Vermin as Animals

[Sylrae]

That just seems silly. You may as well just give them the higher HD then, or give them extra HD. lol

 

[Steinhauser]

Extra HD makes them significantly stronger, increasing their BAB and base saves. Multiple Toughness gives them a few extra hit points. The point itsn't to give them a combat advantage, it's to use up all those extra feats.

 

[CAFargo]

You guys are focusing on what these characters are, not how they feel. A wasp can't really harm a person...maybe one hp. On the other hand, even a manta ray deals 1d4+1 (?) damage on a hit.

Also, animals can't make up swarms, and while animals can become things like dire, only a spider can grow from fine to gargantuan (.1 ft to 40 ft) off spare carrion.

 

[Steinhauser]

What are you talking about? Wasps? No, regular wasps won't be dealing actual damage to humanoids. But giant wasps will. Monstrous/giant vermin are essentially as realistic as dire animals.

Animals can indeed make up swarms. Check out the swarms of bats and rats.

How animals and vermin grow to obscene sizes in D&D is uncertain. For all we know gargantuan/colossal vermin are the results of magical experiments.

 

[CAFargo]

What are you talking about? Wasps? No, regular wasps won't be dealing actual damage to humanoids. But giant wasps will. Monstrous/giant vermin are essentially as realistic as dire animals.

Dire animals are not just larger: they tend to have red eyes, and always have bone-like plate on them. They are also a lot more violent, and have more muscle mass/size to match. Monstrous vermin, on the other hand, tend not to have these physical abnormalities.

Animals can indeed make up swarms. Check out the swarms of bats and rats.

Your right...still, these monsters can also challenge a party to some degree by themselves, and a normal wasp cannot.

How animals and vermin grow to obscene sizes in D&D is uncertain. For all we know gargantuan/colossal vermin are the results of magical experiments.

Maybe in another campaign, but in mine they work in the opposite process of dire animals and dinosaurs. While dinosaurs and dire animals are archaic beasts who are slowly dying out (in most cases), giant insects are actually a new genetic offspring (can magical radiation cause genetic changes?)

You guys are still missing the point. Vermin may be animals, but they don't FEEL like animals.

For an answer to the squid problem, squids and segmented worms grew out of 2 different evolutionary tracks, one having developed segmentation, the other not (a scientific definition of vermin may include the phyla platyhelminthis, nematoda, rotifera, annelida, anthropoda, and most small mollusca).

 

[Steinhauser]

Dire animals are not just larger: they tend to have red eyes, and always have bone-like plate on them. They are also a lot more violent, and have more muscle mass/size to match. Monstrous vermin, on the other hand, tend not to have these physical abnormalities.

None of the monstrous vermin I've seen in artwork or media look exactly like smaller vermin either. They always have exaggerated claws, giant mandibles, rougher-textured exoskeletons. Though none of this is relevent to vermin's deserved status as animals.

these monsters can also challenge a party to some degree by themselves

You mean a 1/8th level party? There is nothing threatening about these animals. A rat does 1 damage with a bite just like a hornet might do with a sting. And again, there's nothing relevant about it.

Maybe in another campaign, but in mine they work in the opposite process of dire animals and dinosaurs. While dinosaurs and dire animals are archaic beasts who are slowly dying out (in most cases), giant insects are actually a new genetic offspring (can magical radiation cause genetic changes?)

Sure, maybe in your very specific campaign, vermin may have something that makes them distinct from other animals. My campaign might have something that makes bears distinct from all other animals. In that case I would change the bears' type to match the campaign, but not as a general rule.

You guys are still missing the point. Vermin may be animals, but they don't FEEL like animals.

And my point is that thinking is completely subjective. Why should some spells not affect some critters when they're made of the same stuff - just because those critters FEEL different? (Besides balance reasons, which isn't an issue here.)

For an answer to the squid problem, squids and segmented worms grew out of 2 different evolutionary tracks, one having developed segmentation, the other not

Keep in mind fish (chordates) evolved from segmented worms.

(a scientific definition of vermin may include the phyla platyhelminthis, nematoda, rotifera, annelida, anthropoda, and most small mollusca).

"Most small mollusca." When does a small mollusc vermin (gastropod) become a small mollusc animal (cephalopod)?

 

[CAFargo]

None of the monstrous vermin I've seen in artwork or media look exactly like smaller vermin either. They always have exaggerated claws, giant mandibles, rougher-textured exoskeletons. Though none of this is relevent to vermin's deserved status as animals.

I still think that vermin (insects) and animals (well...animals) are different. I think that the real reason they're different is because the designers wanted to point out the differences instead of pointing out the similarities; as such, the vermin and animal types split.

You mean a 1/8th level party? There is nothing threatening about these animals. A rat does 1 damage with a bite just like a hornet might do with a sting. And again, there's nothing relevant about it.

True.

Sure, maybe in your very specific campaign, vermin may have something that makes them distinct from other animals. My campaign might have something that makes bears distinct from all other animals. In that case I would change the bears' type to match the campaign, but not as a general rule.

What I meant to say was that I felt that they felt different to me in general...still, I guess this doesn't really matter.

And my point is that thinking is completely subjective. Why should some spells not affect some critters when they're made of the same stuff - just because those critters FEEL different? (Besides balance reasons, which isn't an issue here.)

People are also animals, yet having a type of creature combine the two is ridiculous. Some spells are designed to target one creature (eg: hold person works against humans only because that's the way the spell was "created" to make it easier to use (lower level), yet the hold monster spell works on everything). Vermin work in the same way.

Keep in mind fish (chordates) evolved from segmented worms.

On review, so did most animals...

"Most small mollusca." When does a small mollusc vermin (gastropod) become a small mollusc animal (cephalopod)?

I think that you just answered your own question: a gastropod mullusc would be a vermin, and a cephalopod mollusc would be an animal. For creatures that combine traits of both, it depends on the monster (vermin, animal, magical beast, even aberration could be used for this).

If your trouble is that your players want to play a druid with a vermin as an animal companion, I would say yes. Still, you could always say no and then point out the vermin keeper prestige class from Underdark (FR book).

 

[Steinhauser]

People are also animals, yet having a type of creature combine the two is ridiculous.

This is why I mentioned game balance. Humans are distinct from animals on matters of game balance, and that's it.

a gastropod mullusc would be a vermin, and a cephalopod mollusc would be an animal. For creatures that combine traits of both, it depends on the monster

They came from a common ancestor - and unless a distinct set of critera can be listed that would classify that ancestor as either animal or vermin, the two types must be one and the same.

I have yet to be convinced of any distinct criteria that would set vermin apart from other animals.

 

[Celebrim]

I have yet to be convinced of any distinct criteria that would set vermin apart from other animals.

The allegiance of all animals is ultimately to the Griffin paragon Alcegraff, whereas the leige lord of vermin is the abomination Payaninthar. The spiritual differences cannot be more striking. Alcegraff gaurds the wound in the Great World Ash trees side along with the Solar Ariel. Payaninthar resides in tartarus. It's a simple matter of performing Ansel's Biomancy of Auras to determine them apart, and even a novice barely trained in the art of scrying could tell such distinct auras from the other.

I have no idea what all this other talk is about. 'Common ancestor'? Celapods and mollusks only common ancestor is the Great World Ash itself, as both were created in the fourth moment of creation. 'Evolution'? Cephlapods and mollusks exist in the forms they have from the Tree of Life. Nothing has tampered with them, and if they had employed biomancy the resultant creature would not be either animal or vermin, but an aberration. And I have no idea where this talk of 'humans are animals' come from. They are most certainly not. Animals were procreated from the world ash in the fourth moment of creation, possibly by the direct will of the Allfadur. Humans are one of the Seven Free peoples created aeons latter by the Gods after the First Great Truce. They aren't even the same order of being.

 

[Steinhauser]

Very clever. But as I said before, campaign-specific details should be the exception, not the rule.