TL; DR: An unbuffed Elephant pet that isn't using the Hunter teamwork feats can solo a mob with equal CR to the Hunter plus his pet combined.
Let me mention a few things right off the bat:
1. The Hunter (no archetype) in question is level 9 with an Elephant pet. He has normal PC WBL (46k). The only actual gear the Elephant is wearing is an Amulet of Mighty Fists (Frost) and a Mithral Chain Shirt. That's a total of 1d6 cold damage per hit and +4 armor AC.
2. A level 9 PC with full WBL is a CR 9 creature (his pet is included in the calculation). That's per the rules.
3. If CR 9 creature fights another CR 9 creature each is supposed to have roughly a 50% chance to win (unless there's something special about abilities, environment, etc that tilts the fight in favor of one).
4. A Frost Giant is also CR 9. Frost Giants are immune to cold. Frost Giants are brutes with physical stats above the curve but weaker Reflex/Will and no real special abilities. They are supposed to excel in straight up brawls.
5. Players (and companions) have maximized HP. This means the elephant has 96 HP ((8 base HP + 4 con HP) * 8 levels) rather than 68 Hp ((4.5 base HP + 4 con HP) * 8 levels), which is a 41% increase. Bestiary creatures have a 50% HP boost. This means the Frost Giant has 199 HP rather than 133. Note that this gives the Frost Giant slightly more relative HP.
6. The Elephant does have Improved Natural Attack (Gore) but does not have Dodge or Weapon Focus (meaning its AB and AC could actually be higher). Instead, it has Improved Overrun, Combat Reflexes, and Power Attack (note: I am assuming the pet isn't using Power Attack since that would make the issue even worse, in theory).
7. My current concern is about the pet when it has no limited duration buffs from the Hunter and is not using the synergy of teamwork feats (including Pack Flanking, Outflank, Precise Strike, etc). At a minimum this means it is missing...
4 AC from Barkskin
2 AB and 2 damage from Greater Magic Fang
4 AB from Outflank
3.5 damage (1d6) from Precise Strike
That's a total of 4 AC, 6 AB, and 5.5 damage that it DOESN'T have in this example, and that's not getting into stuff like Strongjaw and other buffs. All the pet has is Animal Focus x2 (which is permanent).
---------------------------------------
Let's review: the pet has an amulet that's useless versus the Frost Giant, does not have a bunch of buffs from the Hunter, and is not getting teamwork feat bonuses from the Hunter. The pet could also have at least 1 more AB and AC if the Hunter wanted. The pet could also use Power Attack.
DESPITE all of these problems, the pet is still favored in a match-up versus the Frost Giant. This is assuming the Elephant starts in full-attack range of the Frost Giant AND the Frost Giant wins initiative. I'm *trying* to favor the Frost Giant.
Here are the core overall stats...
Elephant
+15/+10 Gore (3d6+10) and +15 Slam (1d8+10)
30 AC
96 HP
Frost Giant
+18/+13 Greataxe (3d6+13)
21 AC
199 HP
Overall, it takes the Frost Giant 7 rounds of full attacks to kill the Elephant on average (technically like 6.28 but that rounds up to 7). On the flip side, it takes the Elephant 6 rounds of full attacks to kill the Frost Giant (technically 5.45 which rounds up to 6). Meaning the Frost Giant will usually lose even if the Frost Giant goes first.
And again, this is without Barkskin, (Greater) Magic Fang, Strongjaw, Outflank, Precise Strike, the Hunter doing ANYTHING but taking a nap, etc. And also without Weapon Focus/Dodge or something like a +1 or +2 magical bonus on the mithral shirt barding.
This was also tested with stuff like two Hill Giants (7 CR each, 9 CR total). The Hill Giants were put into flanking position and both got to full attack before the Elephant. Elephant still won.
Am I crazy for thinking this doesn't seem balanced? Considering reducing the pet's power a bit, likely something along the lines of dropping its armor class by a few points.
the hunter is the best animal companion class in the game and most of its features are based around buffing their companion the hunter class gets several passive buffs it can bestow onto its animal companion i also did some calculating and it the ac checks out and its to hit and dmg isn't that great either so it seems pretty balenced
Nothing to be concerned about quite honestly...Hunters are indeed the best animal companion users.
Elephant is okay and it's not even the best animal companion that the hunter can be using.
On top of it said Elephant isn't going to fight CR 9 fights anyway (unless you want to make some very easy fights).
In a party, the group will most likely fight CR 12-13 battle. Which most of the time, the animal companion is just beefy to survive these kind of fights a little bit.
It doesn't take into account that basically most creatures CR 10 and above, have many special abilities...some that can outright just disable the elephant or even kill it in one standard action.
This seems fine to me, I think I should point out that
3) whilst according to CR rules this is true, when you come to an actually vaguely focused PC they will solo of a lot of things their CR, especially the earlier bestiary monsters which are kinda lacklustre. I made a unchained monk based on a gimmick for fun that I didn't think would actually work, in practice he turned out to be able to 2 round a pit fiend on his own with below appropriate wealth by level and could reasonably do so only taking damage if the pit fiend rolls a 20. Excluding wish shenanigans obviously.
My point is, martial PCs with even a vague hint of focusing on a fighting style will be well ahead of the CR curve.
1) Giants (at least earlier giants) don't have many tricks. They're easy enough to deal with because they're beatsticks. That said....
2) Have you tried running your simulations where the giant (or hill giants, second case) can start the fight by throwing rocks at the elephant? They are all big critters, likely to see each other...and the giants have ranged weapon superiority.
It's also worth mentioning that you're currently at the levels where animal companions are reall shining, they start to fall off in effectiveness around 12ish
i also did some calculating and it the ac checks out and its to hit and dmg isn't that great either so it seems pretty balenced
Lady-J, I appreciate your well-intentioned effort to help...but your view of what is balanced is horrendously skewed as we've seen from past threads.
Eltacolibre wrote:
On top of it said Elephant isn't going to fight CR 9 fights anyway (unless you want to make some very easy fights).
Well, let's throw the Elephant at another CR 9 fight. Specifically...the Hunter's evil twin shows up. The Hunter's evil twin is also level 9 with PC WBL and is thus CR 9 (when combined with his pet).
I don't think the heroic Elephant is going to defeat the evil Elephant AND the evil Hunter at the same time. But that's also a CR9 fight, just like the Frost Giant.
Eltacolibre wrote:
In a party, the group will most likely fight CR 12-13 battle. Which most of the time, the animal companion is just beefy to survive these kind of fights a little bit.
Okay, so let's make a CR 13 battle. That's four Frost Giants.
And...let's have the group be four Hunters. Without buffing their pets, without supporting their pets with Teamwork feats, and without the Hunters doing anything themselves...the Elephants charge the Frost Giants and win.
Eltacolibre wrote:
It doesn't take into account that basically most creatures CR 10 and above, have many special abilities...some that can outright just disable the elephant or even kill it in one standard action.
If we removed "elephant" from that statement and put in "fighter" or "slayer" instead, what would change?
Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
when you come to an actually vaguely focused PC they will solo of a lot of things their CR, especially the earlier bestiary monsters which are kinda lacklustre
If the Hunter and his pet were "soloing" the Frost Giant, I'd be fine with that. But let's break down the hunter. You can quibble with these numbers and I'm not claiming they're 100% accurate, but they provide a starting point. The Hunter's power is...
20% the Hunter himself
20% the Hunter's spells (Greater Magic Fang, Barkskin, Strongjaw, etc)
20% the Hunter's teamwork feats (Pack Flanking, Outflank, Precise Strike, Paired Opportunists, etc)
40% the Hunter's pet (with the permanent Animal Focus buffs)
then in this example we're taking away 60% of the Hunter's power. I'm fine with 100% of the Hunter soloing a CR9. I could even accept 80% of a Hunter soloing a CR9. Not so thrilled with 40% of the Hunter soloing a CR9. See the difference?
Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
My point is, martial PCs with even a vague hint of focusing on a fighting style will be well ahead of the CR curve.
Is that so? Let's take a look (spoilers if you don't want to see the math)...
Spoiler:
We've determined the (unbuffed/unsynergized) Elephant has...
Elephant
+15/+10 Gore (3d6+10) and +15 Slam (1d8+10)
30 AC
96 HP
We've determined he can kill the Frost Giant in 6 rounds and can survive 7 rounds against the Frost Giant.
Now let's make a level 9 Fighter. Fighters have save problems, inability to fly, difficulty affecting the plot, whatever (people posit all of the above and more)...but people seem to agree that in raw numbers Fighters aren't hurting. The Fighter will have the heroic array...and we'll buff strength to 16 (3 more points) and the 13 to 14 (2 more points) to get a 20 point buy. So...
18 strength (human)
14 dex
14 con
10 int
12 wis
8 cha
Gear-wise he can afford...
+3 full plate (11k with MW costs and everything built in)
+2 weapon (8k)
+3 heavy shield (9k)
+1 ring of protection (2k)
+1 amulet of natural armor (2k)
+2 str belt (4k)
+3 cloak of resistance (9k)
That's 45k out of 46k, last 1k is spent on some emergency use consumables or saved.
Assuming (Greater) Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Power Attack, Furious Focus, and a few other feats (if you want to mention some others specifically we can include them, but stuff like Iron Will doesn't matter in this case), we get...
+21/+13 (1d8 + 18)
31 AC (10 + 12 armor + 2 dex + 5 shield + 1 natural + 1 deflection)
117 HP (assuming FCB goes to HP)
This Fighter deals 36 damage per round to the Frost Giant, which gives us 199/36 = 5.53 = 6 rounds to kill the giant (this is actually less damage per round than the Elephant). AC of 31 is the one higher and the extra HP means we can live for 117/12.925 = 9.05 rounds.
So it takes us the same number of rounds to kill the Frost Giant but we can survive roughly 2-3 rounds longer than the Elephant. That's not well ahead of the curve, the Fighter will be at roughly 33% health when he wins against the equal CR threat.
How about a Greatsword instead?
Spoiler:
Drop the Heavy Shield +3, bring the Ring of Protection to a +2, lose 4 AC overall. Now we have...
+21/+13 (2d6 + 24)
27 AC (10 + 12 armor + 2 dex + 1 natural + 2 deflection)
117 HP (assuming FCB goes to HP)
This Fighter deals 49.6 damage per round to the Frost Giant, which gives us 199/49.6 = 4.01 rounds to kill the giant. AC of 27 is lower, but combined with the extra HP we can live for 117/22.325 = 5.24 = 6 rounds.
So if we're barely unluckier than average, we'll kill the Frost Giant one round before he would kill us (winding up with like 6 health).
I'm rushing through this so maybe I'm messing up some numbers, feel free to correct me.
We could also make a level 9 Slayer (who offhand would probably have 1 less AB and 2 less damage per hit at this point than the Fighter along with likely slightly lower AC). The Slayer ain't exactly going to obliterate the Frost Giant with ease either.
And again, I'm not comparing the Hunter to the Fighter/Slayer overall...I'm comparing 40% of the Hunter to the Fighter/Slayer.
Lathiira wrote:
1) Giants (at least earlier giants) don't have many tricks. They're easy enough to deal with because they're beatsticks. That said....
That's exactly the point. But the beatsticks are losing to 40% of the Hunter.
Lathiira wrote:
2) Have you tried running your simulations where the giant (or hill giants, second case) can start the fight by throwing rocks at the elephant? They are all big critters, likely to see each other...and the giants have ranged weapon superiority.
Sure. The Frost Giants throw a Boulder at +9...which means they need a natural 20 to hit the Elephant (AC 30 unbuffed). The Hill Giants are slightly better off -- they throw at +7 BUT there are two of them so twice as likely per round to get a hit from a natural 20!
Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
It's also worth mentioning that you're currently at the levels where animal companions are reall shining, they start to fall off in effectiveness around 12ish
So what would be a good way to reduce their power right now while not hurting them (or even buffing them) at higher level?
If the Hunter and his pet were "soloing" the Frost Giant, I'd be fine with that. But let's break down the hunter. You can quibble with these numbers and I'm not claiming they're 100% accurate, but they provide a starting point. The Hunter's power is...
20% the Hunter himself
20% the Hunter's spells (Greater Magic Fang, Barkskin, Strongjaw, etc)
20% the Hunter's teamwork feats (Pack Flanking, Outflank, Precise Strike, Paired Opportunists, etc)
40% the Hunter's pet (with the permanent Animal Focus buffs)
then in this example we're taking away 60% of the Hunter's power. I'm fine with 100% of the Hunter soloing a CR9. I could even accept 80% of a Hunter soloing a CR9. Not so thrilled with 40% of the Hunter soloing a CR9. See the difference?
I'm not going to quibble these numbers I'm going to ignore them because they're ridiculous. How one can think to seperate the hunter himself from spells and feats is bizarre.
As is often the case with your threads you seem to think strong is a problem or ahead of CR curve is a problem, neither is true. In a vacuum, you need to explain how this is a problem, and preferably also how your house rules effect things rather than the forum users having to steadily unearth them over several pages of thread, as has been the case before.
Quote:
Is that so? Let's take a look (spoilers if you don't want to see the math)...
yes, and your rhetorical question is obnoxious.
Quote:
So it takes us the same number of rounds to kill the Frost Giant but we can survive roughly 2-3 rounds longer than the Elephant. That's not well ahead of the curve,
yes it is, your own argument is the Elephant is ahead of the CR curve, the fighter is out performing the Elephant, ergo, the fighter is ahead of the CR curve, and is a pretty vanilla fighter at that.
Compare to a Spirited charge Cavalier, or a Barbarian, or a Vivisectionist Alchemist or any appropriately classed archer and you'll find that both your fighter and that elephant are sad and unimpressive compared to what players can actually produce.
For example a thread was recently made in which a level 10 Inquisitor after 1 round spent buffing produced somewhere around 170 damage a round, at a higher to hit than your elephant.
Quote:
So what would be a good way to reduce their power right now while not hurting them (or even buffing them) at higher level?
Don't, what you're describing is fine. You need to explain why this is actually a problem.
Just to address the *ahem* elephant in the room...
* A level 9 Wizard flies outside of axe range. He soaks a rock (or has a 20% chance of getting hit if he bothers to prepare for combat by casting Mirror Image). He casts Dominate Person (DC 21 (Giant saves on a 15+) if he isn't optimized to be an enchanter, DC 23 or higher if he is). Wizard has a new Frost Giant thrall for the next 9 days.
* A level 9 Brawler grapples the Frost Giant. The Frost Giant drops his axe and hits the Brawler with his slam attacks. The level 9 Brawler pins the Frost Giant. The level 9 Brawler ties up the Frost Giant.
* A level 9 Sorcerer casts an Empowered Scorching Ray. The Frost Giant dies.
I'm sure we can turn this thread into a showcase of how different classes can embarrass a Frost Giant if we really want to.
If you're players are too powerful, either give them stronger opponents or talk to them like an actual adult and ask them to take less powerful options in future and/or be careful with their power. Never reduce a player in power, it makes them feel frustrated. If the player offers a reduction in power, take it.
Now, before handling any of that you have to first consider if it is actually affecting the game. The primary rule is that if the players are having fun, you don't need to change anything. If the elephant is the main martial of the party, then they probably don't mind too much because it isn't stepping on any of their toes.
Finally, please don't claim something is overpowered for being really good at the one and only thing it's actually good at.
i also did some calculating and it the ac checks out and its to hit and dmg isn't that great either so it seems pretty balenced
Lady-J, I appreciate your well-intentioned effort to help...but your view of what is balanced is horrendously skewed as we've seen from past threads.
30 ac at level 9 is 1 above what would generally be considered standard ac for a dedicated front liner the elephant has only a +15 to hit which is well below the normal to hit of that level for dedicated front liners, and their damage is terrible my standard 2h fighter with nothing special tacked on if leveled up to lvl 9 would have about the same ac, would have around +22 to hit with 3d6+30ish to dmg on the 1st attack and +14 with the same dmg on the 2nd attack and have 28 ac and that's basic fighter stuff if they were to go full mix max they could probably reach another +1-2 to hit another 3-6dmg and another 3 ac, compared to that very basic fighter the elephant is nothing especially since its pulling wbl from the hunter
30 ac at level 9 is 1 above what would generally be considered standard ac for a dedicated front liner the elephant has only a +15 to hit which is well below the normal to hit of that level for dedicated front liners, and their damage is terrible my standard 2h fighter with nothing special tacked on if leveled up to lvl 9 would have about the same ac, would have around +22 to hit with 3d6+30ish to dmg on the 1st attack and +14 with the same dmg on the 2nd attack and have 28 ac and that's basic fighter stuff if they were to go full mix max they could probably reach another +1-2 to hit another 3-6dmg and another 3 ac, compared to that very basic fighter the elephant is nothing especially since its pulling wbl from the hunter
Vital strike from Gore: +24 to hit, 7d6+13 damage, or full attack, Gore +24/+19 4d6+13, Slam +22 1d8+1d6+11, usually against a target denied their dex.
So for only the investment in a +1 mythril shirt for the elephant, the hunter is riding around the field allowing his companion to destroy his enemies. Oh, and it's light load carrying capacity is over 2000 pounds.
30 ac at level 9 is 1 above what would generally be considered standard ac for a dedicated front liner the elephant has only a +15 to hit which is well below the normal to hit of that level for dedicated front liners, and their damage is terrible my standard 2h fighter with nothing special tacked on if leveled up to lvl 9 would have about the same ac, would have around +22 to hit with 3d6+30ish to dmg on the 1st attack and +14 with the same dmg on the 2nd attack and have 28 ac and that's basic fighter stuff if they were to go full mix max they could probably reach another +1-2 to hit another 3-6dmg and another 3 ac, compared to that very basic fighter the elephant is nothing especially since its pulling wbl from the hunter
Vital strike from Gore: +24 to hit, 7d6+13 damage, or full attack, Gore +24/+19 4d6+13, Slam +22 1d8+1d6+11, usually against a target denied their dex.
So for only the investment in a +1 mythril shirt for the elephant, the hunter is riding around the field allowing his companion to destroy his enemies. Oh, and it's light load carrying capacity is over 2000 pounds.
thank you for giving some more statistics on how the player in questions elephant isn't actually a problem to the op
See now there you have a beat stick, although I still wouldn't call it problematic.
1) It attacks one thing at a time and aint on-shotting anything, so its focusing on one enemy over two turns minimum, functionally the same as a witch with overland flight going Evil eye/Misfortune - Slumber. For example.
2) Target its will save, its an Elephant, it can't be that high.
3) Target its touch AC
4) Split them up, there are lots of places PCs can and will go, that Elephants can't.
5) Fly
6) Dispel some buffs
6) In a normal campaign you could also AoE it down fairly easily targeting reflex, but blasting has been heavily nerfed in Balkoth's game unless his house rules have changed, so thats one less option I guess.
TL; DR: An unbuffed Elephant pet that isn't using the Hunter teamwork feats can solo a mob with equal CR to the Hunter plus his pet combined.
What house rules are you using? What limitations are you handwaving?
Yes, a melee class is going to stomp on melee encounters; that is playing to their strengths. But what is that elephant going to do against aa flying critter? One up a 40 foot cliff? What happens when that elephant faces a caster that hits will saves?
A toe to toe slugfest is not the only (or best) measure of relative power.
Do you have a 9 level caster in the party? If so don't be concerned about non 9 level casters, they aren't going to break the game nearly as badly as your 9 level casters will.
TL;DR -- A Frost Giant is weak for a CR 9 and the Elephant doesn't have many tricks.
1. The Elephant doesn't get iterative attacks on his natural attacks. Averaging damage and to-hit, the Elephant will kill the Frost Giant in 7.58 rounds and the Frost Giant will kill the Elephant in 6.28 rounds.
2. For fun, compare the Elephant to a different CR 9. Pick a Greater Earth Elemental or a Bone Devil.
The Bone Devil has a fear aura which requires a 17+ to save. Its poison requires a 10+ to save. It resists cold damage and the Elephant has to deal with its 10/good DR. While it has trouble hitting the Elephant (needs a 16+), it can turn invisible and fly for bonuses. It also has a higher AC than the Frost Giant (25 vice 21).
The (huge) Earth Elemental has a reach advantage on the Elephant. It can capitalize on this by hitting the Elephant with its Awesome Blow ability (hits on a 8+, succeeds on a 2+) and milking AoOs. On top of this, the Elemental has DR 10/-.
Why does the elephant have: +15/+10 Gore (3d6+10) and +15 Slam (1d8+10)
A Gore wouldn't get any iteratives unless there is something special going on that I'm not seeing.
See Above. Multi-attack grants iterative since elephants only have 2 natural attacks.
Dave Justus wrote:
I'm also not sure where the 30 AC is coming from. I get he should be 10 + 1 DEX + 7 NAT + 4 ARMOR - 1 SIZE for a Total AC of 20, not 30.
Natural armor +7 base, +6 bonus to natural attack at 9th level, +6 from going to large creature at 7th level. He also said mythril shirt +1 so +5 armor.
I did make an error in my example forgetting about -1 size though, so good catch there.
I'm also not sure where the 30 AC is coming from. I get he should be 10 + 1 DEX + 7 NAT + 4 ARMOR - 1 SIZE for a Total AC of 20, not 30.
The elephant gets +6 NA from being the companion of a level 9 Master (Hunter, Druid, or whatever). It starts with 4 natural armor and at 7th it gets another +3. Also, they gain +3 str/dex based on the level of the master.
This should put it at 28 AC: 10(base) +2(dex) +13(natural) +4(armor) -1(size)
If the player forgot the size increase penalty (and -2 dex from the level 7 adjustment) then it could be at 30.
Also, due to a recent FAQ, the Mithral Chain Shirt barding should cost 4400 GP for the elephant.
Regardless, taking into the correct AC of 28, (and averaging in crits, giant has a x3 weapon, elephant has a x2), the frost giant averages 19.3875 damage per round to the elephant, and the elephant averages 35.41125 damage to the giant. This kills the giant in 5.619 rounds, and kills the elephant in 4.951 rounds. Giant wins by over half a round. This is especially noticable if the giant gets lucky and crits. An average die roll on the crit is 70.5 damage, and if the stars align and rolls max damage it is 93 damage.
The giant also has a lower AC then the average for its level, by 2. The average monster (according to the monster creation rules) should have an AC of 23 and 115 hp(+50% for the house rules). This is mostly a wash, as it only brings the elephant up to 5.83 rounds to kill the giant.
Power Attack brings the elephant up to 38.666 average damage per round, killing the giant in 5.1466 rounds. Power Attack does not help the giant, in fact lowering its average damage to 16.0875, killing the elephant in 5.967 rounds.
I'm also not sure where the 30 AC is coming from. I get he should be 10 + 1 DEX + 7 NAT + 4 ARMOR - 1 SIZE for a Total AC of 20, not 30.
The elephant gets +6 NA from being the companion of a level 9 Master (Hunter, Druid, or whatever). It starts with 4 natural armor and at 7th it gets another +3. Also, they gain +3 str/dex based on the level of the master.
This should put it at 28 AC: 10(base) +2(dex) +13(natural) +4(armor) -1(size)
If the player forgot the size increase penalty (and -2 dex from the level 7 adjustment) then it could be at 30.
Also, due to a recent FAQ, the Mithral Chain Shirt barding should cost 4400 GP for the elephant.
Regardless, taking into the correct AC of 28, (and averaging in crits, giant has a x3 weapon, elephant has a x2), the frost giant averages 19.3875 damage per round to the elephant, and the elephant averages 35.41125 damage to the giant. This kills the giant in 5.619 rounds, and kills the elephant in 4.951 rounds. Giant wins by over half a round. This is especially noticable if the giant gets lucky and crits. An average die roll on the crit is 70.5 damage, and if the stars align and rolls max damage it is 93 damage.
The giant also has a lower AC then the average for its level, by 2. The average monster (according to the monster creation rules) should have an AC of 23 and 115 hp(+50% for the house rules). This is mostly a wash, as it only brings the elephant up to 5.83 rounds to kill the giant.
Power Attack brings the elephant up to 38.666 average damage per round, killing the giant in 5.1466 rounds. Power Attack does not help the giant, in fact lowering its average damage to 16.0875, killing the elephant in 5.967 rounds.
edit: math
hunters can passively buff their companions stats and at the level the hunter is now they get a +4 boost which is probably going to dex thus 30 ac
In the middle of a move, won't have time to respond much for two days, but let me address a few things...
Lady-J wrote:
hunters can passively buff their companions stats and at the level the hunter is now they get a +4 boost which is probably going to dex thus 30 ac
Lady J is correct, the 4 Dex from Aspect of the Tiger is the remaining 2 AC. Hunters can have two Aspects permanently active starting at level 8.
Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
1) It attacks one thing at a time and aint on-shotting anything, so its focusing on one enemy over two turns minimum, functionally the same as a witch with overland flight going Evil eye/Misfortune - Slumber. For example.
2) Target its will save, its an Elephant, it can't be that high.
3) Target its touch AC
4) Split them up, there are lots of places PCs can and will go, that Elephants can't.
5) Fly
6) Dispel some buffs
7) In a normal campaign you could also AoE it down fairly easily targeting reflex, but blasting has been heavily nerfed in Balkoth's game unless his house rules have changed, so thats one less option I guess.
How do #1, #2, #3, #5, and #7 not apply to, say, a Fighter? Many would apply to a Slayer, Paladin, etc as well.
Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
Its just good at its thing.
Let me ask you (and anyone else who cares to respond) a pair of questions.
First, at what point would you say it's TOO good at its thing? What actual numerical values? And how would you determine that?
Second, at what point would you say it's too weak at its thing? As in the first question, I'm looking for actual numerical values and the method of determination.
In the middle of a move, won't have time to respond much for two days, but let me address a few things...
Lady-J wrote:
hunters can passively buff their companions stats and at the level the hunter is now they get a +4 boost which is probably going to dex thus 30 ac
Lady J is correct, the 4 Dex from Aspect of the Tiger is the remaining 2 AC. Hunters can have two Aspects permanently active starting at level 8.
Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
1) It attacks one thing at a time and aint on-shotting anything, so its focusing on one enemy over two turns minimum, functionally the same as a witch with overland flight going Evil eye/Misfortune - Slumber. For example.
2) Target its will save, its an Elephant, it can't be that high.
3) Target its touch AC
4) Split them up, there are lots of places PCs can and will go, that Elephants can't.
5) Fly
6) Dispel some buffs
7) In a normal campaign you could also AoE it down fairly easily targeting reflex, but blasting has been heavily nerfed in Balkoth's game unless his house rules have changed, so thats one less option I guess.
How do #1, #2, #3, #5, and #7 not apply to, say, a Fighter? Many would apply to a Slayer, Paladin, etc as well.
Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
Its just good at its thing.
Let me ask you (and anyone else who cares to respond) a pair of questions.
First, at what point would you say it's TOO good at its thing? What actual numerical values? And how would you determine that?
Second, at what point would you say it's too weak at its thing? As in the first question, I'm looking for actual numerical values and the method of determination.
60+ ac at lvl 9 i would say would be too good at their thing as would many other people but in all honesty(and these are pc guidelines) this formula is pretty decent to follow a frontliner should have around 20+lvl in ac if they aren't being the tank in the party the to hit is a little more complected as there's no formula to follow but a martial should have about +20 to hit on their main 1st attack at lvl 9 to much lower than that and its too weak, saves should be as high as you can possibly get them without encroaching to much on other aspects as a martial you should be able to hit an enemy about 75-80% of the time while only being hit 30% or less at least against your average foes (bosses are a different story)
How do #1, #2, #3, #5, and #7 not apply to, say, a Fighter? Many would apply to a Slayer, Paladin, etc as well.
1, 3 and 7 do, for 2 I think something called armored bravery? might be getting that wrong, fixed the will save issue, for 7, if a fighter doesn't have a way of dealing with fight by 9 he is a fool, at that level a composite bow should not be hard to come by. Also fighters recently got access to some spell casting in the armor and weapon master books so they may be able to fly now, I'm un-familiar.
Aside from that, the fact that your counter high AC melee brutes the same way doesn't actually make your point at all.
Quote:
Let me ask you (and anyone else who cares to respond) a pair of questions.
First, at what point would you say it's TOO good at its thing? What actual numerical values? And how would you determine that?
Second, at what point would you say it's too weak at its thing? As in the first question, I'm looking for actual numerical values and the method of determination.
A fighter with a great sword and 18 strength will one shot things in the early game, give it power attack for overkill, they get progressively worse as they level up until around 14+ish where some of the best archery builds start to come back to one rounding on level encounters, taking 5 turns to kill something during which time you nearly die, is not a problem.
Even if they did overkill damage it doesn't matter they killed something with 100 hit points and did 140 damage! so OP, no wrong, so pointless, those 40 extra points of damage represent wasted resources and or build points that could have been spent somewhere else. Doing a lot of damage in melee is not overpowered. Especially if you have no special way of getting into melee.
AC there is a general rubric of 20+ level being optimal, although at level 1 its completely beyond some builds and at level 20 its actually trivially easy to beat so take it with a pinch of salt, anyway my point is, at a certain point boosting AC has diminishing returns, you're never going to become immune to getting hit and if it gets to high people will just find a way to mitigate it, so whilst high AC can be frustrating if all you throw at them is straight forward beat sticks, its not actually overpowered.
blahpers wrote:
A fighter, Slayer, or paladin would be waaaaay better than a lone elephant companion at that class level. The hunter and elephant together? Depends.
Edit:. You nerfed blasting? Seriously?
Yep, seems he was in a campaign with an optimized blaster once and decided they were the king of unbalance, never to be seen again in his games.
If you go to his profile you'll probably be able to find the thread where-in its discussed.
EDIT: I believe in the passed he has also complained Point blank masted and this may be the second time saying that animal companions are over powered.
When I started running this campaign (which incidentally was the first campaign I had ever GMed), I set the allowed books to Core Rulebook, Advanced Player Guide, and Advanced Class Guide. Other material is on a case by case bias, primarily for flavor or new options.
Since I got pointed to this thread from my thread (as I was looking for advice on building an Elephant/Mastodon animal companion interestingly enough), and being a player as well as a part-time GM, I have this to say.
A GM's duty is to make sure that everyone at the table is having fun, that no one player is eclipsing others at the table (usually due to system mastery), and that he or she is able to build challenging encounters at the level of system mastery he or she has.
Now, if the GM has an issue with a certain class/feat/spell/etc, he or she has one of two choices: work around the problem to still build interesting and challenging campaign, or to introduce house rules (which may involve banning said rules element from the campaign).
Some part of this has to do with the style of campaign that is being run. Or it could be because the level of system mastery on part of the GM is not quite as good as the player.
I'm not inferring anything to the original poster. All I'm trying to say is that it's the right of the GM to house rule any element in his game if he or she thinks it would be better for that campaign. Of course, this should be done with co-operation of the players, so they don't feel slighted. It's part of the non-written social contract most tables have I think.
However, just because one GM decides to house rule something because he or she thinks it's too powerful in his or her game, does not mean that it is considered too powerful in another GM's campaign.
So perhaps the Hunter and Elephant animal companion is too powerful in the original posters campaign. So he or she felt the need (or feels the need) to nerf it. However, be aware that others on here may not see a need for said nerf. And I doubt both sides of this discussion will see much of the others side.
I know I've been in games that had house rules implemented which nerfed certain things (both as a player and GM), and some of the time (usually as a player) I didn't agree with the decision, but I respected the GMs right to do so. It didn't mean that it was BAD-WRONG-FUN, just didn't fit into what the GM feels was right.
TL/DR: the original poster has every right to do what he or she feels is best in his or her game, but don't except everyone else to agree with it or like it.
Sure GM has the right to do whatever. That does not mean that there is not bad decisions. IF a hypothetical GM doesn't have the system mastery to handle any animal companion, then they should not make ANY houserules, because they have just proven that they do not understand the system to the extenct that they should start messing with it, as it would be obvious that they would not understand how the houserule would change the system.
Now I ain't saying that the OP is in that category, this is purely in relation to the post above.
Regarding the bigger discussion. No animal companion is OP, no not even hunters if they used every single gold piece they ever made into it. Any half decently build martial would slaughter the animal easily. And that would be playing on the ACs terms. When you start actually exploiting it's weaknesses even a rogue could do it.
When I started running this campaign (which incidentally was the first campaign I had ever GMed), I set the allowed books to Core Rulebook, Advanced Player Guide, and Advanced Class Guide. Other material is on a case by case bias, primarily for flavor or new options.
Chromantic Durgon chooses to call this a nerf.
And that case by case included throwing out every single option that made blasting work, whilst asking for advice on making blasting work.
Anyway I think the consensus is clear, the Elephant is fine. If you don't like it remove it but I very much doubt you're going to find a swathe of people to tell you you're right to do so.
