Swapping out Wild Shape...

[Foghammer]

How UNbalanced would it be to allow a second animal companion at the expense of Wild Shape?

Somewhat Unnecessary Rambling:

I am pretty sure it would be unbalanced, but how much? And what kind of level adjustment would help curb that. A -3 effective druid level could easily be curbed with the boon companion feat. Is that an acceptable differential (feat tax + loss of wild shape) or would it need to be bumped up to -6 or something?

Unbalanced variants are not a huge deal for me, but I like to keep tabs on them. It helps me keep the illusion of balance. However, this particular subject is a difficult one to pin down for me. I dislike the use of HD to determine multiple companions' strength because it dilutes the concept if the crunch doesn't line up, IMO.

[Kolokotroni]

Foghammer wrote:

How UNbalanced would it be to allow a second animal companion at the expense of Wild Shape?

** spoiler omitted **

The thing you have to consider is gains in action economy, which are very hard to gauge. Also potential interactions with other things. Can the druid bring the Animal Companion back up to full level with something like Boon Companion? If so that seems a fast way around the method you are intending to balance the issue with. I mean if it were to stay on par with the ranger's animal companion and not have a means to improve it then its probably a loss of power compared to wildshape, but added actions, so its probably pretty close to being balanced.

[Umbral Reaver]

Beastmaster ranger might be able to have a decent go at it. Pick up boon companion and eventually have level +4 druid levels worth of animal companions, with no single companion being at an equivalent druid level higher than your level.

I think that works.

[karkon]

I think it is a neat option. It might cause problems with slowing down combat (not sure how much trouble the beast master is). Another good option is to give some option to improve the original companion (more hp more feats etc).