Reliance on pets is no good thing either. RAW you can only directly control an animal with the ride skill.
Tricks are very narrowly defined as of Animal Archive. You need one trick to attack, another to flank and take AoOs, a third to use combat maneuvers, and you need to take attack twice to be able to fight anything but humanoids, monstrous humanoids, giants, or animals. You need defend to allow animals to act on their own initiative. You need down for them to break off combat. You need heel just to get the animal into the dungeon. That's seven tricks. An int 2 animal only gets six. The only one that isn't absolutely necessary is maneuver. You get a bonus trick at level 7 as a hunter, but you probably also want someone to have track and someone to have detect and someone to have seek and someone to have watch.
You also need to spend move actions to command the animal even though talking is a free action and most commands are verbal.
Is it true? Can your animal companion really not even benefit from flanking bonuses, attacks of opportunity, or combat maneuvers, unless you teach it a specific trick for each of those things? (Or else make a high DC handle animal check.)
you can benefit from flanking, but you can't have your animal move into flanking without that trick.
AoO need no tricks.
Combat maneuvers need the trick unless its a free attempt like the trip on a wolf bite or grab on a claw. But to tell your wolf to go grapple would need the trick.
Totes lame! I'll be sending a letter to the authors of Animal Archive in short order.
I've never heard of a trick to use attacks of opportunity, but for the most part, this guy's correct. There are some things I'd interpret differently, but talk to your GM about it.
Basically, I don't think Heel is necessary unless you want it to follow you at all times. I'd consider the animal to always follow you (you're his master), unless its instinct tells him otherwise (say, someone dangles a piece of meat in front of him). Defend isn't a high priority for me, but could be useful when you need to guard something, though that could obviously be rolled into the Guard command.
I know a guy who plays his animals too smart, almost like they have a human-like intelligence. "But it has INT 3! He understands Common!" is the argument, but that doesn't allow him to bypass the trick limit, IMHO.
Tricks that are absolutely necessary, IMHO:
Attack x2
Down (to stop attacking)
Defend/Guard (to defend a specific person or thing)
Flank (though a case could be made that hunting animals know this instinctively. Wolves will always flank opponents, for instance.)
Come/Heel (if a situation becomes too hairy)
Stay (if you don't want him to run away)
If you're a class with an animal companion, you get a bonus trick and have all of these at your disposal.
Animal companions are pretty limited in what they can do, but if you think them out carefully, it won't be a problem, I think.
"Can't have it move into flanking" is a bit of a flawed statement. The animal companion needs the feat to be told to move specifically into a flanking position, but if told to attack a specific creature and the closest spot it can reach without any sort problem is a spot that would allow for flanking, it's not going to not move to that spot.
But yes, the additional animal companion tricks do technically mean there are lots of things animal companions shouldn't be allowed to do.
The extra int adds three tricks
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd argue for "a PC should have complete control on the movements of his creature" argument because it's part of a class feature. Period. If the PC is trying to control extra elephants he just bought at the market with extra cash, then I'd get picky. Otherwise the only thing a GM should do is ask for Handle Animal check as free or move action (depending if it's considered standard trick or pushing).
Also, there's the thing about animals flanking other animals in nature (wolves, lions, etc.) so there...
Other than that, the Int 2 / Animal Companion is a can of worm that's best ignored until the day you go fishing (i.e. let the DM overrule you if he feels like it, otherwise move your little ponies minis the same as your little PCs minis...)
I'd argue for "a PC should have complete control on the movements of his creature" argument because it's part of a class feature. Period. If the PC is trying to control extra elephants he just bought at the market with extra cash, then I'd get picky. Otherwise the only thing a GM should do is ask for Handle Animal check as free or move action (depending if it's considered standard trick or pushing).
Also, there's the thing about animals flanking other animals in nature (wolves, lions, etc.) so there...
Other than that, the Int 2 / Animal Companion is a can of worm that's best ignored until the day you go fishing (i.e. let the DM overrule you if he feels like it, otherwise move your little ponies minis the same as your little PCs minis...)
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.
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.
**
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd argue for "a PC should have complete control on the movements of his creature" argument because it's part of a class feature. Period.
My Cleric's deity is also part of a class feature, but my mean GM says I don't get full control over Pharasma's actions...
The animal can take passive advantage of beneficial circumstances without the tricks, such as benefiting from Flanking bonuses when they occur naturally (no other position for the animal to attack from except one that includes flanking, or a PC moves into flanking position with the animal, as examples).
For the animal companion to create those conditions, that's when the trick is required. The Flank trick teaches the animal to enter, and to try to remain in, a flanking position with the master or an ally. That's a more active role than simply benefiting from conditions others create.
As for AoOs, the wording in the Flank trick is unclear. "It always takes attacks of opportunity." can be read as "it does not ignore any provoked attack of opportunity" (remember, when an AoO is provoked, a creature can usually choose whether or not act on it -- perhaps waiting for a better case). So it may not mean "cannot take AoOs without this trick", but as it says, "will always take AoOs".
Finally, for maneuvers, some of them are part of the animal's attacks (dogs and wolves gain a free Trip attack on successful Bite attacks, for example). These would not require teaching the animal a trick to use.. but if you want the animal to use others (like Bull Rush, Dirty Trick, Drag, Reposition, Disarm, or Sunder), then it needs to be taught to do that.
The tricks limit what the PC can order the animal to do. The list is not exhaustive, and additional tricks can be created for additional behaviors.
Ultimate Campaign includes a sidebar on the topic of intelligent animals.. animal companions with their intelligence raised to be 3 or higher.. which opens the possibility for more independent action by them (with an example given).
There is 8-page section on companions, including animal companions as well as others, that discusses issues of control. In the end, they are NPCs under the GM's control, though they can be guided with the Animal Handling skill.
It is also worth noting that the Move Action requirement does not apply to animal companions unless you are "pushing" the animal... Druids, and any class whose Animal Companion is based on the Druid progression, gain the "Link" feature for their companions at 1st level, allowing them to control their companion as a free action or to push it as a move action.
This is not a new thing, really. Most of the tricks mentioned are defined in the Core Rulebook under the Handle Animal skill, along with the "General Purpose" training (essentially a bundle of Tricks to serve a specific purpose). What the Animal Archive did was to make clear that things like active Flanking are not considered part of normal behavior for the animals, and must be learned as tricks.
Some people disagree, and cite the pack tactics used by wolves as an example of natural use of flanking. For game purposes, though, the rule is you need the trick to do the behavior in the trick.
There was also a Blog post March 11, 2013, that reviewed this in the PFS context.
EDIT: Aaaand ninja'd serveral times over. I need to write shorter posts and do less lookup while writing them.
An animal companion is a limited creature , i have no issues with the players telling it what to do in combat assuming the AC has the tricks , even moving the AC isnt an issue.
But it is an animal , it could have INT 9999 it would still act and think like an animal , which means from an RP point of view , your dog is a dog , if you want a smart companion that can solve things get a eidolon/familiar/phantom.
I'm surprised that any experienced player isn't already aware of this, it largely hasn't changed since 3.0.....Animal Companions have always been NPCs and always needed handling and tricks to function...
I have to wonder what rules you were using that made these such a surprise....
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As long as my players don't ask to do anything ridiculous, I basically let them control the companions as they see fit. I think that following the strict RAW is time consuming, confusing, and frustrating.
I suppose I got confused when Paizo developers openly stated something to the effect of "" <-- Paraphrasing from memory.
I just kind of figured that logic would apply to all companions; else why complicate the game with inconsistent logic in the rules?
What it comes down to is the GM just okays what the player does. Player has companion move around the enemy to flank him? ask for flank trick. Just move next to an human and attacks, just give the nod that it's okay and move on.
I don't know about that developer comment, but cohorts are indeed NPCs as well. How much control a player has in creation is debatable, and certainly the GM is, and should be, the final arbiter of an NPCs actions.
NPCs that are connected to a character, such as cohorts, animal companions and familiar generally are controlled by the player of the character. I think most GMs do it this way, I certainly do, and as long as the player doesn't try to abuse it, that works out just fine. Similarly, with animal companions as long as they have a decent handle animal skill and they have the tricks, I certainly don't make them roll every time they tell an animal to do something, but if a character didn't have any points in the skill at all that would change things.
|
I check at the beginning of the scenario to see that they have enough to auto tap the handle animal roll, then I generally let them handle it if they do. (If not, they roll every time in combat.) If they do something odd, I call them on it. "Hey that's cool. Does your animal have the flank trick? Oh, no? Hmm, probably wouldn't know to do that then. The animal went here, provoked from this person, and is now attacking. Does a 22 hit? No? Ok, roll the attack for fluffy there!"
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The "always takes attacks of opportunities" bit in the flank trick I always read as "will not avoid provoking attacks of opportunity when moving to flank".
/aside
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd argue for "a PC should have complete control on the movements of his creature" argument because it's part of a class feature. Period. If the PC is trying to control extra elephants he just bought at the market with extra cash, then I'd get picky. Otherwise the only thing a GM should do is ask for Handle Animal check as free or move action (depending if it's considered standard trick or pushing).
Also, there's the thing about animals flanking other animals in nature (wolves, lions, etc.) so there...
Other than that, the Int 2 / Animal Companion is a can of worm that's best ignored until the day you go fishing (i.e. let the DM overrule you if he feels like it, otherwise move your little ponies minis the same as your little PCs minis...)
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.
and that sounds completely practical and something a GM would totally love to waste time doing
|
|
I do exactly that. I let the player roll the attack and damage dice, and I let the player move the token, but only if they're doing it appropriately, and if they aren't, I take over.
It's not hard. It doesn't take extra time. Heck, it takes less time, because on that initiative, you don't have someone deciding what to do. They've already decided. Attack, heel, come, stay...the hard part is done. Now off to the races.
|
|
I'd argue for "a PC should have complete control on the movements of his creature" argument because it's part of a class feature. Period.My Cleric's deity is also part of a class feature, but my mean GM says I don't get full control over Pharasma's actions...
I detect some kind of sarcasm. However if you have a 'Deity Companion' class feature I reckon your stats are now irrelevant as your GM has already allowed you *some* control over Pharasma's actions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah... Animal Companion rules (specially what tricks are required to do what) are completely awful and almost completely neuter the class feature is used as per RAW.
Best advice? Ignore them completely and just let the player control the animals action's however they see fit. Unless you're a pissy control-freak GM, it shouldn't bother you at all.
The "always takes attacks of opportunities" bit in the flank trick I always read as "will not avoid provoking attacks of opportunity when moving to flank".
/aside
I have read it that way in the past, myself.
The fact that it can be read in more than one way (we have 3 mentioned in this thread) supports my statement that it is ambiguous. :)
Yeah, whenever I GMed I just let my players run their companions however they wanted, so long as they weren't trying to do anything completely nuts.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
AC should be handled by players as long as it's reasonable.
You can't give an animal complex actions, nor it can function without the proper tricks.
Giving freedom to manage AC give rooms for Wizard to manage their own Summon with specific tactics.
The game really doesn't have tactics available that are too complex for animals to reasonably use. getting a player to use the game mechanics can be a little complicated, but animals know how to flank, wait and delay.
I've seen a flock of 6 ravens simultaneously land around a wolf. The one in back picked up the wolfs tail , the two in front stole his lunch, and they all flew off to share it.
In pathfinder terms, they synced initiative, moved in. The one in front readied a steal maneuver for the one in back to lift the wolfs tail. the two in front aided the steal maneuver, the two in back aided ac as the tail lifted beat a hasty retreat.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would gladly wave away the tricks rules in most circumstances: in my opinion they serve to only prevent characters from getting their tiger to solve a rubix cube, or to give players recourse to throw RAW at overly restrictive GMs who think your Lassy should be a Doge.
Anything else is too time consuming, and gets in the way of playing the game :)
An animal companion with the right tricks pretty much does what the player wants anyway.
Even a dwarf with a 5 charisma only needs a 3 to hit the dc 10 for a few levels
1 rank +3 trained -3 charisma +4 Link +2 training harness = +7
You can also take a few seconds in the morning to set the animal to defend the party meat shield and when they walk into danger the critter follows them.
|
I suppose I got confused when Paizo developers openly stated something to the effect of "" <-- Paraphrasing from memory.
I just kind of figured that logic would apply to all companions; else why complicate the game with inconsistent logic in the rules?
I think that your memory is at fault. Can you find that text?
I recall comments about the creation of a cohort being a collaborative endeavor between the player and the GM, with the GM being the final arbiter about the NPC creation.
You want a item crafting cohort? You should get one. But he will not have 7 str, 7 dex 7 cos so that he get int 20 cha 18 at first level.
Don't forget the penalty if the animal is injured.An animal companion with the right tricks pretty much does what the player wants anyway.
Even a dwarf with a 5 charisma only needs a 3 to hit the dc 10 for a few levels
1 rank +3 trained -3 charisma +4 Link +2 training harness = +7
You can also take a few seconds in the morning to set the animal to defend the party meat shield and when they walk into danger the critter follows them.
Its usually in combat by that point, but it might matter for flank.
The tricks (and bonus tricks) are listed as part of the class feature because they need to be used.
You get everything you need pretty early.
Guard can replace Stay.
Heel replaces Come.
As long as you are rolling on a 12, anything it is trained to do (tricks) is an auto success even when wounded as long as you are rolling on an 11.
Considering most classes that have AC get a +4 to this, and treat Handle Animal as a class skill, it is NOT that hard to be rolling on an 11.
Even without a CHA bonus, you put ONE rank in and are already rolling on an 8.
Grab something like a training harness or whip and you get even more bonuses.
As for behaviour... with the Flank trick, I usually have my cat use it's movement to try to avoid AoO while positioning itself, but have also giving it max ranks in Acrobatics just in case...
My GM will sometimes state that when fighting groups of tightly clustered opponents, the cat may 'misunderstand' the attack command and target someone close/next to who I point at, and that is the highest level of control he exerts over the cat.
Hasn't been a huge issue so far, if it becomes one I will tell him that he didn't clarify this before I took the class, and would like to change characters (he has already said okay, in fact).
Animal companions can be VERY powerful, I'm playing a level 5 hunter with the Huntmaster: Human feat, and Eye for Talent... My cat has a STR score of 22 at this point if I recall (character sheet unavailable), so has a +6 to hit/damage/trip.
Combined with Outflank and Precise Strike teamwork feats (shared with cat because... Hunter) we tend to totally dominate melee.
Animal companions can be VERY powerful, but do require a small investment of skills/extra gear to work properly.
Worth noting, we have animal companions act at the same initiative as their masters in our games... so that might skew my view of things a bit...
I usually run forward to provide a flanking position and attempt an attack, then the cat comes forward and takes advantage of Outflank/Precise Strike.
|
|
An animal companion with the right tricks pretty much does what the player wants anyway.
Exactly right. A Ranger or Druid with a few levels and an above average statistic usually has a good enough Handle Animal for his/her animal companion that any trained tricks will automatically be successful. It's the untrained tricks that the PC may or may not be successful at. The key thing is to choose the tricks that fit your need or concept.
As the GM, I love many aspects of the Animal Archive, especially the part that states that players do not have unilateral control of their animal companion. This is essence of how I would run animal companions in my home game, but it was really nice to see some guidelines.
One of the nice side effects that came out of this is that players were more accepting when I would GM the animal companion as an pseudo-NPC, in and out of combat. From that, I was able to inject some unexpected personality into the animal making the animal more realistic, interesting, and good for the story.
I have found that a player controlled animal companion ends up being little more than a tool. A GM-influenced animal companion usually is more of a character in the story.
The one adjustment I did add was that many animals do have tendencies. For instance, wolves and dogs tend to flank, boars tend to charge, cats tend to hide and stalk, etc. While I would be the one who would 'control' those tendencies, the players usually adapted easily enough.
If you don't enforce tricks and the player can play the AC as he wants, there is no reason to max Handle Animal or even waste items on it.
Having to invest 1/4 of your skill points as a Druid hurts.
I think people forget that animals are animal, no matter their intelligence.
Even with 5 INT they don't become something else, they're still animals, therefore subject to the same rules.
|
|
I neeeeeeeed conntroooooooool!!!!!
(beyond Handle Animal check, you've come to help them... with their problems... so they can be free... :P)
A Ranger or Druid with a few levels and an above average statistic usually has a good enough Handle Animal for his/her animal companion that any trained tricks will automatically be successful.
Many Rangers and Druids probably want to dump their Cha down to 7.
You can make Handle Animal int based with clever wordplay if you wanted to dump CHA.
Oh good. Now I can use handle animal with my druid's oh-so-important intelligence stat.
:P
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can make Handle Animal int based with clever wordplay if you wanted to dump CHA.Oh good. Now I can use handle animal with my druid's oh-so-important intelligence stat.
:P
If you want to dump intelligence and charisma, it is your choice. But it is a bit absurd to lament the consequences.
|
|
A Ranger or Druid with a few levels and an above average statistic usually has a good enough Handle Animal for his/her animal companion that any trained tricks will automatically be successful.Many Rangers and Druids probably want to dump their Cha down to 7.
If you don't want to be as effective at controlling your AC, dump away. It is your choice.
|
If you don't want to be as effective at controlling your AC, dump away. It is your choice.A Ranger or Druid with a few levels and an above average statistic usually has a good enough Handle Animal for his/her animal companion that any trained tricks will automatically be successful.Many Rangers and Druids probably want to dump their Cha down to 7.
Between the item that lets you use handle animal better, the bonus you get for handling your own companion and a skill point in, you can reach 8 at 1st, even with a dumped CHA.
9 is all you need, if you are not going to push, as you can't fail.-2 CHA, +4 Link, +2 Training Harness, +3 class skill, +1 skill point.
Add a +1 trait, and you hit the magic number 9.
With an Int 2 creature, you have enough tricks to fulfill any one role at least at level 1. An Int 1 does suffer a bit, but you can still fulfill the basics.
Also, it is up to the GM whether they control your companion... but luckily most do not want the responsibility.
If you don't want to be as effective at controlling your AC, dump away. It is your choice.A Ranger or Druid with a few levels and an above average statistic usually has a good enough Handle Animal for his/her animal companion that any trained tricks will automatically be successful.Many Rangers and Druids probably want to dump their Cha down to 7.
Its only a minor inconvinience for a few levsls. Defend is the critter doing 90% of its job to start with, then you're 90% likely to make the check even as a dwarf with a dumped cha at first level
As long as you can take 10 to teach it new tricks, you only need +10 total modifier, then you're good to go
Honestly... Unless the player is trying to make his wolf build a motorcycle or something, what's the big deal? AC are already quite well-balanced by their poor saves and extra weapon/armor expenses.
If you don't want it done with summons (understandable, though I must point out that animal are often pretty weak summoning critters anyway), just say it's only possible for Animal Companions because they share a deep, mystical bond with the PC.