NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Falling Icicle" data-source="post: 6035366" data-attributes="member: 17077">As someone who plays Pathfinder, I can tell you that a druid with an animal companion and a druid without one are not balanced. Having the equivalent of a cleric domain is nothing compared to having a pet with its own actions that is by itself almost as powerful as a player character.Is it possible to balance such companions with classes that don't have them? I don't know. 4e tried, but the result was characters that had to split their actions with their pet, and both could only act if a power was used that allowed it. The result was fairly well balanced but just felt nonsensical.Besides, why should only some classes have the benefits of companions? Why can't a fighter have an animal companion? I can see why some more exotic animals might take a druid or ranger to tame them, but why can't a fighter have a wolf that's been his faithful friend and companion and goes adventuring with him? And what about spells like planar binding and planar ally that give spellcasters angels, demons, devils, elementals or other powerful beings as minions? What about things like the leadership feat and henchmen? 3e didn't even try to balance all of these things. You could have one player running around with his own army of animated dead, followers, summoned monsters, etc. It was out of control, and Pathfinder is no better in that respect.How are you ever supposed to balance all of these things? I think having it as part of a followers module is the ideal solution. It's optional so you don't have the impossible task of trying to balance those who have companions with those who don't, and it's fair because it gives everyone the opportunity to have companions, not just druids and rangers. And before you say that it puts all the burden of balancing things on the DM, why don't we at least wait and see what this rules module looks like before jumping to that conclusion?</blockquote>

Verification