Should one apply to the other, if so... are the companions hit dice considered it's level?
Sorry for the clueless... any help appreciated.
No, I would use the master's effective druid level for determining any advancement.
Although, I'm not sure if animal companions are intended to benefit from this subsystem anyways.
Normally, a PC would have to provide the gear to their mount at their own expense. But if you apply it to both the PC and the mount they are getting double the effective value.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Technically, it's just for PCs or NPCs who had WBL, yeah. If the GM was previously giving the druid player twice as much wealth to outfit the companion, though, then the companion should get it too.
As I thought Mark. It really didn't make sense for those classes with companions to effectively get extra WBL as this system is meant to replace part of a characters WBL which would be used to buy certain bonuses with inherent bonuses.
The only problem is mostly that under the auto bonus progression model, items with enhancement bonuses don't exist. So you can't just buy the items to suit up your animal companion with your leftover WBL.
True, but you're otherwise giving an unfair advantage to the player.
I would suggest allow the player to "buy" inherent bonus for his mount using his wealth at the same relative cost as you could previously buy equipment.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The only problem is mostly that under the auto bonus progression model, items with enhancement bonuses don't exist. So you can't just buy the items to suit up your animal companion with your leftover WBL.
If the group agrees, you could probably shift one of your bonuses to the companion: "You take my Thickening and Increased Strength, but I'm keeping my increased Wisdom."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As someone who has used animal companions extensively, that doesn't work.
Animal companions need significant wealth investments, like just as much as a character.
Oftentimes 100% of my WBL goes towards keeping both of us geared.
|
The only problem is mostly that under the auto bonus progression model, items with enhancement bonuses don't exist. So you can't just buy the items to suit up your animal companion with your leftover WBL.True, but you're otherwise giving an unfair advantage to the player.
I would suggest allow the player to "buy" inherent bonus for his mount using his wealth at the same relative cost as you could previously buy equipment.
As a Druid or anybody else with an animal companion, I'd gladly give up more of my WBL to keep both of us geared. With the Big 6 covered for both me and my AC, I wouldn't have a problem with only having a little wealth to throw into consumables, random magic items and other neat toys.
Technically, it's just for PCs or NPCs who had WBL, yeah. If the GM was previously giving the druid player twice as much wealth to outfit the companion, though, then the companion should get it too.
So, my eidolon, who uses weapons and armor... still gets +1 weapons or armor... That doesn't make sense to me.
Like another poster my companion or eidolon is a GREAT portion of what I spend my WBL. Barding, permanent Magic Fangs as soon as possible... collars of protection, etc.
It seems to me that they should be included Just my opinion.
Still considering
|
Under normal rules, any enhancement bonus I gain for my animal companion (either purchased or found) comes out of my pocket. If I want my AniComp to have an Amulet of Mighty Fists +1, I have to pay for it out of wealth I would normally have spent on my PC.
If this is the case under normal rules, then using the Automatic Bonus Progression rules would require me to choose between my PC and my AniComp when doling out the various automatic bonuses. So if I want that same Amulet of Mighty Fists for my companion under the Auto Bonus Progression rules, I would have to confer one of my weapon attunements to the companion's natural attacks.
It sucks because you're essentially splitting your bonuses between two characters, but that's the way I see it working.
Please chime in if you have a different understanding. I'm using this variant in my next campaign, and would like to be sure I am handling it correctly, as I have a druid, a ranger and a dragon rider in the campaign.
