|
First off, I know there is a FAQ about the amount of animals for PFS. Here.
Now let us get into the complex stuff:
Let us say that there is a Druid/Wizard with a Cat Animal Companion and a Rat Familiar. The player decides that they will have the Cat as the active combat companion. This makes the Rat the non-combatant companion. Does this still let the Druid/Wizard gain the Familar Bonus (+2 Fort Saves)?
Continuing this train of thought, now what if the area was pelted by a Fireball? Since the Cat is the active combatant, it will have to make the save. How about the Rat? Even though it is a non-combatant, does it have to make the save?
I sort of had a heated discussion at my local gaming store. I had the concept of "Since it is still granting the bonus, it is considered to be affected by the attack. Being in the proximity of the area effect further applies the point, not caring if it is a combatant or not."
The other point in the debate was "since it is not a combatant, it can not be targeted. Hence, it is immune to the area effect. But because the Familar is still in proximity, the character still gains the bonus"
The opposing argument also applied that if you have the Familar Stachel, the familar gains Total Cover. However, what if the rat is not in the Stachel, and hanging out on the hood of the cloak?
I know that this is a bit confusing, but I can get some clarification, that would help out.
|
Does this still let the Druid/Wizard gain the Familar Bonus (+2 Fort Saves)?
I would say yes partially because the the rat isn't participating in combat he';s providing an active benefit and partially because its fewer things for you to count when you have to make a fort save.
How about the Rat? Even though it is a non-combatant, does it have to make the save?
I would say no because the entire point of him being a non combatant is to not waste time rolling on him.
I would get the Familiar satchel and not worry about it. If you're hard up for carrying capacity drop a grand on a pearl of power I and get ant haul.
I sort of had a heated discussion at my local gaming store. I had the concept of "Since it is still granting the bonus, it is considered to be affected by the attack. Being in the proximity of the area effect further applies the point, not caring if it is a combatant or not."
I could see it go either way. I wouldn't bother, because its literally not worth a rats rear end to waste time on :)
I know that this is a bit confusing, but I can get some clarification, that would help out.
I'm expecting a near 50 50 split on this one.
|
Let us say that there is a Druid/Wizard with a Cat Animal Companion and a Rat Familiar. The player decides that they will have the Cat as the active combat companion. This makes the Rat the non-combatant companion. Does this still let the Druid/Wizard gain the Familar Bonus (+2 Fort Saves)?
No, the rat is not present in the combat.
Continuing this train of thought, now what if the area was pelted by a Fireball? Since the Cat is the active combatant, it will have to make the save. How about the Rat? Even though it is a non-combatant, does it have to make the save?
No, the rat is not present in the combat.
I'm expecting a near 50 50 split on this one.
Sounds about right.
|
The +2 fort saves is a passive benefit of the familiar, it doesn't require the familiar to do anything or even be anywhere near the master (It could be in the Grand Lodge while you are in the Mwangi).
So I would let the character keep that benefit, but I wouldn't let them get the Alertness benefit or any other more active benefit (requires the familiar to be adjacent).
I would also not bother with the familiar taking damage, the 1 companion rule is mainly to speed play.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The +2 fort saves is a passive benefit of the familiar, it doesn't require the familiar to do anything or even be anywhere near the master (It could be in the Grand Lodge while you are in the Mwangi).
The familiar must be within one mile of its master. Numerous scenarios involve travel by magic, such that the familiar could not be within one mile unless it had been near the master in at least one situation of potential or actual combat. Others pass through hostile places where a familiar wandering off on its own would be in grave danger.
|
|
With the familar, taking out the familar can sometimes effect how the combat plays out. Having a squashed scorpion can drop the initiative low enough for a rogue opponent to hit the flat-foot. A killed rat can make the character think twice on fighting ghouls and ghasts.
Though it is sort of similar to sundering gear, if an opponent's tactics state to target any weak animal companion or familiar, making the familar "vanish" seems a bit out of place.
|
Luckily...
In general, a mount, a familiar or mundane pet, and your class-granted animal(s) are acceptable, but more than that can be disruptive....you can use both.
I disagree that this is the question at hand.
The OP isn't asking if having both his Animal Companion and Familiar present in combat is legal, he's asking what happens if he designates his Familiar as a non-combat animal.
And it sounds like most people in this thread agree that nothing happens, so I doubt (or at least, hope) that this doesn't degenerate into the huge argument that your thread did.
|
|
The familiar must be within one mile of its master. Numerous scenarios involve travel by magic, such that the familiar could not be within one mile unless it had been near the master in at least one situation of potential or actual combat. Others pass through hostile places where a familiar wandering off on its own would be in grave danger.
Thank you for clarifying this. I did not look this up before posting.
I can certainly see the argument for no bonuses whatsoever and would not challenge a GM on that issue.
