Can a Druid's Animal Companion take non-monster feats

[Hiro Quester]

Like the title says. Is an animal restricted to taking only monster feats?

DM thinks so. I'm not so sure. I have seen many discussions of good feats for ACs that listed other things (spring attack, Iron Will, Mage Slayer).

Is this just a RAI custom, or is it written somewhere that ACs do (or do not) have access to non-monster feats.

I'd lie to be able to show DM a rule, if possible.

(Backstory: I'm planning out a tiger AC (it has to be a tiger, for flavor/RP reasons). Thinking about the two feats it can take at Druid 12 and Druid 15 levels.

[eggynack]

I don't see why they wouldn't. There's no rule stopping an animal companion from taking other feats, and this is definitely one of those cases where the onus is on the side of those trying to prove that they can't, because the default is that any creature can take any feat. If it helps, "monsters" have non-monster feats in their stat-blocks all over the place. One need only look to the noble riding dog, with its complete lack of any monster feats among its two selected, or most monsters really, for proof. The one thing you may want to stay away from, however, is feats with choices made in game. My reasoning is that an int 2 creature lacks the brain power to make these choices, or at least to make them with any sort of optimization. It's a thing backed up by the fact that the attack patterns of most low intelligence creatures are basically completely rote, with decisions like whether to trip or rage replaced by the auto-trip and auto-rage of animals.

Edit: To make the example method a bit more clear, there is not a single first level animal companion option in core that does not have at least one non-monster feat. In fact, I didn't do a thorough examination, but it looks like there are either no or very few first level animal companion options that have any monster feats at all. This argument only fails to extend to other levels and non-core due to laziness. So, not only can an animal companion take non-monster feats, but they necessarily have at least one no matter what, at least at particular level ranges.

[Jack_Simth]

Like the title says. Is an animal restricted to taking only monster feats?No such restriction exists, to my knowledge.

[Hiro Quester]

Thanks. The point about the examples helps, Eggynack.

[Fizban]

My favorite is the kung-fu wolf: Dire Wolves and some other animals have high strength scores but only one attack to use them on, so have it learn Improved Unarmed Strike to get an actual full attack. Not really all that effective but it's still easier than the Bounding Assault/Rapid Blitz massive pile of prerequisites and come on it's pretty cool. Also qualifies them for Improved Grapple later. Really most animals (and monsters) can easily be optimized for a lot more power; many have Alertness simply because the writers were too lazy to think of new feats when the 3.0-3.5 changeover increased the number of feats on a lot of monsters, Triceratops has Toughness x4 when it could at least have Improved Natural attack and Improved Crit like half the other monsters out there. The only good reason I can think of is that it does make it easier when you polymorph if you don't have to remove a bunch of feats from the statblock, but we all know that monsters were never written with player use in mind. I get annoyed knowing that the "CR" of a monster is based on the stats given, which often have terrible dumb choices but in other cases are perfectly optimized, so altering a monster can have dramatic effects (but I'll still take 3.5 over anything else).

[Urpriest]

"Monster Feats" aren't a concept in 3.5. There are feats that are easier for monsters to get, like those in the Monster Manual, but anyone with any DMing experience will recognize that most monsters in the Monster Manual, including most Animals, have feats from the Player's Handbook.

[Hiro Quester]

My favorite is the kung-fu wolf: Dire Wolves and some other animals have high strength scores but only one attack to use them on, so have it learn Improved Unarmed Strike to get an actual full attack. Not really all that effective but it's still easier than the Bounding Assault/Rapid Blitz massive pile of prerequisites and come on it's pretty cool. Also qualifies them for Improved Grapple later.

Exactly. I strongly considered this for my riding dog, because my Druid PC has taken a level of monk for these reasons. IUS lets you make unarmed strike plus all natural attacks as secondary attacks. Kung fu panda! Plus improved grapple for grappling wildshape forms.

I decided not to for riding dog, because hitting with the bite enables tripping, so weapon proficiency seemed more useful.

Edit: I meant weapon focus(bite)

[Darrin]

You're asking the wrong question. The right question would be: can my animal companion take Martial Study: Leading the Attack.

[Chronos]

While we're at it, PCs can also take monster feats. Improved Natural Attack is a common choice for monks, for instance.

However, also note that monster feats or no, a druid's player can't actually choose their pet's feats at all. The pet is an NPC, and hence decisions about its build are made by the DM. You can certainly request particular feats, but the DM doesn't even need to invoke Rule 0 to say no.

[Fizban]

I disagree: the pet is a class feature, with bonus tricks chosen by the druid. While it does not say the druid chooses skills and feats it's still part of their class writeup, there is no reason to assume the DM is given control of this decision, and the druid is perfectly capable of ditching companions over and over until they get one that learns the right feat if it comes down to it. The best answer is that whoever trains the animal picks the feats it learns (including feats for it's natural hit dice if it's trained from birth), and in most cases this will be the druid.

[lord_khaine]

Just because its something you gain from a class feature does not mean its still not a NPC as well. Its an independent creature, with its own mind and motivations (mainly food/sleep/sex).

And while skill tricks are specifically called out as something it can be taught, then i dont agree on feats being the same thing as that.

An animal companion are already a very strong class feature, i really dont see any reason whatsoever for picking the rule interpretation that makes it even stronger. And i would always support feats being picked up by the GM for it.

[Urpriest]

I disagree: the pet is a class feature, with bonus tricks chosen by the druid. While it does not say the druid chooses skills and feats it's still part of their class writeup, there is no reason to assume the DM is given control of this decision, and the druid is perfectly capable of ditching companions over and over until they get one that learns the right feat if it comes down to it. The best answer is that whoever trains the animal picks the feats it learns (including feats for it's natural hit dice if it's trained from birth), and in most cases this will be the druid.


Just because its something you gain from a class feature does not mean its still not a NPC as well. Its an independent creature, with its own mind and motivations (mainly food/sleep/sex).

And while skill tricks are specifically called out as something it can be taught, then i dont agree on feats being the same thing as that.

An animal companion are already a very strong class feature, i really dont see any reason whatsoever for picking the rule interpretation that makes it even stronger. And i would always support feats being picked up by the GM for it.

All of this is largely beside the point, because the DM and player will generally pick the same feats. The DM wants feats that bring the animal to the optimization level of the party and serve to highlight the creature's combat style in an aesthetically pleasing way. The player wants an animal companion that can keep up with the party in combat without overshadowing anyone, and that fights in a way that seems cool for that particular animal. The goals are exactly the same.

The only time there's conflict is when the DM forgets that D&D isn't adversarial (and thinks their role is to make things hard for the players, rather than making things appropriately challenging for them), or if the player forgets that they're playing a group game and need to peg their optimization level to the rest of the party so everyone can have fun. But in either situation there are much bigger problems to solve than who gets to pick an animal companion's feats.

[sideswipe]

You're asking the wrong question. The right question would be: can my animal companion take Martial Study: Leading the Attack wild cohort.

fixed that for you for funzies

[Solaris]

fixed that for you for funzies

And after that, getting sneak attack on the wolf-pack...

[atemu1234]

My favorite is the kung-fu wolf: Dire Wolves and some other animals have high strength scores but only one attack to use them on, so have it learn Improved Unarmed Strike to get an actual full attack. Not really all that effective but it's still easier than the Bounding Assault/Rapid Blitz massive pile of prerequisites and come on it's pretty cool. Also qualifies them for Improved Grapple later. Really most animals (and monsters) can easily be optimized for a lot more power; many have Alertness simply because the writers were too lazy to think of new feats when the 3.0-3.5 changeover increased the number of feats on a lot of monsters, Triceratops has Toughness x4 when it could at least have Improved Natural attack and Improved Crit like half the other monsters out there. The only good reason I can think of is that it does make it easier when you polymorph if you don't have to remove a bunch of feats from the statblock, but we all know that monsters were never written with player use in mind. I get annoyed knowing that the "CR" of a monster is based on the stats given, which often have terrible dumb choices but in other cases are perfectly optimized, so altering a monster can have dramatic effects (but I'll still take 3.5 over anything else).

This is going to be fun.

Now I want to see a Martial Study Tyrannosaurus Rex.

[Darrin]

Now I want to see a Martial Study Tyrannosaurus Rex.

Still needs a tuxedo, Walther-P99, and a TARDIS (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2011/04/04).