I removed a post. Personal attacks are unnecessary.
Did somebody attack me? :(
Wouldn't that passage mean that if I had found a clumsy perceptive eagle, and I made it into a familiar, it would still be a clumsy perceptive eagle?
It means ask your GM. By RAW you get whats in the book, no changes.
But only due to the familiar bond, at which point they gain access to the casters skills. The familiar bond is one of those exceptions to the normal rules and it is spelled out what they gain. I'd be comfortable calling that one hit die the same as the rest of the "quasi" hit die the familiar gets from the bond as it isn't called out that they do get them. It is only around as long as the bond exists and if you were to allow the selection of the feat and skill points, you open up the possibility of dumping familiars to get a new familiar with new feats and skills as situation dictates.
However, shouldn't vermin familiars such as the greensting scorpion get a feat and skill points when they become familiars? The reason they don't have any skills or feats is because they don't have an intelligence rating. As familiars, they become 1hd creatures with an intelligence rating and as such should have skill points and a feat.
I'm not so sure about that. The HD they have is very real, it's not a "fake" hit dice as those in the class feature description. They DO gain intelligence, and I'd assume that they gain the benefits of that intelligence too, or are you saying by the time they reach 12 intelligence they won't get any additional skills? Or that they don't get to add their intelligence bonus to knowledge checks?
Intelligence is related to skill points in the following way:
- - No skill points.
0 - -5 skill points/level
2 - -4 sp/lvl
4 - -3 sp/level
6 - -2 sp/level
8 - -1 sp/level
10 - standard
12 - +1 sp/level
and so on. If 0-12 applies, why shouldn't the change from - to 6? The same is true with feats.
I'm not so sure about that. The HD they have is very real, it's not a "fake" hit dice as those in the class feature description. They DO gain intelligence, and I'd assume that they gain the benefits of that intelligence too, or are you saying by the time they reach 12 intelligence they won't get any additional skills? Or that they don't get to add their intelligence bonus to knowledge checks?
.
Intelligence is related to skill points in the following way:
- - No skill points.
0 - -5 skill points/level
2 - -4 sp/lvl
4 - -3 sp/level
6 - -2 sp/level
8 - -1 sp/level
10 - standard
12 - +1 sp/level
.
and so on. If 0-12 applies, why shouldn't the change from - to 6? The same is true with feats.
The familiar in question starts with 1HD and a nil intelligence. That is the base creature, anything past that is from the Bond. The Bond states that for purposes of effects related to HD, use the familiars base HD or the master's character level, whichever is higher. They aren't actually anything more than the 1HD creature with (possibly) more hit points due to the Bond. The intelligence gained from the Bond says nothing about granting skill points, it just says here is the equivalent intelligence score of the familiar (which gives it an increased intelligence modifier for skills, probably granted by the master through the Bond).
As a matter of fact for skills it says use either the skills that the familiar started with (which in the case of a vermin would be 0 for its initial HD when it had a nil) OR the skills that the master has (modified by the stats of the familiar itself). Given that the familiar gets ALL of the masters skills I think it would be readily apparent why the Bond doesn't also give skill points by virtue of an intelligence bump. Everytime the master character levels up the familiar is gaining its skill points (actually more than it would have gotten) via the master.
..
The initial HD is the only real HD and it is taken into consideratian via the base creature as are its own skill ranks at that time. The Bond doesn't change that base creature, it adds on top of it and allows to choose the more favorable of its own or the Bond abilities. They gain "INT X" but the feature says nothing about gaining skill points (and skill points are not gained retroactively IIRC anyways) and there is a specific section regarding skills. I'm saying the class feature takes into consideration the intelligence bump via the specified section, so no they don't "gain" skill points from the increased Bond intelligence. They also most certainly use their own intelligence score for skills (gained by ranks from the master's own skills via the Bond) that reference INT modifier, like knowledge checks.
Honestly, now I'm confused. What are the rules on familiars gaining feats now? I didn't think familiars got to add feats....
As far as I know, they don't. They get what's listed in the Bestiary and nothing more. Ever.
I asked if I could switch some of those initial (only) feats out, and it looks like the devs said no, even though it defies all internal game logic.
Even though it defies all internal game logic.
How so? How does using a creature's base stats found in the book "deify all internal game logic"? The rules are simple you gain a base unmodified creature, if it advances {by the rules} to have more feats, better or different stats or the like it is no longer "standard" or "Un modified" now is it?
|
Honestly, now I'm confused. What are the rules on familiars gaining feats now? I didn't think familiars got to add feats....As far as I know, they don't. They get what's listed in the Bestiary and nothing more. Ever.
Well, not ever, just not as a free option.
Many feats, class abilities, racial abilities and / or spells are examples of something that a character couldn't do normally, but can do now.
In addition, PF also adds in Traits, NPC Boons and Faction benefits, as yet more ways to tweak stuff. A Trait that gives you a good eye for finding quality companions, or an NPC Boon granted by doing a favor for some dude who runs a rookery, kennel or stable, or a slightly modified familiar / companion choice as a faction benefit for favors done to the Green Faith, all offers ways around this.
The GM has, literally, a half-dozen ways to make a non-average familiar (companion / mount / whatever) an option, without hand-waving and allowing it for free.
You can even totally tweak stuff. Do a favor for the high priest of Calistria, and perhaps he'll show you how to call one of the cat-sized sacred wasps that buzz around the temple's hives as a familiar. Just because it's not a standard free option, that the player can just choose at character generation, doesn't mean the GM can't make it available either in-story (as NPC Boon or Faction benefit), or through the use of a new trait, feat, spell (perhaps even one that allows one to retrain a pre-existing familiar, to give it a different starting feat, or swap a point or two from one of it's ability scores to a different score, to get a more charismatic beastie or something, with alteration magic), etc.
IMO, the 'unmodified' thing was meant in 3.X to keep people from saying that their cat familiar had the elite array, the half-dragon template and 2 levels of sorcerer. Without a rule to explicitly forbid customizing familiars via templates, higher point-arrays, etc. you can be sure someone would have tried it.
"No, really, a Sarrukh made my lizard familiar into Pun-Pun..."
A feat swap, or a few ability points shuffled around, or a different use of skill points, seems like the sort of thing that could be readily meddled with via trait, feat, spell, boon, faction bonus, etc. without upsetting the game. That's what these mechanics are for, after all, allowing a character to gain something that they wouldn't start with automatically.
Even though it defies all internal game logic.How so? How does using a creature's base stats found in the book "deify all internal game logic"? The rules are simple you gain a base unmodified creature, if it advances {by the rules} to have more feats, better or different stats or the like it is no longer "standard" or "Un modified" now is it?
It's been well established by dozens (if not hundreds) of publications and developer forum commentary that the stats for mosnters are mutable.
A dragon of a certain color and age doesn't always have to have improved vital strike just because it is listed in his statblock. Not all dragons (insert other monster here) are the same. This is an established fact in roleplaying. The statblocks in the bestiaries are just a baseline, something to make the "GM on the go"'s job easier.
One dragon might have feats and skills invested into scouting and physical combat, while its twin brother might have invested into metamagic feats. Their parent might be a sage, forgoing combat options altogether despite what's shown in the ancient dragon's stat block.
The game designers have up and said that, even though there is a wide variety of eagles out there in the game world, spellcasters can only ever have one kind.
Familiars MUST always be cookie cutter/cardboard cutout clones of one another.
SCREW. THAT.
Until they put it into official FAQ/Errata I am going to ignore their "advice" and assume that a "normal familiar" applies to a narrow range of a kind of creature and not one specific stat block.
That way, if I want to switch out the ONE feat or the ONE or TWO skill ranks they get, I freakin' can. It sure as hell isn't going to break the game.
SCREW. THAT.Until they put it into official FAQ/Errata I am going to ignore their "advice" and assume that a "normal familiar" applies to a narrow range of a kind of creature and not one specific stat block.
That way, if I want to switch out the ONE feat or the ONE or TWO skill ranks they get, I freakin' can. It sure as hell isn't going to break the game.
It is not Advice, it is the Rules. Normal, unmodified means just what it says on the tin, they even provided you with pages of stats for those creatures. There is no need to FAQ or Errata what is plain and understood.
You can change the rules if your GM says so, but you do not have a "right" to do so, no more then you have the "right" to change spell out on your list without say so. But if they do not let you, then ya have to use what is written, which is well stated and clear.
You can do that if you're the GM. Or if you get explicit permission from your GM.
The game designers have up and said that, even though there is a wide variety of eagles out there in the game world, spellcasters can only ever have one kind.Familiars MUST always be cookie cutter/cardboard cutout clones of one another.
SCREW. THAT.
Until they put it into official FAQ/Errata I am going to ignore their "advice" and assume that a "normal familiar" applies to a narrow range of a kind of creature and not one specific stat block.
That way, if I want to switch out the ONE feat or the ONE or TWO skill ranks they get, I freakin' can. It sure as hell isn't going to break the game.
+1 That is what the DM is for. The player does not get to dictate what is in the world. If he wants something other then the normal average familiar then that player needs to work with his GM. Not as complex or earth shattering as you would make it out to be.
As a GM, I understand that any given rule may not single-handedly break the game.
But as a general trend in D&D gaming, players are capable of finding DOZENS of these things. Over time, players can switch out and customize their class abilities, their racial traits, they can modify which skills are class skills, select new familiars, (in this example) custom-build those familiars, craft weapons using new rules to get the same abilities for lower prices, alter which spells lists they can learn from (some classes simply allowing them to choose any spell on another classes' lists), modify bonus feat lists
Customizability is power. My concern with this sort of thing is not specifically the familiar, but also that it is representative of hundreds of other minor issues that collectively push the power level of the game upwards.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The developers are hypocrites--that, or they don't track what they write vs what they rule. On one hand they say it's okay to change monsters around and that those in the bestiary are just baselines not meant to represent every creature in the game world, then on the other hand they write a rule saying that all familiars (who come from animals in the world) are exactly alike.
I'm big on consistency. I don't like internal contradictions like that.
Monsters follow almost all the same rules as normal characters. They have feat progressions, skill ranks, etc. Why can these things be adjusted on any creature that is not a familiar?
Doesn't make any sense! It's a purely arbitrary restriction!
I think this thread has run its course as a useful rules reference. Locked.