Guide for Animal Companions in PFS


Pathfinder Society

1 to 50 of 109 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade 4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

With the advent of the clarifications on animal companions in Ultimate Campaign and the Animal Archive, I thought I'd list out a few things that might help Animal Companions run smoother in PFS:

Before the session:

1. Create a separate character sheet for your animal companion (Acom).
2. On the sheet, list all of the tricks your Acom knows.
3. Also note your character's handle animal bonus, and the roll needed to have the Acom perform a trick known and a pushed trick, as well as when the animal is injured. Indicate if you can automatically make the required DCs.
4. Add notes for tricks that have automatic effects without requiring a command from your character, such as Defend and Exclusive.
5. Add notes on role playing the Acom, such as personality quirks, favorite treats, etc.
6. Add notes on the Acom's combat abilities that aren't obvious (like it has a teamwork feat, has ranks in acrobatics, has a grab after bite, etc.)
7. Bring copies of sources for the Acom's tricks, feats, and abilities to the game with you.

At the beginning of the session:

1. Greet the GM, introduce yourself, and tell him you have an Acom.
2. Hand him the Acom's character sheet so he can run the Acom.
3. Wait for him to say, "You're kidding, right?"
4. Explain the clarification in Ultimate Campaign that an Acom is an NPC, and under the control of the GM.
5. Wait for him to acknowledge and accept that he now has more work to do, or express further disbelief.
6. Indicate that Ultimate Campaign also states that the GM can delegate running the Acom to the player, with the GM retaining veto on the Acom's actions.
7. Thank the GM for trusting you to run the Acom, or let him know you have copies of the Acom's tricks, feats, and abilities if he needs to reference them while running the Acon.

During play (If you are trusted with running the Acom):
1. Use separate dice to roll the Acom's attacks and such to avoid confusion.
2. Don't forget to roll the Acom's initiative separately.
3. Acom's should usually delay until your turn to receive orders, unless a previously given command overrides this (like Defend).

Just some thoughts that might help. YMMV

Grand Lodge 4/5

Can I get a citation on the whole 'roll the Acom initiative separately' thing? If the animal companion is just going to delay until your orders, this guideline seems redundant and obtrusive to running combat smoothly.

5/5 5/55/55/5

1. Greet the GM, introduce yourself, and tell him you have an Acom.
2. Hand him the Acom's character sheet so he can run the Acom.
3. Wait for him to say, "You're kidding, right?"
4. Explain the clarification in Ultimate Campaign that an Acom is an NPC, and under the control of the GM.
5. Wait for him to acknowledge and accept that he now has more work to do, or express further disbelief.

Ultimate campaign also puts sentient critters that can understand a language back under control of the player. Following standard operating procedure to up the critters int to 3 and putting a point in linguistics will get you the critter back.

5/5

What if you don't have a copy of Ultimate Campaign?

3/5

KestlerGunner wrote:
Can I get a citation on the whole 'roll the Acom initiative separately' thing? If the animal companion is just going to delay until your orders, this guideline seems redundant and obtrusive to running combat smoothly.

If your Acom has a higher initiative than you, even if it delays, when it's initiative first comes up it is no longer flat footed. That can have an impact on it's AC and other abilities.

Now there has been some debate if you delay are you still flat footed. The sentiment seems to be you're not flat footed because you've had an opportunity to act. But that's another debate. Check the boards.

4/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's odd, but I have never once had a GM ask me to roll separate initiative for my AC, and as a GM never have I *wanted* to have a player roll separately for their AC. Nor have I ever wanted to control a player's AC in combat. It just seems like extra unnecessary work to me.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

For the record, the Ultimate Campaign doesn't call animal companions NPC's. They just say that the animal companion is under GM Control.

Personally, I will expect players to play their own animal companions, and then I reserve the right to say no to some action or another.

I do have them roll their animal's initiative differently, as they have a different initiative score. While it is likely the animal will go first, it is highly possible that the player rolls a 20 for his druid and a 5 for his animal, and the animal goes significantly slower.

I don't think that putting into an animal companion guide the need to give the sheet to the GM to control is necessary. If the GM wants to control it, they will certainly let you know that.

I don't know of any GM who would want to control an animal companion. They got lots of other stuff to worry about.

1/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Ultimate campaign also puts sentient critters that can understand a language back under control of the player. Following standard operating procedure to up the critters int to 3 and putting a point in linguistics will get you the critter back.

I haven't seen UC yet, but it sounds like that conflicts with this FAQ:

FAQ wrote:

Can I improve my companion’s Intelligence to 3 or higher and give it weapon feats?

No. An Intelligence of 3 does not grant animals sentience, the ability to use weapons or tools, speak a language (though they may understand one with a rank in Linguistics; this does not grant literacy), or activate magic devices. Also note that raising an animal companion’s Intelligence to 3 or higher does not eliminate the need to make Handle Animal checks to direct its actions; even semi-intelligent animals still act like animals unless trained not to. An animal with Intelligence of 3 or higher remains a creature of the animal type unless its type is specifically changed by another ability. An animal may learn 3 additional tricks per point of Intelligence above 2.

BNW, can you quote the section of UC which states what you are claiming? It woudl be good to see the exact language to see if there is, in fact, a conflict here or if UC is meant to supersede the FAQ.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Please don't call Ultimate Campaign, UC. That will get confused with Ultimate Combat.

Grand Lodge

Did I miss something. Ultimate Campaign is not listed in Additional Resources. It is ATM not a book used for PFS.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've never had a gm want to play my animal companion o make them go on a different int.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Crispy3ed wrote:
Did I miss something. Ultimate Campaign is not listed in Additional Resources. It is ATM not a book used for PFS.

Agreed. Mike said it would not have Ultimate Campaign content approved , if any qualifies, for PFS play until the new GtPFSOP comes out in August. Link

Even then there are the issues related to if Ultimate Campaign and Animal Archive will be added to the core assumptions as they may change the way Animal Companions are played as laid out in the CRB.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Actually, most PFS encounters have so few NPCs that I have no trouble running the ACs. If nothing else, UCamp justifies a GMs decision at a table to choose to run ACs, even if the material in UCamp is not approved specifically for PFS. No more avoiding AOOs for ACs in the games I run. Although, in reality, this ends up helping the PCs by sucking up NPC resources on disposable hp pools.

"Ultimate campaign also puts sentient critters that can understand a language back under control of the player. Following standard operating procedure to up the critters int to 3 and putting a point in linguistics will get you the critter back."

Not according to the FAQ. They never loose the animal type, nor the necessity for the use of handle animal. I don't see why control would change, either. It is not fair for some players to get two PCs. Period.

5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
David Bowles wrote:


Not according to the FAQ. They never loose the animal type

Which is irrelevant.

Quote:
nor the necessity for the use of handle animal.

Which is also irrelevant given the ease and scope of handle animal checks on an int 3+ critter. Your position that animals are too dumb to avoid attacks of opportunity and don't understand weapons is known to be false by anyone that's ever picked up a broom around a dog.

Quote:


I don't see why control would change, either. It is not fair for some players to get two PCs. Period.

You mean like the summoners and familiar owners who explicitly have this?

If you try to control the critter I'm at best avoiding you. If its a con I'll probably leave the table and head for the paint and take. A lot of people feel the same way. Trying to micromanage the DM into micromanaging the animal is just a pain in the rear.

You seem to think that animal= suicidally stupid. While I could be heartless and sacrifice the critter with pretty much no long term consequences I do not precisely because it is my second PC and I don't want to see him die any more than I want my first PC to die.

Silver Crusade 2/5

I have never seen an AC die in PFS, but I've seen plenty of PCs die. I don't think you have much to worry about. PFS, even in season 4, is often not dangerous enough to threaten ACs. At least not the ACs I see most of the time.

I'm also not alone in the AC AOO thing. It's going to be a YMMV situation for the pet owners. I was at one table at Origins where the GM controlled ACs and saw a couple others. And as I said, its often to the group's advantage anyway.

I was also at tables where the GM let the PCs do whatever with the ACs. At this point, I just accept that those are going to be easy tables. So I didn't attempt to micromanage the GM. It's just that I think its equally legitimate for GMs who prefer to run the ACs them to do so.

In fact, the March 11 blog entry here by Mr. Brock specifically states that ACs under the attack command takes the most direct route of attack. That sure sounds like to me it will run through threatened squares to get to the BBEG. Quit trying to tease out more utility from an already broken-for-PFS class feature.

The same post states that increasing AC intelligence gives no advantage whatsoever in the control department. So a GM who wants to a run an int 2 AC is certainly within his bounds to run an int 6 AC. If the GM declines, I'm not going to say anything, and if he wants to hand-waive the handle rules, I won't say anything either, because its just not worth it. But if a GM wants to reign it in a bit, it's certainly permitted by these combinations of rulings.

5/5 5/55/55/5

David Bowles wrote:
I have never seen an AC die in PFS, but I've seen plenty of PCs die. I don't think you have much to worry about. PFS, even in season 4, is often not dangerous enough to threaten ACs.

I think we've established in a previous conversation that you haven't played the higher level season 4. The gunslinger often refers to the raptor as the "broke ass dinosaur" when he's running around with all of his buffs up and usually has an ac around 34. He's still had a lot of close calls with

A quickened truestrike +disintegration combo (made the fort save by 1 i think- played bend it like beckem with the wizards head the next round though)

free action teleporting + full attack things dropping him to - almost his con: he dropped and survived by the con bonus from animal growth.

Incorporeal ghost thing ripping into him.

(an earlier season) Things from the black lagoon pounding on him.

Playing up, some beetles whalloped him and he lived to -con only because I said "eh, i have a stat boost, cons the only place an odd score does anything, I'll put it there"

NAUGHTY WORD OF INSTANT PARALYSIS!

So yes, there's lots to worry about.

Silver Crusade 2/5

No, I've played in some deadly Season 4 stuff now and the AC was still rocking the house. The NPCs can still beat the PCs to death, but still can't seem to hit the ACs. Funny that.

The alleged "flattening" of ACs at higher levels I was promised by several people several levels ago is not happening. They do the same thing in tier 5-9 that they do in 1-5 from what I'm seeing. The AC is still far too strong of a class feature I think.

I never see any dangerous spells go the ACs way because of the "body overload" effect. The NPCs are too busy trying to stick their paralysis spells on actual PCs, not proxy PCs.

5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
KestlerGunner wrote:
Can I get a citation on the whole 'roll the Acom initiative separately' thing? If the animal companion is just going to delay until your orders, this guideline seems redundant and obtrusive to running combat smoothly.

Linky

I just sidestep the matter by having the druid ride into combat in bat form sitting on the raptors head. Mounts move on your initiative.

Silver Crusade 2/5

It is actually to the ACs advantage if it has a better init, so it is less likely to be flat-footed. There is no reason not to roll it separately. One more thing in the init queue is not going to make a big difference. Especially with some practice running battles.

5/5 5/55/55/5

David Bowles wrote:
No, I've played in some deadly Season 4 stuff now and the AC was still rocking the house. The NPCs can still beat the PCs to death, but still can't seem to hit the ACs. Funny that.

They peak around 7 when they start getting their growth spurts and pounce.

Quote:
The alleged "flattening" of ACs at higher levels I was promised by several people several levels ago is not happening. They do the same thing in tier 5-9 that they do in 1-5 from what I'm seeing. The AC is still far too strong of a class feature I think.

You're not at the higher levels yet.

Quote:
I never see any dangerous spells go the ACs way because of the "body overload" effect. The NPCs are too busy trying to stick their paralysis spells on actual PCs, not proxy PCs.

Whats the difference to a wizard? He should be trying to melt the face of the most dangerous thing in there. If its not the critter then you don't have much to complain about.

Consider how many Animal companions you've seen vs how many characters you've seen. Its no surprise that something you've only seen 1/10th as often hasn't died.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Oh, so the math is supposed to magically change at 7-11? I don't see anywhere on the AC advancement table where their numbers go down at that level, so I seriously doubt this. I've played regular campaigns that high before, and the numbers I see ACs throwing around will be fine at that level.

Peak at 7? That's over halfway through the PFS lifecycle! Even if what you are saying is true, that means ACs are a dominant force for over half the PFS lifecycle.

How is an NPC wizard supposed to fairly know a priori that the badger over there can actually take and dish out more punishment than the heavily armored guy with the two-hander? I clearly don't like ACs, but I would never metagame that. "Oh, clearly that's an optizimed AC and I should drop my most powerful will save spell on it!"

Perhaps my rational simulations of NPCs is part of the problem. But in too many cases, the NPCs are simply downed in bodies. And the ACs stress the NPCs limited resources too thin.

5/5 5/55/55/5

David Bowles wrote:
It is actually to the ACs advantage if it has a better init, so it is less likely to be flat-footed. There is no reason not to roll it separately. One more thing in the init queue is not going to make a big difference. Especially with some practice running battles.

It brings up too many problems when the command is issued on init count 16 and the animal doesn't act until 5. What do you do if the individual the animal was supposed to attack is dead? What if there's a black tentacle in the way, what happens if the target unexpectedly takes to the air etc.

Silver Crusade 2/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
It is actually to the ACs advantage if it has a better init, so it is less likely to be flat-footed. There is no reason not to roll it separately. One more thing in the init queue is not going to make a big difference. Especially with some practice running battles.
It brings up too many problems when the command is issued on init count 16 and the animal doesn't act until 5. What do you do if the individual the animal was supposed to attack is dead? What if there's a black tentacle in the way, what happens if the target unexpectedly takes to the air etc.

I have the animal perform the task on init 5 to the best of its ability, regardless of the change in game state. The AC and the PC are completely separate entities. They should have separate initiatives. The AC owner is free to delay to eliminate this possibility. Seems a small price to pay to me.

5/5 5/55/55/5

David Bowles wrote:
Oh, so the math is supposed to magically change at 7-11?

Ironically its the LACK of magic that changes their numbers in comparison. While the rest of the party is piling on armor, rings,belts headbands and cloak the critter has to rely on their natural armor, armor, and the neck slot only.

Quote:
Peak at 7? That's over halfway through the PFS lifecycle! Even if what you are saying is true, that means ACs are a dominant force for over half the PFS lifecycle.

That would be the zen archer or the ranger archer.

Quote:
How is an NPC wizard supposed to fairly know a priori that the badger over there can actually take and dish out more punishment than the heavily armored guy with the two-hander?

Do you have a build for such a badger?

Quote:
I clearly don't like ACs, but I would never metagame that. "Oh, clearly that's an optizimed AC and I should drop my most powerful will save spell on it!"

Critter or other dumb thing like barbarian eating me= use a will save spell is pretty basic tactics they should have covered in wizard school (or the sorcerer correspondence course)

Silver Crusade 2/5

"That would be the zen archer or the ranger archer."

First off, the fighter archer makes the ranger archer look like a pop gun. Secondly, to show the absurdity of the situation, we are completely leaving out the capabilities of the druid. The AC in a vacuum is not broken. The AC is broken in the context that it is a 9-level caster with wild shape and two good saves that gets to have the thing.

If the druid class itself were weaker, I wouldn't mind as much. Basically, I view the way you want ACs to work as getting an eidolon (with its own magic slots, btw, limited as they are) without giving up spell levels and other good class features like wild shape the way the summoner has to.

"Ironically its the LACK of magic that changes their numbers in comparison. While the rest of the party is piling on armor, rings,belts headbands and cloak the critter has to rely on their natural armor, armor, and the neck slot only."

At least you don't have to share like the summoner. Also, this line really bothers me because you are acting like you don't have a full powered PC in addition to the AC. Which the druid is. And the druid has all the slots you are talking about. The AC is a *class feature*. Other classes get things like trap finding, and the druid gets *pseudo PC*. Really?

"Do you have a build for such a badger?"

I don't play pets. I just know what I've seen. Your own example of the AC 34 AC underlines the crux of the problem to me.

"Critter or other dumb thing like barbarian eating me= use a will save spell is pretty basic tactics they should have covered in wizard school (or the sorcerer correspondence course)"

I'm talking about when the wizard has to decide between, say, two targets. Some AC or a humanoid in heavy armor with a martial weapon.

The reality of the situation is that even with Mr. Brock's rulings and the FAQ ruling, and all that, the AC is still incredibly potent. You call it "suicidal", but in reality, taking an AOO for an AC is probably an NPC resource being wasted on a target that will never be reduced to negative hit points in a PFS combat. Even with every limitation I can reasonably put on the AC through Paizo rulings, they are still broken, due to the generosity of the AC advancement table and size bump.

The Exchange 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In a misguided attempt to lighten the mood in this thread, I'll add in a AC related story...

Toy Story moment:

Party is about to jump into the final fight.

The Dwarven cleric, wanting to try out the new spell IronBeard, gets the druid to let him cast it on her AC - a Large T-Rex. The Druid player was using a plastic toy T-Rex for her AC, sort of like the toy from Toy Story.

So they burst in on the BBE and rushing into melee is a Bearded T-Rex. To make it worse - the Sorcerer in the party hits the (non-humaniod) BBE with a Hidious Laughter, and we have the following....

Judges discription went something like this - "As the doors burst open and a Large figure of the T-Rex rushs into the room, (insert BBE name) whips around ready to respond to the threat - only to catch sight of the animal companion and collapse into gales of laughter. Hands clutching his sides he rocks back and forth, drumming his heels on the floor. Every few seconds he draws a breath - only to catch sight of the bearded lizard again and erupt all over again in giggles."

Needless to say - the fight went well for the PC's. The BBE missed the second save and it was all over from there....

I do think the AC was a little hurt by the reaction to his charge though. It was kind of a Toy Story moment.

Silver Crusade 2/5

That is a good story indeed.

The Exchange 5/5

David Bowles wrote:
That is a good story indeed.

For most of that adventure, the T-Rex was mostly comic relief. He was overshadowed in combat by his Druid (who shape-changed to a LARGER Dino and just ate the mooks) and a combat specialist (Fighter Mutt I think). For the final fight, the two combat PCs had decided to sit back a bit and give ol' Rex a chance at biting something... but they forgot to tell the Sorcerer.

5/5 5/55/55/5

David Bowles wrote:
Secondly, to show the absurdity of the situation, we are completely leaving out the capabilities of the druid.

On my side that's mostly because of how I run my main druid. He mostly buffs the dino and watches him go. He's built to be a faux rogue and uses wildshape for detection and utility.

Quote:
The AC in a vacuum is not broken. The AC is broken in the context that it is a 9-level caster with wild shape and two good saves that gets to have the thing.

So the druid is a powerful class. This isn't news.

Quote:
If the druid class itself were weaker, I wouldn't mind as much. Basically, I view the way you want ACs to work as getting an eidolon (with its own magic slots, btw, limited as they are) without giving up spell levels and other good class features like wild shape the way the summoner has to.

Nothing you're suggesting doing impacts the power of the class. Nothing in "the way i want AC's to work" increases the power of the character on the table. What it DOES do is make it less frustrating for the PLAYER who would otherwise constantly have to remind the dm of the animals feats, abilities, personality, tricks, and magic items.

What you want to do only solves the problem if you annoy the player into leaving or playing another class.

Quote:
Also, this line really bothers me because you are acting like you don't have a full powered PC in addition to the AC. Which the druid is. And the druid has all the slots you are talking about. The AC is a *class feature*.

I run the druid as the class feature so it seems that way to me sometimes. Its how I do things, not a trick.

Quote:
Other classes get things like trap finding, and the druid gets *pseudo PC*. Really?

I've stated my opinion on rogues at length before. I think the problem there is with the rogue.

Quote:
I don't play pets. I just know what I've seen. Your own example of the AC 34 AC underlines the crux of the problem to me.

You know what that 34 AC gets the raptor at that level? A one in four chance of being missed. Things are hitting him on a roll of a 5.

Quote:
I'm talking about when the wizard has to decide between, say, two targets. Some AC or a humanoid in heavy armor with a martial weapon.

He should be hitting the humanoid and unless the humanoid has done something terribly wrong that should be the right choice.

Quote:
Taking an AOO for an AC is probably an NPC resource being wasted on a target that will never be reduced to negative hit points in a PFS combat.

This isn't a matter of opinion this is objectively wrong. Its literally a "who are you going to believe, my unfounded supposition or your own eyes". I listed 6 near death experiences for the allegedly undroppable Animal companion.

Silver Crusade 2/5

"Its literally a "who are you going to believe, my unfounded supposition or your own eyes""

Not quite, because in my experience, the ACs are never in danger. Maybe its the case that you run with a lot of hyper-optimizers that can actually get ahead of the ACs. I don't know. Even if your AC is frequently threatened by the itemized things you list, that means that the AC is sucking up an NPC resource that could be hitting a real PC. That's incredibly powerful just in itself.

Regardless of the reality of the situation above, ACs are too efficacious in the 7-9 range for a class feature that's supposed to "level off". Maybe I wouldn't be so annoyed if PFS didn't end at 12.

I like how nonchalantly you dismiss my problems with the capabilities of the druid. Okay, so people know its broken. Does that make it any less broken?

As for my example, I pulled trap finding out of thin air. You could really substitute any non-spell casting non-pet granting class feature there and it would still be mostly true.

If I had my way, I'd nerf the AC progression table. That's the real fix. But that's never going to happen. And since the control issue really is almost a non-sequitur, I don't harp about it at tables it sit at. I just kind of disappointing because I don't really have to pay attention or try at those tables. My character's turn: Oops! The ACs got it covered! Nothing to see here!

Liberty's Edge 5/5

I've become known as a familiar/AC killer in my area.

AC's are actually more susceptible to death than PC's.

Your experience is the extreme, not the norm.

The Exchange 5/5

David Bowles wrote:

"Its literally a "who are you going to believe, my unfounded supposition or your own eyes""

Not quite, because in my experience, the ACs are never in danger. Maybe its the case that you run with a lot of hyper-optimizers that can actually get ahead of the ACs. I don't know. Even if your AC is frequently threatened by the itemized things you list, that means that the AC is sucking up an NPC resource that could be hitting a real PC. That's incredibly powerful just in itself.

Regardless of the reality of the situation above, ACs are too efficacious in the 7-9 range for a class feature that's supposed to "level off". Maybe I wouldn't be so annoyed if PFS didn't end at 12.

I like how nonchalantly you dismiss my problems with the capabilities of the druid. Okay, so people know its broken. Does that make it any less broken?

As for my example, I pulled trap finding out of thin air. You could really substitute any non-spell casting non-pet granting class feature there and it would still be mostly true.

If I had my way, I'd nerf the AC progression table. That's the real fix. But that's never going to happen. And since the control issue really is almost a non-sequitur, I don't harp about it at tables it sit at. I just kind of disappointing because I don't really have to pay attention or try at those tables. My character's turn: Oops! The ACs got it covered! Nothing to see here!

wow... you sure play with different Druids than I do. Of the two I have played with the most (or seen played), one tends to do the Wild Shape thing to a form like her AC - only bigger/meaner and much more deadly. The AC is mainly used to carry other PCs or our stuff - or to provide a Flanker for the Druid (or a "donkey" to carry things for us). The other is on her 9th or 10th AC now (she uses the same write up, and just changes a number). She tends to loose them once or twice each level... we have taken to leaving them out of the "final fight" as they tend to die from AOO spells and such.

1/5

Setting aside the debate between David and BNW, if anyone from Paizo is reading this blog, we could use some more guidance.

The question of who controls the ACom is largely immaterial. Why? Because the ACom's behavior in combat should be the same, regardless. If ordered to Attack or given the Down command, the rules should provide unambiguous instructions on how that is handled so that it's irrelevant who is moving the plastic figure.

Mike Brock suggested that an ACom will move in a straight line and incur AoO's. While I technically think this is really a Paizo concern and not specifically PFS, if Mike wants to make his interpretation official, then I would ask PFS to put a up a FAQ on this and the other related questions so it doesn't matter who's in "control" of the ACom.

ACom behavior in combat and in response to commands is not something that is improved by "table variation," imho. I think GMs and players would all benefit from being able to deal with these mechanics in a consistent manner, just like with Charge or Trip rules.

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

For point of reference, I ask for a different initiative for animal companions. I also work with the player to make sure the companion is following orders (or not, as the situation warrants).

It has been my experience that two-third of the players with critters who sit at my table have never selected tricks for their companion critters. They are pretty put out when I give them the list from the Core Rulebook and ask them to decide what tricks the critter can do. "But it's my companion!"

It's a teaching opportunity.


Can we get the thread title changed?

"Guide for Animal Companions in PFS" is a bit too official sounding. Wouldn't want anyone thinking this mess has any sort of official bearing on the campaign.

5/5 5/55/55/5

David Bowles wrote:
Not quite, because in my experience, the ACs are never in danger.

Your experience is limited because you're not playing the animal companion itself- you only see them when someone else brings them.

Your experience is limited because you haven't seen what high level scenarios can do to a Critter.

You apparently have a local "target the "real" PC's first" culture. Nothing wrong with that, but its not something in the mechanics of the animal companion.

Quote:
I like how nonchalantly you dismiss my problems with the capabilities of the druid. Okay, so people know its broken. Does that make it any less broken?

It makes it an entirely different topic. This is about the control of the critter. As I've said before, nothing you're going to do within the rules about the control of the animal companion is going to fix the problems you've pointed out. Playing the animal so dumb that it doesn't know what a stick is won't fix your problem. Try the home brew forums for the solution you need, annoying the player will not fix your problem.

Silver Crusade 2/5

N N 959 wrote:

Setting aside the debate between David and BNW, if anyone from Paizo is reading this blog, we could use some more guidance.

The question of who controls the ACom is largely immaterial. Why? Because the ACom's behavior in combat should be the same, regardless. If ordered to Attack or given the Down command, the rules should provide unambiguous instructions on how that is handled so that it's irrelevant who is moving the plastic figure.

Mike Brock suggested that an ACom will move in a straight line and incur AoO's. While I technically think this is really a Paizo concern and not specifically PFS, if Mike wants to make his interpretation official, then I would ask PFS to put a up a FAQ on this and the other related questions so it doesn't matter who's in "control" of the ACom.

ACom behavior in combat and in response to commands is not something that is improved by "table variation," imho. I think GMs and players would all benefit from being able to deal with these mechanics in a consistent manner, just like with Charge or Trip rules.

This.

Silver Crusade 2/5

"Your experience is limited because you haven't seen what high level scenarios can do to a Critter."

I imagine these scenarios can do the same thing to PCs, given that I frequently participate in groups where the AC has the highest AC.

To quote Tarkin, this bickering is pointless. From my perspective, for all the flak summoners get, I think druids are much, much worse. Obviously, many will not agree with that, and that's fine.

I think it is just going to be reality that this is a YMMV topic for now, even with the new books and such. Obviously, some people like BNW will get up from the table when a GM requests AC control, just as I frequently get up from tables with more than one pet class. Maybe that's for the best so no one is in a position where they are unhappy.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Andrew Christian wrote:

I've become known as a familiar/AC killer in my area.

AC's are actually more susceptible to death than PC's.

Your experience is the extreme, not the norm.

I'm just curious how this happens in your area? Are people not optimizing the ACs? I've seen ACs in 5-9 tier rocking 30+ armor class. They just can't be hit. How do you take that out while following the scenarios as written? Don't forget they have evasion, too.

Silver Crusade 2/5

nosig wrote:
David Bowles wrote:

"Its literally a "who are you going to believe, my unfounded supposition or your own eyes""

Not quite, because in my experience, the ACs are never in danger. Maybe its the case that you run with a lot of hyper-optimizers that can actually get ahead of the ACs. I don't know. Even if your AC is frequently threatened by the itemized things you list, that means that the AC is sucking up an NPC resource that could be hitting a real PC. That's incredibly powerful just in itself.

Regardless of the reality of the situation above, ACs are too efficacious in the 7-9 range for a class feature that's supposed to "level off". Maybe I wouldn't be so annoyed if PFS didn't end at 12.

I like how nonchalantly you dismiss my problems with the capabilities of the druid. Okay, so people know its broken. Does that make it any less broken?

As for my example, I pulled trap finding out of thin air. You could really substitute any non-spell casting non-pet granting class feature there and it would still be mostly true.

If I had my way, I'd nerf the AC progression table. That's the real fix. But that's never going to happen. And since the control issue really is almost a non-sequitur, I don't harp about it at tables it sit at. I just kind of disappointing because I don't really have to pay attention or try at those tables. My character's turn: Oops! The ACs got it covered! Nothing to see here!

wow... you sure play with different Druids than I do. Of the two I have played with the most (or seen played), one tends to do the Wild Shape thing to a form like her AC - only bigger/meaner and much more deadly. The AC is mainly used to carry other PCs or our stuff - or to provide a Flanker for the Druid (or a "donkey" to carry things for us). The other is on her 9th or 10th AC now (she uses the same write up, and just changes a number). She tends to loose them once or twice each level... we have taken to leaving them out of the "final fight" as they tend to die from AOO spells and such.

I once played a scenario with a summoner and two druids and my dwarf fighter never got to swing the whole time. Theoretically, this violates the "don't be a jerk" rule, but this is an example of the complete ineffectiveness of relying on such a rule.

Scarab Sages 1/5

David Bowles wrote:


I'm just curious how this happens in your area? Are people not optimizing the ACs? I've seen ACs in 5-9 tier rocking 30+ armor class. They just can't be hit. How do you take that out while following the scenarios as written? Don't forget they have evasion, too.

You mean your players don't have a 30+ AC in the 5-9 tier.

Some players just don't optimize.

Heck, a 32 AC would have been attainable for me last weekend with Mogmurch. He's only level 3.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Artanthos wrote:
David Bowles wrote:


I'm just curious how this happens in your area? Are people not optimizing the ACs? I've seen ACs in 5-9 tier rocking 30+ armor class. They just can't be hit. How do you take that out while following the scenarios as written? Don't forget they have evasion, too.

You mean your players don't have a 30+ AC in the 5-9 tier.

Some players just don't optimize.

Heck, a 32 AC would have been attainable for me last weekend with Mogmurch. He's only level 3.

Uhhh, no. The players in my area usually don't have 30+ AC in the 5-9 tier. Do I even want to know how you are getting 30 AC at level 3?

Scarab Sages 1/5

David Bowles wrote:
Artanthos wrote:
David Bowles wrote:


I'm just curious how this happens in your area? Are people not optimizing the ACs? I've seen ACs in 5-9 tier rocking 30+ armor class. They just can't be hit. How do you take that out while following the scenarios as written? Don't forget they have evasion, too.

You mean your players don't have a 30+ AC in the 5-9 tier.

Some players just don't optimize.

Heck, a 32 AC would have been attainable for me last weekend with Mogmurch. He's only level 3.

Uhhh, no. The players in my area usually don't have 30+ AC in the 5-9 tier. Do I even want to know how you are getting 30 AC at level 3?

With a pregenerated goblin alchemist 8)

Liberty's Edge 5/5

David Bowles wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:

I've become known as a familiar/AC killer in my area.

AC's are actually more susceptible to death than PC's.

Your experience is the extreme, not the norm.

I'm just curious how this happens in your area? Are people not optimizing the ACs? I've seen ACs in 5-9 tier rocking 30+ armor class. They just can't be hit. How do you take that out while following the scenarios as written? Don't forget they have evasion, too.

Race for the Runecarved Key:
At 12+ Tier table, took out the optimized Wolf named Gmork and the Swallow Familiar Xerxes II with a Banshee Wail

Haunting of Hinojai:
At 8-9 Tier table, took out the Raven Familiar Xerxes I (yes, same character) with the Haunt on the balcony

I don't use the enemy tanks, I use the spell caster touch spells and area of effect spells to do so.

GM's need to learn good sound tactics as well as the players. If your GM's are fruitlessly having the badguy mook fighters clang their swords repeatedly off the armored AC's, that's their own fault, not the AC's with high AC.

And I'd like to know how the AC is rocking a 30+ AC and still be able to hit anything or does the Druid walk around naked and spend all their cash on the AC? That's its own problem. Then I target the Druid and the AC stops attacking and drags the Druid off out of the area (flees).

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Artanthos wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
Artanthos wrote:
David Bowles wrote:


I'm just curious how this happens in your area? Are people not optimizing the ACs? I've seen ACs in 5-9 tier rocking 30+ armor class. They just can't be hit. How do you take that out while following the scenarios as written? Don't forget they have evasion, too.

You mean your players don't have a 30+ AC in the 5-9 tier.

Some players just don't optimize.

Heck, a 32 AC would have been attainable for me last weekend with Mogmurch. He's only level 3.

Uhhh, no. The players in my area usually don't have 30+ AC in the 5-9 tier. Do I even want to know how you are getting 30 AC at level 3?
With a pregenerated goblin alchemist 8)

We Be Goblins Too:
Mogmurch starts with AC 20, has an extract of shield and a potion of barkskin +2 and when he fights defensively, that's 30.
The Exchange 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
David Bowles wrote:

....snipping wall of text...

I once played a scenario with a summoner and two druids and my dwarf fighter never got to swing the whole time. Theoretically, this violates the "don't be a jerk" rule, but this is an example of the complete ineffectiveness of relying on such a rule.

My son runs a human fighter - thrown weapon specialist.

Come to think of it he also runs a grapple monk (a Tengu) who has the same "problem"...

Both of these PCs could easily end all fights in a scenario before your dwarf fighter got to do anything. Perhaps before you even went in the combat round. He normally holds them back - thus the "don't be a jerk" rule (yes, it's effective sometimes too). The builds you are singleing out were not a problem... wait.

This is going to sound a little snarky - please don't take it wrong...

but you say you played in a game where 3 players locked you out of combat? Heck, ONE player can lock you out of combat. You were at a table with HALF the table trying to get in thier "part of the action" in combat? So, you played a Combat PC at a table with three other combat builds - and now you feel upset because one or more of them was a jerk and didn't leave anything for you? If you had gone first and killed the monsters - would they be justified in coming on here and posting about how "broken Fighter builds are because my summoner PC didn't get to swing once!" You could just as easily have been locked down if you had sit down with someone running a Monk (my sons build grapples, pins and ties up monsters in a round. Often before anyone else has gone. He does try to only do this to one monster at a time - so that other combat builds have something to do ...), or another fighter, or a wizard, or ... the list goes on.

If I sit at a table with your Dwarf fighter, I'll pull a Healer, or a Face PC or a Traps/Skills guy or.... but I think you see my point. Yeah, it's a problem. It's just the same problem as the guy who's the 4th Barbarian at the table...

Silver Crusade 2/5

Andrew Christian wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:

I've become known as a familiar/AC killer in my area.

AC's are actually more susceptible to death than PC's.

Your experience is the extreme, not the norm.

I'm just curious how this happens in your area? Are people not optimizing the ACs? I've seen ACs in 5-9 tier rocking 30+ armor class. They just can't be hit. How do you take that out while following the scenarios as written? Don't forget they have evasion, too.

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

I don't use the enemy tanks, I use the spell caster touch spells and area of effect spells to do so.

GM's need to learn good sound tactics as well as the players. If your GM's are fruitlessly having the badguy mook fighters clang their swords repeatedly off the armored AC's, that's their own fault, not the AC's with high AC.

And I'd like to know how the AC is rocking a 30+ AC and still be able to hit anything or does the Druid walk around naked and spend all their cash on the AC? That's its own problem. Then I target the Druid and the AC stops attacking and drags the Druid off out of the area (flees).

I honestly have no idea. I have often considered being TFG and asking for a character audit, but if the GM is willing to blindly allow it, it's better just to be bored and collect my sheet than start WWIII over it.

It's also funny how engrossed they get owning things with their pet. One scenario I had passed for one entire fight and three rounds into a second fight before they even noticed I wasn't doing anything. Because I didn't need to.

Scarab Sages 1/5

Andrew Christian wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

Not Quite:
Dexterity Mutagen + barkskin + shield extract = 29 AC

Add a reduce person extract (in formula book) 31 AC
Fight defensively (you have a stupid high to-hit bonus by this point) 33 AC

5/5 5/55/55/5

And I'd like to know how the AC is rocking a 30+ AC and still be able to hit anything or does the Druid walk around naked and spend all their cash on the AC?

1) naked druid. A 750 gp wand of mage armor, bat form, and one of your own barkskins will give you an okish ac.

2) 10+ 5 dex + ,+5 (mithral barding +1), a +4 barkskin that lasts an hour (long enough for most dungeons), a +6 natural armor bonus from being a druid animal companion, +3 ac from being a Raptor, and usually +1 deflection from shield animal companion being up.

Silver Crusade 2/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:

And I'd like to know how the AC is rocking a 30+ AC and still be able to hit anything or does the Druid walk around naked and spend all their cash on the AC?

1) naked druid. A 750 gp wand of mage armor, bat form, and one of your own barkskins will give you an okish ac.

2) 10+ 5 dex + ,+5 (mithral barding +1), a +4 barkskin that lasts an hour (long enough for most dungeons), a +6 natural armor bonus from being a druid animal companion, +3 ac from being a Raptor, and usually +1 deflection from shield animal companion being up.

Obscene. Now that the math is laid out before me, I see the problem. I don't think ACs should be allowed barding, since they already have natural armor. The +6 natural armor is a bonus that PCs can't replicate, at least not without crazy expense. That's way too many defenses for a "class feature".

1 to 50 of 109 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Guide for Animal Companions in PFS All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.