|
I have seen the FAQ item regarding animal companions and intelligence:
Improving Animal Companion's Intelligence to 3 or Higher
Unfortunately, the FAQ is not very clear on the specific point of INT 3 + a rank in Linguistics. I have also seen what looks like related house rule/opinion on this issue in various posts.
But - per the rules, what is the exact benefit of boosting the animal companion to INT 3 combined with taking a rank in linguistics? The FAQ text indicates that the companion will then understand a language. So, where/what is the corresponding impact on getting the animal to perform special actions or reductions in push DC's, etc.?
For example, with INT 3 and linguistics, can a druid:
- command an animal to fight defensively or use total defense?
- command an animal companion to charge a target?
- give the animal companion compound commands for tricks it already knows?
- reduce the DC of pushed actions?
- be able to tell it to do other complex things that are not on the trick list?
- teach it new tricks more easily in shorter time?
Also, why can't an animal companion speak a language like Fey or Draconic or something appropriate to their type if, for example, they are a dinosaur/reptilian, even if they were to speak it in a halting/rasping manner reflecting their minimal intelligence and physiological limits?
Something more concrete in the domain of linguistics would be great so that PFS players and GMs might better understand how to modify the behavior of the companion once it can understand a specific language at INT 3. Learning 3 new tricks per point of intelligence doesn't adequately explain the language/linguistics benefit.
If there are any clear rulings on these issues other than the FAQ I have already indicated above, please let me know! Thx.
Edit: Also - the other obvious point of collision is with the Speak with Animals spell, where an animal will do a favor or service if it is friendly towards you (no tricks required). So, with INT 3 + Linguistics, isn't that like a permanent Speak with Animals? (where no tricks would be required, possibly counter to what the above FAQ states)
|
Most of that has been answered in the monkey see monkey do blog and the PFS FAQ on critter (which you've already found)
But - per the rules, what is the exact benefit of boosting the animal companion to INT 3 combined with taking a rank in linguistics? The FAQ text indicates that the companion will then understand a language. So, where/what is the corresponding impact on getting the animal to perform special actions or reductions in push DC's, etc.?
From the monkey see monkey do blog
The Handle Animal skill functions similarly no matter how intelligent an animal becomes. A character must still make Handle Animal checks to train his animal and get him to perform the appropriate tasks. A GM should, however, make exceptions in the case of how such an intelligent animal might react in absence of instructions. It might not know to unlock a door to escape a burning building—as that's a fact that's learned over time and experience—but a smart animal might have a better chance of finding a way out.
Most of these are subject to DM variation but...
For example, with INT 3 and linguistics, can a druid:
- command an animal to fight defensively or use total defense?
Sounds like the "down" command. If the little bundle of fluff has been ordered not to attack and something comes near it anyway thats the action I would say they take.
- command an animal companion to charge a target?
This is covered by the attack command. Animals use their abilities, including pounce, without needing a separate command for it.
- give the animal companion compound commands for tricks it already knows?
Probably, since its a free action to do so.
- reduce the DC of pushed actions?
The dm can be nice and throw you a +2 circumstance bonus. Or really nice and make it higher.
- be able to tell it to do other complex things that are not on the trick list?
Possibly.
- teach it new tricks more easily in shorter time?
In PFS animal companions train you in between sessions at a rate of 1 trick per point of handle animal in the nebulous time between sessions. There's really not a lot of leeway to speed it up, but if taking 10 isn't sufficient for the trick you might get a bonus on the roll.
Also, why can't an animal companion speak a language like Fey or Draconic or something appropriate to their type if, for example, they are a dinosaur/reptilian, even if they were to speak it in a halting/rasping manner reflecting their minimal intelligence and physiological limits?
Because then they have a tendency to interrupt mission briefings and form unions demanding more armor and better protective magics. (and thats my job)
More seriously, if they can talk they can activate magic items, which gets problematic for action economy, and talking animals tend to be associated with a tone less serious than PFS strives for.
|
|
Flutter - thanks for the additional animal companion links.
I have reviewed the "Monkey See Monkey Do" post - it does not appear to answer my main question and side-steps the issue and detail of INT 3 + linguistics.
I always thought the point of putting a rank in linguistics was that it reflected the cumulative effort to learn a language (like gaining a new level after 3 XP) and, in this case, includes the requirement of applying an ability point to the animal companion's INT after 4 class levels of progress. So, when the linguistics rank subsequently goes into place, the language should be known at that point. Also, the rules state that at INT 3, animal companions can put ranks in any skill. So, the mechanic should work in a consistent manner. When a PC puts a rank in linguistics, it doesn't take years to learn the language - they know it.
In the context of Pathfinder Society Organized Play, I was hoping for a specific reference for how to handle this issue. I don't think there's any functional difference between INT 3 + Linguistics and Speak with Animals (at least on the animal receiving end), where the latter carries no restrictions on the task or favor that is being performed by the animal. All Speak with Animals does is ensure a common language. So, the obvious out on this one would be to draw the line and say it's magic vs. non-magic, which would be a fair distinction that would protect the spell's integrity. A narrow escape! :)
You sound like a good reference for druids/companions, so I guess there's currently no clear rulings on these issues. Unfortunately, it's going to be left in the realm of GM and table variation, which seems unnecessary.
Here is what I suggest (to paizo):
1. If animal companions always require handle animal checks and cannot speak (and are not supposed to be able to speak or benefit from a learned language outside the Handle Animal skill), then ranks in linguistics should be prohibited. Very simple. There's no explanation required, INT points just add to the number of tricks and the integrity of Handle Animal is retained.
OR
2. Each rank in linguistics counts as a +X reduction in the push DC (very reasonable application of non-magical common language). In addition, a known language should permit standard combat actions (with a clear indication in the rules) like fight defensively, total defense, or flank without having to interpret existing tricks, providing that the animal has the Attack trick (or maybe they take it a 3rd time for these advanced maneuvers - 1 for attack, 1 for attack anything, 1 for advanced attacks). And, further, each rank in linguistics might indicate the number of commands the animal can understand in sequence. So, 2 ranks would give +(2*X) bonus to the push check and would allow a druid to say (for example): Seek and Attack, acting as a practical measure of command complexity that is possible because of the now shared language (although it would be a translation from the mechanic of knowing additional languages to understanding a string of tricks -- but maybe not a huge leap, albeit inconsistent). Maybe there's some other cleaner way to handle this kind of effect with advancement? It's worth considering.
I appreciated your remarks above and hope my additional comments are useful in any related discussion, especially if it helps address these gray areas with animal companions. Thanks!
|
|
Since monkey see monkey do assumes that the intelligence bonus grants a language (eventually), it answers the question about getting a language. Getting a language isn't the only obstacle to overcome. While your kitty may understand that you want him to attack the orc, you're still going to have to ask him nicely.
Animal companions are always going to be subject to some table variation. There are simply too many different, wonderful animals in far too many bizarre situations to adjudicate from anywhere but the dms chair.
|
|
I'd like you to meet Libi, a fairly bright mammoth (Int 4) and my companion.
She's been trained to understand my native language, Hallit.
I like to talk to her in that language and issue my commands to her in that language. She currently knows 16 tricks (12 from 4 int, 4 from being the companion of a level 8 hunter (3 from animal companion progression and 1 bonus trick from level 7 hunter), and thanks to my affinity with mammoths I have no issues with having her perform those tricks.
Pushing her to do tricks she doesn't know is still a bit risky while under duress (I only have a +21 handle animal for her), but when I have time it's easy to do.
Your first proposal sounds a bit harsh to me, completely removing options is something that I don't condone unless it's gamebreaking, which I don't think this is. More table variance than some people would like maybe, but not gamebreaking.
Your second proposal, however sounds at least partially interesting. The +X should be a flat +2 to handle animal in my opinion, similar to an aid another or masterwork tool (but stacking with those), and not go up with more ranks.
The rest I'm not so sure about tying it into linguistics. Making it an extra attack trick option sounds interesting, but there is already a trick for maneuvers, and I think a case could be made that fight defensively/total defence could be shoveled among the maneuvers.
Flank is already a trick and with several feats which animals know how to use they'll try to get into flanking positions to benefit from their feats anyway.
As Flutter already mentioned, there will always be bizarre situations that will get table variance. I've had to make Libi understand that a flag while carried by a certain person is a friend ("swear allegiance" for the Flagbearer feat), and GM's have ruled that it works because of her brightness and my high handle animal coupled with her understanding a language.
|
|
Since monkey see monkey do assumes that the intelligence bonus grants a language (eventually), it answers the question about getting a language. Getting a language isn't the only obstacle to overcome. While your kitty may understand that you want him to attack the orc, you're still going to have to ask him nicely.
My post relates to the specific case of adding a rank in linguistics, so it doesn't answer the question. In particular, it lacks resolution of the rules for the linguistics skill which confers skilled training in an ability vs. untrained "smart enough to know but hasn't learned yet" context.
Learn a Language: Whenever you put a rank into this skill, you learn to speak and read a new language.
In linguistics, there is absolutely no restriction on intelligence level or creature type and animal companion INT 3 allows a rank in linguistics. So, by RAW, the animal knows the language and the blog post's implied qualifier of years to learn offers no help.
The following paragraph from the blog says nothing about how this skill should interact with Handle Animal. It just refers to speaking and learning the language and refers to an untrained process that does not consider the rules for linguistics:
Gaining a language does not necessarily grant the ability to speak. Most animals do not possess the correct anatomy for speech. While a very intelligent dolphin might be taught to understand Common, there's no way for him speak it. There is also the issue of learning the language. The rules are mostly silent on this front, due to ease of play for PCs, but a GM should feel safe in assuming that it might take years to actually teach Common to an intelligent animal. All of this, of course, assumes that the animal even bothers to fill that language slot. Possessing the ability to use a language does not necessarily mean that such an ability is utilized.
I see no reason for table variation. All that's required is a basic ruling for how linguistics is supposed to work with respect to Handle Animal, tricks, etc. and also vs. Speak with Animals (to help maintain coherence).
An animal companion has high loyalty for its master. There should be no requirement to ask nicely - there is shared will/affinity. All that is required is the trained attack command. If this were on a Diplomacy table, the animal would be DC0 (helpful) to do most things. DC25 for push equates to hostile diplomacy and makes sense for animals the druid does not know. So, there may be poor coherence between Diplomacy and Handle Animal, except for the inclusion of Wild Empathy as a circumstance bonus. For a random wild animal, the druid gets charisma+level bonuses on the check. The animal companion should be orders of magnitude better than wild DCs as a known, bonded, personal, trained pet.
Also, I found an old 2011 thread on this issue and the question remained unanswered (but just closed the window by accident and am out of time). So, it looks like this issue has been broken/unaddressed for a long time (4 years). I'll search for it again later.
Shamira: The SRD & CORE support the following tricks: Attack, Come, Defend, Down, Fetch, Guard, Heel, Perform, Seek, Stay, Track, Work, along with training packages.
Is there a list of supported/PFS-sanctioned tricks somewhere else? I don't see any reference to flanking, maneuver or any other exotic tricks (that may be 3rd-party content and not PFS legal), except on d20pfsrd.
I appreciate the discussion and would like to see this issue show up in the official PFS FAQs with explicit reference to the role of linguistics, tricks and handle animal.
|
The Animal Archive has additional tricks legal for PFS play, including Flank and others.
Edit:
Tricks: All tricks on pages 8-9 are legal.
|
|
My post relates to the specific case of adding a rank in linguistics, so it doesn't answer the question.
It does. There is no difference between acquiring a language through the int raise and acquiring the language from the point in linguistics (a pfs house rule). If the animal speaks common then it speaks common. The fact is you need to use handle animal on a critter even though it understands your language.
So what you have is
Monkey see monkey do: 'If you raise your animals intelligence to 3 (and thus they gains a language)'
vs your
"If you raise your animals intelligence to 3, and it puts a point in linguistics to learn a language"
There is no functional difference between those two. They've said explicitly that the animal knowing a language doesn't mean you don't need to handle animal.
The following paragraph from the blog
... Ok, you can't say that the answer doesn't exist in that paragraph therefore it doesn't exist.
Is there a list of supported/PFS-sanctioned tricks somewhere else? I don't see any reference to flanking, maneuver or any other exotic tricks (that may be 3rd-party content and not PFS legal), except on d20pfsrd.
The animal archives have more tricks, and airwalk from the airwalk spell in the core rulebook.
I see no reason for table variation. All that's required...
Is a house rule. SOmething PFS doesn't like to make more of.
|
|
Fun fact about the "actually speaking the language" part.
You know how some apes have been taught sign language, right? (Google Koko the Gorilla if you don't). Well, before that, there were some attempts to teach apes to actually vocalize words. Even chimps, the ones closest to humans, proved to be physically incapable of getting almost anything resembling words out. Then sign language was tried, and voila, worked much better.
So even though the animal might have to intelligence to understand a language, raised intelligence does not change its physical characteristics, and won't make it able to actually speak.
|
. If you're looking for codified benefits from a 3 INT, you're not going to find them.
In addition to the benefits you've pointed out, there are some very major codified benefits
1) 3 extra tricks per point of Int
2) access to lots of feats when Int reaches 3. Note that there is a little bit of table variation in what feats are allowed.
Getting to Int 3 is generally a VERY good idea
|
|
<snip> For me, the extra point in INT was far more valuable than getting another +1 on STR or CON or DEX, but I play a more tactical character. If I were a Mad Dog Barbarian, I'd probably just go with a physical boost.
And that's why I went with +2 int at level 1 from the human racial alternate Eye for talent. I also like to have an animal companion with lots of tricks, especially being a hunter with those skirmisher tricks available.
|
|
I tend to joke about having Libi help out with ancient language translation if no-one in the group has the language learned or comprehend languages. The odds of assisting aren't even that bad (4 int so a -3 stat modifier, since it's not a class skill I end up at -2 with 1 rank, and I can cast Guidance for a +1 to raise it to -1.) 45% chance to be able to aid. =]
I'm at the moment contemplating on teaching her the skirmisher trick
It doesn't specify that the allies need to understand her, just hear her trumpetting or something. :P
|
Plus, if your skink has a rank in Linguistics, it can create forged documents. That's not to be underestimated.Do you mean skunk? I am under the impression that animals without hands cannot write. There's s specific example in one fo the books about animals without hands not being able to use keys or something.
That was surely sarcasm on Chris Mortika's part.
If he was actually serious, he forgot that even if an animal comapnion's intelligence goes to 3+ it's still of "animal" intelligence. To expound upon the implications of the FAQ cited upthread: A fighter with 2 intelligence is still smarter than an Animal Companion with 3 or 4 intelligence, since he's still a sentient being. A really stupid one, granted, but as a humanoid he's still smarter than an animal irrespective of intelligence values.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Not entirely specious.
I mean, with an INT of 3, an animal with a single rank in Linguistics has a modifier of -3, not considering other modifiers, such as whether the document has identifiable handwriting.
Animals use camouflage all the time. They disguise themselves, they hide their nests, and they imitate the calls of other animals. Surely it's not that much of a stretch to have an animal disguise one piece of paper to look like another. Surely.
Now, imagine what an animal could do with a rank of Appraise...
|
|
Now, imagine what an animal could do with a rank of Appraise...
The good news is they could figure out the value of an item.
The bad news is that the feline/human or canid/human value translation table hasn't been written. and items only have 2 values "MINE" or "useless"
Kinda depends on animal
Cat: "hmm. Makes me look pretty AND my person is looking at it. MINE"
Dog : " smelly and I can roll around in it. MINE"
Raven : " Shiney. MINE"
|
|
Thanks to all for the replies and perspectives - great, including the jokes which were highly amusing. Also, I picked up a copy of Animal Archive today to check it out. Thanks for the reference. d20pfsrd should really cite the source for the extra tricks - would have made it easier to find and p8-9 will help me in STANDARD, no doubt.
I still feel there is a fundamental problem with the lack of necessary definition in animal companions with respect to Linguistics, Tricks, and Handle Animal that the comments above do not address, and I stand by my assessment of the blog post. Also, it is broken for CORE, which has no access to the Animal Archive. But, I have already explained very clearly above, so I will leave it in the hands of Nethys and all of you fine OPs...and maybe the skinks. ;-)
The only true sadness is a Roc with no Craft Alchemy ranks.
|
|
I still feel there is a fundamental problem with the lack of necessary definition in animal companions with respect to Linguistics, Tricks, and Handle Animal that the comments above do not address, and I stand by my assessment of the blog post
You will still need handle animal even when talking to your animal companions. Thats as clear cut and crystal a ruling as the developers can make.
|
|
I once broke a 30 dollar ruby tipped technical pen the night before a project was due and replaced it with a piece of yellow birch carved to a very fine point with an ink groove in it.
Got my highest grade on any of the projects i did with that pen
I pictured a skink taking his tail off and using the tip in a similar fashion.
|
|
Wait, me joking about having my companion make linguistics checks sparked a serious debate -_- I really should have bolded the joke part I guess?
I'm so going to teach Libi the skirmisher trick:
Cunning Pantomime (Ex): As a standard action, the ranger can communicate with a single creature as if using the tongues spell for 10 minutes. Because the communication is slow and lacks subtlety, the ranger suffers a –4 penalty on all Bluff and Diplomacy checks relating to the creature he is communicating with when using this trick.
What's a mere -6 penalty for bluff/diplomacy when you can have a mammoth do the talking :P
|
|
Truthfully, animals companions are a mess.
Yes.
This thread may explain the classic book Why Cats Paint
And, I'm not sure I want to meet Ginger, the Neo-Synthesist in a dark alley.
Chris: Technically speaking, I don't think skinks have fingers. They only have toes, but still wondering if they could hold a brush a la "My Left Foot".