Hey everyone. This is a little something I've been looking into in my off time. I wondered just what kind of beast options a Beast Master ranger truly had. The above document shows my thoughts on them.
Enjoy!
Lord_Ventnor wrote:
Really nice one.
I was wondering, though : does the Hoard of the Dragon Queen free supplement adds new creatures ?
Excellent job, I loved the Stirge entry 
You think I can get away with having a Beagle instead of a Mastiff?
I went through and suggested some corrections for typos. Otherwise, it looks good. 
I am now thinking of making a Halfling Outrider with a Mastiff Beast Companion.
Undrhil wrote:
Thanks for all the work you've put into this, I have a ranger in my group who is going to take up beast master when she next levels and this will be super useful for her! I like alot of the exotic options you presented like the giant wolf spider, but I think she'll stay traditional and go woth a wolf anyway. I wonder what new fun options the MM will give us.
On a different note, what do you think about the relative power between the two ranger specs? I know some people say ranger as a whole is terrible and I strongly disagree with that, but it seems beastmaster is pretty lackluster until you get around level 11 or so and your pet can really start to help you out, whereas hunter can get +1d8 on most of his attacks starting from level 3. Just wanted to get your thoughts on the pro and con of beastmaster.
Halfling archer on a flying mount trick returns!
TomPlisss wrote:
I cleaned up the guide a little and posted some pretty pictures in it, so I think I'll go ahead and declare it done for now!
I love the idea of a dwarf ranger with a giant badger companion!
I'd re-read the rules entry on the Giant Badger and how rangers grant attacks. Although I'm pretty sure this isn't their intention, the rules actually don't let a ranger command the beast to take actions other than Attack, Dash, Disengage, Dodge or Help. This means that things like multiattack for the badger and swallow for the giant frog would be verboten. Hopefully the'll errata that though.
Regarding the balance between BM and Hunter, Hunter's level 3 feature is an immediate power boost--you're doing extra damage each turn. The BM ranger gives up bonus damage to gain some utility and an ally who can soak a little damage, but doesn't grant extra action economy or damage, can't take opportunity attacks and has very few hit dice for healing.
I think the BM option will be more fun, but less mechanically solvent the higher your level.
RCanine wrote:
Lord_Ventnor wrote:
Very nice guide, thank you very much! Bookmarked
RCanine wrote:
Where do some of these stats come from?
I don't see the badger in starter or PHB. Are these from old playtest rules?
Noctaem wrote:
IxidorRS wrote:
There actually is. It's literally the first sentence in the definition of "Attack" in the Actions in Combat Section of the PHB/Basic rules.
The Attack Action allows you to take one attack on your turn, and some class features modify this action to allow multiple. The Multiattack Action allows monsters to take specific attacks on their turn.
If the Ranger can command the beast to take an Action from it's available Actions well that's fine.
I believe he's referring to page 93 of the PHB which says: "You can use your action to verbally command [the beast] to take the Attack, Dash, Disengage, Dodge, or Help action."
The reference to Attack being an action is found on page 192 of the PHB, which says: "When you take your action on your turn, you can take one of the actions presented here, an action you gained from your class or a special feature, or an action that you improvise. Many monsters have action options of their own in their stat blocks." It then lists as options: Attack, Cast a Spell, Dash, Disengage, Dodge, Help, Hide, Ready, Search, and Use an Object.
So, Multiattack, an action listed in certain animals' stat blocks, falls under the "Many monsters have action options of their own in their stat blocks." Sadly, there doesn't appear to be any way for the Beast Master to command a beast to use any of those actions, as they don't appear on the list from page 93.
Note that if you houserule this (and I probably will), it's probably better to ammend the list on page 93 than to allow Multiattack to be used as part of the Attack Action. Otherwise multiclassed Druids with access to Extra Attack can go a bit crazy, doubling their normal number of attacks.
I'm on a phone at the moment, but if you look up the chapter on combat in the PHB basic rules. The headline "attack" the first sentence.
You forgot to mention that the Giant Poisonous Snake's bite has a 10 ft. reach. It'll be much more mobile than other companions as it can hit and run without suffering opportunity attacks.
Our party Beastmaster has found a lot of use out of utilizing his Companion's reaction ability; strategically placing him on the battlefield to prevent enemies from running around freely if he felt he didn't want to use part of his attack that round.
Danny_Montanny wrote:
RCanine wrote:
Lord_Ventnor wrote:
Thank_Dog wrote:
IxidorRS wrote:
Danny_Montanny wrote:
IxidorRS wrote:
Found this guide in the guide of guides.
Some things I think that would make the guide better:
- Basically all of the CR 1/4 beasts are blue or green. I'd love to see a bit more nuance to the ratings.
- It would be awesome have have some discussion on beast hp, defense and damage scaling. One of the more challenging questions for rangers is going to be whether it's viable to use a small or tiny beast, especially one with CR less than the max.
Also, some responses from the designers on beast companions.
Beasts can make op attacks: https://thesageadvice.wordpress.com/2014/09/06/ranger-beast-reaction/
DCs don't scale with proficiency bonus: https://thesageadvice.wordpress.com/2014/09/06/animal-companion-dc/
It's something I'll see if I can add when I get the time.
Thank you for the guide.
(Ranger Beastmaster/Warlock Chain Pact) Can a Ranger's beast be the same Warlock PC's Chain animal?
Here's an exchange with co-creator Jeremy Crawford about a ranger's beast companion reaction clarification that could be of interest to the guide;
@Plaguescarred Can a ranger's beast companion take reaction and make opportunity attack?@JeremyECrawford I would rule that the beast can make an opportunity attack.
@MykroftHolmes In addition to the ranger's reaction/opatk, or instead of?
@JeremyECrawford I'd say it's in addition to the ranger's reaction.
Timeshadows wrote:
(I don't think you should've left it freely editable, there's a copy-paste gone wrong right now, and a random 'b' inserted in another part by itself...)
Anyway, in my view, beast companion AC does not matter, because you can just get them barding. Plate mail barding is AC18 and costs 6k, but you can make do with chain barding for AC16 until then for 300.
Best picks of the litter right away are the Giant Poisonous Snake (reach can help it stay out of trouble, it has an extremely accurate attack, it deals alright damage even without the poison, with the poison it is ridiculously lethal) and Pteranodon (just because if you're a Small Beastmaster, you can ride it and thus fly at level 3). I wouldn't even look at the others, as their features aren't worth the hassle of trying to keep the beast alive...
I looked into making a wolf-riding Halfling Beastmaster, but the wording of the Beastmaster entry seems to have been made specifically so it prevents you from ever off-hand attacking with a bonus action. As you're never taking the Attack action, you're just ordering the beast to make one. Even with an extra attack of your own, it just says you make an attack, not that it's a part of your attack action. So the wolf gets an advantage from Pack Attack since you're always next to its target, but its potential knockdown doesn't really help you out. Plus, you'd really HAVE to take the Mounted Combat feat to ensure your mount stays alive, because the beast health totals will not be too high, and they have no saves (so any AoE burns them up)...
I think Wolf is pretty close to Giant Poisonous Snake in terms of overall utility as a pet. The constant advantage from Pack Tactics makes the Wolf the most accurate pet if you're fighting alongside it. It also has the potential to cause a negative effect on the target beyond simple damage.
GPS (Giant Poisonous Snake) has +1 AC over the Wolf and 10' reach, which is really cool in a pet. Its hits will deal more damage than the Wolf, but not that much more when accounting for the Wolf's extra accuracy from advantage and the increasing likelihood of enemies saving for half vs. the poison bite. Also, a lot of creature are immune to poison, making the Snake a slightly weaker version than the Wolf. However, if you can reliably manufacture advantage for the GPS, its accuracy is better than the Wolf.
Outside of combat, the GPS has blightsight 10' which is interesting, but it's 10' slower than the Wolf and its perception is significantly worse (considering the Wolf also has advantage on many Perception checks). The GPS also doesn't have Stealth proficiency and so cannot add the Ranger's bonus to it. GPS does have a swim speed, though, which may be useful.
At higher levels, I think Wolf and GPS are roughly equivalent. At low levels, GPS damage is probably vastly superior to Wolf, though, due to the poison bite generally being more effective against enemies of those levels.
I think Giant Crab and Constrictor Snake are good "control" pets as well - Constrictor Snake especially inflicts the "restrained" condition on a hit, giving advantage/disadvantage, and has a slightly better attack bonus than the crab, although much worse AC.
(Edit: Constrictors are too big 
, I glossed over that when re-reading possible pets.)
So I THOUGHT the beast companions scaled poorly, and that it wasn't really worth taking anything other than a CR 1/4 companion. I thought their damage was bad.
Then I made this spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fhfmtOXkChw5Gs0F-UsZg6KdEuHYyPApw3JzKOrsRvs/edit?usp=sharing
After doing this sheet, I realized a few things:
- HP and hit dice don't really matter
- Damage doesn't really matter either
- Attack bonus of +3 or more will keep you plenty accurate
- Multiple sources of damage are amazing
Having done the above spreadsheet, I'm not convinced the OP has done that analysis before rating. By my math, the top beast companions, in general order are:
- Flying Snake (16 AC, +8 to hit, 2 damage instances, flying, swim, flyby, blindsight)
- Giant Poisonous Snake (16 AC, +8 to hit, 2 damage instances, swim, mountable)
- Giant Crab (17 AC, grapple, mountable)
- Panther (two damage instances, mountable)
- Wolf (pack tactics, prone, perception skill, stealth skill, mountable)
- Blood Hawk (pack tacticks, fly, perception skill, keen senses)
- Giant Wolf Spider (15 AC, perception skill, stealth skill (+9!!!), blindsight, darkvision, spider climb, 2 damage instances, mountable)
- Pteranodon (15 AC, perception skill (but crappy WIS), fly, flyby, mountable)
- Giant Badger (darkvision, 2 damage instances, mountable)
- Boar (relentless, 2 damage instances, mountable)
Skill bonuses are nothing to sneeze at either. At 3rd level, a 16-stat PC will have a passive perception of 15, a blood hawk will have a 16.
I know everyone is excited about a pteranodon, the more I realize that it's less useful than it sounds; for your damage to scale your beast needs to be in melee, while you want to be flying high raining arrows. I'm not saying it's bad just that it incentivizes a suboptimal way of playing. Even flyby sounds better than it is, because you can command your beast to take a Disengage as a bonus action.
Edit: regarding HP, the beasts aren't THAT far behind. Rangers are pretty MAD (they want STR, DEX, WIS and CON), so 10-12 is probably all you'll be able to muster. In that case, your beast companion isn't going to be too far behind you. The real question is how do they heal, when their hit dice don't scale.
I'm not sure I'd count poisons as a "separate damage instance," or at least not the same kind as a Pounce attack. Epsecially in the case of Flying Snake, the 3d4 bonus poison damage doesn't really mean anything special in terms of "two attacks" as it's "rolled" together with the 1 piercing damage. It also makes a Flying Snake fairly useless against undead, elementals, or constructs. When I am near my PHB I'll double check, but I am also under the impression that "saving throw" poisons do not benefit from the Ranger's proficiency bonus to damage.
Additionally, Multiattack is pretty pointless for an animal companion, as they will never use that action- just the "Attack" action.
It's somewhat questionable as to whether animal companions will take bonus actions such as Pounce, but there is a good case to allow it (by the rules).
Flyby attack is still pretty useful, as a Ranger cannot command his or her animal companion to both Attack and Disengage in the same turn. (The bonus action Disengage says it can only be used on a turn in which you do not order the beast to attack.)
2Chlorobutanal wrote:
2Chlorobutanal wrote:
I just looked up "Damage Roll," and an argument could be made for saving throw poisons from an animal companion to add the Ranger's proficinecy bonus as damage, as "Damage Rolls" can come from attacks, spells, or monster special abilities. In the case of the Flying Snake, however, there is only one attack, and it happens to deal 1 piercing + 3d4 poison damage. In this case, the damage is treated as one roll, the 3d4 can critically strike, and the Ranger would get to add his or her proficiency bonus exactly once.
In the case of the Giant Poisonous Snake (or Giant Wolf Spider), there could be an argument made that the 3d6 poison damage (save for half) is considered a separate special ability and thus a separate damage roll. This would mean it could not critically strike, unlike the Flying Snake's poison damage, but that it should also technically get the Ranger's proficiency bonus to its damage roll, for a total of 3d6 + 2 to 3d6 + 6. In the end, I see it being a significant but not unbalancing power shift no matter how one interprets it, as the secondary application of the bonus is subject to halving through saves.
FluffyBunbunKittens wrote:
So, are you ever going to add the creatures from the Monster Manual? I'd like to know if a giant owl would make a good animal companion.
TheDraconicSpellcrafter wrote:
Ashrym wrote:
This annoys me:
On one side, we have a ranger who has to wait until 3rd level and who is so specialized as to have an animal companion that the ranger has spent countless hours working with and training. The Ranger is allowed only one of these companions, and must give up an Attack action every round just to get him to follow his commands.
Beast Master Ranger’s Companion (Player’s Handbook, page 93):
On your turn, you can verbally command the beast where to move (no action required by you). You can use your action to verbally command it to take the Attack, Dash, Disengage, Dodge, or Help action.
On the other side, we have a magic item that can be found as early as 1st level. It requires no special training, can be used by any class, and allows up to 3 animals per day, with no duration. These animals, as a bonus action can be given the command to move AND the general orders of attack my enemies.
Bag of Tricks (Uncommon magic item; Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 154):
You can use an action to pull the fuzzy object from the bag and throw it up to 20 feet. When the object lands, it transforms into a creature you determine by rolling a d8 and consulting the table that corresponds to the bag's color. See the Monster Manual for the creature's statistics.
The creature is friendly to you and your companions, and it acts on your turn. You can use a bonus action to command how the creature moves and what action it takes on its next turn, or to give it general orders, such as to attack your enemies. In the absence of such orders, the creature acts in a fashion appropriate to its nature.
Seriously? This is a complete slap in the face for people like myself that actually enjoy playing Rangers. After the results of the first playtest came in, they indicated that there were several issues with the Beast Master Ranger that needed to be addressed and that a special team had been assigned to playtest additional options for us. I know that the D&D team is rather small, and recently they have put out new playtest rules for the Mystic. While the Mystic class is intriguing, it leads me to wonder if the Ranger will just be left in the dust.
Thank you. I think this addresses some of teh concerns I had, but Pet Rangers still seem a little weak in my honest opinion.