Animal companion rules change request


Homebrew and House Rules

The Exchange

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I'd like to request a change to the animal companion rules, to update the rules for controlling animal companions to be more like talking to an intelligent creature.
Stories of druids and rangers usually have characters that talk to their unusually intelligent animal bretheren.

I'd like to suggest something more like that. Similar to what a summoner has, rather than rules for teaching bonded animals tricks, treating them like intelligent creatures. I as a player vow not to dress up an ape in robes and give it a sword like Conan. But I'd like a pet like Drizzit's panther than a dog that knows a few tricks. They would bring the class feature up to date, more in line with the summoner class feature. This would also quell a problem in society play of how to treat/train a companion creature.

Instead of treating it like a dumb animal, treat the class feature like a naturally intelligent animal. Lassie, Silver, Guwenivhar (sp), there's lots of great examples of endearing, smart beastial sidekicks.

You can train a dog or falcon to do "tricks". How about we treat the magic creature, bonded divinely to you, as a little more than a feeble dog.

Liberty's Edge

Keep in mind that you can increase the animal companion's INT score from 2 to 3 at the first ability score increase. As soon as the companion's INT score goes up to 3 you end up up with pretty much exactly what you are looking for.

Liberty's Edge

Marc Radle wrote:
Keep in mind that you can increase the animal companion's INT score from 2 to 3 at the first ability score increase. As soon as the companion's INT score goes up to 3 you end up up with pretty much exactly what you are looking for.

+1. It might not be able to talk back, but it could certainly be taught to understand at least basic common.


Even with int 3 an ape won't use a sword, and still needs to be taught tricks to do most things. Int 3 is not exactly "super smart", and it will still react to most things with it's natural instinct.

However please remember the following: Druids and ranger are about nature, summoners are about magic. It's not natural for an animal to have uncanny intelligence and be able to discuss the fundamental truths of the universe with the wizard.
So they get animals that behave like animals, while summoners get something magical. You can't compare the two.

Also a summoner without its summon is ... ah well not really great anymore, while a druid or ranger can do well without their AC.

There's Speak with Animals spell if you want to talk to them too.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Int 3, yeah, the developers are of the opinion that once an animal , always an Animal. no matter what you raise its intelligence to.

Druids are about Nature *AND* magic. they wield a great deal of divine magic at their disposal. Is it so hard to imagine that the bond between them could be strengthened?

Take away a summoner's eidolon, and you still have a 3/4 bab progression, d8 caster who can toss standard action summon monster spells around.

Take away a druid's animal companion and you've got a 3/4 bab, d8 divine caster who can spontaneously cast 1 round summon nature's ally spells. if he's high enough level he effectively gets beast shape spells a few times per day, one level before a wizard of the same level would get them, but can't use them to turn into magical beasts. though he can summon magical beasts with summon nature's ally spells like unicorns.

Yet give a druid an animal companion, and they need weeks if not months to train it for combat, and in those months, all it learns are a few tricks. is it really smart enough to go flank with the fighter or rogue because the druid gives it the attack command? no, it would probably just move up and attack from the first square. do most dm's stop and slow down combat by controlling the animal companion? no.

I'm just asking for a rules update, to follow the flow of the game, the way i think most people are already playing the game. Hand wave the few months, let the mystic bond be that link that lets the animal intuitively and instinctively know that when its friend the druid tells it to attack, he means to attack from the other side and harry the opponent.

what do you lose if you drop tricks? ::shrug:: nothing.
i'm not saying drop them from the game altogether. But make a druid with an animal companion a little better than a fighter with a few ranks in handle animal and a trained riding dog.


I agree. In our games, we dropped Animal Companion tricks a long time ago. It was slowing down the game and made companions feel more like a punishment than a benefit. We just assumed the magic link was enough to communicate with the animal and pretended tricks didn't exist. Everyone rejoiced.

Liberty's Edge

You could always houserule it or come up with a homemade archetype or prestige class giving you exactly what you want.

I just don't see a lot of people clamoring for smarter, more powerful animal companions. There are no PFS games within 200 miles of me, but I've seen a lot of players play druids and rangers who are perfectly happy with the critters the way they are.


Yeah, there's not really any need for a change to the core rules. As has been noted, most of the things you want to see are already supported within the game's current RAW. Additionally, if that's not enough for you, houserule it so it is and move on.

As an aside, "Drizzit's panther" was not an animal companion. She was an extraplanar creature linked to the material plane by an item; she was actually more like an eidolon than an animal companion.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Heaven's Agent wrote:

Yeah, there's not really any need for a change to the core rules. As has been noted, most of the things you want to see are already supported within the game's current RAW. Additionally, if that's not enough for you, houserule it so it is and move on.

As an aside, "Drizzit's panther" was not an animal companion. She was an extraplanar creature linked to the material plane by an item; she was actually more like an eidolon than an animal companion.

hmmh. true enough.

he was 2nd ed anyway, before they really had companions as rangers right?

still makes for a nice comparison.
yeah, guess i'll never get the change. I just hate having to keep a list of house rules around. i'm old. i forget them easily. and then i've gotta be like "oh and here's the house rules i go by" when a new player joins the troupe.


Quote:
It's not natural for an animal to have uncanny intelligence and be able to discuss the fundamental truths of the universe with the wizard.

Wait.. your dog doesn't do that?

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Animal companion rules change request All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules