Here's the thing: a CR7 Elephant, fully trained, costs 1,000gp. A CR9 Mastodon costs 2,000gp.
If you go with Wealth by level, and the restriction that GM's put on it that there is no more than (say) 25% in one item, these are affordable at 4th and 5th level respectively.
Now, at at 4th level a CR7 creature would be considered powerful enough that it would take everything a party of 4 has got to defeat it (possibly including the lives of some of them), so adding one to the party effectively doubles the "Firepower" of the party. Similarly, the Mastodon would seriously overpower the 5th level party.
Yet I can see no restriction to access them other than GM Fiat; Should their costs be changed to reflect their power (after all a CR4 Griffon is 8,000gp - way beyond WBL restrictions until 8th level, a much more reasonable costing IMHO) or is this loophole one that is not too Overpowered?
My apologies if this has been discussed and I've missed it.
Griffons are large, Elephants/Mastodons are huge.
In most adventures PCs would find it difficult to consistently use a huge creature while a large creature is much easier to use.
Additionally, Griffons are not animals, they are Magical Beasts which is a significantly better type of base creature type.
Finally, Griffons fly, Elephants and Mastodons do not.
I see little problem with the pricing under most circumstances. The Elephants/Mastodons are simply not as useful most of the time.
While I would agree that their size makes it difficult in many adventures, wilderness/exploration adventures would not usually be a problem for them to participate in, making them well worth the investment for those sort of adventures. From a GM's point of view, I would either have to avoid these sorts of adventures (which restricts my range of adventures ultimately to the detriment of the campaign) or GM Fiat the removal of this option; neither are good choices.
I take your point about the difference between magical beasts/animals and the fact that they are flying; however Elephants and Mastodons are very overpowered for those situations where they can be used.
Regarding size differences, with a bit of creativity, most PC's will find a way of overcoming them. Whether it's investing in a wand of reduce animal for those occasions where they need to be smaller, or squeezing into a smaller space (or both); using a bag of holding to carry them to a suitable spot, etc. Even an Elephant with penalties for squeezing into a smaller space would be overwhelming at 4th level.
|
And every bit of damage that the monsters do to the big, easy to hit targets is more of the party's resources that need to be expended to keep them alive.
Granted, that also means that every attack against a mount is not an attack against a PC, and the Ride skill can make hitting them difficult at times. An elephant's Reflex save is +7, and their Will is +6. Fort is not worth hitting. These are, of course, with the save-boosting feats. You could rule that only wild elephants come with those feats, and substitute something else for domesticated ones.
Elephant/mammoth ivory is also a valuable commodity, and well worth poachers taking a few potshots.
Are they a whole lotta bang for the buck? You bet. So are tigers and a great many other animals in the equipment lists. Availability, however, is something the GM controls. Calling it GM fiat puts a negative association with the concept, as though the GM is just randomly picking and choosing what he'll allow the players access to. Campaign considerations can easily justify why certain things aren't available to players at normal prices or within their current locale. Maybe elephants are restricted to purchase and use by the nobility. Maybe the players need a license to own certain creatures (especially dangerous ones) in a given kingdom. Maybe there's just nobody selling that creature in the area because they're not native there. An old article I read (might've been Dragon magazine) made the point that no amount of gold could produce a pineapple in medieval England.
Lets not forget the feeding and maintenance of such creatures. Elephants eat a LOT of food, and that bill can add up quick. The town may not have enough food to adequately supply the party's massive mounts, or they may start to jack up feed prices when the big-money tourists roll into town. Letting them simply graze is an option, but locals might take offense when they start tearing up orchards and gardens looking for food. Stabling for something that big may not be available, either.
Barding. That's not cheap for something so big.
Long story short, while the big mounts may seem great on paper, they're a lot more work than players may expect.
Lets not forget the feeding and maintenance of such creatures. Elephants eat a LOT of food, and that bill can add up quick. The town may not have enough food to adequately supply the party's massive mounts, or they may start to jack up feed prices when the big-money tourists roll into town. Letting them simply graze is an option, but locals might take offense when they start tearing up orchards and gardens looking for food. Stabling for something that big may not be available, either....
Came here to say this same thing. Elephants eat hundreds of pounds of food a day, mostly grass, and need gallons and gallons of water. Unless you are supplying this ( ok so create water orison/cantrip = free water ), the elephant needs to spend most of the day grazing, not traveling or adventuring.
a griffon needs meat which is more calorie dense, and can be transported on the hoof (although this also requires feeding), or hunted more efficiently.
This is easily solved by having the purchased animals...behave like animals. Its that simple. For animal companions this gets hand waved a lot but There is no reason to with purchased animals.
Look up what a tiger eats per day. A lot of trained wild animals can simply react to a trigger and kill simone.
Your lvl 4 of who somehow aquires an elephant will be doing full round push every round to get it to squeeze for example.
You mention outdoors adventures. My response to that is: Stealth and encounter distances.
Your PCs are going to have a much harder time of things if they are wandering around the wilderness with a huge animal. They are going to be attacked, probably at range, far more.
I am currently playing in a primarily wilderness adventure (Kingmaker) and, frankly, I would NEVER take a huge animal with me. It would limit my options far too much. Even horses are a 'maybe' for the things we like to do.
An elephant would make a fantastic meal for a clutch of wyverns . . .
a single wyvern is a CR6 creature. What you're saying, then, is that the correct response to a PC getting a CR7 critter is to start hitting them with CR6 critters (and I do mean in the plural).
Isn't that called power creep? after all, it would essentially come down to a fight between the Elephant and the Wyverns, with the PCs being sidelined a little (just reduced to mobile assistance)
Availability, however, is something the GM controls
The reason I started looking into this was because I imagined an animal handler PC, from a travelling menagerie where they had exotic animals...I don't see availability being an issue for this pc. Game Balance, yes, but not availability.
Now, as a GM I would have to disallow such a character purely on the grounds of Game Balance; that seems unfair and arbitrary and suggests there is something out of whack with the system (shock, horror) and I would have to ask, what could I do to restore Game Balance so as to be able to play such a character? What is to stop a power gamer from deciding to play this out to the max, per the rules and upsetting a GM's game Balance? If every encounter is reduced to "We pelt them with arrows/bolts/bullets while the Elephant charges in and tramples it won't be long before the pcs realise that they're not contributing anywhere near as much as the Elephant, who is racking up multiple kills with massive damage.
Now I can imagine a GM being forced to introduce Wyverns in an attempt to get rid of Elly, but it shouldn't be getting to that situation in the first place.
|
|
The wyvern comment was a flippant bit of hyperbole, but not completely out of the question. Do all of your encounter tables strictly adhere to "appropriate" challenge ratings? Is your world divided into "zones" with specific level ranges?
Predators hunt where they will, not just where they're an appropriate challenge to the party. If they catch wind of a suitable meal in their territory, they are likely to start hunting.
Would they probably stomp the bejeezus out of a party of 4th level characters? Yep. Especially if they employ pack tactics, which wyverns are definitely smart enough to do. That's part of the risk when travelling with a massive buffet item like an elephant.
As for the travelling menagerie PC . . . again, that's a matter of the GM allowing such a thing based on his campaign. Not everything has to conform to strictly codified balance. Heck, even the sacred Wealth By Level that so many on these forums worship is a guideline. Yes, the APs and published adventures are generally written using the WBL as a guideline, but in a home game, that goes out the window.
What's to stop a power gamer from abusing it to the max? The GM. Step in beforehand and say "hey, this idea has the potential to throw everything out of kilter in our game. You can have your elephant, but please don't abuse the system."
If they can't handle that sort of diplomatic solution, then they may be trying to play in the wrong campaign.
The only thing that ever prevents a power gamer from abusing the crap out of any game system is communication and cooperation between players and GMs.
|
|
If you want some solid numbers, instead of simple advice, then here's something for you:
A purchased mount, not being a class feature (animal companion, summoned creature, special mount) should be factored into the APL of the adventuring party. Assuming a group of four 4th level characters plus the CR 7 elephant, that should be 5. A single wyvern is a CR 6 encounter, which is well within the appropriate CR range for an encounter. Two wyverns would be CR 8 – an epic encounter for APL 5.
Wyvern venom has a DC of 17, and it deals CON damage. Each failed save is going to make further saves even harder, so that +13 Fort save is going to wear down eventually.
The wyvern is smart enough (INT 7, WIS 12) that it's not simply going to sit there and let the elephant pound on it. It has Flyby Attack, and it's going to use it to full effect. Should the party start using ranged weapons and smart tactics, it may divert an attack or two to them to get them away from its prey. Eventually, though, a determined wyvern is likely going to take that elephant down. Especially if it has a clutch of young it's trying to feed.
Even if the party manages to escape, that should give them something to think about. Predators capable of hunting an elephant are not uncommon out in the wilds, and the elephant available for purchase in the CRB is not a combat trained animal. It's a baseline domesticated elephant, most of which are used for manual labor like hauling loads and moving around trees and similar tasks.
A domesticated animal engaged in combat with a predator is going to flee if possible, or defend itself if cornered. The Handle Animal DC to keep it under control is going to be 27 (25 to “push” + 2 for being injured) once a hit lands.
Barding for an elephant (or any Huge animal) is going to cost 8x what armor for a Medium creature would cost. They're also going to have to deal with armor check penalties, which are even worse for critters that aren't proficient (and manual labor elephants aren't proficient).
Feeding them isn't actually as bad in Pathfinder as it is in real life – the rules say Huge creatures only eat 4x as much food as Medium creatures, which works out to 40lbs a day. Nowhere near what the National Elephant center cites (200-600lbs a day, plus 50gal of water). By PF RAW, they only cost 2sp a day to feed. By real-world standards, they cost 1gp-3gp per day to feed. Stabling is going to be at least 2sp per day, if accommodations large enough can be found.
If the wyvern thing doesn't grok with your wilderness area (temperate or warm hills are where they're most often found), then a few other predators at that CR range capable of taking down or injuring elephants include:
CR 5
*Crocodile
*Cyclops
*Drakes (flame & mist)
*Hippopotamus (not a predator, but they're very territorial)
*Dire lion
*Manticore
*Shadow mastiff
*Smilodon
*Troll
CR 6
*Very young green dragon
*Ettin
*Hodag
*Bloodhaze mosquito swarm
*Wooly rhino (another non-predator, but very territorial; standard rhinos have been known to kill elephants IRL)
*Rock troll
|
a single wyvern is a CR6 creature. What you're saying, then, is that the correct response to a PC getting a CR7 critter is to start hitting them with CR6 critters (and I do mean in the plural).
Isn't that called power creep? after all, it would essentially come down to a fight between the Elephant and the Wyverns, with the PCs being sidelined a little (just reduced to mobile assistance)
The reason I started looking into this was because I imagined an animal handler PC, from a travelling menagerie where they had exotic animals...I don't see availability being an issue for this pc. Game Balance, yes, but not availability.
Now, as a GM I would have to disallow such a character purely on the grounds of Game Balance; that seems unfair and arbitrary and suggests there is something out of whack with the system (shock, horror) and I would have to ask, what could I do to restore Game Balance so as to be able to play such a character? What is to stop a power gamer from deciding to play this out to the max, per the rules and upsetting a GM's game Balance? If every encounter is reduced to "We pelt them with arrows/bolts/bullets while the Elephant charges in and tramples it won't be long before the pcs realise that they're not contributing anywhere near as much as the Elephant, who is racking up multiple kills with massive damage.
Now I can imagine a GM being forced to introduce Wyverns in an attempt to get rid of Elly, but it shouldn't be getting to that situation in the first place.
Adding a CR 7 combat pet to a CR 4 party is electing to turn the party into pet support. If the players are having fun with that, fine, Elephant vs Wyverns just becomes business as usual.
If they're using it for the RP ("this is my friend the gentle performing elephant") then there's no problem with it unbalancing combat. You can focus on the RP complications like "Dumbo got into Farmer Fred's cabbages," with maybe a "protect Dumbo from the Wyverns" encounter once for a change of pace, if you think they can handle it.
Adding a CR 7 combat pet to a CR 4 party is electing to turn the party into pet support. If the players are having fun with that, fine, Elephant vs Wyverns just becomes business as usual.
If they're using it for the RP ("this is my friend the gentle performing elephant") then there's no problem with it unbalancing combat. You can focus on the RP complications like "Dumbo got into Farmer Fred's cabbages," with maybe a "protect Dumbo from the Wyverns" encounter once for a change of pace, if you think they can handle it.
This is what I'd like to do, apart from turning the party into pet support. If I can get a party that's interested in that, fine, but I feel it's unfair to turn the entire party into pet support just so that I can Roleplay, and if I was GM I'd agree.
If it was more level appropriate, I'd be happy to introduce it; I had in mind someone that trains animals for a living and uses several trained animals they've trained themselves both in and out of combat (so trained trackers for scouting, trained fighting animals for combat, trained mounts, etc.). The problem is, it quickly becomes a force multiplier since there is effectively no limit so far as I can see to how many animals they can have, other than economic ones (and they aren't that much of a deterrent). Just 3 creatures at CR=Level effectively turns a party of 4 into a party of 7, approx. a 75% increase controlled by one player. That player will dominate combat and contribute significantly to out of combat activity, effectively making it a poor game for everyone else. I feel that at present this is a loophole open to exploitation.
Granted, equipping your critters can become expensive, but only if you give them decent equipment; there's no real need to do so since they come equipped with some basic attack, defense and out of combat abilities, but if I had the money to spare I'd do it.
and this does not even reach the question of the cheapness of Elephants/Mastodons.
|
|
I don't see this as too different from wanting to play a Master Summoner, Broodmaster, Huntmaster, Pack Lord, or other archetype that can put a lot of pets on the field. Sure, those pets are less strong than some purchased pets, but the versatility and number of actions for one PC has the same potential to overwhelm the other characters.
It can work, it just takes negotiation.
First, remember that downtime needed to train new pets limits the rate at which they can be introduced. Also, outside of official animal companions, directing a trained animal in combat takes a move action. Depending on how complicated the combat is and whether you want to do anything other than direct your pets in combat, that means you'll only be able to effectively field 1-4 pets at a time.
Second, voluntarily avoid training elephants or similar powerful creatures for combat until your party is high enough level that the pet is not the MVP. Find a way to justify it. Fully grown war elephants are hard to find, so maybe you buy an untrained one at level 4 or 5 and train it over a few weeks between adventures, or in a longer-scale game you get a young elephant that then slowly grows up. Either way the elephant won't fight until you're level 7-9.
Third, complement rather than outclass the other PCs. If you have a tracker PC in the party, don't train a dog to track. Pets work best in smaller parties because there are more roles to fill. Messenger animals can also be handy without stepping on other PCs' toes.
Fourth, consider giving your pets to other players. The "Serve" trick allows a designated character to direct your pet using your handle animal bonus, which is great if the party tracker feels like a dog to help them track, the rogue wants a rat to steal small items and gnaw through ropes, or the squishy caster wants a furry bodyguard at their side in case an enemy gets past the front-liner.