D&D General Should ranger get a companion as its 'signature' feature?

payn

I don't believe in the no-win scenario
Trouble is that concept of summoning lots of things just grinds the actual combat to a halt. You end up with people playing on their phones as the summoner moves and attacks with each of their 15 velociraptors.

But yeah, I've always thought that 'Summoner' is an absolutely awful name for a pet class, yet for some reason Pathfinder clings onto it.
That is an issue, but Id rather they summon a bunch of singular things than a singular thing if thats how it needs to work mechanically.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


payn

I don't believe in the no-win scenario
I have no idea what that means.
Instead of summoning 15 velociraptors, the summoner would get a single one amongst their numerous options keeping the game in line with mechanical expectations and avoiding slow down. Instead of summoning the same eidolon creature constantly to achieve this mechanically.
 

CreamCloud0

One day, I hope to actually play DnD.
Instead of summoning 15 velociraptors, the summoner would get a single one amongst their numerous options keeping the game in line with mechanical expectations and avoiding slow down. Instead of summoning the same eidolon creature constantly to achieve this mechanically.
so basically having a list of creatures that you can access but only having one out at any given time?
 


UngainlyTitan

Legend
Supporter
No, not a fan of pet classes. I am ok with there being a pet subclass for the ranger. For the record I am fairly happy with the upcoming ranger.
 




Scribe

Legend
Yes, I have a 'pet class' in my own little world, and I see no reason really why it wouldnt/couldnt/shouldnt, replace the Ranger.

I'm not hating on the Ranger, but it's identity seems lost...in the wilderness.

Jeff Goldblum Smiling GIF by Supercompressor
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top