Beast Masters and Dexterous Beasts

[barabelsftw]

Hello first time poster here. I'm also fairly new to D&D in general, having started my first campaign over the summer. I posted this question on the D20 radio network but so far have not gotten a response.

I had a player who was looking through Martial Power at the Beast Master class feature and the different types of animals that a PC can have. Many beasts (such as the Raptor and Cat) both have a higher Dexterity modifier than they do Strength and use their Dexterity modifier for their basic attack damage.

My player brought to my attention that every beast at-will, encounter, and daily attack power that deals damage via the beast uses Strength for the damage. None of the powers we could find use Dexterity for damage. Is this supposed to be like this or should the player have the option to use his beast's Dexterity modifier for damage with at-will, encounter, or daily powers like their basic attacks allow them too?

I for one am not sure which way to go. Many Dexterous beasts have things like faster movement speeds or something like that which might make them very unbalanced if they also got to add their Dex to damage with powers but many high-Dexterity beasts (such as the raptor) already have a lower base damage dice compared to their Strength using counterparts.

I haven't had a player yet who ran a Beast Master but a couple expressed interest in it so I'd like to be able to give them an answer soon.

 

[Ferghis]

Honestly, I could go either way on just the rules. So I considered evaluating the character's overall damage, but the striker should do more damage. So I'm not inclined to make that tip the scale. Unless something looks blatantly wrong, I think this should fall under the "Say Yes" rule in the DMG. If it makes the player happy, the game is more fun.

 

[Grydan]

It's unlikely to cause any great imbalance: attacks rapidly fall behind [W] attacks in damage regardless.

While their attacks scale decently, their damage never gets enhancement bonuses, and access to other damage boosts for them is rather limited.

Will it make the Dex beasts more desirable than the Str beasts? Perhaps.

The CharOp folks generally suggest staying away from Beast attacks entirely, if I recall correctly.

The only beastmaster I've ever encountered in play chose the hawk and basically plays as an archer with a sidekick. No beast attacks at all, other than basic attacks when he has no other options. Simply a mobile, goes anywhere, way to pick anyone on the battlefield as his quarry.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Maybe add strength and dexterity to damage, just like the beast companion of the druid adds two different stats?

 

[Wednesday Boy]

Maybe add strength and dexterity to damage, just like the beast companion of the druid adds two different stats?

That's a good suggestion. It's unfortunate that the animal companion of a Leader class (Sentinel) is far superior to the beast companion of a Striker class (Beastmaster Ranger) and they'll likely never update the beast companions.

 

[DEFCON 1]

That's a good suggestion. It's unfortunate that the animal companion of a Leader class (Sentinel) is far superior to the beast companion of a Striker class (Beastmaster Ranger) and they'll likely never update the beast companions.

Well, I think this was part of the thinking in the creation of Essentials in the first place... a way to make better and more balanced versions of certain types of classes and features. Otherwise, they'd have to go in and completely change or gut the older material (now that they had more years to see them in play and how they work) in ways that would've be a real pain in the butt and possibly a much more massive overhaul of a system that became less balanced over time. The creation of an evolved version is oftentimes faster, more effective, and less intrusive than trying to juryrig an outdated system. The Sentinel with animal companion is the evolved version of the Beastmaster Ranger, just like the Warpriest is the evolved Battle Cleric.

Of course... that doesn't help or please those people who wanted to play the original versions rather than the evolved Essentials ones, so it then comes down to those folks making enough of a stink to finally have some Dragon content made to help power up the original ones (like what the Battle Cleric finally got).

But until that time, it really comes down to individual DMs keeping an eye on what's happening and working/not working with the original version, then choosing to houserule in order to help that player get more out of it. I for one agree with that philosophy wholeheartedly. In this particular case... I think adding STR and DEX mod damage to a Beast's damage rolls could work very well. It might be slightly overpowered at low levels when other PCs have not yet acquired higher-powered magic items or additional feats to boost their own damage... but I would guess that probably around level 5-7 the PCs will begin matching the beastmaster's beast in damage.

 

[Zaran]

I think I would throw out the ranger beasts and just use the Druid version with maybe a change from the damage modifier being the druid's wis+con to the ranger's primary stat+wis

 

[Wednesday Boy]

Well, I think this was part of the thinking in the creation of Essentials in the first place... a way to make better and more balanced versions of certain types of classes and features. Otherwise, they'd have to go in and completely change or gut the older material (now that they had more years to see them in play and how they work) in ways that would've be a real pain in the butt and possibly a much more massive overhaul of a system that became less balanced over time. The creation of an evolved version is oftentimes faster, more effective, and less intrusive than trying to juryrig an outdated system. The Sentinel with animal companion is the evolved version of the Beastmaster Ranger, just like the Warpriest is the evolved Battle Cleric.

Yeah, I assume that's WotC's rationale for not addressing any changes to the Beastmaster as well. But it's disappointing because thematically the druid and martial ranger occupy different spaces and mechanically leaders and strikers occupy different spaces, so switching from a Beastmaster to a Sentinel not as easily done as turning a Cleric into a Warpriest.

And it's a good point that this is one of those instances where the GM will have to take things into their own hands and make some houserules.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I don't see all that much difference between the Beastmaster companion and the Sentinel companion. The few actual differences are more related to the roles of the Sentinel and the BM Ranger than anything else, and the way Essentials classes are constructed.

Sentinels get Combined Attack, but remember that this is part of the basic structure of Essentials classes. Even so, it isn't an exceptionally great power. The BM companions have approximately the same damage output as the Sentinel ones, except the Sentinel companion does get to use the PCs stats for damage bonus, which is kind of nice.

Frankly, neither companion's purpose is really to act as an attacker. They block, scout, provide some minor benefit related to the build of the character, and just generally keep you warm at night.

The real issue for the Beastmaster Ranger is that he's a RANGER. He's already one deadly customer, even lacking the TBF or Archer build advantages (which really aren't that big a deal outside of Prime Shot). There wasn't a heck of a lot of room for much more to go on there without blowing the top off the build. OTOH at this point giving the BMR's BC a small damage bonus wouldn't break anything, since they're taking a bit of a hit due to lack of Prime Shot, but that pretty much puts the value of other advantages of the beast at a value of zero.

 

[Wednesday Boy]

I don't see all that much difference between the Beastmaster companion and the Sentinel companion. The few actual differences are more related to the roles of the Sentinel and the BM Ranger than anything else, and the way Essentials classes are constructed.

Sentinels get Combined Attack, but remember that this is part of the basic structure of Essentials classes. Even so, it isn't an exceptionally great power. The BM companions have approximately the same damage output as the Sentinel ones, except the Sentinel companion does get to use the PCs stats for damage bonus, which is kind of nice.

The differences aren't huge but the Sentinel's Animal Companion has +1 to hit compared with the Ranger's Beast Companion and because the Animal Companion uses the PC's primary and secondary stats for damage the Beast Companion slightly lags even with Quarry damage included. And the Animal Companions get an aura, which is pretty nice.

While Combined Attack isn't exceptional, the similar Ranger power where both the PC and the Companion attack (Synchronized Strike) requires that the first attack hits to get the second attack (whereas Combined Attack gets both attacks regardless) and Synchronized Strike averages only 0.5 more points of damage (which includes Quarry damage).

I don't disagree with your points but from a cursory look at the companions it seems like the Leader's companion can strike as well as the Striker's.