That the Beast Master is combat ineffective and that the small amount of utility gained nowhere makes up for it.
Why are we circling back to issues already covered exhaustively?The Beastmaster can do things like have their beast flank around the enemy's position and harass the spellcasters and archers and such. This doesn't even cost anything.
Only if the combat is trivially easy. In any fight where an extra body would make a difference, the pet is far too squishy and the Ranger has no means to keep it alive.The beast can still take an OA even without being commanded. The Beastmaster's 7th level ability is stronger than the Hunter's too. An extra body on the battlefield taking Dodge can be an effective shield for the party's casters.
They need to be compared to:The Beastmaster subclass isn't amazing, but then neither is the Hunter. They need to be compared against each other.
Why are we circling back to issues already covered exhaustively?
Only if the combat is trivially easy. In any fight where an extra body would make a difference, the pet is far too squishy and the Ranger has no means to keep it alive.
They need to be compared to:
1) other classes
2) expectations
The Hunter subclass is a decent chassi for a ranged combatant, especially in a Fighter/Ranger multiclass.
The Beastmaster is severely lacking in almost every compartment.
The argument "since the subclass sees play we don't need to fix it" is preposterous and misleading.
That the Beast Master is combat ineffective and that the small amount of utility gained nowhere makes up for it.
Maybe because they can do better?Their main measures have been "do people play this class?" and "do they have fun when doing so?"
If it is both popular and considered fun to play, why wouldn't they focus their energy elsewhere? If the perceived "problems" have been resolved as far as the player base is concerned, while the "solutions" were not working for the player base, why would they keep pursuing that path?
Bollocks.Mathematically, the Ranger and the Beastmaster are fine.
If rangers could share their hit points with their pets, much would be resolved.Not much, but then they don't need much, particularly if you let rangers share the benefits of spending their own hit dice with companions.