I recently picked up Legacy of Dragons and enjoyed it quite a lot, even though there were some errors (for example, a fighter archetype replacing the 3rd and 5th level bonus feats). I decided I want to build a Drakerider, but ran into a problem.
A level 1 drake is Tiny, and the ability granting it replaces a lot of Cavalier features. Is there a size adjustment I missed, or do I have to handle the loss of nearly all my features and wait until the Drake becomes large at 13th level or build a diminutive character (somehow)?
I know a Cavalier can have a "mount" he doesn't ride, but it seems strange that you can only actually be a drake rider starting at 13th level.
I suppose thematically, it is "....and that is why most people just use horses, since you have to raise drakes personally from birth".
I suppose they might be ridable by halfling cavaliers once they hit small and you grab the undersized mount feat.
I am kind of wary on whether drakes are good at all. They seem worse than animal companions for the majority of your playtime. Maybe they have decent stats... after they get to a size where you can't get them through doors anymore, and you are REALLY high level. I am pretty sure they are just worse at PFS level ranges (not sure if it is PFS legal, but I use the level range as a good gauge for most campaigns).
A person did a comparison at several levels of a Horse, Drake, and another companion that I can't remember. The drake never came out favorably.
The 3rd part Dragonrider is much better, if allowed. It looks overpowered, but is not in practice.
....never?
Damn. I knew that it was behind since it was stated like a familiar while tiny, but I had at least vaguely hoped it caught up when it started getting a bunch of size boosts with associated stat boosts.
Of course, I had already realized the ranger archetype was terrible since it never grew much in size, but the mechanics relied upon size+str boosts to advanced. It was just a bad move to switch from the 'gets stats as it levels, plus stats from size' model of animal companions and eidolons.
Really, it should have just been like a big, dumb, restricted eidolon- like the midway between animal companions and eidolons. A basic chassis (dragon-ish body plan) with some selectable powers.
I know a Cavalier can have a "mount" he doesn't ride, but it seems strange that you can only actually be a drake rider starting at 13th level.
Read the class description. It is explains that drakeriders come expecting to ride terrible dragons into battle only to find out it take a long time to raise a drake to rideable size.
I believe at super high levels that it was better at some things. Just the comparison that was done, (I remember against a giant vulture), was doing it primarily on a few measurements and the AC came out on those. But the drake should have a better will save and some other things. Just not that it's clearly superior to an AC makes it not worth the wait.
Just not that it's clearly superior to an AC makes it not worth the wait.That's the kicker. It beats the AC in a few areas and as is would be a pretty interesting side-grade, but you trade out a lot more than your AC to pick it up and it doesn't really get going until endgame.
And you dragon is still not as tough as the regular horse. That is disappointing. The big thing covered scales? Nope, not as tough as this horse fur.
Really, the scaling of levels is overly disppointing. I could understand having it as the tiny little thing until level 4- those are the levels rangers have to wait to even get an AC. I could even see it not being large and mountable until level 7 (a lot of AC's such aren't either, such as wolves).
But level 13....and it is not even comparable to an animal companion until that point (and even then, it is kind of pathetic with its 20 str vs. a similar wolf's 25 str due to size and scaling str bonuses).
That is the kicker. You wait so long for it to be useful, but even then it isn't that useful. You would be better served just spending feats for monstrous mount and grabbing a griffon. It would have better stats, flight, and pounce. And it turns on at level 7. That is 2 feats, versus the drake rider's cost of losing all tactician abilities, and also losing the right to pick most orders.
A person did a comparison at several levels of a Horse, Drake, and another companion that I can't remember. The drake never came out favorably.
The 3rd part Dragonrider is much better, if allowed. It looks overpowered, but is not in practice.
I would like to see this comparison if you can find it. I'm curious and can't crunch the numbers on my phone.
Lets see if I can figure out how to link. It starts about page 25 of the product discussion. In short, if you want to ride and fight on your mount the vulture is much better than the drake. Sad times.
Go to drake.
I can't help but feel that because they tacked "Dragon" onto the flavor, they suddenly became gunshy about it's power, and overcompensated, giving us a subpar animal companion, which is really shitty when compared to any other dragonkin creature.
When they could have just gone with an eidolon with set limb evos and a small selection of other evos (with a few unique ones).
A restricted eidolon seems like a fine trade off for all the tactician stuff and most order selection. It isn't like the cavalier could make it any worse than regular eidolons that have a mage buddy buffing them.
Too bad it probably would've been an Unchained Eidolon.
The key thing in building any archetype is to not make one so good that it becomes a mandated choice.
The only way to do this is to hit drake hard with the nerf bat. It's still the only cavalier that gets a flying mount without out of class shenannigans.
The answer for Paizo was to make this a class taken by people willing to set aside power and ability for long term gain.
The key thing in building any archetype is to not make one so good that it becomes a mandated choice.
The only way to do this is to hit drake hard with the nerf bat. It's still the only cavalier that gets a flying mount without out of class shenannigans.
The answer for Paizo was to make this a class taken by people willing to set aside power and ability for long term gain.
First it isn't just "equal" to a normal cavalier or paladin, but actively worse. Given a weaker mount and then also required to give up significant class features.
Ah yes the "shenannigans" or taking the beast rider archetype. Oh wait that's the same level of "shenannigans" as taking the drake rider archetype, oh no. Alternatively maybe a cavalier the mounted specialist of the game shouldn't be worse at mounted combat than a druid or alchemist archetype by virtue of having a worse mount selection.
The answer was to make something mechanically unviable because the designers thought it sounded cool. Same "sounds cool" tax that two weapon fighters pay.
Oh you came here expecting to play a cool dragon rider? You thought Dragonlance/Pern/Fire Emblem/Warhammer was cool and want to imitate their mounted combat that in a character? Too bad the class literally tells you that you're wrong for wanting tom have fun that way.
It's REALLY telling that the adventure path entry that involved drake riders published around the same time did not use the drake rider archetype and in fact handwaved away everything that the actual archetype used to nerf your mount. Hmm my paladin's drake is required to be lawful neutral creating some personality conflicts, but hey why is the NPC's drake allowed to be lawful good like him and actually work as a team? My drake "adamantly refuse to wear barding, armor, or clothing items of any kind", but the NPC's drake companions are decked out in armor. The celestial drakes were just objectively stronger, but for some reason PCs aren't allowed the same absolute power as NPCs in what is essentially a speedbumb encounter. Not like mechanics for a singularly powerful boss encounter, but just some normal paladins opposing the evil PCs in Hell's Vengeance. No PCs you are not allowed to be as cool as these NPCs you likely died in two rounds to an evil party member.
Guys, it's a flying mount that breathes fire and can't take a hit. You can argue about it but that what they gave us. Personally I like it, it's kind of a fun idea from a story perspective: fearsome knight who must carefully train his mount from egg to elder as both of you grow in power.
To get it to be a flying mount at ALL you need to spend four of it's five drake powers, meaning it's fire breath is actually a once-per-day 10 foot "Glob" of fire that only deals 4d6.
I will argue that if you're going to use the Drake Companion in any capacity, it would be better served to try and make it a glass cannon on the ground, and not a mount at all.
|
To get it to be a flying mount at ALL you need to spend four of it's five drake powers
The Paladin archetype grants Mount by default and air drakes get Glide... thus 2 to 4 drake powers are needed for a flying mount.
That said, as with the other threads on this subject, I think people are seriously underestimating the benefits of drakes being sapient and speaking. Not to mention having UMD as a class skill.
They may not match an AC on 'combat stats' until higher level, but they are capable of vastly greater flexibility.
That argument only slightly holds water for a cavalier.
A drake's intelligence is 4 and a paladin's non-drake mount has an intelligence of 6. The drake is not smarter than a paladin's war horse.
All the more argument for the OD&D classic paladin mount, the giant ape whose respect has been earned through a wrestling contest.
|
|
A drake's intelligence is 4 and a paladin's non-drake mount has an intelligence of 6. The drake is not smarter than a paladin's war horse.
The paladin warhorse may have a higher Int score, but it still can't speak or reason. That is, the horse can only perform the tricks it knows while the drake can do anything you can talk it in to. They have completely different kinds of 'intelligence'.
This is flatly not true. The blog post you keep referencing is superseded by the later published, Ultimate Campaign. It straight up says that animals with int 3 or higher can if taught learn language as sentences and words with proper meaning outside of pre-programmed instructions.
Increasing an animal's Intelligence to 3 or higher means it issmart enough to understand a language. However, unless an awaken spell is used, the animal doesn't automatically and instantly learn a language, any more than a human child does. The animal must be taught a language, usually over the course of months, giving it the understanding of the meaning of words and sentences beyond its trained responses to commands like "attack" and "heel."
Even if the animal is taught to understand a language, it probably lacks the anatomy to actually speak (unless awaken is used). For example, dogs, elephants, and even gorillas lack the proper physiology to speak humanoid languages, though they can use their limited "vocabulary" of sounds to articulate concepts, especially if working with a person who learns what the sounds mean.
An intelligent animal is smart enough to use tools, but might lack the ability to manipulate them. A crow could be able to use simple lockpicks, but a dog can't. Even if the animal is physically capable of using a tool, it might still prefer its own natural body to manufactured items, especially when it comes to weapons. An intelligent gorilla could hold or wield a sword, but its inclination is to make slam attacks. No amount of training (including weapon proficiency feats) is going to make it fully comfortable attacking in any other way.
Even if an animal's Intelligence increases to 3 or higher, you must still use the Handle Animal skill to direct the animal, as it is a smart animal rather than a low-intelligence person (using a waken is an exception an awakened an i m a l takes orders like a person). The GM should take the animal's Intelligence into account when determining its response to commands or its behavior when it doesn't have specific instructions. For example, an intelligent wolf companion can pick the weakest looking target if directed to do so, a n d that same wolf trapped in a burning building might push open a door or window without being told.
So animal companions aren't allowed to use weapons and need handle animal. Drakes refuse to use weapons or armor and need diplomacy. Small apples. Though this becomes even less relevant because by the time a drake can be ridden a paladin's mount has ceased to be an animal. It is a magical beast and an such argument over animals loses meaning.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is flatly not true. The blog post you keep referencing is superseded by the later published, Ultimate Campaign.
You're going to need to be more specific, because I'm not seeing anything which contradicts the blog post or what I wrote above.
It straight up says that animals with int 3 or higher can if taught learn language as sentences and words with proper meaning outside of pre-programmed instructions.
It says they could potentially learn to understand (not speak, which is what I said that you are supposedly 'contradicting') a language after months of training... just like the blog. All Drakes can speak.
It also indicates that they are still limited to pre-programmed and simple tricks;
"Even if an animal's Intelligence increases to 3 or higher, you must still use the Handle Animal skill to direct the animal, as it is a smart animal rather than a low-intelligence person"
This is the very difference I am talking about. A drake IS a "low-intelligence person", not a "smart animal".
So animal companions aren't allowed to use weapons and need handle animal. Drakes refuse to use weapons or armor and need diplomacy. Small apples.
False equivalence.
Animal companions need Handle Animal checks to get them to do ANYTHING other than their few bonus tricks and can ONLY perform simple tricks.
Drake companions can be directed to do anything and ONLY need a Diplomacy or Intimidate check if it would require them to "take major risks to their lives" or wear themselves out.
They are vastly different both in the range of things they can be directed to do and how often a skill check is required.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have to concur with CB. While the paladin's horse might be more intelligent, the drake is more sentient, actually crossing that line in between animal and person.
The text in Ultimate Campaign makes decided comments about animals, but then specifies that Awakened animals are different. This is because Awaken grants the animal sentience, the ability to actually be a person and not just a beast.
A drake may be objectively dumb, but it's dumb in the way person might be (as opposed to an animal's way), and is still more able to use that intelligence than a horse, even a magical horse.
|
Haven't seen anyone mention this yet, but drake companions also have the added drawback of being irreplaceable. If your drake dies and you can't raise it for whatever reason, you just lose the class feature and any associated class features for good. To contrast a Cavalier can replace their mount after one week.
False.
At the GM’s discretion, a charge who lost his drake might be able to bond with a new drake after going on a quest to find another special drake and spending several years bonding with the new drake.
|
|
Haven't seen anyone mention this yet, but drake companions also have the added drawback of being irreplaceable. If your drake dies and you can't raise it for whatever reason, you just lose the class feature and any associated class features for good. To contrast a Cavalier can replace their mount after one week.False.
At the GM’s discretion, a charge who lost his drake might be able to bond with a new drake after going on a quest to find another special drake and spending several years bonding with the new drake.Not false at all. The sentence immediately before that says that under normal circumstances, drakes can never be replaced. If your GM really wants to, they can allow a replacement, but if the GM really wants to they can do anything at all.
Even so, 'several years' is significantly worse than one week for a mount or 24 hours for an animal companion.
Again, false, and misleading.
Drake companions are extreme oddities among drakes and irreplaceable to their charges, as it takes years to win a drake’s trust. As such, should a drake companion die, her charge doesn’t gain a replacement drake companion and must restore the companion from the dead. At the GM’s discretion, a charge who lost his drake might be able to bond with a new drake a er going on a quest to nd another special drake and spending several years bonding with the new drake.
It does still put the reliance on what a GM might allow and what might be possible for the character, and several years still generally writes the character out of many campaigns.
A week of the cavalier mourning, however, can be worked in with ordinary downtime, while other party members are doing things like researching spells or retraining.
The drake may not be strictly irreplaceable, but it's still an incredibly heavy loss compared to the rest of the party, and almost necessitates finding somebody who can cast Raise Animal Companion on Scaley.
I have to concur with CB. While the paladin's horse might be more intelligent, the drake is more sentient, actually crossing that line in between animal and person.
The text in Ultimate Campaign makes decided comments about animals, but then specifies that Awakened animals are different. This is because Awaken grants the animal sentience, the ability to actually be a person and not just a beast.
No, not particularly. I was avoiding joining this, since I thought someone would bring this up immediately. But no, apparently not.
Sentient Companions: a sentient companion (a creature that can understand language and has an Intelligence score of at least 3) is considered your ally and obeys your suggestions and orders to the best of its ability. It won't necessarily blindly follow a suicidal order, but it has your interests at heart and does what it can to keep you alive. Paladin bonded mounts, familiars, and cohorts fall into this category, and are usually player-controlled companions.
Paladin mounts are treated differently from regular animal companions. Thus why they are given 6 int. The mount outsmarts the drake.
|
|
I'm not sure what's misleading about that. I said under normal circumstances you can't replace your drake. The text says that a charge doesn't gain a replacement drake. I said 'several years' if your GM decides to let you replace it. The text says 'several years'.
You first said it was gone for good, which is false.
Then you said under "normal circumstances" it can never be replaced, which is also false as the text flat out says what you need to do to get it replaced. Just because it is under the GM's discretion, like everything else in their game, does not move it outside "normal circumstances".
I wonder how things would have worked out if there had been an "Extra Drake Power" feat.
I wonder how things would have worked out if there had been an "Extra Drake Power" feat.
Much better. Not ideal, since you'd be eating up a lot of your feats to bring the drake to even with other companions, but much better, since you'd have the option to do so.
Even if the drake just started at small size it would have probably been fine.
Drake has opposable digits.
Source? All the pics of drakes I can find show them without hands or digits of any kind. As far as I can tell, they have no graspers.
Drakes absolutely have opposable digits. They're just attached to their pet humans, who they make do all the work for them.
Meh.
As a hardcore PFS player this is unusable.
The thing works at level 13 in a campaign that ends at 11.
Unfortunate.
Then why say that the charge can't replace their companion at all?It does not say that. At all.
It's says the character doesn't automatically gain a new Drake with no action required on their part.
This is effectively not getting a new drake under most circumstances. As stated already, the fact that it takes YEARS to raise a new drake up to be able to fight implies that you just don't get a new drake within the perview of most campaigns. It is rare indeed to have a game have several years of downtime between active campaign events. New campaigns, sure, but active ones? You lose your class features when that drake dies. End of story. Retire that character or send them off to become a real druid/paladin/ranger.
I am utterly astonished they even put that in there. This is genuinely the worst written series of archetyped in Pathfinder I have ever seen. There are things like Prone Shooter and Monkey Lunge. And then there is this.
|
|
*shrugs*
I like the cavaet, as it makes people more careful with their Drake buddy, and keeps players from switching out their Drake constantly to get ones with different Drake Power loadouts, while also outright stating "Hey, GM, they can get another one if they want."
Or they could go get their's raised.
*shrugs*
I like the cavaet, as it makes people more careful with their Drake buddy, and keeps players from switching out their Drake constantly to get ones with different Drake Power loadouts, while also outright stating "Hey, GM, they can get another one if they want."
Or they could go get their's raised.
But they way they are written, keeping them alive is remarkably more difficult than it should be. They refuse barding, most magic items to boost their stats, and only wear one piece of magic jewelry. And though they have d12 Hit Dice, they get them slower than an animal companion, and their save progress for level is slower and weaker overall than the animal companion.
At least they get Con bonuses from their size increases, but that isn't really helping when those increases remarkably slowly and cannot be aided by magic items at all.
If I knew my drake wasn't replacable and was basically another PC, I would want to be able to at the very least put in as much as possible and have as many options as possible to make that drake safe. because they are my character it seems.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's like Paizo went out of their way to make sure you didn't want to use the drakes but, if you're crazy and took the option that made you a near liability, you'd regret it.