request for reconsideration serpent / plant / vermin companions

[plaidwandering]

In regards to the recent blog charting out what companions get what slots, it starts out saying all get neck/armor by default, but then says unless their body does not allow it. The types of animal companions in the subject are listed as not having those slots.

All companions need these basic slots, denying them firmly categorizes them as second class citizens. Hitting magic/incorporeal is a basic need, as is being able to protect your friend better. This is a something where realism should come secondary to an even level of gameplay. These companions are already among the less damaging/powerful ones(aka the pouncers)

Additionally armored serpents, scorpions, spiders, treants using objects etc are things that definitely exist in fantasy art/literature so I'm not sure why excluding them happened.

This reconsideration would cause better balance among companions. Does not relate to alignment or organization fit concerns.

I don't have any characters with any of these companions currently, but I think choosing one of these more flavorful guys should not carry an extra penalty.

[Dragnmoon]

PFS likes to try as much as possible to follow the RPG and avoid changing from that unless necessary.

The rules for body type slots are from the Animal Archive and not specific to PFS. (Specific to PFS would be putting familiars and companions that did not have a body type assigned into body types)

I personally would prefer not making more PFS specific rules that differ from the Pathfinder RPG rules.

[plaidwandering]

Like I said I don't have one, so I haven't read animal archive. Just because it's inequitable there doesn't mean it should not be addressed.

This is a great opportunity to change something that improves balance from the bottom, rather than depowering something they think is over the top on power level.

PFS team just did a big blog four days ago saying they updated that list, some things seem obvious oversights (ie treants are absolutely biped/hands per their description)

[Dragnmoon]

Asking them to change stuff on the list (what companion/familiar goes into what type) you don't agree with is one thing since that is PFS specific, asking them what magic item slots goes to what body types is another since that is not PFS specific but a RPG rule not a PFS rule.

The first I have no issue with the second I like to see PFS avoid as much as possible.

[Ascalaphus]

plaidwandering wrote:

Hitting magic/incorporeal is a basic need,as is being able to protect your friend better.

In practice DR/magic is much rarer than DR/cold iron, but you don't see a lot of people enchanting their companions to +3. As for DR/magic, try the Magic Fang/Greater Magic Fang spell. These creatures aren't as good at it as others, but they're not entirely lost.

plaidwandering wrote:

This is a something where realism should come secondary to an even level of gameplay. These companions are already among the less damaging/powerful ones(aka the pouncers)

Well there's a lot of tradeoffs in companions, and some of them are definitely better. Bears are worse than wolves and moas are worse than rocs.

In the case of the snake, it does happen to be the grappler/constrictor with the best CMB and it grows larger at 4th level already, for example. If you're trying for a max DPR companion it's not the best, if you're going for control it's a real option. Besides, you can still boost it with Barkskin, Mage Armor and Greater Magic Fang.