Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Jesuit 08-18-04, 03:41 PM	Having just seen the FAQ, I'm a little confused by the changes to Animal Companions. As of 3.5 a Druid or Ranger had animal companions which would advance in size by virtue of hit dice increasing by class level. Now all of a sudden they don't. This doesn't make any sense. Why can a normal Dire Badger in the wild grow to be size L if it has more than standard hit dice but that same animal if a companion to a Druid or Ranger is stuck at size M? Even weirder, if you awaken an animal companion it all of a sudden becomes a size category larger by virtue of hit dice? Since Companions automatically increase in their Str/Dex, BaB, Saves, Feats, Skill Points, Natural Armor, etc due to being an Animal Companion.. one can logically assume that the intent of Druids/Rangers getting progressive companions instead of static ones (by way of 3.0 Hit Dice/Level Companions), we can also assume that Companions are supposed to by slightly superior to a mundane version of the same animal. However, if you take a 9 Hit Dice Dire Badger Animal Companion and compare it to a 9 Hit Dire Badger non-companion the Companion is inferior due to its smaller size (which only in the FAQ became an issue). The Companions inherent increases in Str/Dex, Natural Armor, and BaB are trumped by the normal bonuses accrued from going to size L from size M. If this was an oversight on the part of WotC, thats one thing, but if it was an intentional nerf I would really like to know why. In the FAQ they didn't discuss the issue as being needed for game balance, so I think it was an oversight, but maybe they just thought that animal companions were too uber in comparison to regular animals. /boggle Please offer any information and or insight, as I am really curious about this issue.
Seeker95 08-18-04, 04:01 PM	So your animal companion doesn't get bigger. It still gets stronger, smarter, more versatile, and overall more powerful.
PaladinKD 08-18-04, 05:04 PM	It was always my understanding that larger versions of the standard animals in the monster manual were a different type of animal altogether. Thus an advanced Dire Badger didn't start life as a regular DB. It was always advanced. As in, "Don't go to the hidden vale, the Dire Badgers there are even scarier than around these parts." Using this logic, it seems fitting that your DB animal companion will get smarter, faster and stronger while not gaining in actual size categories.
Jesuit 08-19-04, 01:37 AM	Except that the animal getting faster, stronger, tougher(doesn't get smarter btw, just more skill points) doesn't match up with a raw size increase. The advance hit dice is irrelevant, since the only way for animals to get larger is by advancing in hit dice anyway. So, the point is, that this FAQ (not core) ruling only serves to make an animal companion weaker pound for pound than a mundane normal animal. As to the supposition that the advancement in hit dice only occurs in rare circumstances in the wild... well that would be all well and good if there was a concrete ruling and formula for it (then a Druid could simply take one of the "advanced" creatures for his companion). My only beef and confusion is WHY did they make this ruling. It makes no logical sense given the game mechanics, and they didn't make any actual explanation for the nerf. So I call BS. Input please.
Seeker95 08-19-04, 09:41 AM	Originally posted by Jesuit So I call BS. Input please. So, a halfling monk should get a size increase, because he is getting more hit dice, more attacks and moving faster. It's not BS. It's balance mechanics. An animal companion is something special. Special does not have to mean bigger. If you want a bigger animal companion, let your small one go, and trade up to a different animal.
PaladinKD 08-19-04, 10:48 AM	Originally posted by Jesuit Except that the animal getting faster, stronger, tougher(doesn't get smarter btw, just more skill points) doesn't match up with a raw size increase. Originally posted by Jesuit So I call BS. If an animal used to have a Move Silently skill of +4, and now it has a +14, I call that getting smarter. As in, now it is much more capable of sneaking up on that trespassing party of adventurers... Smarter enough for me. I don't think that one benefit has to match up with the other in regards to Faster, Stronger, Tougher VS. Bigger. I can see both sides of the argument and depending on the animal my opinion on size increase varies. Picture the wily old Tiger in the jungle. Throughout it's long life it has become an even more efficient killing machine. It's stronger, faster and tougher than in it's youth. "Smarter" because it can sneak more sneakily and Hide more... Hidely.:) It will never grow larger than it's adult size, no matter how much it eats. The old crocodile in the river nearby however, has been around for over a hundred years. It started as a wee lil tike but now measures forty three feet long. If it lives another hundred years It'll continue to grow. Old, wily tiger knows to stay far away from Old Yellow Toothed monster Croc. Notice I didn't call your ideas BS. I answered civilly and prefaced my response with 'It was always my understanding.' I thought that since you were asking a question on the forums you were looking for other peoples opinions. If not, you could always send in your own replies to your questions. That way you'd be sure to always agree with the posts.;) (Unless of course BS stands for Being Smart, in which case thank you.:D
Jesuit 08-19-04, 03:24 PM	Actually I was calling BS on the FAQ, for having no logical reason for changing the mechanic of animal companions. As to your example, I don't think it makes sense either, since I'm talking about the difference of the same animal only as pertaining to being an animal companion or not. "So, a halfling monk should get a size increase, because he is getting more hit dice, more attacks and moving faster." No, since a Halfling Monk doesn't have it's own table in the PHB giving it (as per 3.5) size increases. Remember, this is not a feature that I'm saying should be part of the companion. It already was, and was removed. "It's not BS. It's balance mechanics. An animal companion is something special. Special does not have to mean bigger. If you want a bigger animal companion, let your small one go, and trade up to a different animal." It's not balanced mechanics. The larger creature is stronger. Since the size of the larger creatures is DIRECTLY died to their Hit Dice, "balanced" would mean that as smaller creatures gained Hit Dice they would become larger. "Special" is obviously subjective here, since by being "special" the companion becomes inherently weaker to mundane animals. As for as trading out companions, there used to be (again, before the FAQ) a reason to keep old companions. Now there isn't, they removed a roleplaying element for no (as far as I can tell) valid reason. A Dire Badger advanced to Druid ECL 15 isn't tougher than a Dire Tiger not advanced at all. In fact, they are nearly identical in raw damage/Hit Points (excluding Pounce). As to the Intelligence issue, I only consider "smarter" in terms of a raw increase in Intelligence Score. I do so for game-related statistics such as skill points per hit die, and for how much benefit/detriment animals suffer from spells like Curse of the Brute or Touch of Idiocy. By definition, animal companions do not become smarter as they advance, and this is important because this means they gain the same benefit as a normal animal from the Awaken Spell (only more so because all of a sudden they can gain a size category). Since I think I must have worded my questions poorly, as they weren't answered in a matter which satisfies the level of miffed I am at the FAQ, I'll restate them. Is there a logical reason why a 9 Hit Dice regular animal would be inherently larger than a 9 Hit Dice Animal Companion? Is there any logical reason why a Druid would want to keep an earlier companion when they more advanced ones gain more base str/dex and size bonuses then the prior animals do based off Druid levels? I think the answer to both is no. Since 3.5 came out I really liked the idea of the Companions staying even with the power curve of the character, but without the size bonus(es) a Dire Badger simply can't measure up to a Dire Tiger (even at the additional -14 effective level for determining companion bonuses). Again, please just refer to the questions, or if by chance you happen to know why they nerfed a class feature which was by no means overpowered, share. I'm not here to argue, I just want to know why WotC stuck it to the Nature Boys. Don't want to get into a "OMG COMPANIONS R OV3RPOw3RD" debate, I just want to know why they changed it, and from the sounds of it and the response I got from WotC no one has a good answer. I think it was a mistake, and combined with the Dual Shuriken/Rapid Shot/Flurry/GTWF FAQ gem, I wish WotC would stop writing the damn things. My 2 cents.
JoAT 08-19-04, 03:30 PM	Originally posted by Jesuit Is there a logical reason why a 9 Hit Dice regular animal would be inherently larger than a 9 Hit Dice Animal Companion? Same reason that chiuaua isn't the same size as a St. Bernard. Is there any logical reason why a Druid would want to keep an earlier companion when they more advanced ones gain more base str/dex and size bonuses then the prior animals do based off Druid levels? Because they have formed some kind of emotional bond, and most people don't trade up their friends to get a better model when they can? I'm not here to argue, I just want to know why WotC stuck it to the Nature Boys. Because this may have been what they meant/wanted all along. And because the nature-boys (druids, anyways) are powerful enough, perhaps.
Jesuit 08-19-04, 03:46 PM	Personally, I wouldn't consider a St. Bernard and a Chihuahua both 9 Hit Dice Creatures. I guess I should have been more specific. Is there any reason why a mundane 9 Hit Dice Dire Badger would be inherently larger than an Animal Companion Dire Badger of 9 Hit Dice? I agree about the emotional bond, and I think there was more of a reason for players to adhere to it without the FAQ nerf. Now there is a tangible reward for trading in for the newer models, whereas before they older models were equal in power (note, equal not superior). I think you are probably right about a Druid Nerf, but for gods sake nerf Wild Shape/Natural Spell not the friggin Animal Companion. It's not like it's a really Nerf anyway. It's a roleplaying nerf, since you can maintain the same level of power with the more advanced larger companions. I really see this change to the class feature as a negative. I wish they would have specified in the FAQ their reasons for doing so.
PaladinKD 08-19-04, 05:22 PM	First off, no problem with the BS thing. I mistakenly read it as a response to my post. The introduction of profanity (even abbreviated) got my hackles up. :) I have to stick by my guns on the whole advanced animals thing though. "Is there a logical reason why a 9 Hit Dice regular animal would be inherently larger than a 9 Hit Dice Animal Companion?" Only if they were different varieties of the same beast. I think there could be medium sized, 9HD Dire Badgers and large, 9HD Dire Badgers. I don't think that the medium DB automatically grows into the large version as it advances. Reading the MM entry on advancement, it could be taken either way IMO. But as per my previous example with the tiger, it just doesn't make sense to me. As another example. let me put forth one of my player's situations. He is a Ranger with a horse for an animal companion. As the horse advances in HD, will it slowly grow to Huge size, suddenly being a great deal more difficult to mount? "Watch out for that *THUNK*... low portcullis." "He used to fit in this stable, I don't understand what's happened!?":confused: I know the horse doesn't have an advancement listing showing a larger size, but gaining HD thru animal companion bonuses would still cause it to 'grow' if your using your argument. I still think that such listings are for different sub-species of the same type of beast. "Is there any logical reason why a Druid would want to keep an earlier companion when they more advanced ones gain more base str/dex and size bonuses then the prior animals do based off Druid levels?" What JoAT said. Just because something has better stats, is no reason to trade in a trusted animal companion. So what if that wild Dire Badger is a bit tougher because it's Large. Mr. Stinky has been with me for years and besides, he's quicker and 'more skilled' than that big ball of fur. I had a player who passed up weapons with better magical bonuses because he wanted to stick with his family heirloom of a bastard sword. I rewarded him with XP bonuses for good roleplaying as he watched the other players grapple for the weapon.:rolleyes: As for why they changed it in the FAQ, I would guess that it WAS for game balance. Not in comparison with other wild animals, but with other class abilities. Lastly, I'm aware that the forums are a place to debate rulings, so don't think I'm criticizing you for posting this question, but if you don't like the new rule, don't use it. If you're the player trying to convince your DM, I understand this might not be as easy. I, as a DM, see no reason to change the FAQ so far, but perhaps another DM might be convinced.
Jesuit 08-20-04, 01:30 AM	"As another example. let me put forth one of my player's situations. He is a Ranger with a horse for an animal companion. As the horse advances in HD, will it slowly grow to Huge size, suddenly being a great deal more difficult to mount? "Watch out for that *THUNK*... low portcullis." "He used to fit in this stable, I don't understand what's happened!?" I know the horse doesn't have an advancement listing showing a larger size, but gaining HD thru animal companion bonuses would still cause it to 'grow' if your using your argument. I still think that such listings are for different sub-species of the same type of beast." We already go with the assumption that creatures only increase in size if they have an advancement listing. As it stands, only a few options for Animal Companions exist that can grow a size category within a standard 1-20 campaign. The counter argument used against my "the faq is BS" stance was based on Paladin Mounts and Familiars not growing in size. Since Paladin mounts DO grow in size now (just not horses, but creatures like Rhino's and Boars can) based on Hit Dice (the Faq said nothing about Paladin mounts, just Animal Companions), and Familiars never grow in Hit Dice (they get 1/2 casters hit points) I'm left with having to accept a lame ruling from a stupid source (imho the FAQ is generally garbage, which only exists because of over munchkinization), only on the premise of "DM says so." He doesn't like Druids, and has been ******* and whining about my abilities since day one (Quillblast and Murderous Mist primarily). My only objective here was to see if anyone had a valid justification for the nerf. I didn't get one from WotC, and from what people have said here I still don't see any reason why an animal should be inherently weaker as a companion (read not any animal, the SAME animal). If it's game balance, it's unneccessary and ruined a roleplaying reason to stick with an older companion. The campaign I'm in right now is lethal, and we get deaths all the time. If I can get a Dire Tiger, there is no way I'm using a Dire Badger. This was a silly nerf, and completely unneccessary. Still, I am willing to listen if anyone has a logical reason for the mechanics change. Opinions notwithstanding on Druid Class balance, I honestly don't think the FAQ makes any sense. Anyway, if you get a chance at your sessions bring it up and see what your players/DM think about it. Just because I think it's stupid doesn't mean it is, I'd just like to hear someone else maybe agree that in this case, WotC made an error in judgement(won't affect the campaign, but I might feel slightly vindicated).
tiercel 08-20-04, 04:33 PM	Well, one guess would be that they wanted to make it a clearer choice between having a bigger, more physically powerful animal companion (by trading in) or a more skilled one (by advancing one). Don't forget that you get free bonus tricks as you advance a companion, plus any tricks you've taken the time to teach it yourself with Handle Animal. A newly summoned companion (if you are going for the New Big Beefy companion as you advance level) may only know one trick: "attack" (and not unnatural creatures, without being "pushed" as a move-equivalent DC 25 Handle Animal check, albeit with a +4 bonus for being a companion). A companion that knows lots of tricks is easier to use in a variety of situations; a companion that is a big dumb backup fighter requires a lot of work if you want to do anything except be a great brute of an animal. Also, it's not always bad to have an advanced-but-not-size-advanced animal companion. Cities are a lot more likely to let you take your 8 HD M-sized riding dog companion into a city than a dire bear, and the dog will be able to go into caves/dungeons with you more easily too.
Cathon 08-20-04, 04:55 PM	Just because animal companions don't increase their size category doesn't make them less powerful than their natural compatriots. I'd pit my advanced wolf companion with his increased strength, dexterity and especially natural armor against a wolf who merely has the same number of hit dice and is larger. There is always Animal growth if you want a bigger companion in a fight, and one of the major reasons I've stuck with a wolf is that I can take him with me to at least the ranger/druid inn in the city. I'm not sure I could get a dire wolf past the guard without some magical alterations. I sometimes wish I had a companion with a better reach, but I can do that by getting a new companion if I choose to. Basically animal companion advancement is like character advancement, they get better at what they do. MM animal advancement is more about what is the alpha male in the pack like, or what are the tougher black wolf species like. Animals don't simply gain in experience and go up a size category unless they are juveniles becoming adults.
Jesuit 08-23-04, 02:30 AM	Yeah, small corridors could be a factor. I could also see the point of skill advancement (tricks) but the thing that is bugging me is that as of 3.5 we GOT the tricks with our earlier companions. Now we are supposed to trade versatility with raw strength. That's fine for most campaigns, but sometimes you have to have damage output/absorbtion above all else. The point it that Druids shouldn't have to choose. They didn't, until recently. It was a bad call to make them trade up to match the more advanced companions, both for RP and mechanics reasons. Also, raw size more than makes up for the Advancement by Druid level. Side by side, a size L creature will win almost all of the time against a size M creature (unless there is a much larger strength/BaB difference than simply what Animal Companions gain).
Seeker95 08-23-04, 10:42 AM	Jesuit, you've been given an answer. Are you now seeking more information, or trying to convince others of something? If the former, you'll probably have to ask the designers directly. If the latter, what does it accomplish? Go ahead and change it to the way you want it. Then playtest it in your game, and come back to us with your experience.
Conaill 08-23-04, 07:23 PM	Originally posted by Jesuit Even weirder, if you awaken an animal companion it all of a sudden becomes a size category larger by virtue of hit dice? [...] By definition, animal companions do not become smarter as they advance, and this is important because this means they gain the same benefit as a normal animal from the Awaken Spell (only more so because all of a sudden they can gain a size category). Note that the Awaken spell is entirely silent on exactly what benefits the animal gets from its increase in hit dice. I for one made the judgement call that they should *not* increase in size, similar to why animal companions do not gain in size. "The advancement entries for creatures, and the rules for advancing monsters, refer to unusually powerful specimens that are simply tougher (and perhaps bigger) than normal for their kinds." An Awakened animal is not "simply tougher", it has been magically enhanced. Likewise, the bond between the druid and his animal companion is of a somewhat supernatural order, it's not just a somewhat tougher than usual specimen of the species. Check the Awakened Animals thread in my sig for more details...
Greyman 08-24-04, 04:11 AM	Originally posted by Jesuit Actually I was calling BS on the FAQ, for having no logical reason for changing the mechanic of animal companions. As to your example, I don't think it makes sense either, since I'm talking about the difference of the same animal only as pertaining to being an animal companion or not.They did not change the mechanic at all, they merely clarrified it.   It's a FAQ, not an Errata. Size increase has never been granted by the bonus HD. They only grant skill points and feats, and increased base attack bonus and base save bonuses.Quoth the SRD: Bonus HD: Extra eight-sided (d8) Hit Dice, each of which gains a Constitution modifier, as normal. Remember that extra Hit Dice improve the animal companion’s base attack and base save bonuses. An animal companion’s base attack bonus is the same as that of a druid of a level equal to the animal’s HD. An animal companion has good Fortitude and Reflex saves (treat it as a character whose level equals the animal’s HD). An animal companion gains additional skill points and feats for bonus HD as normal for advancing a monster’s Hit Dice.The problem lies with the phrase: "... as normal for advancing a monster's Hit Dice."   You've interpreted it to mean that all of the rules for monster advancement applied.   However, you should only apply the rules for monster advancement pertaining to things mentioned earlier in the paragraph: skill points, feats, BAB, and BSB.
Archangel 08-24-04, 06:26 AM	Also one more thing: What happens when you release your now large 4HD wolf for a new companion? Does it shrink in size after losing its bonus HD or what?
Aerunation 08-24-04, 12:41 PM	when a level one character takes a hit with a great axe for 14 points of damage it's something like a decapatation. When a level 20 character takes 14 points of damage from that same great axe it's a minor flesh wound. When a character gains hit dice because of level(not monster advancement) he not only gets tougher but learns how to roll with the punches. Same with the animal companion. The animal companion is gaining pseudo-levels.
Count Arioch the 28th 08-31-04, 10:15 AM	Actually, in the earlier edition, animal companiopns gaining HD was in a non-core supplement. If you didn't use the Masters of the Wild house rule, then animal companions never gained extra HD at any time. So, the very fact that animal companions gain anything at all is a change to how they worked, and better than the old way. In 3.5, a 20'th level druid's wolf is 14 hd. (I'm going off the top of my head here, so bear with me) In 3.0, a 20th level druid's wolf was 2 hd, and unless your DM used the optional rule in a non-core splatbook, he was exactly the same as a normal wolf in every respect. Of course, back in 3.0, you could have an animal companion as big as the druid's level, which meant that 20th level druid didn't have a 2 hd wolf anymore, he would have a 20 hd legendary wombat, or something equally rediculous. So, it was a nerf after all. But it's a good one, anything that nerfs Gods, err, I mean Druids, is a good thing in my mind.
Grayson 08-31-04, 02:05 PM	Like Greyman said - it wasn't changed, just clarified. More HD doesn't automatically mean a larger companion. As someone stated, it's gaining "psuedo-levels", not growing.
SALDAR 08-31-04, 02:44 PM	As stated these are bonus HD based on the character's level, not on the animal companion's advancement. Therefore, increases in size do not apply. If the animal itself were to increase in HD naturally then a size increase would be applicable.
Count Arioch the 28th 08-31-04, 07:28 PM	All having bigger animal companions does is screw over the dungeon-venturing druid. Bigger animals aren't fun to squeeze into narrow passages.