Am I missing something here or are the rules for having multiple companion animals basically gimping the character who takes them?
Simply put, I didn't see anything that compensated for the fact that two 10th-level animal companions simply aren't anywhere equal to a 20th level companion.
Am I wrong here?
I was wondering this as well.
At first its a powerful option, but the power of it drops off dramatically about level 5.
The feat Boon Companion can do great things...
It only brings your druid level up to your HD and no further.
|
The feat Boon Companion can do great things...
Yeah, and being able to take it multiple times, for the different companions, has potential. Save a feat for Natural Spell, when the time comes, which is really the only 'must-have' Druid feat, and you can toss leftovers into Improved Initiative (which will affect your entire menegeries initiative, since they go on your action) or Toughness or whatever.
Isn't there a trait that also gives +2 effective druid level (up to character level max) to the companion? That might be yet another tweak to buff up this archetype.
It only brings your druid level up to your HD and no further.
Which is exactly what this AT needs. For that companion, your druid level is equal to your effective druid level +4 (max of your character level).
If you're a 3rd level Druid with two riding dogs, and have Boon Companion for one of them, you can use all three of your effective Druid levels on the second dog, and allow the Boon Companion feat to cover the first (which would be at effective druid level 0, if you didn't have Boon Companion, but is now +4, up to a maximum of 3rd).
Two full strength dog companions.
At 5th level, when you take Natural Spell, the Feat will fall behind, and one hound will have your five actual effective druid levels, while the 'Boon Companion' will be lagging behind at 4th.
At 7th level, you can pick up another Boon Companion to apply to the second dog. You now have +4 to each dog (to a max of 7th), and seven effective druid levels to split between them, allowing both to function as full strength companions for a 7th level Druid (with a 'spare' level left over, if you want a third dog with only 2 HD...).
At 9th level, you can add a third dog and a third Boon Companion, divide up the nine actual Druid levels between them (3 each) and have three companions at 7th effective level, which isn't too shabby.
Or you can stick to two dogs, each with a +4, and give one four of your levels worth of advancement and one five, having one full strength '9th level' (8 HD) Druid Companion and one slightly weaker '8th level' (7 HD) Druid Companion.
If I were to play such a druid, I would have a single combat companion and a couple of utility companions. A flying companion and a burrowing companion would probably be the route I'd go. Give em each a couple of HD and keep them out of combat.
Then I have an aerial scout and something that can go under/around if flight isn't an option. Sure, water becomes a problem, but I avoid bodies of water like the plague. (Might just be me; I had a stupid-harsh DM learning the game, and water is lethal when you're loaded with gear.) And I could still take the boon companion feats for each of them, just for added survivability, and because I prefer to bump their Int to 3 to avoid dealing with counting tricks and crap.
I do wonder, though, how a druid with two 14th level companions decked out with magic items would stand up to a druid with a single 20th level companion (also with magic items).
Yet another example of the fact that HD is a terrible mesaure of power. Far, far worse than CR. See animate dead and planar ally/binding for similar cases.
I may do out a CR chart of animal companions/eidolons, and try to align the split to be a more even CR split, the split creatures should total about the CR-1 of the single creature. 2 animals would be CR -3 each. Which is way more than two 10HDs compared to a 20 HD.
I was wondering this as well.
At first its a powerful option, but the power of it drops off dramatically about level 5.
+1
So you have to "patch" the archetype with feats to make it work well?
That's not good.
So you have to "patch" the archetype with feats to make it work well?
That's not good.
It depends where Boon Companion is. Is the feat in the same book?
It depends where Boon Companion is. Is the feat in the same book?So you have to "patch" the archetype with feats to make it work well?
That's not good.
It doesn't really matter, to tell you the truth. If an archetype is gimped and can only be fixed with a feat, that feat should be free for the archetype, or among a list of feats the archetype may select as part of the leveling process.
It doesn't really matter, to tell you the truth. If an archetype is gimped and can only be fixed with a feat, that feat should be free for the archetype, or among a list of feats the archetype may select as part of the leveling process.It depends where Boon Companion is. Is the feat in the same book?So you have to "patch" the archetype with feats to make it work well?
That's not good.
Well, in that case at least one could assume that authors, right or wrong, assumed a feat tax as part of the "deal".
If it were, then every archetype would have this feat tax. I prefer to assume that they just overlooked the feat tax they were causing. ;)
|
|
So you have to "patch" the archetype with feats to make it work well?
That's not good.
Eh, no different than 'patching' your Druid by taking Natural Spell, or 'patching' your evil Cleric by taking Command Undead, or 'patching' your good Cleric by taking Selective Channeling.
Some feats are darn close to required, to make effective or optimal use of certain class abilities.
Just like to point out they don't have to be an even split... However it would probably be inadvisable to still have one at 1st when your 20th.
In the Kingmaker game I'm in I've gone with the Beast Master Ranger, the GM has allowed me to take Boon Companion twice, feat could be read a couple of ways regards Beast Master, or Pack Lord, but then it was written well before UM, or the APG so didn't take them into account.
I've got a Wolf I'm using as the primary AC, levelling it up more often than not, and an Eagle I'll probably be leaving at 5th (1 actual level, +4 from Boon) for scouting.
This works well with Improved Empathic Link letting me see through the eagles eyes when I send it off.
For reference, Boon Companion is from Seekers of Secrets, page 16
|
|
It doesn't really matter, to tell you the truth. If an archetype is gimped and can only be fixed with a feat, that feat should be free for the archetype, or among a list of feats the archetype may select as part of the leveling process.It depends where Boon Companion is. Is the feat in the same book?So you have to "patch" the archetype with feats to make it work well?
That's not good.
The same can be said of natural spell being used to help the druid class. Besides that, since when has the full 1-20 level progression really ever made sense power wise? It's always been unbalanced no matter what as soon as certain magics are made available, at which point a game can be completely derailed by a single selfish players actions. Anyway I digress, I personally this is is an amazing archetype that opens MANY doors.
If it were, then every archetype would have this feat tax. I prefer to assume that they just overlooked the feat tax they were causing. ;)
For the amount of power it *Should* have, a feat tax is fine.
The problem is that the feat tax doesn't give the power that is needed.. Its like a summoner who wants to not summon his eidolon or otherwise can't at the moment. No one wants to be forced to summoning chiwawas to fight bugbears and armies of goblins..
So you have to "patch" the archetype with feats to make it work well?
That's not good.
Huh? It works perfectly well at low levels, just like a zillion other class features that work well at low levels and peter off in usefulness as time goes on.
Huh? It works perfectly well at low levels, just like a zillion other class features that work well at low levels and peter off in usefulness as time goes on.So you have to "patch" the archetype with feats to make it work well?
That's not good.
Hence is badly designed.
Hence is badly designed.Huh? It works perfectly well at low levels, just like a zillion other class features that work well at low levels and peter off in usefulness as time goes on.So you have to "patch" the archetype with feats to make it work well?
That's not good.
I don't know what to tell you. For instance, wizards get the ability to cast 1st level spells, which is awesome at level 1 and considerably less exciting at level 15. That doesn't mean that level 1 spells are badly designed and need patching, IMO.
Course that's what metamagic feats came in for.
Like Hogarth said though, it isn't that its badly designed or anything like that, is that there is a certain amount of maintencs that has to be done to everything regardless.
A sword at level 1 is awesome. The same non-magical non-masterwork sword though sucks at level 20.
I don't know what to tell you. For instance, wizards get the ability to cast 1st level spells, which is awesome at level 1 and considerably less exciting at level 15. That doesn't mean that level 1 spells are badly designed and need patching, IMO.
Is not a good example, sorry. A true strike can be useful at level 20 too.
Moreover, the ability here is SPELLCASTING, which scales very nicely.
Aevux: again, bad example. Class Features =! Equipment
It's the focus and then, presumably, the strength of the archetype. Show me another archetype that treats new powers the same way that isn't also considered faulty in design (Oracle Mystery of Waves, comes handily to mind as another faulty one).
I don't know what to tell you. For instance, wizards get the ability to cast 1st level spells, which is awesome at level 1 and considerably less exciting at level 15. That doesn't mean that level 1 spells are badly designed and need patching, IMO.Is not a good example, sorry. A true strike can be useful at level 20 too.
Moreover, the ability here is SPELLCASTING, which scales very nicely.
Aevux: again, bad example. Class Features =! Equipment
Not a bad example at all. Consider a non-masterwork sword the same as acid splash. Sure, you can get all Great Cleave and Vital Strike and Power Attack with a sword, but it's still just a non-magical sword. And you can get all Empowered Maximized Quicken with acid splash, but it's still just a cantrip.
Some things scale. Some don't. Not a problem, it's just the way things work. Kind of like how that +2 bonus to Stealth (or even +4) from Stealthy gets a bit lost in the noise when you're a level 20 rogue with a +34 to Stealth because your Dex is boosted to 24 and you've got 20 ranks in Stealth, yet it's pretty cool when you're first level and it gives you a +8 instead of a +6.
The thing is, the only needed fix is allowing the pack of animals to equal the CR of 1 animal of the proper level.
Two 5th-level creatures are no match for a 10th-level creature. It's as simple as that. One shouldn't be forced to take a feat so that they are equal in power with the standard class.
It's a matter of the damned archetype not being worth taking as written.
I also seriously doubt that the archetype was created with a feat tax from a feat presented in a non-core product to balance it out in mind.
Pathfinder Chronicles: Seeker of Secrets - A Guide to the Pathfinder Society
That's fairly obscure to throw around as a fix.
Trust me, that feat is not a fix.
It only effects your druid level for animal companions.
Personally with the amount of power the pack options (Broodmaster, Beastmaster, Pack lord) I wouldn't mind being able to use a feat to increase their power.
As is, with it as written and the lack of some real feat support in the later levels, I agree. those three types are pretty worthless.
As is, with it as written and the lack of some real feat support in the later levels, I agree. those three types are pretty worthless.
I think you just have a different opinion regarding what a "multiple pet" archetype should look like.
The Pack Lord is certainly not worthless; it just gives up something of not much value (a single use of wild shape) for something else of limited value (the right -- but not the obligation -- to have more than one animal companion). I think we can agree that a druid with one less use of wild shape doesn't really merit the term "worthless".
A class that had two powerful companions would have to give up something very valuable in exchange, IMO.
Thats like saying that a wizard archtype that gives him an extra toe on his left foot in exchange for 30 hairs on his right eyebrow isn't a worthless archtype because he still functions close to a normal wizard.
Its like saying that a normal dagger isn't worthless when compared to a a dagger with an ivory hilt.
Yes druids are not worthless. Thus an archtype where you can play as a druid wouldn't be worthless as a druid. However it is pretty much worthless as an archtype.
Saying its a right and not an obligation is like making a gnome sorcerer with pyromancy, fireblood line.. and then casting nothing but cold and water spells.
As an archtype, It is pretty much worthless, Its power is right at the first few levels.. where I could have bought a few riding dogs and used them to fight with.
Yes druids are not worthless. Thus an archtype where you can play as a druid wouldn't be worthless as a druid. However it is pretty much worthless as an archtype.
Ah, I thought you were saying it would be a worthless character, not a worthless archetype.
I guess we'll just agree to disagree. I do most of my playing in the level 1-7 range, and it seems like the Pack Lord would do just fine in that range. YMMV, of course.
I don't know what to tell you. For instance, wizards get the ability to cast 1st level spells, which is awesome at level 1 and considerably less exciting at level 15. That doesn't mean that level 1 spells are badly designed and need patching, IMO.Is not a good example, sorry. A true strike can be useful at level 20 too.
Moreover, the ability here is SPELLCASTING, which scales very nicely.
Aevux: again, bad example. Class Features =! Equipment
Not a bad example at all. Consider a non-masterwork sword the same as acid splash. Sure, you can get all Great Cleave and Vital Strike and Power Attack with a sword, but it's still just a non-magical sword. And you can get all Empowered Maximized Quicken with acid splash, but it's still just a cantrip.
Some things scale. Some don't. Not a problem, it's just the way things work. Kind of like how that +2 bonus to Stealth (or even +4) from Stealthy gets a bit lost in the noise when you're a level 20 rogue with a +34 to Stealth because your Dex is boosted to 24 and you've got 20 ranks in Stealth, yet it's pretty cool when you're first level and it gives you a +8 instead of a +6.
You can sell and craft and buy equipment. Class features is something more linked to the core of your PC, and cannot be swapped easily. This was my point.
With money, I could spend 25 GP and gain an "Animal companion"..
25 gp gives me a guard dog.
I could spend 100gp and have a total of 8hd of animal.
EDIT:
The problem with Kobold Quarterly trying to handle it is the Purist DMs out there, who will not use anything not published by paizo as a main book.
Nothing of course the Kobold Quarterly would be able to fix though.. purists are just like that.
|
The problem with Kobold Quarterly trying to handle it is the Purist DMs out there, who will not use anything not published by paizo as a main book.
...purists are just like that.
Boo purists :)
Everyone who isn't a purist, be sure to check out the article in the up-coming Summer issue of Kobold Quarterly that deals with this very topic of beast master type characters :)
With money, I could spend 25 GP and gain an "Animal companion"..
25 gp gives me a guard dog.
I could spend 100gp and have a total of 8hd of animal.
EDIT:
The problem with Kobold Quarterly trying to handle it is the Purist DMs out there, who will not use anything not published by paizo as a main book.
Nothing of course the Kobold Quarterly would be able to fix though.. purists are just like that.
Is not even that. I borrowed from Dragon Magazine a lot in 3.5.
The point is that if I buy a book with options, I should be able to use those option with Book + Core. Otherwise, there's something WRONG.
An option doesnt have to be optimal in order to not be worthless. The archetype allows you to play a concept that normally wouldn't be possible. That in and of itself makes it worth while. That the archetype requires a level of system mastery in order to work in an optimal way is a non issue. Lots of options are non-optimal, that doesnt mean they aren't worth having. That isn't poor design, its just design.
If I were to play such a druid, I would have a single combat companion and a couple of utility companions. A flying companion and a burrowing companion would probably be the route I'd go. Give em each a couple of HD and keep them out of combat.
I think this is an excellent use of this archetype. Gives the Druid some good utility and doesn't severely penalize the main companion. Saying that the archetype is broken fails to recognize the value of a unique use like this.
An option doesnt have to be optimal in order to not be worthless. The archetype allows you to play a concept that normally wouldn't be possible. That in and of itself makes it worth while. That the archetype requires a level of system mastery in order to work in an optimal way is a non issue. Lots of options are non-optimal, that doesnt mean they aren't worth having. That isn't poor design, its just design.
Optimal is something very debatable in a veri diverse and situational game like Pathfinder. The range is wide.
Nevertheless, there are options which are ust too bad to be considered. And this matters because the gameworld (monsters, PCs, NPCs..) follow a cerain math.
If this math is too divergent from the concept shown, it's just play pretend.
|
|
By level 20, a druid should have 3-4 spare feats to use for pure character concept, in this case I think taking boon companion multiple times would more than make up the difference between where they would be at the start and where you think they "should" be.
Also, don't forget that each companion can be made independently intelligent, and equipped with an appropriate number of magic items such as belts, bridles, and the like. The game after level 10 is all about spells and gear anyway and neither of these things is gimped by the class.
Ahaha WHAT.
FOUR feats. From another source.
Enough of this madness.
|
|
Ahaha WHAT.
FOUR feats. From another source.
Enough of this madness.
A human druid at first level has at LEAST 1 feat to blow on character concept which is by definition why someone is trying to accomplish. A character gets feats ever other level meaning 10 feats. After natural spell, maybe a metamagic, and whatever else strikes your fancy like augment summoning you will have a MINIMUM of 3 more feats you have to play around with.
Level 20 a druid could easily have 3 wolves, the biggest of which would be equivalent level 14, while the other two are level 9 each. Each one gets free trips with each attack, and has several magic item slots available to help beef them up.
All that aside, for as long as I've been playing experience tells me that not many people experience high level play (15+), and most of the time spent playing will be at lower levels due to the power curve.
An option doesnt have to be optimal in order to not be worthless. The archetype allows you to play a concept that normally wouldn't be possible. That in and of itself makes it worth while. That the archetype requires a level of system mastery in order to work in an optimal way is a non issue. Lots of options are non-optimal, that doesnt mean they aren't worth having. That isn't poor design, its just design.Optimal is something very debatable in a veri diverse and situational game like Pathfinder. The range is wide.
Nevertheless, there are options which are ust too bad to be considered. And this matters because the gameworld (monsters, PCs, NPCs..) follow a cerain math.
If this math is too divergent from the concept shown, it's just play pretend.
Splitting them evenly without using boon companion is too bad to be considered. However a 10th level character with a 7th level tiger, 2nd level hawk and 1st level ferret is not. Its not the best choice in the world, but the 7th level big cat will do ok, and the other 2 animal companions are there for utility and flavor.
However boon companion STILL only increase your character's druid level up to your HD. It doesn't increase the companion's HD
And it does nothing for brood master. Remember there is 3 types of pack archtypes amongst three different classes.
It targets the class, not the companion, and only up to your current HD.
And even if it did actually work the way people think it does.. It still is in a different book.
As far as optimization and stuff goes..
A knife isn't worthless right?
But does that mean you will try to use a knife when facing giant mecha men who can fire bullets as big as you at 100,000 rounds per minute. A basic knife is pretty worthless then.
+
All that aside, for as long as I've been playing experience tells me that not many people experience high level play (15+), and most of the time spent playing will be at lower levels due to the power curve.
Then sell a game level 1-15.
You sell me 20 levels? Then support 20 levels. I play high level BTW.
Seriously, the answers are
1) Sucks, but is a-ok for flavour
2) Er.. nobody plays high level
????
Especially when what is the difference between a first level ferret animal companion and say .. a ferret animal?
Remember an animal companion doesn't start really being an animal companion until a few levels in. So running around with a first level animal companion and a 19th level animal companion.. You are better off running with a 20 level animal companion and some animal you picked up for pocket change.
Especially when what is the difference between a first level ferret animal companion and say .. a ferret animal?
Remember an animal companion doesn't start really being an animal companion until a few levels in. So running around with a first level animal companion and a 19th level animal companion.. You are better off running with a 20 level animal companion and some animal you picked up for pocket change.
I am not disputing that you arent better off with just the straight animal companion. You are. But that doesnt mean the other option is worthless. Are you weaker? Yes, but it isn't useless, its just less than optimal. There are tons of ways any character class with any archetype can be made less then optimal. That doesnt mean the options shouldnt exist.
A question: the boomerang in APG:
It sucks, or is less than optimal? I wish to know what you think about it because I don't get your concept of "less than optimal".
To elaborate: for a lot of people Two Weapon Fighting is less "optimal" than Two Handed Fighting, because of stats, feats and so on.
This does not mean that TWF is worthless: the number of attacks can be impressive, and this is particularly good if you want a chance to crit, or add dice to damage like sneak attack.
So the two choice are at least decent enough to BE a choice.
On the same route, take Sword&Board. Good? Well, very stat and feat intensive, but awesome. Has good and bad things. It's a choice with drawbacks and coolness (personally I love it).
Now think to the S&B in 3.5. That was not a choice. You didn't have the NUMBERS to make that a choice, at least in core. You could have said "I'm a S&B fighter" but numbers said "no you use a shortsword and sometimes rarely bash someone with little or no effect".
See the point?
The difference between a 15th level animal companion and a 20th level animal companion is not terribly significant. +3BAB, +2Nat Armor, +1 Str/Dex Bonus, etc. It matters, but the ability to add a 5th level Owl to your 15th level Tiger (or a 4th level Owl and a 1st level Badger(Burrow), Crocodile(Swim) or Giant Spider(Tremorsense/Darkvision)) could offer a lot of useful utility.
I am not disputing that you arent better off with just the straight animal companion. You are. But that doesnt mean the other option is worthless. Are you weaker? Yes, but it isn't useless, its just less than optimal. There are tons of ways any character class with any archetype can be made less then optimal. That doesnt mean the options shouldnt exist.Especially when what is the difference between a first level ferret animal companion and say .. a ferret animal?
Remember an animal companion doesn't start really being an animal companion until a few levels in. So running around with a first level animal companion and a 19th level animal companion.. You are better off running with a 20 level animal companion and some animal you picked up for pocket change.
My thing is, you can do all the flavor and all that just running 25 gp guard dogs.
and still, you are running into a mech battle, naked, armed with knife. Now if there was some total badass feats and things you could take for this, you may not be optimal compared to the mechs, but you actually have the ability to use the flavor of your character in combat instead of being punked.