>DM won't allow animal companions
Is there a good reason to do this? Also, Animal thread.
Big Minion Master Fan here.
DM hates how long it takes me to get all my Animals to attack. He usually just makes them all do the same attack at once and stop them from doing anything too complex.
He also hates how many quirks I give my lil buddies. It can't just be a boar, it has to be a energetic little shit that tries to guide your hand to it's ears. Can't just be an attack dog, I'd have to make it a sick old dog who does Poison Damage when biting.
Continuing with your post, have another Dolphin.
>>45890087
Dolphins are greats. Anyone have tips on how to make a merman character?
>Search for merman art
>Mostly gay shit
Fucking why?
They're a fucking pain in the ass to deal with and just more paperwork. Then everyone else wants them and before you know it you've got a fucking zoo following you everywhere.
>>45890313
because tumblr has feelings
>>45890087
i also think this kind of thing takes way too fucking time as well
for me a DM should allow people have pets but for class only and 2 at max.
>>45890481
I know merman aren't considered the manliest creature but I thought they would get more regular art.
Deal with it or leave the group. Problem solved.
>>45890087
It's not just DM'S that think it's a pain. I've played campaigns with minion mongers and it's like having a party of 15 people. The 4 other players take their turns then it's smoke break time for 20 minutes while the weasel, rat, 2 wolves, lion, bear, snow leopard, hawk, dire boar, 3 three summoned scorpions, and an emu individually go through a turn.
Then it's mongers turn to do something, usually some bizarre trick for an animal to door summon even more nonsense after he feels his infernal scorpions aren't up to snuff.
Fuck you, you get one pet.
I once had a player who was playing a bard and asked me to have an eagle or some sort of bird. On d&d 5e rangers can have animal companions, but he wasn't so I was reluctant. I was also afraid that everyone else would like some sort of pet. I ended up letting him having his bird, not sure if an eagle or other smaller bird.
I ruled that he could buy food for 1 month (Lazy as hell but whatever. He would probably forget to buy food daily.) His idea was to have a bird to scout ahead for him until he realized he couldn't speak with animals, this was when he was already crossing lands, bird on his shoulder.
He ended up leaving the bard in a fortress and picked up his old rogue.
>>45891627
DM here, what this guy said, honestly if im running a big fight with multiple people (4+) and they have want their pet to attack I just tell them that it will cost them their bonus action to direct them, most dont want to pay up and the combat goes a hell of a lot faster.
My only exception to this is class mechanics, if you have a group of animated dead/elemental s/fey creatures/a beast masters companion i just go with the book rules and let them do their thing.
At one time I had a random player and he insisted that I should let him attack with al his animals, I told him it would cost him his action, he said fine, after about 2 rounds of combat with people just sitting on their phones for the most part, the enemy spell caster threw an area of effect with a high CON save and murdered most of his shit, much relief was had by the other players and that guy never did that shit again
(mfw they all began to fail the poison Cloud's DC)
>>45892651
But tiger ride!
>>45890087
That dolphin would drown...
>>45893676
guy who drew it probably thinks dolphin are fish.
>>45894285
I am sad now.
>>45894285
But if you look at the helmet, there's a water line below his head. The artist doesn't think dolphins are fish; he just doesn't understand physics.
>>45889890
>Is there a good reason to do this?
Two good reasons actually, though neither are universal.
The first is that in a lot of systems, pets or sidekicks are really broken, giving the character a huge advantage for very little cost, and can hugely skew the balance of the party. In GURPS or nWoD, for example, it's quite easy to make companions who are not only stronger than you, but stronger than any of the other players, and it's also possible to have more than one of them. That can get really out of hand.
The other reason is that some players go nuts with the animal companion thing, and create an atmosphere where they screw over and let down the party in order to protect their animal companion. You may not believe it, but I have personally seen two completely different parties wipe because someone bailed on teammates to make sure their animal companion survived a fight. I've also seen a lot of instances, in those groups and others, where one or more players will get so focused on their animal companion that, to them, the game becomes Nintendogs, and they become unwilling to really do anything other than deal with their pet. It can get really weird, and slow the game down a lot.
This second reason is why I've stopped allowing pets in my own games. I have a player who, if she is allowed to have a pet, won't talk to NPCs, only talks to the pet. Won't go anywhere with the party, just hangs out in the background with the pet. Won't join in combat, just runs away so the pet is safe. Won't help the other players if they are in trouble, hurt, or even dying. She is essentially playing her own solo game with her and her pokemon. So if he's seen that a lot of times with a lot of players, like I have, it may be his justification.
