Animal companion Ranger/ Turn undead Paladin. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Animal companion Ranger/ Turn undead Paladin. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
not Yoda
09-15-05, 12:55 PM Should the ranger's animal companion Mod's be as druid of three levels lower?
Such as with turn undead for Paladins.

Would that make them too powerful?

As it is now the ranger's companion seems unsuitable for higher level play. Almost fragile.

In the past when I played rangers I never wanted an animal companion. How useful are they?
caeruleus
09-15-05, 01:00 PM Should the ranger's animal companion Mod's be as druid of three levels lower?

I've recently made this suggestion in another thread (the thread wasn't on this topic, but the issue came up). I think it's a good idea. By keeping it three levels lower, it's not as powerful as the animal companion of an equal level druid, but it keeps pace with the challenges higher level characters face.
Mercurius
09-15-05, 01:05 PM Yeah, but I'm not sure the ranger's animal companion is specifically supposed to be a combatant so much as a scout, mount, etc. It would be nice if they were a 3-levels below sort of thing in some instances, though I suppose there's always the feat in Complete Adventurer to boost your companion if need be...
not Yoda
09-15-05, 04:38 PM Speaking of that feat maybe it should change your progression to the level-3.

As it stands now sixth level is the time to have that. Twelfth level is when you end up at level -3. Beyond that it's on the wane. If it changed your progression it would not be as useful early like it is now but at later levels it would be much better.
DarknessEternal
09-15-05, 05:33 PM Well, there's a feat that makes it half-level +3, at least. Just take that if you want a stronger animal. That or levels of Beastmaster.
Pliskit
09-15-05, 09:17 PM Yeah, but I'm not sure the ranger's animal companion is specifically supposed to be a combatant so much as a scout, mount, etc. It would be nice if they were a 3-levels below sort of thing in some instances, though I suppose there's always the feat in Complete Adventurer to boost your companion if need be...

Got to back that one up. Most rangers I played or played with had their animal as a tracking device or as a mount. Or sometimes just for the roleplaying possibilities.
Other then that, rangers are boring and will still be if their animal companions were druid-3 in stead of 1/2 druid.
not Yoda
09-16-05, 11:30 AM As a ranger you are the tracking device and mounts can be trained to do their thing. Eg warhorses can learn tricks too.

Maybe that's why they were boring Pliskit.
Pliskit
09-16-05, 11:59 AM Actually that was exactly what I was saying hehe. My point is that there´s three basic functions you can have an animal companion for as a ranger:
1) fighter
2) tracker
3) mount

at 1: The rangers animal companion will not be good enough to fight, whether you have it at 1/2 druid lvl or at druid-3, it will just nog be up to par with the monsters you encounter.
at 2: A 1hd dog has scent and the track-feat, so you don´t really need to have a higher lvl animal for that.
at 3: A horse is a 1st lvl animal companion, so unless you insist on riding a megaraptor you don´t need extra progression there as well.

Conclusion: there´s no need at all to buff the rangers animal companion: it will never be so good as to seriously add something, but flavorwise it makes up for the ranger being a boring class, if you can roleplay with it. And for good roleplaying you don´t need any stats.
not Yoda
09-16-05, 12:10 PM True, but, my goal fror an animal companion is a combat assistant and to be honest it will probably have a better ac than me. Riding dog was my choice it could probably take a wolf on. If memory serves it has an ac of 16 +2 dex +4 natural with chain shirt type barding it sports a 20. When I have barkskin (heh) it will be pretty much a tank. :fight!:
Pliskit
09-16-05, 01:28 PM AC is not so much of a problem: however high you buff it, your dog needs only to be hit once and its 13hp are all gone. So not much of a tank there.

And it won´t do to much damage either, considering it´s bab is +1, and total attack bonuses add up to a mindboggling +3. Yes it will probably be able to hit a wolf, but you don´t really need it for that because at your level, you should be able to fart at a wolf and get it killed :D

It´s really okay to have a riding dog with you to carry stuff for you, hunt rabits with you in the forest, cuddle up to in front of a fireplace if you want to, but it´s just not going to be able to defend your back.
not Yoda
09-16-05, 01:37 PM Useful for flank though and aid another. :) I may just get cleaved. :( Thats why animal companion could stand to be just a little better. Plus it's a pain in the arse to spend months training the little bugger just to see him get whacked. :(
Pliskit
09-16-05, 06:01 PM Not to mention the emotional damage to your character when his favorite pet turns into pulp in front of his very eyes :bigeyes:
not Yoda
09-16-05, 08:39 PM Macabre. :ghosted: :weep:

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
not Yoda 09-15-05, 12:55 PM	Should the ranger's animal companion Mod's be as druid of three levels lower? Such as with turn undead for Paladins. Would that make them too powerful? As it is now the ranger's companion seems unsuitable for higher level play. Almost fragile. In the past when I played rangers I never wanted an animal companion. How useful are they?
caeruleus 09-15-05, 01:00 PM	Should the ranger's animal companion Mod's be as druid of three levels lower? I've recently made this suggestion in another thread (the thread wasn't on this topic, but the issue came up). I think it's a good idea. By keeping it three levels lower, it's not as powerful as the animal companion of an equal level druid, but it keeps pace with the challenges higher level characters face.
Mercurius 09-15-05, 01:05 PM	Yeah, but I'm not sure the ranger's animal companion is specifically supposed to be a combatant so much as a scout, mount, etc. It would be nice if they were a 3-levels below sort of thing in some instances, though I suppose there's always the feat in Complete Adventurer to boost your companion if need be...
not Yoda 09-15-05, 04:38 PM	Speaking of that feat maybe it should change your progression to the level-3. As it stands now sixth level is the time to have that. Twelfth level is when you end up at level -3. Beyond that it's on the wane. If it changed your progression it would not be as useful early like it is now but at later levels it would be much better.
DarknessEternal 09-15-05, 05:33 PM	Well, there's a feat that makes it half-level +3, at least. Just take that if you want a stronger animal. That or levels of Beastmaster.
Pliskit 09-15-05, 09:17 PM	Yeah, but I'm not sure the ranger's animal companion is specifically supposed to be a combatant so much as a scout, mount, etc. It would be nice if they were a 3-levels below sort of thing in some instances, though I suppose there's always the feat in Complete Adventurer to boost your companion if need be... Got to back that one up. Most rangers I played or played with had their animal as a tracking device or as a mount. Or sometimes just for the roleplaying possibilities. Other then that, rangers are boring and will still be if their animal companions were druid-3 in stead of 1/2 druid.
not Yoda 09-16-05, 11:30 AM	As a ranger you are the tracking device and mounts can be trained to do their thing. Eg warhorses can learn tricks too. Maybe that's why they were boring Pliskit.
Pliskit 09-16-05, 11:59 AM	Actually that was exactly what I was saying hehe. My point is that there´s three basic functions you can have an animal companion for as a ranger: 1) fighter 2) tracker 3) mount at 1: The rangers animal companion will not be good enough to fight, whether you have it at 1/2 druid lvl or at druid-3, it will just nog be up to par with the monsters you encounter. at 2: A 1hd dog has scent and the track-feat, so you don´t really need to have a higher lvl animal for that. at 3: A horse is a 1st lvl animal companion, so unless you insist on riding a megaraptor you don´t need extra progression there as well. Conclusion: there´s no need at all to buff the rangers animal companion: it will never be so good as to seriously add something, but flavorwise it makes up for the ranger being a boring class, if you can roleplay with it. And for good roleplaying you don´t need any stats.
not Yoda 09-16-05, 12:10 PM	True, but, my goal fror an animal companion is a combat assistant and to be honest it will probably have a better ac than me. Riding dog was my choice it could probably take a wolf on. If memory serves it has an ac of 16 +2 dex +4 natural with chain shirt type barding it sports a 20. When I have barkskin (heh) it will be pretty much a tank. :fight!:
Pliskit 09-16-05, 01:28 PM	AC is not so much of a problem: however high you buff it, your dog needs only to be hit once and its 13hp are all gone. So not much of a tank there. And it won´t do to much damage either, considering it´s bab is +1, and total attack bonuses add up to a mindboggling +3. Yes it will probably be able to hit a wolf, but you don´t really need it for that because at your level, you should be able to fart at a wolf and get it killed :D It´s really okay to have a riding dog with you to carry stuff for you, hunt rabits with you in the forest, cuddle up to in front of a fireplace if you want to, but it´s just not going to be able to defend your back.
not Yoda 09-16-05, 01:37 PM	Useful for flank though and aid another. :) I may just get cleaved. :( Thats why animal companion could stand to be just a little better. Plus it's a pain in the arse to spend months training the little bugger just to see him get whacked. :(
Pliskit 09-16-05, 06:01 PM	Not to mention the emotional damage to your character when his favorite pet turns into pulp in front of his very eyes :bigeyes:
not Yoda 09-16-05, 08:39 PM	Macabre. :ghosted: :weep: