I would like to reiterate my position that this problem is easily solved by communication- if, as a GM, you are not willing to communicate with your player, there's an inherent problem. If, as a GM, your goal is to "beat the players", there's an inherent problem. If, as a player, you are unwilling to respond to communication, there's an inherent problem.
I want to believe that everyone wants to have fun. Everyone will have more fun if everyone communicates.
-Weapon Proficiency (Shield) and Armor Proficiency (Shield) are explicit things.
-A Shield Champion Brawler without taking Weapon Proficiency (Shield) some other way cannot use his Shield as a weapon (or can with the penalty) until level 3.
-Even then, it's not very good.
./sigh. My dreams of Captain Golarion may indeed be fruitless.
It seems so obvious to me that an archetype designed around a weapon would be proficient in that weapon... I really hope this gets errata'd soon.
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: A shield champion is
proficient with all simple weapons. She is also proficient
with light armor, and with bucklers, light shields, and
heavy shields. This replaces the brawler’s weapon and
armor proficiencies
That's what I have as well. I'm assuming that because the shields are included with the armor, and not the weapons, that it is a different thing.
I'm reading through the Advanced Class Guide Archetypes, and stumbled upon a Shield Champion Brawler. My mind immediately jumped to Captain Golarion- but on a second readthrough, it may not work too well. If I'm reading it correctly, the Shield Champion only gains Weapon Profiency(shields) as they pertain to armor, and not weapons. Which would mean my Captain Golarion couldn't use a shield until level 3- and only then, when he's throwing it. This seems like it's wrong, but..I really want this.
If it doesn't work the way I want it to, how would you advise getting that proficiency?
The only problem here seems to be things with above average damage, like tigers or bison. The easier solution to me seems to be to just ban bison and tigers. We don't need blanket rulings for fringe cases.
Something like "in PFS purchasable animals come without the "trample" and "pounce" abilities, this does not involve animal companions".
Perfect! That way you get your tiger and bison, without unbalancing the game.
Another suggestion:
The only problem here seems to be things with above average damage, like tigers or bison. The easier solution to me seems to be to just ban bison and tigers. We don't need blanket rulings for fringe cases.
I still haven't heard a compelling reason why a level 1-3 PC should be able to buy a creature more powerful than themselves, and use it in combat, to the detriment of scenario balance and participation levels of the other players.
As for class features: at least if the tiger is my animal companion, I had to give up full BAB and martial weapons to get it by being a druid (or whatever other compromises other class features give up). By buying an animal, I give up nothing significant - maybe my +1 weapon comes a scenario or two later and I have two less skill points in Perception, but that's about it.
You give up gold/prestige. You likely give up a trait or feat to get it in the first place. You definitely give up a bunch of skill points poured into Handle Animal. You give up being the only person to be able to command your animal. You give up animal feats, and level progression, and the size bonus.
1) Pathfinder is first and foremost a roleplaying game. If your animal has an amount of personality, (and it should, as most pets do) it's a character. If you're controlling it, it's a Playable Character. (EDIT: this point is kind of semantic. I see what you mean, but disagree.)
2. Only at level one or two, and most people aren't going to be bringing multiple purchased animals to a table.
3. Isn't the end goal of the scenario that the players win? The scenario you are describing is no different from a player bringing an animal companion with multiple attacks.
4. A large amount of optimized PC can solo most 1-2 encounters.
I agree that if your character concept is "you guys sit and watch", you should reconsider. I fundamentally agree with that statement. I also believe that this problem is solved by simple player communication. You can't technically disallow it at your table, but if you are straight with a player that their behavior is destructive to the community, they will almost definitely consider it. (Note: this is only my experience. Others probably have severe problem players.)
I think that having an amount of classes with many animal companions makes the ruling near irrelevant, since the power levels are comparable, and a purchased animal companion is guaranteed to be outclassed.
1) The pit is only about 10 ft deep if I remember correctly, and Feather Fall makes you fall 60 ft a round. So, absolutely, the traps still burst.
2) I would say no, prestidigitation wouldn't work (because they would have to be really coated in it to get the attention of a predator like that), but if they wanted to spend thirty-fourty minutes washing it off, that would work.
3) I believe it's in the tactics that it focuses on one person if they were phereomone'd. If not, it still attacks.
Its a two parter. What does it add to the game VS what does it hurt.
In this case its hurting the low level play in some areas where the trend catches on. As it seems to add nothing to the game even that localized damaged to the game seems to call for a ban.
I disagree. A few easily solved problems with a few players does not, in my opinion, necessitate a ban.
Well, what exactly is being added to the game by purchasable cannon fodder?
It might be rare and localized, but the argument for it seems to be almost non existent.
Nothing is being added to the game. Nothing needs to be added. Things are not banned for "not adding things to the game". You don't see melee weapons on casters banned, or pet gerbils.
The question for whether or not we ban something is not "what is it adding?" The question is "What is it hurting?" and the answer here is not much.
Having read through the Battle Cattle thread and others like it, I really don't feel that this ruling needs made. There are very few animal companions that are what I would call game-breaking, and those are only game-breaking for a few levels. It seems to me that this problem is easily solved: ask the players. If the rest of the table finds it unfun and game-breaking, then ask the "problem" player to tone it down. People want to have fun, even the duder bringing the bison. I'm sure if bison-dude is made aware that he is causing a problem, he'll be at the very least sympathetic.
Spoiler:
It's become a running joke around my area that I kill animal companions. I've only killed two, and that's because the samurai was buying regular dogs with 6 HP and sending them ahead into combat. Of course they were dying. All in good fun, though.
I ran this twice at Pensacon this weekend, and there were no disappointments.
wall of text:
The first table enjoyed it immensely. They played up. Upon finding that Drendle Drang couldn't get his wine, they immediately searched for the trashiest bottle of wine they could, as revenge for sending them on this ridiculous mission. (I joked that it was Sour Cream and Onion flavored) When they decided they were going to back to find Janira and ask for her help, I told them she wasn't there, so they decided to go on to the Wall. I had Janira at the wall, in the rain, having her weekly picnic near her father's name. The ranger and I both teared up. I rolled for the cleric of Abadar both times, which was good, because I play a paladin of Abadar and roleplayed them similarly. The cleric at the table, a character named Monsieur Alphonse with a thick french accent, was the one who found the Pathfinder's Coin. He has Profession Undertaker. The table both knew it was a replayable, and that I was running it again the next day, and opted to have Monsieur Alphonse re-record the message, with a pitch that I read it the next day in his voice. I gave it my best shot, but at that point I'd run five games in two days and had pretty much lost my voice. I misread the map and had one of the windows above the bed, so when they broke in they fell right onto sleeping Fimbrik illusion. This tipped the player's off to the the fact that it was an illusion, but none of them made their save, so all the characters were convinced this gnome was comatose. Pretty funny.
The second table enjoyed it even more. They played down. There were four fighter types, someone playing Merisel, a gnome alchemist (playing the closest thing to Mogmurch I've seen since Mogmurch) and a warpriest. They also got Dreng the worst bottle they could. They were excited to see Janira again (everyone is, she's so great). The two notable occurrences were that when they got to Fimbrik's house, Merisel decided that no one was home and she would jump on the couch. She then failed to notice the summoning circle activate, and fought off the three fire beetles from prone. Good stuff. They also opted to go talk to Sir Reinhardt, and try and help him. He hired Totally-Not-Mogmurch to try and make his leap even cooler by throwing a bomb under him as he made it across. Unfortunately, as we all know, he did NOT make it across, and took an extra six fire damage on the way down for his troubles. They asked me what his domain was going to be if he made it- I told them Orphans, thinking it would be a cute little backstory that he had grown up in an orphanage and wanted to give orphans Golarion over someone to look up to. I did not take into account that he dies, leaving the poor orphans with even less than they had. Pretty sad. The table thought it was funny.
Overall, stellar reviews- even from the last table, who had to put up with me running with no voice.
I never knew how much I needed this poll and it's results until I got this poll and it's results. I found it interesting that, as a bisexual male who leans toward females, I have no heterosexual characters.
Gertie, dash 1:
Life Oracle. Gertie is also very homosexual. Tendai, her long term girlfriend (my girlfriend's character) has male genitalia, but she doesn't mind, because Tendai is also a woman. (Tendai is genderqueer)It's a very loving and pleasant relationship, and all enjoy having them both at tables.
Tofi, dash 2:
Geokineticist. Tofi has kind of Asperger's. She doesn't really get sexual attraction, or most social norms. She became a Pathfinder specifically so she could adventure and earthbend instead of having to be a monk. She's very pretty, though.
Roland, dash 3:
Mysterious Stranger Gunslinger/Divine Hunter Paladin. Roland is bisexual, but leans toward men. He doesn't really do that much, however, because he's a paladin of Abadar and so to relax would be to sway from his duties as THE LAW.
Shia LaBird, dash 4:
Natural Attacker Tengu. Shia LaBird lived alone most of his life, and killed most anyone he found attractive, but his attractive was entirely aesthetic. More "pretty flesh" than "I want that."
Mstislav Iandakovich, dash 5:
Abyssal Bloodrager. Mstislav is literally a raging homosexual. He's also Dark Archive, and very promiscuous. Very fun to roleplay. Wish I got to play him more.
As someone who struggled with their sexuality at a young age, it's hard for me to imagine not contemplating that from character design. Maybe it's just me/my playgroup.
Spoiler:
now to hope none of this violates the paizo messageboards terms of service...
I recommend the Among the X series as well(although I found Among the Gods a bit difficult in comparison). Tide of Morning//Twilight are also good picks. Assault on the Kingdom of the Impossible has already been mentioned, but it's a fun scenario to run and is pretty straight forward.
This is my absolute favorite scenario. I sat down to prep it for Pensacon and fell in love. So many returning characters(Janira, my heart doth skip for thee), so much flavor. Well written. Explicit directions on running it for a party who's already played it and tips for new players are a huge plus.
I often find myself frustrated prepping a scenario, but this was a joy from start to finish. I applaud Thurston and all involved. Keep doing this. This exact thing.
Spoiler:
It's icing on the cake that something this marvelous is evergreen and replayable. B)
