Maybe they were meant to be replacements for Improved Familiars.
Design Manager
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe they were meant to be replacements for Improved Familiars.
That actually makes sense. It would put standard familiars closer to Improved Familiars, but it wouldn't raise the total power level or capability of familiars beyond the current ceiling set by the Improved Familiar feat, ad there would still be a reason to choose one or the other (just not both).
Dot
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A Familiar from Improved Familiar gets the same powers same as normal familiar (modulo giving the spell caster a skill/save/hit point bonus) except they never get the 'ability to speak to animals of its own kind.'
Each of the Familiar Archetypes (Valet, Pilferer, Infiltrater) all replace that ability.
Does this mean you cannot use an Archetype with an Improved Familiar?
If so, that makes the archetypes significantly less useful. Once you have a familiar that could survive on its own, the archetypes that take advantage of that are out of reach.
The familiar archetypes replace the abilities granted by the arcane bond class ability not what the actual familiar has. It's like the Boon Companion feat, it affects the animal companion/familiar by affecting the master and what abilities they are granting to the companion.
Weird, convoluted and not clearly written but that's the only rational way for this to work.
To the above: agreed.
Although there is one other thing that confuses me here. To my knowledge, familiars do not have their own skill ranks because they do not possess actual Hit Dice, only effective Hit Dice. Correct me if this is heinously wrong.
So when the archetypes say "Treat X, X, and X as class skills", how does that work? If the base animal has no skill ranks in those skills, it doesn't even get the +3 bonus. Or is this just another way to say that if the wizard/etc has a rank in those skills, the familiar gets a +3 bonus when it uses its master's ranks?
|
|
So when the archetypes say "Treat X, X, and X as class skills", how does that work? If the base animal has no skill ranks in those skills, it doesn't even get the +3 bonus. Or is this just another way to say that if the wizard/etc has a rank in those skills, the familiar gets a +3 bonus when it uses its master's ranks?
I think that's spot on, yes. Familiars use their master's ranks, so it seems like the correct interpretation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Blitterbug, basic familiars do have their own skill ranks. One skill rank to be exact. Improved Familiars may have more than 1 skill rank depending on the Improved Familiar's hitdice and intelligence.
Both familiars and Improved Familiars have hit dice separate from everything the Master grants. The issue is that those hit dice are generally inferior to anything the Master grants.
Take for example the Lizard (Bestiary p131). It has the following skills and ranks:
Acrobatics +10 (0 ranks, +2dex, +8racial)
Climb +10 (0 ranks, +2dex, +8racial)
Stealth +14 (1 rank, +2dex, +8size, +3class)
The reason it has the 1 rank is because it has 1 HD and thus 1 skill point. The same holds true for all other basic Familiars. Improved Familiars have whatever ranks they started with as well.
When the Master has ranks in the skill that the familiar has ranks in the familiar takes whichever is better. This is important to remember because, in the case of Improved Familiars, they can have more ranks than the Master (2) in a single skill.
Regarding the class skill bonus. The Familiar gains the +3 bonus regardless if it has those ranks on its own or from the Master. In either case it has those ranks.
- Gauss
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
I think this is a case, similar to the case of the companion archetypes, where the author didn't consider the case of familiars that lose some standard familiar abilities. I'm sure that these archetypes are meant to work with Improved familiars just like normal ones, the author just forgot to put in a caveat about "speak with creatures of its type", which most improved familiars don't get.
Basically, as much as I love the Animal Archive, it needed a bit more oversight than it got.
Small sized improved familiars
Cassians
Mephits
Maybe they were meant to be replacements for Improved Familiars.<snip>
What does this mean? It means your archetypical Pilferer familiar may not provoke AoOs from using the Steal maneuver, but it is going to provoke one when entering the square to Steal and another to get out. It loses all levels of evasion, so it is screwed when encountering any spell. It can sneak around really well, but that's about it. It means your archetypical Infiltrator is never going to be flatfooted, but again, screwed against spells. To make things worse, the Familiar's eventual SR is only against divination and mind affecting. The master can watch it get roasted alive all the faster.
<snip>
Well, the Pilferer and Infiltrator archetypes didn't seem to be intended for use in combat - I know, I know, class features are almost always judged based on their combat effectiveness. Generally speaking, people avoid using their familiars at all because of the problems you mentioned - they have no AC, few hit points, and are thus squishy as hell.
I still think those Archetypes' abilities can be useful, in non-combat situations, when the familiar can use Stealth (or you can cast invisibility on it), and it can creep around stealing keys to jail cells off sleeping guards, pick the pockets of unsuspecting noblemen, etc. Of course, this is generally done with Sleight of Hand, as the steal combat maneuver isn't exactly subtle. Really, it's more of a Final Fantasy "Mug" maneuver until you get Greater Steal.
That said, while I do see reasons to take these archetypes in certain flavors of game, they are admittedly very situational, and removing Evasion just hurts.
So... super necro, but this was apparently answered in a faq. Does anybody have a link to said faq? I can't seem to find it.
Sweet thanks.
