|
So I was reading through the Additional Resources and I noticed this:
Equipment: all equipment on pages 12-13 are legal except barding stitches, fury drops, and poison caps
Does that mean that since Barding Stitches are not allowed that animals companions like snakes, spiders, sharks, etc cannot wear barding at all?
Also, does this rule...
The Animal Magic Item Slots table found on the inside front cover of the book is not legal except under the following conditions. First, an animal companion, familiar, or bonded mount, may choose one slot listed under its body type when taking the Extra Item Slot feat (this feat may be taken multiple times, each time selecting a different available magic item slot based on the creature's anatomy). Second, access to specific magic item slots may be granted at a later date by another legal source.
...replace any previous "suggestions" made on the message boards about what item slots are available to animal companions and familiars? Would that mean that the animal has to have the armor slot listed on the table and then take the feat Extra Slot in order to activate that slot and be able to where barding?
Thanks for helping clear this up for me!
|
Can my animal companion or familiar wear or use magic items?It is intended that animal companions or familiars can not activate magic items. An animal companion could benefit from an item with a continuous magical effect like an amulet of natural armor if its master equipped the item for the animal companion. Animal companions of any type may not use manufactured weapons.
Animal companions are also limited by their individual anatomies. In Pathfinder Society Organized Play, animal companions always have access to barding and neck-slot items so long as they have the anatomy. For example, a horse and pig can always have access to barding and neck-slot items. A snake does not have access to either. However, an item called out to be used by a specific animal is usable by that animal regardless of slot.
Additionally, animal companions have access to magical item slots, in addition to barding and neck, as listed on the inside front cover of the Animal Archive so long as they select the Extra Item Slot feat. The Animal Magic Item Slots table found in Animal Archive is not a legal except under the following conditions. First, an animal companion, familiar, or bonded mount, may choose one slot listed under its body type when taking the Extra Item Slot feat (this feat may be taken multiple times, each time selecting a different available magic item slot based on the creature’s anatomy). Second, access to specific magic item slots may be granted at a later date by another legal source. If you do not own a copy of the Animal Archive, your animal companion may only use barding and neck-slot items.
...
If you do not own a copy of the Animal Archive, your animal companion may only use barding and neck-slot items.
Hope this helps!
edit: formatting
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Animal companions are also limited by their individual anatomies. In Pathfinder Society Organized Play, animal companions always have access to barding and neck-slot items so long as they have the anatomy.If you do not own a copy of the Animal Archive, your animal companion may only use barding and neck-slot items.
If you don't own AA, your spider can have barding as long as the GM does not rule that he does not have the anatomy for it. In otherwords, if neither you nor your GM has Animal Archive, you would both be unaware of the rule that spiders cannot have armor, and therefore you can get away with it.
Of course, if you read this thread, you know this is illegal, so you are cheating if you try to get away with it.
|
|
Which is why they need to open out the content from the AA and add it elsewhere so its a core rule - otherwise "If you do not own a copy of the Animal Archive, your animal companion may only use barding and neck-slot items" is the relevant RAW, which is odd.
Could you please list a source to where that rule is written? As far as I know that's only a "suggestion" from somewhere in these message boards which is about as useful as it being written on these same message boards that I don't have to role dice for anything I can just pick the number I rolled.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thats from the FAQ but the full sentence reads
Animal companions are also limited by their individual anatomies. In Pathfinder Society Organized Play, animal companions always have access to barding and neck-slot items so long as they have the anatomy.
So the question is, "Does the spider have anatomy to wear armor?" and the answer is no, whether you have the animal archive or not.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Which is why they need to open out the content from the AA and add it elsewhere so its a core rule - otherwise "If you do not own a copy of the Animal Archive, your animal companion may only use barding and neck-slot items" is the relevant RAW, which is odd.Could you please list a source to where that rule is written? As far as I know that's only a "suggestion" from somewhere in these message boards which is about as useful as it being written on these same message boards that I don't have to role dice for anything I can just pick the number I rolled.
Mike Brock is the Gamemaster for PFS.
I think his actual title is Campaign Coordinator, but you know all those times the rules lead to "Ask your GM?" He's that guy.
|
|
Which is why they need to open out the content from the AA and add it elsewhere so its a core rule - otherwise "If you do not own a copy of the Animal Archive, your animal companion may only use barding and neck-slot items" is the relevant RAW, which is odd.Could you please list a source to where that rule is written? As far as I know that's only a "suggestion" from somewhere in these message boards which is about as useful as it being written on these same message boards that I don't have to role dice for anything I can just pick the number I rolled.Mike Brock is the Gamemaster for PFS.
I think his actual title is Campaign Coordinator, but you know all those times the rules lead to "Ask your GM?" He's that guy.
And when he can't be there, the PFS Guide, FAQ, Additional Resources, and his message board posts serve in his place.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Thats from the FAQ but the full sentence reads
Animal companions are also limited by their individual anatomies. In Pathfinder Society Organized Play, animal companions always have access to barding and neck-slot items so long as they have the anatomy.
So the question is, "Does the spider have anatomy to wear armor?" and the answer is no, whether you have the animal archive or not.
I think the point is that specifically in the case of a giant spider, it is not necessarily clear that it doesn't have the proper anatomy to wear armor designed for it. I could see a GM in good faith deciding either way.
|
|
Thats from the FAQ but the full sentence reads
Animal companions are also limited by their individual anatomies. In Pathfinder Society Organized Play, animal companions always have access to barding and neck-slot items so long as they have the anatomy.
So the question is, "Does the spider have anatomy to wear armor?" and the answer is no, whether you have the animal archive or not.
I think the point is that specifically in the case of a giant spider, it is not necessarily clear that it doesn't have the proper anatomy to wear armor designed for it. I could see a GM in good faith deciding either way.
It IS perfectly clear that the spider does not have the anatomy for it. There is a chart that says it does not. PFS is using that chart.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
BNW, the point is, that if a PC & GM *DON"T HAVE* AA, they *DON"T HAVE* the chart, the only thing they have to go on is the PRD and the FAQ.
So it *is* legitimate for such a PC to have the armor, leading to the very odd situation that a Player is better off *not having* a supplement.
Which is why people are asking Paizo to publish the info in the PRD, so that people cannot rely on protective ignorance.
(And no you can't just say "well they should look at d20pfsrd" because it has numerous rules errors and other rules that contradict PFS rules. And it is not a legal PFS rules source.)
|
|
BNW, the point is, that if a PC & GM *DON"T HAVE* AA, they *DON"T HAVE* the chart, the only thing they have to go on is the PRD and the FAQ.
So it *is* legitimate for such a PC to have the armor
It is no more legitimate than getting any other pfs rule wrong.
Not a legitimate call, not a gray area, not a matter of interpretation.
Wrong.
Now, gods know there are enough rules out there that getting some of them wrong is pretty much inevitable, but there's no excuse for adding to legitimate error with willful ignorance or rules chicanery
leading to the very odd situation that a Player is better off *not having* a supplement.
If the player knows enough to avoid getting the resource they know enough to be cheating, rather than merely incorrect.
Which is why people are asking Paizo to publish the info in the PRD, so that people cannot rely on protective ignorance.
They can't. Its no more protective than getting any other rule wrong.
(And no you can't just say "well they should look at d20pfsrd" because it has numerous rules errors and other rules that contradict PFS rules. And it is not a legal PFS rules source.)
The PRD gets things wrong too on occasion. Its not perfection or nothing.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
BNW, most players don't read the boards. Many don't even read d20pfs or Archive of Netheys.
The only rules they have are the PRD, the guide, the books they own, and the FAQ.
If they don't own AA, They honestly and innocently have the following rule:
If you own AA, use the chart in that section. If you do not own AA, your animal can use Amulet and Barding unless it is serpentine or the GM says no.
So lets take the situation where a player has been building his character for several months. He doesn't have AA, his GM doesn't either. He has as a result, a giant spider with +1 mithral shirt barding.
This character is totally legal. He is following *exactly* the legal rules. If he used d20pfsrd to take extra item slots eyes, you would tell him he is cheating, and that d20pfsrd is not a legal source. But you want to tell him that d20pfsrd is a legal source for preventing him from using barding.
Now he goes out and buys AA. Suddenly the character is stuck with a great big pile of useless chain mail links he cannot use. A situation is created where the player buys a supplement, and in so doing hoses his own character who is now no longer legal. That is a bad thing.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
David: The rule (further on) says "If you do not own... You can only use" So one reading of the rule would say that it only really matters if the player owns the book... :) Which would make everything even worse. (and raises the question, does giving people AA as a present violate the don't be a jerk rule)
Nosig:
Cannot wear barding: Picine, Serpentine, Verminous
Cannot wear neck: Picine, Serpentine, Verminous
Basically, I think it boils down to "it needs to have shoulders." I do think it is really wierd that a crab (which is basically walking armor) can't wear armor.
|
|
If they don't own AA, They honestly and innocently have the following rule:
no, they don't. They have the faq that says they need the shape for it. Common sense should tell them that spider barding is a little iffy.
So lets take the situation where a player has been building his character for several months. He doesn't have AA, his GM doesn't either. He has as a result, a giant spider with +1 mithral shirt barding.
This character is totally legal.
No. No it is not.
It is a legitimate mistake but it is a mistake none the less. The player should not be penalized for it, but it is very much not legal.
But you want to tell him that d20pfsrd is a legal source for preventing him from using barding.
What I'm telling you is that the rule in the faq tells you that the creature has to have the anatomy for it. There's little excuse for not knowing that line. From there common sense should tell you spider barding is a little iffy, and you can ask around.
Now he goes out and buys AA. Suddenly the character is stuck with a great big pile of useless chain mail links he cannot use. A situation is created where the player buys a supplement, and in so doing hoses his own character who is now no longer legal. That is a bad thing.
This is why pencils have erasers. Problem solved.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
I am very unclear on what about a spider or crab anatomy prohibits barding. (I get why no neck slot, but not why no barding.) Other than the fact that if they gave verminous familiars barding, octopuses would be able to use it.
But there is nothing in the spider or crab body shape that would seem to prevent them from wearing barding shaped to their bodies. (Yeah, they can't wear gecko barding, but geckos can't wear ape barding, and neither could wear avian barding.)
|
I will agree that it seems sort of arbitrary... and that means Lord Snappy (my Giant Scorpion) will be losing his barding... even though my player doesn't own the book. Doesn't make a lot of sense (he was going to eventually be getting really nice barding... which would match my armor!), but I guess it proves once again that a vermin animal companion is extremely sub-optimal.
Poor Lord Snappy! So picked upon by the rules... no skills, no feats, almost no tricks. *sniff*
|
What's this "vermin are sub-optimal" bullarky? My Giant Wasp flies me everywhere. Got him a Headband of Vast Intellect (Fly) once I boosted him up with Boon Companion. After that, a pair of Muleback Chords. Now he has skills, feats, and carrying capacity.
Take note that a Verminous animal companion must reach it's first attribute bonus, and get that point in INT before allowing for the headband. Thus making this is anything close to viable. It is Feat and Gold intensive to go this route. Also, Halflings cheat.
|
|
I will agree that it seems sort of arbitrary... and that means Lord Snappy (my Giant Scorpion) will be losing his barding... even though my player doesn't own the book. Doesn't make a lot of sense (he was going to eventually be getting really nice barding... which would match my armor!), but I guess it proves once again that a vermin animal companion is extremely sub-optimal.
Poor Lord Snappy! So picked upon by the rules... no skills, no feats, almost no tricks. *sniff*
Eh. Wand of Mage Armor and Pearl of Power +2 to keep casting Barkskin. That's like +6 armor right there and cheaper than barding. Trust me, I know! (barding gets very expensive very quickly for companions)
|
In PFS play you have to take Extra Item Slot feat to get anything beyond neck slot and barding. The listing in Animal Archive simply points out what you can take the feat to get.
I'm assuming you took Extra Item Slot to get that headband?Giant Wasp isn't classified as 'verminous' ... its under quadruped/hexapod (which get shoulder and armor and headband, et al slots just fine) ... so is not really an apt comparison to the actual verminous category critters. =)
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Wait, now I'm really confused. How is a crab *not* hexapod... (Okay the spider is Octopod, I get that but still it would also seem to fit. ) Sooo weird... And you can put a saddle on a manta ray, but not on a squid...
You know, before this I never went and read that list that closely before. That is a complete pile of silliness.
|
|
How it works, near as I can figure
Though I'm still a little unsure on how specific an animal item has to be before it can wear it without expending the feat.
|
|
David: The rule (further on) says "If you do not own... You can only use" So one reading of the rule would say that it only really matters if the player owns the book... :) Which would make everything even worse. (and raises the question, does giving people AA as a present violate the don't be a jerk rule)
Nosig:
Cannot wear barding: Picine, Serpentine, VerminousCannot wear neck: Picine, Serpentine, Verminous
Basically, I think it boils down to "it needs to have shoulders." I do think it is really wierd that a crab (which is basically walking armor) can't wear armor.
Presumably that means barding is allowed *when legal*. At my table, we follow the animal companions guidelines set forth by UCamp and AA.
|
|
Eh. Wand of Mage Armor and Pearl of Power +2 to keep casting Barkskin. That's like +6 armor right there and cheaper than barding. Trust me, I know! (barding gets very expensive very quickly for companions)I will agree that it seems sort of arbitrary... and that means Lord Snappy (my Giant Scorpion) will be losing his barding... even though my player doesn't own the book. Doesn't make a lot of sense (he was going to eventually be getting really nice barding... which would match my armor!), but I guess it proves once again that a vermin animal companion is extremely sub-optimal.
Poor Lord Snappy! So picked upon by the rules... no skills, no feats, almost no tricks. *sniff*
Mithril chain shirt barding is quite affordable, and pushes Animal Companion ACs quite high.
|
|
Presumably that means barding is allowed *when legal*. At my table, we follow the animal companions guidelines set forth by UCamp and AA.David: The rule (further on) says "If you do not own... You can only use" So one reading of the rule would say that it only really matters if the player owns the book... :) Which would make everything even worse. (and raises the question, does giving people AA as a present violate the don't be a jerk rule)
Nosig:
Cannot wear barding: Picine, Serpentine, VerminousCannot wear neck: Picine, Serpentine, Verminous
Basically, I think it boils down to "it needs to have shoulders." I do think it is really wierd that a crab (which is basically walking armor) can't wear armor.
As much as I'd love to agree with you.
Its kinda a jerk move to try and hold the rules in a book over a player's head, who doesn't own that book, and the book is not part of the core assumption.
I can play an animal companion without Animal Archive. And if I play up to say 9th level without GM's making me use Animal Archive rules, how fair is that for you to tell them they basically can't use half the stuff their animal has because you do own Animal Archive?
|
|
It's a pretty pickle, but it's not fair to the players who own the AA and can't put barding on certain animal companion types. I really wish that PFS hadn't done this with animal companions and just made it uniform.
They did make it uniform.
It works the way it works. But just like every other option in the game, if you own a splat book, you get a more refined set of options.
|
|
Examples: By AA rules, giant ants and wasps can wear armor but a giant beetle cannot. Pigs can wear horseshoes but camels can't. Turtles can wear cloaks. You can put a saddle on an otter but it can't wear a belt of DEX +2. Etc.
None of these make any intuitive sense. Requiring people without the additional resource to abide by these nonsensical categorizations seems to open a big can of worms.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Yeah, I'm not really arguing that it should be legal, I'm just saying it is a really stupid situation.
I kind of wish they had just kept in barding stitches and let everything have armor. I mean it is not like the AC that are unbalanced get denied armor, it is things like the fish AC. I have never seen anyone say "Oh my god, that Fish AC destroyed the game.
|
|
It's a pretty pickle, but it's not fair to the players who own the AA and can't put barding on certain animal companion types. I really wish that PFS hadn't done this with animal companions and just made it uniform.They did make it uniform.
It works the way it works. But just like every other option in the game, if you own a splat book, you get a more refined set of options.
The Pathfinder Society FAQ link that DesolateHarmony posted in the first response covered this. It says that some animal companions can't wear armor because of their body and leaves it up to the GM at the table to determine which animals can and can't wear armor (barding) or neck slot items. It specifically calls out a snake but if the GM at the table has the AA and says, "no your (insert creature) can't wear that item because it doesn't have the anatomy for it" and then falls back to his copy of the AA as proof or even just looks up the Pathfinder Society FAQ the player is kind of stuck since it's a GM call.
Personally I think that the AA should be made a core assumption if you're playing any class that has an Animal Companion or Familiar as a class feature since it clears up a lot of problems with those particular class features and have the list in the front cover should be made core for PFS, maybe even have that chart reprinted in the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I've posted this question before without getting an answer. So I'll repost/rephrase it here:
Now that Animal Archives lists a bunch of possible equipment slots for companions, I'm curious as to what my companion can wear. What body types and which slots exist for the four companions (three plants and a fungus) that the Treesinger (Druid) can take:
(1) Carnivorous Flower
(2) Creeping Vine
(3) Puffball
(4) Sapling Treant
I would guess the creeping vine is treated like a snake, but what body type is a fungus? (I have trouble seeing a Puffball wearing a neck-slotted item.) I think I read somewhere too that a treant never wears armor.
An answer from someone with PFS clout would be greatly appreciated.
Or maybe I'm going about his all wrong and I should just by my treant a cloak, some bracers and a couple of rings and refer to the animal archive as not showing that I can't do this.
|
|
I've posted this question before without getting an answer. So I'll repost/rephrase it here:
Now that Animal Archives lists a bunch of possible equipment slots for companions, I'm curious as to what my companion can wear. What body types and which slots exist for the four companions (three plants and a fungus) that the Treesinger (Druid) can take:
(1) Carnivorous Flower
(2) Creeping Vine
(3) Puffball
(4) Sapling Treant
I would guess the creeping vine is treated like a snake, but what body type is a fungus? (I have trouble seeing a Puffball wearing a neck-slotted item.) I think I read somewhere too that a treant never wears armor.An answer from someone with PFS clout would be greatly appreciated.
Or maybe I'm going about his all wrong and I should just by my treant a cloak, some bracers and a couple of rings and refer to the animal archive as not showing that I can't do this.
I would think that #1-3 don't have any item slots. The Treant is a little trickier. It's more or less a tree with arms. I unless there's a "Plant Archive" put out at some point I'd say that it's a GM call that will vary from table to table.