The Economy of Actions: Pets

[Rechan]

On several threads there has been the comment that pet/summoner classes were pulled because of the Economy of Actions.

The Economy of Actions is that 4e combat is structured heavily on: Standard, Move, Minor, and Immediate actions. Since many abilities have been sequestered to these. This is why action points (Granting an extra standard) are potent, and so on.

However. I am seeing a potential. Look at various spells with "Sustain: Minor". For that matter, the strongest case is Flaming Sphere. As a move action you can move it. As a standard, you can attack with it.

On the one hand, I think it would be rather annoying if your Pet can only attack if you sacrifice a standard action, only move if you sacrifice a Move action. Because then your encounter or other powers aren't really coming into play, since you're so focused on your pet. On the other, I can't see a decent way to balance it.

So what is a sufficient way to balance the Pet issue?

WotC has mentioned that in the Martial Power sourcebook, we'll see Animal Companions. So we may have a clue how this could be handled by then.

The real meat that I want to see is tricking out your pet. Giving them new abilities (either for the encounter, or in some manner I haven't considered). The necromancer setting his skeleton ablaze, the Artificer granting wings to his homuculi, etc.

 

[generalhenry]

if your Pet can only attack if you sacrifice a standard action, only move if you sacrifice a Move action.

that's how mounts currently work.

 

[Rechan]

that's how mounts currently work.

Indeed. But I haven't seen a mount that's better than just the character doing the attacking. I mean, why have the mount attack in the first place when you're better?

 

[Boarstorm]

I think the artificer preview actually has a sneak peek at what we'll end up seeing.

Artifice: [...] As a minor action, you can make your artifice move a number of squares equal to your Constitution modifier, or you can shift it 1 square. The artifice’s defenses equal your level + 4, and it has hit points equal to your healing surge value. If an artifice drops to 0 hit points or is consumed, it is destroyed.

Instead of "artifice" insert "skeletal servant" and you've got a pet. So, something like a standard action to "summon" it, a minor action to move it, a minor action to sustain it, and you're left with two minor actions being eaten up in a round to control your pet leaving you a standard to do whatever else you might want to do.

 

[hamishspence]

feasible

thats actualy rather plausaible, for a Necromancer with a Skeleton (or zombie) I wonder it it will actually be done that way?

 

[Mort_Q]

Seems likely.

 

[Kraydak]

People blow the whole "economy of action" thing completely out of the proportion. If giving someone a pet was that bad, then adding another player would be even worse... Do we see strict 5 players, no more! rules in the DMG?

 

[Boarstorm]

People blow the whole "economy of action" thing completely out of the proportion. If giving someone a pet was that bad, then adding another player would be even worse... Do we see strict 5 players, no more! rules in the DMG?

Umm. I think you miss the point. It's not about the length of a combat round, it's about player equity within that combat round.

 

[James McMurray]

Can someone please point me to the artificer preview? Thanks!

Nevermind. Found it.

 

[Zetesofos]

I think part of the problem with Pets in 3.X was that they were subject to the same rules for attacks as regular PC's. At first level, having your pet attack didn't amount to a LOT more time for a round. However, after about levels 6 and up, pets in ADDITION to players got additional attacks per round. A 5th level ranger with two weapon fighting and an animal companion might make anywhere from 5-6 attacks in one round, compared to a rogue, cleric, or wizard making only one. And past ten, it could be 15 mins for one person to take their turn.

Minor actions could definitely be the way to go, and limiting pets to single attacks will help. We could see them following the same rules as PCs with [W] damage, albeit proportionally lower levels perhaps.