Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Official D&D Errata Updated (Nov 2018)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 7765054" data-attributes="member: 6704184"><p>I wish they hadn't. I'm not sure, but I think this makes multi-classing between casters more complex and annoying. I get that they want to avoid "cheese", but IMO they go a bit too far with this one. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think it only does that, though. I'll have to dig into it more after the weekend, bc it's gonna be a busy one, though. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Agreed. It's...better than nothing, but the beast is still simply inferior except for HP totals at higher levels than a non-subclass granted beast you've simply trained to fight with you. I'm not sure the BM even stands up next to the Hunter ranger, or any of the newer Rangers. I've pretty much given up, and am working on a revision of the revised ranger. Even adding in some new BM oriented spells that buff a critter commanded by the ranger (a type of spell I'd love to see in the game, for rangers, paladins, and chain warlocks) isn't going to fix the fact that you're usually better off making your own attacks, and the beast is just a body on the field with you in a fight, while the Hunter gets pretty solid damage boosts that it can't lose for the rest of the adventuring day because a saving throw was failed. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I really think that the best fix for the BM is just to let it have a turn, but abbreviate what it can do on that turn, and boost it's damage per attack and it's HP. SO, basically the revised BM minus the "let your beast attack again instead of extra attack" nonsense. </p><p></p><p></p><p>There is also the chain warlock, to be fair. I really wish they'd literally just made the BM pet a familiar that you can't change the shape of, and that can be any beast of a certain challenge rating, and it can attack. Or what I wrote above.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 7765054, member: 6704184"] I wish they hadn't. I'm not sure, but I think this makes multi-classing between casters more complex and annoying. I get that they want to avoid "cheese", but IMO they go a bit too far with this one. I don't think it only does that, though. I'll have to dig into it more after the weekend, bc it's gonna be a busy one, though. Agreed. It's...better than nothing, but the beast is still simply inferior except for HP totals at higher levels than a non-subclass granted beast you've simply trained to fight with you. I'm not sure the BM even stands up next to the Hunter ranger, or any of the newer Rangers. I've pretty much given up, and am working on a revision of the revised ranger. Even adding in some new BM oriented spells that buff a critter commanded by the ranger (a type of spell I'd love to see in the game, for rangers, paladins, and chain warlocks) isn't going to fix the fact that you're usually better off making your own attacks, and the beast is just a body on the field with you in a fight, while the Hunter gets pretty solid damage boosts that it can't lose for the rest of the adventuring day because a saving throw was failed. I really think that the best fix for the BM is just to let it have a turn, but abbreviate what it can do on that turn, and boost it's damage per attack and it's HP. SO, basically the revised BM minus the "let your beast attack again instead of extra attack" nonsense. There is also the chain warlock, to be fair. I really wish they'd literally just made the BM pet a familiar that you can't change the shape of, and that can be any beast of a certain challenge rating, and it can attack. Or what I wrote above. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Official D&D Errata Updated (Nov 2018)
Top