Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zardnaar" data-source="post: 7598306" data-attributes="member: 6716779">D&D has never really been that big on pets, in AD&D a high level Ranger might get one but it was fairly useless at combat (literally it was more of a pet), while a Druid or priest in 2E might be able to find something and charm/tame it. Our best effort there was an Elephant but replacing said elephant was not easy but it wasn't exactly a major feature of the Druid who was a primary spellcaster nor was it built into the class as such as you did not get the pet automatically. You would also probably need the right non weapon proficiencies and/or magic to do much with any pet you found. 3E did introduce the idea that Rangers and Druids could have them and they scaled, the problem was the pet was a bit to good especially when combined with wildshape and/or more summoned stuff. In game I did see a high level Druid level a giant fort more or less solo via an animal army.  AD&D and 3E basically reveal the 2 problems with them. The pet is either to weak as to be useless, or the pet is to strong when combined with other class abilities, usually spellcasting. The 3.5 Ranger might be the best per class we have had so far as it was a lot weaker than the Druids but could still act independently of the Ranger and was not so weak as to be totally useless. Paladins did get a mount but in AD&D it was exactly that and mounts tended to be squishy as well.  5E adds the Beastmaster ranger which is more or less universally regarded as the weakest class. This is because they made the pet a major class feature and gave an AD&D 2E style pet but at a lot lower levels. In addition to being weak at combat the pet doesn't act independently of you either at least if you want it to attack anything. You give up your standard action or an attack once you get multiple attacks, conceptually the designers rated the pets attack ability equal to an attack by the Ranger. The beast also doesn't scale as you level up, and you don't get a replacement either but you can bond with one which means you have to go out and find one. That is yet another problem with pet based classes what happens if the pet dies? Last D&D session I played the Rangers pet got caught in a green dragons breath in LMoP RIP Bob 1.  The game designers rated said pet as a major feature, its more comparable IMHO to a minor ability that could be built into the class. Weak pet or hunter ranger hmmn. Even if you gave the class a better pet in 5E the size of said pet is often an issue as well as anyone who has used a Moon Druid to turn into a large and huge beastie knows, you often get in the way. Yet another problem with a pet.  The other problem is worldbuilding. Sure you might be able to convince your DM to let you have a pet tiger, but where do you source rpelacemebnts from if it was not local to your area. IRL certain breeds of dogs cause people to raise eyebrows so how about pet wolves, great cats and dinosaurs in a D&D world I am sure the good folk of Waterdeep would have no problem right? . Now some 3pp have tried to do pet based classes as well such as EN5iders Mahout and Diabolist, and there are probably some on the DMGuild as well. They tend to be a bit messy, TLDR Problems.1. Power level of the pet to weak/strong. 2. Can the pet act independently of you3. Is the pet a major class feature4. What happens if the pet dies and how do you get a replacement. 5. The size of the pet.6. Said pet in the campaign, local laws/mores/ local environment.</blockquote>

Verification