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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4515800" data-attributes="member: 2067">I'm POSITIVE "WoW Emulation" is taboo, and that things are checked against some sort of "Too WoW-esque" litmus over there. They have to be aware of the criticism, and I'm sure they tread lightly whenever they get close to the same territory, to make sure there are some meaningful differences.As far as the "item that grants a radius effect," though, they've already done it. Standards in the Adventurer's Vault. A class doesn't revolve around them, but they're there, for anyone to use, and they work pretty much exactly like a WoW Shaman's totems. While I'm sure they have a litmus, I'm ALSO sure that they're milking WoW for the good ideas that apply well in D&D (pet resurrection, aura-based abilities, etc.). It'd be a bit silly not to.Given 4e's "design for the purpose" agenda, wherever else sharks occur, they wouldn't be good for this purpose. Just like I'm sure a companion wolf will bear only superficial resemblance to the MM wolf. At best, they're ability inspiration, not something you can really use.As an aside, for "multiple pets," I think they deliberately left that out as an option. It gets unwieldy in terms of both flavor and combat balance to let a ranger command a small squadron of allies by himself. It is probably better served, as was suggested above, by a less-focused view of "animal companions." More of an Aquaman "I can convince this whale here to do stuff for me!" thing and less of a Gentle Ben "I married this bear!" thing. The beastmaster ranger as presented seems to be in the latter camp. You have one close ally. There is a niche for the other camp, but it would be better served with it's own focus, I imagine.</blockquote>

Verification