|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
So, I find myself a little confused about the rules for Grab and Constrict. If a creature with both abilities successfully hits an opponent and successfully starts the grapple, does the constrict ability kick in that first round (the round of the initial attack and grab attempt)? Or does the constrict ability start the following round, and if so, does it require another successful grapple check to deal the constrict damage?
Thanks in advance for any wisdom you folks can provide.
Sean
So, I find myself a little confused about the rules for Grab and Constrict. If a creature with both abilities successfully hits an opponent and successfully starts the grapple, does the constrict ability kick in that first round (the round of the initial attack and grab attempt)? Or does the constrict ability start the following round, and if so, does it require another successful grapple check to deal the constrict damage?
Thanks in advance for any wisdom you folks can provide.
Sean
Constrict (Ex) A creature with this special attack can crush an opponent, dealing bludgeoning damage, when it makes a successful grapple check (in addition to any other effects caused by a successful check, including additional damage). The amount of damage is given in the creature's entry and is typically equal to the amount of damage caused by the creature's melee attack.
This doesn't tell us much in the way of WHEN the damage occurs, only that it happens on a successful check.
Grab (Ex) If a creature with this special attack hits with the indicated attack (usually a claw or bite attack), it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity. Unless otherwise noted, grab works only against opponents at least one size category smaller than the creature. The creature has the option to conduct the grapple normally, or simply use the part of its body it used in the grab to hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a –20 penalty on its CMB check to make and maintain the grapple, but does not gain the grappled condition itself. A successful hold does not deal any extra damage unless the creature also has the constrict special attack. If the creature does not constrict, each successful grapple check it makes during successive rounds automatically deals the damage indicated for the attack that established the hold. Otherwise, it deals constriction damage as well (the amount is given in the creature's descriptive text).
Creatures with the grab special attack receive a +4 bonus on combat maneuver checks made to start and maintain a grapple.
The italicized part of the text leads me to believe that constriction damage is immediate, at least when the grab ability is being used.
I hope that helps.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
wow this seems crazy. A 5th level animal companion constrictor snake, with Str 24 Dex 16 Con 17 Int 1 Wis 12 Cha 2 and a bull's strength slapped on it bite as a +12 and does 1d4+16 damage on it's bite (with power attack and weapon focus), then attempts to grab at a +17, and then constricts for 1d4+13 per round, for an average damage of 34 damage. It then proceed to constrict in the next round, doing constrict damage on top of its bite damage for with a +5 bonus to the grapple check... So it does an average of 34 damage per round (For reference a typical CR 5 creature has 55 HP and 18 AC, meaning it dies in 2 rounds and will get hit by the attack 75% of the time)
A typical lvl 5 fighter with 20 str and a greatsword, power attack, weapon focus, weapon spec, and weapon training is swinging at... Greatsword +10 (2d6+16 [7 str + 6 power attack + 2 spec + 1 training]) for an average of 23 damage!? Why is an animal companion doing 1.5 times the damage of a fully focused fighter while inflicting a debilitating condition on the enemy (grappled), while the druid hangs out and has tea?
Does that seem broken to anyone else?
Does that seem broken to anyone else?
Creatures with constriction have always been deadly.
It seems broken, but look at the disadvantages. They're wide open to attacks from their target's allies.
Creatures with constriction have always been deadly.
It seems broken, but look at the disadvantages. They're wide open to attacks from their target's allies.
As far as I'm aware, the only things that really change while you have the grappled condition in pathfinder is that you take a -4 dex penalty and you can no longer make AoO's. Yes, you lose 2 AC, but I don't see how that makes it ok that in the above example, the druid's animal companion outdamages the fighter. In that example, the snake has AC 15 [10-1size+3dex+5natural-2grapple] while the fighter probably has an AC of 20 at most (+1 full plate). Yes, the AC is significantly higher on the fighter, but that doesn't make it ok that the snake does 1.5 times the damage... (remember the snake is not a PC... it's a fractional component of another PC's class features)
Not to mention the fact that grab+constrict should probably increase any creature's CR by +1 or more considering that it nearly doubles their damage...
|
Yeah, I played a druid with a constrictor, and Squeeze (my snake's name) was deadly. I was kind of glad when my druid stopped being playable* shortly after Squeeze got large, he was just doing too much damage compared to the others in the group.
*<rant>A creature with an insanity (lvl 7 spell) gaze attack should not be a cr 5 creature (Barrow Wight)... There's nothing in the monster creation section for increasing cr for a gaze attack with a high level spell...</rant>
vip00, I wouldn't worry about that snake companion too much. First off, at 5th level he's only size medium. That means that his grab ability only works on creatures size small or smaller. Unless you're fighting mostly kobolds the snake probably isn't doing a lot of grappling.
The stats you have seem to be from a higher level snake though, maybe one for a 7th level or up Druid. At that point the Fighter is a little more capable and if nothing else certainly has a second attack per round (and therefore higher potential damage output than the snake). I suppose one could argue that the animal companion is an overpowered class feature, but relatively speaking the snake isn't as nasty as some other companions. As a large creature the higher level snake can grab a wider variety of foes, but he's probably a lot less effective than the
Snake and big cat both have these likely stats at 7th level:
BAB +4
Str +8 (24 Str and +2 item)
Grab +4
Size +1
Grapple CMB +18
I believe the Power Attack penalty comes off of your grapple check too, so grappling things might not be as easy as you'd think. Assuming the snake can pull off the power grapple combo he'll do about 1d4+18 for the bite and 1d4+12 for the constrict, an average of 35 damage. Meanwhile the cat can claw/claw/bite for 1d6+8/1d6+8/1d8+8, an average of 35.5 damage, and he doesn't have to win a grapple check. If he decides that grappling wold be fun his CMB is the same as the snake's, and he gets two free rake attacks, potentially lifting his average damage to something like 58.5.
I also forgot to power attack, so increase that average from 35.5/58.5 to 47.5/78.5. Yeah, the big cat is that much more dangerous than the snake, and he can keep you just as grappled. A Druid with a little imagination will also outfit the cat with an amulet of mighty fists to pump the damage up by 1d6 or even 2d6 per attack. I don't think that damage gets added to constrict, so the snake loses again.
Of course this all assumes that all attacks and grapples are successful. If one die comes up low the snake falls behind more quickly than the cat though. He is also slow and can't pounce. With a speed of 20 he's not likely a good flanker. Granted, the big cat is probably the best combat companion, but an ape will outdamage the snake against most enemies, has reach, and can probably open doors too. I'm sure there are multiple companions in the bestiary better than the snake too.
|
I've always played this a bit different. When I see the section that says that constrict occurs after a successful grapple check, I take it to mean checks in the grapple. It could be argued that the initial check is a combat maneuver check that begins a grapple, not a grapple check in and of itself.
@Devilkiller: Here's the line from the SRD.
Starting Statistics: Size Medium; Speed 20 ft., climb 20 ft., swim 20 ft.; AC +2 natural armor; Attack bite (1d3); Ability Scores Str 15, Dex 17, Con 13, Int 1, Wis 12, Cha 2; Special Attacks grab; Special Qualities low-light vision, scent.
4th-Level Advancement: Size Large; AC +1 natural armor; Attack bite (1d4); Ability Scores Str +8, Dex –2, Con +4; Special Attacks constrict 1d4.
He is indeed a large animal at lvl 5 so my concern is very valid. THe Big cat that you linked to is in fact not large at that level, so his ability doesn't matter till lvl 8.
@YuenglingDragon Anything from James Jacobs is official. Playing it otherwise means houserules!
I'm not sure I agree with the math for the damage of the 5th level snake...
It starts at STR 15, goes to STR 24 at 5th level, and has a BAB of +3 (per the SRD). With Bull's Strength, that's STR 28, a +9 STR bonus. Since Power Attack grants -1, plus an additional -1 at BAB +4, the snake gets Power Attack -1/+3 (as the bite is the only attack, per standard rules for Natural Attacks), for damage of 1d4+(+9+3)=1d4+12 (not 1d4+16). Also, Power Attack applies a -1 penalty to its attack rolls and CMB checks for one round and grants a +3 bonus to melee damage rolls. Therefore, I think, the Constrict damage, not being melee damage per se, would not gain the damage from Power Attack. (This makes sense to me, as constriction would not gain anything from a diminished chance to hit the way that a very powerful attack can.) So the Constriction damage would be limited to 1d4+9, for a total damage-per-round of 2d4+21, or an average of 26 damage.
This is not nearly as far off of the Fighter (the math for which I do agree with) at 23 damage on average per round, but at 5th level he should have at least 5 feats and was only allocated 3 of them. If he has Cleave, for example, his potential damage output doubles to 46 average damage assuming that he faces at least two adjacent opponents. (That caveats exist to predicate average damage cuts both ways, however, as we assumed that the Snake has a fairly good chance of fighting a medium or smaller creature.)
If I felt like it, I could assemble a collection of on-level encounters to calculate the likelihood of the Fighter being able to Cleave (for extra damage) and the likelihood of the Snake being able to Constrict (for extra damage), to multiply the average damage from the conditional attacks by the probability of them occurring to get a truly comparable average damage figure to compare, but given the disparity in AC between the Fighter and the Snake, I'm disinclined to make that effort.
In short, the numbers appeared dramatically different due to a math error and the assumption of the applicability of Constrict coinciding with the lack of a fully defined suite of abilities for the Fighter.
Edited for insertion of Links! to the relevant SRD pages:
Power Attack - http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/power-attack-combat---final
Druid Animal Companion Table - http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/druid#TOC-Animal-Companions
I'm not sure I agree with the math for the damage of the 5th level snake...
It starts at STR 15, goes to STR 24 at 5th level, and has a BAB of +3 (per the SRD). With Bull's Strength, that's STR 28, a +9 STR bonus. Since Power Attack grants -1, plus an additional -1 at BAB +4, the snake gets Power Attack -1/+3 (as the bite is the only attack, per standard rules for Natural Attacks), for damage of 1d4+(+9+3)=1d4+12 (not 1d4+16). Also, Power Attack applies a -1 penalty to its attack rolls and CMB checks for one round and grants a +3 bonus to melee damage rolls. Therefore, I think, the Constrict damage, not being melee damage per se, would not gain the damage from Power Attack. (This makes sense to me, as constriction would not gain anything from a diminished chance to hit the way that a very powerful attack can.) So the Constriction damage would be limited to 1d4+9, for a total damage-per-round of 2d4+21, or an average of 26 damage.
Actually, a creature with a single natural attack adds 1 1/2 time its strength bonus. So the base bite of the snake would do 1d4+(9*1.5) or 1d4+13. Okay, I see your argument for the power attack, so the snake - though we've always played that it gives a bonus to trying to damage an opponent in a grapple (it makes sense that it gives bonuses to damage in a grapple since it takes away from CMB). If we remove that damage bonus, the snake simply does 1d4+13 with a successful grapple check and 1d4+13 more from constrict for a total of 2d4+26, or 31 damage per round. (versus the 23 of the fighter).
It gets even worse for the fighter if you want to consider real encounter situations. An average CR 5 opponent has an AC around 18 (see chart here) so the fighter swinging at +10 needs an 8 or better to hit (65% chance to hit each round). The snake only needs to bite on the first round at +12 (75% chance) and then succeed on the initial grab attempt at +17 (there are no official averages for CMD at this level, but I think you would agree that for a typical opponent of medium or smaller size, it wouldn't be hard at all). On subsequent rounds, the snake gets a +5 to maintain the grapple, so it will be making those checks at +22 (this should be pretty much auto-success for this level). So the fighter will actually have more trouble getting that 23 damage to land than the snake with its 31.
Granted, the snake's damage is cut in half if it can't grab its opponent, so it's not nearly as ridiculous vs a large or larger opponent. So yes, it is more situational, but it completely whoops the fighter in situations where it does apply (don't forget that it grants the grappled condition to the target!). And yes, the fighter may have cleave for example (again, very situational!), but I think you can see why I am concerned about the balance of this situation.
Actually, a creature with a single natural attack adds 1 1/2 time its strength bonus. So the base bite of the snake would do 1d4+(9*1.5) or 1d4+13. Okay, I see your argument for the power attack, so the snake - though we've always played that it gives a bonus to trying to damage an opponent in a grapple (it makes sense that it gives bonuses to damage in a grapple since it takes away from CMB). If we remove that damage bonus, the snake simply does 1d4+13 with a successful grapple check and 1d4+13 more from constrict for a total of 2d4+26, or 31 damage per round. (versus the 23 of the fighter).
It gets even worse for the fighter if you want to consider real encounter situations. An average CR 5 opponent has an AC around 18 (see chart here) so the fighter swinging at +10 needs an 8 or better to hit (65% chance to hit each round). The snake only needs to bite on the first round at +12 (75% chance) and then succeed on the initial grab attempt at +17 (there are no official averages for CMD at this level, but I think you would agree that for a typical opponent of medium or smaller size, it wouldn't be hard at all). On subsequent rounds, the snake gets a +5 to maintain the grapple, so it will be making those checks at +22 (this should be pretty much auto-success for this level). So the fighter will actually have more trouble getting that 23 damage to land than the snake with its 31.
Granted, the snake's damage is cut in half if it can't grab its opponent, so it's not nearly as ridiculous vs a large or larger opponent. So yes, it is more situational, but it completely whoops the fighter in situations where it does apply (don't forget that it grants the grappled condition to the target!). And yes, the fighter may have cleave for example (again, very situational!), but I think you can see why I am concerned about the balance of this situation.
Whups! I missed that 1.5x multiplier for the snake, sorry. I do take your point in that the Large Constrictor Snake is capable of dishing out more damage to a single target than the Medium Fighter. (I still contend that the Fighters potential to strike twice with cleave mitigates this disparity to an extent - the Fighter has a 65% chance to hit for an average of 23 damage on his first attack and an aggregate chance of 42.25% to be able to attempt and connect with the second Cleave attack for 46 total damage (albeit to 2 creatures). For the purposes of the evaluation, I agree with your suggestion that the snake is incredibly likely to confirm all CMB checks in this case, as well as resist attempts to break the grapple due to high CMD. For a true numerical comparison, then, under the law of large numbers, the average damage output should be multiplied by the %chance of success: 0.75 x 31 = 23.25; 0.4225 x 46 = 19.435; 0.65 x 23 = 14.95. But the Fighter retains the ability to execute Attacks of Opportunity, and thus has the potential to be able to gain an additional 14.95 average damage per round, contingent on his foe(s) provoking an AoO. Note that the 5th level fighter still has at least one unallocated feat and could easily select something to improve his chance of making an AoO.) Based on the numbers, over the long term, the Snake is slightly deadlier than the Fighter against an average medium-or-smaller CR 5 opponent provided that the opponent provokes AoOs a statistically insignificant number of times - in the event that the opponent provokes AoOs a significant number of times (something that good tactical play can enhance), the Fighter has the potential to exceed the Snake in deadliness. In order to match the long-term average damage-per-round of the Snake, the Fighter needs to "make up" a gap of 8.3 damage-per-round. An opponent that provokes AoOs 55.5% of the time will reasonably satisfy this discrepancy (14.95 x 0.555 = 8.297). I grant that an opponent who provokes AoOs over half of the time is unlikely in one-on-one combat, but it may become more achievable with cooperation from other party members, and an opponent who provokes a smaller but statistically significant frequency of AoOs is still increasing the Fighter's long-term average damage-per-round.
At 5th level, however, I'm willing to concede that this is more or less an accurate depiction of a scenario that could be found in real life - I think that a Large Constrictor Snake *should* be slightly more deadly than a 5th level fighter against foes it can constrict. I should also point out that the majority of CR 5 monsters in the Bestiary and on d20pfsrd.org are Large sized creatures or have other defenses against being caught in a grapple/constrict situation (The Wraith is incorporeal, the Mummy probably welcomes the grapple, the dragons can fly and have breath weapons, the ochre jelly can't be grappled or constricted, etc.) All of these foes, though, can be smacked by a sword and almost all foes have to potential to provoke AoOs.
In conclusion, I don't particularly see the matter as a problem...
Perhaps it's just a problem in my game, as I tend to have a lot of humanoid opponents with class levels rather than monsters (urban campaign currently). So the fact that the druid can take care of them faster and more efficiently than the fighter on average without ever having to do anything beyond casting a bull's strength (I'm not going to get into the discussion of being able to wold shape and deal damage in addition to the companion as well as summon animals) leaves the fighter with pretty much nothing to do.
At first I thought that it would balance out with the fact that the fighter has much higher survivability, but in the end it really doesn't because the druid can always get a new animal companion if the old one dies. The fighter can't afford to be resurrected every day in a similar fashion.
Perhaps it's just a problem in my game, as I tend to have a lot of humanoid opponents with class levels rather than monsters (urban campaign currently). So the fact that the druid can take care of them faster and more efficiently than the fighter on average without ever having to do anything beyond casting a bull's strength (I'm not going to get into the discussion of being able to wold shape and deal damage in addition to the companion as well as summon animals) leaves the fighter with pretty much nothing to do.
At first I thought that it would balance out with the fact that the fighter has much higher survivability, but in the end it really doesn't because the druid can always get a new animal companion if the old one dies. The fighter can't afford to be resurrected every day in a similar fashion.
Naturally not, I do understand the issue you're having. Two things strike me about the situation, though... If your combats featuring a low number of higher CR foes are leaving the fighter with little to do and are generally less challenging for the party, would it be possible to arrange for encounters with a larger number of individually lower-CR creatures under circumstances where the party is at a disadvantage? Also, it strikes me as rather callous of the Druid to assume the sort of attitude about the expandability of the companion as you seem to depict in your comment about survivability... Just my two cents.
Naturally not, I do understand the issue you're having. Two things strike me about the situation, though... If your combats featuring a low number of higher CR foes are leaving the fighter with little to do and are generally less challenging for the party, would it be possible to arrange for encounters with a larger number of individually lower-CR creatures under circumstances where the party is at a disadvantage? Also, it strikes me as rather callous of the Druid to assume the sort of attitude about the expandability of the companion as you seem to depict in your comment about survivability... Just my two cents.Perhaps it's just a problem in my game, as I tend to have a lot of humanoid opponents with class levels rather than monsters (urban campaign currently). So the fact that the druid can take care of them faster and more efficiently than the fighter on average without ever having to do anything beyond casting a bull's strength (I'm not going to get into the discussion of being able to wold shape and deal damage in addition to the companion as well as summon animals) leaves the fighter with pretty much nothing to do.
At first I thought that it would balance out with the fact that the fighter has much higher survivability, but in the end it really doesn't because the druid can always get a new animal companion if the old one dies. The fighter can't afford to be resurrected every day in a similar fashion.
Speaking in regards to doskius and vip00, currently in my campaign we have a wildshaping grappler druid with a grappling constrictor companion. To date (from level 1-6) the combo is potent in dealing out the damage, but the druid's most often mentioned comment is that he wishes his AC was closer to the Fighter's. He takes a lot more damage in the comparison of my table's live play. Weather this matters to either of you i don't know, but i wanted to share some personal experience in the matter also.
Just to point out, a single Enlarge Person spell would free the Fighter from Squeeze's Grapple+Constrict immediately.
And to make a fair comparison between the two, if Squeeze has received a Bull's Strength spell, it would be fair to give it to the Fighter, too (or at least a Belt of Strength +2).
Quick comparison:
Squeeze with Bull's Strength:
Fighter with Bull's Strength (Str 18, Dex 13, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 8):
Squeeze needs a 10+ to hit the Fighter and a 11+ to Grapple him for additional Constrict damage; of course, if Grappled the Fighter cannot use the Longsword two-handed anymore. Fighter needs a 5+ if two-handed, 4+ if one-handed. If grappled his chances to escape are very few - he better keeps on pounding him with his sword one-handed and trying to drop him dead.
If the Fighter has initiative, the fight if already over. Charge + Power Attack two-handed means he needs a 3+, which is basically a hit which drops Squeeze to 16 hp. Even if grappled + constricted, he would survive (with around 14 hp) and kill him with a hit one-handed (he needs a 4+ to hit him - Squeeze has -2 to AC and Fighter -2 to hit, which evens out). If Squeeze has initiative, the fight is more even.
I would dare to say that the Fighter has an overall advantage, after all - since we are not considering the Animal Companion's Druid held in a fight with the rest of the Fighter's party...
In a one-on-one fight, a Large Constrictor snake is a powerful creature indeed. But again, usually it is supposed to be fought by a party. In such a case, while Squeeze is crippling one character (which has usually enough hp to survive a couple of rounds), the rest of the party pounds him to death (AC of the Animal Companion is not stellar, and while Grappling it is further reduced - and Squeeze cannot retaliate with AoO either).
If the Animal Companion wishes to keep AC and AoO, it would take a -20 on Grapple checks - the Fighter would very easily eascape from such a poor Grapple...
Just my 2c.
There was a 3.0 feat that allowed Fighters an AoO whenever a foe attempted to Grapple, adding the insueing damage to the contested roll. Taking this feat broke our 'dm' of his fixation on trolls and other grappling monsters. Did some incarnation of this feat make it into PF?
Unfortunately I can't force the druid to care about his animal companion, so there is not much I can do about enforcing that. I don't tend to run a lot of smaller enemies, I use a pretty good mix of lower and higher CR enemies; however in a human city, most opponents are... human.
As far as the AC issue, the druid in my campaign rarely actually gets into melee himself, so he doesn't really care much about his own AC.
I was not talking a snake VS fighter situation, they are both on the same side. The snake just makes the fighter feel useless because it can do his job better than he can (and the druid is still a potent spellcaster on top of that!) Additionally, at proper wealth by level, the fighter would have quite a bit of trouble affording a belt of strength +2 especially if he's invested anything into his armor and weapon.
Grappling normally provokes an AoO, the resulting damage of which adds to the AoO. The grab ability of the snake avoids that.
Unfortunately I can't force the druid to care about his animal companion, so there is not much I can do about enforcing that. I don't tend to run a lot of smaller enemies, I use a pretty good mix of lower and higher CR enemies; however in a human city, most opponents are... human.
As far as the AC issue, the druid in my campaign rarely actually gets into melee himself, so he doesn't really care much about his own AC.
I was not talking a snake VS fighter situation, they are both on the same side. The snake just makes the fighter feel useless because it can do his job better than he can (and the druid is still a potent spellcaster on top of that!) Additionally, at proper wealth by level, the fighter would have quite a bit of trouble affording a belt of strength +2 especially if he's invested anything into his armor and weapon.
Grappling normally provokes an AoO, the resulting damage of which adds to the AoO. The grab ability of the snake avoids that.
As far as the Druid caring about his companion... I dunno, if it was my game, I might throw increasingly less subtle hints that the divine source of his class abilities was less than happy with him (starting with purely fluff-based hints and progressing to actual minor mechanical penalties, culminating in impaired spellcasting or having the Animal Companion leave or having the ritual to get a new one fail or something). After all, like Paladins, Druids have an expectation of a particular conduct and detailed mechanical results for failing to uphold their code of conduct:
A druid who ceases to revere nature, changes to a prohibited alignment, or teaches the Druidic language to a nondruid loses all spells and druid abilities (including her animal companion, but not including weapon, armor, and shield proficiencies). She cannot thereafter gain levels as a druid until she atones (see the atonement spell description). Emphasis mine.
Of course, in my opinion, any GM who doesn't provide hints that the behaviour the character in question exhibits will result in the invocation of that clause is a very heavy-handed GM, which is why I suggest the subtle hints that progressively get not-so-subtle. One of the reasons that Druids, Paladins, and Clerics are so powerful is because their expected behaviour is limited by a significantly less nebulous moral/ethical code, subject to the interpretation of the GM.
As a side note, are you having the Druid make Handle Animal checks to control and direct the snake in combat? (If not, technically the determination of what the snake does is left to the GM... Constrictor snakes usually only attack when they're hungry as I recall...)
Naturally, I don't know the specifics of your game situation, so I apologize if I've suggested things that are, for whatever reason, infeasible for you to implement. I'm just trying to point out that I don't think that the Druid class was designed to have the Animal Companion feature regarded as callously as your Druid seems to, and that if the class and the associated class abilities were played more in line with the design expectations, your group might see less of a disparity between the Fighter and the snake.
That's a pretty good idea. Maybe I'll have to start introducing some sort of warnings from nature against his behavior, or a new animal companion taking extra time to come to him after a day of prayer. I'm not sure how I could introduce the handle animal rules in the middle of the game, though technically if the snake knows the Attack trick, it should attack on command without the need for a roll (which is the whole point of the tricks, really).
That's a pretty good idea. Maybe I'll have to start introducing some sort of warnings from nature against his behavior, or a new animal companion taking extra time to come to him after a day of prayer. I'm not sure how I could introduce the handle animal rules in the middle of the game, though technically if the snake knows the Attack trick, it should attack on command without the need for a roll (which is the whole point of the tricks, really).
Actually, no. Not the point of tricks at all. Tricks make the DC of the Handle Animal check reasonable, not eliminate the need entirely.
Even druids need to use Handle Animal on their animal companions. Granted, the Link ability gives them a +4 bonus, and if they put a single rank into it they get +4 from the trained bonus, so a druid with a Cha of 10 still has a +8 to Handle Animal at level 1 (and thus only fails the basic DC on a 1)
But look at Handle Animal for a moment.
Handle an Animal: This task involves commanding an animal to perform a task or trick that it knows. If the animal is wounded or has taken any nonlethal damage or ability score damage, the DC increases by 2. If your check succeeds, the animal performs the task or trick on its next action.
Handling the animal is DC 10, 12 if the animal is wounded. This is for tricks the animal actually knows, whether trained or as animal companion bonus tricks. Now, since there is no auto-failure on skill checks, if the Druid gets a mod of +11 on Handle Animal, you could effectively disregard these roll as a roll of 1 would still succeed even the wounded DC 12. Note, as per the animal companion rules, it is a free action to Handle the companion.
“Push” an Animal: To push an animal means to get it to perform a task or trick that it doesn't know but is physically capable of performing. This category also covers making an animal perform a forced march or forcing it to hustle for more than 1 hour between sleep cycles. If the animal is wounded or has taken any nonlethal damage or ability score damage, the DC increases by 2. If your check succeeds, the animal performs the task or trick on its next action.
If the animal doesn't know the trick, your looking at DC 25 (27 if wounded). For animal companions, it is a move action to "push" rather than a full round. As I mentioned earlier, if you got the Handle Animal bonus up to +26, you could waive the rolls, since a 1 would still succeed.
Finally, many DMs allow an animal companion raised to INT 3 to "free itself" from the trick mechanic, in the sense that the creature is now intelligent enough to understand (and thus perform) all of the standard tricks.
Good Stuff
+1 - the Druid can make the check as a Free action, unless it's to Push the creature, in which case it's a Move action (remember that attacking Aberrations, Outsiders, and other non-natural creatures like Dragons or Were-creatures, and whatnot does require the animal to be Pushed).
That's a pretty good idea. Maybe I'll have to start introducing some sort of warnings from nature against his behavior, or a new animal companion taking extra time to come to him after a day of prayer. I'm not sure how I could introduce the handle animal rules in the middle of the game, though technically if the snake knows the Attack trick, it should attack on command without the need for a roll (which is the whole point of the tricks, really).
As far as implementing the Handle Animal mechanic, the thing that I do to change the way I handle something is to take a few minutes at the beginning of the next session to explain the disparity, and to apologize for the discontinuity, but to explain that whatever I've recently been alerted to makes more sense to me as a way to run the game going forward, and that I'd like to do that. Heck, it can even be just a side-conversation between sessions with the Druid's player. <shrug> That's what I'd do, anyway.
Also, something easy to miss that I didn't mention earlier about replacing an Animal Companion:
[The Druid] may gain a new one by performing a ceremony requiring 24 uninterrupted hours of prayer in the environment where the new companion typically lives. This ceremony can also replace an animal companion that has perished.
Emphasis mine
I think you said that the game was set in an urban setting, so obtaining another snake should be well outside the realm of the intentions of the ability. A rat, sure. Maybe even a Dire Rat. Other rodents maybe, and perhaps a small viper from the sewers (if the city has sewers). Birds also work. Of course, if the Druid's deity/divine patron/Nature is upset at him and he performs the ceremony in the middle of a city, it *might* just not work at all. Then the Druid (and perhaps other party members) have to make a (potentially) time-consuming side-trek to a Tropical or sub-tropical rainforest or lowlands to get a new constrictor snake...
I'm not trying to construct an ironclad method of pissing off the druid's player, just mentioning the various aspects of the Animal Companion class feature that can act as a check against the raw mechanics that the Companion has that are mechanically superior on their own to a similarly levelled PC. >.>
Hope that some of this is helpful anyway.
A friend's game allows the new animal to show up...dumb as a post. All those tricks and stuff take time to manifest. He used a similar system for Familiars.
Finally, many DMs allow an animal companion raised to INT 3 to "free itself" from the trick mechanic, in the sense that the creature is now intelligent enough to understand (and thus perform) all of the standard tricks.
Which I find to be a silly thing to do considering having 3 intelligence does not impart languages to them. In the end, the only thing the 3 intelligence animal can understand are the tricks with which he was already familiar!
Unless, of course, your druid or ranger casts Speak With Animals a lot. :P
Which I find to be a silly thing to do considering having 3 intelligence does not impart languages to them. In the end, the only thing the 3 intelligence animal can understand are the tricks with which he was already familiar!Unless, of course, your druid or ranger casts Speak With Animals a lot. :P
I agree that it is rather silly to think that they hit 3 intelligence and can automatically understand language. However, with a 3 intelligence, they can take a point in linguistics if they are trained in the language. That's what I'm doing in my game with the help of our gnomish bard. She can talk to animals once a day (and has ranks in linguistics), and I can wild shape into the same type of animal. Between the two of us, we can get the messages across.
I don't think it should do away with tricks, but it should give the creature a bonus if it understands the language at a human level.
Which I find to be a silly thing to do considering having 3 intelligence does not impart languages to them.
My dog is dumb as a post (INT 0) and still understands language. E.G.: 'food' 'let's go walk' 'Bad Dog!' 'bedtime' , etc.
Which I find to be a silly thing to do considering having 3 intelligence does not impart languages to them.My dog is dumb as a post (INT 0) and still understands language. E.G.: 'food' 'let's go walk' 'Bad Dog!' 'bedtime' , etc.
That's not understanding of language. That's the animal adapting to various stimuli.
That's not understanding of language. That's the animal adapting to various stimuli.Which I find to be a silly thing to do considering having 3 intelligence does not impart languages to them.My dog is dumb as a post (INT 0) and still understands language. E.G.: 'food' 'let's go walk' 'Bad Dog!' 'bedtime' , etc.
I agree. My ex-girlfriend and I used to do a trick showing how many languages our Jack Russel could speak. We would tell it to do certain tricks in English, Spanish, French, Latin and Pig Latin and sure enough it would do the trick. Most people really thought our dog was multi-lingual. Only a vary few caught on that it was the inflection and tone of voice. If you said "fish sticks now" really quickly and in a low pitched voice, he would go to bed. If you said "fish stiiiicks", he would sit down. If you said "fiiiish sticks" he would stay still while you through a ball. And then if you said "fish sticks" really quickly with a high pitched tone he would chase after the ball. At no point would he look at you expecting to be fed fish sticks.
I agree. My ex-girlfriend and I used to do a trick showing how many languages our Jack Russell could speak. We would tell it to do certain tricks in English, Spanish, French, Latin and Pig Latin and sure enough it would do the trick. Most people really thought our dog was multi-lingual. Only a very few caught on that it was the inflection and tone of voice. If you said "fish sticks now" really quickly and in a low pitched voice, he would go to bed. If you said "fish stiiiicks", he would sit down. If you said "fiiiish sticks" he would stay still while you through a ball. And then if you said "fish sticks" really quickly with a high pitched tone he would chase after the ball. At no point would he look at you expecting to be fed fish sticks.That's not understanding of language. That's the animal adapting to various stimuli.Which I find to be a silly thing to do considering having 3 intelligence does not impart languages to them.My dog is dumb as a post (INT 0) and still understands language. E.G.: 'food' 'let's go walk' 'Bad Dog!' 'bedtime' , etc.
But of course that has absolutely nothing to do with grab and constrict rules which are incredibly useful. But eventually, other characters will catch up. Also, if you have the party being surrounded by multiple foes, it becomes less powerful. If the druid's animal companion dies, you also have the chance of the replacement animal being blocked by guards at the gates of the city, or for them to be attacked while the druid is trying to do the ritual.
Lots of options.
So can you deal grab damage and constrict damage simultaneously or not?
Does this mean that a giant octopus (or a more intelligent creature polymorphed into a giant octopus), could attack, grab, and constrict a victim as many as eight times in a single round???
|
Does this mean that a giant octopus (or a more intelligent creature polymorphed into a giant octopus), could attack, grab, and constrict a victim as many as eight times in a single round???
I would say "yes" but I think that the octopus would take a -20 penalty to it's CMB so that it can make all of it's attacks.
Does this mean that a giant octopus (or a more intelligent creature polymorphed into a giant octopus), could attack, grab, and constrict a victim as many as eight times in a single round???I would say "yes" but I think that the octopus would take a -20 penalty to it's CMB so that it can make all of it's attacks.
Why is that? All it has to do is release the grab after having made it.
1. Attack
2. Grab
3. Constrict
4. Release
5. Repeat from step 1 until all attacks with grab are exhausted.
6. On final grab attempt, consider not letting go, so as to limit the victim's actions on his turn.
7. ...
8. Profit!
Insane amounts of damage to be had.
