ZonkerH's page

I think this only matters for poisons with an interval of 1 round. Since a round is defined as "A period of time during an encounter in which all participants get a chance to act." it only makes sense that the post-initial saving throws are made on the poisoning creature's turn and not at the end of the poisoned creature's turn. If in the initiative order the poisoner went and then the next in order was the poisoned, not everyone would have had a chance to act, and not meeting the definition of "round". Using the "round" approach also allows other party members to act before the poison has a chance to advance in stages. I still have a question about multiple exposures to the same poison with a 1 round interval. If the PC fails the initial save and advances to stage 1 with no onset he immediately is affected by stage 1. If in the same creature turn he is bitten by another creature and fails that save is he immediately affected by the stage 2 effects? Or does it just advance the poison to stage 2 and the effects only occur once the interval has passed?

The FAQ is very helpful but I still am not sure if an Unsworn Shaman can take the Extra Hex feat. The feat states a shaman can only select a hex from "your spirit rather than one from a wandering spirit". Does a minor spirit qualify as a spirit in this case? At 2nd level the archetype "gains access to the wandering spirit class feature". Does this mean that the minor spirits are now all wandering spirits, and thus not available for Extra Hex?

For the rogue talent Resiliency, it states that it is an immediate action that can be performed when the rogue is brought to below 0 HP. I presume that this means the rogue takes the damage, and then the action is "performed". If the blow would outright kill the rogue (to below negative CON), does is this talent still "performed"? Does this give the rogue the temporary hit points that might take him above death (but possibly still unconscious)?

I have some basic questions about temporary hit points and Resiliency.

The description states that it is an immediate action "performed" (an interesting verb) when the rogue is brought to below 0 hit points. I presume that this means the rogue takes damage, falls below 0 hit points and falls unconscious and prone, and then receives the temporary hit points, correct?

If the temporary hit points are not enough to bring the rogue up to 0 HP or higher (quite likely in a low level rogue), does this result in the rogue being stabilized, or just provide an additional pool from which to first lose HP until he stabilizes, is healed, or dies? If he continues to lose HP, what is the penalty that he applies to the stabilization roll - the original negative HP, or the lower (less negative) penalty that result from adding the temporary hit points?

If the temporary HP brings the rogue to 0 or higher, then is the rogue stabilized, or does he continue to lose HP at 1/rd (from the temp pool first) until he somehow stabilizes? If he continues to lose HP, does the positive temp HP result in a positive modifier to the stabilization roll (like negative HP results in a stabilization roll penalty)?

Thanks for the reply, Marc, I did not say that I would not need to use handle animal any more to get the companion to follow a command, only that it did not make game sense to require a creature with a 3 INT, and the understanding of common (as learned through taking linguistics and common as a skill rank), animal companion or not, to take 7 days to learn the meaning of a single word, such as "follow", or "down". At that rate, the very dumb orc fighter that spent a skill point in linguistics to learn common would take years to learn enough words to be able to carry on a simple conversation (at one week per word).

Training an animal essentially means having the animal learn what a specific command means, and what specific action is requested of the animal. However, if the animal has a higher than animal intelligence, and the ability to understand the language, you should not need to spend nearly the same amount of time to explain the meaning of a word.

So, I suggest that a creature (animal companion or not) with a 3 INT and the skill to learn common should be able to learn what the words "follow, stay, sit, guard, attack, etc." mean in an afternoon, as opposed to one week per word. I would still have to use handle animal to get a companion to follow a command that it would be reticent to follow, or might be in the slightest bit confusing, but I suggest that the companion can learn the meaning of the words (as per any other creature with 3 INT and linguistics) more quickly than one per week.

I have read through the blog, and I don't know if my specific issue is dealt with. I am playing a 3rd level hunter who did not start with an animal companion, but rather acquired him during game play. We have been busy as a party, and as a result, have advanced from 1st to 3rd level in only a few days of in-game play. I have only had the time to train my companion one trick, which failed with a bad animal handling roll. Luckily, I get the two free tricks, which allow me to have it attack on command, at least.

My issue is, when the hunter advances to 4th level, if I am able to add the +1 INT to the companion, and raise the INT to 3, and if necessary, use the skill point to acquire a rank in linguistics to learn common, why do I still need to go through the months of training to teach it the very simple trick commands as described in the rulebook?

Training an animal in real life essentially is getting the animal to recognize a specific sound or action that you make (e.g. saying "sit", or pointing your finger at it), and having it "learn" and ingrain the appropriate response. The sound and action can be almost anything, provided it is different enough from other commands that you plan to teach.

However, if the companion has 3 INT, and the understanding of common (albeit rudimentary at the start, but learning over time), why do you need to spend weeks and months to train it simple commands like "follow", "stay", "guard", etc.

I do agree that I will still need to roll animal handler checks to get the companion to do something that would go entirely against its instincts (such as following me across an invisible bridge), or something complex, such as fetching the axe from a room full of different weapons.

So, I suggest that if I advance the INT to 3, and maybe have the companion "learn" common, then there is no more need to "train tricks".