Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Laurefindel" data-source="post: 7992559" data-attributes="member: 67296">True!Without going into details, when 4e came out and for some reasons it didn't speak to me, I made my own version of d20. I based my animal companion (ranger) and hunting dogs (knight) features on TOR's Hound of Mirkwood. But back on the subject...My experience is that when compared to summoned animals, familiars, paladin steeds, phantom steed spells, beastmasters' animal companions, and even animals you buy at the pet store and bring along as underlings, the TOR approach doesn't resonate well with the rest of 5e. For what it's work, the beastmaster's animal companion is closest in design philosophy, but without all the good stuff that could have come along with it. However, people were not annoyed at the companion's lack of tricks to sniff-out intruders and bark at danger and whatnot; they were annoyed by the fact that the animal companion was a poor fighter. Mind you with the way the ranger is made, the RaW animal companion only bring things that the ranger already does, and not much that the ranger itself cannot do without the help of conclave archetypes, so I understand why people were upset with PHB beastmaster.</blockquote>