Talk:Arctic Fox (3.5e Monster)

Ratings

	Foxwarrior favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
	I of course support my brethren in their dastardly trickery. That seems like more hit dice than is really necessary though, doesn't it?

Tarkisflux favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!

While it's not uncommon for a party to go out and save a village or whatever at lower levels, the threat here is less overt. And also substantially more fantastic than lower levels tend to work with (which I appreciate on its own). It would be easy to build an encounter around the monster, but it practically begs for a short arc, even carrying further if you feel like developing its motivations a bit. It's not really a combat threat on its own, but it is carrying around pseudo-famine with it and can harass or elude a party at similar levels for a while. So it's a suitable challenge, just not a standard one. And all of this is rolled together into a tiny cute thing that a party or a mayor or whoever could have adopted as a pet before anyone knew any better. Or even after they knew, because PCs are weird. In short, it's an extremely clever monster that you can do a lot of game building and expectation subversion with. I loves it a lot.

	Fluffykittens favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
	Omg, are you the guy who wrote that awesome catburglar and chaos monk classes?

	Undead Knave favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
	What Eiji said.

	Eiji-kun favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
	I like your monsters, it's not often one sees interesting low level monsters. So why a favor instead of a like? The thing reads like a walking campaign hook, which is hilarious. I can totally see starting out a game where this is the introductory challenge. Good job.

About the Bhu

That's the one Fluffy.  :) Bhu is cool. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 20:59, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Cohort

Any chance of adding a blurb about their cohort? I don't want to look up their leadership score :-/ - Tarkisflux ^Talk 21:04, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

So... that's a lot of cohort. Is there precedence for whether that's considered part of the Fox's CR or not (like summoned creatures are considered part of their summoner's CR)? Because it seems like that should be the case here as it's the direct result of an option that they took in place of a different option, which means you have a CR 4 creature that often results in you fighting a CR 8 creature for no XP. It's extremely weird, but then so is leadership.

Maybe boost the CR to something more like 10 (yeah, it breaks the typical CR rules, but I don't know if there were ever intended to account for leadership), or replace leadership and make their travelling companions less specific? - Tarkisflux ^Talk 14:59, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Not that I was asked, but this is a case where I think it's perfectly fine not to consider the cohort in it's CR. The CR 4 is for the fox itself, which in spite of its large HD is fairly weak in offense and should be handled by a part of appropriate level. More importantly, there can be situations where the fox can be encountered without its entourage in tow, or even with a larger group than is suggested. Since that's a variable, there's no need to count it as part of the CR.

Compare to my Sturmwulf. In this, it has a "second monster" that is built into the first, but unlike Leadership I cannot be separated from it. Thus I am certain to always face both Hybrid and Beast Sturmwulves in battle regardless, and therefore it's appropriate to consider it part of the whole CR.

But if you need a WotC example, consider the various Organizations of monsters. I am certain there is at least one which doesn't have "Solitary" and might have "1d4 strudleplushies plus 1d6 spookycircles" in the entry. I would not expect the CR to reflex the combined value of all units, it represents the value of this specific monster. To that point, look at Asmodeus, or various archdevils and demons. They are rarely ever alone and are expected to be packing their army with them, but I am certain the CR is for Asmodeus and not Asmodeus + 20 Pit Fiends. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 15:32, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, the organization entries don't include the CR for those things, but they also don't include summoned creatures that are an implicit part of the creature. And the CR of Asmodeos (or pit fiends, or clerics) explicitly does include the CR of anything that it happens to summon while you're fighting him. So when extra creatures show up according to the organization listing you're not supposed to exclude any of them from the EL, but you are supposed to exclude summons because it's the use of a character option or ability. Leadership does not seem substantially different from summoning in the "is it a character option and could they have made other choices" test that summon monster answers similarly, and that makes the case very murky here I think.

I'm not complaining about the fact that a CR4 fox is running around with a CR8 guy and enough CR1s to be a much higher EL on their own. Hell, I'd run around with as many of these as I could at pretty much any level because it would be hilarious. I'm complaining that the organization entry and the Leadership feat make it unclear how the extra guys should be included in the EL. I think the easiest way to do it is to just get rid of Leadership and let the Organization entry speak for itself. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 16:09, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

I disagree, summoning is called out as not counting their CR, but if Leadership is anything, it's calling. That, and unlike summoning their presence isn't a direct result of the main creature. The best solution, if it's still murky for you... "The cohort's CR is not counted as part of the fox's CR." I think that nips any issues in the bud regardless how you view the presence of Leadership. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 16:25, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

How is that different from just removing the Leadership feat in the first place and writing up a blurb about their common travelling cohort? And why is that better than just removing it?

And a different comparison - do you get extra xp for fighting a druid's animal companion? Or a paladin's mount? Or a wizard's familiar? Or any other class feature granted follower? If yes, source please? If no, why are those different than the cohorts granted be leadership? - Tarkisflux ^Talk 16:32, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

There is a rules quote out there about that and right now I am too drowsy to find it, but from memory... animal companions, mounts, and familiars are not part of the CR calculation. I believe the reasoning is that their existence and their abilities are dependent on their master, regardless if the creature is sentient. Leadership gives you permission for the cohort, but otherwise provides no bonuses to said cohort beyond permission for them to exist. When I wake up, I'll find that quote. I know it exists somewhere. Probably Rule Compenduim or something. Maybe I'll ask the Minmax board. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 16:39, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi all

Yes, I am that Bhu :)

Will add Cohort stuff tonight

By the by Bhu, you can sign your posts with -- ~~~~ behind it. Also yay! -- Eiji-kun (talk) 01:00, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

I am quite surprised

Didn't expect this one to be the subject of controversy. Allow me to present some history on this:

The monster itself is pretty old. One of my earlier creations actually, and it originally had a Feat other than Leadership. While revising the fluff however, I realized that if they're hiding out in order to avoid the consequences of their demands while waiting for the locals to cave in, they'd have no way of knowing when said demands were met. Hence the Leadership Feat. It gave them token mooks to do errands, and one not so token mook who could act as an enforcer/lieutenant.

And then when I was asked to present details for the cohort I saw this "The character can attract a cohort of up to this level. Regardless of a character’s Leadership score, he can only recruit a cohort who is two or more levels lower than himself.". With a score of 15 the Fox has a 10th Level Cohort, but per this rule, assuming it's Level is equal to it's Hit Dice, it's maximum possible Cohort is an 8.

The CR was for the Fox itself sans followers because I was unsure of the official ruling for listing them in the CR (and I could always edit it in later).Bhu (talk) 19:53, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

I think that the chain from RHD -> ECL -> Level -> Leadership Score is very unfortunate, but probably accurate.

I don't think it's necessary on the creature for your desired fluff though. You already have permission for them to appear in whatever grouping you think they should appear in without it. "Organization: Gang (Humanoid lieutenant and other helpers)" or similar would solve that problem just as easily and without any other weirdness. And that gives you additional flexibility to make them part of a larger group or for the PCs to find one on its own without overriding the Leadership feat benefits that are supposed to come with it. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 21:01, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Another possibility that already has precedent would be to give something like Tome Command and give only followers and no cohort. Gives the minions without the absolute power. - TG Cid (talk) 05:11, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Tome Command??Bhu (talk) 07:31, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Command (3.5e Feat). Which... gives a cohort? I think? It's kind of implied? --Foxwarrior (talk) 08:06, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

If we're doing homebrew, I might as well give you my Variant Leadership (3.5e Feat). Insert critique of Tome, and self shilling. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 08:08, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I should have referenced the feat. Yes, it does specifically give a cohort, but only at the +6 benefit, whereas before you only have a group of followers with the very low level limit. I am not advocating that it just be given that feat, I was just pointing out that by only bequeathing the followers portion of Leadership you can easily fix any issue with this monster. Since this is a homebrew article, I see no reason not to cite homebrew as a possible solution to a common problem with an SRD feat, but there is also no reason to bash Tome in general when I was only trying to use one specific example from it. - TG Cid (talk) 17:00, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

This is a bump, because I'm still not convinced that Leadership is even doing anything that the monster writeup wouldn't do better, and I want to favor the crap out of this thing after it gets resolved (either by my being convinced by rules or other adjustments). - Tarkisflux ^Talk 01:44, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Lo, there has been an editingBhu (talk) 07:00, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Huzzah! I can rate without concern for unfortunate interactions and rules gray areas now :-).

Should Ghost or Cid be delayed or forgetful in updating their ratings, we have a mechanism in place for blocking them in cases like this where an objection has been dealt with and a rating is outdated. You can find more infos here if you're interested. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 01:00, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

ComFav

Congratulations! A favorite is you!

Should you be interested in seeing this article grace the main page (on a random rotation with other favorites), please check this out and write up a blurb. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 06:13, 12 October 2014 (UTC)