By the rules they go on their own Initiative, they're separate from the player themselves, just like any other creature.
I usually just let them go at the same time to simplify matters and such though.
Rynjin, can you quote this rule for me?
I also allow the ranger/druid and pet or wizard and familiar to share initiative.
I am surprised that this is not the correct way to do this, as every GM, including myself, has always done so.
Every GM I have played with I meant.... =/
|
They have their own initiative, but most often act at their owner's command, so the companion should delay for orders if it goes first. If an animal went around with a constant order to attack creatures or do other game-relevant things without further command, as a GM I would want to know about that.
For most combinations it makes sense to roll once with the lowest modifier between them, edit: but I might give a player the option of rolling separately if he had built his PC's initiative substantially higher than the companion's.
This seems to be pretty straightforward, and covered exactly where you'd expect to find it. Each combatant makes an initiative check. Are companions combatants? Yes? Well then they make an initiative check, don't they?
Rynjin, can you quote this rule for me?
I also allow the ranger/druid and pet or wizard and familiar to share initiative.
I am surprised that this is not the correct way to do this, as every GM, including myself, has always done so.
Well it's not a separate rule per se, besides the rule that every creature goes on its own Initiative count.
"At the start of a battle, each combatant makes an initiative check."
The Eidolon/Animal Companion/Familiar/Summon/Whatever is a combatant. therefore it makes an Initiative check at battle start.
If you need any additional affirmation, they clearly state this in the Animals and Their Tricks blog from earlier this year.
To respond to an earlier statement: I've also invariably seen GMs have familiars and companions go on the player's initiative as well. However, they still have their own unique 'turns', so even though they go on the same initiative count, their actions are wholly separate from the character's.
I was under the impression in most games familiars/companions/eidolon went ont heir controllers turn? Why because it creates a logistical headache that really degrades fun.
You end up just repeating hold actions and going on the same turn anyways repeatedly. Its also easier for the players and Dm to track.
Are they PFS GMs?
Because ignoring what the rules say is not something they can do.
Yeah they are PFS GM's. I've put forth the logic we reviewed in this post and they are still saying it's GM's decision and most (if not all) of them appear to lean towards using the PC's initiative and not having separate ones. While I don't want to get into an argument with them I prefer to follow the rules, especially when they a) make sense and b) provide needed balance. I've poured over various posts looking for any of the powers-that-be posting about it but they haven't, which I suspect is because there isn't a need given all the information out there.
Point them to the link that I showed above - the "Animals and their Tricks" blog?
That was written by Mike Brock, the PFS coordinator.
Druids and other classes with the animal companion feature get a +4 circumstance bonus when handling their own companion from the Link class feature. This also allows them to handle an animal as a free action, or use a move action to push the animal. Keep in mind you may still only perform the free action on your turn, so even if your animal wins initiative, it's not going to automatically do what you want before can you order it.
If your animal companion is supposed to go on your initiative, how does it beat you on initiative? :P And if they won't take the word of basically the God of PFS, then I'm not sure what to tell ya...
|
Hey Felix, if your PFS GMs are saying that characters and companions go simultaneously, they are actually incorrect. Strictly speaking, they each have their own initiative.
Remember, a companion takes his orders from the character on the character's turn. If the companion wins initiative, he would have to hold his action until the character's turn to get an order. Alternately, if the companion looses initiative, the character gives the order on his turn, but the companion does not perform the action until the companion's turn.
It is just so much easier to have the character's and companion's initiative at the same time. Yes, it does not follow the rules, but it is something that most players and GMs are ok with.
PS: Mike Brock has a lot of sway in paizo. He is much more than the "PFS Guy", so his opinion is quite credible.
If they refuse to follow the rules, I believe you can report them to somebody (a Venture Captain I think they're called? I don't do PFS).
They ARE willfully ignoring the rule because they don't like it.
There's direct rules text and a quote from Mike Brock telling them they're wrong and they are ignoring it because it does not suit them.
That is not a good quality in a PFS GM. If they cannot follow the rules, they should not BE PFS GMs.
|
|
The exception to all this is mounts. The core book explicitly says that mounts go on their rider's initiativeThis is the perfect time for me to use one of my favorite adage's "You can take a horse to water, but you can't make it drink." lol
That should be:
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink on your initiative." lol