Yeah that's a question I have. I can understand that druids' companions are more powerful because druids have the stronger bond to nature. But what about Paladins and Cavaliers? Both of these classes use their full class level to determin the effective druid level of their mount. Sure fluff-wise at least about the paladin you can say he's got a divine bond with a celestial mount but still, the paladin seems already powerful enough as he is, he doesn't need his mount to pack the same punch as any druid animal companion. And the cavalier has no fluff excuse at all.
I dont know, probably in the game balance it's even but it just seems inappropriate to me that Paladins and cavaliers seem to have a stronger bond with an animal companion than a ranger does.
Yeah that's a question I have. I can understand that druids' companions are more powerful because druids have the stronger bond to nature. But what about Paladins and Cavaliers? Both of these classes use their full class level to determin the effective druid level of their mount. Sure fluff-wise at least about the paladin you can say he's got a divine bond with a celestial mount but still, the paladin seems already powerful enough as he is, he doesn't need his mount to pack the same punch as any druid animal companion. And the cavalier has no fluff excuse at all.
I dont know, probably in the game balance it's even but it just seems inappropriate to me that Paladins and cavaliers seem to have a stronger bond with an animal companion than a ranger does.
It was a fluff decision, more than a balance decision. The ranger's companion is designed to be more of a scout than a combatant. There is a thread where that is clarified. You will have to search for it though.
I pretty much regard the boon companion feat as an automatic take for any ranger at level 5.
Do any rangers without that feat still exist?
|
I'm pretty sure ranger is the only animal companion class with full BAB(I dont count special mounts as they are even more limited than a Druid type companion). Giving them access to better companions via Beastmaster archetype in the APG is now possible, but you have to sacrifice camouflage and the second free combat feat.
IMHO, I could have done without a druid even having an animal companion as they wild shape later and turn into whatever animal they want. Seems redundant. When I create a Druid, i usually take the other Nature Bond and just grab a domain. Cant see myself turning into a wolf and running around with my wolf companion, or turning into a bear and having a wolf companion, one too many animals.
A ranger having an animal companion seems much more logical to me, and IMHO (again) should have the better pet.
Disclaimer**** Just my opinions, to each their own, yadda yadda....
not all rangers need or want a pet.
QFT.
I wouldn't say that Rangers get the weakest animal companions at all. If you consider the animal companion on the basis of your effective druid level, then yeah, it's on the weak side. However, if you consider *all* the aspects of an animal companion, Rangers are near the top. Animal companions should be weighed on which animals you can select (Some are better than others), your effective druid level, your ability to buff/enhance them, and your ability to properly utilize them as a companion. There are currently 6 classes that have access to the animal companion:
Druid - Absolutely the best with animal companions. Has access to every companion, every spell designed to buff an animal to the stars, is the basis for "effective druid level," and can easily utilize the companion as both a caster (shut down the battlefield and let your companion wail on your enemies) and a wildshaper (set up the needed flank and tear into an opponent from both sides).
Ranger - Easily the second best with animal companions. The ranger has access to all the necessary companion buffs (barkskin, g. magic fang, etc) and easily utilizes their ally in most combat styles (archery being among the least useful). A decent selection of animals, though not the best. Their effective druid level slacks, but it becomes less of an issue as the levels push on.
Cleric (animal domain) - Clerics get the same selection of animal companions that druids do, but have a fatal flaw: they get no access to any of the great druid spells to buff the companion. Their druid level slacks, like a ranger, and they struggle as full casters to truly utilize the companion. Still, clerics are great buff-machines, and many of their buffs can still land on their furry companions.
Paladin - Arguably in league with the cleric, the paladin has a decent amount of companion buffs to help their ally along. They have a terrible selection of allies, though they won't struggle to use them. They rank with druid in terms of effective level.
Oracle (Nature) - Pretty much the same as the cleric, with an additional drawback: awful choice of companions.
Cavalier - The worst companion class. Despite the class being built around having a mount, and the only class on the list to actually *not* have an option to choose something else, the companion remains as a means of increasing your base land speed for the durations of its lifetime. It also makes dungeons more difficult for medium sized creatures, too.
I dont mind the ranger have weaker animals, but they should advance at the druid's level.
What's the boon companion feat and where is it at? I've never heard of it before.
What's the boon companion feat and where is it at? I've never heard of it before.
Pathfinder Chronicles: Seekers of Secrets - A Guide to the Pathfinder Society
It allows you to use the druid progression for your animal companion.
What's the boon companion feat and where is it at? I've never heard of it before.Pathfinder Chronicles: Seekers of Secrets - A Guide to the Pathfinder Society
It allows you to use the druid progression for your animal companion.
Well that's quite obscure a place to look for a feat if you are not playing in Golarion.
Well that's quite obscure a place to look for a feat if you are not playing in Golarion.
This right here. If it's not in the main book(s), and in a source that not everyone playing the game will have access to, asking if there's still "anyone not using it" is kind of... unfair?
One might argue that the replies to the OP's questions should be based in the Pathfinder RPG Core and (maybe) the APG exclusively.
One might argue that the replies to the OP's questions should be based in the Pathfinder RPG Core and (maybe) the APG exclusively.
Like mine?
The fact that the Ranger has better animal companions does help a lot. Our party's Ranger's Tiger is easily on par with my Paladin's Horse despite the level hit.
I think some might overestimate a Ranger's ability to buff their companion, though. While the Ranger's spell list has many appropriate spells, their dreadfully slow spell progression severely limits how much he can buff. Not that a Paladin is any better at buffing his mount. In fact, he's even worse.
I would still say, though, that a Cleric with the Animal and Plant Domains has better ability to buff their companions than Rangers by virtue of being a full caster, although, such a cleric is as close to being a Druid as one can get without actually being a Druid, so maybe that's the way it should be
|
Our party's Ranger's Tiger
How'd the ranger get a tiger companion? They're limited to cats (small) in their entry. A tiger can only be used by a druid or a cleric with the animal domain, AFAIK.
edit:
The second option is to form a close bond with an animal companion. A ranger who selects an animal companion can choose from the following list: badger, bird, camel, cat (small), dire rat, dog, horse, pony, snake (viper or constrictor), or wolf.
One might argue that the replies to the OP's questions should be based in the Pathfinder RPG Core and (maybe) the APG exclusively.Like mine?
Exactly like yours actually! :D
I'd like to echo Studpuffin's question, there...
Our party's Ranger's TigerHow'd the ranger get a tiger companion? They're limited to cats (small) in their entry. A tiger can only be used by a druid or a cleric with the animal domain, AFAIK.
edit:
The second option is to form a close bond with an animal companion. A ranger who selects an animal companion can choose from the following list: badger, bird, camel, cat (small), dire rat, dog, horse, pony, snake (viper or constrictor), or wolf.
Well I'll be darned. We just assumed that the Ranger and Druid lists were the same like they were in 3.5. See what happens when you don't read the Rules! I wonder how the small cat would stand up against a Paladin's mount...
Druids should have the -3 level companion, not rangers. Having animal companions was a ranger thing from the start - druids more or less beat them up and stole their things.
|
|
Well I'll be darned. We just assumed that the Ranger and Druid lists were the same like they were in 3.5. See what happens when you don't read the Rules! I wonder how the small cat would stand up against a Paladin's mount...Our party's Ranger's TigerHow'd the ranger get a tiger companion? They're limited to cats (small) in their entry. A tiger can only be used by a druid or a cleric with the animal domain, AFAIK.
edit:
The second option is to form a close bond with an animal companion. A ranger who selects an animal companion can choose from the following list: badger, bird, camel, cat (small), dire rat, dog, horse, pony, snake (viper or constrictor), or wolf.
Honestly, my money is on the mount if you're equal level.
IMHO, I could have done without a druid even having an animal companion as they wild shape later and turn into whatever animal they want. Seems redundant. When I create a Druid, i usually take the other Nature Bond and just grab a domain. Cant see myself turning into a wolf and running around with my wolf companion, or turning into a bear and having a wolf companion, one too many animals.
What about a druid who turned into a bear, had a bear companion, Summoned a bear, and took a leadership feat and was followed around by a blonde bard?
|
Well that's quite obscure a place to look for a feat if you are not playing in Golarion.What's the boon companion feat and where is it at? I've never heard of it before.Pathfinder Chronicles: Seekers of Secrets - A Guide to the Pathfinder Society
It allows you to use the druid progression for your animal companion.
That "obscure place" is considered a core assumption for Pathfinder Society Play though, so it's not entirely unusual.
In all honestly, this is something people should just get used to. There will always be quality feats/items/spells in the other Golarion specific sources. Yes they have a high fluff to crunch ratio, but that crunch is there in every product.
|
|
I certainly tend to agree that the ranger and druid should have the same list of animals to pick from and that the ranger should not be penalized by the negative to his effective druid level.
Luckily, it's a quick and easy house rule to make (unless of course you are playing in a Pathfinder Society game)
|
|
Druids should have the -3 level companion, not rangers. Having animal companions was a ranger thing from the start - druids more or less beat them up and stole their things.ummm... what game were you playing? or did you forget that 3.x mandated ranger companions to HALF the Druid level?
Same one as you, just for a bit longer.
Druids did not have animal companions in 1e and 2e.
In 2e they had to be True Neutral, and they were awesome.
Druids should have the -3 level companion, not rangers. Having animal companions was a ranger thing from the start - druids more or less beat them up and stole their things.ummm... what game were you playing? or did you forget that 3.x mandated ranger companions to HALF the Druid level?Same one as you, just for a bit longer.
Druids did not have animal companions in 1e and 2e.
In 2e they had to be True Neutral, and they were awesome.
Yeah.
In 2e, MOST characters got followers at a certain level, but the list for rangers included animals.
I don't think druids got followers because their only way of advancing in level was to murder other druids, which was hilarious if really bizarre.
Um...is that all it says in Seekers of Secrets?
Does that mean it's not like the one I found on d20 PFSRD?
Your bond with your animal companion or familiar is unusually close.
Prerequisites: Animal companion or familiar class ability.
Benefit: The abilities of your animal companion or familiar are calculated as though your class were four levels higher, to a maximum bonus equal to your character level. If you have more than one animal companion or familiar, choose one to receive this benefit. If you lose or dismiss an animal companion or familiar, you may apply this feat to the replacement creature.
Special: You may select this feat more than once. The effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a different animal companion or familiar.
...if it isn't, then darn it! I already sent it off to one of my friends who lost 3 ranger companions in just as many games. If it's some homebrew garbage trickery, than he won't be able to use it and he'll get pissed at me for getting his hopes up!
Druids should have the -3 level companion, not rangers. Having animal companions was a ranger thing from the start - druids more or less beat them up and stole their things.ummm... what game were you playing? or did you forget that 3.x mandated ranger companions to HALF the Druid level?Same one as you, just for a bit longer.
Druids did not have animal companions in 1e and 2e.
In 2e they had to be True Neutral, and they were awesome.
Neither did Rangers really, they could attract a small number of animal followers at 10th level, similar to how a fighter would attract a body of men-at-arms, but those followers were nothing like modern animal companions. (Except maybe that they're both animals.) These animals did little more than follow. If trained to fight, a animal might defend it's Ranger against some enemies, but certainly not the supernatural foes such a high level character would consider a threat. Nor would a Ranger allow his animals to face such dangers for his 2 hit dice friends would surely be slaughtered.
Druids, on the other hand, can cast Animal Friendship right from 1st level.Seeing as 10th level was quite a high level to obtain in 1e & 2e it was actually far more common to see a Druid walking around with an animal in tow than a Ranger.
It's also worth noting that Animal Friendship was the only way to acquire an animal companion in 3.0
So, yeah, Druids have ALWAYS had more and better animals than Rangers. All the way back to 1e.
|
|
I certainly tend to agree that the ranger and druid should have the same list of animals to pick from and that the ranger should not be penalized by the negative to his effective druid level.
Luckily, it's a quick and easy house rule to make (unless of course you are playing in a Pathfinder Society game)
Beast Master Ranger, Advanced Player's Guide. No need to house rule an option that already exists unless the book isn't being used by your group.
|
|
Um...is that all it says in Seekers of Secrets?
Does that mean it's not like the one I found on d20 PFSRD?
** spoiler omitted **
...if it isn't, then darn it! I already sent it off to one of my friends who lost 3 ranger companions in just as many games. If it's some homebrew garbage trickery, than he won't be able to use it and he'll get pissed at me for getting his hopes up!
That's the Seeker of Secrets one, and it has been confirmed by staff that despite the ambiguous wording this feat adds 4 to your effective druid level. This means that even a ranger with a one-level dip somewhere can have a full character level animal companion.
Your friend will be happy.
Beast Master Ranger, Advanced Player's Guide. No need to house rule an option that already exists unless the book isn't being used by your group.
Luckily, it's a quick and easy house rule to make (unless of course you are playing in a Pathfinder Society game)
Even though the Beast master Ranger has individual abilities (like strong bond) that can replace normal skills like camouflage individually, they really go together flavor-wise (Animal Companion, Empathic Link, Strong Bond).
I think house ruling it as per Marc Radle works better if we belive Rangers and Druids should have their pets reversed (I would reverse them that is), and dont want to specialize in the Beast Mastery build.YMMV
What about a druid who turned into a bear, had a bear companion, Summoned a bear, and took a leadership feat and was followed around by a blonde bard?
lol. Maybe ill wild shape into a poodle and look for a gnome to build me a tricycle. ;)
That's the Seeker of Secrets one, and it has been confirmed by staff that despite the ambiguous wording this feat adds 4 to your effective druid level. This means that even a ranger with a one-level dip somewhere can have a full character level animal companion.
Your friend will be happy.
So it IS official then? It is compatible with the modern Pathfinder rule set?
Also, is there another version of it somewhere?
That's the Seeker of Secrets one, and it has been confirmed by staff that despite the ambiguous wording this feat adds 4 to your effective druid level. This means that even a ranger with a one-level dip somewhere can have a full character level animal companion.
Your friend will be happy.
So it IS official then? It is compatible with the modern Pathfinder rule set?
Also, is there another version of it somewhere?
That is the one I was referring to, and it is made by Pathfinder so you should be able to use it.
Note that Cavaliers are very restricted in the choice of companions they can have. In most campaigns they're going to have a choice of horse, horse, or horse. (or whatever would be the appropriate equivalent, like say Chocobos for a Final Fantasy world. :)
Axe Beak! *does the chicken dance*
|
|
That's the Seeker of Secrets one, and it has been confirmed by staff that despite the ambiguous wording this feat adds 4 to your effective druid level. This means that even a ranger with a one-level dip somewhere can have a full character level animal companion.
Your friend will be happy.
So it IS official then? It is compatible with the modern Pathfinder rule set?
Also, is there another version of it somewhere?
It is from a PathfinderRPG book released by Paizo: Seeker Of Secrets.
Druids did not have animal companions in 1e and 2e.
In 2e they had to be True Neutral, and they were awesome.
They were awesome. I played one and it was fantastic up through level 13. The only thing I didn't like was the fact that at that point, I actually stopped leveling. Sure I hit level 14, but only after everyone else had hit 15-16, and then I realized that I would not level again until the wizard was 18th level, the warrior was 20th level, the cleric was 21st level, and the rogue was 24th level. Needless to say, when I saw that everyone levels the same in Pathfinder, I didn't want to go back.
Oh, and I had an animal companion for my druid. He was a war dog I had picked up with my starting money. He had 2HD had was necessary for my survival at level 1. Of course he was a liability at level 5, and I ended up leaving him with a disciple of mine who had a shrubbery shop. (His name was Roger!)
Boon Companion
Your bond with your animal companion or familiar is unusually close.
Prerequisites: Animal companion or familiar class ability.
Benefit: The abilities of your animal companion or familiar are calculated as though your class were four levels higher, to a maximum bonus equal to your character level. If you have more than one animal companion or familiar, choose one to receive this benefit. If you lose or dismiss an animal companion or familiar, you may apply this feat to the replacement creature.
Special: You may select this feat more than once. The effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a different animal companion or familiar.
Only problem I see with this is...there is no animal companion class feature or familiar class feature. It's called Nature bond for druids and Hunter's bond for rangers. Wizards it's called Arcane bond.
This may be an awful nit-picky technicality, but I've played with a DM who uses specifics like this to rule out stuff from past editions or non-core books anyone might wish to sneak in.