Revised Ranger update

[Mistwell]

It's definitely a help, of a kind. For sure.

He'd probably be better off being a Hunter with the Arcane Initiate feat for this purpose, but yeah, advantage helps.

Can you see that it's a little underwhelming, compared to stories people might have read about warriors "fighting alongside" their companions?

Yes. Not sure what part of "Here are my three suggestions for adding an additional fighting style, some additional spells, and an additional feat to the game to help address some of these issues with the beastmaster" is unclear. I've repeated them. The same group of people either are dismissive or simply ignore those suggestions, and then repeat "Why can't you see why we think this needs help?!?! Why do you guys keep saying there is no issue here?!"

 

[Eric V]

[MENTION=6780961]Yunru[/MENTION] would the following feats and spells give you what you want?

Feat - greater companion. You can now train large creatures and those of a CR up to 1/2. If you have 8 levels in the Ranger class, the CR of your companion can be 1.

1st Level Spell - Hunting Party- concentration, 1 minute. You gain an additional action that you can use only to issue commands to your beast companion. Your companion gains 5 temp hit points (+5 for each additional spell slot level) and gains a 1d4 bonus to its damage rolls.

2nd level spell - Revive Beast - you touch a beast that has been dead for less than a minute. It returns to life with 1 HP.

3rd - Reinvigorate Beast, bonus Action, range 60’, you voice brings vitality back to a beast. It regains all lost hit points and can immediately move up to its speed without taking an opportunity attack.

Why do they have to be spells or feats? Why can't they just be subclass features? Otherwise, it's a tax on the subclass, no?

 

[Mistwell]

None of which involve actually fighting. "Oh cool, can I have my panther leap at him and try to bite his face?" "You cooould, but it'd be better if he just played distraction." "Wow. So cool. End sarcasm."
The point where every animal companion except... two? Except two are melee creatures, and thus can't do the whole "I can be safe from damage by being too far away to easily be hit?" Sure, your wizard buddy can't really take many hits, but they also don't have to be right next to the opponent to contribute.

7th level ability. For all animal companions.

 

[Yunru]

Yes. Not sure what part of "Here are my three suggestions for adding an additional fighting style, some additional spells, and an additional feat to the game to help address some of these issues with the beastmaster" is unclear. I've repeated them. The same group of people either are dismissive or simply ignore those suggestions, and then repeat "Why can't you see why we think this needs help?!?! Why do you guys keep saying there is no issue here?!"

Because they all require additional resources to fix something wrong with the base class?
That's not a fix, that's a tax.

And would still be the same as admitting a fix was needed if WotC did it.

 

[Eric V]

Yes. Not sure what part of "Here are my three suggestions for adding an additional fighting style, some additional spells, and an additional feat to the game to help address some of these issues with the beastmaster" is unclear. I've repeated them. The same group of people either are dismissive or simply ignore those suggestions, and then repeat "Why can't you see why we think this needs help?!?! Why do you guys keep saying there is no issue here?!"

I am pretty sure at least Chaosmancer addressed them...I'm not trying to criticize, they're all fine as ideas, but the fighting style comes on at a different level than when they would get the companion, and the feats and spells are "taxes" that the Beastmaster has to use to make his subclass abilities be on par with the other subclasses who can use their feats and spells for additional things.

Like I asked someone else: why couldn't those ideas just be subclass features?

 

[Yunru]

[MENTION=6780961]Yunru[/MENTION] would the following feats and spells give you what you want?

Feat - greater companion. You can now train large creatures and those of a CR up to 1/2. If you have 8 levels in the Ranger class, the CR of your companion can be 1.

1st Level Spell - Hunting Party- concentration, 1 minute. You gain an additional action that you can use only to issue commands to your beast companion. Your companion gains 5 temp hit points (+5 for each additional spell slot level) and gains a 1d4 bonus to its damage rolls.

2nd level spell - Revive Beast - you touch a beast that has been dead for less than a minute. It returns to life with 1 HP.

3rd - Reinvigorate Beast, bonus Action, range 60’, you voice brings vitality back to a beast. It regains all lost hit points and can immediately move up to its speed without taking an opportunity attack.

The feat not really? It does nothing for their ability to survive, which is the real issue. It would be cool though, if said issue weren't an issue that'd still rear it's head.

The 1st level spell? A bit, because tempHP. I'd be concerned that the additional action might make it too good though.

The 2nd level spell? Kinda but kinda not? Imagine a companion with 40 HP (level 10 ranger). It has 2d8 hit dice to heal itself of 39 damage. But it's still better than permanently losing the creature, especially if the party travels a lot.

The 3rd level spell? Most definitely, but it'd be nice to not have to need it almost every fight.

 

[Yunru]

7th level ability. For all animal companions.

Requires them to not attack. Back to "Not fighting". And if you say it can contribute better by blocking exits... so can a brick wall. Hell, a brick wall would take longer to get around. Can I have a brick wall as my animal companion please?

Because it'd be as exciting, and at least I'd get some RP out of the curiousness of it.

 

[OB1]

Why do they have to be spells or feats? Why can't they just be subclass features? Otherwise, it's a tax on the subclass, no?

It’s not a tax, it’s an expansion of abilities. Not everyone would take them, only those who want their companion to have greater combat abilities than currently provided. Why wouldn’t that come at a price?

And if the price isn’t worth it, than what you are saying is that you don’t really want a better companion for some character concept you have in your head, you just want more power.

As to why not subclass features? Sure, as part of a new subclass it could work, but, as this thread has discussed for weeks now, the Revised Ranger will not be happening.

Seems spells and feats seem a more likely way to get this addressed given that announcement.

 

[Yunru]

It’s not a tax, it’s an expansion of abilities.

When it's an expansion of abilities that should be already expanded, it's a tax.

I feel the need to mention that that also logical extends to "If it's an expansion of abilities that feel like they should already be expanded, it feels like a tax."

 

[Mistwell]

Because they all require additional resources to fix something wrong with the base class?
That's not a fix, that's a tax.

And would still be the same as admitting a fix was needed if WotC did it.

It's not a tax because a majority of people playing the class are already fine with it. It's additional options for those who want something more out of this class, without having to mess with what already works for a fair number of people. Generally adding more options rather than replacing what exists is the better route, as it not only doesn't cause that sense that you spent money on an incomplete product, but it also doesn't then result in a bunch more people being upset that you just "fixed" what was not broken for them.

And I don't think this is really an issue of "admitting" anything. Who cares if they "admit" something? What purpose does that serve? Some people want the beastmaster to do more (myself included) and I think some options to let them do more without altering what already exists is a good route. I'm hoping they do as well, and said as much recently to Crawford on Twitter.