D&D 5E druids don't get animal companions?

[Sacrosanct]

I was just going to make a post asking this same question because I was reading the PHB and saw the Druid WITH A PET TIGER as a clear illustration in the Druid entry. Yes, they can cast Animal Friendship; but it has a duration of 24 hours. I guess they have to devote a permanent spell slot to "Giving Mr. Snuggles His Medicine" every day. Honestly they should make it so spending a higher level slot (let's say 3rd) makes it Permanent (so long as you only have 1 such animal).

The upside is if the GM allows you to get a PET TIGER by doing this, it will allow the ranger to get a much better pet than the ones the Beastmaster ranger gets.

That's not a pet tiger. That's a shapechanged druid.

 

[Mistwell]

Cant a druid use a combination of animal friendship, and then nature skill or whatever animal handling is these days,

It's cleverly hidden in plain site as Animal Handling There is also an Intelligence (Nature) check as a separate skill.

As to your point...

and persuade an animal to be his/her pet? That still works just fine at lower levels. then from 9th if you really want a special pet use Awaken, that all looks sweet to me.

The skill says, "When there is any question whether you can calm down a domesticated animal, keep a mount from getting spooked, or intuit an animal’s intentions, the DM might call for a Wisdom (Animal Handling) check. You also make a Wisdom (AnimalHandling) check to control your mount when you attempta risky maneuver."

Not sure that really does it. I suppose a combination of animal friendship, speak with animals, animal handling, and then maybe some sort of persuasion check to get them to be actual friends?

It does seem odd to me that the Cleric (Nature) is more capable of controlling animals than a Druid, though admittedly I have not read them both all the way through.

 

[Li Shenron]

How about just letting a Druid take the Ranger's Beastmaster subclass?

I have no idea how the Beastmaster works, but if it doesn't improve any prior Ranger abilities, then it can probably be slapped on top of a Druid in place of a Druid's regular subclass.

Some adjustment needed if Ranger subclasses cover less levels that Druid subclasses, or if the features are gained at wildly different levels.

 

[evilbob]

The ranger's subclass is a good start, but it's definitely designed for a more martial character - specifically one that gets two attacks at level 5. You could still do it as a druid, but it would be even worse. Still, it's worth looking at - I'll check when I get a chance!

 

[evilbob]

Ok, so the Awaken spell is also not a good option. It's really just about making a beast sentient. No reason it would protect you in battle, fight with you, etc., especially not on a permanent basis.

However, the ranger's Beast Master subclass is actually a good fit. You can ignore two sentences about "when you get your extra attack" and favored terrain, and it works just fine. I would change the levels, though; the druid normally gets subclass features at level 2 / 6 / 10 / 14, and the ranger is one level later for some reason, but I would follow the normal druid progression.

Unfortunately the class feature is even more terrible for the druid since you don't get extra attacks and therefore would be giving up your casting for the animal to attack, but that's not really the point. However, at high levels the druid actually gets much better thanks to the 15th (or 14th for druid I would think) level ability that you can target both yourself and your companion with spells if they are within 30 feet. The ranger spell list is small so that's not a big deal, but the druid one is extensive, and there's probably something that is a bit tricky on there (shapechange, maybe?)

 

[Umbran]

Don't get animal companions? What about that... barbarian thing that keeps hanging around with the druid? He sure *smells* like an animal. And that halfling rouge has to be part ot he weasel family...

 

[evilbob]

Paladins don't either

Sorry, just realized: paladins don't get mounts anymore, either.

However, they do get "Find Steed" which is a pretty awesome 2nd level spell and way better. It allows you to permanently summon a celestial / fiendish / etc. mount of your choice (no casting cost), and resummon it if it dies or you dismiss it (10 min casting time). It has an Int of 6 and understands your language, and you can communicate with it telepathically for up to a mile. Now THAT is an animal companion!

The paladin steed doesn't specifically get attacks or actions listed, but while you ride it you can cast spells on both of you and it, and it "allows you to fight as a seemless unit" which is a bit nebulous as to whether or not it would make its own attacks, but it seems like it would. Maybe the DMG has more guidance.


Meanwhile wizards (or anyone who grabs a 1st level wizard spell) get Find Familiar, and these things mostly suck. Foremost, they give no static benefit to anything anymore, so all you really get is a pet now. They have their own initiative but cannot attack. You can see through its eyes and hear through its ears and communicate telepathically up to 100 feet, and in a HILARIOUS nod to how familiars are typically treated (and maybe even Order of the Stick) you can actually have it pop off into a pocket dimension where it hangs out until you need it. The main thing it can do for you otherwise is deliver touch spells within 100 feet, using the familiar's reaction to do so. Definitely not worth wasting a spell slot but if you find a scroll and have some downtime, might be nice to pay the 10g fee and have one on retainer for the occasional shocking grasp.

 

[random.brown]

...deliver touch spells within 100 feet, using the familiar's reaction to do so. Definitely not worth wasting a spell slot...

I thought the exact opposite--cast a spell once and gain range 100 feet on touch spells? Where's the downside?

 

[evilbob]

I thought the exact opposite--cast a spell once and gain range 100 feet on touch spells? Where's the downside?

I thought the same until I started hunting for touch spells in the wizard list. There aren't many. In fact, shocking grasp was the only one I could think of without a better search capability.

But to be fair, those two sentences weren't meant to be taken together and out of context. I was saying "this is something good a familiar can do. Now, then, separately, as a whole this spell is not worth a slot".

 

[random.brown]

I thought the same until I started hunting for touch spells in the wizard list. There aren't many. In fact, shocking grasp was the only one I could think of without a better search capability.

Good point.

But to be fair, those two sentences weren't meant to be taken together and out of context.

You know this is the Internet, right?!