Axebeak

Axebeak Sanctuary Society's page

23 posts. Alias of Nefreet.


RSS

5/5 5/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Define "completely wrong"?

The text of that particular Boon:
If you possess a class feature which permits you to take an animal companion or a mount that progresses as an animal companion, you may add the axe beak to your list of legal and available companions.


Lune wrote:
Post the rule, Axebeak Sanctuary Society.

I will do no such thing.

Again, we're speaking different languages here.

And since we've both asked each other a question that the other refuses to answer, I expect this thread to die.

Meanwhile, people with Horse Companions will continue to treat them as having 5ft reach, and people with Axebeak Companions will continue to treat them as having 10ft reach.

Have a good day.


Lune, all creatures in Pathfinder (with the exception of those few already discussed earlier) determine their reach according to the table in the Core Rulebook. It doesn't matter if you're a Human, a Giant, a Horse, an Axebeak, a creature with a template, or an Animal Companion.

All creatures in Pathfinder use that table to determine their reach.

If we didn't use that table, we'd have no clue what the reach of a Horse is. Could be 5ft, could be 10ft. Could be 0ft. We'd have no clue. Same goes for the Axebeak. Same goes for Animal Companion versions of either.

The Rules are written right in the Core Rulebook. The examples are given in the Bestiaries.

It's up to you to show that they're wrong.


We're speaking different languages here, apparently.


It's the same rule I linked the last time you and I had this discussion (you can find it in the previous thread).

And you're clearly not reading what I'm writing here, either, because you missed my point entirely.

There need not be a rule that states Animal Companions follow the general rules. General rules are the default assumption. What you're doing is claiming that the general rules don't apply to Animal Companions, and not providing a basis for that reasoning.

I've already supplied the relevant evidence. It's up to you to show that Animal Companions are handled differently.


Avoron wrote:
That definitely makes sense, although it's slightly less supported by the rules

Agreed. The table we have now isn't Long/Tall/ExtraLong. Those that aren't Tall or Long can legitimately be debated, since we have no firm rules for handling them.

But claiming that we cannot figure out the reach of a Horse (or Axebeak) is ludicrous, and does not deserve to be debated on.


Those examples are the more appropriate question to be discussed. They are specifically different from the general rules presented in the Core Rulebook.

However, most likely, if we follow the same logic as determining the reach of a Horse, then creatures with double the reach of their space (Diplodocus) or with a reach of Space+5 (Elasmosaurus) would have similar reach as Animal Companions.


The specific exceptions to those general rules would be creatures with abnormal reach, such as the Diplodocus in Bestiary 4, or the tentacles of the Giant Octopus.

But nothing in the Core Rulebook (or Bestiaries) tells us to treat Animal Companions differently, so we don't.


Lune wrote:

This:

Quote:

We know a Horse has 5ft reach because it's a Large (Long) creature, and we know an Axebeak has 10ft reach because it's a Large (Tall) creature.

This is explained in the Core Rulebook, with examples given in the Bestiary.

...is not true when referring to animal companions (the topic of this thread).

It is true, because those rules are for all creatures in Pathfinder. And they're in the Core Rulebook, not some obscure splatbook. We don't have the choice to ignore them.

Edited and reworded to remove accusations of "lieing".


Lune wrote:
I recommend reading the previous thread (linked above) to see the arguments of people who do not believe that you default creatures to their Bestiary entry. While that does seem like the logical thing to do not everyone agrees.

I recommend reading the thread as well. As we were both active in that thread, let's not condescend each other in this one.

I kept asking a very important question in that thread that dissenters were unable (or, I believe, unwilling) to answer:

What is the reach of a Horse?

When you find, in print, the reach of a Horse, you will likewise find, in print, the reach of an Axebeak.

(I'll give you three guesses as to which book it's in, and the first two don't count)


Keep in mind that statblocks aren't a basis for rules.

Otherwise Vicious gets blocked by DR.

And, luckily, we don't require statblocks like this to tell us how reach works for Animal Companions.

We know a Horse has 5ft reach because it's a Large (Long) creature, and we know an Axebeak has 10ft reach because it's a Large (Tall) creature.

This is explained in the Core Rulebook, with examples given in the Bestiary.


You still haven't answered the question of "What is the reach of a Horse", either.

I will take that to mean you concede that a large-sized Axebeak has 10ft reach.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

What is the reach of a Horse?


swordfalcon wrote:
As for arguing whether an animal companions, like the axe beak gets reach when they become large. By strict RAW they do not.

What is the reach of a Horse?


What is the reach of a Horse?


claudekennilol wrote:
Axebeak Sanctuary Society wrote:
Just as with any Companion, you compare its natural reach to its Bestiary entry.
Where does it say to do this?

Where else would you get it from?

That's like saying Horses have 20ft reach because nowhere says they don't.

You can only go off what you're given.


I believe a couple creatures have exceptional reach, perhaps the Diplodocus IIRC. Those are the ones that are given specific wording in their Companion statblocks.


claudekennilol wrote:
Axebeak Sanctuary Society wrote:

When the Axebeak becomes large, it gains a 10ft reach.

It's a Large (tall) creature.

Where does it say it's large, tall?

This is all I see

PRD wrote:

Axe Beak Companions

Starting Statistics: Size Medium; Speed 50 ft.; Attack bite (1d6 + 1-1/2 Str); Ability Scores Str 10, Dex 17, Con 12, Int 2, Wis 11, Cha 10; Special Qualities low-light vision.
4th Level Advancement: Size Large; AC +2 natural armor; Attack bite (1d8 + 1-1/2 Str); Ability Scores Str +8, Dex –2, Con +4; Special Attacks sudden charge.
None of that says anything about reach with its 4th level advancement and nothing about it says it's tall.

I will counter equally by asking why you assume it is Large (long).

There is no general default for all Large creatures.

Just as with any Companion, you compare its natural reach to its Bestiary entry. Apes, Snakes, and Bipeds (like the Axebeak and T-Rex) are all considered to be Large (tall). Tigers, Wolves, and Quadrupeds (like Horses and Camels) are all considered to be Large (long).


When the Axebeak becomes large, it gains a 10ft reach.

It's a Large (tall) creature.

5/5 5/55/5

Currently membership is limited to one: the Grand A.S.S. Master.

5/5 5/55/5

Walter Sheppard wrote:
Acedio wrote:
Rarely does being condescending help make a conversation productive.
Says you jerk face!

Don't be an A.S.S.

That's our job.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gray Warden wrote:
Is there anyone in the world who actually reads the thread and answers to the sentences that end with a "?". I'm asking about weights

Is there anyone in the world who actually reads the spell that they're asking questions about?

This spell causes instant diminution of a humanoid creature, halving its height, length, and width and dividing its weight by 8.

All equipment worn or carried by a creature is similarly reduced by the spell.

Compliments of the Axebeak Sanctuary Society.

Remember, don't be an A.S.S., that's our job.

5/5 5/55/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Flagged for misleading title.