Silliness of buying high CR animals animals


Pathfinder Society

51 to 97 of 97 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Seattle aka Gwen Smith

andreww wrote:
Timrod wrote:

Question, do you actually need handle animal if you're planning on using a creature as an impromptu mount without being a cavalier? I just realized how hilarious it would be for my wizard to buy a battle-trained bison and ride around on it casting spells. As far as I can tell, as long as I have the bison move before or after I cast a spell I wouldn't even have to make concentration checks to cast.

For reference, I don't even want the bison to attack, I'd just want it for the imagery of a crazy wizard spamming create pit off the back of a bison.

In my last session my Wizard was riding around on his summoned ankylosaurus shoouting yee-hah! at people.

As long as you make the concentration checks, you should be fine. Riding a mount counts as "Vigorous Motion":

"Vigorous Motion: If you are riding on a moving mount, taking a bouncy ride in a wagon, on a small boat in rough water, belowdecks in a storm-tossed ship, or simply being jostled in a similar fashion, you must make a concentration check (DC 10 + the level of the spell you're casting) or lose the spell."

(Ranged characters also have issues fighting from mount-top.)

4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Seattle aka Gwen Smith

Related question that came up last night:

How much control do casters have over summoned monsters (unintelligent, non-magical beasts, in this case)?

We had an Occultist Arcanist (with the 1 minute/level summons) who wanted the summoned creature to do stuff that an animal companion would require a Handle Animal check for, and I wasn't sure how to deal with it.

Some were easy: for example, drag an unconscious body would require the Work trick and a DC 10 move action check--that one was easy (no trick = DC 25, full round action).

But I was unsure about things like "go into that building and attack an enemy you can't currently see" and "ready an action to attack when someone comes in the door".

The arcanist had no way to speak with the creature and did not have handle animal, so I couldn't see how she would get the animal to understand what she wanted it to do.

Given this discussion on what you can do with purchased trained animals and animal companions, I felt that a summoned, untrained, feral animal would be harder to control than an animal companion. Anything that required a Handle Animal check from an intelligent animal companion should be dicey at best from a summoned monster.

(I assumed based on the spell description that it essentially had the Attack and Attack Any Creature trick.)

Sovereign Court

I didn't read ALL the posts in this thread, so if I repeat something, I'm sorry.

First off, I really appreciate this topic being brought up. This is a great thing for upstart GMs to be aware of.

I've never bought a combat trained animal; the most I've ever dealt with using in PFS is a familiar. However, I've GM'ed a number of games, and am still getting the hand of being stern about the drawbacks that come with using a variety of the game's mechanics.

I should probably re-read the sections on handling animals that are not Mounts or animal companions. I feel I should also thoroughly scan character sheets, inventory sheets, etc before each session in order to make sure the players that utilize these functions are implementing them properly and within the rules.

It should be much more the responsibility of the player to get it right. But is also the GMs responsibility to enforce the rules if the player thinks he can skate by without following the drawbacks. Because, quite frankly, if the player is knowingly skirting the "hard parts" of certain rule sets, it could be considered cheating. And we ALL know how the Pathfinder Society feels about cheating.

Grand Lodge

Summon Monster:
"It attacks your opponents to the best of its ability. If you can communicate with the creature, you can direct it not to attack, to attack particular enemies, or to perform other actions."

My interpretation is similar to yours Dorothy:
The limitation is the communication not the handle aspect, so unintelligent creatures simply attack to the best of their ability and that's all. They understand they are summoned and can't "die" so attack anything is basically provided via magic. Complex instructions can't be given unless a mutual language is understood AND they are simple enough for its intelligence.

So you can't expect your flock of 2-4 summoned eagles to become flank buddies for each of your fellow PC's, but they will attack the nearest target and naturally spread into flanking positions as combat permits (natural cunning so they won't accept AOO's but will look for advantageous conditions including flank when able)

If you had speak w/animal active they should be able to seek independent targets of one another if ordered (since they automatically understand who the bad guys are). I think "flank" as a TACTIC lies outside of general animal comprehension, but in combat they understand to hit where it's hardest to defend. SO they will move to flank for themselves, but not adjust so others can move into flank on their turn.

As for your examples (w/common language requirement met): Both are fine since the enemy ID aspect is met via magic. Neither is really complex beyond that. Telling a falcon to enter a room and steal a ring to the exclusion of other small shiny objects would be to complex for it's poor intelligence though.

Basically, I agree with your reasoning but I'd remove the handle aspect entirely. An Ape understands "drag a body", but a bat might have trouble with an order to crash though a glass window as the window would resemble a wall to his sonar/blind sense. The limitation isn't handle animal checks, its GM patience and overall credulity.

Would you require handle checks on a small earth elemental assuming a common language? They have an intelligence of 4... I would caution that allowing even high DC handle checks can allow an optimized CHA sorcerer to push INT 2 animals to do things a INT 4 elemental couldn't understand.

5/5 5/55/55/5

control Mount in Battle (Dc 20): As a move action, you can attempt to control a light horse, pony, heavy horse, or other mount not trained for combat riding while in battle. If you fail the Ride check, you can do nothing else in that round. You do not need to roll for horses or ponies trained for combat.

Thats a pretty hard check to risk losing all of your actions.

Sovereign Court

BigNorseWolf wrote:

control Mount in Battle (Dc 20): As a move action, you can attempt to control a light horse, pony, heavy horse, or other mount not trained for combat riding while in battle. If you fail the Ride check, you can do nothing else in that round. You do not need to roll for horses or ponies trained for combat.

Thats a pretty hard check to risk losing all of your actions.

Just don't ride anything not trained for combat.

5/5

Dorothy Lindman wrote:

Related question that came up last night:

How much control do casters have over summoned monsters (unintelligent, non-magical beasts, in this case)?

We had an Occultist Arcanist (with the 1 minute/level summons) who wanted the summoned creature to do stuff that an animal companion would require a Handle Animal check for, and I wasn't sure how to deal with it.

I would treat summoned animals in the same way I might treat any other type of animal with the exception that they automatically attack your enemies. I assume they know what their summoner knows about what is treated as an enemy or not. Anything else is going to be DC25 Handle Animal as they arrive essentially "wild" with no tricks. Being able to speak to them won't help, the ability to speak to animals doesn't get around needing to make handle animal checks for animal companion users so wouldn't help summoning types.

There's a reason most of my summoner types use elementals and have all of the elemental languages known.

4/5

kinevon wrote:
So, does "participate" include the Cleric, who rolls low on Initiative, at least relatively, every combat, so he never gets to act because the high Initiative blaster or TH meleer kills everything in one hit?

Well, if that is happening regularly, there's another issue to be addressed, isn't there?

kinevon wrote:
How about if all the Cleric does is activate his wand of Bless, or the Bard does his performance?

They're doing their jobs; that is participating.

kinevon wrote:
If yes, how is it different if the meleer is a class feature (AC) or something someone in the party spent their gold on?

Because the game is about adventurers, not people who sit back and watch a set of numbers they aren't invested in beat up other numbers.

kinevon wrote:
How about the goat/sheep trap finders? You know, where someone in the party buys a herd of sheep, then drives them through the dungeon in front of the party, to set off traps and ambushes.

Haven't come across this one, but maybe that's because a lot of people would see that as pretty cruel to the animals. I might call it cowardice. But I bet the goats aren't going to do much except for traps, so if the PCs participate themselves they will get the XP.

andreww wrote:
Yeah, this is a prety good example of adversarial DM'ing. Trained animals are potentially an issue. You dont deal with them by being a dick about it.

Telling them in advance is not "being a dick about it", it is giving people the option to actually play the game themselves instead of relying on buying their way through and avoiding any exploring, reporting, cooperating, risk, etc. Some people might think they're heroes if they buy a bunch of animals and turn them loose inside a dungeon. tell me what they have done to earn "experience"?

andreww wrote:
Would you do the same if someone's animal companion solo'd an encounter?

See above. Sometimes someone solos an encounter; that's part of the game. Having every PC sit out and just send in combat-trained tigers (which is the post I responded to) is not adventuring, and I would tell the players that before I sat down. You may disagree; enjoy the game your way, friends.

4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Seattle aka Gwen Smith

Grey_Mage wrote:

Summon Monster:

"It attacks your opponents to the best of its ability. If you can communicate with the creature, you can direct it not to attack, to attack particular enemies, or to perform other actions."

If you had speak w/animal active they should be able to seek independent targets of one another if ordered (since they automatically understand who the bad guys are). I think "flank" as a TACTIC lies outside of general animal comprehension, but in combat they understand to hit where it's hardest to defend. SO they will move to flank for themselves, but not adjust so others can move into flank on their turn.

As for your examples (w/common language requirement met): Both are fine since the enemy ID aspect is met via magic. Neither is really complex beyond that. Telling a falcon to enter a room and steal a ring to the exclusion of other small shiny objects would be to complex for it's poor intelligence though.

The biggest issue with the "go in there an find an enemy" was that the summoning caster hadn't been involved in the fight inside and herself hadn't ID'd any of the enemies. On the next turn, she had line of sight on an enemy, so I figured the creature could figure it out now.

Grey_Mage wrote:
Would you require handle checks on a small earth elemental assuming a common language? They have an intelligence of 4... I would caution that allowing even high DC handle checks can allow an optimized CHA sorcerer to push INT 2 animals to do things a INT 4 elemental couldn't understand.

If a creature has higher than average intelligence, does Handle Animal even apply? And what kinds of things would an int 4 creature not be able to understand?

Side note: Off the top of my head, I could actually see the high DC Handle Animal check being able to pull off a trick an int 4 couldn't do. The int 2 creature doesn't have to understand what it's doing: it just knows that when the handler clicks the clicker and gives it a treat, it should do that same thing again. Our dog trainer used this method: when our (not terribly bright and awfully goofy) dog coincidently did something she wanted him to do, she clicked and gave him a treat. After two repeats, he understood that the treat was connected to something he was doing. In just a few minutes, he had narrowed down the "this is what gets me a treat" behavior to two different choices and just alternated between two behaviors. (You could almost see the gears spinning: "It's sitting or lying down--I'll just do both to be sure.")

Now that's the beginning of teach a trick (and dogs are a special evolutionary case), but the basic concept seems sound enough to transfer over to a fantasy world.

5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
GM Lamplighter wrote:

Telling them in advance is not "being a dick about it", it is giving people the option to actually play the game themselves instead of relying on buying their way through and avoiding any exploring, reporting, cooperating, risk, etc. Some people might think they're heroes if they buy a bunch of animals and turn them loose inside a dungeon. tell me what they have done to earn "experience"?

Sure it is. You are taking an entirely legal player option and twisting it around in a wholly adversarial way because you don't like what it does to the game. That's a pretty passive aggressive way to play the game.

If you don't like the effect they have you have better options. If playing with a regular group you can talk to each other like adults and agree some parameters of what sort of things you will use in the game. This is hard to do in PFS in anything but the smallest most tight knit local groups.

You could also make sure that the person buying the animal is properly following the rules. Does it have the attack trick twice? If not you are looking at DC25 Handle Animal to get it to attack many targets. Even if it is a creature that only requires a single attack trick are they actually making the DC10. Is the animal injured, if so +2DC etc.

As far as "have you gained experience" goes I would suggest that anyone who can actively manage to control a tiger well enough to have it take down zombies, carnivorous plants, demons or the like is totally learning something.

Grand Lodge

Dorothy Lindman wrote:


If a creature has higher than average intelligence, does Handle Animal even apply? And what kinds of things would an int 4 creature not be able to understand?

Side note: Off the top of my head, I could actually see the high DC Handle Animal check being able to pull off a trick an int 4 couldn't do. The int 2 creature doesn't have to understand what it's doing: it just knows that when the handler clicks the clicker and gives it a treat, it should do that same thing again. Our dog...

Exactly. An animal can be pushed to to a trick, because the understanding is they have spent time understanding what the clicker means. I'd allow it for Animal Companions, that's what the skill is there for, but for mages and summoners the animals are only in existence for a few seconds or minutes at best limiting what can be attempted by push to what you can convey verbally. Allowing the eagles to know the flank trick by DC 25 push brings it more capability than what is described in the text of the spell.

I understand there is room for differences in opinion, but I think allowing pushes on summoned animals further disadvantages Wizard Conjurers vs CHA-based Summoners casting the same spells they are both specialized in. Summoners don't need anything to expand their powerset IMHO.

3/5

GM Lamplighter wrote:
See above. Sometimes someone solos an encounter; that's part of the game. Having every PC sit out and just send in combat-trained tigers (which is the post I responded to) is not adventuring, and I would tell the players that before I sat down. You may disagree; enjoy the game your way, friends.

I would be careful here, Lamplighter. Based on the whole of your statements, it seems like what you are really saying is, "Enjoy the game your way, unless you are at my table, then you have to enjoy the game MY way or you don't get XP."

I feel like you are using your very loose interpretation of the guide's language to enforce your preferences as actual rules. I'm not sure that's fair. You might better serve yourself and your tables by simply enforcing the action economy of a bought animal, and the somewhat complicated / harsh handle animal tricks and DC system in order to scale back the cheese of this option.

That said, I've not used a bought animal, and likely won't because of the cheese. Also, the one table I had with you (Paizocon 2013 Special) was really good, so I in no way am suggesting you are a bad GM (in case that might have been a take away from my statements here).

5/5 5/55/55/5

The Fourth Horseman wrote:


That said, I've not used a bought animal, and likely won't because of the cheese. Also, the one table I had with you (Paizocon 2013 Special) was really good, so I in no way am suggesting you are a bad GM (in case that might have been a take away from my statements here).

Right. There's enough ways to mess with cheesey players that are clearly within the rules. No reason to go into the gray areas... :)

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Georgia—Atlanta aka The Masked Ferret

I personally enjoy having 'non-combat yaks' on one of my characters.

Grand Lodge 5/5 5/55/5

My Paladin of Rowdrosh uses the gold he earns from Profession (Herdsman) his "Farmstead" vanity to purchase more livestock.

I think he's up to 5 goats and 1 cow, so far.


I bought a large Frilled Lizard to ride into battle in my Paladin/Rogue/Swashbuckler's most recent adventure. He was hanging out in the Mwangi Expanse, is a notsobright member of the Exchange, and it seemed like a good deal.

It didn't overwhelm the combats, no one seemed to mind, and the Climb speed helped a lot since my Fencing Grace paladin is very weak STR-wise.

5/5 5/55/55/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
The Masked Ferret wrote:
I personally enjoy having 'non-combat yaks' on one of my characters.

Soothe Syrup ought to take care of that.

4/5

The Fourth Horseman wrote:


I would be careful here, Lamplighter. Based on the whole of your statements, it seems like what you are really saying is, "Enjoy the game your way, unless you are at my table, then you have to enjoy the game MY way or you don't get XP."

That's one way to interpret it, although due to the vagaries of the internet I don't think I'm making myself clear.

If I had a party of six players who all decided they wanted to play the game by buying a bunch of animals and taking no risks themselves, I would explain before the game that it is one of those things that sounds good in principle but is cheesy and not really any fun, and that I'm not really interested in GMing such an experience, and try to change their minds about it.

In actual fact, depending on my mood I might just run through it... today I'm feeling particularly confrontational over player cheese, though, since it can turn into a huge issue if left unchecked (just like a bad GM can).

I have a hard time believing that this is an actual issue that needs a solution, though. Has anyone actually seen it happen? A whole party who is so detached from the story that they want to play farmers or zookeepers instead of adventurers?


GM Lamplighter wrote:

I have a hard time believing that this is an actual issue that needs a solution, though. Has anyone actually seen it happen? A whole party who is so detached from the story that they want to play farmers or zookeepers instead of adventurers?

Yes, twice in a month and it is getting worse because they are teaching others. If you want to particpate in combat get a cat like mine or you will sit and watch. Because it is a large creature and takes up all the room

even 1 person at level 1 bringing in a large cat wrecks the game completely. Heck even at mid levels.

Would you have fun with a player that everyone of his characters has a large cat? Should i leave the table every time he sits down knowign i will have to wacth his cat do the combat?

The Exchange 5/5

sigh....

PFS is not all about combat. There are a LOT of scenarios where having a large cat will cause issues.... And even if we only consider the combat, there are still issues. Let's check out the first dozen low level adventures and see how many you can use that big cat in...

#0-01, In town - going to have problems getting a loose lion thru the streets.
#0-02, In boats - sometimes small boats...
#0-03, In town, then riding across the desert (camels really like big cats right?)
#0-04, In town again
#0-05 - hay what do you know! this would might just work! Running thru the street to get there might be an issue... but you are doing it in the middle of the night right?
#0-06 - Town - and then 5' wide tunnels
#0-07 - Town - in an opera/theater.... yeah, this is going to get past the ushers..
#0-08 - Town - and why are you bringing a big cat to the Slave Market? How'd you walk it past the guards again?
#0-13 - Sewers and 5' wide walk ways.
#0-14 - Gotta love a big cat in the Puddles district. Hay, maybe GM Torch will like the fact that you brought a lion to his bath!
#0-17 - Other than being a guest on a boat, this one might work.... maybe...

There's the first dozen scenarios - I see one where you could actually use a big cat, and another where you might be able to pull it off... maybe. And ten where it would be a problem - and perhaps some RP oppertunities!
PC: "I tell you officer, he's a shape changed druid friend of mine - really!"
Judge: "roll me a bluff...."

Sorry - I'm not seeing this as an issue.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, Nevada—Las Vegas aka kinevon

@GM Lamplighter: Would you have the same talk with a party of all Druids, all with Animal Companions?

@nosig: And how would the townsfolk know whether it is a Sorcerer with Handle Animal bringing a trained cat, or a Druid with his Animal Companion?

I kno wther ehave been discussions on this board, in the past, about GMs gimping PCs with an animal class feature in at least one of those scenarios you cited, by a GM fiat saying, "No AC.".

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Wisconsin—Pleasant Prairie aka Brew City Crafter

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Finlanderboy wrote:
GM Lamplighter wrote:

I have a hard time believing that this is an actual issue that needs a solution, though. Has anyone actually seen it happen? A whole party who is so detached from the story that they want to play farmers or zookeepers instead of adventurers?

Yes, twice in a month and it is getting worse because they are teaching others. If you want to particpate in combat get a cat like mine or you will sit and watch. Because it is a large creature and takes up all the room

even 1 person at level 1 bringing in a large cat wrecks the game completely. Heck even at mid levels.

Would you have fun with a player that everyone of his characters has a large cat? Should i leave the table every time he sits down knowign i will have to wacth his cat do the combat?

I have to agree with you completely. The first time it happened, it was novel. Now, he does it with every character. I've had to experience this from both sides of the GMs screen and have had more than one player express to me that this is getting old. The problem is a player blatantly exploiting a loop hole in the rules. I don't believe for one minute that the intention was for classes that don't have animal companions to have animal companions.

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Wisconsin—Pleasant Prairie aka Brew City Crafter

nosig wrote:

sigh....

PFS is not all about combat. There are a LOT of scenarios where having a large cat will cause issues.... And even if we only consider the combat, there are still issues. Let's check out the first dozen low level adventures and see how many you can use that big cat in...

There's the first dozen scenarios - I see one where you could actually use a big cat, and another where you might be able to pull it off... maybe. And ten where it would be a problem - and perhaps some RP oppertunities!
PC: "I tell you officer, he's a shape changed druid friend of mine - really!"
Judge: "roll me a bluff...."

Sorry - I'm not seeing this as an issue.

Your analysis is invalid. Season 0 scenarios are irrelevant, compared to five years of power creep. When compared to season five or six scenarios, the numbers are much different. While a tiger might draw attention or be impractical, the prevalence of adventurers, and druids/rangers specifically, make it easily explainable.


nosig wrote:

sigh....

PFS is not all about combat. There are a LOT of scenarios where having a large cat will cause issues.... And even if we only consider the combat, there are still issues. Let's check out the first dozen low level adventures and see how many you can use that big cat in...

#0-01, In town - going to have problems getting a loose lion thru the streets.
#0-02, In boats - sometimes small boats...
#0-03, In town, then riding across the desert (camels really like big cats right?)
#0-04, In town again
#0-05 - hay what do you know! this would might just work! Running thru the street to get there might be an issue... but you are doing it in the middle of the night right?
#0-06 - Town - and then 5' wide tunnels
#0-07 - Town - in an opera/theater.... yeah, this is going to get past the ushers..
#0-08 - Town - and why are you bringing a big cat to the Slave Market? How'd you walk it past the guards again?
#0-13 - Sewers and 5' wide walk ways.
#0-14 - Gotta love a big cat in the Puddles district. Hay, maybe GM Torch will like the fact that you brought a lion to his bath!
#0-17 - Other than being a guest on a boat, this one might work.... maybe...

There's the first dozen scenarios - I see one where you could actually use a big cat, and another where you might be able to pull it off... maybe. And ten where it would be a problem - and perhaps some RP oppertunities!
PC: "I tell you officer, he's a shape changed druid friend of mine - really!"
Judge: "roll me a bluff...."

Sorry - I'm not seeing this as an issue.

So you use these rules against anyone with an animal companion?

Silver Crusade 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Wisconsin—Waukesha aka ZenthaneX

I DM and play in the same area as both Finlander and Brew City. The player in question has eight, check that, EIGHT different characters all with a trained tiger. I played with him last week in a 1-5 where he was level 2 playing up. We got to the final encounter and he held the tiger back until there was any small amount of resistance from the enemies and then let it loose on the BBEG. The tiger took him out in one round, flat.

Now that people see what his little pet can do they're starting to copy him with his total approval. It won't be long until there is literally no point in playing low level scenarios in our area if things continue this way.

I'm sorry but I see no reason for a character that doesn't get an animal companion as part of his class to be able to purchase any one of the several over powered animals that are effectively always available. And while some in this thread use the excuse of having to make Handling checks, you have to know these people plan that in.

Brew is right, it was cute the first time, now it's just BS. It kills the fun faster than the tiger killed that BBEG.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5

Print out what you just posted and read it to him?

Sovereign Court

Finlanderboy wrote:
nosig wrote:

sigh....

PFS is not all about combat. There are a LOT of scenarios where having a large cat will cause issues.... And even if we only consider the combat, there are still issues. Let's check out the first dozen low level adventures and see how many you can use that big cat in...

#0-01, In town - going to have problems getting a loose lion thru the streets.
#0-02, In boats - sometimes small boats...
#0-03, In town, then riding across the desert (camels really like big cats right?)
#0-04, In town again
#0-05 - hay what do you know! this would might just work! Running thru the street to get there might be an issue... but you are doing it in the middle of the night right?
#0-06 - Town - and then 5' wide tunnels
#0-07 - Town - in an opera/theater.... yeah, this is going to get past the ushers..
#0-08 - Town - and why are you bringing a big cat to the Slave Market? How'd you walk it past the guards again?
#0-13 - Sewers and 5' wide walk ways.
#0-14 - Gotta love a big cat in the Puddles district. Hay, maybe GM Torch will like the fact that you brought a lion to his bath!
#0-17 - Other than being a guest on a boat, this one might work.... maybe...

There's the first dozen scenarios - I see one where you could actually use a big cat, and another where you might be able to pull it off... maybe. And ten where it would be a problem - and perhaps some RP oppertunities!
PC: "I tell you officer, he's a shape changed druid friend of mine - really!"
Judge: "roll me a bluff...."

Sorry - I'm not seeing this as an issue.

So you use these rules against anyone with an animal companion?

I'd expect that most GMs would. I daresay I'd go so far as to opine that they should. Large sized companions are supposed to have a downside, afterall. And if the forum posts are at all representative of reality (which is dubious, but that's another issue) cavaliers are given a hell of a time being allowed to bring horses into places. If GMs are stopping horses from getting into fights, they damn well better be stopping tigers, too.

And "using the rules against" players is the wrong way to look at it. The rules are the rules. Especially in PFS, as the "RAW IS LAW" peanut gallery likes to point out so vocally and repeatedly. Of course, classes that come with ACs tend to be able to manage logistical challenges posed by having large sized ACs. Characters using trained animals, they may prove to not be able to surmount those challenges as easily or as often.

Grand Lodge 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Since we're talking bought combat trained animal, example taken a large cat: Tiger.

nosig wrote:
#0-01, In town - going to have problems getting a loose lion thru the streets.

Absalom, city at the center of the world, where everything has been seen already.

Handle animal: Heel (DC 10), move action every time it tries to get distracted (so you move a bit slower).
nosig wrote:
#0-02, In boats - sometimes small boats...

Handle animal: Come (DC 10) to get it into the boat

Handle animal: Stay (DC 25) to get it to stay in the boat.
nosig wrote:
#0-03, In town, then riding across the desert (camels really like big cats right?)

Katheer is large city, people have seen everything already there.

Handle animal: Heel (DC 10)
nosig wrote:
#0-04, In town again

Absalom again.

Handle animal: Heel (DC 10), move action every time it tries to get distracted (so you move a bit slower).
nosig wrote:
#0-05 - hay what do you know! this would might just work! Running thru the street to get there might be an issue... but you are doing it in the middle of the night right?

Absalom again.

Handle animal: Heel (DC 10), move action every time it tries to get distracted (so you move a bit slower).
nosig wrote:
#0-06 - Town - and then 5' wide tunnels

Absalom again.

Handle animal: Heel (DC 10), move action every time it tries to get distracted (so you move a bit slower).
Squeezing, don't forget the penalties (double move, -4 to AC and to hit)
nosig wrote:
#0-07 - Town - in an opera/theater.... yeah, this is going to get past the ushers..

I happen to have played this scenario. Oppara, the upper crust of the elite, those people do the strangest things. Shouldn't be any problem to get a large cat in there if there's some other noble bringing in a couple of peacocks or painted slaves.

Knowledge: nobility followed by Bluff. After that:
Handle animal: Heel (DC 10) to go inside.
Handle animal: Guard (DC 10) to have it keep your seats free while you go buy drinks/popcorn.
nosig wrote:
#0-08 - Town - and why are you bringing a big cat to the Slave Market? How'd you walk it past the guards again?

Absalom again.

What better way to deal with slaves you just bought than to have them be guarded by a freaking big tiger.
Handle animal: Guard (DC 10)
nosig wrote:
#0-13 - Sewers and 5' wide walk ways.

Augustana, while not as big as Oppara, Katheer or Absalom is still a freaking huge city and one of the biggest ports in the Inner Sea Region.

Handle animal: Come (DC 10) or Handle animal: Heel (DC 10)
Depending on how the walkways are you'd either need acrobatics (half speed, DC 0 because it's wider than 3 ft. and a check every round) or squeezing (-4 to AC and to hit, double movement cost)
nosig wrote:
#0-14 - Gotta love a big cat in the Puddles district. Hay, maybe GM Torch will like the fact that you brought a lion to his bath!

Somehow it doesn't sound like a bad idea to have a big guard animal with you there.

Handle animal: Heel (DC 10) and Handle animal: Guard (DC 10)
nosig wrote:
#0-17 - Other than being a guest on a boat, this one might work.... maybe...

You're going to track stuff in a big forest in the River Kingdoms. While a tiger might be a bit odd in that location, a different kind of large cat would fit perfectly.

As for being on the boat: Handle animal: Heel (DC 10) to follow you aboard, followed by Handle animal: Stay (DC 25) or Handle animal: Guard (DC 10) to stay on deck/in your cabin and protect your gear.

I'm not sure if the purchase of combat trained animals should be banned or restriced to riding animals only.
Most scenario's already suffer from action economy with 6 players, some with animal companions/mounts, some with eidolons, a few might have familiars there, resulting in 8-10 minis on the player side alone, adding extra combat creatures to that just makes it too crowded imho.
Mounted players generally use a single mini so I don't think they make it too cluttered.

Sovereign Court

If something drains the fun out of the game, I feel something should be done about it. Let's look at gunslingers and/or firearms in general:

Please please PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong, by the way.

additional resources wrote:
Equipment: No Large or larger firearm is available for purchase. The double hackbut, culverin and any advanced firearms on Table 3-4 and advanced firearms on Table 3-5 and are not permitted in Pathfinder Society Organized Play. No character may purchase a firearm unless she possesses the Gunsmithing feat and firearms are never considered Always Available; a character must possess enough Fame to purchase any firearm not found on a Chronicle sheet or granted by a class feature; All ammunition except metal cartridges may be purchased.

Now, without these restrictions, what do we have?

GM: Roll initiative
Players: WHOOOEEEEE! I'M A COWBOYEH! BANG BANG POW POW SHOOT SHOOT BULLET BULLET GUN!!! Hit ur touch AC kek!
GM: O.o'

The powers that be put the proper restrictions in place to make firearms an impractical choice for classes that are not Gunslinger, as well as keep firearms from trivializing Tier 1-2 scenarios. Without these restrictions, players can plop down 2PP for whatever gun they want, then you have a bunch of players coming in with guns-a-blazin'.

They even nipped gunslinger-style archetype in the bud. Spellslinger, Holy Gun, etc.

In the same vein that these animals seem to blow away the opposition, a bunch of firearms tagging touch ACs for days would achieve the same effect.

Anyway,

Just like a Gunslinger can optimize with high DEX and some Weapon Focus, it's not hard to optimize a character for Handle Animal checks. I'll just play a half-elf and get Skill Focus: Handle Animal as a bonus feat, Pick a class that has Handle Animal as a Class Skill, Tank up my Charisma. Yeah, not hard.

The game is supposed to be fun. Something that makes the games not fun is something that should be looked over by the powers in charge of the Additional Resources.

Just my opinion, of course.


Well how does having a comabt trained animal combatant for every class make the game more fun?

Sovereign Court

It doesn't. That's what I was getting at. That's my fault for not being clearer about what I was trying to post. Posting at work makes me rush what I have to say.

My point was, these combat trained animals appear to be making the game unfun and problematic by practically trivializing entire scenaios. Perhaps we should ask the powers that be to look into the issue.


Brigg wrote:

It doesn't. That's what I was getting at. That's my fault for not being clearer about what I was trying to post. Posting at work makes me rush what I have to say.

My point was, these combat trained animals appear to be making the game unfun and problematic by practically trivializing entire scenaios. Perhaps we should ask the powers that be to look into the issue.

I am sorry I understood you agreed. My question was gear towards those that say there is no problem with these. I was nto replying to you directly.

These forums I believe are the way for us to present issues to the PFS staff. Mike brock reads every post on here. So he should soon recognize the issue. My question is geared towards him as well.

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Wisconsin—Pleasant Prairie aka Brew City Crafter

ZenthaneX wrote:

I DM and play in the same area as both Finlander and Brew City. The player in question has eight, check that, EIGHT different characters all with a trained tiger. I played with him last week in a 1-5 where he was level 2 playing up. We got to the final encounter and he held the tiger back until there was any small amount of resistance from the enemies and then let it loose on the BBEG. The tiger took him out in one round, flat.

Now that people see what his little pet can do they're starting to copy him with his total approval. It won't be long until there is literally no point in playing low level scenarios in our area if things continue this way.

I'm sorry but I see no reason for a character that doesn't get an animal companion as part of his class to be able to purchase any one of the several over powered animals that are effectively always available. And while some in this thread use the excuse of having to make Handling checks, you have to know these people plan that in.

Brew is right, it was cute the first time, now it's just BS. It kills the fun faster than the tiger killed that BBEG.

ZenthaneX brings up a good point. What do we do when this spreads and makes playing low-level scenarios academic?

I can imagine that some time in the near future we'll see new players sit down at a table with four other characters with Tigers and see them kill everything before the new player gets to do anything. This happens again the next two of three times. Will this new player come back if his characters never get to do anything to contribute?

5/5 5/55/55/5

Ask for it to be banned. I have yet to see anyone arguing in favor of the tactic, and the campaign has responded to complaints about less egregious problems than this.

until then Play undead heavy scenarios. You need a dc 25 handle animal check to get it to attack unnatural creatures.


BigNorseWolf wrote:

Ask for it to be banned. I have yet to see anyone arguing in favor of the tactic, and the campaign has responded to complaints about less egregious problems than this.

until then Play undead heavy scenarios. You need a dc 25 handle animal check to get it to attack unnatural creatures.

Until you train it. It is not hard to train it farther.

4/5

New thread added - but I can't copy the link on my iPad. Head over and FAQ the proposal now!

5/5 5/55/55/5

Finlanderboy wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

Ask for it to be banned. I have yet to see anyone arguing in favor of the tactic, and the campaign has responded to complaints about less egregious problems than this.

until then Play undead heavy scenarios. You need a dc 25 handle animal check to get it to attack unnatural creatures.

Until you train it. It is not hard to train it farther.

A combat trained tiger can't learn any more tricks. Its int of 2 allows it to know 6 tricks, which is the number required for combat training.

There's also technically no rule for replacing tricks... except getting it combat trained, so it can't just drop down to pick up a second attack.

The solution there is to get an untrained tiger and drain it up, but since you can train at max 1 trick per session at level 1, 2 at level 2 etc, you'll be level 3-4 before its fully functional. Before then a tiger that knows attack twice but not "heel" should be more trouble than its worth.

Silver Crusade 2/5

GM Lamplighter wrote:

New thread added - but I can't copy the link on my iPad. Head over and FAQ the proposal now!

linkified

As Mike B. said, don't hit the FAQ button. It's a proposed change to PFS, not an actual FAQ.

Dark Archive 4/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Upper Midwest aka Silbeg

Damanta wrote:

Since we're talking bought combat trained animal, example taken a large cat: Tiger.

nosig wrote:
#0-07 - Town - in an opera/theater.... yeah, this is going to get past the ushers..

I happen to have played this scenario. Oppara, the upper crust of the elite, those people do the strangest things. Shouldn't be any problem to get a large cat in there if there's some other noble bringing in a couple of peacocks or painted slaves.

Knowledge: nobility followed by Bluff. After that:
Handle animal: Heel (DC 10) to go inside.
Handle animal: Guard (DC 10) to have it keep your seats free while you go buy...

Tthis is one I have to disagree with you on.

You are going into the most opulent building in Oppara (except perhaps the palace of the Grand Prince). It is all fine carpets, fine wood pews, high class everything. Also (unless you have a certain vanity) you are not nobles.

Pathfinder: "I need to bring my kitty inside."
Guard: "Has it been declawed? Front and back? Or, might want to prevent it from chewing on the pews.. Have its teeth removed, too."

There is no way they are letting something as terrifying as a tiger in there. Or any social event not at the Grand Lodge.

Shadow Lodge

Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
Silbeg wrote:
Damanta wrote:

Since we're talking bought combat trained animal, example taken a large cat: Tiger.

nosig wrote:
#0-07 - Town - in an opera/theater.... yeah, this is going to get past the ushers..

I happen to have played this scenario. Oppara, the upper crust of the elite, those people do the strangest things. Shouldn't be any problem to get a large cat in there if there's some other noble bringing in a couple of peacocks or painted slaves.

Knowledge: nobility followed by Bluff. After that:
Handle animal: Heel (DC 10) to go inside.
Handle animal: Guard (DC 10) to have it keep your seats free while you go buy...

This is one I have to disagree with you on.

You are going into the most opulent building in Oppara (except perhaps the palace of the Grand Prince). It is all fine carpets, fine wood pews, high class everything. Also (unless you have a certain vanity) you are not nobles.

Pathfinder: "I need to bring my kitty inside."
Guard: "Has it been declawed? Front and back? Or, might want to prevent it from chewing on the pews.. Have its teeth removed, too."

There is no way they are letting something as terrifying as a tiger in there. Or any social event not at the Grand Lodge.

Exactly. The Stage Manager would personally murder any usher who let an animal inside. *Especially* a peacock.

Heck, they wouldn't allow you to bring a baby.

Scarab Sages

I would not mind an update that specified your creature could not have more than one hit die than you had levels (which would allow a 1st level character to own a 2-HD riding dog).

My gnome sorcerer does have a tiger but got it when he hit 6th level. Mostly because I was sitting at a four player table with no fighter type. The next scenario it got confused and almost mauled me to death!

Silver Crusade

BigNorseWolf wrote:


A combat trained tiger can't learn any more tricks. Its int of 2 allows it to know 6 tricks, which is the number required for combat training.

The sorcerer with a combat trained tiger in my lodge got around that by buying a bridle of tricks.

She has invested some cash, a trait and a feat.. the mad high CHA she already had. So she can command that tiger to do what ever she wants. I'd be fine with this, she actually has put some investment into the animal except that the tiger is much better than the animal companion of an equivalent level character except for the requiring move actions to command it, but not a problem for her as she has little to do with her move actions anyhow.

I say ban the combat trained animals and limit involvement of animals in combat to class feature animals only

Shadow Lodge

Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
David Foley wrote:
The sorcerer with a combat trained tiger in my lodge got around that by buying a bridle of tricks.

Can a tiger wear a bridle? I think of a bridle as being something for a long-faced animal, not a flat-faced animal. I'm not an expert by any means, so I'm willing to be convinced pretty easily, but my first inclination would be to disallow.

It's worth saying that the text of the item specifically calls out that "a bridle of tricks can be placed on any animal or magical beast with an appropriate shape to wear a bridle" thereby disallowing it if they can't.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, Nevada—Las Vegas aka kinevon

pH unbalanced wrote:
David Foley wrote:
The sorcerer with a combat trained tiger in my lodge got around that by buying a bridle of tricks.

Can a tiger wear a bridle? I think of a bridle as being something for a long-faced animal, not a flat-faced animal. I'm not an expert by any means, so I'm willing to be convinced pretty easily, but my first inclination would be to disallow.

It's worth saying that the text of the item specifically calls out that "a bridle of tricks can be placed on any animal or magical beast with an appropriate shape to wear a bridle" thereby disallowing it if they can't.

To be honest, even a normal bridle only requires the animal have a mouth in the front of its face, and ears that stick up a bit on the top of its head.

Bits are the sticking part. Those tend to have to both be shaped for the specific animal, and use (abuse?) certain oddities of the horse's mouth.

I would tend to think if you could apply a muzzle to it, you could also apply a bridle.

5/5 5/55/55/5

David Foley wrote:


The sorcerer with a combat trained tiger in my lodge got around that by buying a bridle of tricks.

Bridle of tricks is a headslot item. The tiger would need the extra slot: head feat to use it, and they can't get that feat.

A DM might be nice and let the character use it as an item under the "specifically for their use" clause under pfs rules, but that rule seems to mean VERY specifically, for a particular animal, to the point that the only item i'm sure about is horseshoes.


Has any offical descion actually been made about this?

Liberty's Edge 5/5

You are going to have to wait for a new Campaign Coordinator.

51 to 97 of 97 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Silliness of buying high CR animals animals All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Society