D&D 5E The Ranger

[Wolfskin]

Rangers pets' have some nifty attacks in their statblocks, IMO. They may not be killer attacks, but having a critter trip your opponent and then using your other attack to hit him when he's on the ground is nothing to sneer at.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Because it uses your action, right? Would it break anything to separate that and give the beast its own action?

The issue is less the actions and more the lack of durability for the companion.

There are some good potential houserule adjustments in this thread that help the beastmaster without breaking the game relative to other classes.

 

[Nebulous]

Ok, well it's good to see this thread. And it confirms my first post...the casual glance looked weak; you have to delve into the details much more (and weigh a few houserules) to fully see the big picture. So i'm glad to hear the class is not broken (as i had read in some posts).

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

My players love the hunter ranger, but to this date, they never looked twice to the beastmaster. I don't know if it's actually weak during play, but it certainly feels weak. The following conversation is pretty much standard:

"Here is the beastmaster."
"Cool! I get to choose an animal companion?"
"Sure!"
"And it gets to attack?"
"Yes, but only if you relinquish your own attack..."
"I see... No, thanks."

 

[SilverfireSage]

My players love the hunter ranger, but to this date, they never looked twice to the beastmaster. I don't know if it's actually weak during play, but it certainly feels weak. The following conversation is pretty much standard:

"Here is the beastmaster."
"Cool! I get to choose an animal companion?"
"Sure!"
"And it gets to attack?"
"Yes, but only if you relinquish your own attack..."
"I see... No, thanks."

I think people automatically assume that the beasts are going to be weaker than them, when in many cases they're just as, or more powerful.

 

[Nebulous]

My players love the hunter ranger, but to this date, they never looked twice to the beastmaster. I don't know if it's actually weak during play, but it certainly feels weak. The following conversation is pretty much standard:

"Here is the beastmaster."
"Cool! I get to choose an animal companion?"
"Sure!"
"And it gets to attack?"
"Yes, but only if you relinquish your own attack..."
"I see... No, thanks."

Well, it is a very weird balance thing, and hard to imagine in-game how it actually looks (does the PC close his eyes and concentrate to make his wolf companion move and attack?) I would prefer that it had some normal actions, but i haven't really looked at it yet. And probably won't, no one is playing that class so it's a non-issue for now.

 

[Zaran]

What changes about the animal companion as the ranger levels?

 

[SilverfireSage]

What changes about the animal companion as the ranger levels?

Everything. AC, Attack bonus, damage, saving throws, skills all add Rangers proficiency bonus. Health is quadruple the Rangers level, so about that of a rogue. They also gain more abilities to use as a bonus action.

 

[Antz7766]

I like the pseudodragon it helps my ranger alot, especially when I am being used as a scout....

I just have a question regarding this. Is this even allowed in the rule? Or was this a house rule? Reading the block about Ranger's Companion in the PHB, the rule says to "Choose a beast that is no larger than Medium and that has a challenge rating of 1/4 or lower". According to both the PHB and the MM, the Pseudodragon is "Tiny dragon", and not beast like Owl, Panther, and the likes. Just trying to get some clarification. Thanks!

Edit: Typo

 

[steeldragons]

No. It's not.

It's available as familiar. Not an animal companion.