Pathfinder 1E Advice on how to adjust for Pets & Animal Companions

[Clyde Lee Graham]

So, from what I can see, Pathfinder is pretty much the same as D&D 3.x in regards to tacit assumptions regarding APL, and Encounter Levels. That assumption is that 4 PC's of X level vs. an encounter of the same level is roughly an average difficulty encounter.

So, for instance, 4 level 5 PC's fighting a Phase Spider would be considered an average encounter. Okay, sure...

But how do I adjust when, for instance, I have a party consisting of 1 Ranger with Boon Companion Wolf, 1 Druid with Lion, and two non-pet using PCs. Are they still APL 4? There's really nothing in the rules that suggests otherwise, but my experience makes it pretty clear that 4PCs are not equivalent to 4PCs + 2 pets of same equivalent level (and yes, this before all of the summons go off).

What have the rest of you done?

 

[frankthedm]

Supposedly the companions granted through character abilities shouldn't make the party any stronger than if they players took other character options.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/boon-companion
Benefit: The abilities of your animal companion or familiar are calculated as though your class were 4 levels higher, to a maximum effective druid level equal to your character level.

Is the lion that big an issue? it doesn't hit large until 7th level, not 4th.

I trust the companions are being played as written? Make sure the characters are burning up the propper trick selections and right actions to command their companions.

No holding back, companion should be dying & getting them back takes time.

 

[Clyde Lee Graham]

Supposedly the companions granted through character abilities shouldn't make the party any stronger than if they players took other character options.



Is the lion that big an issue? it doesn't hit large until 7th level, not 4th.

I trust the companions are being played as written? Make sure the characters are burning up the proper trick selections and right actions to command their companions.

No holding back, companion should be dying & getting them back takes time.

I was using that as an example, my actual party is 6 level 7's, two of which are AC druids. So a large lion, and a medium cheetah.

Yeah, I just picked up Animal Archive, so I'll be enforcing tricks a bit more carefully but my experience has been that a full strength pet is worth more than either giving up two druid domains, or one druid domain + a feat (boon companion)... just not sure if there's really any way to quantify how much of a force multiplier pets actually are.

I've noticed that it's a bit of a problem with PFS scenarios as well, but I attribute that more to the fact that the scenarios don't scale well, and were written with a 4 PC party in mind. Bump that to six + pets and they're cakewalks.

 

[DogBackward]

Yeah, Animal Companions are considered to be a part of the class that has them. You don't increase the party's APL because of a Fighter's bonus feats or a Wizard's spells, so you don't increase the APL for a Druid's animal companion. It's a class feature, and thus its impact is already accounted for in the math.

 

[Clyde Lee Graham]

Yeah, Animal Companions are considered to be a part of the class that has them. You don't increase the party's APL because of a Fighter's bonus feats or a Wizard's spells, so you don't increase the APL for a Druid's animal companion. It's a class feature, and thus its impact is already accounted for in the math.

I guess I'll just chalk this up to EL and CL just being imprecise then and adjust upwards accordingly but my personal experience with 1.5 years of Pathfinder and I'm not sure how many years of 3.x is that if they're accounted for in the math, their math isn't so good.

 

[DogBackward]

The problem is that their math assumes a basic 20 point buy and a minimum of power-gaming, and power-gaming is not something that is at a minimum in most gaming groups.

 

[Jester David]

As has been said, animals are a class feature and shouldn't affect character power level.
If you're finding them overpowered, pay attention to tricks and the handle animal skill.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

ECL/APL is never going to be a precise measurement. It doesn't take into account being late in the day and low on spells, or having the right or wrong spells prepped, or your point buy, or terrain that is favorable to one side or the other, or how prepared either side is, or that multiple NPCs are a better idea than a single "solo", or how much info the PCs or NPCs have (knowing that your opponent is secretly a red dragon using some kind of polymorph is handy; at the very least you won't be dropping fire spells on it)... and of course it doesn't take class balance into account.

In theory, four monks are balanced with four wizards, and that's not the case.

The issue isn't the companions themselves, it's the balance of the classes. Animal companions are just part of the class, sort of like ... 9th-level spells. Once you're comfortable with how powerful your group is, you can adjust encounters accordingly.

Note: While in theory you're supposed to be demanding Handle Animal checks and so forth, in practice I've never seen a DM ever do this. It just slows down play too much (already a big deal when you're adding extra bodies to a battle), and would overload the DM is they tried to control said companions.

If it were up to me -- it isn't -- I'd put in a nerf to the animal companions to go hand in hand with a removal of any need to make Handle Animal checks, pushing, and so forth. (I'd also try to balance the animal companions with each other; obviously some are much stronger than others.)

 

[airwalkrr]

1) Druids are excessively powerful in oh-so-many ways, not least of which is their companions.
2) Pets, companions, and other such creatures don't seem to have ever been originally conceived (i.e. when they first appeared in D&D) as combat power-houses which can carry the same weight as their masters in a fight. However, characters like Drizzt and Guenhwyvar have skewed this perception.
3) Action economy is often more important than or at least as important as character power level. Companions throw action economy out of whack.

I purposely try to limit the power of animal companions and similar pets because of this. One simple way to do it for druids is by limiting them to the choices of the 1st-level druid and requiring they level up the 1st-level options instead of allowing them to select things like dire bears later on. Another way is to not allow feats or spells that enhance a companion. Making it more difficult to acquire new companions after a companion death is another way to limit things. If the death of a companion is as grievous as the loss of a familiar, players are less likely to put them in harm's way.

Animal companions do not necessarily increase the power level of a party. But power gamers can make it happen easily. There are a wide variety of options to pump up animal companions to obscene levels of ability. It is best to take a look at the capabilities of the rest of the party. Is everyone in the party capable of summoning or bringing along pets? If so, it isn't so much of an issue. But if only one or two party members are doing so, then you might be best advised to either limit the power of companions or give other party members similar pets to keep the playing field level, if for no other reason than to balance the action economy. If one player is taking essentially three turns while the others are only taking one, then the other players are more likely to lose interest. Perhaps give the fighter a special mount, grant the rogue a thief apprentice, or something along those lines. I would be less worried about adjusting the effective level of the party (you can always make them fight tougher monsters if they are walking all over challenges) and more worried about making sure players without companions aren't being sidelined by the druid with Leadership, an animal companion, and lots of summoned monsters taking up half the real-time combat time.