Howdy,
Do animal companions and eidolons take their actions on the turn of the character to which they are linked or do they have their own initiatives?
I've always run the game under the assumption that since the druid needs to direct the actions of the animal companion and, therefore, the animal's actions take place during his turn. After all, if the druid decides to 'push' the animal he needs to take a 'move action' to do so, something he can't do while it isn't his turn.
I assumed that this sort of thing also translated to eidolons and familiars, but my players brought up the fact that there is an eidolon option that gives them an improved initiative score.
Thanks,
like_a_god
|
Huh, I've never thought of that. But I assumed the Druid issues applied to all. For companions in general I always imagined they are in sync with their masters and thus would act together and, maybe for the eidolon the improved initiative is the eidolon reacting to thoughts rather than actions. So eidolon (and others) go at the same time as the character, which would save a lot of time and annoyance in turn taking, but the improved initiative makes them react extremely fast.
My opinion anyway, always same time and the improved init. just makes them individually faster.
They are technically two seperate creatures and as such should both be rolling initiative. Because of attribute bonus differences and feat selection it is very unlikely that the caster and the creature would have the same modifier. Something to keep in mind though, as you said a creature would not do something until it was told to so even if it has a higher roll it would probably have to wait until the caster's own action to act (and so would delay/hold until then and act from there from that point on) but the other case is the caster goes first and gives the command, then the companion goes on it's own roll. If the caster told the creature to go do something and had to roll initiative it would of course use it's own roll while it tried to accomplish that task. Also, if the last command a creature was given was "Guard" the creature would react on it's own roll if something were to happen (an ambush happens, the creature would be able to react on it's own roll to defend the caster if it had a higher roll).
They all have their own Init.
If they have Animal INT, they need to be `pushed` which is only on their Master`s turn, and then enact the command on the creature`s own INIT. If they have and INT of 3 or higher, they are capable of understanding speech (which can be done out of turn), so if they can understand the masters` languages, they can be commanded out of turn (just like PCs and NPCs can communicate tactically).
For Animals (as opposed to Magical Beasts, Outsiders, Dragons and other intelligent types that Familiars and Eidolons often are) I would probably still call for a Handle Animal check to `push`, it just benefits from verbal communication by being able to happen off-turn. (even with magically boosted INT, an animal still is an animal)
By the rules I'd say that the animals and eidolons get their own turn. In practice almost every group I've played with has them act on the master's turn though. I guess folks just find it easier this way. In any event, Druids and Rangers can handle their companions as a free action. I think that the "push" is only needed for tricks the animal doesn't know.
One thing I wonder about is how druids in wildshape forms which can't speak handle their animal companions. Perhaps the Link(Ex) ability allows for this. In 3.5 there were magic items and a feat which allowed speech in wildshape, but in PF I think only the elemental forms can speak.
Link allowing Handle Animal (to use known tricks) as a free action still happens only on the Master`s turn.
Speaking is a special exception to Free Actions in that it can happen out of turn.
AFAIK there`s nothing indicating that Handle Animal is dependent on verbal speech, or sound period.
After all, Animals don`t usually understand verbal speech.
Wildshaped druids can presumably make grunts and other noises if they want.
The thing is lots of people ignore the RAW on Handle Animal for Animal Companions all the time, to the point of just ignoring the distinction between known tricks and actions which require a ´Push`, in effect allowing the player complete control over the Companion at all times. I personally think following the rules is more flavorful in that the Companoin acts more like an actual animal and not a combat robot.
In my current game we started off having the various companions running on their own initiative. However, in practice it ended up better having them on the same initiative of their owner. First, it's one less creature to track on the initiative count, and when the companion ends up ahead of the owner they end up just delaying to the owner's initiative anyway. It's not RAW, but it just makes things run smoother in combat.
One thing I wonder about is how druids in wildshape forms which can't speak handle their animal companions. Perhaps the Link(Ex) ability allows for this. In 3.5 there were magic items and a feat which allowed speech in wildshape, but in PF I think only the elemental forms can speak.
If the companion has the Defend trick, then they'll automatically attack anything (that they'd normally attack) that threatens their master, without being told.
As Quandry said though, there's nothing that says there are "verbal components" to Handle Animal tricks. Hand gestures are probably even preferable, since they can be used without giving away your position.
I've always played/run it as the animal companion / eidolon having the same initiative as the master.
I can see the mechanical arguments for a separate role, but as-is these kinds of characters already have the potential to take some of the longest turns in combat -- splitting that up throughout the round makes it that much worse and bogs down play that much more for everyone.
I've always played/run it as the animal companion / eidolon having the same initiative as the master.
..
I can see the mechanical arguments for a separate role, but as-is these kinds of characters already have the potential to take some of the longest turns in combat -- splitting that up throughout the round makes it that much worse and bogs down play that much more for everyone.
Having them always act on the owner's action is actually more beneficial to the character in truth. Send the creature out to do something and then decide on what to do with their own action or vice versa. Also they know that the command given will take effect and be effective where as if the companion and character are seperate rolls, they have to be more careful on what they command. IE if the companion is going 3 actions after the caster there is the possibility that the target is taken out by one of the other characters and so the command is wasted. It might be easier, but is in effect more powerful that way as well.
If the animal companion is a mount (like with Cavalier), then I always have them at on the same initiative. It doesn't work any other way.
Everyone,
Thanks for the responses to the question. I guess it boils down to whether or not the RAW mechanics meet the needs of the group playing. As such, I'll have to work with the players and see if the RAW is how we want to play it or house rule it to conform with our expectations and needs.
like_a_god
Everyone,
Thanks for the responses to the question. I guess it boils down to whether or not the RAW mechanics meet the needs of the group playing. As such, I'll have to work with the players and see if the RAW is how we want to play it or house rule it to conform with our expectations and needs.
like_a_god
I might have missed it, but did you say what levels the characters are?
My experience is generally that companions and eidolons seem really strong at the low levels and a little less overpowering as you move on up.
I might have missed it, but did you say what levels the characters are?
My experience is generally that companions and eidolons seem really strong at the low levels and a little less overpowering as you move on up.
Well, I had a long running campaign that lasted for almost a year. Had a druid in that that went from 1st level until 5th. More recently, we were doing a series of one-shots to try out new characters and in one session I had 2 summoners. For that session the party was made up of 8th level characters. I think the common consensus was that the edilons might be a little too powerful, but I'm withholding judgment until I see more of them in a variety of situations. Still, my heart dropped a bit when one of them did something like 30 points of damage in one or two attacks.
like_a_god
|
I'm playing a summoner in PFS, and I can safely say they are overpowered at any level. The eidolon can hit top-tier damage with tons of attacks at all levels; and often get free combat manuevers as well. Evolution surge let's them adapt to any situation as well; be it water or another plane. Add to it a free pet buffer and you go too over-the-top.
Druids I agree, the companion wanes in the double-digits.
I have spent quite a bit of time wondering about how to handle a druids animal companion. Last time I ran a good old pen and paper RPG was back in the day of 1st and 2nd Edition.
So now quite a few years later I am very surprised at the amount of refinement that has gone into the game ( Big thumbs up to Paizo and the Pathfinder RPG )
So what I started doing with my group was just let the druid run her animal companion as she saw fit in combat, but it seemed unnatural that her animal just does anything she asks ( Yes I had not at this point read into the rules about Animal Companion Tricks and the Druid needing to use Handle Animal with a Swift Action to tell the companion what to do )
After a couple sessions ( and getting a better grasp of the new rules ) I decided to do as others suggested in this thread to just have her animal companion take the next lowest initiative so she could give it commands.
Some of the other players said that that was not fair because her companion - Tiger DEX 17 - I was hurting his chance at gaining a higher initiative.
I then said if the animal companion gets a higher initiative than the druid he would act naturally on instinct, and only after her initiative comes up would she have the chance to communicate her desired action through Nature Bond (Ex).
So in summary.... When we play again next week I as GM will assume full control of the Druids companion. She can use her known tricks to have it follow her commands or PUSH if it does not know a trick.
I should as GM be more or less controlling her companion based on her ability to Handle Animal. (DC chart from the Core Rulebook Page 97). If she passes the DC Handle Animal check he does as commanded, if not he acts on instinct.
I feel like this is the best interpretation of the rules as far as I can tell. It's an animal first and foremost, while a companion of the druid it will do its best to protect her he would have his own motivations and not just be a "puppet weapon" for the druid correct ?
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
There is no official word on Eidolon/ Companion initiative. We've long run separate initiatives unless it's a mount, particularly with eidolons and familiars who are intelligent creatures that can self direct themselves.
To me an eidolon is a henchman, would a henchmen they act on the players turn?
I think most GMs want to simplify things and run it where each player has one turn a round to keep things expedient. I can appreciate this point of view as well.
Run it how your group is most comfortable.
Edit: Keep in mind that Animal Companions and Eidolons have a fair chance at being significantly better at perception than their summoner/ druid. It's entirely possible they will be running solo during the surprise round.
There is no official word on Eidolon/ Companion initiative. We've long run separate initiatives unless it's a mount, particularly with eidolons and familiars who are intelligent creatures that can self direct themselves.
So quick question as far as raising intelligence is concerned, Is the companion now considered completely under discretion of the controlling player or the GM ?
There is no official word on Eidolon/ Companion initiative. We've long run separate initiatives unless it's a mount, particularly with eidolons and familiars who are intelligent creatures that can self direct themselves.
So quick question as far as raising intelligence is concerned, Is the companion now considered completely under discretion of the controlling player or the GM ?
Player sadly no matter how smart an animal gets the powers that be state that an animal is still an animal and can't do much thinking for itself on tactics and such it even still requires handle animal to give it orders.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
So quick question as far as raising intelligence is concerned, Is the companion now considered completely under discretion of the controlling player or the GM ?There is no official word on Eidolon/ Companion initiative. We've long run separate initiatives unless it's a mount, particularly with eidolons and familiars who are intelligent creatures that can self direct themselves.
I think it's a good idea to let players control all of their critters/ henchmen/ whatever. If you think a player is incapable of managing multiple creatures, then ask them to play another class rather than try and manage it via in game manipulations.
Generally a GM has plenty to do without taking on player responsibilities.
My summoner and eidolon each get their own initiative at my table, but I tend to have them holding actions until the other acts... Sometimes that's not necessary and sometimes its beneficial not to have them acting at the same moment. I prefer separate initiative because it gives me more options.
*Eridan casts 'Summon old thread'*
By RAW animal companions, eidolons and familiars have their own initiative because every creature has his own initiative. That is a general rule and there is no exception for this kind of creatures.
For a faster and simpler game most GMs (including myself) use the initiative of the master for both, master and AC/familiar/eidolon.