This discussion has become a bit heated, so I want to clarify first that I’m just poking my head in to bring up a specific point rather than really engaging with the debate.
The point that occurs to me, is that we don’t know which group of players are satisfied versus dissatisfied (do we?)
In my estimation there are three relevant divisions of players when it comes to product satisfaction in an RPG.
1) Those who are particularly invested in the specific concept (ranger pet fans, in this case)
2) Those who aren’t really fans of the concept
3) People without strong preferences, including many casual players
The majority of people fall into 3. So WotC can make most iconic designs hit 70% fairly easily if they try, because group 3 is easy to please. Group 2 is hard to please, because they already start out dissatisfied and you have to win them over. Group 1 is where your target needs to be, even though it is a minority. If you can make group 1 happy, it’s easy to make 3 happy, and then all you need to worry about is balance, and fitting well with the rest of the game. Making group 2 happy is bonus points (and I think a worthy goal) but it’s least important.
So I’m in group 2 on warlord. I’d prefer they not do anything on that front. My opinion should be least important. The only thing that is related to my opinion that can reasonably be expected to be involved is whether the class feels like it fits in with the rest of 5e crunch and fluff. Now, if they make 1 and 3 happy and make it balanced, they absolutely should listen to the concerns of people in my camp about how to refine it to fit for us (since I’m very invested in things fitting), but that’s absolutely not where they should or devote the majority of their attention to.
So the question becomes which group is satisfied with the PHB beast master ranger?
