Community

Jan 16, 2013 -- 3:22PM, Lashius wrote:

Jan 16, 2013 -- 3:08PM, Oma012 wrote:

Jan 16, 2013 -- 2:45PM, Lashius wrote:

Jan 16, 2013 -- 2:29PM, Oma012 wrote:

Jan 16, 2013 -- 2:17PM, Lashius wrote:

well, one argument down, now are you saying that if I can find an animal companion with a cr within the challenge rating spectrum of it's master that doesn't list a cr you'll admit you're wrong?

in this case this will fall under the Updates rules, if the Animal Companion have a greater CR (almost like the master) under the updates rules, then because this animal companion don't waste nothing of your daily abilities this means that he give full exp.

as example a first level druid have an animal companion CR 1, under the rules fight again a druid with an animal companion give you EXP from a encounter CR 3 (or you only give the exp of the druid???)

If the animal companion are contempled in the Druid class then why the player handbook say in her first example

Animal Companion: Wolf (see the monster manual for details) this monster is described with CR 1

What 'update rules" are you referring too? If you're referencing FAQ, well, we've coverd the fact that they are not rules several times. Oma, im going to just quote Occam's razor in this regard and repeat: No animal companion ever published lists a CR.

The simplest reason as to why no animal companion has a listed CR is because they are part of the encounter, via the druids ability to call them in the first place (note special qualities are considered in an opponents CR, and as you can see from that example animal companions are listed as a special quality).

the FQA have official information about the rules (how use or what try to say), like the Web Rule of the game, are made for Skip Williams, are in the official pag of D&D 3.5 for support of the game like: Rules of the Game, FQA, Erratas and web enhancements.

Ok then why the first example of the druid have a Wolf with CR 1???

"About" is not "is". The FAQ gives information and advice on the rules, but they are themselves not rules (and in several instances are wrong).

Secondly, what "first example"? Every listed animal companion (at least that I have ever seen) dosn' have a listed CR. The sample druid from the DMG is a 5th level druid lizard folk, effectively a CR 6, and has a crocodile companion. A crocodile has a CR of 2 (only 4 less than the druid) which puts the crocodile in the CR range of it's master, yet no CR is listed. This is because the animal companion is part of the druids CR, as it is aquierd through a class feature.

1- no one are wrong use official updated rules.

2- The one in the player handbook reflect the Wolf in the MM that have CR 1.

the CR of the Crocodile are 1/3 of her master (too low), in the first example her CR are equal to her master.

Thanks, Quentin!

Jan 16, 2013 -- 4:21PM, Oma012 wrote:

Jan 16, 2013 -- 3:54PM, Lashius wrote:

then you are saying that under the rules if you fight again a druid level 1 without animal companion and a wolf that he train (but dont have the link ) have a CR of 3

While a Druid level 1with animal companion have a CR of 1 when is very clear that the second need have more CR??

And the MM have CR in the wolf entry and the Player Handbook never say that you drop that entry in her example.

Yes, because thee non companion wolf would need to have the following:

A) Be reared from a pup (taking almost a year (or more) before he would have been ready to train for combat, and requiring a separate and high handle animal DC for rearing them.

B) Be trained for what ever combat tactics you wish it to perform, each such trick taking a weeks worth of training in and of itself.

Not only this, but handling an animal that is not a companion takes a move action and pushing them is a full round action. A druid gets to handle her companion as a free action,or push it as a move action. Since the animal companion is called to the druid as a servant of nature it gets special benefits yes, but is also considered to be an ability of the druids class, where as a trained animal, though taking time, can be sold for proft (you can sell an animal companion but it loses all it's abilities including tricks) and there is no limit to the amount of trained animals that you can use. In this instance, a fighter riding a mundane warhorse is you're advisory, the warhorse is included in the CR as there is no fighter class that grants him a warhorse. he is joined by a paladin and a druid each riding their respective companions (special mount and animal companion), we'll say that they boath have warhorses as well. the paladin and the druid's animal companion do not add to the CR of the encounter because they are gained through a class feature.

That's the easiest way I can think to explain it. Now, if you want to continue the argument oma, make a topic, find some proof for your point, and post somewhere else. You've derailed this topic for long enough, and I'm done adding logs to the fire.

EDIT: appears oma got hit with some sort of moderator action well I typed this up, so I'll redact my response.

Not sure it fits into most games, mainly because of theme. Especially Good aligned groups who's characters would object to hanging with undead. Just something to consider past functionality.

That is technically true, however some Good characters would still not be able to tolorate it. The use of undead could be seen as morally objectionable and the desecration of a corpse, even if these acts are Neutral,  Lawful Good party members might object.

Characters such as Paladins really should not tolorate the use of Undead, even if the creator is Neutral, this would violate his Code of Conduct, he could not knowingly associate with evil creatures, that would include fighting alongside an undead zombie.

Yes, this might be the Paladin's problem not the Dread Necro, but in a group comprised of Lawful Good characters, Paladin, Cleric, Druid all LG, Ranger NG, Fighter CG etc, even a Neutral Dread Necromanceer would be out of place.

Now I am not saying that he couldn't group with these classes, I am just pointing out that there are considerations other then purely mechanical functionality that would effect his character's playability.