If Beast Master Rangers could use bonus actions to attack with their companion, what problems would occur?

Question

If a clause was added to Beast Master Rangers to allow them to spend a bonus action to have their companion to make a single attack after the ranger makes their own Attack action, what would the negative ramifications be?

My goal is to make the Beast Master (PHB, p. 93) on-par with the Xanathar's additions, which an overall consensus from the community is fairly clear that it is not.

Mechanically, I want this modification to play very similarly to dual wielding in terms of use, but I know that this does heavily change Beast Masters, and modifying the action economy without an expendable resource is a big deal.

Would this create a problem with Beast Master Rangers becoming too effective?

Answer 1

This is not overpowered and works fine

I have personally run for a Ranger PC who went with Beastmaster, and as the DM I ruled this very thing; the animal companion can act on the Ranger's turn as a bonus action rather than an action. It worked well and it didn't make the Ranger seem overpowered compared to the other PCs.

It allows the Ranger to still attack on their turn, but also allows the animal to do something as well, rather than one of them seeming useless. It does still have a cost, so if the Ranger wants to cast Hunter's Mark, they need to not have the animal attack that turn, or if the Ranger is a dual wielder, then they've still got to choose between their off-hand attack or the animal (in my case, the PC was an archer, so this didn't come up).

Indeed, compared to a Ranger who is dual wielding, there's little mechanical difference, since there's still 2 attacks being made (or 3 once the Ranger has Extra Attack at level 5). If compared to the Hunter archetype, with class features like Break the Horde, they get to make 2 attacks (or 3 with Extra Attack at level 5) with just their action, so they still get to use Hunter's Mark as well, all in one turn.

Like I said, this houserule for Beastmaster Rangers is exactly what I ruled when I was for a Ranger PC, and it seemed well balanced to me and the players, and this was all the way from 3rd level to something like 9th I think before that character met their end...

Answer 2

No, it doesn't overpower the ranger

The core PHB ranger is generally held to be the weakest class in the game, even by the designers; such is noted in the article which published the UA Revised Ranger:

Over the past year, you’ve seen us try a number of new approaches to the ranger, all aimed at addressing the class’s high levels of player dissatisfaction and its ranking as D&D’s weakest class by a significant margin.

So right from the off, you should understand the core ranger is acknowledged to be at a disadvantage in power compared to the game's other classes, to such an extent that relatively minor changes to the class almost certainly aren't going to be game-breaking.

Building from that base, Beastmaster Rangers are considered to be the weakest Ranger archetype (and by logical extrapolation therefore the weakest class you can play), in large part because their action economy is so awful (this article does a good job describing the flaws it has before going on to review the revised version).

Allowing the animal companion to attack with the ranger's bonus action is a considerably less powerful change than those implemented by the Beast Conclave ranger from the Revised Ranger Unearthed Arcana, which allows the animal companion to just act on its own initiative, as well as (from 5th level) attack on your turn by using its reaction.

If you don't want to entirely adopt the UA Revised Ranger, you can very easily allow the use of the Beast Conclave archetype instead of the standard Beast Master. That would be a more significant change than you're suggesting, but it wouldn't be unbalancing compared to other class's abilities, and nothing in the Beast Conclave archetype depends on the other changes introduced by the UA. I'd strongly suggest doing that over half-measures to patch the Beastmaster.

Answer 3

Yes, it is a bit too strong

You essentially gain the approximate benefits of a feat like Dual Wielder.

Two-Weapon Fighting

The light weapon limit to two-weapon fighting could essentially be bypassed with this system as you could use a higher damage weapon and still get an attack with your bonus action.

This is comparable to the weapon expansion portion of Dual Wielder.

Fighting Style

Also, to add the ability modifier to a second attack you would usually need to select the correct fighting style, but your variant ignores this.

This is comparable to the Armor Class portion of Dual Wielder. (A fighting style level benefit, i.e. the Defense Fighting Style)

Anything else?

The only other concern is that you could split up where you attack and have a hand free, but that will rarely be important.

Does Beastmaster Ranger deserve the benefit?

I am of the opinion that granting a free feat-level bonus to Beastmaster Ranger pushes it above the power level for the other classes.

If you treat your modified character as a dual-wielding fighter for analysis purposes, it deals comparable damage but trades (pre-level 10):

• An additonal fighting style
• Better weapon
• Out-of-combat options for a companion
• Favored Enemy
• Natural Explorer
• Primieval Awareness
• Spellcasting

For

• Action Surge
• Second Wind
• Indomitable
• Martial Archetype features

While the fighter is clearly better combat-wise, the ranger compares due to its out-of-combat utility. The free fighting style and better weapon option makes it too strong.

After level 10, ranger features becomes even better with their higher level spells and since travel is more important in later tiers when dealing with threats of greater magnitude (as evident by the appearance of spells like teleport). Getting one more attack and one more archetype feature for the fighter doesn't compensate.

Answer 4

You are assuming that the community is correct. This is called a Consensus Gentium Fallacy. Also, what does "on par" mean? Each sub-class provides a different tactical options for players. In this case I'll assume you mean combat effectiveness or damage. If that is the case then the sub-class is fine as is.

I'll add the following information to back my point that Beast Master is fine as is. A giant poisonous snake with a level 3 Beast Master gets the following: +8 to attack roll. 1d4+6 bite damage. 3d6 poison damage (DC 10 con save for 1/2). On average; 9 bite bite damage and 6-12 poison damage . 15 - 21 damage total. You can add in that it has blindsight and 10-foot reach.

If you allow the ranger to attack the you get to add an extra 8 damage (+3 Dex and rapier; have not added fighting style). If both the ranger and the beast attacked at level 3 then we're talking about doing 23-29 damage at level 3 as opposed to 15-21 damage from just the snake.

The beast does not use up spell slots to do this extra damage the way a paladin would use smite nor does it use up martial dice for effects like knockdown, nor does it need to spend 1 action to prepare poison on a weapon.

Here is a short list for other CR 1/4 creatures damage, abilities and tactics:

• Panther +6 to hit. 8 - 16 damage with possible knocked prone effect. (and has stealth to help gain surprise)
  Tactic: Ambush enemies and gain an effect on enemies.
• Wolf +6 to hit. 9 damage and has Pack Tactics and with a possible knocked-prone effect.
  Tactic: Used direct combat creature with an 2 effects.
• Giant Wolf Spider +5 to hit. 11 - 14 damage average with climbing (no check) speed of 40ft and +9 stealth.
  Tactic: fast moving, difficult terrain bypassing, great ambusher.
• Giant frog +5 to hit. 7dmg and enemy is restrained on a hit.
  Tactic: Effect on enemies, bypass difficult terrain, does extra dmg to small targets

In comparison:

• Gloom Stalker gains disguise self, Dread ambusher (1d8 + 1d8 +3 =12dmg average)and umbral sight.
• Horizon Walker gains Protection from good and Evil, Detect portal, Planar warrior (1d8 + 1d8 +3 =12 force dmg average total)
• Monster Slayer gains Protection from good and evil, Hunter's Sense, Slayer's Prey (1d6 + 1d8 +3 =11dmg average)

The choice of Beast for the Beast Master is probably the most important consideration and how the ranger will fight with his companion. If you are only interested in direct combat then there are some beasts you should not choose.