Animal Companions

[David Bowles]

Again, I think part of the problem is that the AC never seems to be in any legitimate danger in PFS scenarios.

ACs get in trouble a lot in my homebrew games, but I use lots of templated NPCs, so they stack up to the real PCs much more competitively.

[Michael Brock]

David Bowles wrote:

Again, I think part of the problem is that the AC never seems to be in any legitimate danger in PFS scenarios.

ACs get in trouble a lot in my homebrew games, but I use lots of templated NPCs, so they stack up to the real PCs much more competitively.

I have killed plenty of ACs in tier 7-11. It becomes a bigger threat at higher levels. Are most of your experiences at lower, mid or high tier?

[Dave the Barbarian]

I ran the Eyes of the Ten series a few months ago and whacked the druids AC in 3 of the 4 scenario's. They are only in danger if the PC puts them there, which in my example he clearly did. Three times to be sure.

[Pirate Rob]

I lost my animal companion in all 3 parts of the Heresey of Man.

[Dragnmoon]

Plenty of Animal Companions have died in games I have run... I am not sure that is a good thing though... ;)

[David Bowles]

It's all been levels 1-4. But still by level 4, you'd think there we be some increased danger. .nope.

[Mergy]

It seems to me that most 1-5 scenarios are still pretty laid back as far as danger goes. There are exceptions *cough* Dalsine Affair *cough* but most have been very low on the danger scale.

[David Bowles]

That gives me some hope, because nearly all the scenarios so far have been *yawn* let the pet just kill everything and take little damage in return.

[Fromper]

Yeah, most low level PFS adventures (other than Dalsine Affair and Shipyard Rats) seem to be cake walks.

[WalterGM]

David Bowles wrote:

That gives me some hope, because nearly all the scenarios so far have been *yawn* let the pet just kill everything and take little damage in return.

And then you played Defenders of Nesting Swallow.... :P

[Asherr]

Okay so i was just reading through this string of posts, as im starting aa fresh first level druid character for a new campaign, the one i had just run to level 31 having taken its course.

I have been playing since i was twelve, so literaly half my life, so beleive me when i say, if the fighter and rogue are being out damaged by n ANIMAL they have either built thier characters/or are playing WRONG, yes you can actualy play "wrong".

The guys i play with spend perhaps "2 hours" on thier characters, thats a decent amount rite? sadly no its not, they spend little actual time discussing party cohesion or synergy, who will do what and how, they dont think long term, or hell even mid term, in some cases building a character soley for "fluff" and complain when they dont perform well in thier intended or designed role. so in reallity they have spent 2 hours making there character, but very little time at all actualy seriously thinking about it.

I on the other hand spend only an hour making any given character, in part because i have dedicated the time and effort to learning rules, feats, classes adn there archetypes. Unlike these other players i actualy spend this entire character creation period scrutinizing my in "proto" production character, and as a result actualy excel in the desired areas, whether its combat, negotiations, skill buff, or reconessance, buffing/heals.

You would by your definitionn dub me a min maxxer correct? because i actualy take time to consider pitfalls my character may face and take steps in advance, because i deal more damage consistantly im automaticaly over powered? or is it because i played to my class choices/strengths? again im still a min maxxer, but ill be damned if ill take it from someone who cant even make a fighter that cant out dps a druids animal companion...like srsly, no feats, fighter swinging a greatsword has out dpsed the animal companion, unless for some reason strength was his dump stat...at which point he realy has no idea what hes doing "barring a crazy awsome halfling/goblin using weapon finesse and duelist'ing it up ^^.

if this were 3/3.5, i would agree with you, because animal companions could be altered and buffed by about 20 feats and class option/etc, but in pathfinder they are literaly using a standard array, and follow a strict progression, at a 3/4 BaB i would like to point out.

Is it not also possible, nay, PROBABLE that this animal companion has out damaged your group because of lucky rolls? because the alternative is thier characters are fataly flawed and only the highest immersion of roleplaying could justify it.

And i would also like to point out, just because i make my characters well "properly" (taking the time to actively consider it, not just, oh that would work, or that sounds cool) it doesnt mean i dont roll play. In my grops, i actualy spend the most time actualy roleplaying, and avoiding meta game influenced decisions, i commit to my characters, and by extension thier familiars and animal companions, i dont "throw them away" and i dont know a single person who would, i only place my companions in as mmuch danger as i would place myself, and so i often do it myself, this same rule applying to how i treat other players in game, it allways irks me when the wannabe paladin commands the rogue to scout out ahead in a dungeon we all suspect is full of incorpreal undead or other nasties that can quite easily destroy a character running solo.

as to the matter of everyones time to shine, i have to agree with an earlier post, holding back solely to make a "little guy" feel big doesnt actualy help anyone, should the wizard use lower level spells to help the multi classed sorceror/fighter feel like hes significantly contributing, all the while increasing the parties chances of a fatality or death just to satiate someones ego? the answer is of course no, unless that players suicidaly depressed, or there is a valid roleplaying reason to do so.
the only situations where i can understand, and in fat endorse the use of restraint is WHEN and ONLY WHEN you have an over powered character, in class/feats/skills/abilities/scores/items, hold back, dial back to be slightly better or on par as the other primary damage dealer, and when the *stuff* hits the fan, progressively unleash your power, only reigning it in after youv insured the parties risks are back within acceptable levels. I like to call it the "Goku" super saiyen approach, and it quite surprised one vindictive gm, when he designed a encounter to actualy kill my character, with a significant amount of overkill besides, only to realise too late, i had been playing at about 2/5 of that characters potential "a cleric/healbot" the look on his face as what was his killing blow actually signalled the turning point, priceless, contingencies are just hilarious when used properly and turning to your mates and stating "Opperation W.T.F.is a go", and handing them thier "altered" charactersheets, with all the buffs they just got. Just the look of puzzlement on the gms face, and then as the realization of whats going on hits him XD.

So my point after that rant is this, do not expect another player to "riegn in" his animal companion or indeed his actual character, if its doing more damage its doing so as a standard example of its kind, animal advancmeent, so you would be by that logic, sub par to a animal of same level, mybe look at your own character and see what you could ahve done better to fufill your party role, bards arent designed to do more damage than barbarians and fighters.
second, as so many people have stated snimal companion strength tapers off rather quickly, because its an animal...if it maintains a certain degree of combat significance, its because th eplayer using it ha taken steps to do so, so again, refer to the first step, think about your own character.
thirdly, and lastly. declaiming and denouncing a well built character just because its "stronger" than your own, does not make the creator a bad player, it is there attitude that they bring to the table and the way in which they play the game that decides whether they are a "roll player" or roleplayer.

My latest character will be another testament to "intelligent design", im fufilling a front line tanking role, along with my animal companion (wolf), i dont expect to be dealing much damage at all, especialy later on, as i am also the parties healbot, or half of one, a mates making a cleric, as my levels increase i will take more and more feats and items to synergize with mmy animal companion and increase my wild shape capabilities, by late levels i will probably be on par with the damage ddealers of the party again, and not just relegated to tanking and healbotting, its all in the ebb and flow of each classes makeup and party composition.

And before anyone comments on ym horrendous spelling, im legaly blind...glaring laptop screens or pc monitors arent exatly easy to read.

[Shar Tahl]

Michael Brock wrote:

David Bowles wrote:

Again, I think part of the problem is that the AC never seems to be in any legitimate danger in PFS scenarios.

ACs get in trouble a lot in my homebrew games, but I use lots of templated NPCs, so they stack up to the real PCs much more competitively.

I have killed plenty of ACs in tier 7-11. It becomes a bigger threat at higher levels. Are most of your experiences at lower, mid or high tier?

For me, I did notice my character's companion dying more often as he got higher level and seeming less like having an extra player in the party.

[Stormfriend]

I have to agree with Asherr, in that just because you play a fighter doesn't mean you're a fighter. Classes in PFRPG grant you the opportunity to become something, but you can't just choose a class and expect to be good at it. You need to invest in it as well, through stats and feats.

Think of a student who goes to university but takes no relevant feats, invests no skill points in applicable skills, and pays little attention to his studies. Is he justified in complaining that somebody who didn't even study the subject at university knows more about it than he did? He may be a very interesting character, but that doesn't mean he's any good at the subject.

If your front-line fighter is being outclassed by an AC then you need to accept that he's a wastrel who's suddenly found himself in a difficult job interview and is now trying to explain how his history of drunken boozing qualifies him for the rat-catching job instead of the house-cat that was being interviewed a moment ago.

[BigNorseWolf]

Stormfriend wrote:

now trying to explain how his history of drunken boozing qualifies him for the rat-catching job instead of the house-cat that was being interviewed a moment ago.

Inquisitor of Cayden Cailean?

[Stormfriend]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Stormfriend wrote:

now trying to explain how his history of drunken boozing qualifies him for the rat-catching job instead of the house-cat that was being interviewed a moment ago.

Inquisitor of Cayden Cailean?

Membership of the church and a life spent in worship (at the tavern) doesn't make you a good rat catcher. Or a good inquisitor. It does however make you a good drunk. :-)

Edit: if a situation came up where he needed to out-drink the house cat in the party, then finally he'd have found his niche.

[ShadowcatX]

Stormfriend wrote:

good drunk

Sounds like a prestige class to me.

[David Bowles]

The three attacks of the cat animal companion plus the rake ability are really, really nice at low level. Having the three attacks makes the cat much more consistent at dealing damage than many other melee based characters at that level. I'm just saying this seems really, really strong for a class feature.

[BigNorseWolf]

David Bowles wrote:

The three attacks of the cat animal companion plus the rake ability are really, really nice at low level. Having the three attacks makes the cat much more consistent at dealing damage than many other melee based characters at that level. I'm just saying this seems really, really strong for a class feature.

It gets nerfed pretty hard once creatures start getting damage reduction. Its pretty hard for animal companions to get around it.

[Asherr]

"The three attacks of the cat animal companion plus the rake ability are really, really nice at low level. Having the three attacks makes the cat much more consistent at dealing damage than many other melee based characters at that level. I'm just saying this seems really, really strong for a class feature."

umm you realise that the cats companions claw attacks, or its bite/rake are in fact secondary attacks and recieve only half the strength bonus to damage? rounded down, and attacking with more than one natural attack without multi attak incurs a -5 penalty to hit, i find it laughable that barring a string of 20s it could possibly do more damage than say a fighter sword and boarding, sheer penalties alone for the full attack action actualy lowers its chances of dealing damage to most opponents within CR of the party, let alone dealing more given its penalties to strength based damage on secondary attacks. IF and its a big IF, al the cats attacks hit, it deals 1d6+1 bite, 2 claws at 1d4+0 each, and a 1d4+0 rake attack. Thats dismal, be honest...

Again i have to say, its importat to actualy consider everything properly, at later levels, level 9 when the companion gets multiattack for free from druid level progression, that is when its attacks ona full attack action "charge combined with pounce"deal more damage, but as someone else has already stated, these multiple attacks in turn have to contend with damage reduction, and more attacks is comparatively BAD, exspecialy when compared to strong singular attacks vs damge redution.

in order for a "cat" at the lower levels to imitate this degree of success it has to take the Multiattack feat ASAP level one at the earliest. the resulting charge/pounce would then be resolved at a +0 penalty/bonus (multi attack lowering the penalty to -2, and charging adding +2) this feat choice means the animal companion does not have a different feat of course, and could, given the aggressive metering of the build, result in its unnessisary exposure to risks, and quite likely death. charging lowers its AC and ORC's love to crit low ac targets, and at these lower levels it wouldnt nessisarily take a crit to kill it.

Personaly i steer clear of "dice heavy" combat models, it tends to slow the game down (dont get me started on digitaly rolled dice...), irritating other players/gm, even yourself if it goes poorly. Its why when i run a "companion/familiar/pet/npc" i keep them simple and straightforward, it makes combat less of a chore and still just as enjoyable, as the companoins with less attacks tend to have interesting/usefull perks to make up for it (a wolf can trip after biting and dealing damage, spiders have poison etc)

[David Bowles]

I thought that the claw attacks were primary.

[David Bowles]

And, additionally, I'd argue that waiting for the NPCs to gain damage reduction to balance out pets is *lame*.

[BigNorseWolf]

The claw attacks are primary. This is a change from 3.5 i think.

Claw — 1 1d2 1d3 1d4 1d6 1d8 2d6 2d8 B/S Primary

Rakes are also primary attacks because they are claw attacks.

The damage stays decent on the mat longer than it seems to vs a fighter on paper because animals have easy access to Pounce, which lets them move and full attack. If you are a two weapon fighter or heavens forbid, a two weapon fighting rogue, they can exceed your damage in heavily mobile fights.

David Bowles wrote:

And, additionally, I'd argue that waiting for the NPCs to gain damage reduction to balance out pets is *lame*.

Go with a high strength and a big honking weapon then. So far my velociraptor can out damage a magic missle tossing wizard or a two weapon rogue but gets blown away by anyone swinging a greatsword.

[Mergy]

Personally I'd rather go with the T-Rex. A good UMD skill and a wand of enlarge person (usable by the druid on his companion because of share spells) means that thing is biting for 2d6+4 from level one.

[BigNorseWolf]

Mergy wrote:

Personally I'd rather go with the T-Rex. A good UMD skill and a wand of enlarge person (usable by the druid on his companion because of share spells) means that thing is biting for 2d6+4 from level one.

A little known change from 3.5

Share Spells (Ex): The druid may cast a spell with a target of “You” on her animal companion (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on herself.

A druid may cast spells on her animal companion even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the companion's type (animal). Spells cast in this way must come from a class that grants an animal companion.

This ability does not allow the animal to share abilities that are not spells, even if they function like spells.

No enlarge person for you... unless you take a few levels of sylvan sorcerer.

People also seem to miss that actually sharing the spell as long as your companion was right next to you is now a 10th level feat

[David Bowles]

Thanks, BigNorseWolf. I had forgotten about the pounce trick. I knew there was some reason that the cat was *always* full attacking. And I knew for sure that it wasn't taking -5 on its attacks. I appreciate the input of Asherr, but the situation is not that simple, and the damage of an AC cat is *not* dismal.

[David Bowles]

I have always found that two-weapon rogues have issues connecting with their targets. But that was in homebrew.

[Mergy]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Mergy wrote:

Personally I'd rather go with the T-Rex. A good UMD skill and a wand of enlarge person (usable by the druid on his companion because of share spells) means that thing is biting for 2d6+4 from level one.

A little known change from 3.5

Share Spells (Ex): The druid may cast a spell with a target of “You” on her animal companion (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on herself.

A druid may cast spells on her animal companion even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the companion's type (animal). Spells cast in this way must come from a class that grants an animal companion.

This ability does not allow the animal to share abilities that are not spells, even if they function like spells.

No enlarge person for you... unless you take a few levels of sylvan sorcerer.

People also seem to miss that actually sharing the spell as long as your companion was right next to you is now a 10th level feat

Wow, I missed that part. Would a sylvan sorcerer be able to enlarge his animal companion with enlarge person?

[BigNorseWolf]

Sylvan sorcerers get animal companions at first level, so their sorcerer spell list (and i think any sorcerous spell casting they did off an item) is legal to cast on their animal companion, including enlarge person.

(hmm.. i hadn't considered a dip into it, but expeditious retreat on a velociraptor would just be FUN...)

[Mergy]

Well good! I'm considering a gnome sylvan fey sorcerer with a t-rex companion, and one of the spells of choice would have been enlarge person.

[WalterGM]

Here's a query: Sylvan sorc 1 / Druid 1 -- isn't your AC's level still 1? Or would they stack? Of course, you could just take Boon Companion and just stay straight sorc.

[Mergy]

The best level to take boon companion would be at 3. You only need to go through one bad level before you have a full HD companion.

[BigNorseWolf]

WalterGM wrote:

Here's a query: Sylvan sorc 1 / Druid 1 -- isn't your AC's level still 1? Or would they stack? Of course, you could just take Boon Companion and just stay straight sorc.

The sylvan sorcerer is, afaik, unique in that its

Sorcerer Level-3 minimum 1.

So 1-3 minimum 1 =1 level on the sorcerer

+1 from the druid= 2.

[james maissen]

David Bowles wrote:

but the situation is not that simple, and the damage of an AC cat is *not* dismal.

Are you sure about that?

First you don't get pounce until level 7. If it's an issue by then, talk to your fighters. We're talking about low level here, right?

Let's see at 1st level:

Cat: Claw +2 (1BAB +1STR) for 1d4+1, Bite +2 for 1d6+1 so against AC 17 (say) you are expecting 30% hits including 1.5% crits, so 31.5% of average damage or .315 x 11.5 = 3.6225

Fighter: Greatsword +7(1BAB 5STR 1Focus 1weapon -1PA) for 2d6+10. So against the same AC 17 you are expecting 55% hits including 5.5% crits, so 60.5 of average damage or .605 x 17 = 10.285

Now the cat needs to full attack while the Fighter could walk (or even charge to add more to the expected damage). Moreover the Fighter might also have cleave to attack again if there's an adjacent victim.

At level 6:
Cat: Claw +7 (4BAB 3STR) for 1d4+3, Bite +7 for 1d6+3 so against say AC 17 (again) you are expecting 55% hits including 2.75% crits so 57.75% of average damage or .5775 x 17.5 = 10.10625

Is it just me or is the 1st level fighter hitting slightly better? Now perhaps the Cat has weapon focus in either claw or bite, perhaps it has power attack. It has three feats to play with here. But its not going to alter this picture too much.

Now at level 7 they do ramp up, getting large and having pounce. But we're not talking about the level 7-12 range here I thought..

-James

[Shifty]

I dont care if someones AC kills everything at the table singelhandedly.

All that matters to me is that my team wins.

If my team wins, then I have won... yay shinies for me.

[WalterGM]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

WalterGM wrote:

Here's a query: Sylvan sorc 1 / Druid 1 -- isn't your AC's level still 1? Or would they stack? Of course, you could just take Boon Companion and just stay straight sorc.

The sylvan sorcerer is, afaik, unique in that its

Sorcerer Level-3 minimum 1.

So 1-3 minimum 1 =1 level on the sorcerer

+1 from the druid= 2.

Oh my, I derped hard.

"The druid’s class levels stack with levels of any other classes that are entitled to an animal companion for the purpose of determining the companion’s statistics."

/facepalm.

Carry on, thread, carry on.

[David Bowles]

Your math on the cat is way off because this cat had weapon finesse. It's fine, though, I get the general jist.

[james maissen]

David Bowles wrote:

Your math on the cat is way off because this cat had weapon finesse. It's fine, though, I get the general jist.

So the AC has +2 more to hit, so the 6th level AC attacks as well as a 1st level fighter charging. At 6HD the AC has 2 other feats.. any idea what they are?

It's really easy to see things being more than what they are. Always crunch the numbers. Amusingly enough when the mystic theurge first came out people screamed that it was over-powered.

Likewise what is the Cat's armor class? Perhaps 19? In other words it too is around the range for a 1st-2nd level fighter.

-James

[Mergy]

At first level you can have an AC that is for all intents and purposes a moderately-optimized fighter.

Case in point:

Here's a T-rex:

Chompy
Tyrannosaurus animal companion
N Medium animal
Init +3; Senses low-light vision, scent; Perception +6

DEFENCE

AC 19, touch 13, flat-footed 16 (armour +2, Dex +3, natural armour +4)
Hp 12 (2d8+3)
Fort +3, Ref +6, Will +2

OFFENCE

Speed 30 ft.
Melee bite +3 (1d8+3)

STATISTICS

Str 14, Dex 16, Con 10, Int 2, Wis 15, Cha 10
Base Atk +1; CMB +3; CMD 16
Feats Toughness
Skills Acrobatics +7, Perception +6
SQ link, share spells
Tricks attack II, come, defend, down, heel, perform
Gear tyrannosaurus leather armour

He's got about the AC and health I would expect from a first level front-line fighter. His attack and damage are both a little low, but only by one or two points.

I could definitely see why someone would be upset about this at the early levels, because it seems like the player has two characters. However, PC classes will always scale better than an AC, and there's no getting around that.

[David Bowles]

I don't think that serving up a completely optimized two-hander fighter is a good comparison for an AC anyway. Also, I'm pretty sure that a 20 str in PFS is probably not the route to a balanced character.

In the games I played in, levels 1-3, the cat always had the best armor class in the group. I don't know what that means, other than that people probably weren't min-maxed.

In a way, this not really help my perception of ACs when the example to show how they are not too powerful as a "class feature" is an optimized damage dealer. Seems like a lot of work to out damage a cat that the druid spend 5 minutes making. And none of this takes into account what the druid is doing as well. The fact that we even have to discuss the AC compared to actual PCs seems absurd on its face, and as Mergy pointed out, it is a non-trivial comparison.

[Stormfriend]

The obvious comparison is a 'not min/maxed' two-handed fighter then:

Half Elf Fighter 1
Init +2, Senses low-light vision; Perception +7

AC 19, touch 12, flat-footed 17 (Chainmail, Trait)
HP 13, with level bonus
Fort +4, Ref +2, Will +2 (alternative racial trait)

Speed 20ft
Melee: Mwk Greatsword (PA) +6 (2d6+9)

Str 18, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 10
Base Atk +1; CMB +5; CMD 17

Feats: Weapon Focus (Greatsword), Power Attack
Traits: Observant (Grand Lodge), Defender of the Society
Skills: Climb +8, Perception +7

The AC is comparable in many ways: AC, saves, HP, skills; but in attack and damage the fighter easily trounces the AC. My 14 Str, Longsword wielding diplomat fighter is comparable in damage to the AC, but she's deliberately weak in combat and still has a better chance to hit. She can also talk the hind-leg off a T-Rex...

The one advantage the AC really has is scent; and perhaps the speed increase until level 3 when the fighter speeds up.

[WalterGM]

There's also a hidden "tax" to having an AC. You spend money on armor and other gear for a "second character." You don't get extra gold for playing a druid -- you get the same as everyone else. So now you have two "characters" that are each weaker than one could be. Also, what happens when your AC dies? What about when you and your AC dies? That's a lot of PP and gold to recover your body, get your pets, and cast raise dead x2, restoration x4. My ranger friend just shelled out over 10k gold from a death, and who knows how much PP. Just something to keep in mind when discussing the fairness of having an AC.

[Mergy]

Stormfriend wrote:

The obvious comparison is a 'not min/maxed' two-handed fighter then:

Half Elf Fighter 1
Init +2, Senses low-light vision; Perception +7

AC 19, touch 12, flat-footed 17 (Chainmail, Trait)
HP 13, with level bonus
Fort +4, Ref +2, Will +2 (alternative racial trait)

Speed 20ft
Melee: Mwk Greatsword (PA) +6 (2d6+9)

Str 18, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 10
Base Atk +1; CMB +5; CMD 17

Feats: Weapon Focus (Greatsword), Power Attack
Traits: Observant (Grand Lodge), Defender of the Society
Skills: Climb +8, Perception +7

The AC is comparable in many ways: AC, saves, HP, skills; but in attack and damage the fighter easily trounces the AC. My 14 Str, Longsword wielding diplomat fighter is comparable in damage to the AC, but she's deliberately weak in combat and still has a better chance to hit. She can also talk the hind-leg off a T-Rex...

The one advantage the AC really has is scent; and perhaps the speed increase until level 3 when the fighter speeds up.

Yup, the t-rex falls short of this, and will continue to fall short of it. A lion will have more attacks but a low chance to hit against anything with a good armour class.

[james maissen]

David Bowles wrote:

I don't think that serving up a completely optimized two-hander fighter is a good comparison for an AC anyway.

Well to be fair I was comparing this 'optimized' fighter at 1st level to the animal companion's combat ability at 6th level. It was done to prove a point.

You certainly can make less optimized fighters.. there's a huge range there. Some other posters have done so at low levels. Since I brought up 6th level I'll show you what a purposefully weak 6th level fighter and a nowhere near optimized one can do.

Heck let's see:

6th level fighter with great sword. Let's give him a 14 STR (which I think we will admit is overly low) and a +1 weapon. Of his 7-8 feats we spend 3 (power attack, weapon focus, weapon spec).

To hit: +9 (6BAB 1focus 1training 2STR 1weapon -2power attack)

To damage: 2d6 + 13 (3STR 2Special 1training 6PA 1weapon)

Against AC 17 (the random AC I picked before) he hits with his primary on an 8 (65% of the time). Now 6.5% of the time he crits for double damage, so over all expects to deal 73.5% of a hit for his primary attack. This deals 14.7 damage on average.

This is without charging OR taking a full attack action. The AC NEEDS to take a full attack action to deal his expected 10.1 damage.

The iterative attack of our 14 STR fighter hits 40% of the time and crits 4% of the time. This deals another 8.8 expected damage for a total of 23.5 damage.

Thus this severely gimped fighter is dealing more than double the damage of the 'broken' cat. And that's not counting on any potential AOOs where the cat would fall further behind.

Now it's reasonable for a fighter to start with at least a 16STR (if going with strength for melee) and to get a +2 STR item by 6th level. This would increase his to hit by 2 and damage by 3 over the 14STR version. This would increase the expected damage by about 8damage bringing us over 30 expected damage.

Thus a nowhere near optimal 6th level fighter is doing triple the Cat's damage at 6th.

Admittedly this is a low point for the cat, but please.

I've shown it being substantially under par here.

David Bowles wrote:

In the games I played in, levels 1-3, the cat always had the best armor class in the group. I don't know what that means, other than that people probably weren't min-maxed.

The cat is looking at 17DEX 1Nat armor and possibly 4 armor from barding/mage armor.. so AC 18.

A fighter with a 14DEX in chain armor has at least this, if not more.

If this is the best your group is putting out in levels 1-3 and you find it to be a problem then you might wish to focus on the PCs rather than complaining about the AC.

-James

[David Bowles]

That may be true, but I can't make other players' characters for them. ACs have a feat for improved natural armor too I think.

Again, my complaints are mostly within the context of this being a "class feature". I think WalterGMs point is perhaps the most poignant.

[BigNorseWolf]

WalterGM wrote:

There's also a hidden "tax" to having an AC. You spend money on armor and other gear for a "second character." You don't get extra gold for playing a druid -- you get the same as everyone else. So now you have two "characters" that are each weaker than one could be. Also, what happens when your AC dies? What about when you and your AC dies? That's a lot of PP and gold to recover your body, get your pets, and cast raise dead x2, restoration x4. My ranger friend just shelled out over 10k gold from a death, and who knows how much PP. Just something to keep in mind when discussing the fairness of having an AC.

Technically you can just not raise your pet , and you will get a new one the next scenario. You have snowball the lion, who died in a kobold trap. Snowball II who was killed by the redacted in the redacted, snowball III who took a crit from a greataxe, snowball IV who took a disintegrate to the head...

Buying two sets of gear isn't as bad as you'd think. Since the gold cost is exponential, buying two sets at 1 less is the same as buying 1 set of the absolute best you can have.

[james maissen]

David Bowles wrote:

That may be true, but I can't make other players' characters for them.

No, but if they are significantly outside of what's expected then some things will seem askew when its really the vantage point that's off.

If you elect to build PCs with 8CON scores then fireballs will seem too powerful and deadly.

Animal Companions are not out of whack, but your perspective might be.

At 1st level the AC has 1 feat. They get a second at 2nd level. You've said they spent one on weapon finesse to be able to hit anything. So at 2nd level the AC could have a 19 AC. It's not that impressive. Many PCs will have that and better then.

Paizo has done a decent job at making sure animal companions are not out of line. But they have made assumptions on what that line should be.

Can I ask, what the classes are of the PCs that are being outshined by the animal companion? Are there any martial classes there, or is the complaint that the party healer can't outfight the animal companion?

-James

[David Bowles]

The basic summary is this. I was a small RPG con and played about five scenarios with various classes, but each time I was with this druid.

I expect just about anyone to be able to out-damage my cleric build. That is not the issue.

The druid/AC *combination* made pretty much every other PC involved in these scenarios look foolish. It really didn't seem to matter which martial class it was. It many instances, the druid/AC combo was getting six attacks. The druid was some kind of totem build that allowed this.

Maybe I just got stuck with a bunch of other PCs there were just "vanilla". I know of many PC class builds that break PFS scenarios, but I'm just observing that in these cases, the druid didn't even need to have a broken build.

And for PFS scenarios, AC 19 is really badass at level 2. Especially given that it still moves 40ft with AC 19. Is there a way for a PC to move 40 ft and have 19 AC at level 2? There were two scenarios I never even had to heal the cat because nothing could hit it. I know that for all the tier 1-3 scenarios I played in, AC 19 was the highest AC in the group.

I guess one might blame the PFS scenario writers for this, but I find AC 19 and 3 attacks and level 2 for a "class feature" to be a bit much, *especially* in a society where PCs have 20 build points, and fairly limited access to gear.

[Alexander_Damocles]

David Bowles wrote:

And for PFS scenarios, AC 19 is really badass at level 2. Especially given that it still moves 40ft with AC 19. Is there a way for a PC to move 40 ft and have 19 AC at level 2?

Barbarian, 18 dex, chain shirt, dodge. Barbarian, 14 dex, chain shirt, heavy shield. Spells get ya there too. I've got a character who wanders about (slowly, mind you) with a 23 AC at level 1.

[james maissen]

David Bowles wrote:

I guess one might blame the PFS scenario writers for this, but I find AC 19 and 3 attacks and level 2 for a "class feature" to be a bit much, *especially* in a society where PCs have 20 build points, and fairly limited access to gear.

I'm guessing that non of the various classes was a martial class built for melee?

Sorry, but animal companions are based on a reasonable level of power. If the PCs are significantly below that then an AC can seem stronger while its really that the PC is weaker than what is expected.

When the AC is moving it's 40ft it only gets one attack, which more than halves it's damage that round if it even hits.

A non-druid could elect to spend wealth to have a dog for combat, armor them and have them along. How much do they add for "not even a class feature" at your level? Everyone is allowed one other combatant, did you elect to take advantage of this? At low levels animals along can be strong. Not overpowering, but strong. It's part of the game.

Lastly 'nothing can hit AC 19'? Really? What were the enemies attack at? Much worse than the AC's +4 to hit I guess as even that hits it 30% of the time (almost a third when you adjust for crits). A given fighter easily has a better armor class and damage.

-James

[Andrew Christian]

I actually agree with James Maissen here.
Remember, animal companions do not use the stats from the Bestiary.
The main reason animal companions and/or mounts seem so powerful at level 1-2, is because they are often 1 hit dice higher that the APL until about 4th level.
But a level 1 AC is only 2 Hit Dice with a BAB of +1. With Weapon Finesse and a 17 Dex that’s only +4 to hit. That’s 1d6+1 Bite, and two 1d4+1 Claws at +4 to hit. Not sure how they get a 19 AC, as they only have +3 from Dex and a +1 Natural Armor. Remember, barding costs twice the amount of gold and they don’t move 40 feet in medium or heavier barding. A Chain Shirt is only +4 AC. So to maintain the speed the best I can see is 18 AC for the Large Cat. With Weapon Focus they could have a +5 to hit with one of their attack types, bite or claws. Rake for 1d4+1 damage only works if the cat is grappling, and without the Grab ability they get at level 7, it largely won’t get used.
A fighter (half-orc or someone with adopted half-orc) with the toothy trait and a two-weapon fighter build, weapon finesse, 16 Dex, Weapon Focus, with two short swords would get +3 to hit (not that much worse than the cat) with both swords at 1d6+2 damage (assuming 14 Str) and crit range of 19-20/x2 (better than the cat) and -1 bite for 1d4+1 damage. With a chain shirt, the AC is 17, just one worse than the cat.
So a less than fully optimized fighter stacks up fairly well with the cat.
At 2nd level, the fighter gets significantly better and the cat only gets slightly better.
By 4th level, if this fighter can’t take the cat one-on-one, something is wrong.