Drakewarden: powerful & even overtuned frontloaded?

[Waazraath]

I was looking at the Drakewarden (ranger) subclass from Fizban's, and I noticed that, without any optimization (other than 'put your highest ability score in your main attack stat') it was very, very powerful, especially at the lower levels, compared to other rangers and also other classes.

Lets start with a very basic lvl 3 drakewarden. Race unspecified, Str 16, dex 14 (rest whatever), sword & board, dueling fighting style. We have an AC 18, basic +5 (1d8+5) martial at level 3 (without spending resources). But then we add the subclass: add 1d6 damage (drake reaction), add another attack at +3 (1d6+2). Assuming all hits, that's 18.5 damage without spending resources. Since the Drakewarden needs the bonus action to make the drake attack, there is no room for Hunter's mark, but, with Tasha's ACF Favoured Foe you can do an extra 1d4 1/round without having to spend an action. This boosts damage to 21.

This is very, very nice at level 3, and additionally, the drake is an extra 20 hp, another body to use in positioning.

Similar Ranger builds with othere subclass don't get close (all assuming 1d8 weapon sword & board). Horizon walker does 1d8+5+1d8 (14 damage) without resources, 16.5 with FF; Monster Slayer 13, 15.5 with FF; Fey Wanderer can get to 12, but it has room for Hunter's mark so also can get to 15.5 when spending resources; Swarm Keeper end up with 13, but has room for hunter's mark for 16.5, and adds a nice rider effect. I'll ignore Beast Master. Hunter is difficult, cause it has several options for damage boosting at level 3, but all are situational. The 1d8 extra against large creatures is easiest to compare (and if falls quite short to the Drake Warden), while the other options are far more difficult to asess since they give an extra attack (very powerful) but this really depends on the campaign how often this occurs. The only class that really seems to keep up on damage without relaying on a situational feature is the Gloom Stalker, imo the most powerful Ranger subclass by quite a margin. If a similar build Gloom Stalker attacks 2 times in turn 1, that's 2x (1d8 +5) +4.5 = 23.5, and since both attacks can be upgraded with HM, it can get to 30.5! But, that's of course only for 1 turn, after that damage falls back to 13. If combat lasts more than 2 rounds, the Drakewarden will outpace the Gloom Stalker.

All of the above was about lvl 3, but when we look at levels higher than 3, it stays on top. Most Ranger classes won't get more damage upgrades, unless from spells (which has the Drakewarden as well), or very slowly (the extra 1d8 from Horizon Walker at lvl 11, or the 1d6 from Swarm Keeper becoming 1d8). Drakewarden gets 2d6 extra over the levels on the drake's attack - while not enormous, damage will continue to be highest.

When we compare to other classes, Drakewarden continues to perform exceptionally well. At level 3, a EB warlock does 1d10 + 1d6 +3 = 12 damage; A rogue 1d8 +2d6 +3 = 14.5; a Champion fighter, errr.... 1d8 + 5 with a little bit of extra from the increased crit range and 1/short rest 2x(1d8+5). A totem barbarian with a greatsword does 12 damage when raging, and with vhuman and -5/+10 feat do 22 for the same 'to hit' (+/-) when reckless attacking but that's with using a specific race to get a high power feat, with sacrifising AC which is much lower to begin with compared to Drakewarden and by using a very limited resource (rage).

At this level, you probably need quite specific builds to touch Drakewarden's damage, especially in melee: stuff like monk with unarmed fighting (fighting style feat) and spending all ki in flurry, for regular 3x(1d8+5), or raging Berserker Barbarian with GWM for 2x(2d6 + 15).

Of course at higher levels other classes creep closer and overtake the Drakewarden (easily, with staple builds like barbarians with PAM/GWM, or Fighter BM crossbow archers with SS and CBE). But Drakewarden will still do respectable damage, which can be increased with e.g. spending spell slots on summons.

Counterpoint that I should mention btw is that the Drake Warden's second attack (made by the drake) is only +3 (instead of +5); this lowers damage slightly which isn't part of the numbers shown above - how much depending on the AC of the enemy, but while in general making the damage numbers a bit lower I don't think it alters the overall picture.

Additionally: all the above is only about combat. Additionally, it can choose to spend spell slots on either utility, stealth or healing, depending on what the party needs, and almost all ASI's and the race are free - use those to get whatever abilities seem fun, or useful for the party.



tl;dr - versatile subclass, gives relative high damage without hardly any investment and while being able to keep a relative high AC, and with a bunch of extra features through a permanent companion and spells (which are not or hardly needed for combat). Optimization wise the subclass has an extremely high floor.

[Leon]

Ie what the Beastmaster should have been from the start.

[stoutstien]

It does oh so very slightly more than a battle Smith which is consistent but hardly out of line.

It's also not resource free. Yeah you get it one time for free but every time after that cost you a spell slot so you have to take that in to consideration. It's decently hearty but 15 HP and 16 AC isn't exactly hard to chew through.

I found that a good portion of the time they end up dodging, which while extremely useful for the entire parties, does decrease their output by a significant margin.

Overall it's a solid 8/10. It's a pet class that doesn't a way that's not annoying and has enough "cool" things to differentiate them from other pet classes and/or rangers. I wish for the later class feature to have more flexibility so they don't have to get bigger and fly if they don't want to and instead they can choose a different path but it's a pretty minor quibble.

[RogueJK]

It does oh so very slightly more than a battle Smith which is consistent but hardly out of line.


Agreed. I don't think the Drakewarden is anywhere near "overtuned". I actually think it's just about right. Good, but not head-and-shoulders above the competition.

In my experience, the Drakewarden doesn't really outpace the Battle Smith or the TCoE Beastmaster. Each of these three pets are around the same power level, with each being slightly better in different ways:

Drake Companion: 1x rotatable elemental immunity, added reaction damage, slightly higher AC, can speak, quicker resummoning (Action instead of 1 minute), attack bonus doesn't rely on PC's spellcasting stat, can be ridden by anyone starting at Level 7, eventually becomes flying mount at Level 15.

Steel Companion: Force damage from the start so can bypass B/P/S resistance before Level 7, self-healing and can be healed with a cantrip, slightly higher attack bonus than Drake with 18-20 INT, defensive reaction, 3x condition immunities, can be ridden by a Small PC from Level 3.

TCoE Beast Companion: Can fly from Level 3 (Air), can be ridden by a Small PC from Level 3 (Land or Sea), slightly better saves (adding PB to all instead of just 2), slightly higher damage, slightly higher attack bonus than Drake with 18-20 WIS, eventually shares spells at Level 15, and acts during the PC's turn instead of after so it makes the best option for a mount RAW.


And while the Battle Smith has arguably the weakest of the three pets in combat as far as pure damage output numbers, I think the Battle Smith is still the most powerful of the "pet" subclasses, due to being able to be INT-SAD (scaling both your own and your companion's attacks), having a slightly better spell list overall, and having access to Infusions.

Yes, a Drakewarden or Beastmaster could also be WIS-SAD, but you have to jump through some hoops to get there, and the resulting WIS-SAD build won't be as effective as the INT-SAD Battle Smith.

[strangebloke]

I'll agree with what RogueJK and stoutstein said. Its not head and shoulders above the other pet classes, but I think that's sort of underselling it.

Pet classes in general are super strong. At the most basic level, they just add a lot of HP to the party and effectively act like a relatively efficient summon. Even though they come with restrictions on their action usage, they add a lot of HP and generally have no restrictions on their reactions. At the more cheesy level, the pet totally can attune to magic items if you have extras. Drake with a wand of magic missiles, anyone?

Among pet classes, the drake is a bruiser. Relatively high AC (17 at level 5!) and one of the more permissive mechanics for bringing it back. Only costs a first level spell and you get a free summon. Meaning that you can let the drake die 1/day with literally no downside most of the time. You can also tailor it to resist elemental damage, or target damage vulnerability (though that's more rare) The drake is also able to add damage to the main character with reactions regardless of whether you have it attack or give it an OA opportunity.

And then you get a fireball and a flying mount at higher levels and something like uncanny dodge at high levels. That's just very strong, I don't think there's room for reasonable disagreement about that.

So drakewarden is very good but it doesn't get bonus spells known and the drake can't self-heal and even some of the non-pet ranger subclasses like gloomstalker and hunter are arguably about as good. Battlesmith and beastmaster are also very good.

Drakewarden is very good, but its got competition.

[RogueJK]

and effectively act like a relatively efficient summon

Yep. All three are effectively a powerful "Level 1 Summon Spell", with a long duration, no Concentration, and a free casting per day.

(It's a nice complement to not being able to take advantage of Hunter's Mark, since the Level 1 slots you'd otherwise be spending on HM are going to need to be reserved for bringing your Companion back.)

[Amnestic]

An added benefit: The drakewarden Infused Strike reaction isn't just for the Ranger's attacks, it's for any ally that the drake can see within 30ft of them.

The range requirement means that if the ranger is a ranged DPS, they might need to adjust where they're standing to take advantage of it, but the "any ally" can greatly increases the chance it activates each round, from 1-2 chances (from the ranger's extra attack) to potentially many more depending on your party composition (monk with flurry of blows? yes please!). This also means that if the Ranger spends their Action on casting a spell or doing something else that needs to be done, they don't (necessarily) lose the Infused Strikes damage too.

It does get turned off by anything that blinds the drake though, something to bear in mind.

[Oramac]

I played a Str Drakewarden with a greatsword from 3rd to 15th level. It was loads of fun, and never felt left behind by the other classes at the table.

Truly, it's what the Beast Master should have been from the beginning.

[Witty Username]

All martials are significantly frontloaded and for the most part overtuned at early levels because of it. It is not really until 6th level until progression starts to slow down and the classes are more or less in parity.

[Psyren]

I really like Drakewarden, but it could have used another pass in the editing room. Can other creatures besides you use it as a mount? If you rule yes, can they fly on it sooner than you can? Does the Magic Fang ability turn its entire bite attack magical, or just the extra 1d6? I know how I'd rule on all of these, but it isn't totally clear. And using it as a mount can be a bit clunky when it can only act after my turn.

The biggest benefit to Drakewarden imo is that it doesn't need you to pump your Wisdom to keep scaling, because its attack scales passively with your PB rather than needing to be reliant on your Wis. It also gets a dramatic boost at 15th when you can ride it, so in high level campaigns it might pull slightly ahead of the Tasha BM in terms of utiity and damage. So while it does less damage overall than the BM pet, because you can focus on Str or Dex without it falling behind, in concert the two of you usually end up dealing at least comparable damage because you can focus on your primary stat. (Ideally you want some Wis for the breath weapon, but that is clunky to use too since it eats your attacks.)

With that said, keep in mind though that at this same high level, the BM can slap a powerful buff like Guardian of Nature on both themselves and their companion, and have both them and the companion attack that same turn too by giving up one of their attacks.

Overall, in spite of my niggles Drakewarden is still a very effective subclass - for me though I rank it ever so slightly below Tasha BM.

[Waazraath]

@Psyren: I ignored both beastmasters indeed, so could be that with Tasha's version I missed a comparable subclass
@Witty Username: I agree with the sentiment, though might best not to delve into that too far, cause discussions on those topics tend to derail =| Thing is though, I think Drakewarden is even more frontloaded than most.
@everybody who compares it to other summon classes (Tasha's beastmaster and Battle Smith): as said I didn't look at Tasha's Beast Master, but the Battle Smith more or less strenghtens my point: because Battle Smith is by far the best subclass for Arteficer, with only the artillerist being close (and that mainly due it's crazy temp HP shtick). So I agree with strangebloke that this only means that all these classes are above par.


Which brings me to the question: are the summon pet subclasses out of line, or just good? Cause as I've shown at least for the Drakewarden in the post above, it has:
- above average dam and good defense without optimization;
- gives a large blob of extra hp;
- and given that damage comes from the pet, allows spell slots and ASI's to be used for other stuff.

[stoutstien]

Eh I think the integral pet classes are mostly okay and don't have nearly the issues that the second tier minion army makers have.

Thing about the pet classes is once they figured out the scaling issue they've pretty much nailed it down into a nice little package but when you have things converting spells into massive action pools or hordes or easily replace bodies then issues ensue. Single extra summons or bodies have never been an issue IMO and the ones that are built in even less so because they've been properly budgeted. The fact that they are working at intended without needing extensive system Mastery or specific optimization is a sign of good design rather than bad.
*This is actually my big hang up with the player handbook BM. By the Numbers it's actually pretty solid it just took a very good eye to pick the proper features to make it work.*

You could actually take the basic formula that come up with for built-in pets and transfer it to just about any of the non-full casting classes and be fine. I'm actually working on this myself for my system where it's a "partial" class for lack of a better terms.

*Side note the artillerist is actually very good even without the THP spam. The only thing it suffers with is weird wording with the actual cannons and awkward application of uptime.*

[strangebloke]

Which brings me to the question: are the summon pet subclasses out of line, or just good? Cause as I've shown at least for the Drakewarden in the post above, it has:
- above average dam and good defense without optimization;
- gives a large blob of extra hp;
- and given that damage comes from the pet, allows spell slots and ASI's to be used for other stuff.
I would tend to say its a wash.

The good ranger subclasses either focus on minions or damage. Gloomstalker and hunter are damage focused, Beast and drake (and eventually fey) are minion focused. Drakewarden's pet is tougher and more efficient, but has lower utility until high levels. Can't serve as a mount, for one. Damage is good, but fey and beast get more spell coverage.

Overall I'd probably prefer drakewarden to beastmaster but it comes down to preference and conditions of play. It's like Rime's Binding Ice vs. Shatter. IMO RBI is really good, one of the better second level spells, but the gap isn't massive. You could probably call Drakewarden overtuned but not by much. There's legit non-flavor reasons to prefer other minion-focused ranger subclasses.

Eh I think the integral pet classes are mostly okay and don't have nearly the issues that the second tier minion army makers have.

Thing about the pet classes is once they figured out the scaling issue they've pretty much nailed it down into a nice little package but when you have things converting spells into massive action pools or hordes or easily replace bodies then issues ensue. Single extra summons or bodies have never been an issue IMO and the ones that are built in even less so because they've been properly budgeted. The fact that they are working at intended without needing extensive system Mastery or specific optimization is a sign of good design rather than bad.
*This is actually my big hang up with the player handbook BM. By the Numbers it's actually pretty solid it just took a very good eye to pick the proper features to make it work.*

You could actually take the basic formula that come up with for built-in pets and transfer it to just about any of the non-full casting classes and be fine. I'm actually working on this myself for my system where it's a "partial" class for lack of a better terms.

*Side note the artillerist is actually very good even without the THP spam. The only thing it suffers with is weird wording with the actual cannons and awkward application of uptime.*

I'd still feel very comfortable calling pet classes strong, they're just strong in a boring way - taking hits for the party. The way that most games in 5e go, people rarely get pushed all that hard so this isn't normally relevant and isn't really 'priced in' to the class as designed, at least imo. Way more people would be prioritizing inspiring leader lol.

Granted having a pet isn't ultimately a lot stronger than just being a really tough character (like a twilight cleric or an EK) but.... that's pretty good!

[stoutstien]

Pet classes are strong in a fairly linear fashion which is never going to be "broken" IMO. Its predicable and adjustable easily because it's all out there

*IL is top 5 feats at my table. Only stop seeing it if there is one of the 3 class options that match it*

[Quietus]

The thing with pet classes is that they seem strong at first because they have a high floor - particularly when they aren't tied to a stat for their attack, like the drakewarden. You'll always have basic attacks + pet attacks, and that's always just good. In a no-feats or low-optimization campaign, they will feel great.

In a high optimization campaign? They can get left behind. As soon as other subclasses start taking feats that give bonus action attacks, or increase the damage with their basic attacks, that gap closes fast.

I had a great time with a beastmaster ranger - but I was rolling with a mid to high OP team. I couldn't keep up with the damage output of the swashbuckler/samurai with a 27 str belt and a sunblade, but I never felt like I was failing to contribute. If someone showed up with a rogue who wasn't making off turn attacks with powerful magic items, they would have definitely felt left behind. The other ranger (swarm master) in the party was a tabaxi speed demon, and thank goodness for that, because even though they had sharpshooter, they almost never used it, and as such always felt less powerful than I did.

[Psyren]

I can't think of many builds that could keep up with a 27 Str Fighter with a Sunblade. At that point the DM should probably have been giving both you and your pet additional magic items to compensate.

[Witty Username]

Thing is though, I think Drakewarden is even more frontloaded than most.


That is probably true (I need to check my fizban's again to be sure), however, there is the ecosystem to consider. The ranger tends to have a slow front compared to other classes. The subclasses past the PHB all try to reduce this problem, and so are more frontloaded in comparison to the phb subclasses and the subclasses of other classes.
The short version, its probably fine, ranger is considered one of the weaker classes, a strong subclass is unlikely to be a serious issue..

[Dork_Forge]

I think Drakewarden is a top tier Ranger subclass, competing with Gloom Stalker which is the best imo, and I think a DW Ranger holds up in pretty much any game, even high OP ones where you'd get to leverage the cheap resummon in comparison to Beast Master.

I love the idea of buffing the drake with Longstrider and Aid and then just speeding around the battlefield on your scaley moped of death.

[strangebloke]

The thing with pet classes is that they seem strong at first because they have a high floor - particularly when they aren't tied to a stat for their attack, like the drakewarden. You'll always have basic attacks + pet attacks, and that's always just good. In a no-feats or low-optimization campaign, they will feel great.

In a high optimization campaign? They can get left behind. As soon as other subclasses start taking feats that give bonus action attacks, or increase the damage with their basic attacks, that gap closes fast.

I had a great time with a beastmaster ranger - but I was rolling with a mid to high OP team. I couldn't keep up with the damage output of the swashbuckler/samurai with a 27 str belt and a sunblade, but I never felt like I was failing to contribute. If someone showed up with a rogue who wasn't making off turn attacks with powerful magic items, they would have definitely felt left behind. The other ranger (swarm master) in the party was a tabaxi speed demon, and thank goodness for that, because even though they had sharpshooter, they almost never used it, and as such always felt less powerful than I did.

Yeah I mean, a drakewarden isn't keeping up with a hunter or gloomstalker for single target damage, but "high damage" is not the end-all of optimization. Ultimately the ability to deal 20% single target damage more in a burst turn is actually somewhat trivial. Consider Conjure Animals or the Drakewarden's fireball. These abilities deal a lot of damage! And the drake is a tank as well and eats a lot of damage for the party, and can get OAs for 6d6 total damage a turn!

It's pretty good!

[Psyren]

The drake being stat-agnostic can be a bit of a double-edged sword. Sure, it scaling only with PB means you can safely dump Wis and still have a strong pet with an attack bonus of 3+PB and damage of 1d6+PB (and then 2d6+PB, and eventually 3d6+PB) damage. Even at high levels, 3d6+PB resourceless damage with your bonus action is excellent, and being able to be a low-Wis ranger also enables quite a few builds that would hurt other Rangers to try. But with the TBM, all you need is 16 Wis to match that attack bonus, which isn't hard for most Rangers to get; and even if you never increase it for the rest of your career, the Primal Companion has achieved parity with the same 3+PB to hit. Moreover, if you are able to increase it to 20 later on you've now gone up to 5+PB - which can go even higher if you're able to increase your Wisdom or your spell attack bonus further via means like magic items or boons. And either way. the damage scales up to 2d8+4+(2*PB) with your bonus action for a land beast, not counting the added damage from Charge. Even if you stick with the weaker Sky Beast for a flying pet, 2d4+6+(2*PB) remains pretty comparable to 3d6+PB from a pure damage-with-your-bonus-action standpoint.

Moreover, because your spell attack will be decent anyway on a TBM, that allows you to benefit from other spells that use your spell attack, like Summon Beast or Summon Fey. Even when these summons do not deal magical damage themselves, they're still noticeable additions to your overall DPR. (Sure, they can't compete with Conjure Animals in a lot of fights, but CA sucks to use at a lot of tables anyway no matter how effective it is.)

Because of the above I see TBM as having a slightly lower floor, but a higher ceiling overall. And that plus a couple of other things like acting on your turn instead of after it, the share spells capstone to double some of your powerful buffs like Guardian of Nature, and having the flexibility of how you make it attack (see below), are what cause me to rank the TBM slightly higher than the DW.

Perhaps my favorite aspect of the TBM is the ability you get to command your beast to attack by giving up one of yours. This lowers your overall damage output but is useful if you need your bonus action for something crucial, like the aforementioned Guardian of Nature at the start of a fight, or using Zephyr Strike or Ashardlon's Stride or a BA teleport like Misty Step/Fey Step to safely extract yourself from melee.


Overall I think the Drake chassis is stronger, especially as a tank - with higher AC, and the ability to fly at 7 without dropping down to a weaker Sky form with less HP. I'd be happy to play both subclasses, but TBM gets the edge for these reasons.

[Ir0ns0ul]

Amazing observation. Important to note that your Drake can also contribute big time to your party members, let’s say you have a Rogue (it’s an additional ally to help enable SA) or even a Sentinel Fighter.

What I really like about pets is that you can cast good spells that requires an action without hurting your DPR so much. So you can cast Entangle and still command your pet to attack, hopefully with advantage. You can cast Silence to shut down an enemy spellcaster and still cause some damage with your Drake, this is quite nice.

Just an additional advice: I got frustrated sometimes because we all know pets accuracy is not that good, even for BMs whom actually invested in WIS. Two good solutions that I saw recently were: try to get Bless somehow (multiclassing Cleric, Fey Touched, etc) and/or Peace Cleric’s Emboldening Bond. Whether you multiclassing or if you have someone in the party. Every time a friend says he pretends to be a Peace Cleric I got happy because I know the effectiveness of my pets will increase a lot.

[Quietus]

The drake being stat-agnostic can be a bit of a double-edged sword. Sure, it scaling only with PB means you can safely dump Wis and still have a strong pet with an attack bonus of 3+PB and damage of 1d6+PB (and then 2d6+PB, and eventually 3d6+PB) damage. Even at high levels, 3d6+PB resourceless damage with your bonus action is excellent, and being able to be a low-Wis ranger also enables quite a few builds that would hurt other Rangers to try. But with the TBM, all you need is 16 Wis to match that attack bonus, which isn't hard for most Rangers to get; and even if you never increase it for the rest of your career, the Primal Companion has achieved parity with the same 3+PB to hit. Moreover, if you are able to increase it to 20 later on you've now gone up to 5+PB - which can go even higher if you're able to increase your Wisdom or your spell attack bonus further via means like magic items or boons. And either way. the damage scales up to 2d8+4+(2*PB) with your bonus action for a land beast, not counting the added damage from Charge. Even if you stick with the weaker Sky Beast for a flying pet, 2d4+6+(2*PB) remains pretty comparable to 3d6+PB from a pure damage-with-your-bonus-action standpoint.

Moreover, because your spell attack will be decent anyway on a TBM, that allows you to benefit from other spells that use your spell attack, like Summon Beast or Summon Fey. Even when these summons do not deal magical damage themselves, they're still noticeable additions to your overall DPR. (Sure, they can't compete with Conjure Animals in a lot of fights, but CA sucks to use at a lot of tables anyway no matter how effective it is.)

Because of the above I see TBM as having a slightly lower floor, but a higher ceiling overall. And that plus a couple of other things like acting on your turn instead of after it, the share spells capstone to double some of your powerful buffs like Guardian of Nature, and having the flexibility of how you make it attack (see below), are what cause me to rank the TBM slightly higher than the DW.

Perhaps my favorite aspect of the TBM is the ability you get to command your beast to attack by giving up one of yours. This lowers your overall damage output but is useful if you need your bonus action for something crucial, like the aforementioned Guardian of Nature at the start of a fight, or using Zephyr Strike or Ashardlon's Stride or a BA teleport like Misty Step/Fey Step to safely extract yourself from melee.


Overall I think the Drake chassis is stronger, especially as a tank - with higher AC, and the ability to fly at 7 without dropping down to a weaker Sky form with less HP. I'd be happy to play both subclasses, but TBM gets the edge for these reasons.

These are all things that people missed about beastmasters. In my case, it was Adventurer's League, and we happened to find a staff of power very early on (multiclassed sorc1 to enable it and bring a couple new tricks, mostly Shield). I didn't use it as a power item for most of my advancement, because it didn't feel good to 'turn off' encounters with it, but the +2 to spell attacks (and defenses) was incredible when I rolled out with my beast, a summoned creature, and eventually planned on replacing basic attacks with Produce Flame and Primal Savagery. The plan was, once I transitioned to using cantrips, to switch to dual wielding the staff with a +2 moon sickle. Max wis+prof+4 on all attacks, and eventually Shared Spells to duplicate those cantrips, would have made for a very powerful build.

Would have worked without the staff of power/sorc multiclass, too, but I loved the idea of casting Shield and using Share Spells to enhance my beast's AC to 23.

[RazorChain]

My daughter was playing a Deep Gnome Drakewarden, things started to get a little crazy at level 5 when she started summoning beast as well. She just stayed ranged with her sharpshooting feat and archery fighting style, sending her drake to tank and in tougher fights summoning beast, most often a flying beast with flyby. She just had no qualms sacrificing it in fights....as it just went back to it's pokeball and she could just summon it again.