Can an animal with Int 3+ take Improved Unarmed Strike


Rules Questions

51 to 100 of 206 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

Nefreet wrote:

Have you ever seen someone try to push their Animal Companion to perform an unarmed strike?

I know I haven't.

It's only the following feats the player is after.

I'm imagining, in a fantasy world, of course, where my Druid can actually talk to his snake:

"Hey boy, you're a good boy, aren't you?"
"Sssssss."
"Thatta boy. Hey, how would you like me to show you how to better catch a human-sized rat?"
"Sssssss?"
"Alright, bare with me here. You actually want to lead with your coils, and follow up with your bite, rather than the other way around."
"Sssssss!"

This makes sense. In a home game, I'd come up with a way that your snake could take Improved Grapple without having to take Improved Unarmed Strike. Just like I'd come up with a way for a wolf to take Improved Trip without having to take Combat Expertise and have an Intelligence of 13.

But in Pathfinder Society (PFS), this type of prevarication is not allowed.

If you are training your animal to do IUS, its binary, either you have all of the feat, or you do not.

Grand Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Driver 325 yards wrote:
How do these IUS AC haters explain away Charlie the karate Chimp?

They would consider him broken and demand that he be errataed.

:)

Liberty's Edge

Magda Luckbender wrote:

One would want an animal to take Improved Unarmed Strike so that it could be a better grappler. Specificially:

Improved Unarmed Strike ==> Improved Grapple ==> Greater Grapple.

So what about the wolf (or other animals that trip?)

You going to allow grabbing animals to become better grapplers because there is no specific language that disallows IUS, but not allow tripping animals to become better trippers because there is specific language that disallows tripping?

Access to Improved Grapple and Greater Grapple are not reasons, in and of themselves, to allow IUS for grabbing animals. Because if this were a valid answer alone, then Wolves should be given an allowance to take Improved Trip and Greater Trip without needing Combat Expertise or an Intelligence of 13.

Liberty's Edge

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Not every unarmed strike is some sort of damn martial arts move.

Basically, you have:

Creature, with body, hits other creature, with part of that body.

What is it?

An unarmed strike.

So, a Horse headbutts, or a Camel kicks.

No Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon crap.

But it opens up to crouching tiger / hidden dragon crap, because IUS is a prerequisite for all the Kung Fu combat styles.

Liberty's Edge

Are wrote:
Magda Luckbender wrote:

One would want an animal to take Improved Unarmed Strike so that it could be a better grappler. Specificially:

Improved Unarmed Strike ==> Improved Grapple ==> Greater Grapple.

Personally, I would let the grab ability stand in for Improved Grapple (and IUS) as a prerequisite.

Edit: Seeing as the question relates to PFS, I suppose that doesn't help :)

This is interesting, because I could have swore that I found language somewhere, where this is the case. that Grab or Trip would qualify you for those Improved and Greater combat maneuver feats.

I can't find it.

But Bestiary 3 has the Wolf-in-Sheep's-Clothing that has Greater Grapple, but does not have Improved Grapple or Improved Unarmed Strike. It has the grab ability. Other than just giving the creature the feat cause it makes sense, how is it possible that this creature has that feat?


Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:


But Bestiary 3 has the Wolf-in-Sheep's-Clothing that has Greater Grapple, but does not have Improved Grapple or Improved Unarmed Strike. It has the grab ability. Other than just giving the creature the feat cause it makes sense, how is it possible that this creature has that feat?

In this case, the Wolf-in-Sheep's-Clothing has Greater Grapple as a bonus feat (as signified by the superscripted "B" next to the feat name).

Edit: I agree that it indicates how the designers feel about the issue, though; they wanted the creature to have the feat, so they gave it to it as a bonus feat rather than messing about with prerequisites :)

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

When you read through the Appendix in the Bestiary that discusses how to advance a monster, it has a section that discusses feats.

Paraphrasing, it essentially says that the monsters typically take feats that increase their natural combat abilities.

As such, it seems to make sense that a charging mount, or mount with lots of movement, might take feats that lead up to spring attack, and take spring attack.

There are a lot of historical information of mounted attackers moving in and out quickly during a battle. Skirmishers so to speak.

It makes sense that the animal might take Dodge, because when trained to specifically fight, avoiding damage would seem like a good idea to the animal.

Some teamwork feats would make sense. Indeed, there is an entire new class coming up called the Hunter that is predicated on the master and animal using teamwork feats together.

So, if you take feats that enhance their ability to fight, in a way that they would normally fight, then those feats make sense. The examples above are of course feats that are on the list that any animal can take at 1-2 Int.

Stand Still would make sense. It requires combat reflexes that any animal can take. And not allowing an enemy to get past you seems like a good idea when you are using the Guard or Defend tricks.

Defensive Combat Training would make sense to beef up their CMD.

Wind Stance and Lightning Stance both are extensions of Dodge. Making themselves more difficult to hit seems to make sense, and in some cases you can actually point to real stories of real life animals that seem to ghost about.

Fleet makes sense, because its just teaching an animal to move faster, more efficiently. What animal trained to fight wouldn't like to get at their enemy a little faster?

Any of the Improved saving throw feats are natural extensions of the saving throw feats that any animal can take.

Improved Critical makes sense.

Intimidating Prowess makes sense. I mean a big roaring animal in your face can be pretty scarey.

Lunge, Nimble Moves, and Acrobatic Steps make some sense.

Greater versions of the power attack combat maneuver feats and Cleave make sense. Improved and Greater Sunder also make sense.

Step Up and Strike Back make sense.

Vital Strike and its iterations make sense, when the animal is deprived of using its full attack and doesn't have pounce, vital strike would be invaluable for it to become a better combatant.

That's almost all the feats in the Core Rulebook that don't have prerequisites that an animal cannot meet, or are explicitly forbidden from taking (like shield proficiency or various weapon proficiencies) or flat out don't have the anatomy to use.

The only feat out of the core rulebook, in my estimation, that has question on whether it should, or should not be allowed, is Improved Unarmed Strike.

If you allow IUS, lets look at what it opens up just from the Core Rulebook.

Deflect Arrows, Snatch Arrows, Improved Grapple, Greater Grapple, Scorpion Style, Gorgon's Fist, Medusa's Wrath, Stunning Fist.

Now one might be able to argue that an animal could position itself in such a way, that it could deflect an arrow (or even snatch it in their mouth). It does require that you have one "hand free". According to Nefreet, and the way he defines the Climb Skill, they couldn't take this feat because they don't have any hands.

Improved Grapple and Greater Grapple does make some sense for animals that have the grab special ability. However, what about wolves who have the trip special ability? They will never be able to take Improved Trip, because it requires Combat Expertise which requires an Intelligence of 13. Why should Snakes (or other animals with grab) be the only ones who can improve their natural ability like this?

Scorpion Style and its iterations, and Stunning Fist all require that you actually use Improved Unarmed Strike. Nefreet agrees that his snake using Improved Unarmed Strike to attack with, is not really all that reasonable. The only reason he took it was for access to Improved and Greater Grapple (and eventually Serpent Style). He never plans on using it to attack with. But if you are going to allow IUS, its binary. Either you have it or you don't. As such, if you are going to allow a Turtle to headbutt, or kinda sidle into you slowly with their shell (Unarmed Attack as opposed to their natural attack), then you have to allow them to take the feats that improve upon their unarmed attack.

Essentially, you can't have it both ways. Either IUS is allowed, and all the iterations after it are, no matter how silly it might be that a Turtle could learn Panther Style, or it isn't allowed, because all the alternatives are really stretching credulity.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Are wrote:
Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:


But Bestiary 3 has the Wolf-in-Sheep's-Clothing that has Greater Grapple, but does not have Improved Grapple or Improved Unarmed Strike. It has the grab ability. Other than just giving the creature the feat cause it makes sense, how is it possible that this creature has that feat?

In this case, the Wolf-in-Sheep's-Clothing has Greater Grapple as a bonus feat (as signified by the superscripted "B" next to the feat name).

But by rule (except in situations of developer or GM fiat), bonus feats still need to have prerequisites met.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

Hidden Dragon Crap.

Name of my wolf AC's next finishing move.

My cat likes batting mice around with his claws in, playing with his food. If I made him intelligent, 20 times his size and capable of learning advanced tricks like staying put while staring down an army of undead, couldn't I teach him to slap a skeleton in the head?


Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
Are wrote:
Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
But Bestiary 3 has the Wolf-in-Sheep's-Clothing that has Greater Grapple, but does not have Improved Grapple or Improved Unarmed Strike. It has the grab ability. Other than just giving the creature the feat cause it makes sense, how is it possible that this creature has that feat?

In this case, the Wolf-in-Sheep's-Clothing has Greater Grapple as a bonus feat (as signified by the superscripted "B" next to the feat name).

But by rule (except in situations of developer or GM fiat), bonus feats still need to have prerequisites met.

Only in cases where you can choose between multiple feats to select as a bonus feat do you need to meet prerequisites. In cases where you simply receive a specific bonus feat, you don't need to meet any prerequisites.

Liberty's Edge

From Advanced Players Guide - The feats that an animal could take that aren't on the standard list:

Bloody Assault, Bodyguard, In Harm's Way, Bull Rush Strike, Charge Through, Combat Patrol, Crippling Critical, Dazing Assault, Eldritch Claws, Elemental Focus, Greater Elemental Focus, Fast Healer, Following Step, Step Up and Strike, Furious Focus, Dreadful Carnage, Go Unnoticed, Heroic Defiance, heroic Recovery, Improved Blind-Fight, Greater Blind-Fight, Improved Drag, Greater Drag, Low Profile, Rending Claws, Sidestep, Improved Sidestep, Stunning Assault, Sundering Strike, Taunt, Under and Over, Underfoot.

If you allow IUS the following become available:

Cockatrice Strike, Elemental Fist, Ki Throw, Improved Ki Throw, Perfect Strike, Punishing Kick.

From Ultimate Magic:

Uncanny Alterness

From Ultimate Combat:

Bolstered Resilience (if your AC somehow gets DR), Cleaving Finish, Improved Cleaving Finish, Deadly Finish, Death from Above, Death or Glory, Devastating Strike, Improved Devastating Strike, Disorienting Maneuver (assuming you allow animals to use the acrobatics skill to tumble to avoid an Attack of Opportunity), Flanking Foil, Gory Finish, Hammer the Gap, Impaling Critical, Improved Impaling Critical, Landing Roll, Quick Bull Rush, Quick Drag, Rebuffing Reduction (if AC has DR), Rending Fury, Improved Rending Fury, Greater Rending Fury, Stalwart, Improved Stalwart, Sure Grasp,

if you allow IUS the following become available:

Chokehold, Combat Style Master, Feral Combat Training, Jawbreaker, Bonebreaker, Neckbreaker, Pinning Knockout, Pinning Rend, Rapid Grappler, Stunning Pin, Vicious Stomp, Boar Style, Boar Ferocity, Boar Shred, Crane Style, Crane Wing, Crane Riposte, Djinni Style, Djinni Spirit, Djinni Spin, Dragon Style, Dragon Ferocity, Dragon Roar, Efreeti Style, Efreeti Stance, Efreeti Touch, Janni Style, Janni Tempest, Janni Rush, Mantis Style, Mantis Wisdom, Mantis Torment, Marid Style, Marid Spirit, Marid Coldsnap, Monkey Style, Monkey Moves, Monkey Shine, Panther Style, Panther Claw, Panther Parry, Shaitan Style, Shaitan Skin, Shaitan Earthblast, Snake Style, Snake Sidewind, Snake Fang, Snapping Turtle Style, Snapping Turtle Clutch, Snapping Turtle Shell, Tiger Style, Tiger Claws, Tiger Pounce

So I think you'll see from the above, that I'm not out to particularly restrict all but the base feats. Pretty much just IUS.

Liberty's Edge

Are wrote:
Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
Are wrote:
Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
But Bestiary 3 has the Wolf-in-Sheep's-Clothing that has Greater Grapple, but does not have Improved Grapple or Improved Unarmed Strike. It has the grab ability. Other than just giving the creature the feat cause it makes sense, how is it possible that this creature has that feat?

In this case, the Wolf-in-Sheep's-Clothing has Greater Grapple as a bonus feat (as signified by the superscripted "B" next to the feat name).

But by rule (except in situations of developer or GM fiat), bonus feats still need to have prerequisites met.

Only in cases where you can choose between multiple feats to select as a bonus feat do you need to meet prerequisites. In cases where you simply receive a specific bonus feat, you don't need to meet any prerequisites.

You aren't making sense.

The point is, if I'm creating or advancing a monster from one of the Bestiaries, the rule is that a monster can't take a feat, bonus or not, unless it meets the prerequisites.

Unless by GM or Developer fiat.

In this case, you are saying that the bonus feat of Greater Grapple for the Wolf-in-Sheep's-Clothing is a Developer Fiat bonus feat.

Liberty's Edge

Mark Hoover wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Hidden Dragon Crap.

Name of my wolf AC's next finishing move.

My cat likes batting mice around with his claws in, playing with his food. If I made him intelligent, 20 times his size and capable of learning advanced tricks like staying put while staring down an army of undead, couldn't I teach him to slap a skeleton in the head?

Why would you?

And why, when all its natural instincts tell it to run away, and the only reason its sticking around is cause you trained it with Attack Anything, would it actually choose to?


Just curious, why is intelligence score a factor in this?

Liberty's Edge

because animals have a very restrictive list of feats they can take unless their intelligence is raised to 3 or higher.

Core Rulebook, page 53 wrote:

Animal companions can select from the following feats: Acrobatic, Agile Maneuvers, Armor Proficiency (light, medium, and heavy), Athletic, Blind-Fight, Combat Reflexes, Diehard, Dodge, Endurance, Great Fortitude, Improved Bull Rush, Improved Initiative, Improved Natural Armor, Improved Natural Attack, Improved Overrun, Intimidating Prowess, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Mobility, Power Attack, Run, Skill Focus, Spring Attack, Stealthy, Toughness, Weapon Finesse, and Weapon Focus. Animal companions with an Intelligence of 3 or higher can select any feat they are physically capable of using. GMs might expand this list to include feats from other sources.

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

There are many instances where critters have bonus feats that they otherwise don't qualify for.

Skeletons have Improved Initiative, despite having no intelligence score, for example. Same for zombies with Toughness.

There are others. That's just off the top of my head.

Shadow Lodge

Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
Magda Luckbender wrote:

One would want an animal to take Improved Unarmed Strike so that it could be a better grappler. Specificially:

Improved Unarmed Strike ==> Improved Grapple ==> Greater Grapple.

So what about the wolf (or other animals that trip?)

You going to allow grabbing animals to become better grapplers because there is no specific language that disallows IUS, but not allow tripping animals to become better trippers because there is specific language that disallows tripping?

Access to Improved Grapple and Greater Grapple are not reasons, in and of themselves, to allow IUS for grabbing animals. Because if this were a valid answer alone, then Wolves should be given an allowance to take Improved Trip and Greater Trip without needing Combat Expertise or an Intelligence of 13.

By your quoted reasoning, they shouldn't get access to Improved Bullrush either, even if its listed in the list of restricted access feats.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:

You aren't making sense.

The point is, if I'm creating or advancing a monster from one of the Bestiaries, the rule is that a monster can't take a feat, bonus or not, unless it meets the prerequisites.

Unless by GM or Developer fiat.

In this case, you are saying that the bonus feat of Greater Grapple for the Wolf-in-Sheep's-Clothing is a Developer Fiat bonus feat.

The entire bestiary is filled with creatures that have Developer Fiat bonus feats.


I have seen the list of feats in Animal Companions, but Animals themselves (per the rules defining creature types and sub-types) do not have feat restrictions.

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

This "binary" reasoning does not make sense to me, either.

Having/Not Having a feat does not equate to "always having to use it and nothing else".

Animals can have Power Attack, but that doesn't mean they're always Power Attacking.


Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
Mark Hoover wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Hidden Dragon Crap.

Name of my wolf AC's next finishing move.

My cat likes batting mice around with his claws in, playing with his food. If I made him intelligent, 20 times his size and capable of learning advanced tricks like staying put while staring down an army of undead, couldn't I teach him to slap a skeleton in the head?

Why would you?

And why, when all its natural instincts tell it to run away, and the only reason its sticking around is cause you trained it with Attack Anything, would it actually choose to?

Skeleton: DR 5/Bludgeon. Slam attack (cat batting w/paw) = bludgeon. Good kitty.

Then later, when I'm 20th level and my cat has a bunch of grapple feats, it'll be so epic when he smothers foes to death by cuddling.

Liberty's Edge

Nefreet wrote:

This "binary" reasoning does not make sense to me, either.

Having/Not Having a feat does not equate to "always having to use it and nothing else".

Animals can have Power Attack, but that doesn't mean they're always Power Attacking.

That's not what I said.

The binary is that you either have IUS or you don't. It has nothing to do with whether you use it.

But using the reason that you don't use an aspect of it, should have no bearing on whether the feat should be allowed.


Dead horse issue. The only restriction on whether an intelligent animal can take a feat is if he is physically capable of using it (period).

Now, unless someone is making an argument that an animal is not physically capable of making an unarmed attack, there is nothing to talk about.


I think the intention by the player is to allow their animal companion to qualify for style feats like crane style. I think the intent is less about the IUS feat itself.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Driver 325 yards wrote:
Dead horse issue. The only restriction on whether an intelligent animal can take a feat is if he is physically capable of using it (period).

Bbauzh's contention is that this FAQ sets a precedent that physical capability is not the only restriction on which feats the animal can take.


Okay, then the question is whether the animal is capable of using crane style or whatever else. For instance, does not Crane Wing require a free hand (it may not anymore due to the recent wording change). Assuming it does for the sake of argument, then animals with no hands could not use Crane Wing.

To the extent that the discussion strays from the question of whether or not the intelligent animal is physically capable of using the feat, it is an irrelevant discussion.


Jiggy wrote:
Driver 325 yards wrote:
Dead horse issue. The only restriction on whether an intelligent animal can take a feat is if he is physically capable of using it (period).
Bbauzh's contention is that this FAQ sets a precedent that physical capability is not the only restriction on which feats the animal can take.

I don't see how that FAQ changes anything.


I could see that as precedent to restrict formal combat style feats. I don't see it as valid reasoning to restrict some of the more basic maneuver feats assuming the creature can otherwise meet the requirements.


Quote:

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.

Now short of reading an incredible amount into the above, there is nothing that says or that suggests that style feats are not appropriate for animals. Does the style feat require you to use a tool, speak a language or activate a magic device. If not, then how in the world is this FAQ relevant?

It's not.

Now, if the point is that there should be an errata then okay. However, as it currently stands, yes an animal can use a style feat that it is physically capable of using and that does not require langauge, tools or the activation of magical devices.

Did you see the Karate Chimp. He was doing kung fu with an intelligence of 2. Further, I think the guy who's snake started all this had a snake that did snake style. That just seems to make all kinds of sense. You have a problem with a snake learning to move like a snake to avoid attacks?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I disagree with Bbauzh's assertion, I just wanted him to be clearly and fairly represented.

Liberty's Edge

I have a problem with a snake using a style created by humanoids to mimic how a snake fights, but modifying it to use a humanoid intelligence and anatomy.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber

That FAQ restricts animals from learning weapon proficiency feats.

IUS does not give you proficiency in any weapon.


Driver 325 yards wrote:
Quote:

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.

Now short of reading an incredible amount into the above, there is nothing that says or that suggests that style feats are not appropriate for animals. Does the style feat require you to use a tool, speak a language or activate a magic device. If not, then how in the world is this FAQ relevant?

It's not.

Now, if the point is that there should be an errata then okay. However, as it currently stands, yes an animal can use a style feat that it is physically capable of using and that does not require langauge, tools or the activation of magical devices.

Did you see the Karate Chimp. He was doing kung fu with an intelligence of 2. Further, I think the guy who's snake started all this had a snake that did snake style. That just seems to make all kinds of sense. You have a problem with a snake learning to move like a snake to avoid attacks?

I saw a video of a chimp reacting with martial arts-style movements to very situation-specific prompting, which (while impressive) was most likely scripted. According to the chimp's official website, I don't see anything about the chimp ever competing in any tournaments or any actual unscripted bouts; the chimp's behavior indicates that a chimp could be trained to perform katas, but that's quite a long ways from posessing the necessary intelligence to translate that into a useful fighting form.

You leave out the fact that the FAQ also states that an INT 3 does not grant the animal sentience; everything mentioned refers back to the idea that an INT of 3 does not suddenly give the animal the capacity for complex thought. The example of Karate Chimp is an example of an animal performing a trick in response to a very particular stimuli; that's far different from learning a martial art which, while perhaps based on fixed forms, requires higher thought (i.e., sentience) to effectively apply it in a non-scripted combat situation.

Note again that I'm not arguing against the animal learning IUS. Frankly, I think they should be able to also learn most of the Improved and Greater maneuver feats (despite the fact that they lack an INT of 13). But there's a marked difference between teaching an animal that it can slap with its paw rather than clawing, and teaching it a formal, complex fighting art.

Dark Archive

Xaratherus wrote:
Driver 325 yards wrote:
Quote:

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.

Now short of reading an incredible amount into the above, there is nothing that says or that suggests that style feats are not appropriate for animals. Does the style feat require you to use a tool, speak a language or activate a magic device. If not, then how in the world is this FAQ relevant?

It's not.

Now, if the point is that there should be an errata then okay. However, as it currently stands, yes an animal can use a style feat that it is physically capable of using and that does not require langauge, tools or the activation of magical devices.

Did you see the Karate Chimp. He was doing kung fu with an intelligence of 2. Further, I think the guy who's snake started all this had a snake that did snake style. That just seems to make all kinds of sense. You have a problem with a snake learning to move like a snake to avoid attacks?

I saw a video of a chimp reacting with martial arts-style movements to very situation-specific prompting, which (while impressive) was most likely scripted. According to the chimp's official website, I don't see anything about the chimp ever competing in any tournaments or any actual unscripted bouts; the chimp's behavior indicates that a chimp could be...

So what your saying, is without specific stimuli, it won't work. Such as training your monkey to kick the head of someone when you say head kick. So part of IUS it will work when you give it a command to perform a certain action.

so your stimuli that you need is... "monkey head kick". I think that covers it.


Nefreet wrote:

That FAQ restricts animals from learning weapon proficiency feats.

IUS does not give you proficiency in any weapon.

Doesn't an animal who gets an Int of 3 or higher automatically become a magical beast anyway?

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

No.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Zhayne wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

That FAQ restricts animals from learning weapon proficiency feats.

IUS does not give you proficiency in any weapon.

Doesn't an animal who gets an Int of 3 or higher automatically become a magical beast anyway?

Not animal companions.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Kazumetsa Raijin wrote:
I recommend evolving your companion into a Blastoise, and spamming Hydro Pump or Skull Bash.

More like Hydro Cannon, or Flash Cannon now.


Right turn Clyde

Fictional orangutan punches fictional guy in the face upon command...in make-believe. Game. Set. Match.


Titania, the Summer Queen wrote:

So what your saying, is without specific stimuli, it won't work. Such as training your monkey to kick the head of someone when you say head kick. So part of IUS it will work when you give it a command to perform a certain action.

so your stimuli that you need is... "monkey head kick". I think that covers it.

Sure, I don't have a problem with that. By RAW, that's a trick, and it's a Handle Animal check to direct the animal to do it. That's a move action, which means that you give the command on your turn, and now you don't get a full attack action.

The 'attack' trick is non-specific and doesn't require constant direction, because the creature can operate its natural attacks on instinct. I'd even go so far as to say that you could probably even teach it to include things like paw bashes (unarmed strikes) into the 'attack' command.

However, a good number of combat style feats are used in reaction to an opponent's maneuver - Crane Wing, Crane Riposte, Snake Fang, Turtle Clutch. Since it's at minimum a move action to use Handle Animal, and it's not your turn, how are you giving the command for the animal to use that particular ability? At that point, you're relying on the animal to use a martial art on its own, without your direction and in response to unscripted stimuli; to me, that would require sentience.


Mark Hoover wrote:


Skeleton: DR 5/Bludgeon. Slam attack (cat batting w/paw) = bludgeon. Good kitty.

good news!

Claw - 1 1d2 1d3 1d4 1d6 1d8 2d6 2d8 B and S Primary

Kitty's paw whaps the skellies enough for it to be bludgeoning anyway.


Xaratherus wrote:


Sure, I don't have a problem with that. By RAW, that's a trick, and it's a Handle Animal check to direct the animal to do it. That's a move action, which means that you give the command on your turn, and now you don't get a full attack action.

Free action to handle animal companions

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
EvilPaladin wrote:
The important question that we all must ask here is why would an animal want to take IUS when the have a clearly more effective form of unarmed attacks?

To deal non-lethal damage without provoking an AoO?

Liberty's Edge

pH unbalanced wrote:
EvilPaladin wrote:
The important question that we all must ask here is why would an animal want to take IUS when the have a clearly more effective form of unarmed attacks?
To deal non-lethal damage without provoking an AoO?

But that's not typically how animals think. Typically, if they are going to attack something, they are going to attack it lethally. That's how animals roll.

Anytime you put a decision in the mind of an animal on what type of attack they are going to perform (their standard attack or some other kind of attack that is not normal for them) how do you propose they make that choice?

I see three options:

1) GM is ok with the player metagaming and having the animal instinctively know which is the best option, and they do that.

This breaks precedence with animals still being animalistic, even with a 3+ Int. Those are higher functioning choices. This isn't an option that just adds to their natural skills. We aren't just making them better at what they already do. We are giving them new options.

2) Player character must push the animal to get it to do something that's not natural for it.

In PFS, a ruling has been made that an animal knows how to use their feats. This is sorta a no-brainer ruling. But what does this mean when it has two very different options. a) to do what it normally does, or b) to do something it normally wouldn't do. Do we break precedence and make the character push the animal to perform a feat it knows?

3) Roll randomly anytime its about to start an attack progression.

This to me is a ridiculous option. Animals aren't anymore random than people are. They do what comes naturally to them.

So, as a GM, how do I adjudicate what the animal chooses to do? I certainly am not going to go with option 1 as I hate metagaming, option 2 seems unfair, and option 3 seems ridiculous.

Ultimate Campaign says that animals with a 1-2 Intelligence are actually controlled by the GM. I never do this, I let the player control the animal, but if they start making metagaming decisions or decisions that a creature with animal intelligence wouldn't be making, then I will choose to veto that decision. Intelligence 3+, per Ultimate Campaign, are said to be under the player's control. However, the rules also stipulate what types of actions an animal would be willing to do, no matter how much it understands your language or how intelligent it is. It is still an animal.

The fact that Improved Unarmed Strike creates an option for an animal, should straight up mean it is not appropriate for an animal to take.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Um, you are aware that dogs are actually trained in the real world to take down people non lethally, right? Those instincts can be worked with, even in our mundane world with int 2 animals.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Animal Companions with a 3 or higher intelligence are not typical animals.

So, what a "typical" animal does, is not really all that relevant.

Some of the animals available, don't even have a base for what a "typical" animal of that species can/will do.

Who can say what a "typical" Deinonychus, or Roc would do?

Now, you improve their intelligence to beyond that of any animal?

How does anyone even dare to be an expert on what such a creature can and will do?


I have a dog that has been trained to attack in non-lethal fashion in the real world... he targets arms, lower legs etc...

Liberty's Edge

pauljathome wrote:
Um, you are aware that dogs are actually trained in the real world to take down people non lethally, right? Those instincts can be worked with, even in our mundane world with int 2 animals.

Yes, but the animal is taught a trick, which the handler uses handle animal to tell the animal to specifically do that.

There isn't a trick in Pathfinder to tell an animal to attack non-lethally. Therefore, that option isn't available in Pathfinder.

Liberty's Edge

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Animal Companions with a 3 or higher intelligence are not typical animals.

So, what a "typical" animal does, is not really all that relevant.

Some of the animals available, don't even have a base for what a "typical" animal of that species can/will do.

Who can say what a "typical" Deinonychus, or Roc would do?

Now, you improve their intelligence to beyond that of any animal?

How does anyone even dare to be an expert on what such a creature can and will do?

The rules tell you that an animal of 3+ Int is still an animal, and still reacts and acts like an animal.

So tell me, how does this animal make the choice to use unarmed vs. its normal natural attacks without using one of the 3 options I listed above?


Bbauzh ap Aghauzh wrote:
But that's not typically how animals think. Typically, if they are going to attack something, they are going to attack it lethally. That's how animals roll.

I'd just like to point out that there are *many* venomous snakes that decide when they're going to inject venom and when they're just biting something as a warning. And that's snakes...not one of nature's higher thinking creatures.

Edit: Had the wrong quote earlier.

51 to 100 of 206 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Can an animal with Int 3+ take Improved Unarmed Strike All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.