|
- You're staring only at the L1 roc vs. the L1 constrictor; the constrictor jumps in quality at level 4, the roc takes a lot longer before it makes the jump.I'm looking at level 1 and 2 in particular, not as worried about later on. The concern is that it starts off too strong, not that it winds up too strong. Was even considering limiting its natural attacks to 1 or 2 until level 6 or something.
- You're making a questionable comparison by picking the constrictor as comparison.You mentioned cats and constrictors as the next best thing, that's why I picked constrictor as a comparison.
I've given you a lot of reasons why I don't trust that guy's rankings. I think he's comparing apples (how hard is this creature to defeat for PCs) with oranges (how good is this creature as a companion).
I don't think he gives the constrictor enough credit for a good ability (grab). But you wanted to use his rankings as an argument. So you should be looking at other animals that also get ranked high, and then you see that the difference with the roc isn't that great.
You came here asking us if there's a balance concern about the roc. Now you're spending a lot of effort trying to convince us...I've already noted that the HP is an important factor -- because I'm doing max HP for players. And I didn't realize animal companions didn't get max HP for their first HD, meaning the roc, relatively speaking, has more HP (14 at level 1). That's a very real and very important difference and makes the roc significantly worse under default rules. That's more or less enough to convince me that by default it's not an issue.
This is the first time you bring up that you're first buffing it (by giving it more HP than it should have) and then complaining that it's too strong.
For that matter, if everyone gets max HP on first hit die, the roc would have 10HP (8 + 4.5 rounded down -2 for negative con on two dice), not 14.
the roc has trouble surviving even a single hit from any kind of plausible first level attacker.Goblins do 1d4 short sword or shortbow. That's a plausible enemy at level 1.
Kobolds do 1d6-1 with a spear or 1d3-1 with a sling. That's a plausible enemy at level 1.
Hell, even a Giant Centipede does 1d6-1 (plus poison).
Sure, there are monsters that do more per hit that you might fight at level 1, but if you're fighting a goblin or kobold tribe the roc can take a hit or three just fine.
Orcs are the same CR as goblins, but hit for 2d4+4 with a 18-20 crit range. And it takes 18 damage to stop them. It's all about how you pick your examples.
|
|
I have a player with a gnome druid with a Roc in one of my campaigns. There have been no balance issues. They are tough, but theres no reason to not let them have one./thread
Everyone see this? I guess there are no issues.
--------------
As a GM my players spend much of their game time (and by extension, much of the combat) in open areas while traveling. A level 1 character with flying is a perfectly legitimate topic for GM concern; they can trivialize landscape challenges, can have unparalleled scouting potential compared to non-flyers, and can move at lightning speed. All of those change the dynamics of a game in pretty heavy ways, especially for me because I emphasize those types of challenges to my low level players. Without even looking at the combat stats of the animal I would already have a reason to raise an eyebrow to the notion of a flying level 1 character.
This thread seems to be wholly focused on combat stats comparisons which I actually find surprising. The benefits of flying are better illustrated outside of the combat arena.
A raven or thrush familiar can also fly and scout, and talk back to the wizard to tell what they've seen. And they're much more likely not to be noticed by enemies as anything out of the ordinary (and get pretty good stealth).
I'm not denying that these things make wilderniss challenges go differently. They do. But if that's what the character wanted to be good at, is that a bad thing? Should everyone have a hard time with the same things, or should the GM look at the party and think "now what would be a tricky challenge for these guys?"
A roc might be a problem if played cleverly. For example, getting an ally to cast Mage Armor on it will make it very hard to hit.
On the other hand, as GM you're free to say it doesn't do exactly what the player wants in battle; by RAW they're just supposed to give it commands like 'attack' that it interprets on its own with its limited intelligence.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A roc might be a problem if played cleverly. For example, getting an ally to cast Mage Armor on it will make it very hard to hit.
On the other hand, as GM you're free to say it doesn't do exactly what the player wants in battle; by RAW they're just supposed to give it commands like 'attack' that it interprets on its own with its limited intelligence.
This is a game best left unplayed. Unless your goal is to frustrate your player until he leaves the table.
Personally, I let players control their own animal companions, and generally skip the hassle of a handle animal checks, but apparently that's the game as designed. Animals don't even know that flanking is useful unless you teach them it as a special trick.
Some players don't mind. It depends on whether you think of your companion as a friendly NPC or part of your character.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
4, on top of the above, as I previously mentioned the player is female...which makes me worried that people will think I'm favoring her for her gender. "Oh, the GM lets HER have cool stuff..."
So let them think that. Trying to justify anything "so I don't sound sexist" is just as bad, if not the same thing, as being sexist. This should not even be a thought. As for everything else, I think it has been touched upon enough. I can tell you, my hunter started with a Tyrannosaurus and some people thought it was ridiculous then. By 5th level or so no one will care about the animal.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The roc wouldn't be that great of a choice, if you hadn't tried adding a houserule to bake in weapon finesse. Because the roc can benefit greatly from that feat until level 7, where it then becomes mostly useless.
But allowing a Roc in general isn't a problem. It's allowed at most tables, including PFS. You just need to roll its hp back to the expected value.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So you have not one but two houserules - increased HP* and free Weapon Finesse** - that make animal companions stronger, particularly the roc.
Allowing a Paizo mechanic as written normally doesn't count as "letting someone have cool stuff." If you're worried that your house rules have unbalanced the roc and that this is bugging your other players, ask them privately. It's quite possible that you are just imagining a problem.
Keep in mind that since you've just reached level 2 the problem has already begun rebalancing itself.
*My table actually also plays with max HP for companions, but then we run high power games with stats ~35 point buy so that makes even a full HP pet less impressive by comparison.
**The small cat, another solid animal companion, also gets a big darn boost from free Finesse with its Dex 21.
I've already noted that the HP is an important factor -- because I'm doing max HP for players. And I didn't realize animal companions didn't get max HP for their first HD, meaning the roc, relatively speaking, has more HP (14 at level 1). That's a very real and very important difference and makes the roc significantly worse under default rules. That's more or less enough to convince me that by default it's not an issue.This is the first time you bring up that you're first buffing it (by giving it more HP than it should have) and then complaining that it's too strong.
For that matter, if everyone gets max HP on first hit die, the roc would have 10HP (8 + 4.5...
I believe he's saying ALL hp dice are maximized, not just their first. So the roc is getting 8+8-2 for 14.
So if you think that these rules are too strong change and say that the max HP and/or skipping feats is just for player characters, not for pets. Because yeah, those houserules are a BIG game changer and really favor the roc more than most other companions.
Warcat has significantly more HP and a free feat over the roc using normal rules. Using your rules, The higher HP bonus is quite mitigated by just having more HP overall. 14 compared to 20 isn't as big a difference as 7 to 13. And the free feat to the Roc so that it doesn't need to buy it's good accuracy while the warcat not needing it is no longer an advantage to the warcat.
But seriously, for future threads you start, mention any crazy houserules like you have here from the get go. Because yeah, you gave a crazy strong power boost to one of the best options, while the next best options aren't getting anything nearly as beneficial.
Unless you're giving these bonuses to monsters as well, I'd advise removing them from animal companions.
So let them think that. Trying to justify anything "so I don't sound sexist" is just as bad, if not the same thing, as being sexist. This should not even be a thought.
4, on top of the above, as I previously mentioned the player is female...which makes me worried that people will think I'm favoring her for her gender. "Oh, the GM lets HER have cool stuff..."
That's not good advice to give someone when it comes to to this situation. Advice should not be given on how you would like things to go down.
Bunch of strangers who don't know each other.
DM gives a female player a mechanical advantage.
and you telling him not to worry about potential judgement calls as if geeks are known for being overly eager to please girls.
On the actual Roc stick by the rules, if you are worried about a weak animal companion but the player wants a Roc then reflavor, call another flying animal companion a Roc. They get the Roc they want and no mechanical bonuses.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But if he didn't give the player a mechanical advantage, if he just allowed her one of the standard options, then taking it away on the grounds that she's female is not a good way of proving yourself a non-sexist.
But if he didn't give the player a mechanical advantage, if he just allowed her one of the standard options, then taking it away on the grounds that she's female is not a good way of proving yourself a non-sexist.
What is the standard option he is disallowing?
I thought the entire problem was that he thought the stats where bad.I hope he is comparing those stats to other flying animal companions.
What is the standard option he is disallowing?
He is contemplating retrospectively disallowing a roc companion. (Whether that is 'standard' or not is probably debatable.)
I thought the entire problem was that he thought the stats where bad.I hope he is comparing those stats to other flying animal companions.
He thinks the roc is a bit powerful compared to other animal companions.
What is the standard option he is disallowing?He is contemplating retrospectively disallowing a roc companion. (Whether that is 'standard' or not is probably debatable.)
I thought the entire problem was that he thought the stats where bad.I hope he is comparing those stats to other flying animal companions.He thinks the roc is a bit powerful compared to other animal companions.
I got it in my head when someone was bringing up the idea of eggs that he was going to give them an actual Roc at first level.
Seems like a decent animal companion. It will outshine some players but that's the nature of first level, an unchained summoner would be even stronger.
Many people do skip over lv1. Lv1 play is when you're not much better than a commoner and you should fear for your life still.
But animal companions are strong at lv1 because they are level 2 already. Also, grabs and trips have an easier time at lv1 since there's not so much stuff going on yet to up CMD.
|
|
I built a level 1 small cat companion for PFS with 19 AC, three attacks at +7 to hit (d4+1 bite, two d2+1 claw) and 14 HP (5.5 per HD + 3 from a trait).
I can tell you, my hunter started with a Tyrannosaurus and some people thought it was ridiculous then. By 5th level or so no one will care about the animal.The potential problem is getting to fifth level in this case. Hence why I was considering selected "temporary" nerfs to lower its initial power but have it back to "full power" by level 6 or whatever.
In the future, consider having animal companions start with 1 HD, increasing to 2 at level 2 and 3 at level 3. This makes it weaker for the first two levels, though with similar HP to a normal companion if you keep applying your max HP houserule - which I recommend.
You could minimize the impact of free Weapon Finesse by dropping the Dex of high-Dex companions by 2 points or so, possibly increasing other stats as compensation.
I would not suggest making these changes to an in-play companion unless it's causing significant disruptions. If the other players are feeling overshadowed try dropping them some nice character-specific loot.
Not one of these?
https://www.google.com/search?q=pet+rock&espv=2&biw=1521&bih=78 7&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjd1emZlsDRAhXD5CYKHV UZAX8Q_AUIBigB#imgrc=6b6hMZUYSdWVQM%3A
Many people have said and showed that they aren't too strong at lv1, assuming normal rules.
Some people have said that Animal companions are their strongest at lv1 and that they can be better than some party members. Look at big cat compared to a cleric that has 14 str and 14dex and 14 con. The cat can probably perform better. OR the bard with 10 str and 14 dex, yeah cat is better. BUT none of the animals are beating out a martial class at lv1 using normal rules and most classes can be built to be better than the AC at lv1 as well. Largely depends on party optimization level.
This is the pet classes main feature though at this level. Getting to start with a pretty good pet.
But really, the only reason is because Paizo said so. When making their game they decided to go this route for some reason. Unless you get Jason in here to tell you his reasoning, no one can tell you the reason why.
I built a level 1 small cat companion for PFS with 19 AC, three attacks at +7 to hit (d4+1 bite, two d2+1 claw) and 14 HP (5.5 per HD + 3 from a trait).
Can you show/explain how you did that? I'm not seeing how you can get all those numbers and stuff at lv1.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dex on a small cat is 21. Str 12, Con 13.
AC 19: 10 + 5 Dex + 1 natural + 1 size + 2 leather*
Attack +7 = +1 BAB + 1 size +5 Dex (weapon finesse as the feat)
HP 14 = 2*(4.5 + 1 con) + 3 trait (Blackthorn Rancher, which I actually took to get Handle Animal for a Sacred Huntmaster Inquisitor)
*It's my understanding that the lack of ACP means the cat can wear leather barding even without Light Amour Proficiency (which is going to be my next feat with an upgrade to chain barding). If not AC is 17, which is still a point higher than the Inquisitor running around with the cat.
Ah, leather armor. And I didn't know about that trait. It's kinda neat.
Also keep in mind that a creature can't normally fly while carrying any more than a light load.