4) The animal, being a character in its own right, decides what ITS going to do and either uses the feat or doesn't.
|
So, the argument here is that animals are too dumb to attack in a different way than they are used to?
Arean't there some animals that would have IUS come naturally? Bears (In real life) slam targets (often called being mauled), gorillas slam targets, heck even killer whales use slams to eventually kill their targets (Often by slamming them downward, drowning their prey). Slams are very similar to unarmed strikes. So why not?
If 3 intelligence, the intelligence to be able to understand communication, is not enough intelligence to use these abilities, then what is?
|
So, the argument here is that animals are too dumb to attack in a different way than they are used to?
Arean't there some animals that would have IUS come naturally? Bears (In real life) slam targets (often called being mauled), gorillas slam targets, heck even killer whales use slams to eventually kill their targets (Often by slamming them downward, drowning their prey). Slams are very similar to unarmed strikes. So why not?
If 3 intelligence, the intelligence to be able to understand communication, is not enough intelligence to use these abilities, then what is?
Slam is a specific kind of natural attack. Just ask any zombie ;-)
|
Slam is a specific kind of natural attack. Just ask any zombie ;-)So, the argument here is that animals are too dumb to attack in a different way than they are used to?
Arean't there some animals that would have IUS come naturally? Bears (In real life) slam targets (often called being mauled), gorillas slam targets, heck even killer whales use slams to eventually kill their targets (Often by slamming them downward, drowning their prey). Slams are very similar to unarmed strikes. So why not?
If 3 intelligence, the intelligence to be able to understand communication, is not enough intelligence to use these abilities, then what is?
So why don't pathfinder bears get slam as an attack option?
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.
There's a trick that lets you tell an animal to Aid, and it's attacks become nothing more than a menacing barrage while it deals no damage and instead gives support to an indicated ally.
There's a trick that lets you tell an animal to use a specific Combat Maneuver; a potentially non-lethal attack that it then makes IN LIEU of it's normal, lethal attack.
Yes, there's no specific "non-lethal attack trick" but if real life animals can be trained for it, AND we're talking about a fictional game where you can train a wolf animal companion to be Lassie with the Help trick, why are you so reluctant to allow these animals to learn this feat?
Beacuse it opens up hundreds more feat chains with the potential for abuse? Would you rather the party's druid or ranger trick out his combat buddy with a bunch of homemade magic items or permanized spells? And how many feats does an animal companion get anyway? This wouldn't work on familiars (too smart/no feats), constructs, or bonded objects and it couldn't be abused by a normal, non-bonded animal since they don't advance in HD enough to gain extra feats.
So in other words, just animal companions.
I think the quote was posted earlier, but I'll post again.
Feats
This is the total number of feats possessed by an animal companion. Animal companions should select their feats from those listed under Animal Feats. Animal companions can select other feats, although they are unable to utilize some feats (such as Martial Weapon Proficiency). Note that animal companions cannot select a feat with a requirement of base attack bonus +1 until they gain their second feat at 3 Hit Dice.
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.
FYI There are new feats intended for Animals. Here are a few:
•Jumper
•Lithe Attacker
•Master of Your Kind
•Narrow Frame
•Stable Gallop
•Sure Footed
•Valiant Steed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------
The way I read it, they would be physically capable of taking IUS. It's not on the list, so the GM would have to allow it.
As far as the styles go, (or whatever else you're trying to pick up IUS for) as a GM, I would say no. The GM has the final say so in most situations. In this particular case, it specifically says "GMs might expand this list to include feats from other sources."
|
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.
I think your argument really boils down to: IUS should be illegal in order to keep animal companions from doing the things that real animals can actually do. For no reason EXCEPT you don't want animal companions to do it.
All your arguments about what animals do are specious, as is shown by your constant refrain that real animal behavior is irrelevant since the PFS rules don't allow it.
You can't both say
1) IUS should be illegal because animals don't use it
2) what animals do is irrelevant when determining what PFS animals can do.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, the argument here is that animals are too dumb to attack in a different way than they are used to?
Dunno, I've been headbutted by a horse that took a dislike to me.
|
|
I think your argument really boils down to: IUS should be illegal in order to keep animal companions from doing the things that real animals can actually do. For no reason EXCEPT you don't want animal companions to do it.
I think the reason is because animal companions would otherwise have another way to steal the show in his games in PFS.
|
|
So why don't pathfinder bears get slam as an attack option?Slam is a specific kind of natural attack. Just ask any zombie ;-)So, the argument here is that animals are too dumb to attack in a different way than they are used to?
Arean't there some animals that would have IUS come naturally? Bears (In real life) slam targets (often called being mauled), gorillas slam targets, heck even killer whales use slams to eventually kill their targets (Often by slamming them downward, drowning their prey). Slams are very similar to unarmed strikes. So why not?
If 3 intelligence, the intelligence to be able to understand communication, is not enough intelligence to use these abilities, then what is?
Because pathfinder is NOT real life ;-)
|
|
Why don't bears have slam?
Because Paizo doesn't record every attack that actual animals have and make. Bears do slam without trying to use their claws in real life. At least that's what my grandfather said, who was a forest ranger for many years and had seen, and been a part of, bear attacks.
Anyways, how else does smokey the bear put out forest fires?
Because pathfinder is NOT real life ;-)
Reality is straining the credulity of my fantasy!
|
|
So, the argument here is that animals are too dumb to attack in a different way than they are used to?
Arean't there some animals that would have IUS come naturally? Bears (In real life) slam targets (often called being mauled), gorillas slam targets, heck even killer whales use slams to eventually kill their targets (Often by slamming them downward, drowning their prey). Slams are very similar to unarmed strikes. So why not?
If 3 intelligence, the intelligence to be able to understand communication, is not enough intelligence to use these abilities, then what is?
Because these slams are the natural attack.
That's why there is a natural weapon called a slam.
And bears don't maul with a slam. They maul with claws.
|
|
I never said that IUS should be illegal to keep animal companions from doing things real animals can actually do.
IUS allows you to make an unarmed attack for lethal damage without provoking an AoO. Real animals also have used clubs and spears as weapons in the wild.
In Pathfinder (not PFS--the game system Pathfinder) you'll find that that real life is not copied exactly. Its an abstract which tries to closely resemble real life, with magic, fantasy, and real life legend/myth thrown in.
In Pathfinder, animals can't learn to use weaopns. Period. In a home game, you can modify that if you wish.
In Pathfinder, to get your animal to do something it wouldn't normally do, you teach it a trick, and use handle animal to command it to do that thing. If it doesn't know the trick, or you are asking it to do something outside of its normal animal comfort zone, you gotta use handle animal to push it. This isn't really that far away from real life.
All those examples of dogs that turn off the lights, open the fridge, grab a beer, and serve the master as they put in a movie after saying "Movie Time" or of police dogs that take down badguys non-lethally, are all examples of being taught a trick, and responding to the master giving the trigger command to activate the use of that trick in the animal's mind. Handle Animal was essentially used.
Animals that Slam, in Pathfinder, are defined as Slam Attacks, a type of Natural Weapon. Not IUS.
I'm not trying to advocate that animal companions should not be capable of things real animals are.
What I'm saying is, there are rules within the game system that cover almost every example that people have given of animals doing something crazy or somewhat resembling IUS.
None of those examples or rules include an animal fighting like a Boxer or MMA fighter outside of the crazy kung fu chimp that was really just doing some mimicking exercises of kata.
The rules for what animals do in real life are covered by the Natural Attacks and Handle Animal rules. They actually do a fairly good job of covering those things.
In a Home game, you can craft a trick to do whatever you and the GM agree that trick can do. If it is a trick that allows you to command your animal to attack non-lethally instead of lethally, then go for it.
In PFS, you cannot craft your own tricks. You are stuck using the tricks available in the books.
So again, instead of trying to cut me down with arguments that have nothing to do with what I'm actually saying, why don't you try to answer my question?
How does the animal make its choice to IUS or NA?
I never said that IUS should be illegal to keep animal companions from doing things real animals can actually do.
IUS allows you to make an unarmed attack for lethal damage without provoking an AoO. Real animals also have used clubs and spears as weapons in the wild.
In Pathfinder (not PFS--the game system Pathfinder) you'll find that that real life is not copied exactly. Its an abstract which tries to closely resemble real life, with magic, fantasy, and real life legend/myth thrown in.
In Pathfinder, animals can't learn to use weaopns. Period. In a home game, you can modify that if you wish.
In Pathfinder, to get your animal to do something it wouldn't normally do, you teach it a trick, and use handle animal to command it to do that thing. If it doesn't know the trick, or you are asking it to do something outside of its normal animal comfort zone, you gotta use handle animal to push it. This isn't really that far away from real life.
All those examples of dogs that turn off the lights, open the fridge, grab a beer, and serve the master as they put in a movie after saying "Movie Time" or of police dogs that take down badguys non-lethally, are all examples of being taught a trick, and responding to the master giving the trigger command to activate the use of that trick in the animal's mind. Handle Animal was essentially used.
Animals that Slam, in Pathfinder, are defined as Slam Attacks, a type of Natural Weapon. Not IUS.
I'm not trying to advocate that animal companions should not be capable of things real animals are.
What I'm saying is, there are rules within the game system that cover almost every example that people have given of animals doing something crazy or somewhat resembling IUS.
None of those examples or rules include an animal fighting like a Boxer or MMA fighter outside of the crazy kung fu chimp that was really just doing some mimicking exercises of kata.
The rules for what animals do in real life are covered by the Natural Attacks and Handle Animal rules. They...
Ok, what you're saying is: can an Animal learn/use the feat IUS? No. How does it distinguish between the 2 if it somehow learned it? By RAW, it can't. On all those points you're dead on.
Now how does an animal that learns a trick distinguish between using Bite or Overrun? By the trick it learned and the command spoken to activate a trick called Maneuver. So, by that logic AND your own, there's a mechanism, a RULE in place that allows for animals, specifically trained to perform a task, to do so.
Can a wild wolf, by RAW distinguish between using Trip or biting and tripping? No. Can a Wolf Animal Companion with enough feats and 3+ intelligence learn that difference and perform it on command? Yes. Now, based on that can't we say that as an extension of that RAI suggest that its POSSIBLE for an animal companion to get the feat and learn to use its benefits on command?
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In Pathfinder (not PFS--the game system Pathfinder) you'll find that that real life is not copied exactly. Its an abstract which tries to closely resemble real life, with magic, fantasy, and real life legend/myth thrown in.
In Pathfinder, animals can't learn to use weaopns. Period. In a home game, you can modify that if you wish.
Um, about that. The FAQ that states animals can't use manufactured weapons is a PFS FAQ, so it's a campaign restriction rather than an actual baseline game rule. Outside of PFS, the "no weapons for animals" restriction does not exist.
|
|
An animal is a living, nonhuman creature, usually a
vertebrate with no magical abilities and no innate capacity
for language or culture. Animals usually have additional
information on how they can serve as companions. An
animal has the following features (unless otherwise noted).
• d8 Hit Die.
• Base attack bonus equal to 3/4 total Hit Dice (medium
progression).
• Good Fortitude and Reflex saves.
• Skill points equal to 2 + Int modifier (minimum 1) per Hit
Die. The following are class skills for animals: Acrobatics,
Climb, Fly, Perception, Stealth, and Swim.
Traits: An animal possesses the following traits (unless
otherwise noted in a creature’s entry).
• Intelligence score of 1 or 2 (no creature with an Intelligence
score of 3 or higher can be an animal).
• Low-light vision.
• Alignment: Always neutral.
• Treasure: None.
• Proficient with its natural weapons only. A noncombative
herbivore treats its natural weapons as secondary attacks.
Such attacks are made with a –5 penalty on the creature’s
attack rolls, and the animal receives only 1/2 its Strength
modifier as a damage adjustment.
• Proficient with no armor unless trained for war.
• Animals breathe, eat, and sleep.
Animal Companions are an exception to the bolded rule.
Only further evidence, that an animal companions with a +3 intelligence are not typical animals.
|
Um, about that. The FAQ that states animals can't use manufactured weapons is a PFS FAQ, so it's a campaign restriction rather than an actual baseline game rule. Outside of PFS, the "no weapons for animals" restriction does not exist.In Pathfinder (not PFS--the game system Pathfinder) you'll find that that real life is not copied exactly. Its an abstract which tries to closely resemble real life, with magic, fantasy, and real life legend/myth thrown in.
In Pathfinder, animals can't learn to use weaopns. Period. In a home game, you can modify that if you wish.
This is one reason why I thought this FAQ request should have been made in the PFS forum, and not in the General Rules forum.
And given the push back Andy is getting here, that may be his only option. It's concerning PFS anyways.
|
|
Um, about that. The FAQ that states animals can't use manufactured weapons is a PFS FAQ, so it's a campaign restriction rather than an actual baseline game rule. Outside of PFS, the "no weapons for animals" restriction does not exist.In Pathfinder (not PFS--the game system Pathfinder) you'll find that that real life is not copied exactly. Its an abstract which tries to closely resemble real life, with magic, fantasy, and real life legend/myth thrown in.
In Pathfinder, animals can't learn to use weaopns. Period. In a home game, you can modify that if you wish.
Actually, if you go try to find that FAQ now, it doesn't exist. But the language is in the printing of the 6th edition of the Core Rulebook on page 53 now.
|
|
Um, about that. The FAQ that states animals can't use manufactured weapons is a PFS FAQ, so it's a campaign restriction rather than an actual baseline game rule. Outside of PFS, the "no weapons for animals" restriction does not exist.In Pathfinder (not PFS--the game system Pathfinder) you'll find that that real life is not copied exactly. Its an abstract which tries to closely resemble real life, with magic, fantasy, and real life legend/myth thrown in.
In Pathfinder, animals can't learn to use weaopns. Period. In a home game, you can modify that if you wish.
This is one reason why I thought this FAQ request should have been made in the PFS forum, and not in the General Rules forum.
And given the push back Andy is getting here, that may be his only option. It's concerning PFS anyways.
As you can see what I wrote to Jiggy, its actually part of the core rules now.
Almost any gray area like this cab easily be home ruled to work whichever way the gm and player agree to.
|
|
Ok, what you're saying is: can an Animal learn/use the feat IUS? No. How does it distinguish between the 2 if it somehow learned it? By RAW, it can't. On all those points you're dead on.
Now how does an animal that learns a trick distinguish between using Bite or Overrun? By the trick it learned and the command spoken to activate a trick called Maneuver. So, by that logic AND your own, there's a mechanism, a RULE in place that allows for animals, specifically trained to perform a task, to do so.
Can a wild wolf, by RAW distinguish between using Trip or biting and tripping? No. Can a Wolf Animal Companion with enough feats and 3+ intelligence learn that difference and perform it on command? Yes. Now, based on that can't we say that as an extension of that RAI suggest that its POSSIBLE for an animal companion to get the feat and learn to use its benefits on command?
You are absolutely correct.
In a home game, I can allow my player to make new tricks (or create them as a player).
In PFS, you don't have the luxury of creating new tricks. You are left with whatever is in the Core Rulebook or Animal Archive.
By RAW, any new tricks created, are home ruled items.
As such, we need a ruling on how IUS works with animal companions for the rule book.
Home games can still choose to allow it (or modify / remove prerequisites) for animals that want to learn improved maneuver feats (like trip for a wolf or grapple for a snake). I probably would allow the grab or trip special abilities to be the prerequisite for the improved maneuver feats.
|
|
An animal is a living, nonhuman creature, usually a
vertebrate with no magical abilities and no innate capacity
for language or culture. Animals usually have additional
information on how they can serve as companions. An
animal has the following features (unless otherwise noted).
• d8 Hit Die.
• Base attack bonus equal to 3/4 total Hit Dice (medium
progression).
• Good Fortitude and Reflex saves.
• Skill points equal to 2 + Int modifier (minimum 1) per Hit
Die. The following are class skills for animals: Acrobatics,
Climb, Fly, Perception, Stealth, and Swim.
Traits: An animal possesses the following traits (unless
otherwise noted in a creature’s entry).
• Intelligence score of 1 or 2 (no creature with an Intelligence
score of 3 or higher can be an animal).
• Low-light vision.
• Alignment: Always neutral.
• Treasure: None.
• Proficient with its natural weapons only. A noncombative
herbivore treats its natural weapons as secondary attacks.
Such attacks are made with a –5 penalty on the creature’s
attack rolls, and the animal receives only 1/2 its Strength
modifier as a damage adjustment.
• Proficient with no armor unless trained for war.
• Animals breathe, eat, and sleep.Animal Companions are an exception to the bolded rule.
Only further evidence, that an animal companions with a +3 intelligence are not typical animals.
what's your point?
These animals still have to follow all the rules for animals, except they have a couple extra options.
But they still need to be commanded to do something with Handle Animal. They are not sapient in and of themselves.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can an animal with Int 3+ take Improved Unarmed Strike?
TL;DR. Sorry if this has already been covered.
As a practical matter, there's nothing preventing any creature with 3+ Int from taking Improved Unarmed Strike. It may not be the most effective option if they have natural attacks, but they can do it (just like a Toothy half-orc or a Maw or Claw teifling can take it).
As a game-balance matter, if players want to use an animal companion's limited number of feat choices on Improved Unarmed Strike and related feats (after increasing their Int to 3 or more), the effect will probably not be that significant. Note that 3 Int is considered by the system as "sentience;" the point where a creature becomes a reasoning individual capable of independent thought. At that point, they are not learning "tricks on command," but skills and techniques that they can perform as they desire. The style feats don't concern me as much as Feral Combat Training on an animal cohort monk...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
As a practical matter, there's nothing preventing any creature with 3+ Int from taking Improved Unarmed Strike.
.
.Incorrect, there is something preventing it. It is in the OP post:
Animal companions with an Intelligence of 3 or higher can select any feat they are physically capable of using.
As a GM, I say animals are not physically capable of taking IUS. I would stand by this in my home game as well as any PFS game I run...hence, the reason for the discussion.
What I wonder is how people expect that Paizo can answer. If they answer yes or not to IUS, then what about style feats? Can a snake use boars style? Can a boar use snake style? Can my dolphin use panther style? What about all the other feats? Does the community expect Paizo to provide a list of each feat and the animals that could take it? This is one of the reasons why I expect that Paizo will not answer with anything other than it is up to the GM.
What game balance/cheese issues happen if the feat is allowed. ACs get their first ability increase when they've already purchased 2 of their 8 total feats. This leaves them five potential slots to chain together for cheese.
What then is the devastating effect from these 5 feats that I'm not seeing? Please bear in mind that I have not studied the feats closely enough to say I'm an expert. Do they get like 3 extra attacks or their DPR doubles or something?
At a glance I see style feats, some of which they can't qualify for, that then offer a slightly higher AC, some resistances or perhaps AoOs.
Chain together the math so I can clearly understand how access to the IUS-opened feats makes the AC an unstoppable killing machine.
As a practical matter, there's nothing preventing any creature with 3+ Int from taking Improved Unarmed Strike..
.
Incorrect, there is something preventing it. It is in the OP post:
Animal companions with an Intelligence of 3 or higher can select any feat they are physically capable of using.As a GM, I say animals are not physically capable of taking IUS. I would stand by this in my home game as well as any PFS game I run...hence, the reason for the discussion.
Only if you define "unarmed strike" strictly as bipedal "punching and/or kicking," which by RAW is incorrect: "Unarmed Attacks: Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon..." (Core Rulebook, Combat) Any creature with a head is "physically capable" of a head-butt, not to mention the equivalent of specific real-world unarmed attacks like elbow-strikes, knees to the groin/guts, slaps (open-palm strikes), etc.
You can get an amulet of mighty fists and give your natural attacks weopon bonuses too.Yes weapon enhancements (+1 +2 etc.) but not weapon abilities(fire, cold etc.)
What?
This amulet grants an enhancement bonus of +1 to +5 on attack and damage rolls with unarmed attacks and natural weapons.
Alternatively, this amulet can grant melee weapon special abilities, so long as they can be applied to unarmed attacks.
This doesn't mean that Melee Weapon Special Abilities only work for Unarmed Strikes. It just means that the ability has to be applicable to Unarmed Strikes in order for it to be something you can place on an Amulet of Might Fists.
There is nothing wrong with a Ghost Touch Corrosive Amulet of Mighty Fists for instance for an animal companion or a natural weapon ranger or any other creature looking to enhance its natural weapons.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
All creatures with physical bodies capable of movement, are physically capable of making unarmed strikes.
An animal is not physically capable of doing an unarmed strike so it cannot take IUS.
Being physically capable means more than having a head or foot. Animals have natural attacks, not unarmed attacks.
|
|
All creatures with physical bodies capable of movement, are physically capable of making unarmed strikes.
An animal is not physically capable of doing an unarmed strike so it cannot take IUS.
Being physically capable means more than having a head or foot. Animals have natural attacks, not unarmed attacks.
All creatures have unarmed strikes.
This was true in 3.5, and remains so in Pathfinder.
|
|
Only if you define "unarmed strike" strictly as bipedal "punching and/or kicking," which by RAW is incorrect: "Unarmed Attacks: Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon..." (Core Rulebook, Combat) Any creature with a head is "physically capable" of a head-butt, not to mention the equivalent of specific real-world unarmed attacks like elbow-strikes, knees to the groin/guts, slaps (open-palm strikes), etc.As a practical matter, there's nothing preventing any creature with 3+ Int from taking Improved Unarmed Strike..
.
Incorrect, there is something preventing it. It is in the OP post:
Animal companions with an Intelligence of 3 or higher can select any feat they are physically capable of using.As a GM, I say animals are not physically capable of taking IUS. I would stand by this in my home game as well as any PFS game I run...hence, the reason for the discussion.
But creatures that don't have an otherwise defined natural attack, makes unarmed strikes as a slam attack, which is a type of natural attack.
Natural attacks are types of armed unarmed attacks.