Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Winterthorn" data-source="post: 7474817" data-attributes="member: 1702">As a DM I have had no problem in principle with pets, hirelings, pet classes, the NPC derived from Leadership feat of 3.5E, and so on.  So what if a cless feature, spell, or clever roleplaying means one or two players have an extra character/critter to run?  These extras are part of the PC's team, and in my experience the players who don't have one often pitch in advice for, or exploit tactically, the extra on hand for the benefit of the whole.  Such extras also serve as vehicles for the DM's plot development and story tension.  So IMHO Wotc flubbed on the Beastmaster which could have so much more than it is now. Let the beast fight freely for its master/friend.  Release the beast! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":-)" title="Smile    :-)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":-)" />I don't think a whole rewrite of the Ranger is necessary.  Perhaps all it takes is a few choice errated words and an extra line or two in the reprint of Ranger, and its beastmeaster subclass, and that would be a fix to suffice most people's concerns?  (The secret of good rules is concise and clever wording.)</blockquote>