But a ranger's animal companion doesn't need it
>When you Hunt Prey, your animal companion gains the action's benefits and your hunter's edge benefit if you have one.
Yeah, that is tucked away in the feat description for Animal Companion rather than being part of the general class features for Ranger.
Which also indicates that this only works for the Ranger's Animal Companion gotten with that feat. If you get your Animal Companion from other feats such as the Beastmaster Archetype, then that doesn't apply. Not sure if that is a bug or a feature.
Considering that there are other types of companions besides Animal Companion (Undead Companion, Construct Companion), I am leaning towards feature. Getting any Companion from an Archetype rather than from the Ranger class feat is intended to mean that you don't get to share your Hunter's Edge.
It is probably intended that only companions (Animal Companions) gained from Ranger class feat/features should work with Hunt Prey, however as a GM I would probably let it work despite that.
I mean especially if you're gaining access via a class feat to take a dedication. There's no good reason IMO that a ranger should have to take the animal companion feat from Ranger, if they also want to take the Cavalier or Beastmaster dedication, both of which give you an animal companion.
I mean especially if you're gaining access via a class feat to take a dedication. There's no good reason IMO that a ranger should have to take the animal companion feat from Ranger, if they also want to take the Cavalier or Beastmaster dedication, both of which give you an animal companion.
Is there also no good reason to question if the companion gets the Hunt Prey benefits if they are instead taking Clockwork Reanimator or Inventor with Construct Innovation Dedication from their Class feat slots?
It is a reasonable way to run the game. But I don't think the ruling is as far beyond question or reproach as you want to make it out to be.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean especially if you're gaining access via a class feat to take a dedication. There's no good reason IMO that a ranger should have to take the animal companion feat from Ranger, if they also want to take the Cavalier or Beastmaster dedication, both of which give you an animal companion.Is there also no good reason to question if the companion gets the Hunt Prey benefits if they are instead taking Clockwork Reanimator or Inventor with Construct Innovation Dedication from their Class feat slots?
It is a reasonable way to run the game. But I don't think the ruling is as far beyond question or reproach as you want to make it out to be.
Sorry, what I provided were examples, but not exhaustive. As a GM, I would absolutely allow those dedications to also extend the Hunt Prey benefits to those companions. In theory, all companions are supposed to be roughly the same power level. And especially at higher levels, companions tend not to be very valuable. If someone is set on having a companion in the first place, I'd rather not make the companion worse when there's a semi-reasonable argument that they should have it.
Now, if companions ever got "better" then I might change my mind. But honestly companions have a somewhat narrow window of being "good" choices and are more often a thematic choice than an effective one.
As a GM, I would absolutely allow those dedications to also extend the Hunt Prey benefits to those companions.
That makes the ruling feel a lot better.
Otherwise the inconsistency feels bad: Well, since you got an Animal Companion from Beastmaster, you can share your Hunt Prey benefit since it is an animal. But if you take Clockwork Reanimator, then you don't have an Animal Companion, so the rule doesn't apply.
Now, if companions ever got "better" then I might change my mind. But honestly companions have a somewhat narrow window of being "good" choices and are more often a thematic choice than an effective one.
My thought on that is that allowing the interaction isn't really helping the problem. If the problem is that Companions at high level aren't working, then they need buffed for all characters, not just Ranger characters. Especially not with a buff that probably won't make much difference to solve the problems that Animal Companions face (survivability).
As a GM, I would absolutely allow those dedications to also extend the Hunt Prey benefits to those companions.That makes the ruling feel a lot better.
Otherwise the inconsistency feels bad: Well, since you got an Animal Companion from Beastmaster, you can share your Hunt Prey benefit since it is an animal. But if you take Clockwork Reanimator, then you don't have an Animal Companion, so the rule doesn't apply.
Now, if companions ever got "better" then I might change my mind. But honestly companions have a somewhat narrow window of being "good" choices and are more often a thematic choice than an effective one.My thought on that is that allowing the interaction isn't really helping the problem. If the problem is that Companions at high level aren't working, then they need buffed for all characters, not just Ranger characters. Especially not with a buff that probably won't make much difference to solve the problems that Animal Companions face (survivability).
Yeah, sorry for the confusion. I don't know all the sources one might gain a companion from, so I just listed the couple examples I knew off the top. I understand why you had to question whether I was separating different kinds of companions though.
As to the other issue, I agree companion could use some kind of rework, but it's a tricky balance making sure they don't even come close to outshining a PC but also are worth it. You're right that Hunt Prey benefits don't really do a lot to shore it up, but it's an easy thing for me to say "yeah, let's do that".
To your point though, if we gave companions much better survivability (I don't care how you justify it, but if you gave companions the Saves and AC of their master like familiars get I feel like that's a great solution) then that would help at least keep them from being a liability in a fight.
Ranger's being able to grant Hunt Prey benefits is really marginal. That they can grant hunter's edge does matter, but the utility varies widely. Since flurry ranger's get feats to add many additional attacks they can utilize it, but companions don't get the same action compression. And the companion itself starts to take actions from the ranger to enable multiple companion attacks to benefit from Flurry Edge. And don't get me started on Outwit rangers, thematic but mostly useless. Honestly, Precision ranger is probably the one best suited to use an animal companion (due to not needing to attack as many times) and because the Precision Edge benefit also works better than the others with a companion.
But a ranger's animal companion doesn't need it
>When you Hunt Prey, your animal companion gains the action's benefits and your hunter's edge benefit if you have one.
Yeah, that is tucked away in the feat description for Animal Companion rather than being part of the general class features for Ranger.
Which also indicates that this only works for the Ranger's Animal Companion gotten with that feat. If you get your Animal Companion from other feats such as the Beastmaster Archetype, then that doesn't apply. Not sure if that is a bug or a feature.
Considering that there are other types of companions besides Animal Companion (Undead Companion, Construct Companion), I am leaning towards feature. Getting any Companion from an Archetype rather than from the Ranger class feat is intended to mean that you don't get to share your Hunter's Edge.
It prob was/is intentional since Ranger even had different rules for Mature animal companion, they could only Stride toward or Strike your prey before the remaster.