D&D 5E Revised beastmaster ranger damage...

[Cyber-Dave]

Sorry. No. Just didn't read properly. Thought you were speaking abou favoured enemy damage... don't ask...

No worries. I've done that! In any case, I like the idea. I do think that the favored enemy damage bonus is ripe for abuse when stacked with other modifiers like hunter's mark. I avoided hunter's mark and opted for utility spells (as most of my damage comes from my beast's attacks, and hunter's mark doesn't modify those), so it hasn't come up at my table. I see how it could, though! Especially with a hunter sub-class ranger...

 

[MechaTarrasque]

30 to 50? Something seems off in your calculations. What animal and weapon is s/he using?



You are running something very differently than the way the game is being run at the table I am currently playing at. I'm at level 7 right now. My wolf has only 35 hit points with an AC of 16. It goes down, and it goes down fast. It is easy for the DM to put an end to my animal damage boost, at which point in time my damage usually drops as well (because instead of attacking I scramble to try and heal my animal companion before it fails 3 death saves). I've been keeping fairly careful track of my overall damage per encounter, and while it tends to spike high, the mechanics of the animal companion also make it drop low. All in all, keeping a very careful eye on comparative numbers between my entire group (over the course of encounters and not just turns), there is definitly a problem, but the problem isn't as bad as you are making it out to be (at my table).

If I might make a suggestion: speak to the player about making a small modification to the sheet. I am the player in my group, and I just asked the group for permision to remove the proficiency bonus from my animal companion's damage rolls as a house rule. Speak to your player about making a similar change to his sheet and see if that makes the game more enjoyable. Also, if you are not attacking his animal for some reason, start. If he runs the animal into a tactically dangerous space with lots of monsters around, have them gang up on it and knock it out. Force him to position his animal on the outskirts of combat if he wants to keep it protected. When it goes down, use its death saves as a ticking clock that forces him to spend his actions and spell resources on reaching and then healing it. Your game might start to feel more balanced.

In any case, this is the spell I proposed to the group:

Magic Fangs
2nd-level transmutation
Casting Time: 1 bonus action
Range: touch
Components: V, S
Duration: Concentration, up to 1 hour
You touch an animal connected to you by the Ranger’s Animal Companion class feature. Until the spell ends, its attacks are considered magical with a +1 bonus to attack rolls and damage rolls.
At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 4th level or higher, the bonus increases to +2. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 5th level or higher, you do not need to concentrate on the spell to maintain its effect.

I like magic fangs, but I would probably start it with attacks just being magical (like the devotion paladin and bladelock's weapons) as a 2nd level spell, +1 bonus to rolls as a 3rd level spell, and then just as your wrote it for the higher levels.

 

[Cyber-Dave]

I like magic fangs, but I would probably start it with attacks just being magical (like the devotion paladin and bladelock's weapons) as a 2nd level spell, +1 bonus to rolls as a 3rd level spell, and then just as your wrote it for the higher levels.

My gut reaction to your suggestion is that it is too weak and unfairly penalizes the beastmaster ranger. The bladelock treats his pact-blade as a magical weapon as a passive class ability, not a concentration based spell. The devotion paladin gets to treat his weapon as magical, gains his charisma modifier as a bonus to attack rolls, doesn't need to concentrate on the effect, and does this with a 3rd level ability that recharges on a short rest. Finally, I modeled Magic Fangs off of Magic Weapon. In fact, it's exactly the same, except it applies to your beast instead of your weapon, it doesn't have a 6th level use which grants a +3 magic weapon effect, and it gains a 5th level use which stops it from requiring concentration. What is your reasoning?

 

[discosoc]

30 to 50? Something seems off in your calculations. What animal and weapon is s/he using?

We play again in a few days, so I won't have details until then, but it's something like this...

main bow attack is 1d8 + 14 (dex and sharpshooter and +1 bow)
hunter's mark is 1d6
bear attack is 1d6 + 6 (normal bear with modified damage from proficiency and extra strength)
bear reaction is 1d6 + 6 (triggered when the ranger attacks)

This is just back-of-napkin math here, as I don't have his sheet right in front of me, but that's 29 to 51 damage assuming no crits. Obviously misses would lower that, as would not being able to use sharpshooter, but that's normal for everyone.

Anyway, it's just a lot of damage for the level. I'm not changing or nerfing anything because it may not play out like this in later levels, but right now it's pretty crazy.

 

[Lord Twig]

We play again in a few days, so I won't have details until then, but it's something like this...

main bow attack is 1d8 + 14 (dex and sharpshooter and +1 bow)
hunter's mark is 1d6
bear attack is 1d6 + 6 (normal bear with modified damage from proficiency and extra strength)
bear reaction is 1d6 + 6 (triggered when the ranger attacks)

This is just back-of-napkin math here, as I don't have his sheet right in front of me, but that's 29 to 51 damage assuming no crits. Obviously misses would lower that, as would not being able to use sharpshooter, but that's normal for everyone.

Anyway, it's just a lot of damage for the level. I'm not changing or nerfing anything because it may not play out like this in later levels, but right now it's pretty crazy.

You said you had a Champion Fighter. So he would have:

greatsword attack is 2d6 + 14 (str and GWM and +1 sword), re-roll 1s and 2s and crit on a 19 or 20. Twice.

Assuming all hits, your ranger is doing 41 average damage with no crits. The fighter would be doing 44.666 average damage with no crits (and he crits twice as often).

So not seeing a problem.

 

[Cyber-Dave]

We play again in a few days, so I won't have details until then, but it's something like this...

main bow attack is 1d8 + 14 (dex and sharpshooter and +1 bow)
hunter's mark is 1d6
bear attack is 1d6 + 6 (normal bear with modified damage from proficiency and extra strength)
bear reaction is 1d6 + 6 (triggered when the ranger attacks)

This is just back-of-napkin math here, as I don't have his sheet right in front of me, but that's 29 to 51 damage assuming no crits. Obviously misses would lower that, as would not being able to use sharpshooter, but that's normal for everyone.

Anyway, it's just a lot of damage for the level. I'm not changing or nerfing anything because it may not play out like this in later levels, but right now it's pretty crazy.

Oh, you would be in your full right to impose a minor nerf. Like I said, I just asked my DM and group for permission to house-rule my proficiency bonus to damage away (and add magic fangs to my spell list). My output, right now, is definitely too high (and it has been since level 5). It isn't, however, "basically a second character" too high. That is all I am saying. It definitely, however, needs a slight tweaking. A "magic fang" spell and the loss of the proficiency bonus would put the class in my "sweet spot" for balance, I think. I'll post again after I have a few sessions under my belt with the house-rules in play.

 

[Gladius Legis]

Honestly, I'd just give the Animal Companion a passive "counts as magical for bypassing damage resistances" ability a la the Moon Druid and the Monk. Just add it as another paragraph to "Companion's Bond" at Lv. 3, and remove the proficiency bonus to damage to balance it then.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

So, in other words, the revised ranger...

No. The Revised Ranger changes the numeric stats of the beast companion as you gain levels. It's way too complicated. Hit points are the only number that should change. The other examples I suggested are class features that apply to the ranger's companion but do not numerically mess with their stat block.

 

[Cyber-Dave]

No. The Revised Ranger changes the numeric stats of the beast companion as you gain levels. It's way too complicated. Hit points are the only number that should change. The other examples I suggested are class features that apply to the ranger's companion but do not numerically mess with their stat block.

Ah. I see what you are saying. Now that I am clear on your intent, however, I also strongly disagree with you. The numerical adjustments to attack and defense are needed to keep the pet viable. A lot more HP could replace defense (though I like how swingy the low hp/high defense combo on the beast plays out, to be honest, and prefer that approach in terms of game experience). Advantage, however, would not work for attack rolls. Being capped at a +5/+6 to attack, even with advantage, will result in the beast being useless during high-level play.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Ah. I see what you are saying. Now that I am clear on your intent, however, I also strongly disagree with you. The numerical adjustments to attack and defense are needed to keep the pet viable. A lot more HP could replace defense (though I like how swingy the low hp/high defense combo on the beast plays out, to be honest, and prefer that approach in terms of game experience). Advantage, however, would not work for attack rolls. Being capped at a +5/+6 to attack, even with advantage, will result in the beast being useless during high-level play.

I'd just let the number of attacks they can make scale in some way, probably based on the number of attacks they get when the ranger uses his reaction to give them extra attacks. I think a creature with some enhanced defenses making several attacks is probably going to stay relevant in high-level play with bounded accuracy. Of course, that gets into the question of "how strong should the companion be"?