Barbarian wants a pet wolf.

[Hollysword]

My party's barbarian wants a pet, some kind of animal companion. How can I balance this, he insists that barbarians usually has pet wolves.

[Giant2005]

The best way is to simply have him multiclass in 3 or more Ranger levels (which isn't actually much of a cost because Barbs don't gain much of anything past level 5).
Or you can just let him purchase a wolf as a pet for around 200g, and have him spend an action to make an animal handling check every time he wants to have it attack in combat.

[Hudsonian]

Give it to him... no upgrades. Same attacks as beastmaster but only against the same enemy that the barbarian is currently engaging. No pack tactics. I guarantee that he will decide he is better off just keeping the wolf out of harms way and he will still get to have his pet... or he can let it fight and it will die in an expedient manner with no special effort from you. Also, maybe start it out as a cub? For flavor.

[Hollysword]

Yeah, he wants one starting as a cub. I'll let him have a full wolf at level 3. Would it unbalance the party too much though?

[Giant2005]

Yeah, he wants one starting as a cub. I'll let him have a full wolf at level 3. Would it unbalance the party too much though?

It depends on how you handle it. It will be fine if you use any of the above solutions. If you just give it to him as basically another complete character under his control, then of course it will be unbalanced - two characters is always going to be better than the one that everyone else is stuck with.

If you want to, just give him the Ranger's Beastmaster subclass instead of his choice of Barbarian one. The levels work out pretty okay (just have the BM abilities come one level later with the exception of the level 3 one) and it wouldn't be too broken - it would deal a bit more damage than a Ranger BM, but the loss of Ranger utility is enough compensation.

[DragonSorcererX]

Yeah, he wants one starting as a cub. I'll let him have a full wolf at level 3. Would it unbalance the party too much though?

Give him one and count the wolf as pc until he stops making much difference (like when the melee pcs are powerful enough to kill 4 mooks in one round and the wolf struggles with one) and adapt the size of the encounters to fit the new size of the party.

[comk59]

I have an Owlbear following the party, and it hasn't unbalanced much. That may be because the Bard that charmed him won't let him get into combat that looks too dangerous.

[Hollysword]

Ok, how about this. A new subclass for the barbarian:

3rd level - Animal Companion, same as ranger's but only count half of the barbarian level for the HP, and half of proficiency for the bonuses. Also no favored terrain.

6th level - Dead level, not sure what to put in (maybe Primeval Awareness that uses rage to activate?)

10th level - Exceptional Training (same as ranger's 7th level)

14th level - Bestial Fury (same as ranger's 11th level)

The barbarian doesn't get Share Spells due to lack of spells. The lack of magical bonding also means they don't get the features as soon as the ranger does, getting them 3 levels after the ranger's instead, and the additional bonuses for the animal are only half as good. Any idea what to put as the 6th level bonus though?

[Tanarii]

As a subclass replacement it's probably too weak to give the companion 2 HP / Barb level. 4/level is a bit survivable with lots of barding and sniping around the edges of combat. Half that won't be.

Besides, unlike a ranger, there's almost no chance the wolf will do comparable damage to the Barbarian just doing his normal thing and reckless attacking with a greataxe. Especially if feats are in the game, since any Barb in a feat game will want to take GWM as soon as they can.

So basically, he's blowing a subclass for a set of features he'll almost never use.

IMO he's best off just raising it as an NPC companion that doesn't have any mechanical side to it. In other words doesn't mechanically contribute to combat, even if he's technically involved in it. For the cool factor.

[Giant2005]

As a subclass replacement it's probably too weak to give the companion 2 HP / Barb level. 4/level is a bit survivable with lots of barding and sniping around the edges of combat. Half that won't be.

Besides, unlike a ranger, there's almost no chance the wolf will do comparable damage to the Barbarian just doing his normal thing and reckless attacking with a greataxe. Especially if feats are in the game, since any Barb in a feat game will want to take GWM as soon as they can.

So basically, he's blowing a subclass for a set of features he'll almost never use.

IMO he's best off just raising it as an NPC companion that doesn't have any mechanical side to it. In other words doesn't mechanically contribute to combat, even if he's technically involved in it. For the cool factor.

He could be going with a Dex-based Sword and Boarder. Combine his ridiculous AC, Rage Resistances, and Mounted Combatant and they would be a really tough team to beat. Neither the mount nor Barb would be taking any damage worth noting down.

[Hollysword]

As a subclass replacement it's probably too weak to give the companion 2 HP / Barb level. 4/level is a bit survivable with lots of barding and sniping around the edges of combat. Half that won't be.

Besides, unlike a ranger, there's almost no chance the wolf will do comparable damage to the Barbarian just doing his normal thing and reckless attacking with a greataxe. Especially if feats are in the game, since any Barb in a feat game will want to take GWM as soon as they can.

So basically, he's blowing a subclass for a set of features he'll almost never use.

IMO he's best off just raising it as an NPC companion that doesn't have any mechanical side to it. In other words doesn't mechanically contribute to combat, even if he's technically involved in it. For the cool factor.

I just didn't want to make him overshadow actual ranger beastmasters (the party has one), so I reduced the HP gain and Prof gain of the pet. The barbarian player still insists barbarians commonly keep pets as attacking beasts. I don't know what to do.

[Giant2005]

I just didn't want to make him overshadow actual ranger beastmasters (the party has one), so I reduced the HP gain and Prof gain of the pet. The barbarian player still insists barbarians commonly keep pets as attacking beasts. I don't know what to do.

Have you actually started playing yet? It sounds to me like he really wants to play a Ranger with the Outlander background. He doesn't need to be a Barbarian to be barbaric.

[JellyPooga]

One option is to contradict this player. It's your game, your world. Tell him that no, Barbarians don't in fact keep wolves as attack dogs. That's the easiest, if least satisfactory approach; GM's should say yes when they can.

The next option is to tell him that yes, Barbarian tribes often keep wolf attack dogs, but their handlers have the Ranger Class, not Barbarian. The Barbarian Class is reserved for the warriors of the tribe.

Third option; tell him to multiclass with Ranger. Suboptimal, but he gets his pet.

Fourth; tell him to take the Magic Initiate (Druid) feat and take the Animal Friendship spell as his 1st level pick.

Fifth; give him a baseline wolf as an NPC pet. Animal Handling to control it.

Sixth; homebrew a Barbarian Path to include a pet.

I don't recommend (6).

(4) and (5) will get him a pet that will likely die in short order. Maybe that's what he needs; a proverbial slap in the face to make him realise that no, adventuring Barbarians with the Barbarian Class don't actually get pets. If you do go with (4) or (5), be sure to adjust encounter difficulties to account for the wolf as long as it's alive.

(3) will make him feel gimped. It's a seriously underpowered option.

(2) is the best option here if all he really wants is a pet; just because this character has a barbarian background, doesn't mean he has the Barbarian Class.

[Asmotherion]

Have him roll-play his backround with the pet in a solo session. Or have him buy it and then train it by spending 1 hour of downtime per day using a handle animal check... He should pass the DC set by you 10 different days to teach an order to the wolf.

[Hollysword]

Have you actually started playing yet? It sounds to me like he really wants to play a Ranger with the Outlander background. He doesn't need to be a Barbarian to be barbaric.

Yeah, we've had a session, he wants to be a barbarian for the huge HP pool and the rage.

[JellyPooga]

Yeah, we've had a session, he wants to be a barbarian for the huge HP pool and the rage.

In that case, point him to the book and ask where he found the part about Barbarians with pet wolves.

If he wants it as a fluff thing, give it to him. Just adjust your encounter difficulties and play the NPC wolf appropriately (won't attack undead, fearful of fire or loud noises, etc). If he wants it as a Class feature, point him in the direction of the Druid or Ranger and tell him to multiclass.

[Hollysword]

In that case, point him to the book and ask where he found the part about Barbarians with pet wolves.

If he wants it as a fluff thing, give it to him. Just adjust your encounter difficulties and play the NPC wolf appropriately (won't attack undead, fearful of fire or loud noises, etc). If he wants it as a Class feature, point him in the direction of the Druid or Ranger and tell him to multiclass.

He is adamant that it is going to be a fluff thing. He's seen barbarians in other media that runs into battle with a pet running beside them. Looks like I'll have to adjust for this pet, once he proves he can handle such a pet (animal handling, I'll make it DC 20... his abysmal Wis should keep him entertained for enough sessions). How much should I adjust the difficulty to accommodate a CR 1/4 beast in the party once it joins the party?

[Giant2005]

He is adamant that it is going to be a fluff thing. He's seen barbarians in other media that runs into battle with a pet running beside them. Looks like I'll have to adjust for this pet, once he proves he can handle such a pet (animal handling, I'll make it DC 20... his abysmal Wis should keep him entertained for enough sessions). How much should I adjust the difficulty to accommodate a CR 1/4 beast in the party once it joins the party?

I really think you are being a bit too gullible. Him wanting the wolf for fluff reasons and wanting Rage and d12 HD for purely mechanical reasons; don't really mesh well.
He obviously doesn't give much of a crap about the fluff if he isn't willing to sacrifice mechanics for it.

[JellyPooga]

I really think you are being a bit too gullible. Him wanting the wolf for fluff reasons and wanting Rage and d12 HD for purely mechanical reasons; don't really mesh well.
He obviously doesn't give much of a crap about the fluff if he isn't willing to sacrifice mechanics for it.

To be fair, a bog-standard wolf isn't going to last long, even at 1st level. The first hard fight it gets involved in will probably see its demise and unless this player goes home to get another trained, pet wolf, that'll be the end of it.

As for adjusting encounter difficulties; I wouldn't worry too much about it. I'd simply count it as one additional 1st level party member, without it improving, but still sucking up a share of the XP. That is, unless, the player has no intention of involving it in combat, much as a riding horse is not (which I gather isn't the case here).

Oh, one other thing. Make him pay for it out of his starting gold. A Mastiff is CR 1/8 and costs 25gp. For a Wolf (CR 1/4), let's just double it to 50gp. Done. He's paid a cost for something that he'll probably get fairly limited use out of.

Finally; make sure "civilised" folk react appropriately to the presence of a wolf. A wolf is not a dog and many rural communities might react...aggressively to its presence. Town guards may not even let it through the gates.

[Hudsonian]

If you take away pack tactics and only allow it to attack as one of the attacks of the barbarian it won't affect the balance of encounters at all. But will still let him play with his pet wolf.

Also, give the poor canine death saving throws. Don't make it be dead as soon as hp =0

Oh, and the knock down effect. Make it a grapple effect instead.the DC is so low it shouldn't come into effect that much. And if it does, it should cause aggro. Maybe the barb can choose grapple or no.

[Hudsonian]

What is the beast master's companion? Wold it get along with the wolf? I feel like there could be some interesting dynamics in that relationship.

[JellyPooga]

If you take away pack tactics and only allow it to attack as one of the attacks of the barbarian it won't affect the balance of encounters at all. But will still let him play with his pet wolf.

I beg to differ; it will affect the balance of encounters...negatively for the PC's. Even granting the Wolf its Pack Tactics, a Barbarian Greataxe with Str:16, Reckless Attack and Rage is a far better proposition than the Wolfs +4(w.advantage)/2d4+2 plus prone on a DC:11 Strength save.

I don't see a problem running this wolf as an NPC, bought with money, not improving and directed in combat using Handle Animal. If the player is looking for some kind of cheesy advantage, he's not going to get it; he didn't want a dog, which might be trained for war, he wanted a wolf:
- At the first sign of something unnatural, noisy or scary, it should probably bolt. Possibly never to return. Good luck getting it to attack any Undead, Ooze, Aberration, Fiend, Plants, some Fey, probably most Celestials, Dragons, Monstrosities and Elementals. In fact, it's probably easier to say that it will only go for Humanoids and Giants and even some of them it might shy away from without some kind of incentive. Oh, better hope whatever you want it to attack isn't using big flashy spells, flaming torches or the like too. Not unless your Handle Animal skill is phenomenal, I suppose...
- As the PC's approach town, our Barbarian will have to keep a very tight leash to stop it from ravaging the local population of sheep, goats and chickens. Wolves are predatory and I don't know that any Farmer likes a wolf hanging around his flocks, let alone eating them.
- If he manages to get it into town, the locals should probably make comment about the friggin' wolf in town; good luck getting a room at the inn without causing a stir.
- Local guard? They'll probably shoot it on sight unless you've got a collar on it, in which case they might ask to see your dog-fighting license. No license? Well, if you'll just come with us, we'll get you all set up with one and you can pay the fine while you're at it. Don't want to pay? Ah, now we have a problem. You could attack or kill the guard, I suppose, but then you'll be done for assault or murder...

[Tanarii]

He is adamant that it is going to be a fluff thing. He's seen barbarians in other media that runs into battle with a pet running beside them. Looks like I'll have to adjust for this pet, once he proves he can handle such a pet (animal handling, I'll make it DC 20... his abysmal Wis should keep him entertained for enough sessions). How much should I adjust the difficulty to accommodate a CR 1/4 beast in the party once it joins the party?if it's just for fluff reasons you don't need to adjust at all. The wolf cannot make attacks, cannot be targeted or take damage, or block movement. Done.

Mechanically it doesn't exist in any way. Now it's a fluff thing.

[Sigreid]

I'd let him buy a wolf, same as buying a dog in the PHB and just not be careful with it. It won't last long enough to be a bother, it won't coordinate attacks with the party (you decide what it attacks), It won't be particularly stealthy. It doesn't have any special defense against AOE or control spells. Just play it like a dog and it'll be more of a burden than a help.

Yes, dogs can be helpful in particular circumstances, but mostly by using it's nose to find things or attacking common villagers. A wolf or a dog is no match for a real PC monster fight.

[Thrudd]

I would let him have a wolf pet, or at least let him find one and train it if he has the skills to do so. Treat it like an NPC member of the party that you control which might follow his commands if he rolls high enough on animal handling. Have it behave like an animal would. It will pretty much attack whatever is attacking him. If it gets hurt, it will likely run away and hide, and it might be hesitant to approach really large or strange creatures or objects.

[Asmotherion]

if it's just for fluff reasons you don't need to adjust at all. The wolf cannot make attacks, cannot be targeted or take damage, or block movement. Done.

Mechanically it doesn't exist in any way. Now it's a fluff thing.

You just described my car since yesterday.... It's not really working or taking me anywere... it's just a fluff thing...

[Knaight]

if it's just for fluff reasons you don't need to adjust at all. The wolf cannot make attacks, cannot be targeted or take damage, or block movement. Done.

Mechanically it doesn't exist in any way. Now it's a fluff thing.

Mechanics and fluff don't decouple that neatly. In setting, the barbarian is supposed to have a wolf. Some sort of wolf that can never actually do anything doesn't come across like a wolf in the setting but some sort of bizarre wolf-phantom.

[Sigreid]

Mechanics and fluff don't decouple that neatly. In setting, the barbarian is supposed to have a wolf. Some sort of wolf that can never actually do anything doesn't come across like a wolf in the setting but some sort of bizarre wolf-phantom.

I really don't know where this idea comes from that all barbarians have wolves. /shrug

[Knaight]

I really don't know where this idea comes from that all barbarians have wolves. /shrug

Neither do I, but that's besides the point. The given character that the player is trying to make is a barbarian with at least one wolf. A barbarian described as having at least one wolf where the wolf has no ability to interact with the setting mechanically doesn't represent a barbarian with a wolf well in-setting.

[Shining Wrath]

So your barbarian seems to be a bit of a munchkin. There's absolutely no reason a barbarian's pet should have beastmaster ranger progression at all, which is a special class feature. It's as though he said he was proficient in a musical instrument because Outlander background, therefore he can cast Bard spells.

Let any character who wants one have a pet. The pet is an NPC, and you play them according to their description in the monster manual. A wolf would probably defend its master against some threats and flee others. Throw in innkeeps who won't want the wolf in their place and the creature blowing a few stealth checks by snarling or barking.

[Sigreid]

Neither do I, but that's besides the point. The given character that the player is trying to make is a barbarian with at least one wolf. A barbarian described as having at least one wolf where the wolf has no ability to interact with the setting mechanically doesn't represent a barbarian with a wolf well in-setting.

If I were going to allow him to get one, and I probably would, as stated earlier I would just have it be a wolf and he'd have no more control over it than one would over a pet. And it probably would not survive.

[Shining Wrath]

If I were going to allow him to get one, and I probably would, as stated earlier I would just have it be a wolf and he'd have no more control over it than one would over a pet. And it probably would not survive.

Yeah, it's not an animal companion. It's not a familiar. It's a pet. Let him have it, and even give him advantage on his Animal Handling checks. One Fireball and it's gone.

[Asmotherion]

An other way I figured to make it work: make it a feat. Since you can be a spellcaster with a feat, why not get a pet option out of an other?

[Hudsonian]

OR use the new ranger beastmaster. Maybe adjust the levels so that they don't have a blank level. But besides that. Looks like it could be fun.

Edit for Clarity: This is as opposed to Totem or Berserker. Might have to remove "Coordinated attack" as that would be WAY overpowered on top of Extra Attack.

big balance issues early, but balances out at the end.

[Tanarii]

The new beastmaster demonstrates that allowing a beast on top of extra attacks at all is 'overpowered'. They took extra attack away from the new beastmaster in return for the beast.

So you could do the same with this Barbarian. Allow him to trade in Extra Attack and his Path for the new Beastmaster subclass abilities.

[Maxilian]

Why not treat it as a Mastiff (at least at the start), they are already balanced to be around low lvl players (having in mind how cheap Mastiffs are)

[Hudsonian]

The new beastmaster demonstrates that allowing a beast on top of extra attacks at all is 'overpowered'. They took extra attack away from the new beastmaster in return for the beast.

So you could do the same with this Barbarian. Allow him to trade in Extra Attack and his Path for the new Beastmaster subclass abilities.

Not quite the same. I'm going to say this once and then let other people fight over it because in reality I don't have an animal companion this fight. But here goes:

They didn't "Remove" extra attack. The replaced it with coordinated attack which is a very flavorful and interesting way of having that extra attack, but it did come with a penalty. HOWEVER, the penalty here is significantly larger if you take the attack away from the PC and give it to the companion due to damage dealing capability differences. AND the added amount of damage is less percentage-wise for the same reason. Adding in that the other two classes have similarly powerful 3rd level abilities and that both of them have much more powerful other abilities and really you aren't making him too powerful. ESPECIALLY if the wolf is dead in some quest where 8 hours is a really long time to be in one spot. This gives the barbarian (which has similar fluff to the ranger) a really cool alternative that could be AWESOME for the player, yet a couple of mooks could still cause major danger to a huge part of who that character is.

TLDR: Big damage boost, but IMHO not a big deal in the long run.

[Tanarii]

You're wrong. Coordinated attack has nothing to do with it. They added a beast that comes with its own attack instead of the weird ranger controls the attack ability. And because of that, they removed extra attack.

Coordinated attack replaces the old ability for the companion to attack twice and still have the ranger attack. It has nothing to do with the Extra Attack equivalent.

So the Barbarian needs to do exactly the same. If he gets a companion (which comes with one attack even before coordinated attack) he should sacrifice extra attack.

[Telesto]

Just... give him a wolfpup when he's like level 3. When it hits adulthood it will still just be a wolf that's combat trained. He'll probably keep it out of harm's way. Maybe when he's a higher level he ends up with a pack of wolves... which is still just a pack of wolves.

Charge him gold for them, though, and time/food/etc

[N810]

Maybe give him some features if he choses all wolf totem paths, over the ever so popular bear totem.

[TripleD]

A while back someone posted a thread about a new way to deal with NPCs. Their idea was to treat them almost as equipped items; they add a few extra abilities, but otherwise do not exist mechanically.

New Rule: Pets
* A Player Character may have one pet at no penalty. Multiple pets impose disadvantage on any Animal Handling checks for pets
* Pets occupy the same space as their handlers.
* If a Pet had an ability to interact with an object or creature away from its master, it may not willingly end its turn away from its master (i.e. May not willingly interact with anything more than half its speed distance away)
* Pets may not be attacked directly unless the PC is restrained or unconscious (DMs discretion). Area effects hit them normally.
* *Animal Throw* : some pet abilities ask for an Animal Throw to set the DC for a task. This is equal to pet's relevant modifier + an Animal Handling Check from you.
* *Panic*: if a pet is hit in combat, make an Animal Handling check equal to 10 + Pet's HD. On a failed save roll a d6:
1 : Take damage equal to the pet damage
2-3: A random creature within 1/2 you pet's speed takes damage equal to your pets damage.
4-6: Pet flees battle. Pet may be recovered at DMs discretion.
Roll the d6 every turn until you succeed on the check. You have disadvantage on this check if the pet is larger than you.
If you are unable to speak or interact with your pet you automatically fail this check.

We could take that idea for the wolf:
HP: 11 AC: 13 Pet Damage: 7
* Trip. As an action you may make a Animal Throw(STR) attempt against any adjacent foe. It must succeed or be knocked prone.
* Scent and Smell. You have advantage on any Perception checks which rely on scent or hearing

I thought about making the trip a bonus action, but that makes a bit too powerful for my liking.

[Finback]

What's the PC's Int. score? Is the wolf's higher? Then you just have the wolf be smart enough to stay out of combat, knowing he has a big meatshield to handle things.

[Thrudd]

A while back someone posted a thread about a new way to deal with NPCs. Their idea was to treat them almost as equipped items; they add a few extra abilities, but otherwise do not exist mechanically.

New Rule: Pets
* A Player Character may have one pet at no penalty. Multiple pets impose disadvantage on any Animal Handling checks for pets
* Pets occupy the same space as their handlers.
* If a Pet had an ability to interact with an object or creature away from its master, it may not willingly end its turn away from its master (i.e. May not willingly interact with anything more than half its speed distance away)
* Pets may not be attacked directly unless the PC is restrained or unconscious (DMs discretion). Area effects hit them normally.
* *Animal Throw* : some pet abilities ask for an Animal Throw to set the DC for a task. This is equal to pet's relevant modifier + an Animal Handling Check from you.
* *Panic*: if a pet is hit in combat, make an Animal Handling check equal to 10 + Pet's HD. On a failed save roll a d6:
1 : Take damage equal to the pet damage
2-3: A random creature within 1/2 you pet's speed takes damage equal to your pets damage.
4-6: Pet flees battle. Pet may be recovered at DMs discretion.
Roll the d6 every turn until you succeed on the check. You have disadvantage on this check if the pet is larger than you.
If you are unable to speak or interact with your pet you automatically fail this check.

We could take that idea for the wolf:
HP: 11 AC: 13 Pet Damage: 7
* Trip. As an action you may make a Animal Throw(STR) attempt against any adjacent foe. It must succeed or be knocked prone.
* Scent and Smell. You have advantage on any Perception checks which rely on scent or hearing

I thought about making the trip a bonus action, but that makes a bit too powerful for my liking.
Treating NPCs like extra PC abilities is a bad idea. It is too divorced from the reality of the game world.

It's also a lot of new rules for something that already exists in the game. It doesn't need to be this complicated. A pet is an NPC, run by the DM like any NPC, it's stats are in the back of the PHB or MM. The PC "owner" can use their skills or abilities to give the pet simple commands that you would expect a trained animal to understand: "attack" "stay" "come" "fetch" "find the scent". When not under command, it will behave with animal intelligence. Walk along with the group, sniffing stuff. Maybe attack what is attacking their master. Growl at strange things. Run away or hide when it gets hurt. It can be targeted like all creatures can, DM will decide if an enemy would target it: definitely if it is attacking something, that something will probably defend itself.

[Malifice]

The best way is to simply have him multiclass in 3 or more Ranger levels (which isn't actually much of a cost because Barbs don't gain much of anything past level 5).

Brutal critical and more rages per day?

If your DM is sticking to anything resembling the 6-8 encounter adventuring day, being able to rage in more of them is totally worth sticking it out for.

[Tanarii]

Treating NPCs like extra PC abilities is a bad idea. It is too divorced from the reality of the game world.
You'd be amazed at how many people disagree with this sentiment. Every extra NPC is extra time taken at the table controlling them, slowing down the game.

This goes for Animal Companions and Summons too. It's on reason the original Ranger was written as it was. And despite the constant moaning, accepted by many DMs and Players. Especially common among those that had played at a table with 3.5 Druids.

[Kurt Kurageous]

Ok, so here comes the attempt at realism...

Yer wolf thinks you are the alpha. So it...

hangs out in with the party. It's a watchdog, not a guard or attack dog. When you rest, it rests. If it hears noises, it gives out soft growls, starts pacing around you, or looks at you then freezes in a point pose. When violence happens, it lets you deal with it, because that's what the pack leader alpha does. Sure, it will run next to you and wag its tongue and tail, but it's not a trained fighting machine. Once it has warned you, it will get behind you and the party and bark its head off and snarl intimidatingly when the bad guys show up. It will circle a BBEG and cut off their escape. It might run down a goblin. It will snarl at the rogue if that dang Halfling looks at your backpack too closely. But attack something bigger than it? Not likely. That's not its role in the pack. That's yours.

That's the most a PET wolf will do. See Dances With Wolves.

Real attack/patrol dogs are worth thousands of dollars IRL for the amount of hours put into them to attack on command, hold an enemy, and not do things an untrained dog will do by instinct and habit.

He has NO skill as a trainer, he cannot know how to create a killing machine out of a puppy. But he should have something useful in a pet wolf, just not something very useful in combat.

Now if you go see the old packmaster back at the tribe, he may have a one or two year old mastiff spec'ed or even wolf spec'ed dog he'd be willing to sell for about twice the price of a riding horse. That dog could do anything anyone wants it to against a humanoid or quadruped. It wouldn't know what to do with a Behir, ooze, roper, or other weird looking thing.

End attempt at realism.

[TripleD]

It's also a lot of new rules for something that already exists in the game. It doesn't need to be this complicated.


Oh I completely agree that the system I gave is overly complicated. I pulled it out of my rear and it definitely needs a lot of polish and reworking to fit in with the aesthetic of 5e.

But as for the general idea...





Treating NPCs like extra PC abilities is a bad idea. It is too divorced from the reality of the game world.

You'd be amazed at how many people disagree with this sentiment. Every extra NPC is extra time taken at the table controlling them, slowing down the game.

This goes for Animal Companions and Summons too. It's on reason the original Ranger was written as it was. And despite the constant moaning, accepted by many DMs and Players. Especially common among those that had played at a table with 3.5 Druids.


I found the thread I was referring to before:

NPC Companion System Idea (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?459858-NPC-Companion-System-Idea&highlight=NPC)

Like Tamarii said, a lot of people (myself included) really like the idea of abstract NPCs. Added new players or summoned monsters to the party is fun, but adding them as full creatures in combat can break action economy and is frankly a pain to keep track of. This is one case where I am more than willing to go "gamist" over "simulationist".

[Thrudd]

Oh I completely agree that the system I gave is overly complicated. I pulled it out of my rear and it definitely needs a lot of polish and reworking to fit in with the aesthetic of 5e.

But as for the general idea...



I found the thread I was referring to before:

NPC Companion System Idea (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?459858-NPC-Companion-System-Idea&highlight=NPC)

Like Tamarii said, a lot of people (myself included) really like the idea of abstract NPCs. Added new players or summoned monsters to the party is fun, but adding them as full creatures in combat can break action economy and is frankly a pain to keep track of. This is one case where I am more than willing to go "gamist" over "simulationist".

Right. To me, the point of getting help from NPCs and summoning spells is to "break action economy" aka, outnumber the enemy or at least shore up your numbers against being overwhelmed. This is balanced by not allowing permanent animal and npc party members that are too powerful, remaining mostly under DM control so they can't be used like tactical extensions of the PCs, morale rules which means they could decide to retreat if things look bad, enemies target them just like any other character. It isn't any more "breaking" or time consuming than if the party had more players (in fact it is less, because there are fewer people making the decisions for these characters). You just need to be aware that those npcs are not weapons and shields for your PCs, they are separate people/creatures with their own agendas. That goes for animal companions, to me, as well. I don't like the beastmaster ranger class at all.