Tiny creatures can move into or through...


General Discussion (Prerelease)

Scarab Sages

My group is currently in the midst of a discussion about the rules regarding differences in creature sizes. At issue is how the mage's familiar should be moving and attacking.

This thread has some discussion about the movement, but it's not directly related.

Here are my thoughts (as GM):

* You may not occupy the same square as an opponent.
* You may not end your movement in an illegal square (such as an opponent's).

Those are the two biggies. Then there are these:

* Tiny and smaller creatures may move into or through another creature's square.

That sounds like an exception to the first rule, above. But is it also an exception to the second rule? For example, can the mage's Tiny familiar move into an opponent's square and remain there until its next turn? I can find no rule that allows the creature to remain there. In fact, even the "three sizes different" rule only allows for "moving into or through" and doesn't specifying ending movement in the occupied square.

This is important in general because the Tiny familiar provokes an AOO when it moves into the Medium creature's square to attack. If it cannot remain in that square, it will provoke another AOO every time it attempts to attack.

I have a second question related to this one, but I will save it until later as it depends on the answer here.

Thanks for your help and opinions!

Grand Lodge

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
azhrei_fje wrote:
But is it also an exception to the second rule?

I use the following as DM justification for very small creatures occupying the same space a s a small (medium) or larger creature.

d20SRD.org wrote:

Tiny, Diminutive, and Fine Creatures

Very small creatures take up less than 1 square of space. This means that more than one such creature can fit into a single square. A Tiny creature typically occupies a space only 2½ feet across, so four can fit into a single square. Twenty-five Diminutive creatures or 100 Fine creatures can fit into a single square. Creatures that take up less than 1 square of space typically have a natural reach of 0 feet, meaning they can’t reach into adjacent squares. They must enter an opponent’s square to attack in melee. This provokes an attack of opportunity from the opponent. You can attack into your own square if you need to, so you can attack such creatures normally. Since they have no natural reach, they do not threaten the squares around them. You can move past them without provoking attacks of opportunity. They also can’t flank an enemy.

-Skeld

EDIT: Also, logically speaking, a creature cannot move into a square to attack, then attack, then move out of the square because it's an "illegal to occupy" square (unless is Spring Attack or Fly-By Attack). I believe that adds some logical justification to Tiny creature occupying a Medium's square.

Scarab Sages

Skeld wrote:
EDIT: Also, logically speaking, a creature cannot move into a square to attack, then attack, then move out of the square because it's an "illegal to occupy" square (unless is Spring Attack or Fly-By Attack). I believe that adds some logical justification to Tiny creature occupying a Medium's square.

Thanks. The problems I have with that quote (which is also one I use, btw), is that it never says they can stay in the square. There is a rule that specifically says they cannot stay in the square, and there are just vague hints that they can.

And nowhere do the rules specify the effects of having a Tiny creature in the same square with you. For example, when you leave the square (not withdrawing, but move+action) do you provoke from the Tiny creature?

And if you allow the Tiny creature to take that AOO, why don't swarms of Tiny creatures get AOOs against a Medium creature when they provoke? Why should a single Tiny creature have different rules from a bunch of Tiny creatures?

The swarm subtype description specifically says "no AOOs" from swarms, which sort of implies that a Tiny or smaller creature normally would. But it begs the question, why not from a swarm?

And the swam subtype specifically says that occupies the same space as other creatures. Would that be necessary to state if Tiny and smaller creatures had that ability by default?

Note also that the rules only say that a Tiny creature can move into or through your square, not that you can move into or through a Tiny creature's square!

Again, thanks for your response! I'm curious how other GMs rule on this. And whether Jason has any clarifications for this situation.


Back to the part on reach of tiny creatures for your answer. You can only attack of opportunity a creature which you threaten. You can only threaten that which you reach. A tiny creature does not have reach (usually, unlesss its pixies with pitchforks again, or miniature kraken time).

Thus, a tiny creature does not threaten you, thus it can not make attacks of opportunity. You may argue that it threatens you because it entered your square to attack you, but that is merely what it is capable of doing because it entered your square. It does not change the fact that it does not have reach, and thus does not threaten you, and thus can not make an attack of opportunity.

The closest example I can see is if a person is on the other side of a door and I step, from directly in front of them, to 5' to the side, I now have cover, but I can still attack them. I don't threaten them, because of the cover. I may be missinterpreting that, so I will suggest my next closet comparison, just in case. In a grapple (3.5 rules at least, which is still somewhat relevant, since it seems like the small creature rules havent changed) a grappling creature does not threaten squares, but is not actually prevented from attacking other creatures (there are various penalties to doing so, but the basic idea is relevant).

I don't know if this will help, or just muddy the waters. Hopefuly it helps.

EDIT- Rereading, Skeld covers most of this much more succinctly with a bit of Quoted SRD.

Also, I feel that the OPs quotes spell it out rather plainly, at least to my English major perspective.

"you may not occupy the same square" strikes me as "you may not be in a square at the same time". The second is rather redundant relative to that version, but the two together are trying to say "you may not normally move through, or end your movement in, an opponents square". It then mentions the exception for tiny and smaller, using two explicit adverbs: "into" and "through" which implies that it is fine to both move only "into" (and not out, thus staying in) an opponents square, and moving "through" (and thus moving both into and out).

Hmm, far as I'm concerned, I see it as case closed, all issues resolved. Now to see how many agree.

Scarab Sages

The Black Bard wrote:
"you may not occupy the same square" strikes me as "you may not be in a square at the same time". The second is rather redundant relative to that version, but the two together are trying to say "you may not normally move through, or end your movement in, an opponents square". It then mentions the exception for tiny and smaller, using two explicit adverbs: "into" and "through" which implies that it is fine to both move only "into"...

Yes, I've decided I agree with the idea that a Tiny or smaller creature can move into (and remain) in the square of a larger creature.

But your take on the AOO is that they have 0 reach and don't threaten? Even though there are other rules that say, "Since you always threaten your own square..."? (Darn, I can't see the thread at the same time as I'm replying or I'd quote it. Grrr. Okay, opened another tab.)

SRD wrote:
You can attack into your own square if you need to, so you can attack such creatures normally. Since they have no natural reach, they do not threaten the squares around them.

Now it's referring to PCs, meaning Medium and Small creatures, but what if "you" were Tiny?

And the second sentence is your point, I think. But shouldn't they threaten the square they are in?


azhrei_fje wrote:
And the second sentence is your point, I think. But shouldn't they threaten the square they are in?

I would say that Tiny creatures would only threaten against other Tiny creatures, since other creatures would have reach on them. (Like a large versus a medium.) Tiny creatures should be able to take AoO's against other tiny creatures or unwary larger ones - I know of some cats who are love to take AoO's.

If we think of it as rescaling the map towards the tiny creature, then a 5x5 square becomes four 2.5 x 2.5 squares, so a tiny creature would threaten actions in its own square. On the other hand, the smaller you get the less ability you have to reach outside your own square, so what the game might be saying is that Tiny and smaller creatures don't have reach (how much reach does a leech have?).

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16

I would say that the rules do support, though indirectly, that a tiny creature can indeed stay in the square occupied by a larger creature. Since they can enter that square and then attack, and you certainly can't assume that tiny creatures automatically have spring attack or flyby attack, etc., then by moving and attacking, their turn is then over, not allowing them to leave the square.

Now, on another, but related topic, how do you/should you adjudicate a tiny creating that lands on a larger creature and wants to stay on them, attacking each turn. This also applies to medium creatures (such as PCs) who want to land on and continue attacking a gargantuan creature (such as a dragon). On the fly, I called for an acrobatics check each round - DC 20 if the larger creature doesn't move, DC 30 if it uses a move action to move, DC 40 if they actively try to shake off the smaller creature. I'm not aware of rules anywhere that deal with this situation (or for that matter other size mixes where the riden creature doesn't want a rider - say a centaur wanting to dislodge a human who leaps onto it's back.)

Grand Lodge

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
azhrei_fje wrote:
Thanks. The problems I have with that quote (which is also one I use, btw), is that it never says they can stay in the square. There is a rule that specifically says they cannot stay in the square, and there are just vague hints that they can.
I think this is just a problem with the rules not being as complete in the SRD as they could be. Let's look at another logical argument. Take this quote:
d20SRD.org wrote:

Ending Your Movement

You can’t end your movement in the same square as another creature unless it is helpless.

This would imply that a Tiny cannot end his movement in a Medium's space. We know that most Tiny's have a reach of 0 and must enter a creature's square to attack. Using the literal interpretations of these two statements together, a Tiny cannot move into a Medium's square and attack it without Spring Attack or Fly-By Attack. Therefore, any Tiny with reach 0 that doesn't have either of those feats (or carrying reach weapon) can't attack a Medium (he can't move into the Medium's square, end his movement, and attack).

Obviously, that doesn't make any sense. A non-Spring Attacking Tiny with reach 0 has to be able to occupy an opponent's square or else he wouldn't be a treat. Otherwise, there would be no need to have Vargouilles in the SRD.

azhrei_fje wrote:
And nowhere do the rules specify the effects of having a Tiny creature in the same square with you. For example, when you leave the square (not withdrawing, but move+action) do you provoke from the Tiny creature?
Use this again:
d20SRD/org wrote:

Tiny, Diminutive, and Fine Creatures

Very small creatures take up less than 1 square of space. This means that more than one such creature can fit into a single square. A Tiny creature typically occupies a space only 2½ feet across, so four can fit into a single square. Twenty-five Diminutive creatures or 100 Fine creatures can fit into a single square. Creatures that take up less than 1 square of space typically have a natural reach of 0 feet, meaning they can’t reach into adjacent squares. They must enter an opponent’s square to attack in melee. This provokes an attack of opportunity from the opponent. You can attack into your own square if you need to, so you can attack such creatures normally. Since they have no natural reach, they do not threaten the squares around them. You can move past them without provoking attacks of opportunity. They also can’t flank an enemy.

Since you can make an attack of opportunity into your own square and most Tiny creatures (with reach 0) can only threaten their own square and the Tiny and Medium both occupy the same square and creatures provoke AOs when move out of a threatened square, then a Medium who attack a Tiny in his own square then moves out of that square should provoke an AO from the Tiny.

azhrei_fje wrote:

And if you allow the Tiny creature to take that AOO, why don't swarms of Tiny creatures get AOOs against a Medium creature when they provoke? Why should a single Tiny creature have different rules from a bunch of Tiny creatures?

The swarm subtype description specifically says "no AOOs" from swarms, which sort of implies that a Tiny or smaller creature normally would. But it begs the question, why not from a swarm?

And the swam subtype specifically says that occupies the same space as other creatures. Would that be necessary to state if Tiny and smaller creatures had that ability by default?

Swarms exist as a template with slightly different rules from those of the base creature they represent. I would imagine, the no AOs rule is there for simplification and to keep swarms balanced.

JoelF847 wrote:
Now, on another, but related topic, how do you/should you adjudicate a tiny creating that lands on a larger creature and wants to stay on them, attacking each turn.

If it's "land on" and "hold on," then I would say grapple. Otherwise, he just occupies the square and takes his FRA each round (when he doesn't have to move).

-Skeld

Scarab Sages

tergiver wrote:
azhrei_fje wrote:
And the second sentence is your point, I think. But shouldn't they threaten the square they are in?
I would say that Tiny creatures would only threaten against other Tiny creatures, since other creatures would have reach on them. (Like a large versus a medium.) Tiny creatures should be able to take AoO's against other tiny creatures or unwary larger ones - I know of some cats who are love to take AoO's.

Hmm, that's interesting. A Tiny creature would threaten other creatures next to its 2.5-ft sub-square (for lack of a better term).

tergiver wrote:
If we think of it as rescaling the map towards the tiny creature, then a 5x5 square becomes four 2.5 x 2.5 squares, so a tiny creature would threaten actions in its own square.

This was actually my thinking on it. The rules are oriented towards a Medium-size PC (with some adjustments for Small creatures). So when they say, "You" they are referring to a Medium-size creature, not a Tiny one. When referring to the square of a Tiny creature, they should be referring to the 2.5-ft quarter-square, should they not?

tergiver wrote:
On the other hand, the smaller you get the less ability you have to reach outside your own square, so what the game might be saying is that Tiny and smaller creatures don't have reach (how much reach does a leech have?).

And this is the other aspect. As Skeld pointed out, if a Tiny creature can make AOOs against other creatures within the same 5-ft square, then what about Dimunitive creatures? There can be 25 of them in a single 5-ft square -- do they get to make AOOs as well? Using Skeld's logic (unless I missed something) the answer is "yes". But that means 25 AOOs against a Medium-size creature who leaves the square! Statistically, I may as well figure out what the damage is based on at least a single 20, a single 19, and so on. This will be MUCH higher than a swarm would do.

Skeld avoids the swarm issue by arguing balance, and I don't mind having to make concessions in order to preserve balance, but I don't like arbitrary concessions. I want at least some kind of logic (preferably in-game) as to why the situation is the way it is.

Last, there's an argument that a Tiny creature would need to have Spring Attack to move into the square, attack, and then move back. But isn't this exactly what a venomous snake does? They typically lunge forward to bite, then recoil back to a position not too far from their original location.

Until we hash this out, I've ruled that the Tiny creature can occupy the same square as the Medium. It does not get an AOO against a Medium creature that leaves the square, although I would give it an AOO against a Tiny or smaller creature. (I just can't reconcile that with swarms not receiving an AOO. Especially given the number of creatures in a swarm -- surely ONE OF THEM would make an AOO?)

I'm leery about ruling anything beyond that until this is resolved, since I have character who make be able to shapechange into Tiny creatures and I don't want any abuse. :-/


azhrei_fje wrote:
* Tiny and smaller creatures may move into or through another creature's square.

Look at the word "or".

That implies you could drop either the first or second part and the statement would still be true, i.e. "Tiny and smaller creatures may move into another creature's square" AND "Tiny and smaller creatures may move through another creature's square" are both true. If the rule actually meant you cannot REMAIN in a square after moving into into it (but neglected to specify that for some reason), it could drop the first part completely ("may move into") to simply state "Tiny and smaller creatures may move thru another creature's square", since that would 100% match such an intent, right? (whether or not it species the not-remaining-in part) So your problematic reading assumes that there is no particular reason 2 separate features were either included or excluded in the rules, instead of assuming their presence/absence actually mean something.

As mentioned, Tiny creatures generally have NO reach, so if you add this restriction not explicitly ordered by the rules, THEY CANNOT MAKE ANY MELEE ATTACKS unless they have Spring Attack. Realistically, the rule simply says: "Tiny creatures are allowed to enter the square" without any other restrictions or requirements for what you do after entering the square. Take it at face value.


How about submitting this as a question to "Ask the Kobold?"


I think the Kobold's time is more valuable...

Liberty's Edge

I've encountered this one a few times, and how we have always ruled it in our group is this:

The attack rules for a tiny creature(as quoted above) state that the tiny creature has to move into the square of a foe to attack it, and that movement is what provokes the AoO since you are leaving the square adjacent which the opponent threatens. That seems to back the statement the tiny creature ends its movement outside of the larger creatures square.

So the way I see it, the tiny creature moves forward into the larger creatures square to attack, provoking as he moves and then makes the strike. This would end his turn, but since sharing the square is not a legal move, he is shunted to the nearest legal square(normally back where he came from, but I don't really have a problem with the idea of a tiny creature slipping past or around a larger one).

There is some precedent with this, though its normally from things like spell effects that put you in a place that is not allowed, for instance making a save against a blade barrier and being pushed out to one side or the other of it.

-Tarlane


I thought I remembered hearing that they were having an issue getting enough submissions for questions at KQ for Skip Williams' column.


no new info on this?

Scarab Sages

Tarlane wrote:
I've encountered this one a few times, and how we have always ruled it in our group is this:

I appreciate your insight but it doesn't answer the original question. Which is, Assuming that a Tiny creature may occupy the same square as a Medium creature, does the Tiny creature receive an AOO against the Medium creature when the Medium creatures leaves the square (via a move action, not a 5-foot step)? Please account for the Tiny creature having a reach of 0-feet and the rule quote that all creatures may attack into their own square (and hence, threaten their own square). You may need to define "square" to accomplish this, but I'll take any opinions I can get at this point!

I find it amazing that no one else has this problem! And I don't know where to find this lowly "Kobold", but I'll look around. If this individual is supposed to be akin to the Sage of WotC FAQ fame, then of course they woudl have time to answer the question -- their job is specifically to clarify such things! And certainly they would want to know about before getting to far into the production cycle of the new PF Rulebook, right?

(Off to find the Kobold's lair...)


azhrei_fje wrote:
Assuming that a Tiny creature may occupy the same square as a Medium creature, does the Tiny creature receive an AOO against the Medium creature when the Medium creatures leaves the square (via a move action, not a 5-foot step)?

The tiny creature gets an AOO because it threatens its own square and the medium creature occupying that same square leaves that threatened square. According to d20-SRD:

"...Moving: Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes an attack of opportunity from the threatening opponent..."

Scarab Sages

Beastman wrote:

The tiny creature gets an AOO because it threatens its own square and the medium creature occupying that same square leaves that threatened square. According to d20-SRD:

"...Moving: Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes an attack of opportunity from the threatening opponent..."

So you're cool with the use of the word usually?

And you're cool with the fact that Tiny and smaller creatures have Reach 0-ft?

If there were 100 Fine-size creatures in the square, you'd give them each an AOO? That means five natural 20's. Is that fair for the Medium-size creature?

So why don't swarms receive AOOs against opponents who move out of their square?


azhrei_fje wrote:
Beastman wrote:

The tiny creature gets an AOO because it threatens its own square and the medium creature occupying that same square leaves that threatened square. According to d20-SRD:

"...Moving: Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes an attack of opportunity from the threatening opponent..."

So you're cool with the use of the word usually?

And you're cool with the fact that Tiny and smaller creatures have Reach 0-ft?

If there were 100 Fine-size creatures in the square, you'd give them each an AOO? That means five natural 20's. Is that fair for the Medium-size creature?

So why don't swarms receive AOOs against opponents who move out of their square?

No, I'm not cool with that and it wouldn't be fair for the medium-sized creature. I only quoted the relevant rule. I think, the word "usually" in this context means that you do not provoke AOO if you use a Withdraw action.

Since I never encountered 100 fine-sized creatures in a square, I never ran into that problem. But i can't honestly say how I would rule such a situation.


We're all over-thinking this.

No combatant stands still in their square. I think a lot of people forget this, because we put our figures out on our flip-mats and the figures stand there, unmoving, and we get it our heads that our characters do too.

OK, maybe not, but it's kind of comical to think that this is what we do.

In any case, that tiny creature is not sitting still in its own little corner of your square.

It is moving around, trying to bite or scratch you, or whatever it does. Therefore, it is all over your 5' square, sharing it with you.

If you move away, it will get an AoO because you left the square it threatens - your square.

There is no question about whether it has reach. Can it bite you on its turn? Yes? Then it can bite you on your turn when you move out of the square where it threatens to bite you.

In fact, reach is never a question in AoO rules. If an opponent leaves a square you threaten, he provokes an AoO from you. Reach is irrelevent to that rule. Of course, reach is very relevent to figuring out which squares you can threaten, but once you know that, if an opponent leaves one of those squares, that action provokes.

So, we all know the tiny creatre threatens you in your square. So the question of reach is already resolved. It threatens you, it threatens your square. It doesn't threaten other squares because its reach is 0.

But since it threatens you square, if you leave that square, you provoke the AoO, just like you would if you left a threatened square of a bigger creature.

This all seems really simple and intuitive to me.

Where's the conflict?

Liberty's Edge

I'm with DM_Blake on this one. Though, just as a side note, if you have 100 fine creatures in a square, I think at that point it should be treated as a swarm and use those rules. You are talking of being fair to the medium creature, and the swarm rules were designed to give the smaller creature both the advantages of numbers but also limitations as well, since so many creatures end up blocking each other as well.

Scarab Sages

Tarlane wrote:
I'm with DM_Blake on this one. Though, just as a side note, if you have 100 fine creatures in a square, I think at that point it should be treated as a swarm and use those rules. You are talking of being fair to the medium creature, and the swarm rules were designed to give the smaller creature both the advantages of numbers but also limitations as well, since so many creatures end up blocking each other as well.

You have read about the Swarm subtype, right? The rules say that for a collection of Tiny creatures to be a swarm, there must be 300+ of them. I think the numbers for Fine creatures is in the thousands. If you're going to claim that 100 Fine creatures is a swarm, then what about 50 of them? Or 25? Or 15? Where do you draw the line? The answer is that you don't have to -- the RAW already have drawn that line for you and they put it at a very big number. Much higher than 100. So if you rule that 100 Fine creatures is a swarm, that's definitely not by the rules. (I'm not disagreeing with your approach -- I would likely do the same -- but my point behind this thread is to determine what the solution is PER THE RULES and why individual GMs interpret those rules the way they do.)

Based on DM_Blake's response, I guess he's okay with 100 Fine creatures moving around in the same square and all of them threatening that square, thus granting 100 AOOs. (So figure 5 natural 20s and 5 natural 19s, on average. And be sure to use poisonous creatures, preferably ones with a venom that damages the Constitution score so that the Fort bonus drops on each successful attack.)

I have submitted this to the Ask the Kobold thread and Skip has agreed to cover it in an upcoming column, so maybe I'll get an answer. I'll decide if it's an "official" answer after I hear his reasoning. (I have to say that because some of the FAQ answers contradict each other and he wrote some of those... But I have high hopes for a workable solution.)

Dark Archive

azhrei_fje wrote:
Beastman wrote:

The tiny creature gets an AOO because it threatens its own square and the medium creature occupying that same square leaves that threatened square. According to d20-SRD:

"...Moving: Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes an attack of opportunity from the threatening opponent..."

So you're cool with the use of the word usually?

And you're cool with the fact that Tiny and smaller creatures have Reach 0-ft?

If there were 100 Fine-size creatures in the square, you'd give them each an AOO? That means five natural 20's. Is that fair for the Medium-size creature?

So why don't swarms receive AOOs against opponents who move out of their square?

The term usually is just the easy why to say unless special conditions apply....for example, if the creature makes a successful tumble check, etc.


azhrei_fje wrote:
I'll decide if it's an "official" answer after I hear his reasoning. (I have to say that because some of the FAQ answers contradict each other and he wrote some of those... But I have high hopes for a workable solution.)

Skip's answers rarely contradict themselves, and he almost always *notes* that this is a change to a previous answer. The contradictory answers, from what I've seen, mostly came from the "new sage", Mr. A. Collins.

Thanks for submitting it - it'll be an interesting answer!

Frankly though, if 100 fine creatures are attacking you, and they actually do at least 1 hp of damage per attack, you're pretty much dead anyhow.


Majuba wrote:
azhrei_fje wrote:
I'll decide if it's an "official" answer after I hear his reasoning. (I have to say that because some of the FAQ answers contradict each other and he wrote some of those... But I have high hopes for a workable solution.)

Skip's answers rarely contradict themselves, and he almost always *notes* that this is a change to a previous answer. The contradictory answers, from what I've seen, mostly came from the "new sage", Mr. A. Collins.

Thanks for submitting it - it'll be an interesting answer!

Frankly though, if 100 fine creatures are attacking you, and they actually do at least 1 hp of damage per attack, you're pretty much dead anyhow.

Isn't this a case where the level of the encounter - 100+ creatures who can act cohesively to attack you, and deal even 1 point of damage, let alone poison or some other nasty effect - comes into play?

Can anyone actually pull an example of this out of the MM?

Scarab Sages

crmanriq wrote:
Can anyone actually pull an example of this out of the MM?

Out of the MM? I'm not sure what you mean.

Although with 100 Fine-size creatures against a typical Medium-size creature, they won't be doing 1 hp each. Five of them will roll 1's and 5 will roll 20's, plus every number in between. For my campaign, the target had an AC of 22, IIRC. So with a BAB of about +3 or +4 (my guess at the highest a Fine creature would have given the size penalty), they would need to roll a 19 or 20. Of course, if the attack was melee touch they might only need a 10+. In any case, I don't think the damage is the issue, really.

The issue is that the rules aren't clear and I have to decide for myself. Whatever decision I make can be argued against by the players. And regardless, whichever way I rule there are (to me) implications for future encounters. Hence my desire to know how other GMs have ruled and the effect it had in their campaigns. Plus, I'd like to know what the intention was behind these rules and why the creature sizing doesn't scale. (For example, there's a difference in how Tiny and Medium creatures interact and how Medium and Huge creatures interact. Why?)

But yeah, I'm eagerly waiting for Skip's take on it.

Scarab Sages

He has answered this question. See http://www.koboldquarterly.com/k/article686.php for Skip's take on it.

I've posted a comment because one aspect still needs clarification, IMO.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / General Discussion (Prerelease) / Tiny creatures can move into or through... All Messageboards
Recent threads in General Discussion (Prerelease)
Druid / Monk?