Can familiars use wands? How about potions and oils?


Pathfinder Society

1/5

5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

As per the subject, can we have a clarification on what familiars can and cannot use?

The Pathfinder FAQ states:

Quote:
It is intended that animal companions or familiars can not activate magic items.

However, there is a highly contradictory thread where Michael Brock states or confirms, among other things:

* A select list of Improved Familiars can activate wands (specifically: faerie dragon, imp, lyrakien azata, mephit, quasit, and sprite)
* Bipedal familiars can wear\wield whatever, provided it is available on the Biped (hands) chart

However, none of these things ever made it into the FAQ!

So what gives?
Are we supposed to assume that every buried thread and comment made by staff in these forums, even if multiple years old, should be taken as official?
That the FAQ entries can't be taken at face value, as they lack key and important information?
Additionally, it appears the wand-capable list given is somewhat arbitrary, conspicuously skipping over some intelligent creatures with hands. Guidance on how to classify newly created improved familiars would also be helpful.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Baltic

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Tonya assigned a team of volunteers that currently going through all the old posts made by previous Campaign Coordinators to make sure these are either added to the guide or removed.

As there are a lot of changes happening at this moment, it might take some time before everything is implemented though.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

I'm very interested in this question as well. There are "enough" familiars that can use wands, and they're also some of the most powerful familiars going by the rest of their abilities.

That's kind of sad though; if you pick any other improved familiar you lose out twice. Meanwhile, this list of wand-wielding familiars has essentially been "frozen" for several years while new familiars pop up in bestiaries. Consider for example the pooka which actually has Use Magic Device trained as a skill. Looking at its stats it's really not more impressive than a lyrakien so balance arguments feel a bit contrived.

It looks to me like the original list was based on whatever improved familiars were available at the time (bestiary 1-2) and then somewhat abandoned due to a reluctance to lavish any further attention on something the leadership actually would have preferred didn't exist at all (action economy enhancing/wand-wielding familiars). As a result the list was arbitrarily frozen featuring coincidentally only a few but very powerful choices.

Nitpick: in the thread Byakko cited I couldn't find Mike actually saying bipeds can use any items; rather, it seemed he said that "these familiars use the biped chart and can use wands". Which doesn't tell us whether any new familiars should use the biped chart and if that qualifies them for anything. I also get the impression his post was written in the middle of some hectic travelling.

Scarab Sages 2/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Byakko wrote:

As per the subject, can we have a clarification on what familiars can and cannot use?

The Pathfinder FAQ states:

Quote:
It is intended that animal companions or familiars can not activate magic items.

However, there is a highly contradictory thread where Michael Brock states or confirms, among other things:

* A select list of Improved Familiars can activate wands (specifically: faerie dragon, imp, lyrakien azata, mephit, quasit, and sprite)
* Bipedal familiars can wear\wield whatever, provided it is available on the Biped (hands) chart

However, none of these things ever made it into the FAQ!

So what gives?
Are we supposed to assume that every buried thread and comment made by staff in these forums, even if multiple years old, should be taken as official?
That the FAQ entries can't be taken at face value, as they lack key and important information?
Additionally, it appears the wand-capable list given is somewhat arbitrary, conspicuously skipping over some intelligent creatures with hands. Guidance on how to classify newly created improved familiars would also be helpful.

It is true that wand use never made it to the FAQ. I think it slipped through the cracks. Since it was posted in the forums officially it is official for PFS. It does need its place in the FAQ though.

The second question can be found in the FAQ though, as I quoted below. His answering a question about biped(hands) does not actually change anything from how the biped(hands) chart works. It still and always has given access to all magic item slots as if a human... but familiars still must pay to access slots beyond barding and neck.

*About the arbitrary wand use list*
Campaign management has tried to keep familiars fairly cut back despite the fact that the player base can never seem to agree if they are a) Too weak to be used in combat or b) Too powerful to be allowed in the hands of PCs without severe rules keeping them back. Basicially, survivability vs action economy.
So, instead of giving blanket permission for "familiars with hands" to use wands, they give a specified list. Agreed though that the list needs to be in the FAQ and given periodic updates.

*About magic item slots*
The biped(hands) slots are the same slots a human character uses.
Also, it is noted that the listed improved familiars use the biped(hands) chart not to give them free access to all the magic item slots but to given them their place on the chart of possible magic item slots. Improved familiars were not on that chart to begin with. You still must pay a familiar's starting feat to open up any magic item slot beyond barding and neck slots.
You must use common sense on which chart to use for any familiar not on the magic item slot chart in the animal archive. If your creature looks like a tiny humanoid... then it probably has the biped(hands) slots. But, if it looks like a flying snake it should use the serpentine. If it looks like a bipedal wolf, it probably uses biped(claws/paws). Etc.
I will state again for emphasis, biped(hands) does not give access to magic item slots any more than any other body type.. it just gives potential access to all magic item slots which no other body type does. Though, some get close. You must still take the Extra Item Slot feat on your familiar to get access to the slots no matter the body type.

*About magic item activation*
There is NO magic item activation of ANY kind beyond certain familiars being able to use wands(which are slotless) and companion creatures of int 3 being able to use ioun stones.
Slotless items like drums being played to activate still counts as an activation, which is not allowed.
But, if an item provides a bonus without activation then that magic item will still provide its bones. Such as an amulet of natural armor.
Also, in PFS, to use a wand ALL familiars must use UMD even if they would be able to use the wand without it.(This is a very strict reading, YMMV, as the faerie dragon SHOULD be able to use wands without UMD but is listed as needing UMD for wands)

*About Animal Archive*
To use any item option beyond barding and neck, you must have the animal archive book. The lone exception is the familiars which may use wands may do so without owning the book.

*About potions*
Potions are not truly activated. Since they function as spells that target based on consumption or application, potions SHOULD be a-okay for familiars. But, you know there is bound to be a GM or two out there who qualifies potion use as activation. So, YMMV.

*About weapons*
Weapons are slotless items, more or less. Though, they must be wielded to have an effect. If a weapon is in the hands of a familiar that may wield a weapon and the weapon has a magical effect which involves choice(activation) then it will not function. But, if the item has a continual effect then it functions as any other continual effect item. The restriction on magic item use is only related to slots and 'activated' items.
Example: A frost enchanted mace normally may have its effect turned on or off in the hands of a player's character. But, if the frost effect is turned off and a familiar picks it up, the familiar can not turn the effect on. But, if the frost effect is on and the familiar strikes something with the mace then you add 1d6 frost damage.

*About the FAQ*
The FAQ is poorly written. It uses the term 'animal companion' to mean 'animal companion', 'familiar', 'mount class feature which are like animal companions'. And yet still uses terms like 'animal or familiar' which makes it confusing.

For anyone unclear if familiars get only the two slots or not...

Mike Brock wrote:
Improved familiars listed above can activate wands as mentioned above. Other ACs and familiars can not. Also, ACs and familiars only get the two slots unless the player owns AA.

linky

Bolding mine

FAQ wrote:


Can my animal companion or familiar wear or use magic items?
It is intended that animal companions or familiars can not activate magic items. An animal companion could benefit from an item with a continuous magical effect like an amulet of natural armor if its master equipped the item for the animal companion. Animal companions of any type may not use manufactured weapons.

Animal companions are also limited by their individual anatomies. In Pathfinder Society Organized Play, animal companions always have access to barding and neck-slot items so long as they have the anatomy. For example, a horse and pig can always have access to barding and neck-slot items. A snake does not have access to either. However, an item called out to be used by a specific animal is usable by that animal regardless of slot.

Additionally, animal companions have access to magical item slots, in addition to barding and neck, as listed on the inside front cover of the Animal Archive so long as they select the Extra Item Slot feat. The Animal Magic Item Slots table found in Animal Archive is not a legal except under the following conditions. First, an animal companion, familiar, or bonded mount, may choose one slot listed under its body type when taking the Extra Item Slot feat (this feat may be taken multiple times, each time selecting a different available magic item slot based on the creature’s anatomy). Second, access to specific magic item slots may be granted at a later date by another legal source. If you do not own a copy of the Animal Archive, your animal companion may only use barding and neck-slot items.

An animal or familiar has to have an intelligence of 3+ to activate an ioun stone. If the animal or familiar has less than a 3 intelligence, they may not activate an ioun stone.

The brownie, faerie dragon, imp, lyrakien azata, mephit, quasit, sprite familiars, granted by the Improved Familiar feat, use the Biped (hands) section of the chart. The carbuncle and voidworm protean, familiars granted by the Improved Familiar feat, uses the Serpentine section of the chart. If you do not own a copy of the Animal Archive, your animal companion may only use barding and neck-slot items.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

Lorewalker wrote:
Also, in PFS, to use a wand ALL familiars must use UMD even if they would be able to use the wand without it.

Where did you get this from?

Scarab Sages 2/5

Ascalaphus wrote:
Lorewalker wrote:
Also, in PFS, to use a wand ALL familiars must use UMD even if they would be able to use the wand without it.
Where did you get this from?
Mike Brock wrote:


Wand use doesn't require the Animal Archive for these few improved familiars - brownie, faerie dragon, imp, lyrakien azata, mephit, quasit, sprite familiars - gained with the Improved Familiar feat. They use their master's UMD when activating a wand.

No other activated item may be used, to include scrolls, by any animal companion, familiar, or improved familiar.

Linked

To be fair, that is a very strict reading... and some GMs may read it lighter than I. But, in PFS, I try to read things as restrictive as possible and then be happy when it is not the case.

Sczarni 4/5

I always felt that familiars should be able to carry tiny items such as flasks, potions, ribbons, rocks, etc. The above rulings were mostly aimed toward wands so I am still curious about the answer, although I am not expecting much.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

Lorewalker wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:
Lorewalker wrote:
Also, in PFS, to use a wand ALL familiars must use UMD even if they would be able to use the wand without it.
Where did you get this from?
Mike Brock wrote:


Wand use doesn't require the Animal Archive for these few improved familiars - brownie, faerie dragon, imp, lyrakien azata, mephit, quasit, sprite familiars - gained with the Improved Familiar feat. They use their master's UMD when activating a wand.

No other activated item may be used, to include scrolls, by any animal companion, familiar, or improved familiar.

Linked

To be fair, that is a very strict reading... and some GMs may read it lighter than I. But, in PFS, I try to read things as restrictive as possible and then be happy when it is not the case.

Looking it over, I hesitate to accept that reading, because

- There is an alternative reading that works perfectly well with the standard game rules.
- It would mean Mike changed the game rules by means of a vague implication.

My alternative reading is this: of course familiars use their masters' UMD, because familiars inherit their masters' skill ranks. So this statement is foremost a general reminder of the familiar rules, not a new ruling. All those other familiars listed would always need UMD to use wands, and so would the faerie dragon if he tried to use a non-sorcerer spell wand. So again a reiteration of existing rules, not an alteration, except for choosing this narrow list of familiars. However, their actual UMD bonus should be calculated based on the familiar, rather than using the master's bonus. (Otherwise some familiars will probably end up with a much higher UMD bonus than if they used their own stats!)

If I'm wrong, I think this ruling really should be revised. Actually, I think it should be revised anyway.
- The specific list of familiars is outdated and extremely arbitrary.
- It's buried deeply and rather vague. People asked Mike for clarifications and he's surprised they don't understand.
- It looks cobbled together ad-hoc. From the thread it looks like he's at a Con at the time and providing a temporary ruling with the intent to add it to the FAQ, but never does so. So we're not talking about something that's been thoroughly tested for defects.
- It's not like there's no demand for an improved ruling; people ask about it every other month or so. It's just that after stonewalling they eventually give up as if this is one of those things that just doesn't get fixed, because the leadership really wishes familiars would just go away and would prefer people stop asking about them.

Scarab Sages 2/5

Ascalaphus wrote:

Looking it over, I hesitate to accept that reading, because

- There is an alternative reading that works perfectly well with the standard game rules.
- It would mean Mike changed the game rules by means of a vague implication.

My alternative reading is this: of course familiars use their masters' UMD, because familiars inherit their masters' skill ranks. So this statement is foremost a general reminder of the familiar rules, not a new ruling. All those other familiars listed would always need UMD to use wands, and so would the faerie dragon if he tried to use a non-sorcerer spell wand. So again a reiteration of existing rules, not an alteration, except for choosing this narrow list of familiars. However, their actual UMD bonus should be calculated based on the familiar, rather than using the master's bonus. (Otherwise some familiars will probably end up with a much higher UMD bonus than if they used their own stats!)

If I'm wrong, I think this ruling really should be revised. Actually, I think it should be revised anyway.
- The specific list of familiars is outdated and...

Agreed it is very strict. But, you're going to see that kind of strictness at tables occasionally. What one reads as over clarification some could read as new specification.

I personally would not run a table with the rule that faerie dragons would need umd for sorcerer wands.

And yes, I also think he meant umd ranks as usual not bonus... but honestly the whole thing is very unclear. It was put together during a rush time and never revised.

My 7 cha wizard with a lyrakien and umd very much appreciates the use of ranks over bonus.

I have quite a few questions about familiars I would like answered some day as well. I'm a fan of the little things and have spent a good amount of time making builds around the familiar using archetypes like the fighter(eldritch guardian) and rogue(carnivalist).

I've got an idea I'm playing with involving an eldritch knight, mauler familiar, with the hp feat, polymorph familiar and CL increasing items and abilities. It is not hard to get cl +4 so beast form 4 at level 7... to get a gorgon with breath weapon... or chimera...
Though, for some builds a valet would be better... just with a lot less health.
(An easy to forget rule, any time you gain an ability due to a polymorph spell the DC for that ability is equal to the DC of the polymorph spell cast. Thus, turing into a little viper is not actually a bad decision. Con damage is nice.)

Scarab Sages 2/5

Malag wrote:
I always felt that familiars should be able to carry tiny items such as flasks, potions, ribbons, rocks, etc. The above rulings were mostly aimed toward wands so I am still curious about the answer, although I am not expecting much.

He was always very specific to mention that the magic item limitation was related to 'activated' items. Anything that is activated is out... you are good otherwise. A wand, scroll, Gloves of reconnaissance anything like that is activated. A potion, amulet of natural armor, +1 armor are things that are not activated.

Also, I do not believe this limits a familiars 'mundane' slots, as it were. That is related to their anatomy. So, a monkey familiar with Extra Item Slot(ring) could get use from wearing a magical ring, but could wear as many rings as it had digits.

My lyrakien currently wears a handy haversack, for example.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, Minnesota

How can you get extra item slots on a familiar? Is there any way for familiars to take feats, or does the master have to take a feat so that the familiar can get a slot?

Hmm

Scarab Sages 2/5

Hmm wrote:

How can you get extra item slots on a familiar? Is there any way for familiars to take feats, or does the master have to take a feat so that the familiar can get a slot?

Hmm

If you have Animal Archive, there is a rule that allows a familiar to trade out its base form feats for a very select group of familiar feats. So, if it has improve initiate, you could trade that to get +1 cl on harmless spells you cast on it, or extend on spells you cast on it... things like that. This includes the extra item slot feats.

(It has not been clarified, but I assume the pre-req on the feat is not applicable for PFS(common sense rule) as otherwise humanoid familiars could not get slots)

Scarab Sages 2/5

An additional note to keep track of is that through the Diabolist gets an imp as an AC(and thus not an imp improved familiar) they still fall under all the rules involving improved familiars and magic item use. Thus, they can use wands. Though... this would go against the 'use umd from master' but I think that difference is a common sense issue... in other words use the ranks you purchase for your imp according to AC rules.

Sczarni 4/5

Lorewalker wrote:
Malag wrote:
I always felt that familiars should be able to carry tiny items such as flasks, potions, ribbons, rocks, etc. The above rulings were mostly aimed toward wands so I am still curious about the answer, although I am not expecting much.

He was always very specific to mention that the magic item limitation was related to 'activated' items. Anything that is activated is out... you are good otherwise. A wand, scroll, Gloves of reconnaissance anything like that is activated. A potion, amulet of natural armor, +1 armor are things that are not activated.

Also, I do not believe this limits a familiars 'mundane' slots, as it were. That is related to their anatomy. So, a monkey familiar with Extra Item Slot(ring) could get use from wearing a magical ring, but could wear as many rings as it had digits.

My lyrakien currently wears a handy haversack, for example.

There was topic "Monkey See, Monkey Do" (something like that) where it was slightly concluded that familiars can't use bows. If they can't use bows, they can't use thrown flasks. If they can't use thrown flasks, well, they can't use even a rock offensively. Complete nonsense if you ask me, but I didn't feel like debating such rare corner cases.

Scarab Sages 2/5

Malag wrote:
Lorewalker wrote:
Malag wrote:
I always felt that familiars should be able to carry tiny items such as flasks, potions, ribbons, rocks, etc. The above rulings were mostly aimed toward wands so I am still curious about the answer, although I am not expecting much.

He was always very specific to mention that the magic item limitation was related to 'activated' items. Anything that is activated is out... you are good otherwise. A wand, scroll, Gloves of reconnaissance anything like that is activated. A potion, amulet of natural armor, +1 armor are things that are not activated.

Also, I do not believe this limits a familiars 'mundane' slots, as it were. That is related to their anatomy. So, a monkey familiar with Extra Item Slot(ring) could get use from wearing a magical ring, but could wear as many rings as it had digits.

My lyrakien currently wears a handy haversack, for example.

There was topic "Monkey See, Monkey Do" (something like that) where it was slightly concluded that familiars can't use bows. If they can't use bows, they can't use thrown flasks. If they can't use thrown flasks, well, they can't use even a rock offensively. Complete nonsense if you ask me, but I didn't feel like debating such rare corner cases.

ACs can do that much and they are not sentient.

Handle Animal Trick wrote:
Bombard (DC 20): A flying animal can deliver projectiles on command, attempting to drop a specified item that it can carry (often alchemist's fire or some other incendiary) on a designated point or opponent, using its base attack bonus to determine its attack roll. The animal cannot throw the object, and must be able to fly directly over the target.

It is important to remember that the Monkey See Monkey Do blog is related only to non-sentient animals.

If an animal familiar is sentient(which I believe they are) then that blog post has no bearing on them.

Though, I did a thread some time ago about the fact that familiars are not declared sentient. It comes down to this... if the MSMD blog post applies to animal familiars then you must also use handle animal to control them. So, if you apply some you must apply all and no one wants to use HA on familiars.

MSMD Blog Post wrote:
The Handle Animal skill functions similarly no matter how intelligent an animal becomes. A character must still make Handle Animal checks to train his animal and get him to perform the appropriate tasks. A GM should, however, make exceptions in the case of how such an intelligent animal might react in absence of instructions. It might not know to unlock a door to escape a burning building—as that's a fact that's learned over time and experience—but a smart animal might have a better chance of finding a way out.

Thus, a sentient familiar is only limited by 1)Intelligence 2)Magic item use per the faq 3)Body type.

Take an int 8 scorpion familiar. It could not use a bow as it could not even hold it. A monkey familiar CAN hold a bow(it is listed as one of three body types which have 'hands' that can hold things; Avian, Biped(claws/paws), Biped(hands)) but the ruling is that any animal which can Hold a weapon 'may' not be able to wield it effectively and leaves that up to the GM.
So, a monkey familiar, if sentient, would be able to throw a flask just fine. Or, an avian familiar would be able to drop one regardless of sentience.

Animal Archive wrote:


Creature body types marked with an asterisk (*) are able to grasp and carry one object at a time in their paws, claws, or hands, including
weapons, rods, wands, and staves, though they may not be able to use such items effectively (GM’s discretion) and take penalties for
nonproficiency as usual.

(Which is sadness for the 8 tiny dagger wielding blue-ringed octopus which will never be able to fight in the Eldritch Guardian fighting arenas. Inky, I can't choose you...)

Sczarni 4/5

@ Lorewalker

Just for reference, I meant on topic, not the blog itself. A topic with similar name was active here in PFS forums a month or so ago where person asked for answers about familiars. Things which you already mentioned (Handle Animal skill and their sentience) were asked but people were convinced that "wand PFS rules" applied to every other objects that familiars might be able to use. I guess it all boils down to GM's rulings on the table, but otherwise I agree with what you said.

4/5

Page of Spell Knowledge, being continuous and non-activated it its way, would seem to be usable in PFS for a familiar with spontaneous spell casting and spell slots (such as a faerie dragon).

Scarab Sages 2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malag wrote:

@ Lorewalker

Just for reference, I meant on topic, not the blog itself. A topic with similar name was active here in PFS forums a month or so ago where person asked for answers about familiars. Things which you already mentioned (Handle Animal skill and their sentience) were asked but people were convinced that "wand PFS rules" applied to every other objects that familiars might be able to use. I guess it all boils down to GM's rulings on the table, but otherwise I agree with what you said.

Yup, the rules are purposely vague to leave it up to GM judgement.

But that means there is no rule that states a sentient familiar with hands can not use a bow just as there is no rule that states they absolutely can. It is a very clear 'maybe, ask your GM'.

But this is related specifically to animal familiars. An outsider familiar should have no restriction other than magic item use(and anatomy) at any table unless the GM just does not like familiars... and then that is very much a house rule to say an imp can't throw a flask.

Things that are reasonable
1) Saying a monkey can not use a bow due to anatomy issues.
2) Saying a crab can not hold a sword
3) Saying a spider can not throw a flask
4) Having familiars go on their own initiative or their master's
5) saying a magic item which gives choice is a matter of activation and thus a familiar can not use that function

Things that are unreasonable:
1) Saying a raven familiar can not drop a flask it can carry the same way a flying AC may.
2) Saying a sentient familiar that the judge rules has hands capable of throwing a rock can not throw said rock
3) Saying a familiar with proper anatomy can not wear armor(barding)
4) Saying a familiar can not use its non-combat skills
5) Saying a lyrakien can not use a bow

Scarab Sages 2/5

Stephen Ross wrote:
Page of Spell Knowledge, being continuous and non-activated it its way, would seem to be usable in PFS for a familiar with spontaneous spell casting and spell slots (such as a faerie dragon).

Yes, that does seem like something that should work. It does not require activation as it merely changes your spells known by being in your possession.

4/5

Aegis of Recovery UltEquip (continuous or condition activated) and Talisman OccltAdvnt(condition activated) would also seem to be usable in PFS.

5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There is the bombard trick specifically for having an animal companion drop things on you.

Familiars don't use the tricks system: they're sentient. I have a sorcerer with a 7 int who's 12 int familiar makes handle sorcerer checks.

Scarab Sages 2/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:

There is the bombard trick specifically for having an animal companion drop things on you.

Familiars don't use the tricks system: they're sentient. I have a sorcerer with a 7 int who's 12 int familiar makes handle sorcerer checks.

That's pretty much what we've been talking about. A familiar, being sentient, should be able to at least do something a trained non-sentient animal can do.

2/5

What about familiars with variable forms? Elementals, for example can vary wildly in shape. As a player with a 7th level Kami Medium I would like to know if my statue-shaped little buddy can use UMD or not.

Scarab Sages 2/5

technarken wrote:
What about familiars with variable forms? Elementals, for example can vary wildly in shape. As a player with a 7th level Kami Medium I would like to know if my statue-shaped little buddy can use UMD or not.

They can't(for activated magical items, conceivably they could UMD to use 'always on' magic items that they don't meet prereqs to use).

When it comes to activated magical items only 3+ int companions can use ioun stones, only a very select group of familiars can use wands and no familiar may use any other activated magical item unless they are granted that power in their description or other legal text.

The list for wand use is only; brownie, faerie dragon, imp, lyrakien azata, mephit, quasit, sprite.

The list is in need of updating or at least telling the player base that it does not need updating. (Though, I think that would cause some upset)


Lorewalker wrote:

I've got an idea I'm playing with involving an eldritch knight, mauler familiar, with the hp feat, polymorph familiar and CL increasing items and abilities. It is not hard to get cl +4 so beast form 4 at level 7... to get a gorgon with breath weapon... or chimera...

Though, for some builds a valet would be better... just with a lot less health.

Just wanted to jump in here, I made a post asking about polymorph familiar and while it wasn't an official answer, I did get some unofficial clarification from Mark Seifer. Take a gander before you decide to go with that build, and just be aware you might run into some table variation on what exactly you can change into with polymorph familiar.

linky


What about giving a familiar a humanoid form using Alter Self or similar Polymorph subschool spells in combination with the Share Spells feature of the Familiar rules? If my greensting scorpion is now a buck naked gnome for 10 minutes per caster level, can it use my UMD ranks with its new set of hands?

1/5

Hi all, glad to see there are others out there who are fond of their familiars and would like to get an updated FAQ.

Here are some pertinent quotes from the magic item section which might trigger some conversation too:

Quote:
To use a magic item, it must be activated, although sometimes activation simply means putting a ring on your finger. Some items, once donned, function constantly.
Quote:
Use Activated: This type of item simply has to be used in order to activate it. A character has to drink a potion, swing a sword, interpose a shield to deflect a blow in combat, look through a lens, sprinkle dust, wear a ring, or don a hat.

So some clarification on what "activated" means in regards to familiar might also be useful.

Scarab Sages 2/5

Jayder22 wrote:
Lorewalker wrote:

I've got an idea I'm playing with involving an eldritch knight, mauler familiar, with the hp feat, polymorph familiar and CL increasing items and abilities. It is not hard to get cl +4 so beast form 4 at level 7... to get a gorgon with breath weapon... or chimera...

Though, for some builds a valet would be better... just with a lot less health.

Just wanted to jump in here, I made a post asking about polymorph familiar and while it wasn't an official answer, I did get some unofficial clarification from Mark Seifer. Take a gander before you decide to go with that build, and just be aware you might run into some table variation on what exactly you can change into with polymorph familiar.

linky

You're right, eh. Should have paid more attention. The YMMV rule will mean without any forms but small animals the spell is worthless.

Scarab Sages 2/5

JDLPF wrote:
What about giving a familiar a humanoid form using Alter Self or similar Polymorph subschool spells in combination with the Share Spells feature of the Familiar rules? If my greensting scorpion is now a buck naked gnome for 10 minutes per caster level, can it use my UMD ranks with its new set of hands?

Yes it can use UMD, no it can not use it to use activated items besides ioun stones... but I don't know of any ioun stones that need umd to function.

Scarab Sages 2/5

Byakko wrote:

Hi all, glad to see there are others out there who are fond of their familiars and would like to get an updated FAQ.

Here are some pertinent quotes from the magic item section which might trigger some conversation too:

Quote:
To use a magic item, it must be activated, although sometimes activation simply means putting a ring on your finger. Some items, once donned, function constantly.
Quote:
Use Activated: This type of item simply has to be used in order to activate it. A character has to drink a potion, swing a sword, interpose a shield to deflect a blow in combat, look through a lens, sprinkle dust, wear a ring, or don a hat.
So some clarification on what "activated" means in regards to familiar might also be useful.

I tend to use common sense here. A +1 weapon is a +1 weapon no matter whose hands it is in. To say use activated weapons make a +1 weapon or a potion no longer magical in a familiars hands is... weird to say the least. But then again, there are a set of drums (Drums of Haste) that Mike Brock said a familiar could Not activate even though it is activated through use(playing it and passing a perform check).

There can be an argument made to say a familiar can not interact with magical items at all unless the master put them on the familiar(use activated, triggered by master on putting on familiar). Since there can be an argument for it, well, this probably does need review and clarification. As, according to the strictest reading a familiar can't even benefit from a potion even if the master pours it down his familiars throat... (magic item, not always on, activated on use).

4/5

The FAQ where intent is stated makes it pretty clear for PFS. PF rules allow a lot but PFS uses a simplified subset as it is an organised play campaign.

Activate and use are different words, activate has a specific meaning in PF and would include "use activated"(MBrock's post). That's why I posted the items I did as they are autonomous and activate of their own accord.

Your last paragraph contains suppositions that are both flawed and provocative but I think you do not support those views.
A plethora of statements(arguments) can be made, that doesn't make them valid or reasonable.
On potions, as a full round action a character gives another a potion, it's a case where either could activate it (historical usage where unconscious people are given potions, Poisoner's Gloves, Potion rules). The target is always given a choice as to whether it affects them or not (see Potion rules).

Polymorph in PF does not change your type though it could expand the wearable body slots with the Animal Archive. It still wouldn't put the creature on the list for wand usage.

4/5

A distinction is made between spell-like ability(SLA) and having it as a known spell (from your class spellcasting list). This would imply that SLAs don't count for wand activation (so it is back to UMD).
This is somewhat at odds with the description entries "Spells, A faerie dragon casts spells as a 3rd-level sorcerer."

4/5

IMO the most powerful thing in normal play are those 6 commune questions. The GM should answer them as the representative power behind the familiar which makes those imp answers very tricky (I believe everything Asmodeus translated by an LE imp that wants to take my soul to hell tells me!). After that would be the familiar giving their fallen master a cure potion (which could save the master). That also gives the cat(silvanshee) with Lay On Hands an added boost.

2/5 *

Anything that breaks the action economy is very powerful (which is why classes with pets are so hard to balance). I saw a faerie dragon (or maybe pseudodragon?) at a convention. It was effective.

Scarab Sages 2/5

Stephen Ross wrote:

A distinction is made between spell-like ability(SLA) and having it as a known spell (from your class spellcasting list). This would imply that SLAs don't count for wand activation (so it is back to UMD).

This is somewhat at odds with the description entries "Spells, A faerie dragon casts spells as a 3rd-level sorcerer."

While that is true about SLAs not being viable for wand activation, a faerie dragon only has one SLA. It does have 8 spells know that it casts like a third-level sorcerer. It also has 6 first level spell slots that it uses like a third-level sorcerer. If you increased its charisma enough it could gain additional first level spell slots as well for the same reason. That also means it has a sorcerer's spell list as a third level sorcerer would.

Thus, nothing should be at odds with a faerie dragon utilizing certain wands without UMD... unless you read Mike's words in their strictest sense.

faerie dragon statblock wrote:


Spell-Like Abilities (CL 3rd; concentration +6)

3/day greater invisibility (self only)

Spells Known (CL 3rd; concentration +6)

1st (6/day) grease (DC 14), silent image (DC 14), sleep (DC 14)
0 (at will) dancing lights, flare (DC 13), ghost sound (DC 13), mage hand, open/close

Scarab Sages 2/5

Stephen Ross wrote:

The FAQ where intent is stated makes it pretty clear for PFS. PF rules allow a lot but PFS uses a simplified subset as it is an organised play campaign.

Activate and use are different words, activate has a specific meaning in PF and would include "use activated"(MBrock's post). That's why I posted the items I did as they are autonomous and activate of their own accord.

Your last paragraph contains suppositions that are both flawed and provocative but I think you do not support those views.
A plethora of statements(arguments) can be made, that doesn't make them valid or reasonable.
On potions, as a full round action a character gives another a potion, it's a case where either could activate it (historical usage where unconscious people are given potions, Poisoner's Gloves, Potion rules). The target is always given a choice as to whether it affects them or not (see Potion rules).

Polymorph in PF does not change your type though it could expand the wearable body slots with the Animal Archive. It still wouldn't put the creature on the list for wand usage.

---

Alert, I do not agree with the argument I am posting and do not wish this to be used at tables.
---
I'll just say that considering a potion is listed specifically as a use activated item(thus, is activated up imbibing) that when you make a blanket statement that says a familiar can not activate any magic item(this includes continuous use items, as its master must put the item on it to make it work for the familiar as per the FAQ)... it is not a far-fetched or unreasonable argument to say a familiar cannot benefit from a potion as they can not activate it.

My reasoning:

I do not think anyone will actually choose to GM using this as a ruling... I am merely posting it because if you follow the FAQ as written and the rules concerning activation and use of magic items the conclusion is this; a familiar can not activate any magic item no matter the type(this includes potions, +1 armor/weapons) unless it was a continuous effect item(which a potion is not, but a +1 armor is) and equipped on the familiar by its master only. Of course... this is only if you conclude that Animal Companion and familiar are used interchangeably in the faq... if you do not, the FAQ gets even MORE confusing and limiting.

If you do not prescribe to that reading then 1) familiars and bonded mounts do not get barding and neck slots automatically, 2) Only animal companions are limited by their anatomies, 3)A familiar can not activate ANY magic item, even continuous ones. So, no amulet of natural armor. This is due to the second line I bolded in the PFS FAQ quote below, as no line is given for familiars or bonded mounts, only ACs. 4) A bonded mount is not limited in how it may activate magic items

PFS FAQ wrote:


It is intended that animal companions or familiars can not activate magic items. An animal companion could benefit from an item with a continuous magical effect like an amulet of natural armor if its master equipped the item for the animal companion. Animal companions of any type may not use manufactured weapons.
Magic Item section, CRB wrote:


The four ways to activate magic items are described below.
...
Spell Completion:
...
Spell Trigger:
...
Command Word:
...
Use Activated:
This type of item simply has to be used in
order to activate it. A character has to drink a potion, swing a sword, interpose a shield to deflect a blow in combat, look
through a lens, sprinkle dust, wear a ring, or don a hat. Use
activation is generally straightforward and self-explanatory.
Many use-activated items are objects that a character
wears. Continually functioning items are practically always
items that one wears. A few must simply be in the character’s
possession (meaning on his person). However, some items
made for wearing must still be activated. Although this
activation sometimes requires a command word (see above),
usually it means mentally willing the activation to happen.
The description of an item states whether a command word is
needed in such a case.

Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Can familiars use wands? How about potions and oils? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.