# Fleshraker dinosaur animal companion -- opinions?



## Olgar Shiverstone (Mar 31, 2008)

What's the assessment of the balance of the fleshraker dinosaur (MMIII), particularly as an animal companion?

To me, it seems pretty dangerous for a CR2 creature.  AC is high for an animal at 20, hp average at 24, but the full attack damage output (at around 4d6+10 total for 4 attacks starting at +6 to hit) seems just insane when the three poisoned attacks' damage (1d6 Dex primary/secondary each) is added in -- and that's not counting the rake or the leaping pounce ability.  

It seems like a creature designed as a single monster against a party, but as an animal companion seems a little too generous.  Though it's clearly stated in MMIII as an option for a druid companion at (level-3) abilities ... wow, that poison is almost a single-round knockout for any creature that can be hit.

The level 6 vow of poverty druid in our campaign (yeah, I know that's borderline right there, but our DM recognizes it as such, and the player is a good guy who plays it well; he's certainly had many levels of suckitude to get there) came to today's session with one, and wildshaped into the critter as well.  Thematically it isn't a problem -- the campaign is Savage Tide, the druid is a jungle druid, and dinosaurs are around, so a druid wildshaping into a dino and with a dino companion is actually a good flavor fit for the campaign. With the animal companion adjustments, though, it was up at AC24, 45 hp (sames as the party fighter/blackguard), +8 "to hit" -- quite the damage potential when the poison damage is factored in.  It made for quite the threshing duo when the druid was wildshaped, too.  

Our DM decided to nerf the poison down to one save, 1d6 Dex damage max per round, even if all three poison attacks hit.  Any thoughts about this being appropriate?  Is the fleshraker over the top, or are we making too big a deal over the critter?  The druid player is having fun so we don't want to rain on his parade unnecessarily, but for a while there the fleshraker did seem to outshine the front liners (it did die at the end of today's session, along with the party warblade, but that's another story -- and I'm certainly happy that his damage output saved my character and several others during the course of the session).


----------



## Nifft (Mar 31, 2008)

That dinosaur is generally held to be one of the strongest forms available, and is head & shoulders above its compatriots.

It's a power boost to the Druid... and IMHO, Druids were one of the 2 strongest classes before this boost.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Olaf the Stout (Mar 31, 2008)

One of the players took a Bloodstriker Dinosaur (also MM3) as an animal companion in my campaign.  It is also listed as a possible animal companion for Druids.  He only got to have it for one session before the campaign ended but it was certainly powerful.  I think it would quite easily defeat an animal companion of similar power level from the MM1.

Olaf the Stout


----------



## Nifft (Mar 31, 2008)

Olgar Shiverstone said:
			
		

> The level 6 vow of poverty druid ... (sames as the party fighter/blackguard)



 Why isn't one of these two dead?

 -- N


----------



## Quartz (Mar 31, 2008)

If the druid is getting Exalted feats, then poison is right out.

And no way is the fleshraker CR2: it's a walking TPK for first to third level characters. It's got the HP of a 3rd level character, the AC of a 6th level character, the to hit of a 3rd-4th level character, and 4 attacks. CR 4 or 5 is more like it.


----------



## roguerouge (Mar 31, 2008)

Don't forget the extra-lethality of an adventure path when talking about balance issues.


----------



## Storminator (Mar 31, 2008)

The druid in Fleshraker wildshape with the Fleshraker animal companion?   

PS


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Mar 31, 2008)

Quartz said:
			
		

> If the druid is getting Exalted feats, then poison is right out.
> 
> And no way is the fleshraker CR2: it's a walking TPK for first to third level characters. It's got the HP of a 3rd level character, the AC of a 6th level character, the to hit of a 3rd-4th level character, and 4 attacks. CR 4 or 5 is more like it.




I did forget to mention the druid's Touch of Golden Ice feat, which gives him an "exalted" poison, too, though it admittedly only works against evil creatures.  Of course, since about the only thing we face are evvil creatures .... (Don't ask me to explain the concept of "exalted poison", as I didn't write the silly book.)



			
				Nifft said:
			
		

> Why isn't one of these two dead?
> 
> -- N




*shrug* Not my job to police another player's exaltedness.  Besides, the blackguard is more lawful than evil ... we (IC) wouldn't even know he was evil if he hadn't pinged the cleric's detect radar once, and she didn't tell everyone in the party.  He has something up his sleeve.  It's the half-drow rogue/swordsage with the full-on psychotic evil whose relationship baffles me.  My character is a chaotic-good (neutral tendencies) battlemancer who thinks both the druid and drow can't be trusted.


----------



## Nifft (Apr 1, 2008)

Olgar Shiverstone said:
			
		

> I did forget to mention the druid's Touch of Golden Ice feat, which gives him an "exalted" poison, too, though it admittedly only works against evil creatures.  Of course, since about the only thing we face are evvil creatures .... (Don't ask me to explain the concept of "exalted poison", as I didn't write the silly book.)



 The basic concept behind "ravages" is: it's like poison, but you can use it and stay Exalted.

It is indeed a silly book.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## akbearfoot (Apr 1, 2008)

How do you manage to have characters with exalted feats adventuring with evil characters?

It's pretty much spelled out that characters with exalted feats have to be the epitome of -goodness-  To me that precludes adventuring with people whom you know to be morally unsound.  If the cleric has even cast detect evil and knows there are evil PCs, then that is all the evidence you need....So in the interest of avoiding PCs kiling PCs either the evil PC needs to go, or the exalted character needs to go.


I think what the other guy meant about using poisons was that the rules explicitly say that using poison is considered an evil act, even though it doesen't automatically make your alignment evil if you use it.  Either way exalted characters are prohibited from doing 'evil things'  otherwise they aren't really exalted afterall.  As such, you should be prohibited from taking animal companions that use poison, or inflicting poison on your enemies (except for ravages).  You also can't cast the Poison Spell, or Creeping Doom since they inflict poisons.  Tell the druid to be happy with his Dienonychus.


----------



## moritheil (Apr 1, 2008)

Nifft said:
			
		

> The basic concept behind "ravages" is: it's like poison, but you can use it and stay Exalted.
> 
> It is indeed a silly book.
> 
> Cheers, -- N




Insert 10-page flamefest about ontological evil, ethics, and morality.

There.  Just preempting so no one else undertakes it.


----------



## Maldor (Apr 1, 2008)

akbearfoot said:
			
		

> How do you manage to have characters with exalted feats adventuring with evil characters?
> 
> It's pretty much spelled out that characters with exalted feats have to be the epitome of -goodness-  To me that precludes adventuring with people whom you know to be morally unsound.  If the cleric has even cast detect evil and knows there are evil PCs, then that is all the evidence you need....So in the interest of avoiding PCs kiling PCs either the evil PC needs to go, or the exalted character needs to go.
> 
> ...




so since pioson is evil that mean in your game all vipers and piosons spiders are evil
i'm also not wear of good creatures not being able to use pioson i know the pallys can't but thats becuase it's dishonorable 

P.S. don't forget BOED is 3.0 and many of the things it says are evil arn't in 3.5 like Death magic


----------



## Nifft (Apr 1, 2008)

Maldor said:
			
		

> so since pioson is evil that mean in your game all vipers and piosons spiders are evil



 Of course not. Animals and vermin don't have enough intelligence to be moral beings. They're always Neutral -- not by choice, but rather by default. They're not Lawful or Chaotic, either.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Failed Saving Throw (Apr 1, 2008)

Nifft said:
			
		

> Why isn't one of these two dead?
> 
> -- N




The warblade was attacked by a spear-wielding lhosk, and I rolled two 20s in a row on him. The crit killed him. 

The Fleshraker animal companion was dropped by an angry chimera.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Apr 1, 2008)

Olgar Shiverstone said:
			
		

> What's the assessment of the balance of the fleshraker dinosaur (MMIII), particularly as an animal companion?




I consider it to be completely over the top compared to other comparable creatures.

I seem to recall reading some kind of playtest report (not 4e)  on the wizards.com site which mentioned how a fleshraker animal companion completely dominated a game.

Regards


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 1, 2008)

Olgar Shiverstone said:
			
		

> What's the assessment of the balance of the fleshraker dinosaur (MMIII), particularly as an animal companion?




It's broken for it's CR.


----------



## eamon (Apr 2, 2008)

Jack99 said:
			
		

> It's broken for it's CR.



The fleshraker's pretty powerful for an animal companion of a 4th level druid.

On the other hand, if the entire party is heavily min-maxxed (and it looks like they are) a puny animal like the fleshraker isn't going to be dominating the game.

In any case, druid animal companions are pretty good around those levels:  A 3rd level druid can have a riding dog animal companion advanced by 2HD (in total thus 4HD and more than the druid himself), with more hit points than the fleshraker you only get next level and if you invest its feat in improved natural armor, the same AC.  Of course, you don't get the insane # of attacks and poison, but I'm just saying that low-level druid's have pretty good animal companions in any case.  A fleshraker's more powerful than other CR2 animals, but in a high-power party, it's not a big issue.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 2, 2008)

eamon said:
			
		

> The fleshraker's pretty powerful for an animal companion of a 4th level druid.
> 
> On the other hand, if the entire party is heavily min-maxxed (and it looks like they are) a puny animal like the fleshraker isn't going to be dominating the game.
> 
> In any case, druid animal companions are pretty good around those levels:  A 3rd level druid can have a riding dog animal companion advanced by 2HD (in total thus 4HD and more than the druid himself), with more hit points than the fleshraker you only get next level and if you invest its feat in improved natural armor, the same AC.  Of course, you don't get the insane # of attacks and poison, but I'm just saying that low-level druid's have pretty good animal companions in any case.  A fleshraker's more powerful than other CR2 animals, but in a high-power party, it's not a big issue.




Comparing the riding dog to the fleshraker:

riding dog (for a 4th level druid) 4d8+8 hp, bite +6 1d6+4 damage, ac 19
fleshraker (and lets forget about natural bond, since it is a very debated feat) 4d8+8 hp, claws(2) +6 1d6+3+poison, bite +1 1d6+1, tail 1d6+1+poison, ac 20

So, same HPs, more or less same AC (fleshraker wins by a very small margin). However, max damage (no crits) for the mutt is 10, while it is 32 + 18 dex damage for the fleshraker. Even though 2 of the attacks has little chance to hit, the claw attacks are just as good as the dog's, there are two of them, with dex poison damage on top.

That is, in my mind, quite a bit of a difference. Not to mention that the fleshraker can benefit much more from the feats that it will gain as it increases in HD (multi-attack and focus ability (poison) both come to mind). The DEX damage is lethal against many targets.

Anyway, YMMV ofc.

Cheers


----------



## eamon (Apr 2, 2008)

Jack99 said:
			
		

> Comparing the riding dog to the fleshraker:
> 
> riding dog (for a 4th level druid) 4d8+8 hp, bite +6 1d6+4 damage, ac 19
> fleshraker (and lets forget about natural bond, since it is a very debated feat) 4d8+8 hp, claws(2) +6 1d6+3+poison, bite +1 1d6+1, tail 1d6+1+poison, ac 20
> ...



Of course, that's not a correct comparison.

Firstly, a riding dog has those stats on a _3rd_ level druid, which is a nice bonus!

Then, since you've added a 4th HD, you may add +1 to an ability score, which ,since constitution is odd (and str/dex aren't any longer) you'd most reasonably add to Con.  Also, you can add a feat, and for fair comparison, adding improved natural armor is reasonable so both have exactly the same AC, even though potentially more useful feats do exist.

So, a riding dog would have slightly more hp (4 more), the same AC, the same attack bonus, but far fewer attacks, no pounce and no poison.

is a fleshraker more powerful?  Yes.  But it's also one level higher.  You could also get a dire bat, for the same AC, again slightly more hp (30), but large and flying (i.e. a handy mount) and with the potentially useful blindsense.

Is the fleshraker too good an upgrade for a mere one level bump?  Perhaps.  But it's not going to be a problem in a party which is strongly min-maxed, and certainly not in a party like the actual poster's, which included a bunch of dubious Exalted stuff and whatnot.

_Edited to add_: Oh yeah, and don't forget that riding dogs (can) come trained for war, which means they can wear armor without extra penalties, which is a BIG boost!

In other words...  it might be a problem in some situations, but it shouldn't be a big one in this particular case.  I think the DM's ruling that the poison applies max once per round is a good compromise.

Like many other splat book abilities, it's not broken per se, merely powerful, and it's most problematic when only part of the party is using that kind of stuff.  As long as everyone is benefiting from splat-book power-creep, then it's a question of taste; do you like splat books or not?


----------



## Evilhalfling (Apr 2, 2008)

somebody want to run a comparison fleshraker vs 6th lvl animal companions? 
It might provide enlightenment.
I would balk at a posion-spewing dinosaur for an exalted PC - think of common attitutdes towards spiders and snakes, yes there natural  but they have a terrible reputaion.


----------



## Olaf the Stout (Apr 3, 2008)

How do people think the Fleshraker compares to the Bloodstriker Dinosaur (also from MM3)?

Olaf the Stout


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 3, 2008)

I forgot about the feat, so yeah, same AC if you will. But Animal Companions get STR/DEX as they increase in HD, instead of the usual +1 stat, so no CON increase for the dog. At least, that was my impression from the rules.

Cheers


----------



## Nifft (Apr 3, 2008)

eamon said:
			
		

> is a fleshraker more powerful?  Yes.  But it's also one level higher.  You could also get a dire bat, for the same AC, again slightly more hp (30), but large and flying (i.e. a handy mount) and with the potentially useful blindsense.



 Dire bats have one attack. They're useful as mounts, but less than mediocre as combatants.



			
				eamon said:
			
		

> Like many other splat book abilities, it's not broken per se, merely powerful, and it's most problematic when only part of the party is using that kind of stuff.  As long as everyone is benefiting from splat-book power-creep, then it's a question of taste; do you like splat books or not?



 The poison alone is better than anything any other animal companion can get. The fleshraker combines the AC & special attack of a controller (riding dog) with the Pounce special attack of a striker (panther) and adds in triple the power of a debuff specialist (viper).

If you took away ALL of its poison and removed pouncing trip, it'd be a reasonable comparison. Pounce + Rake is a very nice combo.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## kitsune_kune (Mar 9, 2011)

*One thing easily missed*

I know this is an old thread, but I wanted to add my 2 cents

In the descriptor of the Fleshraker, just above the description of Leaping Pounce, it Has an extra line that clearly states the Fleshraker CANNOT sue both bite and tail attack on the same opponent in the same round. This effectively limits its attacks to 3. Once read, why anyone would choose bite over tail is beyond me.

Trust me, I missed the text line many times aswell, just noticed it recently


----------



## the Jester (Mar 9, 2011)

kitsune_kune said:


> I know this is an old thread, but I wanted to add my 2 cents
> 
> In the descriptor of the Fleshraker, just above the description of Leaping Pounce, it Has an extra line that clearly states the Fleshraker CANNOT sue both bite and tail attack on the same opponent in the same round. This effectively limits its attacks to 3. Once read, why anyone would choose bite over tail is beyond me.




It just means that it's hurting multiple opponents.


----------

