| 7 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, I know this question has been asked before but throughout all of my searching I never found a definitive answer. Under familiars it states
Hit Dice: For the purpose of effects related to number of Hit Dice, use the master's character level or the familiar's normal HD total, whichever is higher.
So does this mean that for every odd hit die I get that my familiar would get a feat as well?
There is certainly an argument for it -- but almost everyone agrees "no" especially since beast bonded witches can give their feats to their familiars.
Oh, makes sense. I was actually asking because of a witch I'm playing though because its literally the first witch ever in my group (combined we have played every class but witch so, and it seemed fun) I just decided against archetypes so I didn't even bother checking them.
Feats are not an "effect" related to number of Hit Dice.
What that means for example is that sleep wouldn't affect a familiar of a 5th level sorcerer since it counts as having 5 HD, etc. Stuff like that.
They count as having HD for the purposes of interacting with certain abilities. They don't actually have the HD, so they don't get the feats. Quatar's last post was an example of how their virtual HD affect interaction with other abilities.
Feat are not affects, but some of the produce effect.
Effect should be a defined term, but it is not. Generally speaking things like spells, SLA's, Supernatural Abilities, and so on are effects.
If the familiar got all the things that HD would give it then it would be better to just give it HD, and then make a rules exceptions saying that it only has half of instead of virtual HD.
Compare the familiar to animal companions and eidolons which are called out as having feats.
To further answer the question many abilities say how they work when they interact with creatures of a certain HD, such as color spray or a dragon's fear effect.
If I had a high level caster's familiar from an official 3.5 of PF product I would use it as an example.
edit:I misread an ability.
but they would have at least 1 HD and thus on feat just for existing wouldn't they?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
but they would have at least 1 HD and thus on feat just for existing wouldn't they?
Yes. They should have whatever feat is in the bestiary.
Feat are not affects, but some of the produce effect.
Effect should be a defined term, but it is not.
So basically the answer is there isn't one then.
As far as I can tell the main thing that makes me think RAI is likely no, is simply because there are a lack of feats that you can give familiars that are specially designed for them to take. However, Considering previous rulings, I would not put it past paizo to stick with their guns, regardless, Effects should become a defined term.Because by RAW, an effect of numbers of HD is more feats, and as long as effect remains without a rules definition, it's default definition is that of a dictionary, and that would mean that all things related to HD with the exception of HP, since it's specifically stated as an exception, apply.
Hero lab is not affiliated with Paizo as far as I know, and likely shouldn't be taken as a source against something.I just started a lvl 10 Wizard in Hero Labs,to see what it did...
My flying squirrel was listed as getting Animal tricks, but not Feats (Other than the base ones from being a flying squirrel.-Uriel
Effects are not defined by RAW so there is no RAW that call feats effects.
That means by RAW there is nothing giving you the feats.
No, they don't. They give their people a small skill bonus, and serve as a spellbook for witches. In most cases, they are considered part of their master's body for area spell effects and the like. I think.
Animal companions and eidolons do get feats, because they don't exist to enhance their master, but can act as their own entity. I think.
And Hero Lab is pretty well tied into the Pathfinder system, very few errors that I've encountered. Not canon, mind you, but pretty accurate.
Typing RAW does not make you right. Effects are not feats if you can't show it to me in the book.
Feats are defined however:
Feat: A feat is an ability a creature has mastered. Feats often allow creatures to circumvent rules or restrictions. Creatures receive a number of feats based off their Hit Dice, but some classes and other abilities grant bonus feats
An ability is not an effect.
Abilities can cause effects, but one is still not the other.
As an example
Staggering Critical (Combat, Critical)Your critical hits cause opponents to slow down.
Prerequisites: Critical Focus, base attack bonus +13.
Benefit: Whenever you score a critical hit, your opponent becomes staggered for 1d4+1 rounds. A successful Fortitude save reduces the duration to 1 round. The DC of this Fortitude save is equal to 10 + your base attack bonus. The effects of this feat do not stack. Additional hits instead add to the duration.
Special: You can only apply the effects of one critical feat to a given
critical hit unless you possess Critical Mastery.
As you can see the feat can cause an effect, but it is not an effect itself.
The term "effects of this feat" means that the effect comes from the feat which in turn means the feat cause the effect, but it is not the effect.
edit:
ef·fect
[ih-fekt] Show IPA
noun
1.
something that is produced by an agency or cause; result; consequence
It seems the effect is produced by the feat I just listed.
Going to chime in on the "No, they don't get feats." side of the fence.
I'd like to mention that where you see eidolons and animal companions statted up with level progression data tables, it lists Feats they have there. The familiar also has a table, but conspicuously absent from this is....a column of feat totals. The rule where they have hp equal to half the PC is another way to avoid giving them hit dice and through that, feats.
|
No they don't get feats. Stop being so literal and see the RAI. Also see Witch's beast-bonded ability. Certain rules written as an exception to a rule allude to existence of said rule.
As for Herolab- Paizo's own staff will soon be switching over to it. Its accurate. Familiars don't get feats because they only have 1HD.
I can scarcely believe someone is trying to justify this.
You have shown me nothing. You claimed your dictionary definition which you never posted was valid.
You are incorrect by RAW and RAI. Feats are not an effect. You have yet to show me anything. I did give you a dictionary meaning, and per my last post it works according to how I explained it.
RAI trumps RAW. The dead condition is proof of that.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
PF=Hit Dice: For the purpose of effects related to number of Hit Dice, use the master's character level or the familiar's normal HD total, whichever is higher.
3.5=Hit Dice: For the purpose of effects related to number of Hit Dice, use the master's character level or the familiar's normal HD total, whichever is higher.
As you can see they are worded the same way.
I know 3.5 is not Pathfinder, but the same wording is used. Here is developer article on familiars. If the same wording is used then obviously the meaning is the same.
For purposes of resolving spells and other effects, a familiar has Hit Dice equal to its own or equal to the master's character level, whichever is higher.This effective Hit Dice total applies only when the familiar is subjected to some effect whose resolution depends on Hit Dice, such as sleep, holy word, circle of death, and the frightful presence special attack. The familiar does not gain any skills, improved ability scores, base saving throw bonus, base attack bonus, feats, or hit points from its effective Hit Dice (though being a familiar improves most of these things -- read on), nor does the familiar increase in size.
For example, a cat normally has 1/2 a Hit Die, and a sleep spell could normally affect eight cats (because sleep affects up to 4 Hit Dice worth of creatures). If a cat familiar has a 5th-level master, however, it effectively has 5 Hit Dice for purposes of how spells affect it and it is not subject to a sleep spell.
Temporary Hit Dice increases that the master gains (such as from a bard'sinspire greatness power) don't increase a familiar's effective Hit Dice.
Note that they do get the feats for their actual hit die and any bonus feats from their race.
Also of note on this subject if you are playing with Psionics is that Psicrystals do get feats thanks to actually getting HD.
Which was nice since it meant your pet could actually remain useful at higher levels. There wasn't much use in the "deliver touch spells" bit when not only were you sending your pet into harm's way (often a mere AoO away from doom) but your to-hit bonuses never really got at better (they don't use your BAB, lack weapon finesse, and most have horrible strength scores).
I know that currently our tabletop group has a psicrystal that occasionally does a bit of stuff in combat. It's no where near the level that even a ranger companion can fight, but when the psion uses metamorphosis or a similar power, he might share the power with the crystal and have his psicrystal function as another "body" on the field (the psicrystal might turn into a humanoid-looking thingy with some slightly adjusted stats or size changes). The 3/4 BAB and hardness 8 actually lets the little guy occasionally leap into combat and deliver a touch power and live to tell the tale. :P
That being said, most of my group really love their psicrystals. I know my PCs often have Improved Psicrystal two to three times. One of my current characters is a psionic monk who uses a homebrew feat to use her psicrystal as a weapon (the psicrystal assumes the form of a weapon of your choice and grows stronger as you progress in levels). She uses her psicrystal to tank (she shares vigor with it for temporary HP, then share pain to split damage with her crystal which currently has 10 hardness, keeping it from suffering heavily under the shared damage).
Of course, my psicrystals tend to be more important than familiars. Because familiars don't really grow, they become window dressing. Another nameless owl to deliver the mail I suppose. Most get replaced with Improved Familiar to remain useful (usually for Use Magic Device abuse). The psicrystal on the other hand remains a valued "member" of the team because they get better, and make great spies and friends. The psicrystal is the little minion that gets to shout "death from above" all Dominic Deegan style and hit the enemy for *d6 damage from dissipating touch when they least expect it.
The familiar? Well if he flies in and shouts "death from above" it's more like "death to above". Whammy. One attack of opportunity later and you're making hard Concentration checks every time you want to so much as cast a cantrip. It's very sad. :(
Note that they do get the feats for their actual hit die and any bonus feats from their race.
Also of note on this subject if you are playing with Psionics is that Psicrystals do get feats thanks to actually getting HD.
I agree with that already. It is the issue of getting additional feats that the other poster is incorrect about.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
No they don't get feats. Stop being so literal and see the RAI.No, I'm in several games already where the RAW is all that matters, and the DM contacts paizo and must double check things, pretty consistently. and RAI does not always come out to be what you think is reasonable. which is why a party of first level bards is capable of destroying Galorian.
Sucks to be you, IMO. Following RAW blindly and resolutely despite common sense and people telling you for certain that you are wrong is an irritating and frankly silly road to walk. That and developers make far too many errors for this to actually work in practice. By RAW, your table's monks are not proficient with unarmed strike. Sucks to be them too.
Explain how a high morale bonus to one roll destroys Golarion? Several level 1 spells spent for a big bonus to attack is all well and good but even if you hit something beyond what you normally could, its just going to squish your bards.
This endless crusade for perfect RAW is an incredibly frustrating trend. The 'dead' condition does not need rules saying you can't attack or take actions. The rules are there built on a foundation of common sense.
As for the RAW debate- wraithstrike's points are pretty irrefutable. Your trying to twist the word 'effects' to include 'feats'. The table for familiars doesn't include feats. The very text you have quoted also allude to that familiar's are only considered to have HD for the purpose of spells. An exception that proves the rule. The beast-bonded witch archetype is also clearly designed as an exception to the usual state of affairs- that familiar's don't get feats. This conclusion is painfully obvious.
RAW as some holy grail- the idea frustrates me, I will not deny it. Because people will blindly swear by some poorly worded text rather than simply use their better judgement.
You know, I'm not trying to play devil's advocate here but anon fem does have a point here.
First of all I find it ironic and surprising that many of the people posting in this thread have a very long record of being of the opinion that RAW > RAI. To turn around in this thread and argue RAI > RAW seems odd.
While I agree that they don't get feats it has always seemed odd to me that familiars should be the exception to the RAW posted rule above that things gain feats for having HD. Especially as there is nothing specifically saying that they do not.
Also of note is the irony of those who have echoed the "3.x is not Pathfinder" argument who are posting quotes from 3.x material as evidence to support their opinion. Those same people have argued against 3.x material being used to support an argument that they disagreed with.
...anyway, I just find a lot of irony in this thread. Its humorous to me. *shrug*
Actually, they are proficient, they get IUS as a bonus feat. are you trying to be intentionally thick here?
Try reading the IUS feat before breaking the most important rule of the forum. Nowhere in it does it say anything about proficiency.
I do, however, recall there is an "everyone is considered to be proficient with unarmed" rule somewhere, which does invalidate his point, but doesn't make you magically likeable.
The point of the argument is that the familiar does NOT actually gain HD, no gain in HD means no automatic feats. Trying to pretend your way around that does not change it.
*Must resist urge to flag posts...!*
As to the OP, if you want to sidestep this whole issue you should take the Half-Elf witch archetype in ARG and get your own personalised magical item, a spontaneous spell, and bonus spells on your list.
(I've never thought that the familiar has feats based on HD, but then I always assumed it carried over from 3.5).
Well, I didn't really intend for this to cause that much conflict but I would like to thank you for your input. For the sake of not being tempted to exploit it even if most would be worthless to them I'm going to go with the no feats.
No they don't get feats. Stop being so literal and see the RAI.No, I'm in several games already where the RAW is all that matters, and the DM contacts paizo and must double check things, pretty consistently. and RAI does not always come out to be what you think is reasonable. which is why a party of first level bards is capable of destroying Galorian. They ruled that moment of greatness stacks with itself (since it doubles a bonus rather than increases it) they may make similar judgments in the future, although i don't believe feats for familiars are quite on that level. I never argued it was RAI because I don't know Paizo's view, but your entire statement, since I never argued against such, is a giant appeal to emotion. If you want to disprove the RAW, someones going to have to put something new on the table, not just throw a tantrum.
For purposes of resolving spells and other effects, a familiar has Hit Dice equal to its own or equal to the master's character level, whichever is higher.This effective Hit Dice total applies only when the familiar is subjected to some effect whose resolution depends on Hit Dice, such as sleep, holy word, circle of death, and the frightful presence special attack. The familiar does not gain any skills, improved ability scores, base saving throw bonus, base attack bonus, feats, or hit points from its effective Hit Dice (though being a familiar improves most of these things -- read on), nor does the familiar increase in size.
For example, a cat normally has 1/2 a Hit Die, and a sleep spell could normally affect eight cats (because sleep affects up to 4 Hit Dice worth of creatures). If a cat familiar has a 5th-level master, however, it effectively has 5 Hit Dice for purposes of how spells affect it and it is not subject to a sleep spell.
Temporary Hit Dice increases that the master gains (such as
...
This certainly makes a very good argument for RAI, however, that doesn't mean it's the case, since it's omitted from paizo's rules. regardless RAW is the only thing I care about here, but it's nice to see some substance behind your words for once.
It is not in 3.5's rules either.
The same way Paizo has the blog and FAQ, the 3.5 devs had articles call "Rules of the Game". In these articles they would give the RAI on rules that were often debated on.
These are the actual rules:
PF=Hit Dice: For the purpose of effects related to number of Hit Dice, use the master's character level or the familiar's normal HD total, whichever is higher.3.5=Hit Dice: For the purpose of effects related to number of Hit Dice, use the master's character level or the familiar's normal HD total, whichever is higher.
The area I had in the quotes box is the explanation.
According to RAW the "dead" condition allows you to still take actions after you die. :) <--I see Alexander Kilcoyne ninja'd me six hours ago. :)
You know, I'm not trying to play devil's advocate here but anon fem does have a point here.
First of all I find it ironic and surprising that many of the people posting in this thread have a very long record of being of the opinion that RAW > RAI. To turn around in this thread and argue RAI > RAW seems odd.
While I agree that they don't get feats it has always seemed odd to me that familiars should be the exception to the RAW posted rule above that things gain feats for having HD. Especially as there is nothing specifically saying that they do not.
Also of note is the irony of those who have echoed the "3.x is not Pathfinder" argument who are posting quotes from 3.x material as evidence to support their opinion. Those same people have argued against 3.x material being used to support an argument that they disagreed with.
...anyway, I just find a lot of irony in this thread. Its humorous to me. *shrug*
Not the case at all. I generally favor RAI. I do use RAW at times when comparing rules text to other rules text and only then to find RAI. I also hate the 3.x is not PF argument. People often tell me that. I don't tell them that.
---------------------------------------------For Anon:
Intent trumps RAW for most of us, and back to the dead condition for Anon. Where in the rules does it say the body needs a soul to continue to move. By RAW you can still move. Don't ignore the RAW now. If you take them into the dying condition first they are out of luck, but if you can take them from living to dead and bypass dying by RAW they can still move. It is strange how you want to use logic(spirit of the rules), and ignore the spirit of the rules when it is convenient.
There was actually a thread on these board mentioning several ways in which the rules fail if you follow them blindly. I wish I could remember the title of it.
*Must resist urge to flag posts...!*
As to the OP, if you want to sidestep this whole issue you should take the Half-Elf witch archetype in ARG and get your own personalised magical item, a spontaneous spell, and bonus spells on your list.
(I've never thought that the familiar has feats based on HD, but then I always assumed it carried over from 3.5).
So you agree that the RAI is no extra feats?
So... Why doesn't anyone quote the stats of a familiar of a high level caster npc from one of the official APs?
So... Why doesn't anyone quote the stats of a familiar of a high level caster npc from one of the official APs?
I tried, but I could not find any. The witches in Carrion Crown should have familiars, but there are no stats for the familiars. Their familiars are not even mentioned.
So you agree that the RAI is no extra feats?*Must resist urge to flag posts...!*
As to the OP, if you want to sidestep this whole issue you should take the Half-Elf witch archetype in ARG and get your own personalised magical item, a spontaneous spell, and bonus spells on your list.
(I've never thought that the familiar has feats based on HD, but then I always assumed it carried over from 3.5).
Yes (no feats for familiars). Though, if a dev comes out and says they do get them I'm not fussed.
Yes (no feats for familiars). Though, if a dev comes out and says they do get them I'm not fussed.So you agree that the RAI is no extra feats?*Must resist urge to flag posts...!*
As to the OP, if you want to sidestep this whole issue you should take the Half-Elf witch archetype in ARG and get your own personalised magical item, a spontaneous spell, and bonus spells on your list.
(I've never thought that the familiar has feats based on HD, but then I always assumed it carried over from 3.5).
I misread your name. I thought you were Anon.
Except I'm not wrong. this is starting to sound like a religious debate. Provide some material evidence that invalidates what I've shown for RAW, and explain how ignoring RAI makes me wrong when I never made ANY statements about what the RAI is.Sucks to be you, IMO. Following RAW blindly and resolutely despite common sense and people telling you for certain that you are wrong is an irritating and frankly silly road to walk.No they don't get feats. Stop being so literal and see the RAI.No, I'm in several games already where the RAW is all that matters, and the DM contacts paizo and must double check things, pretty consistently. and RAI does not always come out to be what you think is reasonable. which is why a party of first level bards is capable of destroying Galorian.
In looking into an entirely unrelated question, I just found your RAW answer as to why familiars don't get feats. Both these quotes are from the Character Advancement section.
When adding new levels of an existing class or adding levels of a new class (see Multiclassing, below), make sure to take the following steps in order. First, select your new class level. You must be able to qualify for this level before any of the following adjustments are made. Second, apply any ability score increases due to gaining a level. Third, integrate all of the level’s class abilities and then roll for additional hit points. Finally, add new skills and feats. For more information on when you gain new feats and ability score increases, see Table 3–1.
Clearly, gaining a new feat is part of the process of gaining a level. For creatures with racial hit dice, it's part of the process of gaining a hit die. But a familiar does neither. It simply uses the master's character level.
Note that there are a number of effects and prerequisites that rely on a character's level or Hit Dice. Such effects are always based on the total number of levels or Hit Dice a character possesses, not just those from one class.
This is a separate rule in the advancement section. Gaining feats have already been covered above (where it says "See multiclassing, below"). So talk of "effects" here has nothing to do with feats unless it explicitly says it does. Since it doesn't call out feats as being an effect, and it already addressed feats, then feats are not considered to be an effect.
At best, you can argue that gaining feats is an effect of gaining a level or HD. But familiars do neither.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
Examples here and here.
*sarcasm* Careful, posting anything from the d20pfsrd will immediately result in someone saying "THEY MAKE STUFF UP, DON'T LISTEN TO THEM, IT'S ALL WRONG, BARBARBARBAR" */sarcasm*
I really can't fathom how this argument keeps going. Familiars don't gain feats. If they were meant to gain feats, it would show feats on the "Familiars" table in the book, just like it does for Animal Companions. Instead, there's a witch archetype that lets the witch give her familiar feats. It's blatantly obvious to me and so many others, I just don't get it. Seriously, this should have been case closed a long time ago.
Familiars, by the example, get 1 feat but it does not have to be the feat the base animal comes with. The rat has skill focus perception normally, that rat familiar has weapon finesse.(which is a must if you want your familiar to deliver touch spells)
I wonder if toughness would be an effect related to HD....
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
Familiars, by the example, get 1 feat but it does not have to be the feat the base animal comes with. The rat has skill focus perception normally, that rat familiar has weapon finesse.(which is a must if you want your familiar to deliver touch spells)
I wonder if toughness would be an effect related to HD....
There is only one "Rat" entry in the Bestiary, and it's the one listed as Rat (familiar):
Rat CR 1/4
XP 100
N Tiny animal
Init +2; Senses low-light vision, scent; Perception +1
Defense
AC 14, touch 14, flat-footed 12 (+2 Dex, +2 size)
hp 4 (1d8)
Fort +2, Ref +4, Will +1
Offense
Speed 15 ft., climb 15 ft., swim 15 ft.
Melee bite +4 (1d3–4)
Space 2-1/2 ft.; Reach 0 ft.
Statistics
Str 2, Dex 15, Con 11, Int 2, Wis 13, Cha 2
Base Atk +0; CMB +0; CMD 6 (10 vs. trip)
Feats Weapon Finesse
Skills Climb +10, Stealth +18, Swim +10; Racial Modifiers
+4 Stealth
Ecolo gy
Environment any temperate
Organization solitary, pair, nest (3–12), or plague (13–100)
Treasure none
Fecund and secretive, rats are omnivorous
rodents that particularly thrive in
urban areas.
A DIRE Rat has Skill focus (Perception). Very different.
|
|
I tried looking at some adventure paths for examples, but the familiars seem to always say (Bestiary, p.xx).
I wonder if toughness would be an effect related to HD....
You mean if the familiar got the feat through its normal racial HD? I'd say it would get the (HD + feat) hit points it's entitled to for its normal racial HD, or half the master's hit points, whichever is greater. That does make Toughness suck as a starting familiar feat, but it falls in line with the familiar rules.
It isn't advancing as a creature or in a class, it just gets bonuses because of its master.
I checked, everyone (including monks) are proficient in Unarmed Strike.
All characters are proficient with unarmed strikes and any natural weapons possessed by their race.
As for familiar feats: good stuff Bobson.
- Gauss