And I believe the same thing applies for the dragon. It’s just a cosmetic perk that we get for doing the Kickstarter. I doubt they will be available once the game goes retail.
We’re going to start off with the pets being cosmetic “for fun” only and see where that takes us.
The problem with giving abilities to the pets is that not everyone will have access to them, which causes a balance issue. If we balance the game around players without the pets, then the game will start out too easy for you, because you have access to the pets’ special abilities.
Depending on how things go, we may or may not add capabilities to the pets in a way that doesn’t throw the initial game balance out of whack. For instance, maybe once you gain access to an Animal Trainer, she can train and upgrade your pets to fight or haul or whatever. This is just one idea off the top of my head. I’m sure you guys can think of more.
Even as a cosmetic-only perk, I personally think the pets will be a lot of fun. You’ll get to name them and watch them run around and play with your settlers.
4 Likes
Wooo! I feel the winner for being right! I’m excited to see my little dragon going around and playing with my baby mammoth 
I agree with @Tom however, I don’t think they should have special abilities and I believe they should just remain as cosmetic pets. We’re going to have an animal trainer and a beast master. If we want full grown dragons (or even have baby dragons that we can raise into large dragons) that could just be put into the game.
If we reach the point where we have seasons, they could do something like: Your animal trainer/Beastmaster go out and find a baby dragon. You capture it/raise it and over a few seasons it can grow into a full fighting dragon. Maybe you have to do some “mini-game” type gameplay like the farming with soil and water, but food and love so it doesn’t grow up to be a full dragon and then attack your town. (First idea that came to mind)
@Tom I understand that, but this to me is kind of like condensing a college paper. Is that actually necessary? I would argue that it isn’t, and if it isn’t necessary it’s added fluff that takes away from the rest of the experience. In this case, it takes away from development time on something else that could matter and actually add to the game.
Others might enjoy it, like @Cronus but that doesn’t mean it’s the most effective use of development time.
But don’t let my criticism of this one aspect tear down the overall game. I’m very excited about the project and in a way look forward to the pets… I just will forever see them and wonder “what’s the point?”
Maybe they’ll make good scouts and I’ll just send em out into the world to discover my surrouding area until they die. 
I don’t think people understand the point of cosmetic items in video games. They don’t serve as any game-mechanic other than they are there to look neat. It’s like if you play League of Legends and bought a new skin for your character, and then thinking it should give you some sort of perk or advantage against others players.
Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not a big fan of a cosmetic item being a mid-high tier stretch goal like the dragon. I was alright with the Baby Mammoth being one of the first tiers, but the when I saw the dragon my thought was, “Meh.” Now we have some awesome 300-400k and I would LOVE to see the 500k hit.
I don’t really think creating the small pets, that will more than likely only be given out as Kickstarter exclusives (or maybe even pre-order) is wasting development time. It falls into that category of, “perks for giving us money before the game is released” which some people like. To me, it’s just a fun bonus that I get. Sort of like the critter pets in WoW. I did enjoy my mini-Diablo and my narcoleptic Panda Bear, but those weren’t the reasons why I pre-ordered the game.
@Cronus it isn’t about understanding the point. I get the point. I have plenty of games where I’ve actually payed for items that were PURELY cosmetic, but frankly we’re paying a total of $40,000-$80,000 for a bunch of junk that do nothing else but take up space in our settlement. you don’t need $20,000 to design and animate a “pet” that does nothing. You should take that money and design something that’s useful.
The “perk” of paying $30 or $50 for a cat and/or dog is understandable, though slightly disappointing. It’s like a badge to prove your support/loyalty in the kickstarter. But a $20,000 mammoth? That better be able to do something more than look cool.
So I guess in these terms we’re in agreement… but it is not a lack of understanding of the issue. If anything it’s quite the opposite.
We aren’t paying $20,000 for a mammoth. The Mammoth and the dragon are just little thank yous for hitting another mark on the board. The $100,000 marks are the big mechanical improvements on the game, the other stuff is just filler to make people feel like they are actually gaining something more as the counter ticks up. Most of the things labeled as stretch goals would probably have been in the game even if they weren’t hit.
The animals are just there to add something to the surrounding. Seeing your little dragon walk by will remind you that you helped make the game a reality. I really don’t see what is such a big issue with having a few additional assets in the game.
3 Likes
@Tom of course… i was completely overlooking the need for balance (my exuberance got the best of me)… yes, it makes much more sense for the pets to be purely cosmetic (at least from the onset)…
@DAWGaMims the pets (in my mind) represent simple achievable goals that would -not- pull the devs from other more significant work (at least not for any significant stretch of time)… they are simple to achieve mini goals, to help propel the campaign towards larger objectives… it should be noted though, that those “in between” goals have begun to turn into more meaningful content pieces themselves though…
Personally, if the pets ever did perform a function, I think I would want it to be passive and rather secondary.
As far as dragon’s go, If they were in the game, and obtainable,I would want to have to do something that was damned hard to even just get a dragon egg, and then raise it accordingly - being given one from the get go would kinda spoil it a bit I think. Plus all of the reasons @Tom listed above.
Going back to the mammoth, this was the first tier post funding, and just over a third of the backers have opted for the $15 tier. They aren’t receiving any in-game animal apart from this, and so for them, the mammoth would be quite a nice cool thing that they can have and a worthwhile stretch goal. For those of us who have pledged the higher tiers it might seem a bit overkill to have multiple pet animals walking around, and as @SteveAdamo said, they’re there to keep things ticking along. It’s safe to say the inbetween tiers from that first one have all been pretty awesome.
I get what everyone’s saying, and I’m honestly glad most people are fine with it versus me thinking it’s a waste… it would be a shame if someone got caught up on it and didn’t back it becasue they viewed it as a waste (or, conversely, pulled out of backing it). I also want to reiterate I mean no offense to the developers - they have their vision and I can appreciate it even if I disagree with some of their design choices.
Nevertheless, I still don’t like it.
1 Like
a very level-headed response… something most forums lack, certainly those as new as this one… it’s perfectly OK to have differing opinions from the developers, or the community “at large”… its what makes for a healthy dialogue… 
1 Like
It’s good that we don’t all agree, as ideas get pushed forward that way! But yer, it is refreshing to see these ideas constructively worked through.
IMO, all “pet” entries after the first one are just dummies so “multiplayer” gets an actual step size of 40k, not 20k.
With the support for pets already in at that point, adding another can hardly take more than a few hours total so it’s more a marketing than a developing cost.
Take example of Torchlight? Pet become a big part of the gameplay.
not sure how we can fit it into Stonehearth though.
Dog become early warning barker? increase hunter gathering ability.
cat do whatever cat do…
Well they plan on having the animal trainer / beast master. So they could still put in actual dogs / cats that could be domesticated for some purpose. I wouldn’t mind seeing dogs treated as bonus to hunters. But that still shouldn’t have any impact on the puppies/kittens we get for backing the Kickstarter.
I believe they have a big plan for pets/animals in the game, just not the little critters we get from KS.
1 Like
Hmm. You’re absolutely right! We can’t have that. I guess I’ll have to start being a dirty troll to balance things out. Maybe I will constrain it to only one person and just pick on Geoffers.
Joke’s on you when they implement the ‘Victim’ leaderboard.
Quiet you! Isn’t there some legendary sausage you should be collating or something?
1 Like
I will collate you if you’re not careful. [size=6] And then I’ll collate that sausage [/size]
1 Like
Kinky. 
2 Likes