Animal Companion Mechanics and the Appeal of the Ranger Class

[Boox]

Boox: Your ideas and compilation of other ideas gave me *surprise!* yet an idea! :D

 

In certain Native North American cultures, there were initiation rites, where the young men (and hopefully women too) went out in a deep forest on their own in order to find their soul animal, their special animal companion of sorts. They were out there for days, until they had a vision (encountered an animal that responded to them/stared at them), and voilà! You got yourself a soul animal, and it even affected your name in some cultures. 

 

Imagine if this was in PE. At some point, in some setting, a ranger has to go out in a forest on her/his own, and I find her/his animal companion. In that way, we would not be able to choose, though. I bet that I would get for three days and nights of stumbling through the sticks a warty toad.

Now that's a brilliant idea! That would really be something special. 

 

However, I think that it could be possible to incorporate player choice into that. You could choose your animal companion during character creation and that choice would carry over into whatever scenario is used to introduce the companion. Possible scenarios could be:

• (Your original suggestion:) At some point, you receive a quest from your order (or tribe or whatever) to search for your soul animal, or
• A scripted event that shows the process you described, or
• You start out in a special small and unique intro zone where you discover your soul animal, or
• A combination of the above

If the scenario would be brief enough, it might be viable to have a custom event for each animal companion type. I think that especially the scripted events consisting of concept art and text could be manageable.

 

Alternatively, couldn't a scripted event (the visions you see as you deliriously stumble through the undergrowth) contain a set of puzzles or questions that could determine what your animal companion would be? For example, the answers could indicate play style preferences or companion type preferences without being too obvious.

[Osvir]

To answer OP's question "What would you like to see?":

- Taming an animal in the wilds. Don't just magically get one. Attain one. Catch it. Perhaps even fight it to low health. Yes yes, pokemon and all but, in a roleplaying game like Eternity!? I think it would be awesome. Tackle and wrestle down a bear. Or create an intricate trap to lure the bear in. No pokeballs here.

- Animal companions only drain Stamina. Ordering around your animal companion takes energy.
- Animal companions having their own Health bar just like they would if you fought and killed them in the wilds. Doesn't make sense that the "wolf" gets cut and that would make the Ranger get hurt as well? Sharing stamina could make sense on the other hand.

The companion itself:
- Naming
- Extra "Top of the Pack" Slots

One temporary passive ability:
- Training/Taming
When an animal is caught it tends to not always follow orders, have a couple of penalties to some stats and can randomly choose to fight the owner instead (berserk effect). A good time to beat some sense into the animal to make it understand who's master. That sounds really brutal but how else would you tame a wild arctic wolf? This last for an in-game day or two. 

Edited November 29, 2013 by Osvir

[IndiraLightfoot]

 Tackle and wrestle down a bear.

 Haha, I can picture it already! That is so cool. Imagine if you get a pray mantis, and then you have to box against him in order to win him over as a soul mate.

 

Boox: You have truly improved my idea and made it much more appetizing for a CRPG. Problem is: Now I want to play it your way, let's just hope Obsidian reads this and implements it.

Edited November 29, 2013 by IndiraLightfoot

[Xienzi]

Being able to catch and switch out animals would be kind of nice, but there are all kinds of problems with that.

 

For one, how you would access your past friends. If you so choose to have the stronghold and have the animal's affection at a specific number, you could it stay around the keep while you go make more animal friends. If you don't have a stronghold, you could instead release them back into the wild and they'd return to the map you acquired the beast on.

 

Then there is the problem of soul-bonding. Perhaps it is something that you can create and break at will, but at the same time a feature one would be hesistant to break so easily? I kind of imagine it being similar to wit-bonding in that sense. If this was used, then what kind of penalties would the Ranger suffer for changing companions?

Edited November 29, 2013 by Xienzi

[Mor]

- Taming an animal in the wilds. Don't just magically get one. Attain one. Catch it. Perhaps even fight it to low health. Yes yes, pokemon and all but, in a roleplaying game like Eternity!? I think it would be awesome. Tackle and wrestle down a bear. Or create an intricate trap to lure the bear in. No pokeballs here.

 

...

 

When an animal is caught it tends to not always follow orders, have a couple of penalties to some stats and can randomly choose to fight the owner instead (berserk effect). A good time to beat some sense into the animal to make it understand who's master. That sounds really brutal but how else would you tame a wild arctic wolf? This last for an in-game day or two.

This sound like a mini game, and a very repetitive one if each time it only last for an in-game day or two.

 

Also if you want an oblivion like tutorial mission for choosing your soul animal, will Druids get one for their transformation animal of choice, mages for their choice of their spellschools etc?

 

 

- Animal companions only drain Stamina. Ordering around your animal companion takes energy.

- Animal companions having their own Health bar just like they would if you fought and killed them in the wilds. Doesn't make sense that the "wolf" gets cut and that would make the Ranger get hurt as well? Sharing stamina could make sense on the other hand.

It is my understanding that the reason for the shared stamina/health is so that you don't use your pet as a drone to soak up the damage. IMO it will also makes pets your Achilles heel, so your idea to share only Stamina makes more sense to me. (but then again we still don't know all the details on how it works). Edited November 29, 2013 by Mor

[JFSOCC]

I think soul-bonding an animal is not just understandable for mechanical reasons, but also narratively. It makes the connection rangers have with their companion animal deeper and spiritual, and it reminds me of the "wit" as described by Robin Hobb in the farseer trilogy.

[Osvir]

 

- Taming an animal in the wilds. Don't just magically get one. Attain one. Catch it. Perhaps even fight it to low health. Yes yes, pokemon and all but, in a roleplaying game like Eternity!? I think it would be awesome. Tackle and wrestle down a bear. Or create an intricate trap to lure the bear in. No pokeballs here.

 

...

 

When an animal is caught it tends to not always follow orders, have a couple of penalties to some stats and can randomly choose to fight the owner instead (berserk effect). A good time to beat some sense into the animal to make it understand who's master. That sounds really brutal but how else would you tame a wild arctic wolf? This last for an in-game day or two.

 

1. This sound like a mini game, and a very repetitive one if each time it only last for an in-game day or two.

 

Also if you want an oblivion like tutorial mission for choosing your soul animal, will Druids get one for their transformation animal of choice, mages for their choice of their spellschools etc?

 

 

- Animal companions only drain Stamina. Ordering around your animal companion takes energy.

- Animal companions having their own Health bar just like they would if you fought and killed them in the wilds. Doesn't make sense that the "wolf" gets cut and that would make the Ranger get hurt as well? Sharing stamina could make sense on the other hand.

 

2. It is my understanding that the reason for the shared stamina/health is so that you don't use your pet as a drone to soak up the damage. IMO it will also makes pets your Achilles heel, so your idea to share only Stamina makes more sense to me. (but then again we still don't know all the details on how it works).

1. I imagine it does feel like a mini-game. But I don't expect you to catch all animals you find. There's probably a hard limit for the Ranger (how many etc. etc.) for starters the Ranger might not be able to tame any animals. And then as the Ranger goes up a couple of levels you can catch 1, then 2 and perhaps max (if not already too much) 3.

 

I envision animals/pets to be permanent to the Ranger. In that sense, if you can keep your animal companion alive long enough you wouldn't suffer "mini-game madness".

 

2. I realize that as well but it depends on how Stamina is handled. Is Stamina something that goes up instantly after every fight and you always have 100%? Or is Stamina a "Day"-Resource that you spend doing actions?

 

Rested/Well-Rested idea:

- 100% Stamina == Resting bonuses/Well-Rested

- 50% Stamina = Normalized stats. "You've worked half a day, still feeling at the top of your game"

- 25% Stamina and down = Some very minor penalties to hit/miss chances.

- 10% Stamina = Enemy hits more often, Characters hits less (You need to rest, you've been up 20 hours and/or spent all your "energy" or "fatigue")

- 0% Stamina = Pass out. Gain 10% Stamina after battle.

 

Balancing thoughts:

- Support Classes can heal Stamina but can't heal their own Stamina maybe~

- Healing Stamina can only be done every now and then again (You can't nuke a companion with Stamina heals), maybe a sort of cooldown~ can only heal Stamina on a character once every 3rd-4th in-game hour (Stamina Potions, Spells, Abilities, Talents, Regeneration etc. etc.)

- Healing Stamina gets capped (can only heal up to +5% of current value)

- Getting low on Stamina = Higher Chance, Bad Stuff

 

As for Pet Stamina and Ranger Stamina:

- The Pet only has Health, no Stamina.

- Attacking with the Pet costs the Ranger Stamina.

- Building a "Beastmaster" being a choice, a build path~ having an animal companion+attacking with ranged weapons costing lots of Stamina in a non-efficient way. The idea: The animal companion becomes a "weapon", and using 2 weapons (bow+animal) drains Stamina fast.

[Chippy]

Although it sounds a great mechanic for me to send my rodent animal companion into an enemy camp to stealthily sneak up the bed covers of their archmage and assault eyeballs, I don't really expect the familiar to survive - so as long as they don't end up as the glass canon thing that mages were, I'm good. 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

I find the notion of shared health and stamina intriguing, but it does introduce quesitons regarding suspension of disbelief. Bonding with a wild animal--or any animal for that matter is going to place you outside the realm of civilization. This is good from a flavor standpoint, as Rangers by definition should be woodsman and beyond development of Man. Bringing your ranger and his or her "companion" into a city, town, or even an inn should be very problematic.

[Silent Winter]

I find the notion of shared health and stamina intriguing, but it does introduce quesitons regarding suspension of disbelief. Bonding with a wild animal--or any animal for that matter is going to place you outside the realm of civilization. This is good from a flavor standpoint, as Rangers by definition should be woodsman and beyond development of Man. Bringing your ranger and his or her "companion" into a city, town, or even an inn should be very problematic.

I agree that such a bonded ranger should feel uncomfortable in civilised towns/cities.  Perhaps they get a concentration penalty (or don't revover health as quickly) and grumble about the time spent there (I seem to recall Jaheira (druid) complaining about being in the city (and other companions complaining about being in the countryside) in BG).

 

I think soul-bonding an animal is not just understandable for mechanical reasons, but also narratively. It makes the connection rangers have with their companion animal deeper and spiritual, and it reminds me of the "wit" as described by Robin Hobb in the farseer trilogy.

curiously enough, I'm re-reading those books at the moment.  wit-bonding was my first thought as a comparison too, but I think this takes it a step further with the shared stamina pools so not just getting grief-crazed when your animal dies.

[Sensuki]

I wonder what Sagani's animal companion is.

[IndiraLightfoot]

A wolverine. It got to be. Or perhaps better still, a lynx.

[AGX-17]

They should get an eastern dragon "companion." Obviously. Don't take issue with the fact that dragons in the far east are considered either gods or higher than gods.

[Boox]

I read through this thread again and I've been trying to think more about the mechanics aspect of animal companions. The shared health/stamina pools seems to be the most significant factor in how to play the ranger-animal companion as a duo, at least from a combat perspective. I suppose we would need to know more about the stamina system in order to make any really meaningful points, but I will settle for speculation.

 

That being said, I enjoyed reading Osvir's thoughts on the stamina system and it mirrors my understanding. I'd also like to share some thoughts on the health system. Based on how I've understood explanations of the system, health is more a description of how injured you are (bruised, joints sprained, muscles pulled, tissue cut, bleeding, inflammations, broken bones, etc.) whereas stamina describes how winded you are, i.e. how much of your energy resources you've used up. For example, if you've just run a marathon as fast as you possibly can, you're probably fairly close to 0 stamina, but at 100% health. On the other hand, if an ogre just chopped off your arm with an axe and crushed your body with a mace, you're health is at 0% no matter how much stamina you have left. Being in combat, you are likely to block and parry enemies' blows and your armor will protect you as well, but it takes energy to fight and therefore it reduces your stamina. Maybe your opponent is very skilled or lucky and he manages to strike you in a way that causes a cut or other damage, which will decrease your health. I think Osvir's system would be a good representation of this on a mechanical level.

 

But how does health tie into this and, more importantly, how does the health/stamina sharing fit into the picture? Maybe as your health decreases, your maximum stamina decreases as well, i.e. your body's energy and effort output capacity decreases as damage is accumulated. A simple example would be, that I can't possibly fight as effectively if I have a broken leg or arm, but I can still fight if I have to. A decreased health pool could also affect abilities and the use of skills. For example, a 50% decrease could result in a 50% reduction of max stamina and the efficacy of abilities also being reduced to half (just as a basis for discussion).

 

A fairly simple lore-based explanation for shared health/stamina pools would be that the soul-bond connects the ranger's and animal companion's consciousnesses together. As the ranger becomes more tired, the animal companion feels the same strain as their minds are one. Similarly, if the animal companion suffers enough damage to die, the ranger's soul departs his/her body as it follows the AC's soul into the afterlife/limbo/reincarnation cycle. What comes to in-between cases, a severed limb is experienced by both the ranger and AC in a similar fashion, regardless of whose limb is severed.

 

If we assumed this kind of system, I wonder what the effect on combat gameplay would be. Obviously, great care would have to be taken in positioning the ranger and AC on the battle field. I think it's safe to assume that most players would use the ranger as a ranged fighter, as that seems to be the emphasis of the ranger's abilities. If ranged weapons suffer a penalty when an enemy is engaging the character in melee combat and switching weapons in a similar situation would incur even more penalties or attack of opportunity for the enemy, a natural role for the AC could then be to serve as a melee deterrent. Another mechanic could be that when the AC is engaging an enemy, the ranger has a bonus to attacks on that enemy, i.e. the AC works together with the ranger and guides the enemy to a disadvantageous position or otherwise distracts him/her. These two roles could be further improved with the AC's abilities. For example, when both the ranger and AC are close to each other, both could be granted a bonus to defense/attack. Or, the ranger and AC could share the field of vision which would mean that a ranger could attack from a greater distance (Ulquoirra's panther stealthily sneaks closer to a bandit camp unnoticed allowing Ulquoirra to strike a deadly first blow from beyond where the bandits can see).

[Failion]

Got me thinking about the movie The Crow when I hear rangers share their health and stamina with their pet. The pet your ranger uses affects your playstyle I'm guessing. A crow would pester casters and other archers to keep the ranger safe. But would easily get the ranger killed if the crow were used against a melee combatant. 

[Lephys]

Honey badger should be an option. Immunity to giving a crap about anything. Seriously... They basically walk up to cobras and slap them in their faces, and say "YOUR EGGS ARE NOW MY EGGS, FOO!", even whilst the cobra bites them and injects its venom. They just kill it to death, then embrace the sweet, sweet venom sleep, until it runs out of their system. Then, they wake up, and eat all the cobra eggs, and probably the snake, too.

 

That, and they climb into beehives and eat all their honey WHILST the bees are all swarming about and constantly stinging them!

 

Look 'em up on youtube, for some documentary footage. They be'z crazeh.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Thanks, Lephys! Now I want a honey badger ASAP!!

 

Btw, Obsidian had in NWN2 a weird obsession with badgers, so it's all within the realm of the possible.

[Mor]

Honey badger

...

Look 'em up on youtube, for some documentary footage. They be'z crazeh.

You mad?! if I am going to look it up, I am going to stumble on that damn Badger Badger mushrum crap again *shudders* and going to have kill myself

[AGX-17]

Thanks, Lephys! Now I want a honey badger ASAP!!

That's a strange choice. If I was going to choose how I died, it probably wouldn't be by attempting to keep an animal known for being psychotically vicious, violent and so tough it frequently wins fights with lions as a pet.

[Osvir]

A question I haven't seen been brought up in this thread is.......

Animal Companion Equipment? I can see how they could give 1 or 2 extra top of the back items.

But the most pressing question I really have to ask is:

Are animal companions permanent when caught or temporarily charmed? Are they spawned magically or does the Ranger/Druid "whistle" for them to come and then they run away when low health/low morale??

[Mor]

hmm... I would like a chastity belt for my hamster, when in good mood those things can multiply like rabbits 

[Griebel]

hmm... I would like a chastity belt for my hamster, when in good mood those things can multiply like rabbits 

Naaaaaaah, after a couple of months of ingame time your ranger would be capable of taking down the main baddie all by himself and his horde of hamsters "Go for the eyes and all of the other bodyparts,  Boo and your children and children's children and children's children's children, go for the eyes and all of the other bodyparts". Though one well aimed fireball would make one hell of a furry mess ...

Edited December 4, 2013 by Griebel

[Jajo]

I.

I've never been a fan of ranger's animal companion. I've always found them more of a maintenance nuisance, than an asset, whether it being P&P, or games (not saying they are useless, just that the negative outweighed the positive, for me). I find them tolerable only after an enormous portion of autonomy is given to them - in other words, if they're playing themselves almost all of the time.

In light of this, I hope, that if a versatile class has the ability to have a permanent animal companion, this is only one optional build for the class and that the companion is not a mandatory part of the calculation of "strength" of the class. I'm thinking about rangers here, because they're one of the most versatile classes in 3.Xed. If having a companion is a core element of a class in PE, I'll most probably just avoid that class, but seeing how one class could be so good, if only one could switch a companion for something else, would make me sad.

 

II.

For the classes that will have an animal companion (is this confirmed, BTW?), I hope, that they have a great number of choices. I'm not a fan of animal companions, but in NWN2:SoZ my feat strained ranger went as far as taking exotic companion feat, just to have a dinosaur. Armadillos, sloths, pandas, koalas, platypussies, monitor lizards, hippos, turtles, snakes, pigmy mammoths, performing chimps, swarm of bees, swarm of dancing fleas, albatross, ...

Please! Surprise me! Anything out of the ordinary I find int he list of animals - I know I'll be pleasantly surprised and happy about it.

 

III.

Having equipment for companions would be tricky from several different perspectives:

- It would be very costly to have equipment (Armor? backpacks? What else is sensible to put on an animal companion?) rigged and designed for each animal model separately.

- It would be costly to have all the different companions balanced based on equipment (Assuming, that an armor made for a horse doesn't fit on a dog, badger, bear, ...).

- What would be an explanation for pieces of animal equipment laying around? For me, it's entirely acceptable, perhaps even sensible, to have horse or dog armor. What about bear armor? Ferret armor? Koala armor? What would be a believable story behind that? How would one go about crafting such an armor and how much time would that take and cost?

 

IIII.

Do animals have souls? Do animal companions have souls? Would a 3ed paladin's horse have a soul? Do puppies go to haven?

[Jarmo]

CRPG D&D animal companions (NWN &ToEE) suffered from declining effectiveness (druid) or from being almost useless to begin with (ranger).

 

Early levels, when the party is mostly dressed in chain & leather and don't yet have magic weapons or much attack skills,

it's awesome to have a bear companion. Good solid attacks, good AC, lots of hit points.

 

But add a few levels and the companion doesn't loog too good anymore.

Good attack skills, but non-magical low damage (compared to flaming swords).

High hit points, but compared to plate, natural fur and skin are like damage magnets.

Meaning the animal appears, soaks up damage and dies in seconds.

 

Transfer to PE, you share the health pool with that big easy target.

[TheHarpoMarxist]

Except I think for P:E the animal companion is going to improve with your level, which solves some of the problem of it becoming just another way enemies can hurt you with minimal payoff.  If they balance it right, it should continue to be useful enough throughout.

 

Hmmm...  I wonder if a Ranger cna have a horse companion.  Stick some firearms on him and suddenly you've got a Cossack or a Dragoon .