| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Greetings everyone.
I have a quick question:
Reading my way through the board, I stumbled multiple times upon an axiom that seems well established but which I couldn't pinpoint in the rules:
Axiom:
An animal (a creature of the animal type) which somehow gains an INT of 3 (and - depending on who you ask - one rank in the Linguistic skill) can understand the language of its owner and therefore doesn't need any tricks.
I believe the foundation of this "rule" is the ability describtion of Intelligence:
...Creatures of animal-level instinct have Intelligence scores of 1 or 2. Any creature capable of understanding speech has a score of at least 3...
BUT - having studied mathmatics for several semesters - I know that "IF a THEN B" does NOT automatically mean "IF b THEN a".
Only because "understanding speech" has a requirement of "INT 3" does NOT automatically mean "every creature with INT 3 can automatically understand speech"!So i.e. a druid's animal companion would not benefit from an increased Intelligence score from 2 to 3 (in any way actually).
Comments?
Yar!
They do not automatically understand a language with an Int of 3. That is what the one rank in the Lunguistics skill is for. Only when an Animal gains an Int of 3 or higher is it allowed to put ranks into any skill instead of those from it's limited list (see the Druid Animal Companion section for the list of skill it can normally take). The increase in Int also allowes it to take any feat that it meets the prereqs for (instead of from a limited list, see the same section: Druids: Animal Companions for the list), with the caveat that it must be able to physically accomplish it.
That rank in Linguistics then follows the rules for the Linguistics skill, which states: "Whenever you put a rank into this skill, you learn to speak and read a new language".
Most people would say that by natural extension, being able to "speak and read" also means being able to understand. However, in my games, I rule that the animal must have the proper vocal structure to speak, so while it may learn common, it may not be able to speak it (but Draconic and Sylvan on the other hand, are GREAT languages for animals to learn to speak).
A point to remember: the CRB is not a legal document that can cover every possible scenario. The devs have said this before, and that such a book/encyclopedia would be thousands upon thousands of pages long, and they have no intention of going into that level of legal detail for this game. They want some things to be handled by common sense, and they also want some things to be open to interpretation. (hence the need for a GM).
But those are what I remember the devs saying way back when. Still, in ~MY~ games, the above is true.
TL:DR - that's what the rank in Linguistics is for.
~P
Okay, I see.
But after Bestiary Rules, creatures with INT 3+ CANNOT acquire levels in the "animal type/class".
So what "Class" is an animal companion?
Is it a special "class/type"?
Yar.
It is still an Animal. Animal Companions are exceptions to the rule. They are special that way. They follow their own special advancement as described in the Animal Companion Section of the CRB, increasing in HD and potentially Int as well, all while remaining of the Animal type.
EDIT: You will also note that a Paladin's special Mount is an Animal, and it starts with an Int score of 6. And yet, despite this, it is of the Animal type until the Paladin reached 11th level and his mount acquires the Celestial template. Then and only then does it become a Magical Beast.
In short, the Bestiary rules are for your basic animals you find in the wild. Animal Companions are special, unique cases with special rules that trump the generic rules for Animals, yet they are still Animals.
~P
Your axiom is incorrect.
You can tell someone what to do, and they might understand you. But that doesn't mean they'll be able to do what you said. This applies to animals as well as people.
You can tell a particularly smart dog you want it to run into the burning house and pull out wounded people, but unless it's trained to do so it'll just look at you and sit there. Just like humans would, really. Reading the fire-fighters' manual does not a fire-fighter make, after all.
Even better, the Cosmopolitan feat grants two languages and lacks any Intelligence prerequisite.
every sentient being knows atleast 1 language, I assume for an Int 3 creature this would be either the mother language of the master, or common, without having to place ranks in linguistics
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Even if the animal can understand you with linguists and INT3 doesn't mean you can stop rolling handle animal checks to get them to do things.
It just makes it easier to get them to perform more complex tasks
Can I improve my companion’s Intelligence to 3 or higher and give it weapon feats?
No. An Intelligence of 3 does not grant animals sentience, the ability to use weapons or tools, speak a language (though they may understand one with a rank in Linguistics; this does not grant literacy), or activate magic devices. Also note that raising an animal companion’s Intelligence to 3 or higher does not eliminate the need to make Handle Animal checks to direct its actions; even semi-intelligent animals still act like animals unless trained not to. An animal with Intelligence of 3 or higher remains a creature of the animal type unless its type is specifically changed by another ability. An animal may learn 3 additional tricks per point of Intelligence above 2.
ironic how that is the opposite of how animal familiars don't need to do any kind of rolls and whatnot, seems to me like a totally needless hurdle for Druids and Rangers
ironic how that is the opposite of how animal familiars don't need to do any kind of rolls and whatnot, seems to me like a totally needless hurdle for Druids and Rangers
familiars have their own drawbacks like having half the HP of their masters total which can't be modified, they are very different beasts for different purposes.
yes, these differences (other than the magical link and such) is what I would like to get rid off, there is no reason to have such a great difference between a raven familiar and a raven animal companion as example
|
Even if the animal can understand you with linguists and INT3 doesn't mean you can stop rolling handle animal checks to get them to do things.
It just makes it easier to get them to perform more complex tasks
Can I improve my companion’s Intelligence to 3 or higher and give it weapon feats?
No. An Intelligence of 3 does not grant animals sentience, the ability to use weapons or tools, speak a language (though they may understand one with a rank in Linguistics; this does not grant literacy), or activate magic devices. Also note that raising an animal companion’s Intelligence to 3 or higher does not eliminate the need to make Handle Animal checks to direct its actions; even semi-intelligent animals still act like animals unless trained not to. An animal with Intelligence of 3 or higher remains a creature of the animal type unless its type is specifically changed by another ability. An animal may learn 3 additional tricks per point of Intelligence above 2.
I have been looking for this, where did you find it?
I have been looking for this, where did you find it?Even if the animal can understand you with linguists and INT3 doesn't mean you can stop rolling handle animal checks to get them to do things.
It just makes it easier to get them to perform more complex tasks
Can I improve my companion’s Intelligence to 3 or higher and give it weapon feats?
No. An Intelligence of 3 does not grant animals sentience, the ability to use weapons or tools, speak a language (though they may understand one with a rank in Linguistics; this does not grant literacy), or activate magic devices. Also note that raising an animal companion’s Intelligence to 3 or higher does not eliminate the need to make Handle Animal checks to direct its actions; even semi-intelligent animals still act like animals unless trained not to. An animal with Intelligence of 3 or higher remains a creature of the animal type unless its type is specifically changed by another ability. An animal may learn 3 additional tricks per point of Intelligence above 2.
PFS has some special rules that do not matter at all for anyone that is not playing in PFS, I wouldn't use any ruling from PFS unless it is a PFS-ruled game, PFS rules are not rules for Pathfinder unless it is also written in an official source and/or has a proper errata
This seems to be a similar problem to how often rules for the Golarion setting are used to try to sell them as if they were Pathfinder system rules, like the "only evil undead" rule from Golarion. (ironic, as they break this rule themselves with ghosts and other things already)
PFS has some special rules that do not matter at all for anyone that is not playing in PFS, I wouldn't use any ruling from PFS unless it is a PFS-ruled game, PFS rules are not rules for Pathfinder unless it is also written in an official source and/or has a proper errata
This seems to be a similar problem to how often rules for the Golarion setting are used to try to sell them as if they were Pathfinder system rules, like the "only evil undead" rule from Golarion. (ironic, as they break this rule themselves with ghosts and other things already)
Considering there are no other rules to answer the question it only make sense to use the PFS ruling
Considering there are no other rules to answer the question it only make sense to use the PFS rulingPFS has some special rules that do not matter at all for anyone that is not playing in PFS, I wouldn't use any ruling from PFS unless it is a PFS-ruled game, PFS rules are not rules for Pathfinder unless it is also written in an official source and/or has a proper errata
This seems to be a similar problem to how often rules for the Golarion setting are used to try to sell them as if they were Pathfinder system rules, like the "only evil undead" rule from Golarion. (ironic, as they break this rule themselves with ghosts and other things already)
then it requires a proper answer/errata, not a link to PFS
IMHO an animal with Int 3 would already have learned one language, and would be intelligent enough to not have to roll handle animal checks for tricks it knows, at Int 5 tricks wouldn't matter anymore, just as in case of a familiar the animal would have enough sense to do things even if not trained if physically capable, like a monkey or delphine as example
Considering there are no other rules to answer the question it only make sense to use the PFS rulingPFS has some special rules that do not matter at all for anyone that is not playing in PFS, I wouldn't use any ruling from PFS unless it is a PFS-ruled game, PFS rules are not rules for Pathfinder unless it is also written in an official source and/or has a proper errata
This seems to be a similar problem to how often rules for the Golarion setting are used to try to sell them as if they were Pathfinder system rules, like the "only evil undead" rule from Golarion. (ironic, as they break this rule themselves with ghosts and other things already)
then it requires a proper answer/errata, not a link to PFS
IMHO an animal with Int 3 would already have learned one language, and would be intelligent enough to not have to roll handle animal checks for tricks it knows, at Int 5 tricks wouldn't matter anymore, just as in case of a familiar the animal would have enough sense to do things even if not trained if physically capable, like a monkey or delphine as example
Nothing personal but I think a PFS ruling carries a bit more weight than someone opinion when the rules are vauge and no errata yet exists.
but hey if its a home game do what you want. the fun police won't stop you ;)
and most games I've played in the whole trick/handle animal side of things gets completely ignored and the player just says what the animal is doing.
I didn't say to use my opinion on the matter, but neither has PFS more meaning or worth than an opinion either
and as you said, the trick/handle animal thing is an overcomplication of things to begin with :)
Wait, a PFS rule doesn't mean it is also a rule for the Pathfinder system as well.PFS is all RAW though, there is no RAI (for the most part). There is no interpretation of the rules, they are set in stone and you either follow them or you don't play.
PFS in fact has a LARGE number of house rules (no item creation feats, no atheist clerics) to compensate for it being an organized plan environment and its golarion specific content.
There are also a large number of "Dm's call" where PFS will probably differe from a DM: horses not being able to wear belts comes to mind.