After going over animal companions again and again, I'm forced to conclude they're just not even close to balanced.
Proposal:
Use base animal. Animal gets a 'companion penalty' equal to CR (fractions become 0). This penalty reduces effective druid level on the companion chart. This penalty cannot be offset by Natural bond.
At DM's option, one can have a smaller version of a companion with one less penalty and a larger version with one more.
So:
Badger and dog use regular druid level
Horse and wolf use druid level -1.
A large wolf is -2.
Velociraptor is -2.
Deinonychus is -3.
I'll just say I disagree with the whole concept you got going here and leave it at that.
I would love to see a way to get balanced companions.
Balanced Animal Companions .... Did Pathfinder RPG system make animal companions, more, the same or less ballanced than the 3.5 system? I really liked the concept of getting cooler animal companions for high level druids. Pathfinder changed not only the animals but the whole animal companion progression system.
-Swiftbook
Just My Thoughts
My belief was that PF already balanced them >.> Then again, I wouldn't know, but that's my belief.
Ok, so not to throw down the "I hate 4e" gauntlet here, but basically what you're proposing is to homogenize the concept of an animal companion to basically a single creature that gains "different" abilities. 4E did that with classes, and we ended up with a series of wizards we kept calling "fighters," "clerics," and "rogues."
Also, I personally believe that the current grouping of animal companions *is* balanced. 3e is a beautiful system because it has such a complex balancing system when it comes down to it. Take the different companions, for instance. Not a single one is "the best," and none are "the worst." In fact, every single animal companion has its own strengths and weaknesses that lend itself to certain character concepts & builds.
For instance, size large is both a boon and a major hindrance. Sure, it's great when your companion is dishing out damage and trying to land a successful trip, but as soon as you start going through doorways you've got to leave them behind. Goodbye class feature.
Sure, dogs are inferior to small cats, but urban adventurers will find them invaluable when they can keep their ally at their hip during all their adventures. Birds may suck when it comes to dishing out damage, but they can fly and aren't left behind when the party needs to go airborn. Snakes are the same, having both a swim and climb speed, they can follow you into most situations.
My point is that every single animal companion is suitable to a certain druid/ranger/cleric. There's no best or worst, only "best for your character."
I've actually changed my position and mind a bit on this topic already, and mostly agree.
The one change I would make is to permit people to relabel companions (IE: I want a dog who trips, so I'm going to use hyena stats) and to swap advancement schemes.
For example, if you want a dog who stays Small, instead of gaining a size category at 4th level, gain +2 Str and Con like a Horse or Camel does.
Actually, are those already not options in the official rules?
I thought they were. -Is referring to keeping the small dog-
... Doh. You're right, though in this case the option is +2 Dex, +2 Con.
There are so many rules confusions that come from not reading the last line of a description.
(hangs head)
Dude, don't worry about it, I've missed a few rules myself. >< lol That's what ya get for converting to a system similar to, but so VERY different from 3.5 >< You tend to hang onto 3.5 tendencies and then go.. oh shi- wait.. OH MY GOD SWEET.
In fact, I've gone so far as to start homebrewing something for the game, that was already an official pathfinder rule. So imagine how I-- oh wait, we're doing that now.. Anyway, point is. I did the same thing with something else >.>
(grin) There was a thread on ENWorld about rules you never noticed.
And it's surprising how many come up. Spell descriptions, for example... much of the time, people honestly just skipped over the last sentence, over and over, for years. And someone points it out and the person's head explodes. Since... it's right THERE.
Link to thread? lol.
In return, lawlz.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJqgtfvZdsk&NR=1
My apologies... this was probably years ago, and I have no search on ENWorld. :/