Natural Bond Poll

[Bront]

Yes, and I don't see the problem. The animal companion part of the druid isn't what's broken.

Here's a question, A Ranger 6 takes Natural Bond at 6th level, what does it do for him? How about if he takes Beastmaster at his next level (Which adds level + 3 to a companion)? How about later when he gets his second animal companion (at a different rate), does it count there too?

 

[Thanee]

Yes, and I don't see the problem.

It doesn't work with 1st-level (as in weaker) animal companions, but it works with the advanced ones.

I wouldn't have a problem with a feat, that adds +3 to effective druid level here, without limits (like the Beastmaster ability), but the limit is there, and it is there for a reason (that doesn't mean it has to be a good reason, of course ).

As for the question, I would assume, that it works with only one animal companion from the wording (IIRC, can't check it right now), though it would probably be better to have it work with all of them (they are already progressively weaker than the first one you get).

Bye
Thanee

 

[gabrion]

To the people who are voting based on what they prefer rather than what they think the rules say, please keep in mind that there are two options that allow you to disagree with the RAW but still accept what it says. Polls like this are not served well if people are voting for something they know is wrong just because of personal preferance.

 

[Bront]

I think there is a nuance here about the feat that is being missed.

Druid Level 7 and Natural Bond Can have a lion (at Druid Level 4, so extra HD and such), but can't have a Dire Lion (Because to get it, the druid level would have to have been higher than it's current level). However, once you hit Druid 10, you can get that Dire Lion (with the bonuses at Druid Level 4).

This is why the feat is worded like it is. You can't use it to get better animals, but you can use it to make the better animals better once you have them (Which seems fine to me).

 

[Thanee]

I think there is a nuance here about the feat that is being missed.

Not at all. The effective druid level is only used to determine the animal companion's abilities, not what animal companion a druid can get.

Bye
Thanee

 

[gabrion]

No!

(Hey, it didn't say 'per the RAW' there... )

Bye
Thanee

So just to get this clear Thanee, you voted no, but you don't think that answer is supported by a literal reading of the rules? If the first two options had been followed by "per the RAW, and that's fine with me!" would your answer have changed?

 

[EyeontheMountain]

To the people who are voting based on what they prefer rather than what they think the rules say, please keep in mind that there are two options that allow you to disagree with the RAW but still accept what it says. Polls like this are not served well if people are voting for something they know is wrong just because of personal preferance.

Do me a favor and don't tell me how to vote.

 

[EyeontheMountain]

Teh way I see it is the level drop for getting a better companion is a cost, and does not/should not/was not intended to allow a druid to pay the cost and then make it up. So for a straight druid, the feat is totally useless.

Same as for a sorceror who multiclasses into wildmage. Practiced spellcster does not make up for the occasional effective caster level loss.

But of course there will always be those who start at the desired endpoint and twist everything to make that endpoint semi-logical.

 

[Thanee]

To the people who are voting based on what they prefer rather than what they think the rules say, please keep in mind that there are two options that allow you to disagree with the RAW but still accept what it says. Polls like this are not served well if people are voting for something they know is wrong just because of personal preferance.

I voted for what I think is right.

I think the RAW is not clear, since they used the same or rather a similar term in both occasions.

Ranger's have effective druid levels, druid's do not have effective druid levels. They have druid levels. And there is talk of the druid's effective level in the PHB, but I don't think this is the same as the effective druid level mentioned in the CV.

I don't think, that when you look into the table and find out what abilities an advanced animal companion is going to have, that you use an 'effective druid level' of the druid, but rather a different figure, let's call it S (S equals (effective) druid level - adjustment (the number subtracted from 'level' in the parantheses of the header line on the table for advanced animal companions)).

Therefore, I voted 'No!'.


(The reply to Hypersmurf above was mostly in fun. The above is my opinon. I'm aware, that it is not entirely clear, thanks to the already mentioned mess-up with the terms.)

Bye
Thanee

 

[gabrion]

Same as for a sorceror who multiclasses into wildmage. Practiced spellcster does not make up for the occasional effective caster level loss.

But of course there will always be those who start at the desired endpoint and twist everything to make that endpoint semi-logical.

So you think people are "twisting" the rules against their intent, but at the same time you're telling us the the FAQ entry on wild mage and practiced spellcaster is wrong? I wasn't telling anyone how to vote, I was just asking them to be sensible.

I think the RAW is not clear...

Ah, well I suppose that makes you exempt from voter fraud accusations.