Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Minionmancy?


Pathfinder Online

Goblin Squad Member

So, having thought about something posted (specifically, this post about raising some skeletons and dressing them in a quite fetching bow-tie and top hat combination), I have to ask: is minionmancy going to be doable/viable?

Meaning, specifically, will there be the possibility of necromancers running about, reanimating corpses at the cost of onyx, crafters making golems, and druids catching ALL the dinosaurs*?

And, if so, will the minions count as part of the character in question for gaining things such as bounties, losing reputation, and so on?

*May be an exaggeration, but one that would be quite amusing

Goblin Squad Member

I've always thought it was fertile ground for character design and development. As an extension of the idea, I think soldiers should have a skill for leading NPC soldier since I don't see the game developing a large enough population of dedicated soldiers to make the profession viable for years.

The evil mastermind and his armies of minions is an interesting character to play, and it should not be contingent on other players following you to play such a character.

Goblin Squad Member

OMG!

I would absolutely love it if GW implemented a good pet system! It is one of the most important aspects of choosing a game in my mind. The last great one I played with a superb pet system was SWG,Diablo 2, and the original torchlight. Unfortunately, they ruined SWG, and with the sequals they got rid of having armies of pets :(

But honestly if they would make that happen I would love them forever.

On a side not though, aside from directly controlled pets (summoned/ tamed/ gifted) I would love to see if they could implement a NPC diplomatic system (similar to what Vanguard was trying to do). It would be awesome if you could train in diplomatic skills so you could talk your way out of fights, or steal from NPC's without killing them. Or befriend NPC's who could help you out if you are running away from people chasing you, or in general having an alternative to killing every NPC that fights with you. If you could almost kill an enemy and offer it the choice of working for you or being dead like usual, that would be amazing!

Of course, as I write this I understand that this is all a pipe dream. There is a reason good pet systems and expansive NPC engagement options are not more ubiquitous, it is very hard to make them (as it all has to be programmed) the inherent balancing issues with having armies of minions and of course the fact that this game is taking a new direction of trying to be entirely player driven and operated.

Still, if there was any hope for this (expansive pet system and/or advanced NPC engagement) even if it is very far in the future way after release, please tell me!

Goblin Squad Member

I sincerely hope that Necromancers are not limited to a single effective "pet" with the occasional summoning of a small group of minions. I think it would be truly epic to be able to raise a literal army.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
I sincerely hope that Necromancers are not limited to a single effective "pet" with the occasional summoning of a small group of minions. I think it would be truly epic to be able to raise a literal army.

Indeed, that is one of the reasons I brought this up. Minionmancy is needed! Let us swarm our foes with bodies, even vastly weaker ones! We have reserves!

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

One scene that always sticks in my mind when thinking of epic battles is the battle at the beginning of Dragon Age Origins. As the darkspawn close the first thing they do is loose thier arrows, then send in the hounds, and finally charge in themselves.

I would really like to see a cool pet system. It would be pretty awesome to loose our war hounds against hordes of necromancer controlled undead.

There needs to be limitations on this or at a certain point it will devolve into Minion-Master Online though. I think there should be a limit on what you can control based on leadership/handle animal type skills and it should require some pretty long training times to advance those skills.

There should be two types of pets. Ones bound to your character that can be ressurected if they die but consume skill slots. For instance a ranger or druid's wolf companion might take up a passive and a refresh slot.

The other are trained pets. When they die they are dead. This means either they are gone for good or you might be able to ressurect them at great expense. These kind of pets take considerable time/expense to train up but do not require your character give up skill slots to control them.

The balance needs to be such that building an force of player controlled NPCs is an effective tactic in major battles but not an "I win" card that allows you to overcome large formations of well organized, trained, and equipped players with just a few players who sit around raising corpses or training hounds all week.

Goblin Squad Member

I actually think that balancing will be inherent. The more time you spend on gaining skills that allow you to have higher pet counts, better pets, or a combination of the two will be less time getting your character up.

I.e. Your character will be weaker when surrounded by an army of minions. If they can take you out, then chances are your pets will flee without their fearless leader (haha)

Personally, I think all pets should be "trained" (I think it should be tamed). Every NPC should have the opportunity to die, there should always be a risk in taming a drake (spending hours instead of using the time to tame/summon easier creatures like bunnies ) and having it die if you are not too careful. It would inherently balance pet users, though it will probably piss them off and keep the people playing them low as well.

Once again though, while I would love to see this, <b> I still think it is a pipe dream! </b> Unless we can get some massive support behind a pet system. They are hard to make...

Osirion Goblin Squad Member

I like the idea of proper necromancy being included too -- I like fighting undead and I like commanding them -- but let's recall that there is a max number of undead a single caster can keep control of at any given time. Animating more would turn previous animates loose. If that happens, a caster should remain responsible for what those undead do even if they no longer control them. I don't think it's the creation of skeletons and zombies that gives animate dead the [evil] descriptor, it's the potential for harm that such creatures present to random innocents. A necromancer that keeps close control over their minions and destroys them when done shouldn't be shifted toward evil, but a necromancer who makes too many and leaves them wandering the map should shift toward evil even if the undead wander around for days before attacking an innocent.

Goblin Squad Member

dragonsowl wrote:
Personally, I think all pets should be "trained" (I think it should be tamed). Every NPC should have the opportunity to die, there should always be a risk in taming a drake (spending hours instead of using the time to tame/summon easier creatures like bunnies ) and having it die if you are not too careful. It would inherently balance pet users, though it will probably piss them off and keep the people playing them low as well.

That's the point of ones that consume slots. Rangers and druids with pets shouldn't be rare. Why should something that is trivial compared to a character death in the P&P be such a bigger deal than it in this game? All you have to do in the P&P to get a new companion is pray 24 hours which is super trivial when you consider the DM will likely "fast forward" through them.

Goblin Squad Member

I hope so. The Mastermind class in CoX was one of my favorites to play because of all the great options they had for pets in that game. Especially having the ability to name individual ones and script specific behavior and emotes for them

Goblin Squad Member

Andius wrote:
dragonsowl wrote:
Personally, I think all pets should be "trained" (I think it should be tamed). Every NPC should have the opportunity to die, there should always be a risk in taming a drake (spending hours instead of using the time to tame/summon easier creatures like bunnies ) and having it die if you are not too careful. It would inherently balance pet users, though it will probably piss them off and keep the people playing them low as well.

That's the point of ones that consume slots. Rangers and druids with pets shouldn't be rare. Why should something that is trivial compared to a character death in the P&P be such a bigger deal than it in this game? All you have to do in the P&P to get a new companion is pray 24 hours which is super trivial when you consider the DM will likely "fast forward" through them.

Well, on the one side, I am assuming that it won't be terribly difficult to tame/train/summon certain creatures. If your wolf dies, I am sure their are packs of them in the forest. All this system is doing is making sure that there is balance. Instead of being able to instant summon another wolf after it dies, you need to run away, mourn your friend, and find a new one. It adds to tactics and makes it so that people with pets (especially ones that focus on them) are not perpetually over powered.

Yes, there will be an option where if they train in the right skills (i.e. number of pets that can be controlled and max level/ power of pets) for long enough, and then go out and find enough pets to become quite powerful (potentially allowing one person (evil maybe?) to cover most of a hex as opposed to having to share) they also have the ability to lose it all and start from scratch.

I think this is rather important in a game where players have and make persistent impacts on the world. Can you imagine a druid (or necromancer) who takes over a hex to set up his home and constantly tries to keep people out (druid= protect the woods! necromancer= my land) and becomes an opponent that the neighboring hex's have to work together to overcome! (this seems very awesome to me)

It means that there are opponents and adventures for the good guys to go after. It also means that once they are defeated they can't come back the next day and take it all over again by instant resummons (either by mass numbers or a super powerful pet)

Now I know you are saying that this has nothing to do with whether or not a druid or ranger or necromancer can summon a single pet, but if that single pet has the ability to become quite powerful and summoned/released/used extremely soon after it is lost, I view it as a bit of a balancing issue. Also, it means that the players who choose this path have to make meaning actions to find a new pet, train it up to its former glory (or better) and actually have something to do instead of summon and attack. It makes this entire path more of an adventure than simply a means to becoming more powerful. (ex; necromancer having to find bodies, golem makers having to find materials, druids and rangers having to find animals, summoners... having to make contracts?)

I personally find this approach mentioned above much more fun than having a perpetual static only ever able to be improved pet. It makes the game more dynamic (i.e. for me, more fun). Again, this is just my opinion.

Of course, all of this conversation might be for not, since making pet systems are immensely difficult and they may not even be thinking about it. If they are, it probably won't be implemented for quite a long time SUPER SAD FACE! :(

Goblin Squad Member

dragonsowl wrote:
Well, on the one side, I am assuming that it won't be terribly difficult to tame/train/summon certain creatures. If your wolf dies, I am sure their are packs of them in the forest. All this system is doing is making sure that there is balance. Instead of being able to instant summon another wolf after it dies, you need to run away, mourn your friend, and find a new one. It adds to tactics and makes it so that people with pets (especially ones that focus on them) are not perpetually over powered.

There is nothing overpowered about pets you can resurrect. Companions are something you take at the loss of other features in almost every game you find them even if the loss is not obvious.

In Pathfinder however, the loss is quite obvious. You make a direct choice between an animal companion or a domain of magic as a first level druid. As a hunter you make a similar choice between an animal companion or a favored enemy bonus you can share with your group at 4th level.

So you sacrifice the strength of your character for the strength of a companion. This isn't just a crazy P&P concept that can't work in an MMO. In Guild Wars you could give up a skill slot for an animal companion and another to revive them. In EVE drones were cheap to replace and drone focused ships generally came with extra drone-bay space you could use for back-up drones incase you lost some in combat. And let us not forget the companion focused classes of games like LOTRO and WoW.

Steering away from those titles though let me bring it back to the point it is consistent with the P&P. There is a reason I stated a passive and a refresh slot for a wolf. Passive to have it, refresh to revive it. Is there not a spell that resurrects animals only in the P&P. Could that not be easily adapted to a "revive companion" spell for the MMO?

The fact is companions are a very iconic feature. Making them too hard to come by would be like nerfing paladin smite/lay on hands, bard performances, or barbarian rage to the point they were rarely used in general combat. It just isn't Pathfinder anymore at that point.

Besides. I would like to make my companion part of my roleplay. Not some meaningless critter that will only be there until the next time I face a tough opponent in PVP, because I'm likely to lose it even if I win.

Goblin Squad Member

I always loved when games had items for pets. I remember Vanguard had a systems for necro pets where you could work on corpses to get skin grafts and such to empower your pet a bit. How cool would it be to get like some sort of special dirt for earth golems or other items to give small benefits to pets.. pets rock!

Goblin Squad Member

I've always thought of necromancers as having high numbers of raised undead to act as attrition eg skeletons grabbing hold of a character and dragging them off a cliff or sinking into water. Perhaps a structure for necromancers to perform this role or ability to form a unit of minions that march like an "army"?

On another related note re pets: Just watched Jo Nesbro's Headhunters (NOR: Hodejegerne), and Rangers could do with one of those (Dogo Argentino/Argentinian Mastiff) dogs!

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Paizo Licensed Products / Pathfinder Online / Minionmancy? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.