ken loupe's page

I'm thinking nobody is saying wizards because they aren't showing to the game with 3 full spellbooks of spells, 15 wands, and 100 scrolls like a home game wizard will.

When it's 90 degrees out and you lose power 10 minutes into the game that hasn't started because the DM was more than 40 minutes late. In the same room with a 40 person Magic Tournament.

Thanks for all of the replies everyone. I'm waiting on Amazon to drop the books off as we speak. Was hoping for a lower cost one time solution.

I am looking to come to table with 2 traits. However, I don't have the book in question that 1 comes from. This is my first time playing PFS obviously.

Is there any way to have the trait legally without the book?

Was going to play PFS for the first time next Monday. By all of the posts alluding to it, it seems like a pretty douche filled environment. I may switch my plans and play a cleric just to see all of the mouths drop because I will actually play my role.

Lots of really simple things a vampire can do to counteract stuff like that even at low levels. Sun? Darkness, deeper darkness, and so on. Need to get invited into a house? Dominate person on the owner. Vampire is a much more potent template to add IMO. The lich can use a hat of disguise, or cast alter self to get into a town.

What is this paper you speak of? Writing? How does one do this? My entire group games with laptops. Computers really work so much better for all of my gaming needs. With a site like d20pfsrd.com I don't even need to keep track of a single book if I don't want to. Organization can't be easier than folders on the PC.

Didn't we have this exact discussion rather recently, with direct input by James?

I was not privy to said discussion. What was his ruling?

Generally, I'd allow the PC's to *create* whatever they wanted assuming they had the feats, spells, and time allowed. (whatever they wanted meaning, assuming we looked it all over and it was approved, etc..).

The problem to me with the Celestial armor is that it already tells you what it is made out of. To me- its like "can I make a mithril shirt adamantine?" They are really asking "can I double dip materials?".

I'd say: Sure. but what you change will effect it. If they want to change the gold to mithril then they are making the armor worse :)

However, if they wanted to make one with a bigger bonus or with Fire Resistance tacked on or whatever then just adjust the cost accordingly and move on- based on what seems fair to you.

Something i would Not let someone do would be to apply "celestial" to an already existing set of armor. To me, that'd be like asking if you can make your steel BP into a mithril BP. AN already-existing item is made out of whatever it is made out of.

(hope that makes sense lol)

-S

It does. Thanks.

I am the DM in this case, and I'm hedging to keep it exactly how it is in the book. Just looking for some different viewpoints. Which I do greatly appreciate.

Can you make it mithril? By looking at the item it already has properties that leads me to believe it is mithril. Any thoughts?

You also may want to take advantage of the imbue arrows ability more. Grab glitterdust, fear, crushing despair, etc. I would flip your CHA and Dex scores around and go more of the controller route with dropping area effects in here and there. I would also go sorcerer 2/pally 5/ AA 6 myself.

ken loupe wrote:

While the rules are silent, it makes sense that the creature gets his own init since he has an int of 7. He doesn't need any direction to do anything like the usual companion that has an int less than 3.

Familiars get up to an int of 15, yet they typically still go at the same time.

They can, but they shouldn't have to. Any NPC's in the party don't just wait for the party do they? Unless they are told to wait for commands (henchman or follower).

While the rules are silent, it makes sense that the creature gets his own init since he has an int of 7. He doesn't need any direction to do anything like the usual companion that has an int less than 3.

http://4430987385857300241-a-1802744773732722657-s-sites.googlegroups.com/s ite/pathfinderogc/gamemastering/PZO1114-FullCoverArt.jpg?attachauth=ANoY7cr JF7e_U6bfEvh8b9XGAzb5fCDTuia4q1ZL2aQc2TM4-RmcC5WST6eLjzFNg856-hsWlPkEhNotn7 GnmMOnzQbIyhI4V-6g69b9Qbsv9z5riDwmVX277Ju-CKp26UGZqvFE_LCFRRXn6fYBDeRq1pPLA FhpZTepuVzwct7tDf04ETbdE7H34ygDqtORDd0xbyxTPi-r4Xph9bknaWX2K4kM0p4c0Sz2PPYr _M06l9A1pH4EKgc%3D&attredirects=0

That dragon has an amulet, or some sort of wonderous item on his ear.

Kamelguru wrote:

Hey, you know what else is overpowered? Anything else when you assume dragons are idiots and the GM doesn't know how to run one. Even rogues can one-shot an idiot dragon if they try hard enough.

Here is a dragon how I run it when it uses it's treasure on not being a retard: (Note that this is using only the core rulebook and bestiary, I could make him much much much worse with Draconomicon and such)

Advanced Ancient Red Dragon CR 20
XP 204,800
CE Gargantuan dragon (fire)
Init +8;
Senses dragon senses, smoke vision; Perception +38
Aura fire, frightful presence (300 ft., DC 32)

Defense
AC 58, touch 14, flatfooted 55 (+3 Dex, +40 natural, +5 deflection, +4 armor, –4 size), 62 when buffed (+4 shield)
hp 487 (25d12+325)
Fort +31, Ref +22, Will +28
DR 15/magic; Immune fire, paralysis, sleep; SR 30
Weaknesses vulnerability to cold

That is not out of the beastiary, I or II.

So since your leaving RAW can he? Lets stick to RAW which would be a CR 21 encounter for a CR 20 party (which the Summoner is part of) and no taking the monsters treasure as a way to buff them up, thats not RAW as far as I know. If it is RAW can you point me to where it says that?

I haven't researched it or anything, but your group plays that all of the baddies leave treasure they could use to their advantage in gift boxes for the PC's to take after they whoop up on them? From 1st level the retard goblins we run into use treasure against the party be it a magic sword or any sort of potion to help them.

nogoodscallywag wrote:

OK!

I have another question about stacking.

Empower Spell is a feat the scorc has. If I take on Heighten Spell, what happens? The Empower makes the level of spell 2 higher; with the Heighten, will this increase to 3 levels higher? Or just stay at 2?

Also, with Maximize Spell, if I have a CHA of 13, allowing only level 3 spells or higher, does this mean if i take on this feat I cannot cast 3rd level maximized spells?

You having a 13 CHA means you can cast 3rd level spells when your level permits it. (have to be 6th level to cast them)

OK!

I have another question about stacking.

Empower Spell is a feat the scorc has. If I take on Heighten Spell, what happens? The Empower makes the level of spell 2 higher; with the Heighten, will this increase to 3 levels higher? Or just stay at 2?

These feats and the maximize spell feat you mention later makes them use up higher spell slots. For example, to cast an empowered magic missle (1st level spell) you would need to be able to cast 3rd level spells (which you can't do until 6th level), and would have to forgo casting a 3rd level spell to get off the empowered 1st level one. So those feats like that are useless to you for a while.

Raemann wrote:

Dorje Sylas wrote:

.

Out of all of it Pen and Paper has one supreme advantage still over any digital comer. That is the long campaign. Adventure Paths from Paizo would be a good example of the kind of game that Pen and Paper can do that the other forms have difficulty in achieving. In...

I liked this point that you made and I really liked the last point that you made about people that wouldn't be caught dead with a dice bag in their hands. You made me remember the key feature of PnP being it's appeal to the unchallenged mind. They who find unimpressive stories, quests and gear-popping the rave were never candidates for true dungeon crawl in the first place. But, I am a hopeless fan of the human potential and so I wait for the masses to embrace the joys of mentally stimulating challenges.

Someone else warned me that I was a tad naieve?

Then you missed my part about EVE Online. Here's the quasi joke graphics. Having played EVE and done the range, High Security "save" space to dabbling in 0.0 (unsecured full PvP space). EVE is defiantly not for unchallenged. Penalty of very dark story material in the setting, and a large amount of player to player driven drama. Gear is good in EVE, but so is knowing when and how to use it. You can see it in the Alliance Tournaments where everyone is basically bringing top end gear.

Could be the mechanics on how players "level" in that game. Which is not the traditional "kill things to gain XP". EVE uses a Skill Points per Second system, the long you play the better your character gets. In effect it is a "character growth" system. My "Main" character transition from market merchant to a Wing Commander and Mining Foreman.

Many of the people I've "fleeted" with would likely not be interested in playing a Pen and Paper RPG.

Great now I have another time sink to invest in. I have always considered picking EVE up. Now I will have to.

james maissen wrote:

KilroySummoner wrote:

I have never found a use for a Lantern archon - though it sounds useful, an Auroch has never failed to be more useful.

Fight a tin can cleric with stoneskin up.

Your summons simply miss them, and when they connect the stoneskin eats most of the damage.

In other words, when you want some touch attacks that ignore DR.

-James

This. They're not the most useful summon of their respective level, but their abilities are unique enough to warrant summoning them in specific circumstances. They certainly made fighting golems easier for my team.

Lantern archons at the level you get them do some solid work. Don't overlook aid, and definitely don't overlook truespeech in the right situations.

I've kicked around some thoughts on an elven archer/wizard full caster, but a transmuter from the enhancement sub school. at 8th level in combat he can have his highish int, his transmuter +2 buff, his enhance subschool buff, and his 8th level subschool buff towards dex,int, and strength to make him do decent damage with a bow when not casting.

What annoys me is the 'one-true-wayism' coming the other way. It's not a one-sided fail.

It's that insistence that rolling is the ONLY way to be creative and roleplay and that anyone that doesn't is a stupid munchkin.

I'm not seeing a one wayism from that side. If anything I'm seeing lot's of ways to play from that side. Lot's of way's to work a background to fit in from that side. Where did you see someone saying the only way to have fun was from rolled stats?

Strange One wrote:

I agree with Pirate on this. I've been playing RPG's for about 27 years and it never ceases to amaze me how many players seem to forget those two words before the word "Game"...Role Playing!

No offense intended, but if a player can't have fun unless they've got a character who can whoop arse in combat, then that player is missing the point in my opinion. I would gladly take those stats and make a totally fun character out of them using just about any class. Sure, every character must have a class, but there's no rule in the game that says the character has to be GOOD at it. Playing a bumbling wizard with a low intelligence or a skinny fighter with a pathetic strength score can be tons of fun. Especially when the character thinks they're awesome.

Except when you die a lot or are completely ineffectual in the game, then it isn't fun at all.

Quote:

Reminds me of something Sun Tzu said in The Art Of War: "For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the epitome of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the epitome of skill."

You know who doesn't negotiate? Angry bears/trolls/zombies/owlbears/evil cultists/etc.

Quote:

If all you want to do is kill things, go play DOOM.

If all you want to do is role-play, go join an acting troupe.

I understand that in your mind only YOU can be right, but you won't die more or less with stats like these versus uber stats. You dying has more to do with luck of the draw than it does with stats.

I have seen minmax character after character get buzzsawed in my current game group while the guy with a PC created for him (doesn't live and die with a rulebook at his side) constantly goes against what his PC is built for and shines time and time again.

All of the characters theorized in this thread are not only going to be fun to play, but have just as much survivability and threat potential as an uber statted one. If you look at stats as what they are (percentage points of doing whatever is called for) this guy is 5 or 10% behind an uber stat guy in whatever the player wants to run.

vuron wrote:

Keep in mind that as a touch attack your target's touch AC is liable to be much lower than his physical AC. If the difference between the 2 numbers is large enough the chill touch can actually produce a higher DPR than a melee attack because the hit percentage with a melee attack would be so low.

Well, yes, but if i wanted to make a character that does nothing but stand at close range and attack once or twice a round, i would roll a fighter.

I dont suppose spectral hand makes this spell more worthwhile?

It makes it more worthwhile for sure since you aren't standing next to whoever slugging it out. I myself have a monk sorcerer build with all of the touch spells and the aberrant bloodline (10' reach for touch attacks). Dude can get his AC in the high 30's and still has a +7 to hit on touch attacks at 8th level. Never over look something that hits touch AC. Hell touch of fatigue is even very good if used in the right way and thats 0 level.

Late, but I like to play this game. I like the dwarf druid, but an Elf Wizard maybe?

Stats would look like this.
STR 12
DEX 10
CON 13
INT 15
WIS 10
CHA 9

I know people want a higher int for Wizard but he could do pretty well with this actually; by the time he really needs it he can boost spells with spell focus feats, boost his int stat leveling, and get some Int boost items... and/or focus on spells that don't need saves. Conjurer, Transmuter, or Universalist would all be good.

Gotta say though, it's stat rolls like this (and ones that are all 17s and 18s) that make me insist on point buy when I run my own games, despite the other problems that point buy pose.

There are quite a few spells that have no save for this wizard. Not to mention a lot of utility spells where obviously none is needed.

This topic really gives me an itch to work out a game with the roll up option imposed.

The main stats for a frontliner or a caster aren't that far off. No you won't be a rogue. You can still adequately play anything but a rogue even if you are all stats stats stats in these 2 examples. Who cares if your fighter has a 17 int for example.

And what about the far more powerful character wiping up mooks like spilled drinks as opposed to the OP who could maybe slow them down and worry them a bit and then possibly beat them through attrition?

For a straight fighter he hits roughly 10% more of the time, for 2 points more and has 1 more hp per level. Let's not play it up like he is a pit fiend.

ken loupe wrote:

I have to again disagree on the Hercules comment. With that logic it is pointless to ever play anything but a caster. At high levels in the majority of play (with players talents being equal)they will just hands down beat a non caster.

Which is why most people around here rarely get to higher level games. How many APs are written targeted at levels 15-20?

Quote:

The OP obviously will have only a select few options that he can pull of playing well obviously. Where as Fergie's character can pretty much pick and choose through most classes.

That being said, when it comes down to combat with equal gear they aren't so far apart when they play a role best suited to them.

...what? Fergie plays a halfling fighter. He still has a better to-hit and damage than the OP if the OP plays a Half-Orc Fighter. Not to mention AC and HP.

Quote:

but being a summoner, or druid, or some other spellcasting class not directly worried about throwing out high DC save spells it can surely function.

Yes, they will all be equals when playing a class based around having a secondary character and improving its combat abilities. Or just staying in the back and not trying to add to combat directly. That's hardly a point at all because SOME ONE does have to be in front. Not everyone can just stand in the back and do nothing.

I said a role best suited to them which for the OP obviously isn't a fighter. You originally said they have no place in the same party. With this last post you said they could be in the same party. Thanks for agreeing to my point.

Just like if Fergie had his 17 str in cha and his 12 cha in str it doesn't make him useless in combat because he isn't best suited to be a front liner.

Gallard Stormeye wrote:

A lot of you guys have a terrible attitude. Just because his stats are slightly below average doesn't mean his character is useless or hopeless.

No, it means it is severely limited in both its survivability and ability to contribute to the party. Never mind choice on the part of the player if he even wants to approach either of those things.

Quote:

His DM had his players use this stat generation method for a reason.

Yes, I've seen lots of bad decisions for good reasons. Like "This is the way I've always done it!" or "This is the way we do it in my other game!"

You know, intelligent, well-reasoned stuff.

Quote:

Yes, point buy is superior, but you guys wouldn't be suggesting he kill himself or some other rubbish if he had the 'silly 16+ in each stat' character.

No, because that would be good. (Your attempt at logical fallacy is laughable.)

I wouldn't even be making the suggestion if he ended up with the mediocrity I rolled. His stats as rolled and as partitioned are awful. Especially if some one rolled really well.

In opposition to what the old-timer, ken, wrote, I say you can't have a peasant and Hercules in the same party and have fair and balanced combat. You can't even have "a really average character" and Hercules in the same group and have fair and balanced combat. You either challenge one and not the other. Or you challenge one and kill everyone else

I have to again disagree on the Hercules comment. With that logic it is pointless to ever play anything but a caster. At high levels in the majority of play (with players talents being equal)they will just hands down beat a non caster. The OP obviously will have only a select few options that he can pull of playing well obviously. Where as Fergie's character can pretty much pick and choose through most classes.

That being said, when it comes down to combat with equal gear they aren't so far apart when they play a role best suited to them. No the OP can't be a fighter class or an int based spellcaster anywhere near Fergie, but being a summoner, or druid, or some other spellcasting class not directly worried about throwing out high DC save spells it can surely function.

A lot of you guys have a terrible attitude. Just because his stats are slightly below average doesn't mean his character is useless or hopeless. His DM had his players use this stat generation method for a reason. Stop suggesting he find reasons to game the system.

Yes, point buy is superior, but you guys wouldn't be suggesting he kill himself or some other rubbish if he had the 'silly 16+ in each stat' character.

I second the dwarf druid option. Kingmaker seems to favor druids a lot (at least early on).

I often feel point buy is to cookie cutter. While the game has progressed as far as "tightening up" the rules, it has lagged in some things I liked about earlier editions.

ken loupe wrote:

This is pretty close to a low fantasy point buy. He has a couple of good stats, and some crappy ones. To say that PC's can't function without 18's or 20's in their prime stats is absurd. The game also is not just a numbers game tactics are useful as well. In combat, "luck of the die" in many cases is way more important than stats.

It's a 9 point buy. 10 point buy is low fantasy. But what if another player has the equivalent, like Fergie, of better than High Fantasy? And that was assuming the DM was understanding that he needed to run a low fantasy game in the first place.

I am aware it's a 9 point I said close. 9 is very close to 10. The fact that one has low fantasy stats versus one having over high both can easily still play at the same table, and in the same group. If I were the DM it would be standard monsters straight from the book. Fergie can be a gish, or go just about any PC I suppose. While the OP can be lets say the druid, or summoner mentioned before. I still see him being viable as a PC.

ken loupe wrote:

Cartigan wrote:

ken loupe wrote:

If everyone rolled stats he likely has the best or near the best out of the group he averaged 11+ per stat versus the normal 9.5. I also now want to play a rolled stat game.

I play a rolled stat game, but it was WAY higher than this (my character probably came out to 30+ pt buy in 3.5). Plus the stats went wherever you wanted them, not the absurd "HAND OF THE GODS" 3d6 straight down the line.

It's not all that absurd. The game wasn't always point buy, and I have had lots of fun playing both styles. With the optimizing generation,I'm sure there are still a million different ways this character will get up near doing 900 damage a round like so many folks love nowadays.

It's completely absurd. Legacy != good simply by the fact it is legacy. Plus, the game was not the same thing. 3d6 straight down the line may have worked back in the bad old days of "death as a regular occurrence" and "we don't have rules, let's bs everything" but everything today is balanced a certain way and everything is a numbers game.

This is pretty close to a low fantasy point buy. He has a couple of good stats, and some crappy ones. To say that PC's can't function without 18's or 20's in their prime stats is absurd. The game also is not just a numbers game tactics are useful as well. In combat, "luck of the die" in many cases is way more important than stats.

OK, I have to try it...

** spoiler omitted **

EDIT: Hand of the GODS indeed! I will slay you all!
EDIT2: This just makes me more inclined toward point buy. Having the OP's character and this one in the same party is a headache for the GM.

No more than an optimized PC and a bunch of non optimized guys.

OK, I have to try it...

** spoiler omitted **

EDIT: Hand of the GODS indeed! I will slay you all!
EDIT2: This just makes me more inclined toward point buy. Having the OP's character and this one in the same party is a headache for the GM.

WOW! Yes you will.

ken loupe wrote:

If everyone rolled stats he likely has the best or near the best out of the group he averaged 11+ per stat versus the normal 9.5. I also now want to play a rolled stat game.

I play a rolled stat game, but it was WAY higher than this (my character probably came out to 30+ pt buy in 3.5). Plus the stats went wherever you wanted them, not the absurd "HAND OF THE GODS" 3d6 straight down the line.

It's not all that absurd. The game wasn't always point buy, and I have had lots of fun playing both styles. With the optimizing generation,I'm sure there are still a million different ways this character will get up near doing 900 damage a round like so many folks love nowadays.

If everyone rolled stats he likely has the best or near the best out of the group. OP averaged 11+ per stat versus the normal 9.5. I also now want to play a rolled stat game.

KilroySummoner wrote:

You just posted your base form and evolutions, not feats, stats, magic items, saves, ac, hp, etc so I can't tell if it is legal.

Because I thought the confusion was coming from the evolutions, not adding the numbers up. However see if I do something wrong

Webby
Bite(1)
Improved Damage(1)
Magic Attacks(1)
Ability Increase[str](2)
Energy Attack[acid](2)
Web(3)
str:18 con:13 dex:19 int:7 wis:10 cha:11
fort:3 ref:9 will:5
AC:22(23)
HP:Assume that it's half(39)
Feats:
Improved Init
Dodge
Outflank
Damage:
[bite]+10(d8+6)+d6
[tail slap]+5(d6+2)+d6

Yuanty
Bite[1]
Claws[1]
Improved Damage(claws)[1]
Improved Natural Armor[1]
Increased Ability(str)[2]
Limbs[2]
Energy Attacks(cold)[2]
str:18 con:13 dex:19 int:7 wis:10 cha:11
fort:3 ref:9 will:5
AC:24(25)
HP:Assume that it's half(39)
Feats:
Improved Init
Dodge
Outflank
Damage:
This is where I am a bit leery I am assuming that the claws and bite are 'primary' going off full BAB?
[bite]+10(d8+6)+d6
[claws]x2+10(d6+4)+d6
[tail slap]+5(d6+2)+d6

What you for sure are doing wrong is your energy attacks go to one specific attack type. Not all of them. You would need to spend evo points on every different type.

Greg Wasson wrote:

Eidolon threads are broken! They won't stay dead!!!

Greg

I know, its ridiculous.

Plus they get full BAB and seven thread attacks. Its just ridiculous.

There only weakness is math, which only (insert broken class here) gets and no one ever plays them.

I just wish the developers would use there time machines, go back, and place a madatory picture of doppy from the seven dwarves as a tag on anyone who uses the word broken. Besides how long are they going to use that time machine and not do anything, eidolon threads are running loose in the wild right now.

Good thing I prepared eidolon thread immunity for tomorrow, that way I will only sustain flesh wounds!

^rant

mandatory picture of Dopey...

The fact that almost every full BAB class PC takes this trait means its overpowered.

Random encounters while the party rests. Don't let the 15 minute adventuring day happen. Works every time.

Stealing from what a DM did to me, but binding a high level summoners eidolon is a pretty top notch choice

The disconnect comes into play when the rules say that you MUST charge directly towards your target. You can't do that, and then move again without trampling the foe in your way, but you can't trample since you can't charge when there is an obstacle (of any kind) in your way.

You can't even charge alongside the target (jousting style) by RAW since that is not the shortest possible route from which you can make your attack.

Take a look at overrun as well. Yes you can charge through a square as part of a charge.

Can you even use Ride-by Attack with a charge? There seems to be a disconnect in the rules. That's obviously the intent, but the rules as written don't seem to allow for it.

My players are really confused and are hoping for some Pathfinder Designer input on the matter.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/ride-by-attack-combat---final

Where is the disconnect? It actually says you use it as part of a charge.

Big congrats on this Mark. I use your site and d20pfsrd.com every single time I do any gaming. That right there lets you know how well respected, and useful your site is.

Actually I hate everybody's house rules. Yours tend to make lots of sense, but house rules will always suck. The summoner is not broke!

Most importantly congrats on the nomination. I am fully aware how many hours you put into the site. You and the collaborators at d20pfsrd.com deserve any and all accolades you get.

I personally have all 3 of Hyrum's one nighters, and the free module from Sagawork Studios. I can't hype the 4 of them enough. Fantastic work.

[ Even being large can be an issue. My tiger is large in Cot, but I keep forgetting to look for a spell to drop it down to a smaller size until its time to fight something dangerous.

Agreed. I was pointing out a way to stop someone from easily ruining an adventure by being so oversized.

Basically from what I've googled, read, and heard. You can fire an arrow in like 3 seconds, accurately from a back quicker I guess.

4+ arrows >.> 6 seconds.... doesn't compute... <.<

BTW 3 seconds is for a VERY GOOD archer. >.> Least from what I hear.

True, but it can also be said that a 1st level fighter/ranger/pally is essentially at worst a professional soldier. A 1st level cleric can mend deadly wounds with but faith in his god. A 1st level wizard can bend reality. A 1st level druid can call wild animals to his side. A 1st level rogue gets an extra d6 when flanking... ;D

With all of those things it becomes easy to think a 6+ level full BAB archer can be a Robin Hood sort.

wraithstrike wrote:

When they first came out they could wear armor, plus any magical item. Even a fighter can get up to 60 if he focuses on it. On top of that the eidolon has natural armor, there is the feat for improving that, and it is possible to boost it more by spending evolution points.

True, but that was when they first came out. Since then, the only problem I see with them is the Size Evolution needs a Nerf, Pounce needs a level req, and there could be a clause on limbs evolution on getting special permission from you DM for more than one. As most people have commented, The Eidolon is a bit of a glass cannon. If you tailor him to give him survivablity its dmg will (probably) drop below a fighters.

On a side note: If you have evolution for Bite, Claws, and Slam, They all have primary attacks in the discription but I was under the assumption that you could have only one. If you got another you had to pick which was your primary attack. If they can all act as Primary attacks at the same time that might need to be addressed too.

Size bumps are at 6 and 11th respectively. Neither is game breaking at their levels. Huge can just get ruined by a simple 5' hallway in a dungeon crawl. Pounce you need the sub optimal quad for.

Every monster has average hp. So a d10 gets you 5 plus con bonus. Allowing rolls can sneak in more or less hp's. I would leave that to GM's call. 51 sounds nearly impossible for it though since it's 5 HD with a 13 con unless it has buffed that on his ability buff.