How to have animal companions fight on "without direction"?

[CapnZapp]

Okay, so who's with me in believing it's incredibly lame for a Beastmaster Ranger to not be able to attack in any round he makes his companion attack?

I mean, I'm all for play balance, but just because a feature is balanced doesn't make it right. It needs to be fun too.

So, what options do a DM have? The only rule is that the animal companion must not use up the Ranger's standard action to attack.

(Please, no "the current system is fine as-is" posts. This thread is specifically for those who feel the current system simply isn't fun, and therefore needs to be changed. If you don't have any problems with the RAW Beastmaster build this thread is not for you. Thank you for not threadcrapping!)

Let me start off the suggestions by noting the two possible solutions I've found in official books:

1) the "wondrous figurines" solution. Adventurer's Vault allows anyone to summon specific critters using a kind of "reversed action economy": each action you spend gives the figurine one action. So you can use your minor action to have the figurine do a standard action; if you want it to both move and attack you can spend your minor and your move action. Only if /by some obscure reason) you want it to take a full complement of three actions will you have to spend your own standard action.

2) the "druid summons" solution*. There's a "Primal Power Playtest" article out which introduces summoning powers for the Druid (who doesn't get this in PHB2). These summoned critters have something interesting: an instinctive action. This is an action which the critter takes automatically unless you made it do something else (using the usual action economy).

Now, before you protest, of course I realize we can't just switch over Animal Companions to either of these two "action economies". That'd be overpowered. At least, if there was no cost attached. Now, what would be an appropriate cost or drawback to allow us to offer animal companions to our Ranger players with either one of these solutions or something else.

Anything except the current situation, where the animal companion only attacks if you give up your standard action for the turn, that is.

If there's been any previous threads on the subject, feel free to simply link me...

Regards,
Zapp

*) Really, I'm reading what the playtest have to say about druid summons (my emphasis):

Unlike a wizard or invoker, both of whom must keep
a firm grip over their summoned creatures, a druid
can rely on his summoned animals to fight on without
direction.

Now, doesn't this fit in perfectly for the Ranger's Animal Companion too...?!? (If you need to ask yourself what my opinion is, the topic title is a hint...)

 

[CapnZapp]

Here's a few suggestions. Feel free to discuss them (how balanced they are etc):

Attack (Move Action): Your beast companion makes a melee basic attack against an enemy of your choice. You may not use an Encounter, Utility or Daily power for your standard action.

A different approach to the same suggestion would be to make up a specific (weak) at-will you could use at the same time your companion attacks. Or why not simply use basic attacks (mainly keeping the Ranger from doing a Twin Strike)?

Attack (Standard Action): You make a basic attack against an enemy of your choice, and your beast companion makes a melee basic attack against an enemy of your choice.

Another way would be to introduce instinctive actions, but to balance them by nerfing the animals somewhat. In this example, I'm lowering attack scores by two across the board:

Boar (Beast Companion)
Melee Basic Attack: Gore; level + 2 vs. AC; 1d8 + Strength modifier damage.
Instinctive Action: The boar charges the nearest enemy it can charge. If it cannot charge any enemy, it does nothing.

 

[Pale Jackal]

The weak At Will is the easiest, but isn't very fun.

The Move Action idea doesn't strike me as fun, it discourages movement, and depending on the conditions of the fight: sometimes not moving is perfectly fine, so thus it could be imbalanced.

Another idea is to sort of re-theme the Fighter as a Ranger. My logic being: the Fighter gets extra attacks under specific conditions, so maybe you could take the Fighter class, replace his Mark/Combat Challenge ability with some appropriate Beastmastery mechanic (which is either as conditional, or make it broader but weak), and change his skill options around. Of course, Tide of Iron might not really fit with a Beastmaster Ranger (unless it's your 'pet' doing the pushing? Thereby take Tide of Iron and require the pet to be adjacent for the push to occur, and the push occurs from your pet?) Cleave (or whatever the anti-minion power is called) also has its rider effect be based on your pet... but it's area of origin is your pet! Therefore, you can send your pet next to that minion, three squares over, and take him out with your pet, while you're attacking some normal guy. Assuming your attack hits, of course. I don't think requiring a separate attack roll is really necessary. The "always damage" power (Reaping Strike?) requires your pet to be adjacent to get the extra damage, or possibly the pet can do damage to some other target if you miss. I kind of like how "Cleave" lets your pet feed off your success, while "Reaping Strike" lets your pet feed off your failure. Sure you could come up with something like, "Symbiotic Strike" or "Nature's Equilibrium" for them.

So, kind of like the Shaman's spirit companion, your pets location is crucial to the effect your powers have. If you think this mobility is too potent, you could make the Combat Challenge weaker, or change the Fighter's (I mean, Beastmaster's) hit points per level or something. Though I think the Combat Challenge could possibly just stay the same, since if your other effects depend on your pet's location, your pet feels like it's doing stuff. Since my original idea was that you take the Fighter's, and change its Combat Challenge so that it triggers every round (and make it weaker) and a la, you have your Ranger.

Move action to move your pet. Maybe some powers could mitigate this: possibly a daily or encounter power called "As One: whenever you take a move action, your pet can also move." Maybe it could be an At Will Melee Basic attack which lets your pet move.

 

[Pale Jackal]

Another idea might be to have Hunter's Quarry damage done by the pet. If you hit, do your Hunter's Quarry damage to a target adjacent to your pet. Upside: minion killing potential is increased. Downside: re-positioning both yourself and your pet is tougher.

A weird quirk is targeting a low defense target to deal damage to a high defense target. Of course, you could require rolls for both the PC's and the pet's attack.

I don't have Martial Power, so I don't even know what the Beast Master Ranger reads like. I'm going purely off the PHB classes.

 

[FireLance]

Actually, I like the idea of a separate at-will that works like the fighter's Cleave: the ranger makes an attack vs. AC, deals 1[W]+Strength modifier to the target, and the beast companion deals Wisdom modifier damage to an enemy adjacent to it (either the same enemy or a different one).

 

[CapnZapp]

Okay, so nothing previous on this subject then?

Alrighty, let's begin by comparing the current ranger beast companions (there is some variety, so I'm picking Cats and Wolves; two choices I guess are common enough) to the wondrous figurine animals.

At level 1 it isn't unreasonable to find a level 4 treasure, so let's start off with the Onyx Dog (or 3-5 Onyx Dogs really, to make both an "encounter" power).

HP: Companions win hands down (22 vs 9). Sure you can spend a surge to boost a figurine, but companions have two surges of their own. There simply is no comparison.
Attack: Companions +5, Figurine +7. Expressed in relative terms: level+4 vs level+3. About equal. Considering the Expertise feats, I'm willing to go with MP's formula.
Damage: I'm a little unclear on how it's supposed to work. Per MP, companions do more damage on OAs than straight attacks. If correct, this is a wonky rule indeed. Regardless, the figurine's d6+3 compares favorably to a single d8.
Opportunity Attacks: The companion gets to do one OA per turn (using up your immediate interrupt in the process) with attribute bonus damage to boot. This figurines normally don't do. However, the Onyx Dog does - provided it stays adjacent to the foes that attack you. A wash, I would say.
Defenses: Companions get level+14 for AC and around two points lower for NADs. The Onyx Dog fig gets level+12 (roughly). Again, I'm inclined to use MP's formula - it isn't unreasonable to calculate fig values for a level higher than the party after all.

I won't go into detail about speed, skills and such, as there didn't seem to be anything game-breaking about either companions or figurines.


So, let's just check out if these parameters hold true at higher levels. There aren't any Epic figurines, so we'll have to do with the highest-leveled fig there is: the Golden Lion.

HP: Still no match.
Attacks: The Golden Lion uses level+1. My guess is the lowered formula is to compensate the very nice special ability of this specific figurine (Pounce). If we take that out of the picture, I'd say the MP comparison holds up.
Damage: I guess MP offers the Ranger feats to up his companion's damage, otherwise 1d8 is getting to suck very hard indeed. Not that 1d8+4 is much better.
Opportunity Attacks: As written, the Golden Lion offers nothing in this department. However, as a general figurine I'm supposing it wouldn't be out of line to follow the MP framework (replacing Pounce, in this case).
Defenses: Golden Lion's got level+11. Close enough I'm buying the MP formula.

So.

Does this mean I can tell a ranger player "you can switch over from the MP action economy to the AP action economy provided you'll agree to nerfing your critter's hit point total?"

Or is there something else I'm missing, that would make this change still overpowered?


To be specific: the proposal is to keep everything as per MP rules, only with two changes:
1) you only need to use a minor action to command your beast companion. Thus, you first minor action allows the beast to take a standard action. Your second minor action grants the beast a move action. And your third minor action (probably your standard action) grants a minor action.
2) Your animal companion only gets 5+level hit points; plus a surge's worth assuming you spend one. This probably works best for characters whose beast companions actually are figurines (didn't Gygax' "Gord the Rogue" books feature one of those?) so having your buddy killed in every combat doesn't become an issue.

 

[KarinsDad]

To maintain balance, this is what we did:

For animal companions, the command actions are lowered by one and the move and defend actions can no longer be shared (i.e. if both PC and companion move, then it takes two actions, a move for the PC and a minor to command the companion, if both PC and companion defend, then it takes two actions, a standard for the PC and a move to command the companion). The standard action commands become a move action, the move action commands become a minor action, and the minor action commands do not change.

 

[Garthanos]

Another idea might be to have Hunter's Quarry damage done by the pet. If you hit, do your Hunter's Quarry damage to a target adjacent to your pet. Upside: minion killing potential is increased. Downside: re-positioning both yourself and your pet is tougher.

A weird quirk is targeting a low defense target to deal damage to a high defense target. Of course, you could require rolls for both the PC's and the pet's attack.

I really like this idea and the reskinning fighter attacks as well .we could represent multiple different fighting styles integrating man and beast

I think the One attack even works for me.... The One roll means the two have a telepathic bond and ones failure or success throws off and/or inspires the others, when they are attacking in unison it is ultimate team work... so there moves are combination moves... like a single fighter .. (if his left hand punch works it sets up the other slash if it doesnt work it puts him off position too use the slash ... this is a way I like to skin cleave).

If your beasts injury can result in psychic feedback ie hitpoint damage to the hero then that can be balancing factor for the extra reach of having your companion be elsewhere than right by your side.... it almost wouldnt matter if the beast had a ton of hitpoints that way...(Normally a fighter cant loose there ability to do a cleave or a reaping strike at all.... so even if the beast had an indeterminant amount of hit points it would be balanced ie your beast could be seen as having a mirror of your hitpoints becuse it is united with you at soul level... but if so there is nothing balancing the extra reach/range it provides, where as if it doesnt perfectly mirror them and you can loose those at-wills when it is "taken out of the fight".... is that balanced... how far can the beast be and still be fighting in telepathic unison. perhaps a nice throwing weapon based reach ;-)

Other feedback would be cool too, like if it fails or suceeds on a saving throw that penalizes or enhances your next attack or saving throw.

 

[Pale Jackal]

I expand on my quarry idea here. One thing I don't like about the quarry idea is that I broke certain pet perks into feats. For example, I'd like a pet to behave like a real creature so ideally it'd provide flanking, or make opportunity attacks, but I feared I'd make beast mastery rangers too powerful, so I turned those into feats. Along with removing Prime Shot, and the extra feat rangers get, of course.

I do find the telepathic idea interesting... I tried to avoid it, but it could help balance some issues. Such as a) pets being subject unreasonably to OA attacks and b) possibly eliminating the need for feats for stuff like pets providing flanking, since AoE attacks will be more devastating with a beast mastery ranger around. Of course, Martial Power has its own solution, allowing rangers to spend surges, but I kind of disliked that, though I suppose it works just as well if you're going to go with the telepathic solution.

 

[Garthanos]

Exactly if you get the advantages of being at two places at once surely the balance factor is to give you the disadvantages as well. Ie. you are able to be damaged and impaired from two places at once.

1) If your telempathic companion is affected by a psychic effect you should be too.
2) You experience psychic feedback when your telempathic companion is damaged.
3) Yes you both can operate independently with regards to moving and making basic attacks but when you do you are less powerful (pretty much only basic attacks though and a basic attack from your companion shouldnt be that impressive they are out of sorts and unsure of themselfves if you arent linked in.), much like an unarmed swordmage .... however you are able to summon your companion and create links with new companions through ritual or perhaps in desperate circumstance command a creature which you are not bound to? A sword mage can do greenflame blade with his fists or use a weapon he hasnt bonded to.. right?