Oh, and in case anyone wonders, yes, I have been recently play testing the hunter as is with a wolf as my animal companion.
Build: Caleb, Half-Elf Hunter 6, NG Medium humanoid (elf, human)
Str 18, Dex 14, Con 12, Int 13, Wis 14, Cha 10
Base Atk +4; CMB +8 (+10 trip); CMD 21 (23 vs. trip)
Skills Climb +10, Handle Animal +5, Heal +7, Intimidate +4, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +6, Knowledge (geography) +6, Knowledge (nature) +6, Perception +13, Spellcraft +5, Stealth +11, Survival +11 (+14 to track), Swim +10
Feats: Combat Expertise, Coordinated Maneuvers, Improved Trip, Quick Draw, Tandem Trip
Traits: forlorn, reactionary; Alternate Racial Trait: Ancestral Arms (bastard sword)
Gear: Wand of CLW; +2 Ironwood Chain shirt, +1 Keen Bastard sword, Composite longbow (Str +4), Ring of protection +1
Hunter Spells (usually) Prepared:
2nd —bull's strength, barkskin x2, lockjaw
1st —aspect o/t falcon, longstrider, magic fang x2, speak w/animals
0 —guidance, know direction, stabilize, purify food/drink, create water
Animal Companion:
Whisper, Male Wolf, N Medium animal
Str 15, Dex 17, Con 15, Int 3, Wis 12, Cha 6
Base Atk +4; CMB +6; CMD 19 (23 vs. trip)
Feats: Combat Reflexes, Improved Natural Attack (bite), Power Attack
Tricks: Attack, Defend, Down, Fetch, Heel, Hunting, Other: Flank, Seek, Stay, Track
Skills: Acrobatics +7 (+15 jump), Perception +7, Stealth +7, Survival +2
---
Our fist couple fights involved water-based encounters, so I didn't get to use my animal companion as effectively as I would have liked, and that sort of hurt my hunter as most of his feats were geared towards fighting in tandem with the wolf. Our third encounter was land-based, but I made the mistake of thinking Combat Maneuvers needed flanking and sacrificed the +2 to the wolf's Trip ability in favor of gaining us both a +2 to attack. Wasn't so bad, but I rolled horribly for my own attacks and while the wolf DID hit twice, I misread Tandem Trip and didn't realize the wolf gets TWO chances to trip whether I'm attempting to trip or not just for me having the feat. Live and learn, right?
Fortunately, we played these characters a second time, and my team got to see more battle together. My trick with the hunter is to start with the bow in hand, attacking with ranged while closing since I only get one attack anyways. As hunter and wolf close, I Quick Draw my sword and get into melee with my wolf either flanking or battling beside me. If there's no chance or too low a chance to Trip, then we flank; if it's possible to Trip, then we're adjacent. It seemed to work well, but a 3/4 BAB meant I missed more often than hit despite having a +9 bonus to melee (I tended to roll mid-range and lower more often than high; bad dice day for me), and although my wold had a 21 AC (Barkskin), he took a heavy beating a lot of times as he seemed to be the better target (with my ring, armor, Dex, barkskin, and Combat Expertise, I had a pretty decent AC), and my wand is mostly spent trying to heal the wolf. That's one thing the hunter could use is a way to heal his animal companion without having to use up his limited spell slots for Cure spells.
First session, we tried Animal Focus as written, but that meant I could only use it once, period, as everything we've done has only been in one day, and the one fight he used it in lasted only 4 rounds. Not cool.
Second session, we tried 1 minute/level in non-consecutive one-minute intervals and it was MUCH more effective, letting me switch as needed between Dex buff, Str buff, climb skill, and faster movement during a rather long battle, and be able to do it again later when we went up against the bosses and didn't hurt the game at all, although I DID overlook that when the hunter invokes the ability, his animal companion gets it as well. Overall, I like this ability and really thinks it to be MUCH more effective with longer durations.
Overall, I like the concept of the Hunter, but he needs more effective combat-oriented spells and some way to heal his companion, like maybe a Lay on Hands or spontaneous Cure spells that only affect the companion. Something akin to the Summoner/Eidolon Life Link might be nice, but I really don't like Life Link as it is currently written (having to wait until the companion reaches zero or less hit points to use would suck), and I REALLY do not want the Hunter to become a divine Summoner. I would much rather have the hunter be able to transfer hit points to his companion as a standard action touch ability that transfers up to his level in hit points usable 3+ Wis modifier times per day.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
If it's Hunter only, why not just make them like Hunter Talents (rogue talents) rather than introducing them as Teamwork feats? I think if it's a teamwork feat, it should be usable by ANY class that wants to take them.
Because if we make them teamwork feats, then any class with an animal companion can make use of them, but they're still primarily a hunter freebie.
As it is, they've just taken an already made feat (Broken Wing Gambit) and just altered it to affect the animal companion since they can't achieve 5 ranks in Bluff.
1) People complain that "most teamwork feats won't work for the hunter because the animal companion can't perform the necessary actions."
2) Design team takes an established teamwork feat and makes it something a hunter could use.3) People complain that it's "just an already-made feat altered to affect the companion."
4) Design team goes "..."
I disagree: There are archetypes for the Summoner that weaken (or even give up) the Eidolon in exchange for improving the Summon Monster ability.The consensus on these archetypes, more or less, is that they're bad deals. The "problem" with the Summoner is in the Eidolon, and IMO it's not actually a problem; It just does what melee/skill monkey classes should be able to do, but can't.
Yeah, my GM keeps bringing up the Eidolon as the broken aspect of the class and that's why he won't allow the class in his game. Myself, I have a couple house rules, such as the Eidolon does NOT get a full BAB (well, NEARLY full, that is), but uses the Summoner's 3/4 BAB. I seriously think it SHOULD be using the animal companion's BAB, but I think the eidolon was meant to be more combative and that's why it has a stronger BAB. The other problem with the eidolon is the d10 Hit Dice it gets as opposed to the Animal Companion's d8 because it's an "outsider", but technically so are summoned animals and they don't get d10 HD, just a template tacked on to the base stats ("celestial" or "fiendish").
This brings us back to the Hunter's animal companion: Would giving it a d10 HD as opposed to a d8 HD, as if some sort of "advanced" version of the base animal, make it too powerful? From what I'm reading, the general consensus seems to be to make the Hunter's companion more like the Summoner's eidolon, and yet those are some of the arguments as to why the Summoner's eidolon is too strong compared to standard PCs. The overall idea is for the companion to aid the Hunter as a constant ally, not take the Hunter's place in the battlefield like the eidolon (currently) does with the Summoner. I would suggest that if you want to make the Hunter's companion more combat-effective than a druid's, then either improve the Hit Die or improve the BAB, but not both. My preference would be increased HD; it doesn't really need to hit harder as much as it needs to survive longer.
If it's Hunter only, why not just make them like Hunter Talents (rogue talents) rather than introducing them as Teamwork feats? I think if it's a teamwork feat, it should be usable by ANY class that wants to take them.Because if we make them teamwork feats, then any class with an animal companion can make use of them, but they're still primarily a hunter freebie.
As it is, they've just taken an already made feat (Broken Wing Gambit) and just altered it to affect the animal companion since they can't achieve 5 ranks in Bluff.1) People complain that "most teamwork feats won't work for the hunter because the animal companion can't perform the necessary actions."
2) Design team takes an established teamwork feat and makes it something a hunter could use.
3) People complain that it's "just an already-made feat altered to affect the companion."
4) Design team goes "..."
I do not understand.
Aside from being a prerequisite to take Broken Wing Gambit, where does having ranks in bluff come up in the actual "Benefit" section of the feat?
The companion doesn't need to qualify for the teamwork feats right? The Hunter does, and then the companion is treated as having those feats?
In that case, there is no need for a rewrite of Broken Wing Gambit.
Broken Wing Gambit (Combat, Teamwork)
You feign weakness, making yourself a tempting and distracting target.
Prerequisite: Bluff 5 ranks.
Benefit: Whenever you make a melee attack and hit your opponent, you can use a free action to grant that opponent a +2 bonus on attack and damage rolls against you until the end of your next turn or until your opponent attacks you, whichever happens first. If that opponent attacks you with this bonus, it provokes attacks of opportunity from your allies who have this feat.
Aren't the "requirements" being referred to in the Hunter's Tactics feature meant to mean the requirements listed within the Body of the teamwork feat and not the Prerequisites for taking that feat?
So, for example, if the Hunter takes Outflank, he and his companion still need to be Flanking to get the bonus listed, and still need to score a critical hit to get the attack of opportunity provocation. I just assumed that this line was for clarity's sake.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You haven't seen Wounded Paw Gambit and don't know how it's different than Broken Wing Gambit, so you're not really in a position to dismiss it as "not needed."
Yeah, my GM keeps bringing up the Eidolon as the broken aspect of the class and that's why he won't allow the class in his game. Myself, I have a couple house rules, such as the Eidolon does NOT get a full BAB (well, NEARLY full, that is), but uses the Summoner's 3/4 BAB. I seriously think it SHOULD be using the animal companion's BAB, but I think the eidolon was meant to be more combative and that's why it has a stronger BAB. The other problem with the eidolon is the d10 Hit Dice it gets as opposed to the Animal Companion's d8 because it's an "outsider", but technically so are summoned animals and they don't get d10 HD, just a template tacked on to the base stats ("celestial" or "fiendish").
Templates that change the creature type (like celestial and fiendish) don't cause the creature's BAB, HD, and saves to change unless the template specifies otherwise. They're really only changed in type to gain associated immunities and for the purposes of interacting with effects.
As for BAB, the Eidolon does effectively have 3/4 BAB: It's got "full BAB" but doesn't get a new hit die each time the summoner levels. Making it have 3/4 BAB means it'd effectively have 9/16 BAB.
Templates that change the creature type (like celestial and fiendish) don't cause the creature's BAB, HD, and saves to change unless the template specifies otherwise. They're really only changed in type to gain associated immunities and for the purposes of interacting with effects.
As for BAB, the Eidolon does effectively have 3/4 BAB: It's got "full BAB" but doesn't get a new hit die each time the summoner levels. Making it have 3/4 BAB means it'd effectively have 9/16 BAB.
Yeah, I'm aware of all this; I'm just trying to find a way to make the class more playable even though I'm pretty sure my GM will never allow the class in his game no matter how much I try to "fix" the things he (and apparently others, from what he reads on the boards) has the most issue with. I'm just concerned the Hunter might go the way of the Summoner regarding the companion as compared to the eidolon and then we get another "unplayable" class. Here's hoping the play tests for the Hunter can make a more-balanced class, and then maybe, just maybe, someone can go back and fix the Summoner using the Hunter as a guideline.
Having played the druid/ranger dual-class sloooowww progression, I really look forward to seeing the final results of the Hunter and hope it will be acceptable to my GM...but then again, he has issues with companion creatures and summonings in general, so it probably won't.
You haven't seen Wounded Paw Gambit and don't know how it's different than Broken Wing Gambit, so you're not really in a position to dismiss it as "not needed."
Fair enough and I apologize if my tone seemed dismissive.
I was accepting another poster's description as canonical and that is my mistake.Frankly, I like the idea of "Hunter Specific" teamwork feats. It will enable some more potent teamwork feats without simultaneously granting a big boost to Inquisitors as a side effect. If the end result is that hunters (and perhaps cavaliers) get better, I think we will all be happy to see them.
I was just worried that I misread the Hunter's Tactics feature somehow and that the Companion was going to have to qualify for teamwork feats being granted by it. This is not the case right?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was just worried that I misread the Hunter's Tactics feature somehow and that the Companion was going to have to qualify for teamwork feats being granted by it. This is not the case right?
This might just be me oversimplifying the problem, but why not just give the Animal Companion the teamwork feat the hunter has rather than just treating the Animal Companion as if it had it. Without worrying about the animal's prerequisites of course.
Answering both these questions: the language is being clarified and updated in the revised playtest document. The hunter automatically grants her teamwork feats to her animal companion, and the companion doesn't have to meet any of the prerequisites for those teamwork feats.
You haven't seen Wounded Paw Gambit and don't know how it's different than Broken Wing Gambit, so you're not really in a position to dismiss it as "not needed."
You're absolutely right, we haven't seen them. My apologies, I'll wait until we see them before getting to worried. Based on what I heard, my assumption was that it was Broken Wing Gambit just without the bluff requirement (an investment that wouldn't make sense for the Hunter considering they'd have to give up 5 ranks of bluff to get that feat) and what Jason had reportedly explained the Broken Paw Gambit does on the podcast.
Lord Malkov you're right about the Feat Requirement. Only the Hunter needs to meet it, not the animal companion. Still, the Hunter would have to invest 5 ranks of their currently limited skill point pool to do so for that particular feat. Regardless, I'm speculating and that's bad so I'll stop.
This might just be me oversimplifying the problem, but why not just give the Animal Companion the teamwork feat the hunter has rather than just treating the Animal Companion as if it had it. Without worrying about the animal's prerequisites of course.
Wouldn't that solve a big heap of problems without wasting page space and money on what are simple rewrites?
Don't get me wrong, there are still teamwork feats that would need some rewrites and mechanical changes, namely the ones based on casting or firing weapon. I just think this is a more effective way to go about things. Especially since giving both the pet and the Hunter Precise strike would ease off the pet's damage woes in the long run.
Or does it already work like that? The wording is a little muddy.
Well the advantage of the way it works now is twofold.
1. The hunter can change a single teamwork feat as a standard action (which is actually pretty awesome if you think about it) and that extends to the companion... this just makes more sense if the feats are on the hunter.
2. The hunter can take teamwork feats outside of just the bonus feats he is granted, and those will also work with Hunter's Tactics.
I think that since the inquisitor and cavalier already have similar abilities, that this will be very clear in the final write-up.
I see the summoner as focused on controlling their eidolon, whereas the hunter acts with their AC in tandem. Thinking about this further, they can cast magic fang on their animal, and don't have magic weapon on their list; what they really need is a way to easily gain a scaling bonus for both them and their animal.
As written, most Teamwork Feats are too finicky and don't give a lot of benefit. Getting them for free is nice, but convincing X teammates to take them for such heavy positioning requirements and such little benefit is another thing entirely.
For me this is true to the extent that I consider teamwork feats to be a class feature shared by the cavalier and inquisitor.
Sean quick question about the team work feats granted to AC from hunter's tactics. If another member of the party also has that same team work feat and is in position along with animal companion do they get the benefits also or are the team work feats and animal companion only going to work between hunter and his animal?
Just like other teamwork feats, all participants who meet the triggering conditions can take advantage of the feat's benefits. So if you and your eagle have teamwork feat X and trigger it, and your ally Bob the fighter also has X and is triggering it, all three of you get its benefits.
1. It's hard to get two people to take the feat and qualify
That's why the hunter gets bonus teamwork feats, and automatically grants those to her companion.
2. Benefits are weak
A teamwork feat should be just as powerful as any other feat of its tier. I'm sure some of the published teamwork feats are lackluster, but that's because we weren't providing clear guidelines as to what teamwork feats were supposed to do and how powerful they're supposed to be.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For me this is true to the extent that I consider teamwork feats to be a class feature shared by the cavalier and inquisitor.
Jason says that was the intent: a way to create a flexible class feature for those two classes which technically other classes could get involved in, but were primarily intended for the two classes which got extra teamwork feats and either (1) trigger them without other people taking the feat, a la inquisitor solo tactics, or (2) grant the teamwork feats to others, a la cavalier tactician.
For me this is true to the extent that I consider teamwork feats to be a class feature shared by the cavalier and inquisitor.Jason says that was the intent: a way to create a flexible class feature for those two classes which technically other classes could get involved in, but were primarily intended for the two classes which got extra teamwork feats and either (1) trigger them without other people taking the feat, a la inquisitor solo tactics, or (2) grant the teamwork feats to others, a la cavalier tactician.
This is an incredibly helpful clarification. Free feats for certain classes that get benefit, but you won't see many (if any) classes that don't get them automatically for free.
It helps to see them less as feats and more as class features that allow build variety (if I'm understanding the intention correctly).
For those unaware, there was a podcast last night by Know Direction with Jason Bulmahn as a guest and they talked about the Advanced Class Guide and the playtest and spoilered some of the upcoming changes to the classes.
There is a thread with mine, and others', notes here: Podcast Notes.
For me this is true to the extent that I consider teamwork feats to be a class feature shared by the cavalier and inquisitor.Jason says that was the intent: a way to create a flexible class feature for those two classes which technically other classes could get involved in, but were primarily intended for the two classes which got extra teamwork feats and either (1) trigger them without other people taking the feat, a la inquisitor solo tactics, or (2) grant the teamwork feats to others, a la cavalier tactician.
Ah, thanks, I've wondered about that from time to time.
If it's Hunter only, why not just make them like Hunter Talents (rogue talents) rather than introducing them as Teamwork feats? I think if it's a teamwork feat, it should be usable by ANY class that wants to take them.
Or maybe it could be a teamwork feat that Hunters can take with hunter "talents"?
If it's Hunter only, why not just make them like Hunter Talents (rogue talents) rather than introducing them as Teamwork feats? I think if it's a teamwork feat, it should be usable by ANY class that wants to take them.Or maybe it could be a teamwork feat that Hunters can take with hunter "talents"?
Well if Mount/Companion is a requirement, then it is still available to Druids, Rangers, Cavaliers, Oracles with Nature Bond... you know, it doesn't have to be just for hunters.
Keeping the feat format is probably the easiest way to go and to also ensure that the Hunter can perform whatever the requisite actions needed by the feat are.
If it's Hunter only, why not just make them like Hunter Talents (rogue talents) rather than introducing them as Teamwork feats? I think if it's a teamwork feat, it should be usable by ANY class that wants to take them.Or maybe it could be a teamwork feat that Hunters can take with hunter "talents"?
Well if Mount/Companion is a requirement, then it is still available to Druids, Rangers, Cavaliers, Oracles with Nature Bond... you know, it doesn't have to be just for hunters.
Keeping the feat format is probably the easiest way to go and to also ensure that the Hunter can perform whatever the requisite actions needed by the feat are.
I suppose I see 3 (and a half) ways to do this [teamwork feats].
1. Make it a feat. This makes it available to everyone.
2. Make it a feat and give it out as a bonus feat. This allows certain classes, inquisitors & cavaliers, to be better at it, but still leaves it open to everyone.
3. Make it a feat, and make it available as a talent, this allows certain classes to be better at it, if they so choose, at the opportunity cost of other abilities, or alternately they could select those other talents - or mix and match - to personalize their character, while still being available to everyone.
.5 make it a talent. then it's only maybe usable by whoever's talent it is, if they take it. This makes sense if it's a very class oriented thing, but not generally.
Option 3 is what I went with in my redesign there.
If one or some of Teamwork feats are the work-around for hunters falling behind in accuracy at later levels then I guess that is pretty cool. But then that (those) feat(s) is (are) a feat tax, right?
I would prefer to see that just come as a class feature everyone gets.
Not a dealbreaker at all though. I am excited to see what is coming.
Far moreso than the Warpriest, I would love to see this class be a spontaneous caster, for one very good reason:
There has never been a spontaneous caster of the druid spell list in all of 3rd edition D&D (and Pathfinder too, obviously) as far as I know. Barring obscure 3rd party stuff of course. Ever since I first saw the Druid's spell list, I've wanted that. If the Hunter had that, I would play it in a heartbeat. :)
If the point is to bring something fresh to the game, that would certainly qualify.
There has never been a spontaneous caster of the druid spell list in all of 3rd edition D&D (and Pathfinder too, obviously) as far as I know.
The 3.5 Spirit Shaman had "prepared spontaneous casting" just like the Arcanist (and is probably the prototype for that class's casting) using the Druid list.
It is not well known, but I quite liked them.
The 3.5 Spirit Shaman had "prepared spontaneous casting" just like the Arcanist (and is probably the prototype for that class's casting) using the Druid list.
But never a straight-up spontaneous caster. Seems like a great opportunity! It would also increase the "want to play" factor of this class by 200%, as at current, it's...kinda neat, but not really that interesting. Great potential, but it feels pretty under-whelming.
As an added suggestion, what about gaining "Hunter Weapon Training" at 2nd level and every three after? Basically, it gives a +1 bonus to attack and damage with any weapon that the Hunter class specifically grants proficiency with (simple weapons, longbow, scythe, shortbow and scimitar).
As an addendum to my last suggestion, I mean that you have to pick a weapon it applies to each time.
If it's Hunter only, why not just make them like Hunter Talents (rogue talents) rather than introducing them as Teamwork feats? I think if it's a teamwork feat, it should be usable by ANY class that wants to take them.Because if we make them teamwork feats, then any class with an animal companion can make use of them, but they're still primarily a hunter freebie.
As it is, they've just taken an already made feat (Broken Wing Gambit) and just altered it to affect the animal companion since they can't achieve 5 ranks in Bluff.1) People complain that "most teamwork feats won't work for the hunter because the animal companion can't perform the necessary actions."
2) Design team takes an established teamwork feat and makes it something a hunter could use.
3) People complain that it's "just an already-made feat altered to affect the companion."
4) Design team goes "..."
LOL,
"And the winner, in a one post knockout, Sean K Reynolds!!!!!!"*crowd goes wild*
On one hand, I'd be a little suprised if they gave the class a turbocharged Weapon Training progression (Fighter's is every four levels), since that's pretty similar to just giving it full BAB in the first place, which they didn't do. The only difference is that you get more attack bonus (eventually) and damage, at the cost of fewer attacks and diminished ability to qualify for feats that care about your actual attack bonus, but it works out generally similar.
On the other hand, the Hunter's current patch-to-full-BAB is one of the more anemic of them (especially in games where getting specific magic items is generally possible), so maybe a blunt solution is where it's at.
If it's Hunter only, why not just make them like Hunter Talents (rogue talents) rather than introducing them as Teamwork feats? I think if it's a teamwork feat, it should be usable by ANY class that wants to take them.Because if we make them teamwork feats, then any class with an animal companion can make use of them, but they're still primarily a hunter freebie.
As it is, they've just taken an already made feat (Broken Wing Gambit) and just altered it to affect the animal companion since they can't achieve 5 ranks in Bluff.1) People complain that "most teamwork feats won't work for the hunter because the animal companion can't perform the necessary actions."
2) Design team takes an established teamwork feat and makes it something a hunter could use.
3) People complain that it's "just an already-made feat altered to affect the companion."
4) Design team goes "..."LOL,
"And the winner, in a one post knockout, Sean K Reynolds!!!!!!"*crowd goes wild*
Yet if all they've done is taken that feat, removed the bluff requirement, and then throw it back in as a new teamwork feat that only affects animal companions, isn't that just a band-aid? I don't know how the final feat will look yet and realized I was not being fair.
I admitted that I was simply speculating and I will withhold my thoughts until I see the finished product when the next PDF is released. I trust and respect Paizo staff as they really want what's best for the their consumers.
In all honesty, I think it'd be better if Animal Focus was actually applied to the Companion instead of the character, since the character can buy their own items. Plus, it helps the Companion scale into more credible threats as levels go up and up...
Or it could apply to both... that would be my preference. Their might grows greater with the power of friendship!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Good news! It already does apply to both.
|
Way I read it, the Hunter is actually a duo of characters (the PC and the Pet) working (and especially fighting) in tandem.
We have something like this when Rogues pair with martial types (including other Rogues because of the synergy between their tactics, ie flanking and sneak attack).
IMO, the teamwork feats cover the synergy part. So the Hunter and the Pet do not necessarily need full BAB to be efficient. However, they do need something akin to sneak attack (ie, higher damage) if they do not get full BAB. And honestly, I do not feel that the Animal focus or the spells are enough to fulfill this role.
Also, the Pet needs to be on par with a PC (and NOT with an Animal Companion) in terms of durability (ie, Hit points, AC, saves). The spells might compensate for this, as this is usually how the Druid does it.
To sum it up, whether through spells, animal focus or a different growth table, the Pet needs to be as tough as a PC and both the Hunter and the Pet need a boost in either BAB or damage.
If the hunter and the Animal Companion are both 3/4 BAB, they would each benefit from frequent buffs individually, to say nothing of working as a team.
If the hunter and the Animal Companion are both 3/4 BAB, they would each benefit from frequent buffs individually, to say nothing of working as a team.
Not sure if I'm reading your post right, but it sounds like you agree that they need buffs to be effective in combat?
If this class works as a team, between animal focus and teamwork feats this should be the bread and butter of this class to take down enemies. I hope that we some more bonus to hit/attack buffs with Animal Focus or better ways to increase HP, to hit, damage, and AC.
Alternatively... a quick and dirty solution would be make the animal companion's HP and BaB equal to the Hunter...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just make all buffs that effect one effect the other. Focus already does this, but I think it would be easy to patch a special ability that grants the pet whatever you hit yourself with in terms of buffs. It would be pretty awesome for action economy too.
Just make all buffs that effect one effect the other. Focus already does this, but I think it would be easy to patch a special ability that grants the pet whatever you hit yourself with in terms of buffs. It would be pretty awesome for action economy too.
I totally agree with this... just called it Advanced Share Spells.
If it seems to powerful, then you can always reduce the duration when spells are cast this way, or have them be cast at a reduced Caster Level (which would reduce both duration and variable effect as well as make them easier to dispel). Personally, I would say that the duration of such spells are split in half between you and your companion.
Barkskin for ALL!
I remember animal companions working that way in 3.5e with share spells. It wasn't even that big of a deal, though it got nerfed in the PF core.
Bringing it back would be unique to the Hunter, yes?
|
|
There already is an Improved Shared Spells feat, but it does not work that well for flanking pets as the effect stops if they go further than 5 feet from you. Also the Spellcraft 10 ranks requisite is pretty hard.
Making it an ability special to the Hunter would be great. Doubly so with an archetype that would allow you to share your pet's natural attacks.
Just seemed like a really easy way to bring the class up to some sort of parity. It would still be less effective than a druid, but that is okay as long as they get some fun stuff like that kind of share spell feature.