Slight buff/s to bm ranger?

[desero clades]

A player of mine is loving his ranger, but he kind of feels like hunters mark wasn't a great choice since his attacks are spilt between himself and his pet. How op would be to let his pet benefit from hunters mark as well?

[Wolfsraine]

A player of mine is loving his ranger, but he kind of feels like hunters mark wasn't a great choice since his attacks are spilt between himself and his pet. How op would be to let his pet benefit from hunters mark as well?

Not OP at all. I would urge you to just let him have it and try it out, if it's OP at your table you can figure out another alternative.

It's all going to depend on the players at your table. As long as everyone is having fun there shouldnt be any issues. My group for instance, let me give up my spellcasting, as a hunter ranger, in exchange for an animal companion with CR=1/2 my ranger level, which atm is 5. So I have a dire wolf that I can command as a bonus action on my turn. Worked out fine for us.

[jkat718]

Not OP at all. I would urge you to just let him have it and try it out, if it's OP at your table you can figure out another alternative.

It's all going to depend on the players at your table. As long as everyone is having fun there shouldnt be any issues. My group for instance, let me give up my spellcasting, as a hunter ranger, in exchange for an animal companion with CR=1/2 my ranger level, which atm is 5. So I have a dire wolf that I can command as a bonus action on my turn. Worked out fine for us.

If you want a WotC-designed spell-less Ranger, take a look at the latest Unearthed Arcana (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/modifying-classes). It gives you healing salves and BM maneuvers instead of spells, and gives some pretty decent summoning abilities to boot. Obviously, if you were just looking for a better Animal Companion, this isn't for you, but it might give you some ideas for what you could reasonably gain in place of some spell-related class features.

[Wolfsraine]

If you want a WotC-designed spell-less Ranger, take a look at the latest Unearthed Arcana (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/modifying-classes). It gives you healing salves and BM maneuvers instead of spells, and gives some pretty decent summoning abilities to boot. Obviously, if you were just looking for a better Animal Companion, this isn't for you, but it might give you some ideas for what you could reasonably gain in place of some spell-related class features.

Yea, that post is what sparked this idea. The DM and I figured giving up spells was huge, so I just got a beefier animal companion in place of spells. Working out fine so far, we'll see how it holds up over the next few sessions.

[Kryx]

Bonus action to command the companion is quite broken in terms of DPR. I would definitely not recommend it from a mathematical standpoint. Several posts around here discuss the math.

[Giant2005]

A player of mine is loving his ranger, but he kind of feels like hunters mark wasn't a great choice since his attacks are spilt between himself and his pet. How op would be to let his pet benefit from hunters mark as well?

I don't think that is OP at all really - you tend to do more DPR with Beast Bond than Hunter's Mark anyway. Hunter's Mark is only more useful against targets with really low AC and those targets tend to not need the extra damage nor warrant the wastage of a spell slot.

[Totema]

The Hunter's Mark houserule looks fine as is. Heck, I'd be inclined to add an additional function for Hunter rangers too, perhaps something that harkens back to the original function of favored enemies. But that's just thinking out loud. :smalltongue:

[Ardantis]

It's worth noting that eventually the Beast Master can share spells and cast Hunter's Mark on both himself and the beast- although it's at a prohibitively high level, 15 I think.

[Wolfsraine]

Bonus action to command the companion is quite broken in terms of DPR. I would definitely not recommend it from a mathematical standpoint. Several posts around here discuss the math.

I don't actually care about the math at all. That's why I urge people to try whatever it is they want to try. If it's broken or overpowered when put to use then do something about it.

[Kryx]

I don't actually care about the math at all.
The game is built and balanced on math. Ignoring it while making houserules is a recipe to unbalance the game.

Bm may be illogical, but it is balanced. There are several "fixes" around which make it more logical while mostly maintaining balance.

[Totema]

The game is built and balanced on math. Ignoring it while making houserules is a recipe to unbalance the game.

Bm may be illogical, but it is balanced. There are several "fixes" around which make it more logical while mostly maintaining balance.What would you say are the fixes that maintain the balance best?

[Kryx]

What would you say are the fixes that maintain the balance best?
The main issue with the companion is its relative squishiness imo. MelloRed on the wizards forums suggests to create a spell to resurrect the beast and to give the beast hit dice. See http://community.wizards.com/forum/rules-questions/threads/4187181
I think those are the best patches to the current system.

For fixing the illogical nature while keeping it balanced there aren't many options imo. I'm personally waiting on wizards to release their alternate version as they asked about it heavily in the last survey.
There are several threads about it. If you want a different version that is balanced search here, Reddit/r/dndnext, enworld, or the wizards forums.
I don't have any in mind and can't find them on mobile.

[Vortenger]

The proposed patch to BM Rangers in my game is granting the Share Spells feature at level 3 along with the companion, that way spells like Hunter's Mark never lose their value. In place of share spells, their high level ability is issuing any command as a bonus action, including attacks. This allows a BM ranger to keep pace with a Swift Quiver Hunter archer at similar levels for damage and attacks per round, and gives the companion an eventual near autonomy. So far it feels balanced, though the player and I have an agreement nixing Awaken on the beast for now.

[Ardantis]

That level 3 fix sounds about right, but making commands a bonus action wrecks dual-wielding for Beastmasters. There has to be a better way.

[Person_Man]

I'd be fine with giving a Beastmaster Ranger the Share Spells ability much earlier, as long as the player was willing to commit to strait Beastmaster, and wasn't dipping into it and then heading into a full caster class in order to set up some sort of Share Spells shenanigans.

Other buffs to consider (some of which are already considered RAI):

1) The Companion can use their Reaction to make an Opportunity Attack when it normally applies.

2) Your DM allows custom barding/armor for your Companion which pushes its AC higher, and grant the companion Proficiency in that barding/armor.

3) Your Companion can use/attune passive magic items (rings, amultets, etc), and your DM actually gives out enough magic items at higher levels that you have a few to use with your Companion.

4) The Companion can use the Multiattack ability when commanded to take the Attack Action (Giant Badger):

5) If the Companion has an attack that also inflicts a status effect or poison that requires a Saving Throw to effect the target, you add the Ranger's Proficiency Bonus to that Saving Throw, because you assume that it is a saving throw that it is proficient with (Giant Crab, Flying Snake, Giant Wolf Spider, Panther, Wolf); AND/OR

6) The Companion can and use their Bonus Action to use any special abilities/attacks they possess and could normally use (Panther).

7) If the Companion inflicts poison damage, you treat the it as a separate damage roll (allowing you to add your Proficiency bonus to the damage roll), and not a bonus to the initial bite damage (Flying Snake, Giant Wolf Spider).

8) If the Beastmaster is incapacitated or separated from his Companion, the DM determines what the Companion does, and the Companion generally acts in a reasonable manner (for its species and Intelligence). The Companion isn't a remote controlled robot or a mind controlled summons. It may Disengage to a safer position, or Attack the creature it attacked last turn, or protect its master, or try to Dodge, or whatever, but its unlikely to just stand still like a statue and do nothing.

8) Ordering the Companion to take the Attack Action counts as the Ranger himself taking the Attack Action for purposes of allowing Two Weapon Fighting (allowing the Ranger to use his Bonus Action to make an Attack) or anything else that explicitly requires the Attack Action to use (some Feats/abilities).

9) Let the Ranger choose (DM approved) alternate Companions that provide more interesting abilities, without increasing the overall damage output beyond what a normal Companion could do. This might include some Swarms, Monstrosities, etc.

[Vortenger]

Right, thanks, Person_Man. I forgot to mention we feel Share Spell applies only for Ranger spells, so that problem solves itself. As to dual wielding, yep. It doesn't mesh. The mechanic of primary attack, panther, panther, (bonus) off hand attack routines feels awkward enough that I'm not sure its much of a loss. Dual lance wielding is left to the bards and paladins, I suppose.

[Easy_Lee]

Right, thanks, Person_Man. I forgot to mention we feel Share Spell applies only for Ranger spells, so that problem solves itself. As to dual wielding, yep. It doesn't mesh. The mechanic of primary attack, panther, panther, (bonus) off hand attack routines feels awkward enough that I'm not sure its much of a loss. Dual lance wielding is left to the bards and paladins, I suppose.

It would be panther, panther, primary, bonus, but since the attack and command attack action just allow the attacks to occur, they can happen in any order.