Hi all! I threw together a class, roughly based off of ranger, that is based on befriending in-game creatures and then using them as companions. I added a few things that I thought were thematic, like charming, commanding, and dominating animals as you level.
I am afraid its too strong. And I am sure there is lots of issues with using CR = class level companions. I think its a little bloated early and little sparse later but I'm not sure honestly.
I am looking for critique on what I have made, suggestions for additions or removals, and anything else you care to add or postulate.
Oh, and I need a better name!
Thank you in advance!
You definitely want to change the name, because there is a ranger archetype Beastmaster already, and its schtick is also having multiple animal companions. The hunter archetype Packmaster is similar. Beast Speaker, maybe? Beast Charmer?
Expert Handler: getting to take 20 any time one could normally take 10 is quite powerful. Maybe limit it to a number of daily uses equal to your level?
Charm Animal: No need to compare to charm person and mass charm person; the spells charm animal and mass charm animal exist.
The name and leading fluff of Predator's Pact imply that it will only work with predators. If so, you should state that explicitly; if not, you should probably change the name & fluff.
I'm not sure why it's appropriate to Intimidate a creature into becoming your companion. And why is using Handle Animal not an option? (With the take-20 ability disallowed for this usage, of course.)
"The pact creature is treated as an animal companion, but can think and act for itself without command due to its wild nature." Just what does this mean? Animal companions are no stupider or less able to act than non-companion animals. Are pact creatures smarter than normal animals? If so, you should explicitly raise their Int.
As for the core crunch of the class, I don't know if it'll be balanced but it's not obviously unbalanced (IMO), so it should be a worthwhile experiment.
I agree with Wuzzy Fuzzy that Expert Handler is way too strong of an ability to hand out at 1st level. Making it limited use or granting it at 11th level would be more appropriate.
Predator's Pact is needlessly complicated and is vague on important details. The sentence ""The pact creature is treated as an animal companion, but can think and act for itself without command due to its wild nature" doesn't make any sense as animal companions are already independently thinking creatures, which is why they have a set of rules that govern their behavior. i'm guessing you're trying to go for some kind of class feature that gives you a rotating animal companion or something? It needs rewritten from scratch and could be simplified by having it work like summon nature's ally with an extended duration.
Overall, the class isn't very interesting. It's mostly just a grab bag of features taken from other classes. Predator's Pact is the only major mechanic and it needs totally rewritten.
Phew, I thought no one was going to reply!
@Fuzzy-Wuzzy: Yup, that's why I asked for a new name! I hit a creative block on that one.
I didn't realize Handle Animal was an impactful enough skill to make Expert Handler so strong. I figured if this class's whole shtick was befriending and taming animals, they should be the best at it. I will think of ways to accomplish this differently though.
Charm Animal, how did I miss that? I sware I thought I searched for it. Nice catch, thank you.
Good point for Predator's Pact. I will rename and fluff. Intimidate is made to allow for more options (such as an evil character). Have you seen How to Train Your Dragon II? The main villain intimidates the dragons into serving him, and in general the wild tends to be "ruled" by the fiercest creatures so I figured it fit rather well thematically. I thought about adding Handle Animal to the choice of skill checks, but I decided Handle Animal seems to be how well you train and command the animal, rather than persuading it to fight as your companion. Mechanically, I didn't want to pile so much focus onto a single skill. I might still be persuaded to change my mind here though.
Maybe I am misinformed on how animal companions work normally, but don't you have to use Handle Animal to give them an order? What do they do if you do not give them a command? What I meant by "can think and act without command" is it will attack or retreat of its own accord if not expressly told otherwise. If animal companions can do this already, then I will remove that line. Either way, I should probably reword it.
Thank you for the feedback!
@Cyrad: You are right, it still needs some fleshing out. That's why I am here! Can you be more specific on what is needlessly complicated and what is vague?
As I replied to Fuzzy-Wuzzy, that line is apparently written poorly (and might come from my lack of knowledge) but was meant to convey that a pact creature will attack or retreat of its own volition rather than having to be told to do so (to show that this is still a wild creature, not one raised from birth or domesticated).
Rewriting from scratch is an option, but I don't know which flaws you think require rewriting so I'm not sure how much better it would be. I was thinking of being able to change companions in a much more flexible way than, say, a druid. But I wasn't going to make a class feature that is quite pokemon level, carrying around multiple companions to change on the fly. I add the ability to summon one companion later, and that's basically the extent of it.
You are right though, it is not overly "interesting" but it is something I have wanted to play for a long time. It is heavily based off of ranger for the sake of balancing, so maybe I should just make it a ranger archetype rather than a new class.
Thank you for the feedback!
As I replied to Fuzzy-Wuzzy, that line is apparently written poorly (and might come from my lack of knowledge) but was meant to convey that a pact creature will attack or retreat of its own volition rather than having to be told to do so (to show that this is still a wild creature, not one raised from birth or domesticated).
This is already true for animals and animal companions. An animal will always respond to a threat unless you teach them a trick and command them to do otherwise.
Maybe I am misinformed on how animal companions work normally, but don't you have to use Handle Animal to give them an order? What do they do if you do not give them a command? What I meant by "can think and act without command" is it will attack or retreat of its own accord if not expressly told otherwise. If animal companions can do this already, then I will remove that line. Either way, I should probably reword it.
You do need to use Handle Animal if you want to give them an order, but they don't always require orders. Also, with animal companions using Handle Animal is usually a free action, so it's not much of a burden:
Link (Ex): A druid can handle her animal companion as a free action, or push it as a move action, even if she doesn't have any ranks in the Handle Animal skill. The druid gains a +4 circumstance bonus on all wild empathy checks and Handle Animal checks made regarding an animal companion.
Anyway, left to its own devices an animal companion will do whatever a normal animal of its kind (usually this means "nondomesticated") would do. If combat is happening, a predator will attack an enemy, while an herbivore will probably settle for defending its master. OTOH, if the beastie knows the Defend trick then:
The animal defends you (or is ready to defend you if no threat is present), even without any command being given. Alternatively, you can command the animal to defend another specific character.
regardless of what it is.
Note that an animal attacking an enemy because it has no orders will not make clever tactical decisions about which enemy to attack. Nor will it make sure to be outside the line of the lightning bolt your wizard is about to cast at the main foe. For that kind of thing you need to direct it with Handle Animal.
You may want to look over the section in Ultimate Campaign on "companions" (by which they mean anything and anyone that hangs out with you, not just A/Cs). In particular there's stuff about the impact of the GM's rules about who gets to control the companion on things like this.
@Cyrad: Thanks!
@Fuzzy-Wuzzy: Thank you, this is very informative. I will remove that section then. I will take a look, thank you for the recommendation.
@Lunaramblings: As far as I know, the Handle Animal skill can't be used to tame or control wild animals, right? As far as Diplomacy vs Intimidate, I really like the distinction. I need to tweak and streamline how it works still for sure, but I think I will keep this.
It would probably be much simpler if I changed everything to Handle Animal, but it feels wrong to pile so much mechanically onto a single skill.
Wild Empathy allows you to use Diplomacy on creatures to sooth them. For this class, this would rarely be used in combat and is more a social or random exploration mechanic. The Charm/Command/Dominate Animals abilities are limited in there uses, and are primarily built for combat. I definitely see the redundancy, but I think its a healthy and thematic redundancy. This class's whole idea is to be the best at handling animals.
As for "having a TON of animals" I'm not sure I follow. The class can usually only have one companion with them, and then could charm/command/dominate creatures they came across in combat. But a druid could do nearly the same thing, so I don't think its unreasonable. Can you elaborate?
I have looked at the archetypes and at third party classes, but I haven't looked at the Beast Heart Adept. I will check it out, thank you!
I am sure you have seen the movie Beast master. It is one of my favorites.
Instead of the Rangers favored enemies.
You can have a selection of favored beasts. You choose one group, and get bonuses to handle animal, intimidate etc. to all animals that fall into that category.
I would include the ability to have a bond animal ability a number of times per day that allowed you to see thru its eyes and control it directly.
Also with the bonded animals let them have minutes per day like the paladin weapon to gain enhancement bonuses to its attacks and smite natures enemy or natures rebuke, where you or the animal witnessed a major injustice to animals or their area in which they live.
Instead of just sharing team work feats, you could make it possible to loose one trick group and learn a new one in its place a number of times per day.
Also with the favored animal, those bonuses also apply as a flanking bonus when you are working together with that animal in combat.
I am sure you have seen the movie Beast master. It is one of my favorites.
Instead of the Rangers favored enemies.
You can have a selection of favored beasts. You choose one group, and get bonuses to handle animal, intimidate etc. to all animals that fall into that category.
I would include the ability to have a bond animal ability a number of times per day that allowed you to see thru its eyes and control it directly.
Also with the bonded animals let them have minutes per day like the paladin weapon to gain enhancement bonuses to its attacks and smite natures enemy or natures rebuke, where you or the animal witnessed a major injustice to animals or their area in which they live.
Instead of just sharing team work feats, you could make it possible to loose one trick group and learn a new one in its place a number of times per day.
The 1982 one?!
I considered doing the favored enemy thing, just as you say. I might work it in still, especially if I make this into a ranger archetype instead.
I thought about that too. You get the empathic link for your companions, but I think I will add a warg-like ability too. Mechanically, maybe I will make it so that the greater empathic link works on dominated creatures, so you can see through their eyes and control them.
That's a very flavorful idea, I will see if I can make it fit.
I haven't done anything with tricks or teamwork feats on this class yet, but I considered it. I didn't want to infringe into Hunter territory anymore than I already have though. Hmmm.
maybe add class level to handle animal checks instead of 2 times cha
There you go. That is a good idea too.
Maybe give them sense animal as well. A bonus on perception checks to see animals being stealthy.
The obvious class name is Beast Tamer, right? It's the title of this thread and all.
The problem I see is that if the only animals/magical beasts you meet for an extended period of time are tame & owned, or unattractive to tame as far as you're concerned (maybe not in the GMs less informed opinion) then you're a ranger without bonus feats or favored enemy or spells; this is not good. Maybe they should have some ability to find weak animals (half level as CR?) in downtime or at level up, analagous to a wizards ability to get a couple of spells each level even if they find no scrolls, enemy spellbooks or wizards to trade spells with that level.
Nice looking doc. Did you copy some code from the SRD site?
You simply have too much at 1st level.
SKILL LIST
Diplomacy looks out of place here.
EXPERT HANDLER
You grant twice Cha mod. Using twice an ability modifier is a thing I haven’t seen before in the game. The problem with it is that if the character has a Cha of 11 or worse, then the class feature does absolutely nothing. I don’t think that always taking 10 should be a 1st level feature. It should be earned. Even the class with the very best animal companion (hunter) never gains this ability. Being able to take 20 at 11th level just makes it worse. Congrats. Have an untapped +10.
If you want the character to be the best animal handler give the class a +1/2 level bonus (minimum 1). The bonus gets better with time. Or, give him a non-scaling, flat bonus like +2 or something. Maybe tack on a secondary thingy. The druid’s wild sense grants a bonus on two skills. The rogue’s trapfinding ability grants a skill bonus but also the ability to disarm magical traps.
TRACK
Not a bad ability, but not strictly necessary for a tamer of animals. Just how many skill-based class features do you need at 1st level?
WILD EMPATHY
It’s fitting, and if you give the class a reason to use Cha beyond this class feature and the Handle Animal skill, then he really will be the best at it.
CHARM ANIMAL
I don’t like it. He’s already got Handle Animal and Wild Empathy. A character so dedicated to skill-based animal interactions doesn’t need to develop magical abilities. It’s just too much thrown on the heap. If this class had a collections of talents like the rogue, alchemist, barbarian, etc. then that would be a good place to put this ability. It should be an option. Also I think being able to use this a number of times per day equal to Cha mod is bad design. At 1st level it could be zero times per day or 4 times per day.
BEAST’S PACT
I think I understand what you are trying to do here, but you are also trying to reinvent the wheel. Animal Companion is already a well established ability used by multiple classes. Just use that instead. This new thing is unnecessarily complicated. There is already a prestige class or archetype (I forget) that eventually grants multiple animal companions. I don’t suggest copying it, but maybe look at it and find some inspiration. Something else fun might be to allow the character to also gain a familiar, except you remove all of the magical abilities and Int increases. Somewhere after 1st level. A tiny animal that could be useful from time to time. I do like the idea of swapping out the current animal companion. Other classes would have to dismiss the companion or wait till it dies.
FERAL SPEECH / COMMAND ANIMALS / DOMINATE ANIMALS
Again, why bother being so good at animal skills if the character can simply use spells instead? How may times per day do you expect the character to have encounters that involve animals?
ANIMAL AGILITY / ANIMAL INSTINCT
I appreciate the skill aspect, but I feel like you might have run out of ideas and started tacking these on.
As a general update, I decided to make this a ranger archetype, but also create a non-ranger based version of this class. The stand-alone class is going to have a pretty nice lift of heavy class features gained through Talents, to be taken at certain levels. Each talent is going to be at least as strong as a feat, if not stronger, and some are meant to be taken at each talent level to basically add a whole new core mechanic to the class (like wildshaping into creatures you have made a pact with). I will have the updates up once I finish finals.
@ Lady-J: You make a good point, as does @Rogar Stonebrow. I changed it to class levels added to the check for Expert Handler.
@Rogar Stonebrow: I like the sense animals. Maybe even as a supernatural ability similar to a detect magic. I'm sure there is a spell for that. I think I might add this to the talent list, rather than the core class.
@avr: Beast Tamer doesn't quite fit the fluff I am going for. The class doesn't exactly "tame" the creatures, but earns their respect through leadership or fear. You make a good point about not finding creatures.. I am designing this specifically for a wild campaign so I didn't even think of that. I will think on that. At level up, gain a new creature from the animal companion list maybe? Half the fun of this class is tracking down and recruiting the beasts, I think, so I am wary of lessening that.
@Ciaran Barnes: Thanks for the thorough response! And thank you, I value presentation lol. I wasn't coding in something like LaTeX, just formatted it in Word and then Google Docs.
SKILLS: But Diplomacy is one of two main skills here. The class uses Diplomacy or Intimidate to interact with creatures, and then handle animal to give them commands once they are a companion.
EXPERT HANDLER: You make some good points, as did others, and I changed the bonus. I will leave taking ten for now. The bonus is too low (in most cases) to auto-success checks at level one so I don't think it is game-breaking. However, to your other point, this class is heavily based on Charisma, so I would expect someone taking it to have at least a +1 modifier, but hopeful +2 or +3.
TRACK: I agree with you, and my newest incarnation has replaced it with an ability called Beast Lore, which will given the class a bonus on certain skill checks (namely knowledge and survival) to identify, find rumors about, and track beasts.
CHARM ANIMAL: I have honestly begun to feel similar. The main reason I added this in the first place was to give the class an in-combat ability against beasts. This is even more true of Command and Dominate. Also, as mentioned above, this class is expected to have a Cha mod. It would be like a monk with Wis or a paladin with Cha. They would be severely hindering themselves by not having a Cha bonus. That said, I will think on other ways to redesign the usages.
BEAST'S PACT: I think maybe I didn't describe this well. @Lady-J has the right of it, this isn't trying to reinvent Animal Companions or allow more than one companion, specifically. They work just like animal companions once recruited, and you can only have one with you. But the point is to go and tame them in the first place, and it allows you to have all the awesome monstrous companions you could want. Any beast you come across can potentially be added to the team; this alone is the entire reason for making the class.
I definitely need to rewrite it though, as it seems to confuse people.
FERAL SPEECH: I think Feral Speech will stay, but the level it is awarded might change. This class's point is to understand animals more than they probably understand anything else, so I think being able to speak to them is very thematic.
COMMAND/DOMINATE: As with Charm, this was meant for in combat use. In low-beast campaigns, this would probably just be a poor class to play. But in wilderness campaign or with a DM that likes monsters (like myself) this becomes really strong. That is the dilemma I am facing. Its really good when creatures are around, and its useless when they are not.
What if I made the abilities only usable with a skill check? Maybe a contested roll, the beastmaster's diplomacy/intimidate vs the creatures Will save? This a bit unconventional, but it seems interesting.
Or perhaps I can expand these Charm/Command/Dominate spells out to other targets? Start with animals, add magical beasts, add aberrations, add people, add dragons? Ultimately working like a Charm/Dominate Monster spell that can target anything? I considered this but it shifts the theme of the class, which I am not a fan of.
@Lady-J: exactly! If you go tame a Tarrasque, you should be able to walk around with your colossal magical beast! The way I intended it was they use the stats you capture them at, and then gain the progression of an animal companion from there. If they have an advanced template or version later (such as a dire form) they can upgrade at the appropriate level.
Shouldn’t he use Handle Animal or Wild Empathy instead of Diplomacy? I would favor Wild Empathy, because then the strength of the class feature will be based on the character’s class level, not how much or how little his bonus is based skill points he has allotted or how many bonuses he has accrued through magic and feats.
Personally, i think it would be too powerful to keep their actual size and stats and to let them progress like a cimpanion. Which is why I proposed what I did. It makes it obvious that you are a conduit empowering the animal, but at the end of the day they are just animals.
Also having access to magical beasts as well is too powerful, and can easily wreck encounters because of the diverse abilities they have.
Also, being limited to only one animal at a time doesn't seem very beast mastery.
I also think a beastmaster is so entune with animals and their behaviors always have an idea when something is not right in their natural surroundings. So while outside in the wilderness, they always get to act in a suprise round.
Well Wild Empathy says it functions as a Diplomacy check. So, making it an actual Diplomacy (or Intimidate) check allows the player to scale it other ways, depending on how much they choose to focus on it (such as through ranks, traits and feats). I want them to be able to raise that check if they want to spend resources to do so. Bare minimum, if they put one rank in, they get a +4 +Cha bonus to it, and they can scale from there.
Maybe I should drop Wild Empathy though, and replace it with something like "You can use Diplomacy and Intimidate on animals and magical beasts". Actually, I like that. It gives them more options than a standard Wild Empathy, making them better at it than, say, a druid. This also makes the Charm animal, even more redundant.
In my newest version, I have moved Charm animal to a talents list, and I will change to this new version of Wild Empathy. I need a name, something similar maybe but not Wild Empathy, to avoid confusion. Suggestions?
being pretty much the only funksion of the class i see no issue with allowing them to have full size, nor do i see an issue with allowing magical beasts and it wouldn't make sense for them to lose size simply because they were tamed plus i think he only meant they act like animal companions ie need to be taught tricks and what not to function not actually gaining the stats of an animal companionPersonally, i think it would be too powerful to keep their actual size and stats and to let them progress like a cimpanion. Which is why I proposed what I did. It makes it obvious that you are a conduit empowering the animal, but at the end of the day they are just animals.
Also having access to magical beasts as well is too powerful, and can easily wreck encounters because of the diverse abilities they have.
Also, being limited to only one animal at a time doesn't seem very beast mastery.
I also think a beastmaster is so entune with animals and their behaviors always have an idea when something is not right in their natural surroundings. So while outside in the wilderness, they always get to act in a suprise round.
I like having access to full sized creatures my self. It always struck me as odd when I first started pathfinder and the DM said my elephant couldnt be huge or gargantuan.
Thematically, beast tamer having access to centaurs and other sentient creatures and powering them up. Does not make sense. Maybe if the only magical beast that could be tamed had a max of 3 intelligence it would be ok.
I want them to keep their size and stats, that is why the class doesn't get much else. The class IS having these creatures and fighting alongside them. It might very well prove to be too strong, but I testing will see. In that case, I will just reduce the CR or I will limit abilities that the creatures have.
I have some uncertainty with recruiting higher intelligence creatures myself, but I have taken it into account. The DC raises for every point of intelligence (making something like a dragon virtually impossible to recruit). But, it is an option. Furthermore, that is why I emphasize that this isn't a taming class (despite the name of the post). It makes a pact with the creature, a mutual agreement. It's less a master/servant relationship and more a fellowship.
And technically, centaurs are monstrous humanoids, so you can't tame them.
I might also have to make a few "you cannot tame this" exceptions.
Creatures with Int > 2 will have a meaningful alignment. The DC should go up significantly for each axis (good/evil, law/chaos) on which the critter and ranger are opposed---or else it should just be impossible to make a pact with anything with an opposed alignment.
Creatures with Int > 2 will have a meaningful alignment. The DC should go up significantly for each axis (good/evil, law/chaos) on which the critter and ranger are opposed---or else it should just be impossible to make a pact with anything with an opposed alignment.
Great point, hadn't thought of that. I will add this to the DC modifiers section. Nice catch, thank you!
I like the concept of being one with beasts. I also like the concept of having multiple Companions. However, i agree with others, this feels more like a Ranger archetype. I mean, We already got a class more focused around animal companions, the hunter.
If it were an archetype I think it'd be better off based on hunter than ranger. Animal focus seems too apropos to pass up. Trading in the 6/9 spellcasting for pact creatures feels about right.
If it were an archetype I think it'd be better off based on hunter than ranger. Animal focus seems too apropos to pass up. Trading in the 6/9 spellcasting for pact creatures feels about right.
I came to the same conclusion. I am working on a standalone class now that will feel more like its own creation, and then a hunter archetype.
I will get them posted sometime next week. I might start a new thread then.
i think it should be its own class that way you can apply archetypes to it
I like it as a new class, personally, but I think making it both ways is important. The standalone class is probably going to be little strong, and stray a little more from core Pathfinder. This makes a lot of GMs wary. The archetype version, however, will be very similar to Hunter and therefore might be easier for most GMs to allow.