| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Up is up with this? It seems to be rather random as well. It would be helpful if animal companion conversion mechanics were released.
Some exmaples.
-Wolf being the only animal companion(AFAIK) that doesn't have low light vision.
-Lepord not having pounce and rake.
Can we please get some clairification? Should animal companions have everything that the animals naturally have(once the advance of course)?
Up is up with this? It seems to be rather random as well. It would be helpful if animal companion conversion mechanics were released.
Some exmaples.
-Wolf being the only animal companion(AFAIK) that doesn't have low light vision.
-Lepord not having pounce and rake.Can we please get some clairification? Should animal companions have everything that the animals naturally have(once the advance of course)?
All animals have low-light vision from animal traits, unless specifically noted. Since the wolf companion doesn't say it removes the low-light vision, it has it . It was just mistakenly left off the wolf companion.
The leopard loosing those is because of it being classified as a small cat. (If you look at the small cat companion, it is a cheetah. The speed is too fast, and it gets the sprint ability, which leopards don't get. You will also notice, the stats for a big cat companion don't match the lion or tigers either.) Leopards need their own category, as they don't fit either the small cat or large cat companions.
My only complaint is that you can't have a large bear companion. You can have a large ELK, and a large APE, but not a large BEAR. Really...?
We house rule it at 7th level though, so it's kind of moot as far as my games are concerned. It's just one of those pet peeves of mine.
Up is up with this? It seems to be rather random as well. It would be helpful if animal companion conversion mechanics were released.
Some exmaples.
-Wolf being the only animal companion(AFAIK) that doesn't have low light vision.
-Lepord not having pounce and rake.Can we please get some clairification? Should animal companions have everything that the animals naturally have(once the advance of course)?
All animals have low-light vision from animal traits, unless specifically noted. Since the wolf companion doesn't say it removes the low-light vision, it has it . It was just mistakenly left off the wolf companion.
The leopard loosing those is because of it being classified as a small cat. (If you look at the small cat companion, it is a cheetah. The speed is too fast, and it gets the sprint ability, which leopards don't get. You will also notice, the stats for a big cat companion don't match the lion or tigers either.) Leopards need their own category, as they don't fit either the small cat or large cat companions.
It only STARTS out as a SMALL creature. At 4th level it ADVANCES to a MEDIUM creature. Cheetah would then gain sprint. But how about a Lepord? Lepords don't really sprint(AFAIK), and a MEDIUM Lepord does indeed have both pounce and rake.
So again I ask, why do some animals seem to randomly lose some abilities?
If the wolf's lack of low light vision wasn't intentional, then why isn't it fixed in the eratta? And yes the GENERAL rule is indeed that all animals have Low-Light Vision, however the animal companion rules are categorized as SPECFIC rules which override the GENERAL rules.
If the wolf's lack of low light vision wasn't intentional, then why isn't it fixed in the eratta? And yes the GENERAL rule is indeed that all animals have Low-Light Vision, however the animal companion rules are categorized as SPECFIC rules which override the GENERAL rules.
Because errata is never perfect. Just like things get overlooked in the first printing of the book, things get overlooked when compiling errata.
If you want your cat companion to be closer to a leopard, then you have to house rule a new animal companion category. Leopards aren't big enough to be classified as a "Big Cat" companion, nor are their abilities the same as the "Small Cat" companion.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
If the wolf's lack of low light vision wasn't intentional, then why isn't it fixed in the eratta? And yes the GENERAL rule is indeed that all animals have Low-Light Vision, however the animal companion rules are categorized as SPECFIC rules which override the GENERAL rules.Because errata is never perfect. Just like things get overlooked in the first printing of the book, things get overlooked when compiling errata.
If you want your cat companion to be closer to a leopard, then you have to house rule a new animal companion category. Leopards aren't big enough to be classified as a "Big Cat" companion, nor are their abilities the same as the "Small Cat" companion.
Okay I think you're getting too caught up on the big/small cat name categoriziation. It's irrelevant.
For the "Cat, Small" option it is a choice between the Cheetah and the Lepord. At 4th Druid/7th Ranger level they advance and gain sprint. However sprint is the Cheetah's ability(Bestiary pg40). Now, we can see that a Lepord has pounce and rake in place of sprint, so logically it should get them when it advances, in place of sprint.
Do I really have to explain the differences between Cheetahs(Plains) and Lepords(Forests)?
All the "Cat,Small" means is that it is "smaller" than a Lion or Tiger. That's it, nothing else. A couger(mountain lion) would be a "Cat,Small" as well. A new "medium" cat entry doesn't need to be created. The animal's actual size is irrelevant to this discussion. I am asking about an animal's special abilities/qualities and why some seem to be missing randomly(meaning no specfic mechanic behind the inclusion or exclusion of said abilities, or at least one that is not appearant). I honestly don't understand where this confusion is coming from but I hope I cleared it up.
So inconculsion the two questions for thread discussion are as follows.
1. Would it "unbalance" the Lepord to give it pounce and rake in place of sprint. Keep in mind that both of these animals are CR 2 creatures. One having sprint, the other having pounce&rake.
2. What is the mechanic/proces(if any) behind converting an animal into an animal companion. Because so far it seems as though the inclusion/exclusion of special abilities/qualities are completely random.
Bump.
Leopards aren't big enough to be classified as a "Big Cat" companion, nor are their abilities the same as the "Small Cat" companion.
Funnily, leopards are part of the Panthera genus of the family Felidae, together with the tiger, lion and jaguar. They are also part of what is colloquially known as the big cats, which consist of the same cats (they are the only cats that can actually roar). I would have liked it better if they had included it in the Big Cat companions, even though the leopard is the smallest of the big cats. But it is an easy enough fix to just move it there and put some of the smaller cats, like the snow leopard, into the Small Cats category. On the other hand, the sprint ability seems to be tailor made for the cheetah and does not really fit the leopard or most of smaller cats.
I guess it is because of the differences between druids and rangers. Rangers cannot choose a Big Cat as an animal companion, probably because the Big Cats are considered to be more powerful.
The problem with putting leopards in the Big Cat animal companion is that the big cat companions start as medium-sized and advance to large sized. Leopards are medium sized.
IF you put it in the big cat animal companion, not only will the size not be right, but the ability scores will be bigger than a leopards, the damage of the bite and claws will be greater, and it won't have its climb speed.
If you truely want a leopard animal companion and not just a generic small cat companion, it really does need its own category. Both big and small cat categories leave out parts of the leopards abilities, or just increase them beyond what the leopard can do.
Errata (what there is of it) is here.
one thing you need to realize is companions do t loose any abilities. the beasiary stats are irrelevant to companion stats.
The problem with putting leopards in the Big Cat animal companion is that the big cat companions start as medium-sized and advance to large sized. Leopards are medium sized.
IF you put it in the big cat animal companion, not only will the size not be right, but the ability scores will be bigger than a leopards, the damage of the bite and claws will be greater, and it won't have its climb speed.
If you truely want a leopard animal companion and not just a generic small cat companion, it really does need its own category. Both big and small cat categories leave out parts of the leopards abilities, or just increase them beyond what the leopard can do.
Once again, you're getting way too hung up on the animal's actual size. A leopard is perfectly fine as a "Cat, Small" the differences in stats between a cheetah and a leopard is very minor, they are pretty much identical. The only thing that's really needed(in my opinion) is simply exchanging sprint for pounce&rake when someone chooses the Leopard.
What I'm really wondering about is if there is an actual game mechanic behind the conversion of animal to animal companion, and say an actual procress. Because so far the inclusion/exclusion of an animal companion's special abilities/attacks/qualities seems rather random. If someone disagrees with this, I highly encourage them to check out the wolf.
one thing you need to realize is companions do t loose any abilities. the beasiary stats are irrelevant to companion stats.
They may be a little different yes. But I do not think that is entirely the case. After all it's still an animal that the Druid or Ranger attracted to him to befriend.
Otherwise we have Wolves that can't see in the dark and Leopards who believe they're Cheetahs and try to sprint rather than waiting in a tree and pouncing upon unsuspecting prey.
Yes there are some aspects that support your post. For example: Why do Tyrannosaurs never grow up? Biggest they get is large size, or a Bear that only reaches medium size.
This is the cause of the confusion, the conversion from animal to animal companion seems rather random, some things are included while others are not.
But this thread is specifcally discussing the random inclusion/exclusion that seems to take place with some animals' special qualities/abilities.
This thread is basically the same as this one.
one thing you need to realize is companions do t loose any abilities. the beasiary stats are irrelevant to companion stats.They may be a little different yes. But I do not think that is entirely the case. After all it's still an animal that the Druid or Ranger attracted to him to befriend.
The confusion is that there is a Bestiary animal entry, and an Animal Companion entry, with the same name. People assume one is related to the other. The developers have said they are not related at all.
Animal Companions do not "start from" a Bestiary entry and get converted. Animal Companions are built differently from the Bestiary entries.
Animal Companions are designed to be part of their master's class abilties. The abilties they get are a "package" designed to be balanced with the other class abilties of the master.
Bestiary entries are designed to be opponents for the PCs. The abilities they get are designed to be a "package" that provides a challenging foe to the PCs.
This is discussed most thoroughly (that I can recall) in threads about the Paladin and Cavalier horses, wherein the point that they are separate and different by design is made by the developers.
yar.
This thread is basically the same as this one.Neat, oh and how did posting that contribute to this thread again?
it contributed because it is more functional and constructive to have all conversations regarding the same topic to be in one location. Many times the moderators will lock down a thread that is basically a duplicate. However, the moderators are busy, and can't always lawyer the forums, so other posters try to help them out by suggesting the same: to do all conversations on a topic in one place, and avoid duplicate threads.
Also please note that the linked thread has been infested with forum-nazis-who-think-they're-moderators trolls who seem to delight in making useless posts and spamming the forum. So it's not really a good place to hold a discussion.
Also please note that the linked thread, now that it actually IS in the forum that everyone said it should have been in in the first place, is now starting to get better quality posts (and on topic posts).
Also, I posted in the other thread linked to by wraith as well (regarding the topic being discussed), so I will not repeat myself here.
~P
|
Animal Companions are designed to be part of their master's class abilties. The abilties they get are a "package" designed to be balanced with the other class abilties of the master.
This here is the heart of the issue. The companions in the core are generic for balance and simplification purposes. For most of the entries, there are several species which in real life would have slight variances. But, for the sake of not having bloat in the class entry, some needed to be generalized. Any DM is free to houserule these if they feel they do not fit the spirit of the build.
As for the low-light vision wolf thing you have brought up a few times, in your post from last year HERE, there is a link to HERE where James Jacobs clears it up. You seemed to be ok with it then....
This thread is basically the same as this one.Neat, oh and how did posting that contribute to this thread again?
Also please note that the linked thread has been infested with forum-nazis-who-think-they're-moderators trolls who seem to delight in making useless posts and spamming the forum. So it's not really a good place to hold a discussion.
I needed to flag it so I made a post which linked to the other post. Other than that the person checking the flag would not know what I was talking about.
It helps to wait for a response before making an assumption. See the bolded area.PS:It also helps to check the poster to see if they are the type to spam. That is what I do when I suspect a spammer. If they normally make sense I question their post. If they normally say things I consider to be nonsensical in nature then I ignore them.
yar.
it contributed because it is more functional and constructive to have all conversations regarding the same topic to be in one location. Many times the moderators will lock down a thread that is basically a duplicate. However, the moderators are busy, and can't always lawyer the forums, so other posters try to help them out by suggesting the same: to do all conversations on a topic in one place, and avoid duplicate threads.
Darn mind reading pirate. :)
|
The problem with putting leopards in the Big Cat animal companion is that the big cat companions start as medium-sized and advance to large sized. Leopards are medium sized.
IF you put it in the big cat animal companion, not only will the size not be right, but the ability scores will be bigger than a leopards, the damage of the bite and claws will be greater, and it won't have its climb speed.
You don't have to advance an animal companion's size if you don't want to.
Instead of taking the listed benefit at 4th or 7th level, you can instead choose to increase the companion's Dexterity and Constitution by 2.
Of course, this is far, far worse than what you'd be getting otherwise, and the faux-leopard still doesn't have a climb speed. But at least the size is right.
I'm curious why don't the people eating a medium cat just take big cat and not level it large? take the lesservstats and keep ot jaguar/leopard/puma sized.
I'm curious why don't the people eating a medium cat just take big cat and not level it large? take the lesservstats and keep ot jaguar/leopard/puma sized.
now now, that wouldn't let them complain ;)
I'm curious why don't the people eating a medium cat just take big cat and not level it large? take the lesservstats and keep ot jaguar/leopard/puma sized.now now, that wouldn't let them complain ;)
No, there is still reason to complain. If you did it that way, the leopard still would not get rake or pounce, which is one of the OPs problems. So using big cat, but not advancing it still does not solve the problem.
No, there is still reason to complain. If you did it that way, the leopard still would not get rake or pounce, which is one of the OPs problems. So using big cat, but not advancing it still does not solve the problem.
Alright. Then to try to be helpful, i suggest like other posters simply swapping out things on the small cat to get what you want.
lose: 20' base movement, sprint, tripping bite.
gain: 20' climb, pounce. (you don't really need to add in rake, but you can if you like.)
The revamped critter, even if it gains pounce at 4th, will still be less powerful then the big cat, except in the specific situations where pounce comes into play for levels 4-6 ONLY. For level 1-3, and 7-20, the big cat would still be superior in every way, so it's not a game breaking swapout.
how's that?
I'm still irritated by the fact that companion bears start as small while wolves start as medium. Aren't bears supposed to be big and stuff?
One idea would be changing the whole companion mechanism into something eidolon-alike, of course limitated by "choose stuff that fits an actual animal and shub-niggurath is not considered as one" (maybe make a list with basic animal types - somewhat similar to the 3 types of eidolons but much more restricted, allowing the "small cat" type the "evolutions" of sprint, pounce, rake, finesse, mobility...)
If you truely want a leopard animal companion and not just a generic small cat companion, it really does need its own category. Both big and small cat categories leave out parts of the leopards abilities, or just increase them beyond what the leopard can do.
How about emphasizing Dex focused stuff, giving out some feats like finesse and mobility? Maybe giving them a higher starting Dex? The parties rogue will be glad about a flanking partner
|
|
I'm still irritated by the fact that companion bears start as small while wolves start as medium. Aren't bears supposed to be big and stuff?
They seem to be modeled after american black bears. They average about the size of a large dogs as adults(though quite a bit thicker and stronger) and art fairly small as adolescents. It would be cool if there was a grizzly/polar bear option like the cats.
They seem to be modeled after american black bears. They average about the size of a large dogs as adults(though quite a bit thicker and stronger) and art fairly small as adolescents. It would be cool if there was a grizzly/polar bear option like the cats.I'm still irritated by the fact that companion bears start as small while wolves start as medium. Aren't bears supposed to be big and stuff?
Meanwhile, wolves are modelled after ponies that become monstrous ponies that eat your face at level 7.
It's still weird. :)
|
|
They seem to be modeled after american black bears. They average about the size of a large dogs as adults(though quite a bit thicker and stronger) and art fairly small as adolescents. It would be cool if there was a grizzly/polar bear option like the cats.I'm still irritated by the fact that companion bears start as small while wolves start as medium. Aren't bears supposed to be big and stuff?
Meanwhile, wolves are modelled after ponies that become monstrous ponies that eat your face at level 7.
It's still weird. :)
Yeah. They seem to be Dire Wolves from the Song of Ice and Fire
|
|
Up is up with this? It seems to be rather random as well. It would be helpful if animal companion conversion mechanics were released.
Some exmaples.
-Wolf being the only animal companion(AFAIK) that doesn't have low light vision.
-Lepord not having pounce and rake.Can we please get some clairification? Should animal companions have everything that the animals naturally have(once the advance of course)?
I'm actually more curious how many times you are going to create a new thread to ask the same question. For example, you keep asking about the wolf animal companion not having low light vision over and over and OVER, even though countless people, including James Jacobs , has told you that they do.
Then, as soon as people call you out on this, you cry 'forum nazi' and continue right on complaining
The AC rules are fine. Are they perfect? No. They are balanced and workable. If you want to tweak things in your home game you can.
Please stop creating tread after thread to ask the same questions.
THe current rules for ACs only work well for modelling a small range of creatures.
Like DIre Platapuses just arne´t supported.
I FULLY expect Ultimate Combat to include a LOAD of new Animal Companions and Mounts,
including rules for expanding beyond the basic Animal Companion rules.
Stuff like bigger bears, completely new types of creatures, etc, is all what I expect them to do.
There just doesn´t happen to be that wide a range CURRENTLY.
As for the low-light vision wolf thing you have brought up a few times, in your post from last year HERE, there is a link to HERE where James Jacobs clears it up. You seemed to be ok with it then....
Wait... ShadowViper is full of it!?!?!? What!?!?!?!
(Note: I may on occasion mention in passing a known problem with the rules when it´s relevant to the subject at hand, but I almost always also mention if Paizo has stated the RAI on it, even if they haven´t yet applied Errata. Ignoring such great public feedback in a disrepect to those at Paizo who are so helpful here on the boards, and further, pretending such official guidance doesn´t exist so one can whine all the more just doesn´t improve the game for anybody.)