Being able to use existing AC choices, but using a revised advancement chart that gets the AC up to 20 HD might be a good direction to go. In addition to teamwork feats, the hunter needs some kind of generally applicable bonus they can share with their companion, just as the cavalier has their banner, the ranger has favored enemy, and so forth.
My rewrite currently, assuming an extension of the AC chart, ends up with a companion that has 18 HD and has an ability (inspired by Jessie Scott's take) to gain a generally applicable bonus they can share with their companion. it also has the ability to lay traps and hunt like nobody else.
What about tying the hunter's animal based aspects to their animal companion?
Got a bear ? Use animal focus for x,y, and z bear like abilities.
Got a giant snapping turtle? W, v, or zOverall, disappointed in this class. Worse spell progression, slower bab, underwealming animal focus.
That suggestion makes the Hunter even less versatile than he was. But hey: maybe that is a cool gimmick.
Maybe the Hunter could gain additional abilities from learning to fight like her animal companion. Maybe gaining access to a one or two of the animal companion's feats as long as the animal companion is within line of sight? I dunno.
I actually like the list of animalistic abilities from the Shapeshifter and Infiltrator acrchtypes. I also like the terrain mastery abilities from the Horizon Walker.
Any of these three concepts could work.
In light of that, I would make this suggestion:
A Ranger gets Favored Enemies... he learns how best to track and kill certain creatures. A Hunter, could instead learn how best to emulate them.
At 1st level, a Hunter learns how to copy the unusual abilities of Animals. He chooses one type of creature at 1st level, such as “Bears.” The Hunter selects one ability or feat from the Animal Focus list for that creature (see below). If the animal focus requires the Hunter to make a more specific choice (such as what skill to use with Skill Focus), this choice is permanent and cannot be changed.
At 5th, 10th, and 15th-level, the Hunter chooses another animal type and selects one Animal Focus ability from that type’s list, as well as an additional ability from any one list of a creature type he’s selected (including the one just chosen, if so desired). If an animal focus ability grants a bonus feat, the Hunter does not need to meet the prerequisites for that feat.
Bear: Bonus Feat: Great Fortitude, Cast Bear's Endurance 3/day as a spell-like ability with a caster level equal to the Hunter's level, Gain a +2 insight bonus to CMB and CMD when grappling or defending against a grapple.
Cat: Bonus Feat: Lightning Reflexes, +10 ft enhancement bonus to movement speed, +2 insight bonus to damage rolls when using a slashing weapon.
Dragon: Bonus Feat: Power Attack, +2 natural armor bonus to AC, Resistance to either Fire, Cold, Acid or Electricity 5.
Eagle: Bonus Feat: Skill Focus(Perception), +10 ft to the range of any ranged weapon used by the Hunter, +2 insight bonus on rolls made to confirm a critical hit.
Jackal: Bonus Feat: Mobility, Low-light vision, +4 insight bonus to saving throws made to resist disease.
Fish: +4 insight bonus to Swim checks and a swim speed equal to half the Hunters land speed, Resist Cold 5, Hold Breath universal monster ability
Bat: Bonus Feat: Blind Fighting, The hunter may Hide in Plain Sight when in areas of dim light, +2 insight bonus on saving throws made to resist negative energy effects.
Wolf: Bonus Feat: Improved Trip, Scent, any melee weapon wielded by the Hunter is treated as having the "Menacing" special weapon property
Owl: Bonus Feat: Iron Will, Darkvision 60ft. (if the hunter already has darkvision their darkvision increases by 60ft.), +1 caster level.
I actually like the list of animalistic abilities from the Shapeshifter and Infiltrator acrchtypes. I also like the terrain mastery abilities from the Horizon Walker.
Any of these three concepts could work.
In light of that, I would make this suggestion:
A Ranger gets Favored Enemies... he learns how best to track and kill certain creatures. A Hunter, could instead learn how best to emulate them.
At 1st level, a Hunter learns how to copy the unusual abilities of Animals. He chooses one type of creature at 1st level, such as “Bears.” The Hunter selects one ability or feat from the Animal Focus list for that creature (see below). If the animal focus requires the Hunter to make a more specific choice (such as what skill to use with Skill Focus), this choice is permanent and cannot be changed.
At 5th, 10th, and 15th-level, the Hunter chooses another animal type and selects one Animal Focus ability from that type’s list, as well as an additional ability from any one list of a creature type he’s selected (including the one just chosen, if so desired). If an animal focus ability grants a bonus feat, the Hunter does not need to meet the prerequisites for that feat.
Bear: Bonus Feat: Great Fortitude, Cast Bear's Endurance 3/day as a spell-like ability with a caster level equal to the Hunter's level, Gain a +2 insight bonus to CMB and CMD when grappling or defending against a grapple.
Cat: Bonus Feat: Lightning Reflexes, +10 ft enhancement bonus to movement speed, +2 insight bonus to damage rolls when using a slashing weapon.
Dragon: Bonus Feat: Power Attack, +2 natural armor bonus to AC, Resistance to either Fire, Cold, Acid or Electricity 5.
Eagle: Bonus Feat: Skill Focus(Perception), +10 ft to the range of any ranged weapon used by the Hunter, +2 insight bonus on rolls made to confirm a critical hit.
Jackal: Bonus Feat: Mobility, Low-light vision, +4 insight bonus to saving throws made to resist disease.
Fish: +4 insight bonus to Swim...
I like it. It is certainly more interesting.
Want to try to bundle in increasing attack bonuses (or other bonuses) to animal companions (summon nature's ally) of certain types as well?
Or is that flying to close to the sun?
Fun non-attack ally bonus
Owl: (in addition to the stuff you listed) Animal companions that begin as small sized creatures and have a fly speed may deliver touch spells as a wizard's familiar.
I guarantee we're not going to give the default hunter fewer options for the animal focus ability (whether giving it access to only a few and increasing that with class level, or by limiting it to the companion the hunter has), as the criticism of the class is that it isn't powerful enough.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Go with the beastlord theme.
Go with the beastlord theme.
Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay.
Maybe this is dumb, but what do people think about giving the Hunter a spontaneous spell conversion list, like Clerics can spontaneously convert to Cure (or Inflict, if you're a necromancer or you make bad decisions) spells and Druids can convert to SNA?
One of the hallmarks of the Druid list is that it has piles of incredibly situational stuff, but it's not totally wrong to sometimes prepare some of those things if you have some idea that they might be useful, because you can always just make it an SNA spell instead, and SNA has property that it's widely useful in many situations. Similarly, casting cure spells with your slots as a cleric isn't exciting, it's a rare day where nobody gets hurt, so it's always something to do with your slots.
I was thinking that Hunters could have a conversion list that specifically focuses on their animal companions. It might involve creating some new spells, since there aren't interesting and generally applicable spells that benefit animals at every spell level, but it would let rangers prep the more situational druid spells more often without them going to waste so much.
Maybe this is dumb, but what do people think about giving the Hunter a spontaneous spell conversion list, like Clerics can spontaneously convert to Cure (or Inflict, if you're a necromancer or you make bad decisions) spells and Druids can convert to SNA?
One of the hallmarks of the Druid list is that it has piles of incredibly situational stuff, but it's not totally wrong to sometimes prepare some of those things if you have some idea that they might be useful, because you can always just make it an SNA spell instead, and SNA has property that it's widely useful in many situations. Similarly, casting cure spells with your slots as a cleric isn't exciting, it's a rare day where nobody gets hurt, so it's always something to do with your slots.
I was thinking that Hunters could have a conversion list that specifically focuses on their animal companions. It might involve creating some new spells, since there aren't interesting and generally applicable spells that benefit animals at every spell level, but it would let rangers prep the more situational druid spells more often without them going to waste so much.
I think they should just get a crazy summon nature's ally progression:
1 converts to SNA 12 converts to SNA 2
3 converts to SNA 3 or [4 starting at level 8 for two 3rd level spells prepared or one 4th level spell]
4 converts to SNA 5 or [6 starting at level 12 for two 4th level spells prepared or one 5th level spell]
5 converts to SNA 7
6 converts to SNA 8 or [9 starting at level 18 for two 6th level spells prepared]
Then let nature's allies share teamwork feats with the Hunter and his pet.
I like it. It is certainly more interesting.
Want to try to bundle in increasing attack bonuses (or other bonuses) to animal companions (summon nature's ally) of certain types as well?
Or is that flying to close to the sun?
Fun non-attack ally bonus
Owl: (in addition to the stuff you listed) Animal companions that begin as small sized creatures and have a fly speed may deliver touch spells as a wizard's familiar.
Actually, what I think would be super good and super flavorful is this:
The Hunter is learning these neat tricks to fight more like an animal right? So lets give the Companion the ability to fight more like a person!
So, at the same levels when the hunter is getting his bonus feat/skill/ability from the animal focus ability I wrote up, the companion gets to pick a fighting style that emulates the way that humans fight. This increases the companion's access to feats and seems to be a perfect pairing flavor-wise.
So, Animal Focus Part 2.
At 1st level, a Hunter's animal companion learns how to copy the tactics and fighting techniques of humanoids. He chooses one type of humanoid at 1st level, such as “Dwarves.” The Companion selects one ability or feat from the Companion Focus list for that type (see below). If the Companion Focus requires the Companion to make a more specific choice (such as what skill to use with Skill Focus), this choice is permanent and cannot be changed.
At 5th, 10th, and 15th-level, the Companion chooses another humanoid type and selects one Companion Focus ability from that type’s list, as well as an additional ability from any one list of a humanoid type he’s selected (including the one just chosen, if so desired). If a companion focus ability grants a bonus feat, the Companion does not need to meet the prerequisites for that feat.
Dwarf: Bonus Feat: Medium Armor Proficiency, The Companion's speed is no longer reduced by wearing armor or barding, +2 to saving throws vs. Spells
Halfling: Bonus Feat: Combat Reflexes, +2 AC against attacks of opportunity provoked by movement and +2 to attack rolls on attacks of opportunity, +1 luck bonus to all saving throws
Human: Bonus Feat: Skill Focus, The companion can ignore any requirements of Intelligence or Combat Expertise when selecting feats that modify a combat maneuver, The companion gains 1 additional skill point for every hit die it has (the companion continues to gain skill points in this way as it gains new HD).
Elf: Bonus Feat: Weapon Finesse, The Companion can move at full speed while using Stealth without penalties, The companion gains SR equal to its HD +5.
Orc: Bonus Feat: Vital Strike, The companion gains Darkvision 60ft, Choose one of the companion's natural attacks. The damage die of that attack increases by one step. This increase stacks with other effects like Improved Natural Attack
Giant: Bonus Feat: Power Attack, The companion's natural armor increases by +2, The companion is treated as being one size category larger for the purposes of using maneuvers and abilities (like Grab) and for calculating CMB and CMD
Gnome: Bonus Feat: Bonus Feat: Toughness , Choose one ability possessed by the companion. Its DC increases by 2., The companion may now wear up to two magical rings. These rings can be woven into its hair or placed on horns but otherwise function as normal.
Go with the beastlord theme.
I'm gonna name my firstborn after you, Sean.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe this is dumb, but what do people think about giving the Hunter a spontaneous spell conversion list, like Clerics can spontaneously convert to Cure (or Inflict, if you're a necromancer or you make bad decisions) spells and Druids can convert to SNA?
One of the hallmarks of the Druid list is that it has piles of incredibly situational stuff, but it's not totally wrong to sometimes prepare some of those things if you have some idea that they might be useful, because you can always just make it an SNA spell instead, and SNA has property that it's widely useful in many situations. Similarly, casting cure spells with your slots as a cleric isn't exciting, it's a rare day where nobody gets hurt, so it's always something to do with your slots.
I was thinking that Hunters could have a conversion list that specifically focuses on their animal companions. It might involve creating some new spells, since there aren't interesting and generally applicable spells that benefit animals at every spell level, but it would let rangers prep the more situational druid spells more often without them going to waste so much.
I think they should just get a crazy summon nature's ally progression:
1 converts to SNA 1
2 converts to SNA 2
3 converts to SNA 3 or [4 starting at level 8 for two 3rd level spells prepared or one 4th level spell]
4 converts to SNA 5 or [6 starting at level 12 for two 4th level spells prepared or one 5th level spell]
5 converts to SNA 7
6 converts to SNA 8 or [9 starting at level 18 for two 6th level spells prepared]Then let nature's allies share teamwork feats with the Hunter and his pet.
That's pretty neat. If they don't do that, one idea for an archetype might be a hunter that trades the animal companion for the Summoner's Summon Monster SLA, but for SNA instead, and the archetype is allowed to share teamwork feats and the Animal Focus boosts with anything summoned with SNA.
Go with the beastlord theme.Awesome. How about something like a warg Game of Thrones allowing the player to fully control the companion without needing tricks or pushing the animal, but having to leave their own body helpless while doing it.
Mmm as much as I like the flavor of that ability, I don't much care for it in game terms. The Beastlord should work in tandem with her companion. I'd really like it if they had a *Super* Animal Companion that performs much better than the others. It could be intelligent like an Eidolon so that it doesn't need to be handled. It being a Magical Beast version of the animal would be super helpful.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's pretty neat. If they don't do that, one idea for an archetype might be a hunter that trades the animal companion for the Summoner's Summon Monster SLA, but for SNA instead, and the archetype is allowed to share teamwork feats and the Animal Focus boosts with anything summoned with SNA.
I quite like this idea.
@"Lord_Malkov
Me laughing at this in literally no way should be taken as my thinking this is anything less than an awesome idea.
@others
Yeah. The teamwork feats for summons was someone else's idea though. From a while ago.
I think that person also suggested something like the summoner's ability to cast summon monster N a few times a day when the eidolon isn't around. I like that too.
Like: Summon Natures Ally (level 1/2 Hunter level) Wisdom mod times a day plus another time at level 4 and every 4 levels afterwards.
That's pretty neat. If they don't do that, one idea for an archetype might be a hunter that trades the animal companion for the Summoner's Summon Monster SLA, but for SNA instead, and the archetype is allowed to share teamwork feats and the Animal Focus boosts with anything summoned with SNA.I quite like this idea.
Funny, the last time I brought up this exact same idea, I got jumped on by a bunch of people that said that this would bog down combat and slow the game to a crawl....
Well, if the tides have turned on that, yes I think this could work.
I also still think that simply giving the Hunter a second persistent companion would do the trick. Essentially giving the Hunter the full progression companion from druid and the lvl-3 progression companion from the ranger.
|
Mmm as much as I like the flavor of that ability, I don't much care for it in game terms. The Beastlord should work in tandem with her companion. I'd really like it if they had a *Super* Animal Companion that performs much better than the others. It could be intelligent like an Eidolon so that it doesn't need to be handled. It being a Magical Beast version of the animal would be super helpful.Go with the beastlord theme.Awesome. How about something like a warg Game of Thrones allowing the player to fully control the companion without needing tricks or pushing the animal, but having to leave their own body helpless while doing it.
I think you are overlooking the out of combat utility that would make this feature awesome.
Want to scout? Get in your hawk and fly over. Track? Get in your wolf.
Better yet at higher levels if you see a low CR animal flying by, warg check to take it over and explore safely out of your body.
This is not a combat ability as much as a non-combat ability.
So, what do you guys think of this?
In addition to the teamwork feats, the animal companions receive boons as well. One of them should be additional free Handle Animal tricks at set Hunter levels. These would work very similar to the teamwork feats for Inquisitor where they can switch them and they solidify the next time they get to choose another. So if you need your wolf to be sneaky, switch out the "Sneak" trick and have them go with you. Want your megasaurus to bull rush enemies? Take the "Maneuver" trick to switch out and have them push enemies.
Additional Hunter animal tricks are learned at level 2 and every 2 levels after or 3 and every 3 levels after. These can be changed as a full round action.
This alone would be a huge boon. If the Hunter is companion focused, they should receive a Cavalier like Expert Trainer class ability too at level 4 or 5. They should be able to train their Companion with speed and ease. I think increasing the trick count as well would make the animal companion "smarter" which more people were asking for without having to go through brand new animal companion rules.
Mmm as much as I like the flavor of that ability, I don't much care for it in game terms. The Beastlord should work in tandem with her companion. I'd really like it if they had a *Super* Animal Companion that performs much better than the others. It could be intelligent like an Eidolon so that it doesn't need to be handled. It being a Magical Beast version of the animal would be super helpful.Go with the beastlord theme.Awesome. How about something like a warg Game of Thrones allowing the player to fully control the companion without needing tricks or pushing the animal, but having to leave their own body helpless while doing it.I think you are overlooking the out of combat utility that would make this feature awesome.
Want to scout? Get in your hawk and fly over. Track? Get in your wolf.
Better yet at higher levels if you see a low CR animal flying by, warg check to take it over and explore safely out of your body.
This is not a combat ability as much as a non-combat ability.
This can already be achieved at 6th level with the Beastlord Ranger Archetype. Personally, I like it where it is. The Beastlord Ranger was a perfect position for that and I don't think it thematically fits with the Hunter theme here.
Beastlord/Monk!
1. Having something cool available as an archetype doesn't mean it wouldn't also be cool as part of a class.
2. The beastmaster feature isn't Warging. It's modified empathic link. Not nearly the same.
3. Beastlord theme.
But how is this any different from Wildshape aside from less forms to choose from and your body is left defenseless? Theme and flavor aside, what you're suggesting mechanically is a less useful wildshape. Limited to your animal companion only and your body is defenseless. Plus, you lose your animal companion until you return to your form, effectively crippling you from a class feature.
Personally, this is too close to wildshape to make it in and the developer's have said this not going to be a shapeshifting class.
I do think that this would make an interesting archetype.
That's pretty neat. If they don't do that, one idea for an archetype might be a hunter that trades the animal companion for the Summoner's Summon Monster SLA, but for SNA instead, and the archetype is allowed to share teamwork feats and the Animal Focus boosts with anything summoned with SNA.I quite like this idea.Funny, the last time I brought up this exact same idea, I got jumped on by a bunch of people that said that this would bog down combat and slow the game to a crawl....
I've actually done the same idea with a summoner archetype, and that's why I like the idea so much. It's a clever way to make use of the teamwork feats, as you can create your own guys. My version had the ability to pray for a new teamwork feat each day to give to your summons, rather than just giving the ones you have.
Summons almost necessarily slow down the game, as it's an above normal number of critters on the field at once. But if you're giving them teamwork feats, you're probably summoning using a lower Summon Nature's Ally than you can usually draw from, since you want the 1d4 summons to really make use of the teamwork feats you give out. This means they'll fall even faster than normal, so it shouldn't be a huge change.
Limiting it to just one instance of Summon Nature's Ally would also go a long way. The problem with master summoners is that they aren't limited in such a way.
Maybe each Hunter gets one of several paths
Path of Masks: Gain more Animal Focus benefits, and eventually can take the shape of their animal companion, also picks one mask to have permanent benefit and gains inherent bonus instead of enhancement
Path of the Heart: Hunter and companion can Shield Other, animal companion can benefit from any teamwork feat the hunter has, extra teamwork feat, eventually can merge with the AC (like a synthesist)
Path of the Pack: Gains longer duration SNA summons and banner-like bonuses for AC and summoned animals
Path of Blood: Gains the ability to lay on hands, with an added benefit when healing their AC, and can spontaneously convert spells to cat's grace/bull's strength bear's endurance, eventually hunter and AC gain inherent bonuses to ability scores
|
|
It is more like a limited magic jar than wildshape. I think it would be a cool additional feature not the class's trademark ability.
Exactly. Not every ability needs to be a combat ability.
And if you say "Flavor and theme aside" I think you are missing the point.
Flavor and theme are a primary goal, not side dishes.
That's pretty neat. If they don't do that, one idea for an archetype might be a hunter that trades the animal companion for the Summoner's Summon Monster SLA, but for SNA instead, and the archetype is allowed to share teamwork feats and the Animal Focus boosts with anything summoned with SNA.I quite like this idea.Funny, the last time I brought up this exact same idea, I got jumped on by a bunch of people that said that this would bog down combat and slow the game to a crawl....
Well, if the tides have turned on that, yes I think this could work.
I also still think that simply giving the Hunter a second persistent companion would do the trick. Essentially giving the Hunter the full progression companion from druid and the lvl-3 progression companion from the ranger.
We didn't jump on you, we pointed out that having multiple companions slows the game down and ends up giving one player a lot more time in combat than others, taking much longer to resolve combats. This is legitimate criticism of having multiple pets - especially in official PFS games.
And to be fair, you were talking about having 3 animal companions at level 11. When talking about Summon Nature's Ally, you are limited to rounds/level and they are much simpler to command (as in, they attack to the best of their ability until they die or are unsummoned). SNA inherently works different than an animal companion which does not make them immediately interchangeable.
I still think that more than one companion (especially having two fully level companions) is too much of a time drain and possibly character management.
I will let others weigh in though and see what the developer's think.
My $.02.
It is more like a limited magic jar than wildshape. I think it would be a cool additional feature not the class's trademark ability.Exactly. Not every ability needs to be a combat ability.
And if you say "Flavor and theme aside" I think you are missing the point.
Flavor and theme are a primary goal, not side dishes.
No, I'm not missing the point. The developer's have said in this thread they are not going to take this class down shapeshifter route and I agree. Anything that even mimics shapeshifting just leaves this class as a subpar druid.
When I said "Theme and Flavor aside" I was referring to not bringing that aspect up. But if you want to talk about how I feel about the "theme" it brings to the class I'd be more than happy.
Mechanically - because, you know, theme and flavor are only the half of the product - what you're suggesting is wildshape (becoming an animal - your animal companion to be exact) by removing your pet from the world while you "inhabit" it's body/soul and leaving your body helpless. How does the name "Hunter" bring about thoughts of "Magical men inhabiting animals so they can take over their bodies to do their bidding?"
If this is "like" Magic Jar, where does the animal companion's soul go? Where is the receptacle it goes to? What happens if your animal companion dies while you're in it's form? Do you die since your "soul" was in there?
Warg idea has been done by the synthesist.
Might be cool to be bale to see their eyes without being vulnerable (ala Beastmaster), but "wearing" them has already been done.
|
|
Warg idea has been done by the synthesist.
Might be cool to be bale to see their eyes without being vulnerable (ala Beastmaster), but "wearing" them has already been done.
You mean the widely banned synthesist?
Not nearly the same thing.
This isn't changing shape, this isn't wearing a power suit. This is going into a bird to fly over the battlefield to scout. This is going into a mouse to get through a hole to listen in. This is being a stray dog wandering into town to get the lay of the land.
But you aren't there. You can't suddenly shift from mouse form to your body inside the inn. Because you aren't there. The mouse is. You are just in control of the mouse.
But unlike seeing through eyes, you are actually in control of the actions of the creature and the creature.
This is Bran and Jon with their wolves. This is very limited magic jar.
Suddenly your generic normal dog animal companion is a lot more useful, since a generic normal dog animal companion won't stand out wandering around...
Again, way to much focus on combat, not enough consideration of utility.
That's pretty neat. If they don't do that, one idea for an archetype might be a hunter that trades the animal companion for the Summoner's Summon Monster SLA, but for SNA instead, and the archetype is allowed to share teamwork feats and the Animal Focus boosts with anything summoned with SNA.I quite like this idea.Funny, the last time I brought up this exact same idea, I got jumped on by a bunch of people that said that this would bog down combat and slow the game to a crawl....
Well, if the tides have turned on that, yes I think this could work.
I also still think that simply giving the Hunter a second persistent companion would do the trick. Essentially giving the Hunter the full progression companion from druid and the lvl-3 progression companion from the ranger.
We didn't jump on you, we pointed out that having multiple companions slows the game down and ends up giving one player a lot more time in combat than others, taking much longer to resolve combats. This is legitimate criticism of having multiple pets - especially in official PFS games.
And to be fair, you were talking about having 3 animal companions at level 11. When talking about Summon Nature's Ally, you are limited to rounds/level and they are much simpler to command (as in, they attack to the best of their ability until they die or are unsummoned). SNA inherently works different than an animal companion which does not make them immediately interchangeable.
I still think that more than one companion (especially having two fully level companions) is too much of a time drain and possibly character management.
I will let others weigh in though and see what the developer's think.
My $.02.
Well if we are talking about mirroring the summoner's Summon Monster SLAs then they last 1 minute/level.
But in any case, the concern I would have is that:
1. The eidolon is more powerful than the AC
2. The summoner attempts to avoid the slowdown by being unable to have both out.
3. The summoner spell list is stronger
4. Summon monster is a stronger more versatile summon spell than SNA.
So, the tradeoff would have to be that the Hunter's companion stays out (which makes the most sense since it isn't a summoned companion like the eidolon) and the Teamwork feats. (hopefully having them apply to summons, dire wolves with tandem trip!)
And Hunters would get 3+wisdom uses per day (rather than charisma)
If that is the case, though, you can expect Hunters to use Summon Nature's Ally in pretty much every fight, which means that they will play through every combat with their companion and at least 1 other summoned creature (possibly more).
So... I guess I just don't see why a persistent companion would be any worse. In my experience, a companion that you have stats for, that doesn't have to be looked up or modified with augment summons/moonlight summons etc, runs faster. A good player will carry around stat block cards for creatures that they regularly summon, but it can get wonky when they need to pull out something different for a weird case.
If you don't give Hunters the advanced summon progression for SNA that summoner get, then SNA becomes an incredibly weak option that isn't going to get used 95% of the time. (IE with a 6 level spell progression, a Hunter will generally be at least 2 spell levels behind a druid.. and summoning one 3 HD leopard at level 9 is just going to be fruitless)
So, bringing up SNA versus a persistent second companion, I think ends up being the same amount of bookkeeping and game time required. If it pushes one way, I would say that summoning multiple creatures is probably going to slow the game down more.
OTOH, giving the hunter a second companion makes it a unique class. That very well may not be the way they want to go, and it could be to slow to implement as a base class, but I think that if full SNA progression is on the table, then this should be too. I don't quite think we need a druidic summoner clone.
Warg idea has been done by the synthesist.
Might be cool to be bale to see their eyes without being vulnerable (ala Beastmaster), but "wearing" them has already been done.You mean the widely banned synthesist?
Not nearly the same thing.
This isn't changing shape, this isn't wearing a power suit. This is going into a bird to fly over the battlefield to scout. This is going into a mouse to get through a hole to listen in. This is being a stray dog wandering into town to get the lay of the land.
But you aren't there. You can't suddenly shift from mouse form to your body inside the inn. Because you aren't there. The mouse is. You are just in control of the mouse.
But unlike seeing through eyes, you are actually in control of the actions of the creature and the creature.
This is Bran and Jon with their wolves. This is very limited magic jar.
Suddenly your generic normal dog animal companion is a lot more useful, since a generic normal dog animal companion won't stand out wandering around...
Again, way to much focus on combat, not enough consideration of utility.
I understood your point/idea. I don't think it's a good fit for this class, and gave a reason why, but I'll clarify.
I wasn't going for combat over utility or whatever.My point was this is a mix between a druid and a ranger, not a ranger and a synthesist.
If you don't agree, then fine. I'm glad you look at more than one angle when thinking about class design. You have great input.
I just don't understand why you feel the need to paint your point of view as one from a supposed "high ground" position ("Again, way to much focus on combat, not enough consideration of utility") to talk down to dissenters.
You did this all through the Warpriest threads. Please stop this.
EDIT: If this isn't how you meant to present your arguments, then I apologize.
About Animal Focus
-Shark
1st: Bite attack (when you or AC have still bite attack, that deals damage as if the creature were one size larger than it actually is.)
8th: Critical multiplier x3 ->15th: x4
-Deinonychus
1st: 2 Claw attacks (when you or AC have still claw attacks, they deal damage as if the creature were one size larger than it actually is.)
8th: Crithical threat 19-20 ->15th: 18-20
-Bat
1st: blindsense 5ft ->8th: 10ft -> 15th: 30ft
-Guidance of Animal Spirit (EX)
At x level or higher, while using Animal Focus that you gain bonus on any skill check, you or your AC can always choose to take 10 for that skill check, even if rushed or threatened.
Well if we are talking about mirroring the summoner's Summon Monster SLAs then they last 1 minute/level.But in any case, the concern I would have is that:
1. The eidolon is more powerful than the AC
2. The summoner attempts to avoid the slowdown by being unable to have both out.
3. The summoner spell list is stronger
4. Summon monster is a stronger more versatile summon spell than SNA.So, the tradeoff would have to be that the Hunter's companion stays out (which makes the most sense since it isn't a summoned companion like the eidolon) and the Teamwork feats. (hopefully having them apply to summons, dire wolves with tandem trip!)
And Hunters would get 3+wisdom uses per day (rather than charisma)
If that is the case, though, you can expect Hunters to use Summon Nature's Ally in pretty much every fight, which means that they will play through every combat with their companion and at least 1 other summoned creature (possibly more).
So... I guess I just don't see why a persistent companion would be any worse. In my experience, a companion that you have stats for, that doesn't have to be looked up or modified with augment summons/moonlight summons etc, runs faster. A good player will carry around stat block cards for creatures that they regularly summon, but it can get wonky when they need to pull out something different for a weird case.
If you don't give Hunters the advanced summon progression for SNA that summoner get, then SNA becomes an incredibly weak option that isn't going to get used 95% of the time. (IE with a 6 level spell progression, a Hunter will generally be at least 2 spell levels behind a druid.. and summoning one 3 HD leopard at level 9 is just going to be fruitless)
So, bringing up SNA versus a persistent second companion, I think ends up being the same amount of bookkeeping and game time required. If it pushes one way, I would say that summoning multiple creatures is probably going to slow the game down more.
OTOH, giving the hunter a second companion makes it a unique class. That very well may not be the way they want to go, and it could be to slow to implement as a base class, but I think that if full SNA progression is on the table, then this should be too. I don't quite think we need a druidic summoner clone.
Ah, I see. I didn't realize the suggestion was to mirror the Summoner's Summon Nature's Ally time extension. In general, I don't think the Summoner is a good class. It's all kinds of broken, but that's not for this thread. My point - it's not good to base any of the abilities off from Summoner until it either receives errata or adjustments. That's just me though, so I can't speak for any of the developer's on this point.
Plus, you fail to point out that the Summoner as a base class does not allow the Summoner to have his Eidolon out and use his summon monster spell like ability. Since Animal Companions function differently, it's not a 1:1 comparison.
I don't think a base class having multiple companions is a good idea. Between the action economy of each turn, having to manage characters, and the more companions you own the harder it is to plan APs, figure out wealth by level, etc, it also makes it harder for less experience players to get the maximum enjoyment out of the class.
And I'm assuming Paizo staff goes into building these classes so everyone could enjoy them and not just Pathfinder or d20 experts.
Warg idea has been done by the synthesist.
Might be cool to be bale to see their eyes without being vulnerable (ala Beastmaster), but "wearing" them has already been done.You mean the widely banned synthesist?
Not nearly the same thing.
This isn't changing shape, this isn't wearing a power suit. This is going into a bird to fly over the battlefield to scout. This is going into a mouse to get through a hole to listen in. This is being a stray dog wandering into town to get the lay of the land.
But you aren't there. You can't suddenly shift from mouse form to your body inside the inn. Because you aren't there. The mouse is. You are just in control of the mouse.
But unlike seeing through eyes, you are actually in control of the actions of the creature and the creature.
This is Bran and Jon with their wolves. This is very limited magic jar.
Suddenly your generic normal dog animal companion is a lot more useful, since a generic normal dog animal companion won't stand out wandering around...
Again, way to much focus on combat, not enough consideration of utility.
I get it. You explained the whole Game Of Thrones theme. Thanks, though I definitely understood it the first time and this second or third explanation isn't any more convincing. It still isn't a compelling argument. You keep likening it to a limited magic jar spell; guess what, Druid doesn't get magic jar. Nor would this function in the same way. The two classes this one draws from is Ranger and Druid. That should be the focus.
What you're actually describing, and seemingly blind to or not listening, is this IS wildshape, only extremely restrictive. "Morphing into an animal" versus "taking over an animal". Call it what you want, it's still changing you into something else.
Calling it "like magic jar" or "warging" or any other term does not make it something it's not. We're comparing Hunter to Druid and Ranger. What does this ability you're suggesting most emulate? Druid's wildshape. What are the developer's not going to do with Hunter? Have any sort of wildshape like ability.
And yes, this IS the Synthesist class ability:
How is what you're suggesting any different than this? They call it living armor instead of power armor maybe? Or is it because the Hunter is now helpless?
|
|
The new classes are evolving to be more than the sum of their parts. I asked Sean if we should provide Hunter like feedback or Beastlord, he said Beastlord and so I suggested an ability fitting to that theme.
This class from my perspective is all about forging a bond with a specific animal far closer than the one shared by rangers and druids with their animal companions. Warging is a nifty, not too powerful ability that woukd be a nice addition to the class's repetoire. Sometimes in new class design the classes are too focused around certain abilities and don't get the variety the core 11 have. I wonder if we were designing the druid today if it would get Timeless Body for example.
I'm sorry if this response seems a little bit out of left field. I haven't followed the thread closely, but I have an idea:
I realize that vermin companions exist largely for flavor purposes and tend to suck by the numbers. I think it would be a fascinating idea to see an archetype for this class (or expanded rules for the base class) that uses vermin companions and gains certain bonuses for using them, bringing them on par with other options.
For example, an increase to the spider's poison DC and an increase to that poison's damage. Or an increase to the crab's AC, making it tankier. Or an additional plus 2 to all charge attacks made while riding a scorpion. These aren't necessarily the best ideas, but some kind of bonus to the power of vermin could make for a very fluffy way to play this class.
Additionally,
I SECOND THE NOTION THAT THIS CLASS SHOULD RECEIVE BONUSES BASED OFF OF THE TYPE OF COMPANION CHOSEN.
For example, a bonus to trip for allying with a wolf, a static increase to CON for taking a boar, envenomed attacks for taking a spider, pounce attacks for taking a big cat. This change alone would make me extremely curious about playing a hunter.
I think a Telepathic Link with a Magical Beast Companion would be really cool. It'd be best if you still chose from Animal Companions, but then changed it to Magical Beast with the full benefits that change offers.
The new classes are evolving to be more than the sum of their parts. I asked Sean if we should provide Hunter like feedback or Beastlord, he said Beastlord and so I suggested an ability fitting to that theme.
This class from my perspective is all about forging a bond with a specific animal far closer than the one shared by rangers and druids with their animal companions. Warging is a nifty, not too powerful ability that woukd be a nice addition to the class's repetoire. Sometimes in new class design the classes are too focused around certain abilities and don't get the variety the core 11 have. I wonder if we were designing the druid today if it would get Timeless Body for example.
Completely fair. I guess maybe I don't understand the intention of this class anymore then. Maybe I'll take my hands off playtesting, analysis and suggestions until it's made clear what the intent is.
Beastlord seems rather vague to me. Mystical animal connection or master of their natural animal companion?
At this point, I'm frustrated with this class. I was most excited for this one, and it's the biggest let down for me. Now it sounds like we don't know where it's headed and we still have two very different groups of people - ones who think this is a natural world/less magical animal companion focused Hunter, and a mystical magical animal controlling one.
Until we get clarification on the matter, we're going to have two different groups disagreeing with each other.
I guess I'll step out until there is clarification.
|
I do not want to see the class get a bonus based on animal chosen, unless it is a bonus based on a very *broad* class.
The reason is, that would mean that once the bonuses have been enumerated, if an animal gets added to the druid list, if the person adding the animal doesn't know about this class, no bonus gets assigned, and you effectively can't take that animal.
If you want to have the class changed based on type of animal bonded, I think that should be what archetypes are for. (ala the various animal themed druid archtypes.)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You don't need to step out, give your feedback on the class and what features and direction you would like to see the class take. Don't worry about what me and Ciretose are suggesting so much. Sean is lead on this class he will see all our feedback and evaluate it in his own arcane tyought process.
All feedback is welcome and construcrive discussion considered.
|
|
I understood your point/idea. I don't think it's a good fit for this class, and gave a reason why, but I'll clarify.
I wasn't going for combat over utility or whatever.
My point was this is a mix between a druid and a ranger, not a ranger and a synthesist.
If you don't agree, then fine. I'm glad you look at more than one angle when thinking about class design. You have great input.
I just don't understand why you feel the need to paint your point of view as one from a supposed "high ground" position ("Again, way to much focus on combat, not enough consideration of utility") to talk down to dissenters.
You did this all through the Warpriest threads. Please stop this.EDIT: If this isn't how you meant to present your arguments, then I apologize.
You keep referring to the synthesist and they are not remotely the same concept. The Sysnthesist is functionally the eidelon as a body suit in the "Iron Man" vein.
It is a power suit. It powers you up. To quote the fluff "A synthesist summons the essence of a powerful outsider to meld with his own being. The synthesist wears the eidolon like translucent, living armor."
If anything you will generally be weaker and more vulnerable when warged. It is a utility feature that would only be used in combat in specialized circumstances. It is not shapeshifting (which is something Druids have) and it is akin to what a Ranger Archetype has. And it has tons and tons of interesting roleplaying options and flavor, IMHO.
I don't paint my point of view as the high ground position. But I also don't defer to anyone else's position as the high ground position when I disagree with it. Because I think my position is the better one.
That is why I am arguing for it.
As to tone, I generally try to reflect the tone I'm reading. If someone is discussing, I discuss. If someone is being selectively outraged and hypocritical...I'm less inclined to be friendly and cordial towards them...:)
You are presenting an interpretation I don't agree with. I don't think it is similar thematically or mechanically to the Synthesist. Above is why I don't think that. You are also being respectful...although kind of accusing me of something I don't think is true, which if not for the last sentence I would have taken as an attack.
That is your argument. I don't agree with it. If you feel like I'm talking past you (and others) in many of these posts, it is probably because I kind of am. Because you, personally, aren't my audience.
It is unlikely I can convince you. So I'm not trying. I'm presenting an argument to everyone else who maybe I can convince. Same in the other thread. If that comes off as taking the high ground...sorry. It isn't about you, or anyone else in the thread.
You and I quite often agree and at other times disagree, generally doing both in an agreeable manner. You've been around the threads long enough to know my tone and style.
We disagree on this topic, but I really want the Warg feature to be a part of this so I'm going to advocate for it. And you can keep advocating against it. And I'll think I'm right and you'll think you are right and the world will keep spinning.
Same thing happened in the other thread.
Do you suggest I stop arguing for things I like and defer to those who are arguing for things I dislike?
|
|
Calling it "like magic jar" or "warging" or any other term does not make it something it's not.
Except that is exactly what we are arguing for.
You aren't wearing the animal "like translucent, living armor." You are taking control of the animal to do things you couldn't do in your body.
Serious question, have you seen Game of Thrones or read the books?
That is what we are talking about.
Stuff
No, you're right. I do not want you, or anyone else, to stop offering your opinions.
I see the differences in the synthesist, and the Warg idea, but invariably, unless you mechanicly make it inpossible, someone will try to "wear" a bear into combat. Then we have the same thing. That's my only concern.
Ciretose, I think you, quite frankly, fail to understand that your way of phrasing your posts is insulting to the reader.
Or maybe you don't really care.
I'm going to asume it's the first one, as I'd like to live in a world made up of nice people, who sometimes misunderstand each other.
At any rate, I'd just like to tell you that there are ways of presenting an argument that don't make you come off as arrogant or superior. But currently, your way of posting consistently does just that.
Please stop phrasing your arguments that way.
Ignoring temporarily the existence of the summoner, because that class breaks all kinds of rules, and working within the context of what the class is and is supposed to be (and not just what the name implies), I think that a good thesis statement for the Hunter is "Class that notably is the best at fighting with an animal companion." That could mean that the animal companion is literally stronger than that of other classes, or it could mean that the hunter has lots of options for boosting it, or it could mean that the hunter gets bonuses themself. The class is already pushing in that direction to some degree; I think it would be cool to push harder. I know that "person who fights with a pet, where the pet is a big big part of the character" is something that a lot of new players want to play. Currently the most direct choice for that setup is a druid, but druids lack weapon proficiencies and have a lot of other stuff going on.