CapnZapp
Legend
Thanks - I haven't played a Beastmaster ranger, so this is valuable insight.
Of course, the question then becomes: why play a Beastmaster?
Apart from role-playing considerations of course. I fully realize these might be sufficient in any given campaign, but say, if the question is asked to the charop boards?
Would they then say "don't play a Beastmaster" (or at least the variant that actually uses his companion for combat - I fully understand there can be a Beastmaster Alone variant that doesn't really care for the pet, and the Beastmaster Scout variant that uses the pet for non-combat purposes)
By the way, my question is not meant to be snarky. I honestly believed the beast companion was designed to be used for combat (as in "most combats")...
Have you considered playing the pet as expendable (again I fully understand if any given player find that uninteresting for fluff reasons "that's heartless")?
Haven't my books here, but if the ressurrection requires minimal expense (and no healing surges) perhaps you can play the Ranger build as having a companion that provides a few rounds of flanking, soaks a few hits, but then croaks; to be raised for service after a short rest?
That is, you go in full aware there will be no (or next to no) surges expended on the beast?
Guess I need to go check the particulars of that rituals (specifically, if the ritual returns the raised companion at full health)...
Edit: Never mind, found it. Okay so it doesn't work out that way. Not because the ritual is expensive or because it returns the critter still wounded (a death penalty is all). But because, again, the ritual casting time is ridiculously long. (Had it been, say, five minutes, everything would have worked out just like I guessed... close, but no cigar eh?)
It does make me appreciate your houserule though. Basically, it allows the beast companion to suck a little less. (In combat that is - outside combat the action economy isn't that important anyway)
Of course, the question then becomes: why play a Beastmaster?
Apart from role-playing considerations of course. I fully realize these might be sufficient in any given campaign, but say, if the question is asked to the charop boards?
Would they then say "don't play a Beastmaster" (or at least the variant that actually uses his companion for combat - I fully understand there can be a Beastmaster Alone variant that doesn't really care for the pet, and the Beastmaster Scout variant that uses the pet for non-combat purposes)
By the way, my question is not meant to be snarky. I honestly believed the beast companion was designed to be used for combat (as in "most combats")...
Have you considered playing the pet as expendable (again I fully understand if any given player find that uninteresting for fluff reasons "that's heartless")?
Haven't my books here, but if the ressurrection requires minimal expense (and no healing surges) perhaps you can play the Ranger build as having a companion that provides a few rounds of flanking, soaks a few hits, but then croaks; to be raised for service after a short rest?
That is, you go in full aware there will be no (or next to no) surges expended on the beast?
Guess I need to go check the particulars of that rituals (specifically, if the ritual returns the raised companion at full health)...
Edit: Never mind, found it. Okay so it doesn't work out that way. Not because the ritual is expensive or because it returns the critter still wounded (a death penalty is all). But because, again, the ritual casting time is ridiculously long. (Had it been, say, five minutes, everything would have worked out just like I guessed... close, but no cigar eh?)
It does make me appreciate your houserule though. Basically, it allows the beast companion to suck a little less. (In combat that is - outside combat the action economy isn't that important anyway)
Last edited:
