Beast Master Ranger - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 jaden_stormtracker Jul 10, 2015 8:13:41	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.
#2 Amondaun Jul 10, 2015 9:11:14	I agree completely. I wanted to play a Ranger (Beast Master) for a while now but this has been a major issue for me. I thought the idea of a animal companion was to help you, not take up half or your only standard action each round. Sure they are stronger than an average beast but I'm the end their inferior to the Ranger himself which brings up the question: why let my beast attack when I can hit easier and do more damage? And if your going for a ranged ranger half of your spells (at least mine would) will be useless when your beast eventually gets the buff too. "Lion use lightning arrow! ...oh wait..."
#3 jaden_stormtracker Jul 12, 2015 19:29:53	i can't believe that they put out yet another class (Mystic) when they KNEW full well how badly the Ranger sucked. The Ranger, which was a class from launch, should have been corrected BEFORE tieing up important staff on a limited team with other projects! Now, according to Mike Mearls from the podcast, the Ranger is so janked up, they don't even like it and are completely scrapping the entire class. They are going to be making 3 new rangers, and release them slowly over time, maybe a couple levels at a time (which is virtually unplayable). And the kicker is - this process won't even START for a long while (again thanks to the stupid mystic). Sorry if Im ranting all up over the Internet, but seriously finish one project completely before starting another!
#4 Mazzy Jul 13, 2015 0:00:02	If it makes you feel better the designers know they screwed up. They have said on numerous occasions that the beastmaster is substantially weaker than they would have liked. However they are not going to release errata to fix it as that is not how fifth edition is going to work. Instead they will "use the feedback from the ranger to influence future design." Now certainly if you are playing in a home brew game you can talk to your DM. He might be sympathetic. But if you are hoping a designer reads this thread, nothing will come of that. They screwed up. They know they screwed up. They know the beastmaster sucks. But fifth edition is not going to be the kind of game that issues yearly errata to balance classes. You're on your own.
#5 Ironxxx Jul 13, 2015 1:20:52	I've played a BM quite a bit and they're great fun, I think they play better than you think they would. However, we added a rule in that you could use your attack as RAW or you could use your bonus action to command the pet and it just continues doing what it did last - as per the bag of tricks. If you want to play one speak to your DM and see if he allows that. Oh, and give it death saves then you're good to go.
#6 SDaken Jul 13, 2015 4:11:04	well in the last edition of DnD official podcast, that dude (i forgot the name) said they were planning to completely redisgn rangers in future unearthed arcana editions, hopes for the best.
#7 Zaistars Jul 13, 2015 4:26:22	As much as errata irritates me, completely redesigning classes is also nuts. You'd thing that with such a long development time they would have been able to work these bugs out. Also, have beast masters ever been viable...ever? My house rules allow the ranger to command the beast and take an action as an action each round. We also play the beast as a creature rather than a robot the PC has to command to do something as simple as move. I also allow the beast to have death saves. Just makes gameplay smoother.
#8 TheCriticalFail Jul 13, 2015 4:40:44	Actually the main issue with beast master is the fact that there's no method to get the beast magical attacks. With a little bit of creative thought, the class itself isn't all that weak, Crossbow expert wielding hand crossbow and a net for example (Net as your first main attack, your second attack gets transferred to the beast which means you don't suffer the disadvantage of the net not allowing it anyway, follow up with hand crossbow attack for your bonus action. Your hand crossbow attack and the beast attacks gain advantage, allowing you to proc sharpshooter pretty easily once you have it as well). There are also quite a few other ways to get its damage and abilities up to par, though you won't be able to keep up with anyone optimizing it's certainly not a wasted party member. However... the fact the beast can NEVER get magical attacks means for large portions of the game and against a HUGE amount of boss mobs... you really have no choice but to NOT use it. Since it can't do a damn thing. Give beasts magical attacks at the minimum. That's the only part that needs a hot fix and in my opinion should be errata, since it's the only class in the game where there's no way for its main source of power/damage to become magical which is just plain unfair.
#9 iserith Jul 13, 2015 6:30:56	jaden_stormtracker wrote:
#10 Awakened_Gazebo Jul 13, 2015 13:20:48	I would also have prefered that the "rangers companion" feature in the PHB had included the option of several animals, instead of only one. I mean come on, do you know a player with a normal seahorse or a giant fire beetle as a companion? If the PHB instead had included the option of 50exp worth of animals that would have been neat. Then you could have a single 1/4 animal for a more combat oriented companion. Or 5 CR0 critters for scouting and illumination (fire beetle) or any other combination like a stirge (CR1/8) a giant fire beetle (CR0) and a spider (CR0). @iserith Im pretty sure the majority of players are well aware of that WotC wont come barging into their apartments when they make some houserules. That doesnt mean players cant be annoyed at poor rules anyway. If CR 1 goblins was listed as having fireballs as an innate at will ability in the MM, players would also be in their right to be annoyed, even though 99% of DM would houserule it away anyway, thats not the point. Houseruling a collar of ferocity is cool and certainly a great concept, but if you as a player cant convince the DM or you play in AL then its no good. And I take it you dont play AL (ok, I dont either)
#11 iserith Jul 13, 2015 13:37:11	Awakened_Gazebo wrote:

Post/Author/DateTime

Post

jaden_stormtracker

Jul 10, 2015 8:13:41

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.

Amondaun

Jul 10, 2015 9:11:14

I agree completely. I wanted to play a Ranger (Beast Master) for a while now but this has been a major issue for me. I thought the idea of a animal companion was to help you, not take up half or your only standard action each round. Sure they are stronger than an average beast but I'm the end their inferior to the Ranger himself which brings up the question: why let my beast attack when I can hit easier and do more damage? And if your going for a ranged ranger half of your spells (at least mine would) will be useless when your beast eventually gets the buff too. "Lion use lightning arrow! ...oh wait..."

jaden_stormtracker

Jul 12, 2015 19:29:53

i can't believe that they put out yet another class (Mystic) when they KNEW full well how badly the Ranger sucked. The Ranger, which was a class from launch, should have been corrected BEFORE tieing up important staff on a limited team with other projects!

Now, according to Mike Mearls from the podcast, the Ranger is so janked up, they don't even like it and are completely scrapping the entire class. They are going to be making 3 new rangers, and release them slowly over time, maybe a couple levels at a time (which is virtually unplayable). And the kicker is - this process won't even START for a long while (again thanks to the stupid mystic).

Sorry if Im ranting all up over the Internet, but seriously finish one project completely before starting another!

Mazzy

Jul 13, 2015 0:00:02

If it makes you feel better the designers know they screwed up. They have said on numerous occasions that the beastmaster is substantially weaker than they would have liked. However they are not going to release errata to fix it as that is not how fifth edition is going to work. Instead they will "use the feedback from the ranger to influence future design."

Now certainly if you are playing in a home brew game you can talk to your DM. He might be sympathetic. But if you are hoping a designer reads this thread, nothing will come of that. They screwed up. They know they screwed up. They know the beastmaster sucks. But fifth edition is not going to be the kind of game that issues yearly errata to balance classes. You're on your own.

Ironxxx

Jul 13, 2015 1:20:52

I've played a BM quite a bit and they're great fun, I think they play better than you think they would. However, we added a rule in that you could use your attack as RAW or you could use your bonus action to command the pet and it just continues doing what it did last - as per the bag of tricks. If you want to play one speak to your DM and see if he allows that.

Oh, and give it death saves then you're good to go.

SDaken

Jul 13, 2015 4:11:04

well in the last edition of DnD official podcast, that dude (i forgot the name) said they were planning to completely redisgn rangers in future unearthed arcana editions, hopes for the best.

Zaistars

Jul 13, 2015 4:26:22

As much as errata irritates me, completely redesigning classes is also nuts. You'd thing that with such a long development time they would have been able to work these bugs out. Also, have beast masters ever been viable...ever?

My house rules allow the ranger to command the beast and take an action as an action each round. We also play the beast as a creature rather than a robot the PC has to command to do something as simple as move. I also allow the beast to have death saves. Just makes gameplay smoother.

TheCriticalFail

Jul 13, 2015 4:40:44

Actually the main issue with beast master is the fact that there's no method to get the beast magical attacks. With a little bit of creative thought, the class itself isn't all that weak, Crossbow expert wielding hand crossbow and a net for example (Net as your first main attack, your second attack gets transferred to the beast which means you don't suffer the disadvantage of the net not allowing it anyway, follow up with hand crossbow attack for your bonus action. Your hand crossbow attack and the beast attacks gain advantage, allowing you to proc sharpshooter pretty easily once you have it as well). There are also quite a few other ways to get its damage and abilities up to par, though you won't be able to keep up with anyone optimizing it's certainly not a wasted party member.

However... the fact the beast can NEVER get magical attacks means for large portions of the game and against a HUGE amount of boss mobs... you really have no choice but to NOT use it. Since it can't do a damn thing.

Give beasts magical attacks at the minimum. That's the only part that needs a hot fix and in my opinion should be errata, since it's the only class in the game where there's no way for its main source of power/damage to become magical which is just plain unfair.

iserith

Jul 13, 2015 6:30:56

jaden_stormtracker wrote:

#10

Awakened_Gazebo

Jul 13, 2015 13:20:48

I would also have prefered that the "rangers companion" feature in the PHB had included the option of several animals, instead of only one. I mean come on, do you know a player with a normal seahorse or a giant fire beetle as a companion? If the PHB instead had included the option of 50exp worth of animals that would have been neat. Then you could have a single 1/4 animal for a more combat oriented companion. Or 5 CR0 critters for scouting and illumination (fire beetle) or any other combination like a stirge (CR1/8) a giant fire beetle (CR0) and a spider (CR0).

@iserith Im pretty sure the majority of players are well aware of that WotC wont come barging into their apartments when they make some houserules. That doesnt mean players cant be annoyed at poor rules anyway. If CR 1 goblins was listed as having fireballs as an innate at will ability in the MM, players would also be in their right to be annoyed, even though 99% of DM would houserule it away anyway, thats not the point.

Houseruling a collar of ferocity is cool and certainly a great concept, but if you as a player cant convince the DM or you play in AL then its no good. And I take it you dont play AL (ok, I dont either)

#11

iserith

Jul 13, 2015 13:37:11

Awakened_Gazebo wrote: