like being forced to come up with something appopriate to the situation at hand since what tricks are easy or hard depends on not just the trick, but the specific animal and its personality and method of training used, and that's hard to reprsent with rules without being extremely verbose.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

IMO:

*You can have animal companions with a total CR upto 1/4 your level. You can also train one of your pets, increasing it's CR (counting against the total). Increasing it's CR gives it (whatever the Monster Manual says). You get a companion by some making a successful animal handling check.

Aha! Here come my infinite numbers of owls!

(And then I will cast Animal Shapes and they all turn into giant scorpions and rhinoceroses.)

 

[mellored]

Aha! Here come my infinite numbers of owls!

(And then I will cast Animal Shapes and they all turn into giant scorpions and rhinoceroses.)

Well... assuming CR 0 counts 1/8.

But, yea, no reason not to support that kind of beastmaster too.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I'll see your Murder of Crows and raise you a viking horde:

https://youtu.be/P-wGG8vYbZU?t=55 (Shrek 3, Immigrant Song)

 

[EditorBFG]

I proceeded with this feat based on certain assumptions:
1) The beastmaster archetype is mechanically inferior and unpopular, and I won't be using it.
2) I want characters in my game to be able to have beast companions separate from their class.
3) I want having a beast companion to continue to be an important part of the character as they gain levels.
4) WotC is not going to release separate rules for non-beastmaster animal companon use any time soon.

Granting those four assumptions, is a feat not the best solution to the problem? Or is my feat just not right? Is there a better idea, and if so what is it?

 

[mellored]

I proceeded with this feat based on certain assumptions:
1) The beastmaster archetype is mechanically inferior and unpopular, and I won't be using it.
2) I want characters in my game to be able to have beast companions separate from their class.
3) I want having a beast companion to continue to be an important part of the character as they gain levels.
4) WotC is not going to release separate rules for non-beastmaster animal companon use any time soon.

Granting those four assumptions, is a feat not the best solution to the problem? Or is my feat just not right? Is there a better idea, and if so what is it?

#2 means your options are either a feat, or a magical item.
#3 means the beast needs to grow, or improve magic item (artifact concordance?).

CR 1/4 your level seems right to me. That gives you a CR 5 pet at level 20. Enough to take out some low level creatures, but will still be crushed by a terrasque.
But a figurine of wondrous power can also work.

 

[Saeviomagy]

#2 means your options are either a feat, or a magical item.

Or not. Find steed basically gives you this for the cost of a spell that you cast some time prior. I'm currently leaning towards not having an opportunity cost at all, just like I wouldn't charge a character a feat to hire any other npc.

#3 means the beast needs to grow, or improve magic item (artifact concordance?)

I do like the idea of applying concordance to henchmen, minions and beast companions.

 

[bedir than]

Or not. Find steed basically gives you this for the cost of a spell that you cast some time prior. I'm currently leaning towards not having an opportunity cost at all, just like I wouldn't charge a character a feat to hire any other npc.

Other NPCs have their own agency, make their own decisions. A 3 INT bird does not, unless it's "I'm not fighting that's dangerous"

 

[Xeviat]

Animal Handling is a skill. If one were to expand upon the skill system, then one could have animal training as part of the Animal Handling skill. If you even take the step and have animal training require proficiency in Animal Handling, you have a small opportunity cost.

Now, having an animal provides an HP boost to the party, but the animal is also vulnerable to area attacks. It depends on the percentage of area attacks your party suffers in your games, though, whether these two would balance against each other. The animal also ends up eating party healing resources; even if it has its own Hit Dice, it will still need more healing.

If the animal's damage never exceeds 2d6+5, then it fits into the range of a "weapon". Some amount of scaling may be nice, to mimic magic items, but you could always slap a "magic fang amulet" on the beast. Allowing the beast its own actions (except help on attack), and allowing it to take an attack (maybe including help on attack) when the master gives up an attack (or their whole action, maybe).

It's AC and HP need to scale to keep up with things. It's damage only needs to scale a little, unless your game uses magic items and you aren't going to give out a magic item.