Pathfinder Player Companion: Animal Archive (PFRPG)

BigNorseWolf wrote:

How are familiars supposed to use any of the feats in here? IIRC they only get one feat because they're technically only 1 hd and that one feat is "locked" as the feat they get as a regular animal.

Page 18: Feats that are meant for familiars can be switched out for a familiar’s default feats (as listed in the familiar’s statistics) if the familiar meets the prerequisites. Such feat replacements must be made when the PC first acquires a new familiar, and—like all new feats from supplemental sources—the new feats should be approved by the GM before being integrated into play.

Thanks.

Presumably you'd have to get a familiar at higher levels for "master of its kind" or dismiss your familiar and get a new one, which would be sad.

I've been going over this and can say I'm quite happy. My ranger just hit 4th level and is taking a cat as her companion. I plan to give it the Totem Animal archetype and my wizard in another game is adding the Valet archetype to her familiar.

All in all this is looking to help me a great deal on my two characters.

Likely because the Cavalier Musketeer archetype from UC covers the "rider with a gun" trope?

Actually, if I'm reading it right, the musketeer doesn't get a mount? I'm actually confused about that. After all the gun stuff it says that it replaces the "standard" mount ability, but doesn't say anything about mounts after that. Am I missing something?

Protoman wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

How are familiars supposed to use any of the feats in here? IIRC they only get one feat because they're technically only 1 hd and that one feat is "locked" as the feat they get as a regular animal.

Page 18: Feats that are meant for familiars can be switched out for a familiar’s default feats (as listed in the familiar’s statistics) if the familiar meets the prerequisites. Such feat replacements must be made when the PC first acquires a new familiar, and—like all new feats from supplemental sources—the new feats should be approved by the GM before being integrated into play.

Thanks.

Presumably you'd have to get a familiar at higher levels for "master of its kind" or dismiss your familiar and get a new one, which would be sad.

Or, as I mentioned in my review, the Beast-Bonded Witch allows you to give your feat slots to your familiar if you choose, so that makes these new feats just awesome for them.

Barding stitches...

...that's horrible. o.O;

Holy Mother of Calistria... I agree.

Wait, wolves are associated with Shelyn? Being a big wolf fan, I am oddly pleased by this. But are they associated with any other deities besides her & her brother? In RL mythology they're usually companied with war gods.

Wow, I didn't know that either. That's strangely ironic since my girlfriend is a werewolf and worships Shelyn. I always figured it was because she was so into love and beauty and protecting those she loves, but I wonder if there is more to it? I'll have to ask her.

I love this book, but I have two complaints:

1. The alchemist didn't get an archetype with a guinea pig/lab rat familiar.

2. The porcupine isn't available as a familiar. :(

I love this book, but I have two complaints:

1. The alchemist didn't get an archetype with a guinea pig/lab rat familiar.

2. The porcupine isn't available as a familiar. :(

Well that's a shame. A porcupine would have been awesome.

I do not have the book, but reeding to the previews it is a shame that still there is no way for a fighter to gain a decent mount. Basically roughrider and dragoon are not viable without multiclass. A real shame for the wasted opportunity.

I do not have the book, but reeding to the previews it is a shame that still there is no way for a fighter to gain a decent mount. Basically roughrider and dragoon are not viable without multiclass. A real shame for the wasted opportunity.

I don't know if it's on purpose or not because of there already being a 3pp bonded pet variant, but I wouldn't think that would stop them.

Are there any intentions to include the materials presented in this book to PFS?

The rabbit's bite attack bonus seems to be miscalculated. Since familiars use their Dexterity modifier to attack whenever it is higher than their Strength modifier, the rabbit should have a +5 (+3 Dex, +2 Size) to hit as opposed to the -2 their listed as having.

Are there any intentions to include the materials presented in this book to PFS?

The Additional Resources is supposed to be updated sometime today and will include parts of this book.

The rabbit's bite attack bonus seems to be miscalculated. Since familiars use their Dexterity modifier to attack whenever it is higher than their Strength modifier, the rabbit should have a +5 (+3 Dex, +2 Size) to hit as opposed to the -2 their listed as having.

Actually this is incorrect. Familiars use Dex for Climb and Swim. It's just most familiars have Weapon Finesse as feats. Rabbits don't.

Joshua Hirtz wrote:

The rabbit's bite attack bonus seems to be miscalculated. Since familiars use their Dexterity modifier to attack whenever it is higher than their Strength modifier, the rabbit should have a +5 (+3 Dex, +2 Size) to hit as opposed to the -2 their listed as having.

Actually this is incorrect. Familiars use Dex for Climb and Swim. It's just most familiars have Weapon Finesse as feats. Rabbits don't.

Looking at the Attacks portion of the Wizard's Familiar section on the PRD I find this:

Use the master's base attack bonus, as calculated from all his classes. Use the familiar's Dexterity or Strength modifier, whichever is greater, to calculate the familiar's melee attack bonus with natural weapons.

So for the rabbit's bite attack you would determine the attack bonus by its Dexterity modifier.

Odraude wrote:

Joshua Hirtz wrote:

The rabbit's bite attack bonus seems to be miscalculated. Since familiars use their Dexterity modifier to attack whenever it is higher than their Strength modifier, the rabbit should have a +5 (+3 Dex, +2 Size) to hit as opposed to the -2 their listed as having.

Actually this is incorrect. Familiars use Dex for Climb and Swim. It's just most familiars have Weapon Finesse as feats. Rabbits don't.

Looking at the Attacks portion of the Wizard's Familiar section on the PRD I find this:

Attacks wrote:

Use the master's base attack bonus, as calculated from all his classes. Use the familiar's Dexterity or Strength modifier, whichever is greater, to calculate the familiar's melee attack bonus with natural weapons.

So for the rabbit's bite attack you would determine the attack bonus by its Dexterity modifier.

That's true, and while the creature in question is in the New Familiar section, not all rabbits will be familiars. Similarly, not every viper you encounter is a familiar, even though it is under familiars in the Bestiary. For normal rabbits you'd use its strength, for familiars (per the wizard class entry) you'd use its dexterity. Make sense?

That's true, and while the creature in question is in the New Familiar section, not all rabbits will be familiars. Similarly, not every viper you encounter is a familiar, even though it is under familiars in the Bestiary. For normal rabbits you'd use its strength, for familiars (per the wizard class entry) you'd use its dexterity. Make sense?

I admit, I failed to realize they were just going off what a normal animal would be. That's clear to me now that I went back over it.

Sorry for the mishap on my part.

Edit: Question. Why does the armidillo's claw equate out to a +0 attack bonus?

I think the Charger companion archetype has a typo/need for errata.

The mounted challenge ability says it works for cavaliers riding the companion and replaces shared spells, but cavalier mount class feature doesn't get shared spells. As of now, cavalier mounts don't qualify for the archetype and only times cavaliers seem to benefit off the mounted challenge ability are if riding an animal companion that belongs to another character or it obtained an animal companion via multiclassing (not with the Mount class feature) but that seems rather weird.

Not errata: Indefatigable (REALLY awkward to say word lol) looks awesome with the Mad Dog barbarian archetype lol.

Valet familiar archetype is gonna make crafting SOOOOO much faster! Now just gotta work it in for my level 5 crafting oracle.

For further discussion on this topic:

Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:

Barding stitches...

...that's horrible. o.O;

Holy Mother of Calistria... I agree.

Eric Hinkle wrote:

Wait, wolves are associated with Shelyn? Being a big wolf fan, I am oddly pleased by this. But are they associated with any other deities besides her & her brother? In RL mythology they're usually companied with war gods.

Wow, I didn't know that either. That's strangely ironic since my girlfriend is a werewolf and worships Shelyn. I always figured it was because she was so into love and beauty and protecting those she loves, but I wonder if there is more to it? I'll have to ask her.

If you delve into Golarion Lore, you will discover that Shelyn and Zon-Kuthon's parent was a Wolf Diety type,and that is why shelyn gets wolves and ZK gets rabid ones.

Have Giant Owl's been revised down to animals, or is something weird going on with their inclusion on the purchasable Riding Animals list on p14 - no other high INT or magic beasts are on there?

Have Giant Owl's been revised down to animals, or is something weird going on with their inclusion on the purchasable Riding Animals list on p14 - no other high INT or magic beasts are on there?

Whoops! Great catch! Since giant owls are indeed still magical beasts, they should not be included on the lists of purchasable animals in this book.

I just want to drop in to say that I am very positively surprised how good and useful this book is. Certainly not what I was expecting – I guess I expected something lukewarm, corner-case stuff – well to be honest I don't exactly know what I was expecting. I any case I wasn't really looking forward to this, but the actual book has convinced me otherwise. Well done!

Now, I finally know how expensive a tyrannosaur is, should I ever want to buy one! :)

Mighty Squash wrote:

Have Giant Owl's been revised down to animals, or is something weird going on with their inclusion on the purchasable Riding Animals list on p14 - no other high INT or magic beasts are on there?

Whoops! Great catch! Since giant owls are indeed still magical beasts, they should not be included on the lists of purchasable animals in this book.

I don't really mind personally. I mean, it's akin to selling slaves, only instead of it being people, it's an animal.

I'm still annoyed about no LARGE BEARS being available to Rangers and Druids.

Must be very small Pandas too...

I'm still annoyed about no LARGE BEARS being available to Rangers and Druids.

Must be very small Pandas too...

hahaha. I can understand the irritation. There are plenty of animals that do get to Large, Bear would seem to be a no-brainer.

Oops!

You are absolutely right. I missed that note in paragraph 2 of the mount ability for cavaliers about no share spells.

The question then becomes what they *should* exchange for the ability, and one answer could be nothing. Simply add a specific exemption for cavaliers, like:

A cavalier's mount gains this ability automatically when selecting the charger archetype even though it does not have the share spells ability.

I don't know that cavaliers are so overpowered as a class that this would be a big problem to add an extra benefit for them, but I'd have to take a closer look at the archetypes again to suggest anything different.

Just a suggestion.

People seem to be referring to this post to say that cavalier mounts can take ANY companion archetype, but your post specifically refers to the Charger archetype (although at the end you do say "archetypes", plural), which is the only one that specifically mentions cavaliers, so I have to ask:

Should that apply to all companion archetype abilities that replace share spells, or just Charger's Mounted Challenge?

Hi there,

As always with the caveat that my authorial opinions are just that and not official RAW-affecting rulings, my statement above was specific to the charger archetype. It even says so right in the blue sentence.

Personally, I don't think it's unreasonable to allow a cavalier's mount to take the other archetypes; the racer in particular seems like it would fit well with certain kinds of cavaliers, but I think the only one I'd strongly advocate for ensuring an exception would be the charger archetype, as it really was intended for cavaliers and the reference to the missing share spells ability was just an oversight by me in writing it, not an intentional exclusion. The other archetypes COULD work with a cavalier, but aren't as closely tied to it conceptually.

Hope this helps, for whatever it's worth.

Hi there,

As always with the caveat that my authorial opinions are just that and not official RAW-affecting rulings, my statement above was specific to the charger archetype. It even says so right in the blue sentence.

Personally, I don't think it's unreasonable to allow a cavalier's mount to take the other archetypes; the racer in particular seems like it would fit well with certain kinds of cavaliers, but I think the only one I'd strongly advocate for ensuring an exception would be the charger archetype, as it really was intended for cavaliers and the reference to the missing share spells ability was just an oversight by me in writing it, not an intentional exclusion. The other archetypes COULD work with a cavalier, but aren't as closely tied to it conceptually.

Hope this helps, for whatever it's worth.

MORE than helpful, and thanks for the quick response.

Like I had said, people were citing that as justification for cavalier mounts qualifying for any companion archetype replacing share spells, whereas my own reading limited it to just the charger archetype.

I, for one, hope that Paizo releases an official clarification/errata to allow cavaliers to take more than just charger and the highly-inappropriate Totem Guide (seeing as Spiritual Guidance only functions for spellcasters, except for the guidance part). Racer is another archetype that would go well with a mount, but Bodyguard has the potential of being particularly cheesy...

Just so people are aware, I am still in the process of evaluating the Charger/cavalier discrepancy (as well as other potential errata posters have pointed out), and am formulating an official response. Since we've got a lot of projects going on right now, I haven't been able to devote as much time to these issues as I'd like, but rest assured they are being considered and should be addressed within the next few weeks.

Until then, Jason's excellent suggestions should more than suffice for players and GMs running home games. :]

I just want to drop in to say that I am very positively surprised how good and useful this book is. Certainly not what I was expecting – I guess I expected something lukewarm, corner-case stuff – well to be honest I don't exactly know what I was expecting. I any case I wasn't really looking forward to this, but the actual book has convinced me otherwise. Well done!

Now, I finally know how expensive a tyrannosaur is, should I ever want to buy one! :)

Thanks for the kind words! If you're feeling up to it, writing a brief review summarizing what you've just said here would be super helpful. The number of stars next to the product name is usually the first thing potential readers see when checking out a book, so reviews of all shades are highly appreciated. :]

Thanks for the kind words! If you're feeling up to it, writing a brief review summarizing what you've just said here would be super helpful. The number of stars next to the product name is usually the first thing potential readers see when checking out a book, so reviews of all shades are highly appreciated. :]

Good idea! I just submitted my very first review.

Just so people are aware, I am still in the process of evaluating the Charger/cavalier discrepancy (as well as other potential errata posters have pointed out), and am formulating an official response. Since we've got a lot of projects going on right now, I haven't been able to devote as much time to these issues as I'd like, but rest assured they are being considered and should be addressed within the next few weeks.

Until then, Jason's excellent suggestions should more than suffice for players and GMs running home games. :]

I'd suggest a general rule stating that cavalier mounts can sacrifice a bonus feat granted at first level in place of the share spells ability. That way, they could sacrifice Armor Proficiency (Light) (or Endurance, for the Beast Rider archetype), which would make them pretty much identical to standard druid animal companions of the same archetype.

Just so people are aware, I am still in the process of evaluating the Charger/cavalier discrepancy (as well as other potential errata posters have pointed out), and am formulating an official response.

I don't think anyone has mentioned it in this thread, but if the Spell Sponge feat really means "harmless" then there are only two spells I can find, of any level for any class, that are both marked harmless and have a target of "you".

I made a rules thread but it's not going anywhere.

Spell Sponge is definitely an issue. The list of available spells is so low it is almost completely a trap feat at this point.

Spell Sponge is definitely an issue. The list of available spells is so low it is almost completely a trap feat at this point.

I addressed this issue in another thread, and have pasted the errata below for convenience.

The use of "harmless" in this instance was an unnecessary complication, since as you pointed out, there are only a couple spells that have a target of "You" and are explicitly stated as harmless. Ignore the word "harmless" so that the sentence reads: "Whenever your master targets you with a spell with a target of 'you,' the spell's duration...."

This feat plays off the share spells ability possessed by most animal companions and familiars, so it should be applicable with any spell cast upon the animal companion or familiar that can only be cast on that creature because of the share spells ability. So spells that target "You and 1 ally" or "You or creature touched" aren't fair game, since you could already cast them on the AC/familiar even without share spells.

Hope this clears things up!

FYI, clarification has been added to d20pfsrd.com :D
-signed, your friendly neighborhood fixerman.

Yet silence on the LARGE BEAR issue, this is a conspiracy.

What happened? Paizo staff got a beef with Grizzly Adams?

Bear-riding gunslingers: now that's fantasy!

Apparently you can only do that if you fight as part of the Lollypop Guild's Munchkin bear-riding brigade.

C'mon designers, you give even the most questionable Companions the option of size L, where's the Bears?

Are Paladin mounts considered Animal Companions for the sake of taking Animal Companion archetypes? Can a Paladin mount take the Bodyguard archetype?

Personally I'd allow it, but I think by RAW they are not officially animal companions so it wouldn't work. Patrick may add it to the FAQ if you flag it.

One question regarding Huntmaster and viable Animal Companions:

A Roc is an animal, and obviously a bird, and I find it on the animal companion list.
Still I guess it wasn't intended to have a huntmaster with a roc companion, was it?

One question regarding Huntmaster and viable Animal Companions:

A Roc is an animal, and obviously a bird, and I find it on the animal companion list.
Still I guess it wasn't intended to have a huntmaster with a roc companion, was it?

Correct. The hunting pack class feature of the Huntmaster is specifically intended to only accommodate the "bird" animal companion (that is, the entry listed on page 53 of the Core Rulebook) and the "dog" animal companion (page 54 of the Core Rulebook). Animal companions that happen to be bird- or dog-like but don't have those specific names were not meant to be included.

Luckily my DM allowed that anyway.

Gnome Huntmaster riding his Roc animal companion, swooping out of the sky!

I was just reading in the Advanced Race Guide yesterday and saw that ratfolk are said to commonly travel on giant rats (dire rats with the giant simple template).

Giant rats have no price listed in the equipment lists for ratfolk in the Advanced Race Guide. Are they priced/listed in Animal Archive?

I don't have Animal Archive yet (or anything else since December), so just want to know if it's in there.

Just so people are aware, I am still in the process of evaluating the Charger/cavalier discrepancy (as well as other potential errata posters have pointed out), and am formulating an official response. Since we've got a lot of projects going on right now, I haven't been able to devote as much time to these issues as I'd like, but rest assured they are being considered and should be addressed within the next few weeks.

Until then, Jason's excellent suggestions should more than suffice for players and GMs running home games. :]

It has been about a month since this post, has there been any follow up on this issue, or a clarification given?

Patrick Renie wrote:

Just so people are aware, I am still in the process of evaluating the Charger/cavalier discrepancy (as well as other potential errata posters have pointed out), and am formulating an official response. Since we've got a lot of projects going on right now, I haven't been able to devote as much time to these issues as I'd like, but rest assured they are being considered and should be addressed within the next few weeks.

Until then, Jason's excellent suggestions should more than suffice for players and GMs running home games. :]

It has been about a month since this post, has there been any follow up on this issue, or a clarification given?

The simplest and fairest solution to the charger archetype issue is to remove the last sentence from the charger archetype's mounted challenge ability and replace it with the following: "This ability replaces link."

Reasoning: Finding a mount that is bred to ride into battle clad in armor and bearing a heavily armored rider would no doubt be a dauntless task, and these war horses are likely more obstinate than their less-outfitted counterparts. As such, a cavalier who gains a charger as a mount would need to have ranks in Handle Animal to make the most of such a wild and powerful breed.

@Patrick Renie: Depends on the society... I know a horse that in order to ride him you have to trick him into thinking he is Armoured.

If there is some 'errata' published for this, I would like to have Carnivore Feed applied to size "Tiny". I have a ferret, and it would make sense a "day's" supply would be worth 2 to 4 days for him, or perhaps 2 for Tiny, 4 for Fine, 8 for Diminutive, or something to make it clear. I am going to presume each 'days' supply covers him for 2 days, and I do not expect a GM to argue the point. But having a handy reference would be dandy. :)

Yet silence on the LARGE BEAR issue, this is a conspiracy.

What happened? Paizo staff got a beef with Grizzly Adams?

I was thinking Merida as a Pathfinder character, actually. Archer ranger with bears quite ironically as both her favored enemy and her animal companion.

Which brings up another point, which I highly doubt is addressed in this book (I don't have it, but I'll definitely buy it if I ever get around to doing a PC with an AC). Merida's bear companion was a mama bear with 3 cubs. How would you handle something like that in Pathfinder?