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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Minigiant" data-source="post: 6534215" data-attributes="member: 63508">Wolves and panthers are great scots and trackers.Yes, The Beast Master's Animal Companion is weak. It should have be a better combatant. More HP, better saves, and maybe another feature like evasion. But, the Beast Master's Animal Companion is not useless or horrible. It took a bit of time for people to figure out the nuances. The pet has many uses.But some things are justified.Giving a combat pet a full set of actions was proven as bad game design in previous editions. It works in movies and books. It works in video games as the computer does the math and computation. It doesn't work at a table as it drags down the game. Such a thing could not be the default.Giving a combat pet the full stat line up as a PC was proven as bad game design in previous editions. Sure, you don't want your pet to die but you don't want him a better warrior than the other warrior PCs played by human friends. An since the ranger is a warrior, you'd have 2 full powered warriors in one PC.Making favored enemy was proven as bad game design in previous editions. It forces the DM's hand, makes PC effectiveness not in the player's control, and imposes additional mandates on the whole game just to be fair.WOTC's didn't make a perfect ranger. I'll give the a B- or C+ on design. But it's the best ranger D&D ever had. Better than all the Fs of the past. All the idea's were good but the numbers are off  (spells known, number of FE/FT, companion HP). But overall, the 5th edition ranger actually does what the description says. And after years of the rangers not actually being rangers, I don't fault people for nothing knowing what the ranger is and disappointed due to understanding.Some numbers are off though. But at least it wasn't poorly designed too.</blockquote>

Verification