So you ignore two of the main limiting factors (That being you only get it at that price if bought near that habitat and even then only at the Dm's discretion.) and then complain that they are unballanced?
How does that have anything to do that you can start with a HD6 tiger at lvl1. Please go look at all of the animals on that list. Where-ever the campaign is taking place, im sure you can find a plenty abuse mount to use there.
Is it me or are people getting more hostile as it gets closer to day time?
Might just stop posting on this topic if i have to deal with stuff like that, all the main points have been covered anyway and ive formed an educated opinion of it and will make sure to advice DM's that i play with to ban mounts except for Horse/Donkey unless you are able to rear it from the wild while in-game. Forces ranks in Handle Animal + Time + dont have the HD =/= relative CR issue.
|
So you ignore two of the main limiting factors (That being you only get it at that price if bought near that habitat and even then only at the Dm's discretion.) and then complain that they are unballanced?How does that have anything to do that you can start with a HD6 tiger at lvl1. Please go look at all of the animals on that list. Where-ever the campaign is taking place, im sure you can find a plenty abuse mount to use there.
The abuse that requires 1. the use of traits an optional rule to begin with (And probably one of the less balanced traits as well) and 2 Ignoring the part that states the Dm can set the price and availability however he feels. If the dm feels the animals are to cheap it is there in black and white in the text that he can change the cost to whatever amount he wants or simply say they are unavailable.
The question was Are mounts truely this unbalanced and if you go by what is written in that book I would say no.
The tiger is limited to 6 tricks which are spelled out in the handle animal skill. It has the "attack" trick once so you will be required to "push" the tiger to fight a lot of monsters such as undead.
If the tigerish wearing medium armor, its base movement should be lower.
The tiger shouldn't naturally charge to attack foes. The DM should require you to make the skill check. If the beast was domesticated for riding, it shouldn't be any more aggressive than a horse.
And don't forget that if it ever gets wounded, there is a -2 penalty on the handle animal check.
I'm reminded of this.
Having a mount vastly more powerful than the rest of the party looks dangerous to me. Just because it's combat trained doesn't mean it holds any special loyalty to you after all, it'll be combat trained for anyone who mounts it.
All it takes is for someone to knock you off the saddle, hop up on your tiger, and now you're fighting both him and your tiger.
Exactly this!
The only issue I could see is that I can't keep a sweater on my dog, how are you keeping a tiger from ripping the armor it's not trained in off?
I'm just a little curious where the OP came up with all the meat to feed the tiger. A tiger needs 40lbs of meat a day. That is a huge expense at first level.
Yes, they are that unbalanced but
1) You need to burn a move action to get it to attack a specific target. (no big loss since it attacks better than you do)
2) It won't attack undead oozes etc. for you unless you can make a handle animal check at dc 25, using a full round action (slightly tougher)
3) The animal will loose effectiveness as you level up. At level 1 its a god, at level 5 it will start to taper off, at level 7 it will be a speed bump
4) A druid with charm animal will quickly turn into a TPK.
I'm just a little curious where the OP came up with all the meat to feed the tiger. A tiger needs 40lbs of meat a day. That is a huge expense at first level.
1) Where are you getting that figure?
2) A pig is 3 gold.
Carnivore Feed; Price - 5cp; Weight - 5lb
Consisting of various kinds of raw meat that have been jerked, smoked, or salted for preservation, a day's worth of carnivore feed is adequate food for any Small or Medium meat-eating animal such as a tiger, bear, or dog . Larger carnivores might require up to 2 to 4 days' worth of carnivore feed per day.
At most, by Raw, the tiger would eat 2 sp in food a day.
I'm just a little curious where the OP came up with all the meat to feed the tiger. A tiger needs 40lbs of meat a day. That is a huge expense at first level.1) Where are you getting that figure?
2) A pig is 3 gold.
Seaworld, their average is lower. But a tiger that is being used as a mount is getting a lot more exercise than either a tiger in a zoo or the wild, where the spend most of their time not doing anything.
|
Other creatures can use handle animal on your tiger as well, unless you've trained it with the exclusive trick. it also won't attack anything that isn't humanoid or animal without being trained in the attack trick twice (attack anything). Since combat riding general purpose takes up 6 tricks, your tiger can't learn exclusive or attack lvl 2 without unlearning another trick.
What your GM should do, if he allows such a high CR mount, is include it in the average party level when determining encounter CR, design encounters with 5ft hallways that it has to squeeze through, change enemy tactics and composition (many more enemies, low level enemies will likely scatter so the tiger can't kill more than one of them at a time, enemies have druids or rangers, traps, etc).
You can't add such a creature into a level 1 group without making adjustments.
The largest problem with the list of riding animals presented in Animal Archive is that it is currently a PFS-legal part of that supplement. A 1st-level character can dump 2 PP into picking up a combat-trained riding tiger.
The reason this hasn't been addressed as a rules fix is that there are few GMs who would not laugh this off when a player suggested it.
Yes, this is broken, yes, it should probably be addressed by the game designers at some point. IMHO there are far worse game design issues that are much harder for GMs to simply laugh off that should be addressed first.
If you were a player in my game my reaction to this would have been: "You aren't seriously going to try to play that are you?"
And provide a copy of that book.The largest problem with the list of riding animals presented in Animal Archive is that it is currently a PFS-legal part of that supplement. A 1st-level character can dump 2 PP into picking up a combat-trained riding tiger.
Right, but it's a problematic thing to have listed in the additional resources. The vast majority of people I know in PFS would never try to bring a headache like that to a table, but I'd hate to be GMing and have to deal with a 6 HD riding tiger in a tier 1-2 chronicle.
The only thing I have to say is that the (Summon) Mount gets you a horse or a pony for 2 hrs/level, which ain't bad at 1st level for a Wizard or a Sorcerer. An extra Mount helps carry that heavy backpack or the loot from the dungeon.
A Chaotic Neutral-type character can use a Wand of Mount (4,500 gp) to summon horses as needed, and ride 'em to death for maximum sprint speed like the Pony Express. Sure, the horses will be near-dead at two hours, but you just Summon a fresh mount and keep going.
Is a war trained Tiger proficient in Scale armor barding? If not, wouldn't it also be taking that bardings maneuver penalty to all it's attacks? -4 on all attacks and movement reduced to 30 feet (so even if you succeed in the push and full round action to make it charge on it's own, it's charge is only 60 feet total).
Plus every move action or full round action you take to control the animal are actions your not getting. So your going to be fairly immobile in combat yourself, which as a caster should make you a prime target.
"Rule 0" is a perfectly valid response when the rules ask for them. Theres a difference between DMs changing written rules and DMs adjudicating when the rules say the DM should adjudicate.
That said, I agree they are too cheap.
Is a war trained Tiger proficient in Scale armor barding? If not, wouldn't it also be taking that bardings maneuver penalty to all it's attacks? -4 on all attacks and movement reduced to 30 feet (so even if you succeed in the push and full round action to make it charge on it's own, it's charge is only 60 feet total).
Plus every move action or full round action you take to control the animal are actions your not getting. So your going to be fairly immobile in combat yourself, which as a caster should make you a prime target.
OP mentioned that he's happy to take the -4 penalty on attacks, since at level 1 the attack is so massive on the tiger that it doesn't matter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I should also add, to the OP's actual question. There are basically 3 ways for this to play out:
1. GM doesn't allow it. This falls under the common sense sanity check that a GM should apply to all decisions.
2. An inexperienced GM allows it; the resulting carnage may make the mount seem imbalanced.
3. An experienced GM allows; the encounters, rewards, and risks balance out and the game is none the poorer for it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The easier way to handle this issue is to simply use the rules of the game.
A nonsentient companion (one with animal-level intelligence) is loyal to you in the way a well-trained dog is—the creature is conditioned to obey your commands, but its behavior is limited by its intelligence and it can’t make altruistic moral decisions — such as nobly sacrificing itself to save another.
Animal companions, cavalier mounts, and purchased creatures (such as common horses and guard dogs) fall into this category. In general they’re GM-controlled companions. You can direct them using the Handle Animal skill, but their specific behavior is up to the GM.
Roughly this creature is a wild animal completely under the control of the GM. Realistically anytime it encounters a situation it hasn't been trained for it defaults back to it's instinctual reaction (which are determined by the GM) and you'd better make sure to not get in it's way when that happens.
Oh, and a hand full of kobolds is not an acceptable challenge for a CR 4+ party. The tiger is not a class feature so it needs to be added to the party's APL as normal to determine the correct CR you should be facing.
I think it's sort of hilarious. I'm just imagining that keeping that much meat around and trying to control its behavior is going to be self-limiting.
I think two things need reiterated that a couple posters mentioned earlier. Pushing an animal to do things is DC25, and most of the stuff listed in here as the tiger doing are things that qualify as pushes rather than the default DC10. At level 1, even with a silly 20 charisma, this sorcerer can only have a single rank in this non-class skill. Giving a bonus of +6. Having to repeatedly roll a 19 or a 20 in order to do these things is what keeps it from being gamebreaking, but a lot of that onus is on the GM.
For instance, yes, having the tiger combat-trained and being a tiger will get it to attack the mob of kobolds. It kills one. It then trots off to feast on the corpse at a safe distance. Want it to break with instinct, drop that body and attack another one? Roll a 19.
Send it on a charge forward against the enemy? Great, they roll handle animal to try to grab its reins and calm it down. Or they just tackle you off and get their very own super mount (because sorcerers are known for their high first level CMD, right?). Or just straight kill the rider, because um, the sorcerer just charged into a mob of eight enemies. Not spurred on by a rider, the tiger's inclination would be to avoid a stand up fight with a bunch of dudes with spears and go find a nice sheep or something to chow on. Or even worse, toss the bleeding out rider down in front of the tiger ... it isn't going to have any more compunction against finishing you off than a horse would about eating a bundle of hay you just took off its back.
As others said Charm Animal instantly makes it friendly towards that person. Using Handle Animal on your turn does not counteract it, you don't magically turn the friendly status off because you shake your reins. Want to attack that guy now? Roll a 19.
The point is that handle animal is not magic, you have no bond with this creature that compels it to do what you say. I'm not saying that the GM should systematically screw with the player, because it sounds like the player is generally having fun with this cool thing he's got. But the GM needs to use the rules (and some storytelling instincts) in order to make sure that it's fun instead of just a gamebreaker.
Well, tigers are not the kind of predator that immediately feast on a kill. But they don't like loud noises, can't walk over rough terrain, and are going to be wary of multiple opponents, or anything larger than them. In real life, villages in India will surround themselves at night with blankets of thorns... making the village completely tigerproof.
I should also add, to the OP's actual question. There are basically 3 ways for this to play out:
1. GM doesn't allow it. This falls under the common sense sanity check that a GM should apply to all decisions.
2. An inexperienced GM allows it; the resulting carnage may make the mount seem imbalanced.
3. An experienced GM allows; the encounters, rewards, and risks balance out and the game is none the poorer for it.
For #1 I will add that players really need to do the sanity check too. If the OP really considered doing something he thought was overpowered just because he could, then he's gonna burn his GM out by asking him to make common sense calls like this over and over again.
If something seems too good to be true, it probably is. And the GM is going to make it so, if it isn't already. So just take that into account ahead of time, and try to make a great character. Don't try to make trouble.
For #1 I will add that players really need to do the sanity check too. If the OP really considered doing something he thought was overpowered just because he could, then he's gonna burn his GM out by asking him to make common sense calls like this over and over again.
If something seems too good to be true, it probably is. And the GM is going to make it so, if it isn't already. So just take that into account ahead of time, and try to make a great character. Don't try to make trouble.
While this can be true , the GM is the one with the responsibility to make the call.
He could have allowed it and then shaped the adventure to take the tiger into account , it would not be so broken then.
Many times players simple believe that the GM will do that, if they ask and get special authorization even more, and go for it, clearly the OP also did not thought this would cause such unbalance himself.
The problem here was the fact that both player and GM lacked experience with this kind of thing atleast.
Also , for christ sake , who had the idea to sell freaking combat trained tigers for 500 gp without adding a big red sign explaining this could happen...
Munchkins always fail sanity checks by definition.
On one hand, published rules should be decently balanced and including a "up to DM's discretion" is a bad idea, at least in a game that is so rules-focused as Pathfinder.
On the other hand, dismissing the requirement of DM's approval as "invalid since it's rule 0" is kinda dumb. Rule 0 is about the DM's right to change a rule - in this case, the rule explicitly calls out for DM interference. There's a difference.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are a number of good points with regard to how this balances.
First, the character does not have standard wealth and has effectively brought an NPC into the equation. They have used a resource. Once its gone it is gone.
Second, the tigre is controlled by the GM and follows tricks. Its very dangerous, but if treated properly should not be hostile to its owner. As mentioned this does limit it somewhat more than most people assume.
Third, should someone get control of your tigre it will be very nasty. As mentioned, the tigre is a separate entity. Once controlled by someone else its not going to obey your heel command any more than it would a heel command from anyone else.
Out of interest, what are the rules on opposed handle animal checks? Looking at the rules it only talks about getting animals to follow simple commands. What if I have a trained mount and somebody else commands it to do something.
There are a number of movie style examples. My dog will sometimes go to other people who are shouting for their own dogs. Try getting an animal to attack Crocodile Dundee :)
|
As for those advocating hoards of bison, just imagine trying to command them all?
Secondly, once they are running amok, try commanding them all...
Not to mention, try standing near them... you know that role for the stench around Troglodytes? Yeah, that is kinda like a bunch of bison or any cattle really in an enclosed area. Pew! And stealth would be totally out of the question!
But seriously, in answer to the OPs original "question", no mounts are not this imbalanced, but the occasional corner case of a poorly adjudicated rule or option being exploited by a player can certainly be.
Actually, one of my favorite encounters ever involved a herd of aurochs, an NPC goblin druid, invisibility to animals, call lightning and charm animal.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, one of my favorite encounters ever involved a herd of aurochs, an NPC goblin druid, invisibility to animals, call lightning and charm animal.
See, stories like that are the kind that make me harken back to the "Old Days", when we didn't have enough players to fill a group so the solo Thief purchased 150 chickens and had little metal bits fastened to their talons and beaks and set them loose on the "Keep on the Borderlands"...
|
|
From what I have heard a lot of the trained animals from that book are very unbalancing if allowed to be purchased. I have heard of people buying trained leopards and wrecking low level PFS scenarios. The main rule of thumb that should be followed in any campaign is that the DM should look at something like this carefully before allowing it, and if he does allow it, he needs to make the price more realistic and adjust the combat enounters appropriately. Also, you as a player have a responsibility to not try to bring something into the game that appears to be obviously overpowered. The goal of the game is to have fun, not to "win", and it's no fun when your tiger pet destroys encounters with the rest of the PC's on the sidelines.
The big problem I have is that animals are rather heavily over-statted in Pathfinder. They're balanced for gameplay purposes to present credible opposition to fantastic and mythical characters... leaving those animals grossly overpowered against your run-of-the-mill NPC's.
This is unfortunate, and to a certain extent it's just embedded in the rules of Pathfinder. It's something GM's always needs to keep in mind; the amount of power most animals have in pathfinder will far exceed your expectations based on their real-world counterparts.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Kobolds need to buy some trained tiger mounts and join in the fun.