Quote Originally Posted by noob View Post
Ranger's beasts are limited to the attack action.
Ranger's beasts wording is very different than this one. My point is no beast has multiple attacks; so the bit about the beast making more than 1 attack is nonsense.
And the ranger need to say to their pet to attack every round.
I believe the intent of the feat was to give a pet as much useless as the ranger one so it is normal if it does not multiattack nor do anything useful.
Tasha's beast pets don't have that bug in them.

There was like 1 or 2 pets you could cheese-optimize into being a better attack than the baseline ranger's attack. For most pets, it was a trap.

Don't replicate bad design? "You can do TRAP OPTION" once we know the option is a trap seems like a bad idea.
You need to wait for level 11 before your beast can multiattack as a ranger:

And level 11 unlocks should be outside of the effects of a feat else it is just a lame level 11 unlock.
Then remove stuff about letting the pet attack more than once.

Having low hd means the pet will be vulnerable to hd based effects so at the very least your pet should get virtual hd for the purpose of resisting such effects.
What HD based effects?

I'm serious. I don't know if there is one in 5e, and if there is, it is very obscure.

The 20 HD bit is just that the pet ends up being as tanky as the controller, or moreso (d10 HD, possibly decent con). One design problem with pets in a game like D&D is how to make them useful without outshining PCs.

Almost all of the "power budget" of this feat is sunk into "THAT IS A HUGE BAG OF HP". I'm not sure that is a great way to balance something like this.