One thing that's been bugging me going over the rules, is that the folks in charge of the Bestiaries at Paizo don't seem to be able to care much for properly categorizing hyenas.
For starters: the Dire Hyena is listed as also being called a "hyaenodon". Now, the actual animal called the hyaenodon isn't remotely related to hyenas; heck, it's not even related to any currently existing species, the entire order to which they belong went extinct. Is this intended to be a case of using an existing name for a fictional creature, or did someone mix up hyaenodons and pachycrocuta?
Another petty grievance from your unfriendly neighborhood hyena fan: hyenas aren't canines, and are not closely related to them (they're closer to felines, but that's still a stretch), so why is it that the Animal Lord template's Species Affinities for Canine Lords include hyenas? To me, it's as if the Dinosaur Lord also included Crocodiles because they're big, scaly, and "primitive".
I realize that we're free to ignore such things and make house rules in our own games, but with all the misinformation about hyenas that already exists, it really bugs me to see this in my favorite game.
I'm going to actually houserule those.
They should be fixed by the RAW if you ask me.
Uhh...why should categories be based off lines of descent rather than, say magical, spiritual, behavioral, or morphological similarities? The reptilian "lizardfolk", you will note, are susceptible to Charm Person whereas apes and monkeys are not.
Because charm person targets humanoids, which are defined within certain parameters that do not include nonhuman primates. The animal lord categories name specific categories: orders, genera, and families of animals, not groups based on magical, spiritual, behavioral, or morphological similarities (and I'd argue that hyenas, especially the more recognizable spotted hyenas, are not similar enough to canines in those respects). This is an apples and oranges situation.
It would be a different story if the animal lord's description specified something like "Caninoid", but it says "Canine". Animals that count as canine are pretty narrowly defined.
They are lumped in with canines for game balance reasons. Because there aren't enough hyenas to make a hyena lord.
This is a game. Sacrifices for game balance have to be made.
And why are apes so weak compared to human warriors? And so dumb? (Trust me, a chimp IRL is a LOT smarter than a cow.)
A: Because "Animal" as a simply-defined "nonmagic, with Int = 1 or 2" category is far too convenient to ruin over something as trite as, you know, real life.
For that matter, why was the historical dire wolf (a Pleistocene mammal much like a stockier, heavier wolf) replaced in 3e by the "dire wolf" (a giant spiked monster the length of an SUV)?
A: Because people like giant spikewolves, and don't really know or care about historical accuracy. That also explains why greatswords in the game weigh 8 lbs (vs. a historical 2.4 to 3.3 lbs.) and, judging from the art, are at least nine feet long in most cases (vs. more like 5 ft. historically).
People want "BIG!" versions of stuff, and they want "cool" names for it. They do not care if the names are misused. They do not care if the "big" would be unusable in the real world. The game designers are smart enough to give the audience what they want.
As a huge science biology nerd myself, sometimes accepting things like this in the "regular world" must happen. I house rule Gnolls differently because of this .
What Picture shows a 9 foot Greatsword?
And a Greatsword could weigh 8 pounds though the Balance is good enough it seems to be lighter.
What Picture shows a 9 foot Greatsword?
Orik (sp?) in PF#1 seems to be the poster-child for things to come. And the original art for the earthbreaker makes me want to call it a "backbreaker" (for the user trying to lift it) instead. And why the iconic fighter's swords always appear to be an inch thick in cross-section is yet another mystery.
But, you know what, people LIKE really oversized weapons. The art reflects that preference. Paizo sells books. Everyone wins (except the very few prissy historians like myself, and, really, I just don't look at the art and all is well).
And I warn my players in advance that, in my home game, apes have higher Str and Int than those shown in the PFB.
STR yes INT I would just make them act smarter than people expect.
But Orik's blade would only be around 4 feet on the blade. Which is well within the guidelines for a Bastard Sword.
I know this is stupid of me, but I'm just going to come out and ask...
If Intelligence (the game stat) has nothing to do with intelligence ("just make them act smarter!"), then why does it exist as a stat? Just make skill points dependent on something else, make Wizards cha-based casters, and do away with it -- that would seem a whole lot simpler to me, in that case.
I need not ask why an animal that can learn ASL and teach it to its offspring (e.g., a chimp) has Int 2 and no ability to learn languages -- I already addressed that above. Personally, I use a simple "none (can't speak)" notation in the "languages" line, and then I can give them an Int stat commensurate with intelligence (I use 6 for chimps, 4 for smart dogs like border collies, 2 for things like domestic cattle).
Intelligence denotes knowledge in d20. It really is stupid. But hey gotta love legacy.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They are lumped in with canines for game balance reasons. Because there aren't enough hyenas to make a hyena lord.
This is a game. Sacrifices for game balance have to be made.
I don't think that's accurate. It wouldn't unbalance anything to make a Hyena Lord. The whole idea behind Animal Lords is that there can be one for every type of animal, no matter how few of those animals exist. The idea of having an adventure featuring the animal lord for a creature that's about to go extinct is one of the best reasons for having the template.
I think hyenas just got lumped in with canines because the guy who wrote up the bit on Canine Lord figured, "Hyenas are like dogs, right? Meh, good enough," and called it a day. That, and because Animal Lord is a template with thousands of different applications so nobody took the time to make a Hyena Lord. It's good for those hyenas I adore the playful little scamps...
XP 19,200
Gnoll animal lord ranger 10
CN Medium outsider (native, shapechanger)
Init +4; Senses low-light vision, scent; Perception +14
DEFENSE
AC 24, touch 16, flat-footed 19 (+3 armor, +1 deflection, +4 Dex, +1 dodge, +5 natural)
hp 145 (2d8+10d10+72)
Fort +16, Ref +13, Will +8
Defensive Abilities evasion; DR 10/silver
OFFENSE
Speed 50 ft.
Melee bite +16/+11 (1d8+7 plus trip)
Ranged +1 returning javelin +15 (1d6+6/x2)
Special Attacks favored enemy (humans +6, magical beasts +2, animals +2)
Spell-Like Abilities (CL 12th)
At will—charm animal (hyenas only, DC 12)
Ranger Spells Prepared (CL 7th)
3rd—greater magic fang
2nd—bull’s strength, hold animal (DC 15)
1st—charm animal (DC 14), longstrider, pass without trace
STATISTICS
Str 20, Dex 19, Con 20, Int 12, Wis 17, Cha 12
Base Atk +10; CMB +15; CMD 29
Feats Toughness, Vital Strike, Improved Natural Weapon (bite,) Weapon Focus (bite,) Great Fortitude, Iron Will, Endurance, Dodge, Diehard
Skills Acrobatics +15 (+23 when jumping), Handle Animal +12, Intimidate +11 Knowledge (nature) +12, Perception +14, Sense Motive +11, Stealth +15 (+19 in tall grass), Survival +14; Racial Modifiers +4 Stealth in tall grass
Languages Gnoll, Sylvan; speak with animals (hyenas only)
SQ change shape (hyena; shapechange), favored terrain (plains +4, desert +2), hunter's bond (hyena), swift tracker, track +5, wild empathy +11, woodland stride
ECOLOGY
Environment warm plains and desert
Organization solitary
Treasure NPC gear (+1 leather armor, +1 returning javelin, amulet of natural armor +1, ring of protection +1, other treasure)
They sure look like dogs to me.
I still find it funny no-one has mentioned that Canines, Felines, Caniforms, and Feliforms are all closely related enough that there are very few differences between them. Mainly how flexible their Ankles and powerful their Paw Tendons are.
They are lumped in with canines for game balance reasons. Because there aren't enough hyenas to make a hyena lord.
This is a game. Sacrifices for game balance have to be made.
That doesn't hold up against the other animal lord examples given: we have the crocodile lord, and the bear lord only has grizzly bears suggested for their base animal; as far as balance, the dinosaur lord has both the deinonychus & t. rex suggested, yet the former is CR 3 and the latter is CR 9.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually have a much greater problem with the illustrations of many of the extinct "real world" beasties. My wife dreaded the arrival of a new Bestiary because I would rant and rave and wear sack cloth and eat ashes and... you get the picture.
|
Okay, I gotta agree with the OP concerning the Dire Hyena thing (since it's been said by Paizo that they intended to make the "Dire" animals the prehistoric versions of the animals as I think 1st edition did), but the classification of hyenas as canines doesn't really bother me. I assume that's a game balance thing. Insects and arachnids are still "animals" yet they are classified as a completely different creature type by bestiaries. I cringe at it, but fully understand the purpose. Hyenas are listed as "canine" for the same reason as a lot of non-mustelid creatures are listed in the Bestiary as being able to "speak with kind" with weasels: because putting hyenas in their own category would mess stuff up cause they'd stand alone.
I still find it funny no-one has mentioned that Canines, Felines, Caniforms, and Feliforms are all closely related enough that there are very few differences between them. Mainly how flexible their Ankles and powerful their Paw Tendons are.
"Although phylogenetically close to felines and viverrids, hyenas are behaviourally and morphologically similar to canines in several aspects (see Convergent evolution); both hyenas and canines are non-arboreal, cursorial hunters that catch prey with their teeth rather than claws"
So they are dog-like cats.
Dire Hyenas would be 100% dogs though.
"Hyenas groom themselves often like felids and viverrids, and their way of licking their genitals is very cat-like (sitting on the lower back, legs spread with one leg pointing vertically upward). However, unlike other feliforms, they do not "wash" their faces."
As an aside: According to psychology lecturer Britta Osthaus at the University of Exeter, cats do not understand cause and effect.
Another petty grievance from your unfriendly neighborhood hyena fan: hyenas aren't canines, and are not closely related to them (they're closer to felines, but that's still a stretch), so why is it that the Animal Lord template's Species Affinities for Canine Lords include hyenas? To me, it's as if the Dinosaur Lord also included Crocodiles because they're big, scaly, and "primitive".
You mean like the way the Dragon Lord deals almost entirely with lizards and crocodiles? Kinda lame, but not really worth working up a rant about to me.
2) As mentioned previously by others, the cladistic differences between Creodonts and Carnivores (i.e. Carnivora) is pretty small compared to some of those other categories. Dinosaurs, looking at you.
Actually, if we are going to be really nit picky, that probably isn't true. "Creodonta" is probably a trashcan group, with Hyaenodonts belonging to Afrotheria (same group that includes elephants, hyraxes, and aardvarks), while oxyaenids are...well I am not sure we know yet what they are, but they are either some sort of stem lauriastheria or vaguely near carnivora.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not actually all that concerned with it. Hyenas are enough unlike dogs that I'm just going to rule them separate in my own games. Dogs, wolves and jackals are pretty obviously enough alike to give them all to the Canine Lord but, if I ever make use of Animal Lords, I think there's also enough difference to make a Dog Lord, a Wolf Lord and a Jackal Lord. After all, there are stats for all three creatures meaning you can template any one of them and, the way I see it, that's the point of Animal Lords.
I doubt the OP is meaning to say the whole system needs a rehaul because of some questionable zoology. I'd guess it's just nagging at them and they wanted to throw it out there.
Now I'm tempted to start an Animal Lords thread for people to post their own zany critter kings...