A player has approached me about re-statting his Level 3 Lion Shaman Druid to be a Pack Lord. My key issues revolve around his plan to have the time of his life at low-levels controlling 2, 3, 4 or more Spinosauri, freely swapping them around through the relatively small 24-hour new-animal ritual. His character also recently became Evil, so not being too concerned about his low-level animal companions being easily wiped seems to fit into that, according to him.
Some issues I noted included
-Slowing down combat; I suggested capping the maximum number of animal companions he can have based on how many people are in the group that day.
-Suspension of disbelief; one dinosaur is one thing, 3-4 of them is... another.
-Hand-waving feeding and finding it; easy for one dinosaur, less so for 3-4
-Not worrying about his animal companions getting wiped might make him non-neutral and not 'revering nature'
From a mechanical standpoint however, it's hard to fault him; having many spinosaurs at low-level will be like every day is a christmas massacre, and the archetype has scope for swapping them for a higher-level companion once DR starts kicking in and he gets serious.
I suppose what I'm asking is... any thoughts? I'm a bit flummoxed on this, not sure how to respond to him, told him I'd think about it for a few days.
Even as an evil druid it is assumed that you will revere nature and not throw your animal buddies away. The rules do not specify what counts as "not revering nature", but this is not druid-like behavior in my opinion.
As for slowing down combat just let him know that he needs to be prepared and ready to keep things moving.
Supension of belief is subjective. If dino's are rare in your gameworld then let him know up front.
As a druid he should have survival as a class skill. If he is in an urban area let him know that he needs to keep gold on hand to feed them.
He sounds NE so he does seem to be correct alignment wise, but like I said I think he falls short on the revering nature scale.
He sounds NE so he does seem to be correct alignment wise, but like I said I think he falls short on the revering nature scale.
"Revering nature" is rather open and there are many aspects of nature. Not caring that the weak of his brood fall just shows his commitment to the brutal laws of nature: Only the strong survive. Their service to him is a test and all those that die have failed, but in being culled they have made the herd stronger.
He sounds NE so he does seem to be correct alignment wise, but like I said I think he falls short on the revering nature scale."Revering nature" is rather open and there are many aspects of nature. Not caring that the weak of his brood fall just shows his commitment to the brutal laws of nature: Only the strong survive. Their service to him is a test and all those that die have failed, but in being culled they have made the herd stronger.
That is another way to look at it. I will admit I was somewhat biased because I saw the connection between the AC and the PC as something more than disposable bag of hit points, however the rules do not disallow it.
Much like the paladin the GM will have to decide what "revere nature" means.
i would go with the common sense option. that is, have him face the resolt of his actions. if he let his dino die left and right remmber that most of these are teretorial creatures and not many of them co-exist in a certen scale of area. that mean you can roll and see how many of them are in the area and rule that once all are dead. he can't have any more of that kind. go back to wolves if they are stil lavalble.
there might be not that many of each specific creature in a given area. make sure to mark down how many are there and if he rolls high enough on knowledge neture tell him the avrage amount of how many hsould be .so he can think of what he gets each time.
i would also add that if too many craetures die under his leadership there should be a chance (for every extra dead one per week\day you call it) that others who would might have joined are frightend from the smell of dead craetures around the teretory. if too many animals\dinoes diead close by ,their secnt should still linger.maybe their death is also tracable.
A lot of the problems you are citing would also be problems should the Druid take the summoning route (which is, in my opinion, more powerful, versatile, and therefore slows down the game by that increased amount in comparison, especially when the stats aren't already set-in-stone like the Animal Companions would be).
One other thing you are forgetting is that a lot of nature is cruel, and the 'disposing' of creatures is something that can easily be founded in Darwin's experiments. To me, it seems like the PC is taking the "Survival of the Fittest" approach; if it is strong enough, it will live, and its genes will carry on. If it is weak enough, it will die, and it will make the rest of nature that much stronger.
Here's a prime example of what I'm talking about; be warned though, even if it comes from a natural documentary, it is graphic and technically NSFW.
Of course, that's giving him the benefit of the doubt. I do imagine if you plan to allow him to dispose of his animal companions like that, you can only imagine how he would feel about his fellow party members. After all, if he treats his animal companions that way, biologically speaking, the players he is with are also animals, and are his companions as well. So don't be surprised if he treats his fellow players the same way he would treat his class feature companions; it would fit into the character he is trying to emulate, but it can also cause some unwarranted PVP in the most extreme circumstances.
If this is strictly a gameplay concern, then it falls into the realm of houseruling, since by RAW (and RAI), a Druid can manage however many creatures he can summon/control; it also tells you that the PC is wanting to undertake a larger responsibility on his behalf, so if you think he is capable of it as a person, then the bogging down combat shouldn't be that big of a concern. If he has trouble managing his turns as it is, I'd simply tell him that he wouldn't be able to handle the responsibilities of being a Pack Lord, he would disgrace the laws of natural evolution, and end up dying for his incompetence.
Already at level 3 the pack Lord's pets are gonna be behind normal ACs even if he only have 2. They Will die left, rigth and center and quickly it would have sloved Down combat more if he had had just one with the proper Care and support you Can give it if you hva just the one.
At higher levels PETs that are several levels behind wont be a Real thing in combat. Just look at ranger pets without boon companion.
And if he tries to boost there level with boon companion tell him no!
Of cause he need to feed them and they Will attarct attention in most places but that is part of the deal.
Thanks for your thoughts everyone, will consider.