Regarding Druid Animal Companions

[DDK]

I think this is more an issue of the ill-thought out mechanic that drives the Animal Friendship spell.

HD does not equal CR and so you have the case where intelligent companion choice can unbalance the game.

Taking away the animal companion ability is definitely NOT the answer. Not allowing an animal companion that is too powerful, however, is. How to adjudicate this is another matter entirely.

 

[Bagpuss]

If I was the Cleric I'd be more annoyed with the nerf'ing of spontanious healing than how nasty an animal companion is.

Removing spontanious healing really takes the fun out of being a cleric, you have the choice of either

a) Limiting you spell selection and enjoyment by taking a load of healing spells or
b) have the party whine and complain at you when you can't heal them

Anyway couldn't the Druid have a Dire Bear (HD 12d8+48, 2 claws 2d4+10 plus bite 2d8+5 damage) next level, its double their hit dice according to the spell discription? A Dire Wolverine is nothing to worry about.

 

[hammymchamham]

I think this is more an issue of the ill-thought out mechanic that drives the Animal Friendship spell.

I disagree. There are no spells that deal with the CR of a creature (or EL or ECL), but a lot that deal with the HD of the creatures affected.

If I was the Cleric I'd be more annoyed with the nerf'ing of spontanious healing than how nasty an animal companion is.

Yeah, what he said

 

[Paradoxish]

Taking away the animal companion ability is definitely NOT the answer. Not allowing an animal companion that is too powerful, however, is. How to adjudicate this is another matter entirely.

Agreed. Just keep the druid from having a far too overpowered animal companion and you're safe. Also, there's a lot your DM can do to keep the druid from leaning on the animal companion too much. The Dire Wolverine has a low AC and his will save is only so-so at even moderate levels - meaning that he's very vulnerable to a lot of spells that can render him useless or even turn him against the party. Let's see how happy the druid is with his uber-companion when the party is suddenly forced to fight it AND their enemies.

Ultimately, though, the best course of action is to just not allow some animal companions for 'free' (that is, ones that the druid has simply because he's a druid). If the druid's player wants to go out in search of a specific companion the DM can make a quest out of it, possibly making it more trouble than it's worth. This will also encourage the druid to rely on the other party members a bit more than his companion, since it'll be difficult to get another one should it die.

You should also encourage your DM to take into consideration the fact that the animal companion may not appreciate being used as a walking tank. The animal friendship spell does not bind an animal to you, it just makes the animal your "friend". I know that my dog would certainly stop being my friend if I kept throwing her at people who want to kill her. Oh, and like someone else said, the DM should control the animal companion - only allowing player control based on what the druid has taught it.

Obviously, though, I don't think the druid's ability should be nerfed.

Just my $0.02.

 

[Chondu]

I agree 100% with Bagpuss. Spontaneous healing is the one thing that makes a 3E cleric an enjoyable character to play, as opposed to a 1E 'combat medic syndrome'. How many people rushed to play a cleric in 1E? No wonder the guy's POed.

 

[jgbrowning]

well

and now for something completely different.

i first thought the name of this thread was "Retarded Druid Animal Companion." I had pictures of drooling wolves in my head.

back to your previously scheduled thread....

joe b.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Whatisitgoodfor - Awaken does not specify that the creature becomes a magical beast. It's not mentioned in errata, nor in the FAQ. Nor is it changed in the "Mass Awaken" spell in MoTW. An awakened animal is an animal.

There is ONE place that it is mentioned, but it's in the flavour text of MoTW. Since it's only mentioned in that one place, and almost everything else (along with common sense) contradicts it, I'd say the flavour text is at fault.

Next - Marimmar: What was the rationale behind removing spontaeneous curing?

Also - Do you follow the rules about a druid only being able to use creatures with up to his own hit-die? ie - a 5th level druid could have 10 hd of creatures, but any one of them could only have a maximum of 5 hd? Might solve your problem.

Finally, take note of the fact that in order to make your animal attack unusual opponents (ie - anything which is an aberration, undead or outsider), you have to spend a trick for each category.

IMHO, the most effective use for animal companions is to have lots of small ones, each with a useful package of tricks.

 

[whatisitgoodfor]

Hmmm....

You seem to be correct in that the spell description does not indicate that Awaken changes the type of the animal.

However, the creature in question does now violate one of the fundamental aspects of his former type, namely having an Int of 3+.

Also, the D&D Main FAQ, in a query about the spell in question, refers to the spell changing the creatures type to Magical Beast, then states the the critter recieves +2d8 HD, instead of the d10s that a Magical Beast would normally warrant.

So, the only observation that I can make about this is that an Awakened animal is an odd amalgam of the of the characteristics of type Animal and type Magical Beast.

Or, to be marginally concise in my rambling, I was probably wrong and I'm really confused now.

 

[Argent Silvermage]

Awakened Animals

They are considered Magical beasts. Animals spells will no longer effect them. Mainly because an animal who has a 3+ int. it no longer really an animal. They are an NPC with fur, feathers or fins.

 

[Atma]

Suggestion #1: Un-nerf the cleric and allow spontaneous healing. It was put in the game for a reason - to make clerics into more then walking band-aids.

Suggestion #2: Tell the cleric to suck it up and take the Animal domain next time.