Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Xeviat-DM Aug 28, 2015 3:06:00	Hello everyone. I, like many others, want to fix up the Beast Master Ranger. I, like some, am a math junkie. I think the two can play together well.   It seems most people's complaints about the Beast Master Ranger fall on levels 3 and 4, when the Ranger and Companion cannot act in tandum. I definitely feel this.   (Quick TL:DR; here I'm suggesting two avenues to patch the beast master. Either allow the companion to act like a chain warlock's familiar, where it has its own action and can use help for the Ranger, OR allow the Ranger to command their companion to take an action using their Bonus Action. I look over the math to both of these below.)   Now, what does the ranger give up by going for Beast Master instead of Hunter? Well, you give up +1d8 damage once per round vs a target at less than half hp, OR extra attack once per turn against a creature within 5 feet of a creature you just attacked, OR a reaction attack against a large or larger creature who attacks you. Instead, you get a pet.   How much is that extra +1d8 damage? The others are more circumstantial and harder to balance (yes, white room, blah blah). We wouldn't want the pet to only deal 1d8 damage (1d4+2?), as that would feel really weak I think. It could work in a pinch, but it would be really boring.   No, why not have the pet work like a familiar? It gets its full suite of actions, but it can't attack. So, familiars can't take the attack action, but they can still take the dash, disengage, dodge, help, hide, ready (ready what?), search, and use an object actions. Help stands out. What if the Beast Master's companion could help with its own action starting at level 3? How would that compare to the Hunter's +1d8 damage vs. opponents at less than max hp?   Well, lets look at an archer ranger, because it's a little simpler than a twfing ranger atm, okay?   First, the Hunter with colossus slayer (assuming Dex 16, Archery fighting style, and Longbow): vs. AC 13: 12 damage on hit, 21 damage on crit, 70% hit, 5% crit: 9.45 damage (12.25 damage with Hunter's Mark) vs. AC 15: 12 damage on hit, 21 damage on crit, 60% hit, 5% crit: 8.25 damage (10.7 damage with Hunter's Mark)   Then, the Beast Master with their companion using Help (assuming same stats): vs. AC 13: 7.5 damage on hit, 12 damage on crit, functionally 84% hit, 9.75% crit: 7.47 damage (11.09 with Hunter's Mark) vs. AC 15: 7.5 damage on hit, 12 damage on crit, functionally 78% hit, 9.75% crit: 7.02 damage (10.43 with Hunter's Mark)   So, the Beast Master is still dealing less damage than the Hunter, but far closer. I'm starting to think that the Exceptional Training feature could be moved up to the base companion. Then, when the ranger exchanges their attack for their beast's, it's a choice for more damage (with the giant poisonous snake topping things off with a wopping 21 potential damage, or something reasonable like a wolf's 9 and prone or a panther's 14 on a pounce).   This got me wondering if the companion's action could instead just be the Beast Master's bonus action. So I ran some numbers.   In the style of the DMG, which looks at damage over 3 rounds without factoring miss chance, I crunched the numbers on the damage capabilities of the barbarian, fighter, monk, and rogue; if not using their limited abilities, they fell between 11 and 7.5 (rogue was at 17!); if using their limited abilties in one fight (all of which are either 3/day or recharge on short rest, which are functionally the same with the recommended 6 encounters), their damage averaged 20.4.   So, I evaluated a Hunter Ranger using the Two Weapon Fighting style. They averaged 17.5 (even with the Rogue) and 21.2 if they used Hunter's mark (HM on first round, then second weapon attack in rounds 2 and 3); this fell right in with the Rogue's expected damage (the Assassin rogue doesn't have limited damage, but assassinate only works against creatures who haven't acted yet, so assuming that happens half the time seems fair to me).   Where does this leave our Beast Master? Well, lets imagine the Beast Master needs to use their Bonus Action to command their beast to take an action. This precludes the Beast Master from using two weapons, so I chose Dueling.   The beast master's base damage of 1d8+5 puts them at -8 damage compared to the Hunter (though they are getting +2 AC from a shield mind you, more on that later). If they use hunter's mark, they're at 1d8+5+1d6 which puts them ... 8 behind the hunter ranger using hunter's mark and two-weapon fighting. So we have an even 8 damage to compare against.   Well, if the ranger's companion deals 8 damage per round, then it'll be fair. A number of the CR 1/4 beasts deal damage in this vecinity; only the giant wolf spider (11.5) and giant poisonous snake (17!) stand out. Now, this requires dropping adding the Ranger's Proficiency Bonus to the pet's damage, but I think that's a fair price to pay for getting to have it act. A few pets would need to be rebalanced, but I don't think anyone would mind.   Either of these solutions helps to avoid the issue that comes up when the ranger needs to retreat (which is avoided normally if the DM pulls out of combat time during a chase sequence, but not if the retreat happens in combat).   Either of these solutions could work. I'm partial to the first, treating them like familiars, only because I like the companions having their own actions and I like the symetry within the system.   What do you think?
#2 Xeviat-DM Aug 28, 2015 3:08:40	I did say I'd address the issue of my second comparison having the beast master with +2 AC from a shield. I think this is balanced by the fact that the pet can be attacked and disabled, negating damage and class abilities from the Beast Master.   Additionally, I think the Ranger should have access to a revivify beasts spell at 1st level, so the choice becomes between dropping a hunter's mark or using magic to heal or revive the beast. Alternately, simply not rolling death saves for the beast and assuming it "feints" when dropped to 0 would be fair IMO.
#3 CCS Aug 28, 2015 6:31:20	I think the answer is even simpler: The animal the ranger attracts is a perfectly normal animal. The only thing that is different is that it always acts on the Rangers inititive, makes death saves, & the ranger player decides it's actions. The animal doesn't gain anything Stat wise & the ranger doesn't "give up" anything in some quest for "balance" And no, the ranger doesn't gain any extra magical power to keep the animal alive. (5e rangers can already choose to be casting Cure Wounds). So it's on the player to keep Fluffy alive in combat
(Reply to #3) Xeviat-DM	CCS wrote: