If normal thrushes with 2 intelligence have the ability to distinguish threats, be trained with Handle Animal, and generally survive, then 6 intelligence is plenty for functioning as a sapient assistant to an adventurer who tells it what to do. With 15 wisdom, the thrush is far more discerning than most humans. Your DM ripped you off, and it could have been for any number of reasons, but they probably weren't justifiable.
But this is a thread about mental ability scores, which haven't been extensively and exhaustively codified by rules. Opinions vary, so the old cop-out addage applies: Expect table variance.
|
I agree with Castilonium. The GM ripped you off. PCs can have 6 intelligence with the right (wrong?) race and choosing to reduce INT as a dump stat. At 6 INT, you can speak full sentences, identify threats, etc.
I'd like to have seen that GM's opinion about my Riddywipple familiar. He has 23 INT, stealth and perception scores in the mid 20s, greater invisibility, AND telepathy to 100 ft. Talk about a scout...
Not official, but generally held that IQ is equal to intelligence times 10, so your thrush should have an IQ around 60. This is around the same IQ as an 8 year old.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Insist that the paladin be limited to the same repertoire.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is not exactly going to be making very many knowledge checks until later on (when you can have both more knowledge ranks and it has a better int anyway), but it will at least be able to say whether there are creatures over there.
It can't tell the difference between a wolf and a dire wolf and a were wolf for its life, but it can at least tell you that there is a big fuzzy thing over there.
I could also see limiting its ability to count. A expect things to be vague and going like "one" "a couple" "a few" "a bunch".
Above normal intelligence animals do not function the same as regularly intelligent creatures.
The closest example of this that I can provide are to tell you to look at the blogs on animal companions with high intelligence.
See this blogpost and this one too. To me they set a precedent.
Unless I'm forgetting something, high intelligence familiar are still not sentient creatures. Though they are highly intelligent for their kind.
What that information means specifically is still pretty up to the GM.
In this particular case, I would have give you some vague information.
Whether there were humanoid or non-humanoid creatures present. A rough idea of how many. Alone, a couple, a few, or a lot. Maybe if creatures had fur or had shiny metallic skin (full plate).
You wouldn't get an exact number or description, like there are 5 orcs wearing full plate.
I know familiars are a weird case because they can have mental based skills which really leaves them in a weird area of intelligence that isn't clearly defined.
If there is a statement somewhere that says they become sentient, that would really make it more clear.
They are considered magical beasts for effects that depend on type, but I don't think that has anything to do with their sentience.
Above normal intelligence animals do not function the same as regularly intelligent creatures.
The closest example of this that I can provide are to tell you to look at the blogs on animal companions with high intelligence.
See this blogpost and this one too. To me they set a precedent.
Unless I'm forgetting something, high intelligence familiar are still not sentient creatures. Though they are highly intelligent for their kind.
What that information means specifically is still pretty up to the GM.
In this particular case, I would have give you some vague information.
Whether there were humanoid or non-humanoid creatures present. A rough idea of how many. Alone, a couple, a few, or a lot. Maybe if creatures had fur or had shiny metallic skin (full plate).
You wouldn't get an exact number or description, like there are 5 orcs wearing full plate.
You are forgetting the rules paizo put out in ultimate campaign, which is one of the key non-blog sources for the 'animal with 3+ int' vs 'actually sentient' rules sets (and puts those precedents you cited into written rules). Here are the relevant bits
Nonsentient Companions: a nonsentient companion (one with animal-level intelligence) is loyal to you in the way a well-trained dog is—the creature is conditioned to obey your commands, but its behavior is limited by its intelligence and it can't make altruistic moral decisions—such as nobly sacrificing itself to save another. Animal companions, cavalier mounts, and purchased creatures (such as common horses and guard dogs) fall into this category. In general they're GM-controlled companions. You can direct them using the Handle Animal skill, but their specific behavior is up to the GM.
Sentient Companions: a sentient companion (a creature that can understand language and has an Intelligence score of at least 3) is considered your ally and obeys your suggestions and orders to the best of its ability. It won't necessarily blindly follow a suicidal order, but it has your interests at heart and does what it can to keep you alive. Paladin bonded mounts, familiars, and cohorts fall into this category, and are usually player-controlled companions.
There are more details than that, but this is enough to squarely put familiars out of the category of "it is just an animal" since it isn't in the same "need a handle animal check".
|
Except that familiars are not above intelligence animals. They are relatively stupid magical beasts. :) becoming a Familiar changes their type.
That said, they still are not considered smart enough to use weapons or magical items beyond ioun stones. But if you gave it fairly specific questions, it should be able to give you fairly specific answers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a human sorcerer with eye for talent and a 7 int, 7 wisdom.
His thrush familiar with the 12 int and 15 wisdom makes handle sorcerer checks.
Except that familiars are not above intelligence animals. They are relatively stupid magical beasts. :) becoming a Familiar changes their type.
That said, they still are not considered smart enough to use weapons or magical items beyond ioun stones. But if you gave it fairly specific questions, it should be able to give you fairly specific answers.
Well, once you are past the 3 int threshold, it isn't that hard to use weapons.
Elementals typically have 4 int, but their subtype allows them to get simple weapon proficiency if they have a humanoid shape. So weapons are typically more the realm of hands, which most familiars lack. And I think monkeys might be barred at some levels for balance reasons (basically forcing you to get improved familiar if you want a wand mon...key...)
Above normal intelligence animals do not function the same as regularly intelligent creatures.
The closest example of this that I can provide are to tell you to look at the blogs on animal companions with high intelligence.
See this blogpost and this one too. To me they set a precedent.
Unless I'm forgetting something, high intelligence familiar are still not sentient creatures. Though they are highly intelligent for their kind.
What that information means specifically is still pretty up to the GM.
In this particular case, I would have give you some vague information.
Whether there were humanoid or non-humanoid creatures present. A rough idea of how many. Alone, a couple, a few, or a lot. Maybe if creatures had fur or had shiny metallic skin (full plate).
You wouldn't get an exact number or description, like there are 5 orcs wearing full plate.
You are forgetting the rules paizo put out in ultimate campaign, which is one of the key non-blog sources for the 'animal with 3+ int' vs 'actually sentient' rules sets (and puts those precedents you cited into written rules). Here are the relevant bits
...Nonsentient Companions: a nonsentient companion (one with animal-level intelligence) is loyal to you in the way a well-trained dog is—the creature is conditioned to obey your commands, but its behavior is limited by its intelligence and it can't make altruistic moral decisions—such as nobly sacrificing itself to save another. Animal companions, cavalier mounts, and purchased creatures (such as common horses and guard dogs) fall into this category. In general they're GM-controlled companions. You can direct them using the Handle Animal skill, but their specific behavior is up to the GM.
Sentient Companions: a sentient companion (a creature that can understand language and has an
I'm not sure that is sufficient. It does establish them as sentient, but then adding a point of int to almost any animal companion and a rank in linguistics should suddenly count them as sentient then.
And we know that a paladin still needs to use handle animal on his mount to get him to do things, despite the mount being extra intelligent. Just as any other animal companion would be required to be controlled with handle animal.
If anything, I feel this only makes it muddier where the actually separation should be and what is reasonable for them to do.
I always assumed the paladin mount had a high intelligence specifically so the paladin wouldn't need to use Handle Animal.
I'm not sure that is sufficient. It does establish them as sentient, but then adding a point of int to almost any animal companion and a rank in linguistics should suddenly count them as sentient then.
And we know that a paladin still needs to use handle animal on his mount to get him to do things, despite the mount being extra intelligent. Just as any other animal companion would be required to be controlled with handle animal.
If anything, I feel this only makes it muddier where the actually separation should be and what is reasonable for them to do.
Not sure if it helps, but here is the discussion on intelligent animals from UC. Since familiars were already placed into a category separate from animal companions, mostly separated by the need for the handle animal skill, I think it doesn't apply (since you don't 'still' need handle animal- you never needed it...at least with familiar; don't know much about paladin mounts).
Increasing an animal's Intelligence to 3 or higher means it is smart enough to understand a language. However, unless an awaken spell is used, the animal doesn't automatically and instantly learn a language, any more than a human child does. The animal must be taught a language, usually over the course of months, giving it the understanding of the meaning of words and sentences beyond its trained responses to commands like "attack" and "heel."
Even if the animal is taught to understand a language, it probably lacks the anatomy to actually speak (unless awaken is used). For example, dogs, elephants, and even gorillas lack the proper physiology to speak humanoid languages, though they can use their limited "vocabulary" of sounds to articulate concepts, especially if working with a person who learns what the sounds mean.
An intelligent animal is smart enough to use tools, but might lack the ability to manipulate them. a crow could be able to use simple lockpicks, but a dog can't. Even if the animal is physically capable of using a tool, it might still prefer its own natural body to manufactured items, especially when it comes to weapons. An intelligent gorilla could hold or wield a sword, but its inclination is to make slam attacks. No amount of training (including weapon proficiency feats) is going to make it fully comfortable attacking in any other way.
Even if an animal's Intelligence increases to 3 or higher, you must still use the Handle Animal skill to direct the animal, as it is a smart animal rather than a low-intelligence person (using awaken is an exception—an awakened animal takes orders like a person). The GM should take the animal's Intelligence into account when determining its response to commands or its behavior when it doesn't have specific instructions. For example, an intelligent wolf companion can pick the weakest-looking target if directed to do so, and that same wolf trapped in a burning building might push open a door or window without being told.
As you may notice, it references awakened heavily, and I think that is generally the way to go for how to treat a familiar- it is a creature awakened by its connection to its spellcaster. While the exact mechanics differ, you have animals treated as magical beasts and given a proper intelligence score.
A familiar is a magical beast, not an animal. It probably has a few more animal instincts than some other magical beasts, but its not any more limited to "ooo worms!" than you are to "ooo bananas"