|
Everyone, please stop saying "Caster Level". No part of the familiar system or Improved Familiar uses "Caster Level". Class levels are all that matter. Effective wizard levels for familiars and "Arcane Spellcaster Levels" for improved familiar.
There is a very important distinction despite the poor nomenclature.
"Caster Level" often comes with spellcaster class levels but it is not a class level.
"Arcane Spellcaster Level" is a phrase that appears nowhere else in the rules and has no definition. It's also part of the D&D SRD, not written by Paizo.
Choose one:
(Arcane) (Spellcaster Level)
(Arcane Spellcaster) (Level)
(Arcane Spell)(caster level)
The first two seem to be the same, and the third isn't supported as an option for improved familiars.
Maybe Paizo is concerned that no matter what choice they make on how to rules this a bunch of existing PCs will suddenly become disenfranchised. I mean, in some games there are PCs with Eldritch Heritage (Arcane) using their "effective sorcerer level" to take Improved Familiar while in other games there are PCs with a single level in a class which grants a familiar qualifying via a bunch of levels in some other arcane caster class.
Changing the arcane spellcaster level requirement to a character level requirement would grandfather in existing PCs but might outrage people who think Improved Familiars are too powerful (though I'd expect that there should be less concern over that now that familiar archetypes offer some interesting "unimproved" options)
In most cases, use your level as your effective wizard level when determining the abilities of your familiar/spririt animal etc.
A wizard is an arcane spellcaster...
So no problem for me! ^^
But that effective wizard level does nothing for meeting feat pre-reqs. And feat pre-reqs aren't abilities of your familiar.
Thus there is no problem, but you don't qualify for imp. familiar.
But that effective wizard level does nothing for meeting feat pre-reqs. And feat pre-reqs aren't abilities of your familiar.
Thus there is no problem, but you don't qualify for imp. familiar.
The level limit isn't really a prerequisite. At least it's not like any other prerequisite in the game. For instance, you could take the feat at level 3 to get a celestial hawk, and then dismiss the hawk at level 7 to pick up a Cassisian Angel.
In theory, the devs could add an improved familiar that had even lower level prerequisites.
But that effective wizard level does nothing for meeting feat pre-reqs. And feat pre-reqs aren't abilities of your familiar.
Thus there is no problem, but you don't qualify for imp. familiar.The level limit isn't really a prerequisite. At least it's not like any other prerequisite in the game. For instance, you could take the feat at level 3 to get a celestial hawk, and then dismiss the hawk at level 7 to pick up a Cassisian Angel.
In theory, the devs could add an improved familiar that had even lower level prerequisites.
Yes you qualify for the feat, you just can't choose any familiar with it. It's not like being pedantic does anything for a conversation. It's already been established that this is so, I'm using shorthand speech, sure I'll clarify when someone like you wants to bring it up, but it should be obvious to most what is being discussed.
Being overly pedantic is how you give yourself enough wiggle room to do what you want to do without it being a houserule.
Sufficiently high Level is a singular number no matter how many different spells you can cast. So Eldritch Heritage (Arcane) nets you the ability to gain a familiar, and a caster level. Possibly not "arcane", but given the feat's tittle, I think it can be argued RAI it is arcane also.Eldritch Heritage(Arcane) does not grant you a caster level:
OK. Mis-remembered. I expect there are some feats out there that do give you a caster level.
Since there are a number of racial SLAs, getting a caster level by race = HD is pretty easy. Add Eldritch Heritage (Arcane) (as one way to get a familiar), and away you go for Improved Familiar.
/cevah
Look, I think we can all agree that "Effective Wizard Level" is what it should be. What the actual rules are, nobody knows. And as things stand, we will never get an official clarification, because the feat is part of the D&D SRD, not Paizo property.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Look, I think we can all agree that "Effective Wizard Level" is what it should be. What the actual rules are, nobody knows. And as things stand, we will never get an official clarification, because the feat is part of the D&D SRD, not Paizo property.
(1) We don't all agree that "Effective Wizard Level" is what it should be.
(2) I don't believe that there is any legal reason that they couldn't clarify the meaning.|
|
Look, I think we can all agree that "Effective Wizard Level" is what it should be. What the actual rules are, nobody knows. And as things stand, we will never get an official clarification, because the feat is part of the D&D SRD, not Paizo property.(1) We don't all agree that "Effective Wizard Level" is what it should be.
(2) I don't believe that there is any legal reason that they couldn't clarify the meaning.
We may not all agree that it should be "effective wizard level" but I think we could all agree that it would be a fair and simple way to go that fully supports multi-classing and familiars. The only negative part that I can see that some may not like is that it allows improved familiars with non-spellcasting classes. This I do not have a problem with, though. But even that can be solved by saying the levels only count if they are from a spellcasting class.
Correct. They could absolutely change it to be whatever they want. They could clarify it at any time. They just... haven't. And I think partly that is because they are more or less "done" with the CRB.
I still think they should replace it with character level, but I guess if they clarified it as effective Wizard level at least you could take Boon Companion if needed. At that cost other feat based options which are available now might be better though.
That wasp familiar feat just needs some clarifications about what it does and doesn't do. I wish there were versions for other deities. Shelyn should have a songbird for example.
It's relevant in that the most likely way this will get resolved is with other feats that do a similar thing in a different way. This is such an old question and would be very easy to answer. By a certain time, you begin to feel that the silence is itself an answer of "No FAQ needed".
I think "No FAQ needed" might be a poor response here since different people would likely interpret it in different ways (caster level -vs- effective wizard level). I suppose that leaving it vague could be a way to let both methods work, but it also seems likely to create table variation and make players a little uncertain about whether Improved Familiar is right for their PCs.
Their silence doesn't mean "No FAQ needed" they have a huge list of FAQs, and this time of year there are many missed weeks.
Jason has a birthday
Jason out sick
Pathcon
Pathcon prep?
Someone out of office for a con
Like over the last 2 months we've had just a few FAQs because it's hard to get everyone in the office at the same time to confirm a FAQ.
And we have a Gauntlet FAQ that should be coming soon, The bardic masterpieces has a lot of FAQs and still not answered, and I think there was another one or two that had more FAQ requests than this one.
|
I want to point out a few things:
==================== ONE ====================
Prerequisites: Ability to acquire a new familiar, compatible alignment, sufficiently high level (see below).
Let's break it down. The three requisites are:
1. the ability to acquire a new familiar (not in dispute)2. a "compatible alignment" [whatever that means]
3. a "sufficiently high level (see below)" [whatever that means]
It is clear that you need to read the later text to figure out the second and third requirements. So let's look at the next line.
==================== TWO ====================
Benefit: When choosing a familiar, the creatures listed here are also available to you. You may choose a familiar with an alignment up to one step away on each alignment axis (lawful through chaotic, good through evil).
Observations:
1. The benefit says that the creatures listed here are also available to you. This means that taking this feat does not remove the base familiar options, but it adds new options to the list of familiars.2. But the new options appear in a list with alignment and level requirements, and this is the important part: ONLY HERE are the words "Arcane Spellcaster Level" used. It is apparent that for the options on this list, "sufficiently high level (see below)" is defined by the number under the heading "Arcane Spellcaster Level".
This means three things:
1. Because of the word 'also", when you take this feat, your list of familiars includes all the normal familiars, as well as the new familiars in the list in the CRB. Effectively there are two lists of familiars for you to choose from when you take the improved familair feat. Since the list of normal familiars have no alignment or level requirements, the second and third requirements for the Improved Familiar feat effectively mean 'any alignment' and 'any level' with regards to those options. But they remain valid options.
2. BUT if you choose a familiar from the newly added list, "compatible alignment" means an alignment within one step on each axis from the familiar's alignment, and "sufficiently high level (see below)" means "Arcane Spellcaster Level" of the listed number.
3. If a later source grants new options to characters with improved familiar feat, it can certainly follow the format of the table in the CRB. But it can also define "compatible alignment" and "sufficiently high level (see below)" in a different way. Effectively, it can add a "benefit" to the feat that follows the existing framework of the feat, or it can add a new benefit under a new framework that still provides a definition for the requirements "compatible alignment" and "sufficiently high level (see below)". Remember, specific trumps general.
The question is: has this list been expanded with options that define those requirements differently? This leads me to the third thing I want to point out.
==================== THREE ====================
Starting from Bestiary 2, we started to see lines like these in monster entries (I'll just give the first three as examples):
A paracletus can be chosen as a familiar by a 7th-level neutral spellcaster who meets the prerequisites and has the Improved Familiar feat.A 7th-level lawful good spellcaster with the Improved Familiar feat can select a cassisian as a familiar.
A chaotic good 7th-level spellcaster can gain a lyrakien as a familiar if she has the Improved Familiar feat.
We established that the "compatible alignment" and "sufficiently high level (see below)" requirements of the Improved Familiar depend on the familiar chosen. These new additions present new options, but they are different from the previous list of options in TWO ways. Firstly, they define "compatible alignment" more strictly - instead of defining it as within one step on each axis of the creature's alignment, they define it as a specific alignment. Secondly, they define "sufficiently high level (see below)" more BROADLY as "xth level spellcaster".
Ergo, under a strict logical reading, when deciding whether you meet the "compatible alignment" and "sufficiently high level (see below)", you need to look at what the familiar choice requirements. The CRB list covers the choices in the core Bestiary, and a specific set of requirements apply to the options in that list. However subsequent sources have added new options that do not follow the structure of the list in the CRB, and instead have their own requirements for BOTH "compatible alignment" AND "sufficiently high level (see below)", and BOTH of those components differ from the list in the CRB - if you want to argue that "spellcaster" really means "arcane spellcaster" for those options, the same logic will require you to argue that "chaotic good" really means "chaotic good, chaotic neutral, neutral good or neutral". Or you can accept these new examples do not follow the rules of the table in the CRB.
==================== CONCLUSION ====================
For the "sufficiently high level (see below)" requirement, if the familiar option says "arcane caster" or is listed in a list that states "arcane spellcaster level", you need levels in an arcane spellcaster class. If it says "spellcaster", then enough levels in any spellcasting class will suffice. If, hypothetically, there is an option that says "xth level character" or something similar, then only character levels (as opposed to spellcasting levels) are required. The same reasoning applies for the "appropriate alignment" requirement.
At the very least these points should be uncontroverisal without need for FAQ.
|
|
Actually, if you read the other thread, some people did not already know that. They were arguing that you always need arcane spellcaster levels for all improved familiars. My post explained why that is definitely not true.
To answer the question in the thread title, at the very least, any spellcaster with a familiar (including divine and psychic casters) will have some options for improved familairs, just not the ones in the CRB list. Most of the options from Beastiary 2 onwards are however available.
And if someone can find a creature which gives a criteria for "sufficiently high level (see below)" for the improved familiar feat and that criteria does not refer to spellcasting, then non-spellcasting classes can take that option, including an eldritch guardian or vanilla fighter with the familiar bond feat. The question is whether or not such options exist. I have not seen one yet, but they might exist now or in the future.
|
|
As for the CRB list, the quote by JJ linked earlier in the thread already answered that:
I'm not sure it NEEDS a definition... but if it does, it's precisely what it says it is. A level in any class that grants arcane spellcasting. You don't need a caster level in the class (although I'm not sure off the top of my head of any arcane classes that don't grant caster levels).James,
The Improved Familiar ability has a requirement of 'Arcane Spellcaster level'. However, to my knowledge that term is not defined. It could be interpreted as 'Caster Level' or it could be interpreted as 'Arcane Class level'. Which is it? Is it something else altogether?
Thanks as usual.
- Gauss
Emphasis mine.
|
|
Their silence doesn't mean "No FAQ needed" they have a huge list of FAQs, and this time of year there are many missed weeks.
Jason has a birthday
Jason out sick
Pathcon
Pathcon prep?
Someone out of office for a conLike over the last 2 months we've had just a few FAQs because it's hard to get everyone in the office at the same time to confirm a FAQ.
And we have a Gauntlet FAQ that should be coming soon, The bardic masterpieces has a lot of FAQs and still not answered, and I think there was another one or two that had more FAQ requests than this one.
This was so silly that I almost didn't reply... but then I realized you might actually be serious. So, let me lay it straight... the issue here is one that has been an issue for nearly the length of Pathfinders existence. This isn't new. It has just has become exasperated 'lately', as in during the last few years. Silence after that long of a time, with the question being posed many times to many developers... well, you may begin to see the point being made?
If the silence was from just a year... I get your point. Maybe even two, for a small issue. But this is beyond a "they're busy" excuse.
Then again this is not the only issue to receive this treatment. Mounted combat is another famous example, but not the only one. Though, mounted combat actually has received some answers. While this issue has only received "there is no issue" answers.
awesome!!! I'm glad this works now. Time to reexamine some of builds now that this works.
A little surprised they denied improved tumors, but not heartbroken about it.
Well I was never in doubt about these classes QUALIFYING for the Feat
(I too would have ruled on side of Tumor Familiar, IMHO that's clearly Stealth Errata)
But the FAQ still leaves remaining issues about implementation, i.e. what it does once you have it.
Shamans are the #1 problem (ironically, because they are the case superficially mentioned as 'working'), because they explicitly say you cannot choose another type (later, after your initial selection). Improved Familiar Feat does not GIVE you a choice, it expands an existing choice to have more options.
There is some other single-type Familiar Classes/Options whose wording is problematic from a different angle, e.g. Pirate Bard and Cleric Domain Familiars. While these don't have explicit prohibition of changing types later, they don't have ANY choice built in at all so by the functioning of these Familiar abilities there isn't every "choice" moment for Improved Familiar to expand the options for.
Obviously you can see that all these cases depend on the wording of each specific case, not Improved Familiar itself. But if Paizo wanted to clarify how Improved Familiar is usable by all potential Familiar classes, they kind of need to address those cases.
Beyond the selection of new familiar type issue, the FAQ's own paradigm of "archetype overlap" (as criteria for ruling Improved Familiar isn't compatable for a specific variant Familiar ability) is seemingly triggered by Shaman Spirit Animal's messing around with creature type (and rules language specific to ANIMAL spirit animal-cum-Familiars).
With regards to shaman, there is the argument that a celestial cat is still a cat.
Well, sure, but I think those issues deserve explicit answers, not leaving them to speculation... If Shamans or anybody else are only supposed to be able to use a sub-set of Improved Familiar, that should be made clear.
Besides "limited upgrade to template" reading (cat->celestial cat), if we assume full access to Improved list there is also issues of exactly how the Spirit Animal "may never change" rule is "suppressed" by Improved Familiar: Is it a "one time" suppression, i.e. when you take the Feat you can use it "fully", but then are fully subject to "may never change" rule? Or is the "never change" rule permanently suppressed? If Improved Familiar is somehow suppressing the "never change" rule, can you now choose new NON-"Improved" Familiars from the base list as well?
As I mentioned following PDT post, the seemingly minorly problematic "animal"-specific wording within Spirit Animal as well as it's apparent modification of "type" classifications to "Outsider" seem well within the realm of triggering the FAQ's own "archetype stacking" paradigm, where they explicitly say that anything that would mess with the creature type should be excluded. To be honest, the entire "full choice" vs "sub-set of choices" (e.g. Celestial Cat) vs. "no choice" matrix of possibilities seems exactly like two sets of modifications are being merged, exactly contrary to the "archetype modification" paradigm, whereby you are not allowed to combine two rules options if they modify the same area.
And if a celestial cat is still a cat... Can my (Half-Dragon) Human Sorceror take one at level 1 without a Feat? :-)
Quandary, I have similar questions about the Shaman. I posted them over on Mark's thread. Hopefully one of us will get some clarification on this.
Thank you, thank you, thank you for the Improved Familiar FAQ!!!
I was pleasantly surprised that a Shaman can use this feat considering this part of the Spirit Animal description.
If a spirit animal is lost or dies, it can be replaced after 24 hours through a special ritual that consumes material components worth 500 gp per shaman level. The ritual takes 8 hours to complete. The new spirit animal must be the same kind of creature as the previous one.So I'm wondering how these rules interact.
(1) At 1st level a Shaman selects a Cat Spirit Familiar.
(2) At 2nd level the Cat is killed. The Shaman replaces his Familiar with another Cat, because that is his only allowed choice. It must be the same kind as the one that was killed.
(3) At 3rd level the Shaman takes the Improved Familiar feat, dismisses the second Cat and selects a Celestial Hawk. Is this possible because the feat overrides the restriction from the Spirit Animal restriction or because dismissing the Cat isn't the same as the Cat being lost or killed?
(4) If the Celestial Hawk was killed at 5th level, would the 'same kind' rule kick in and require that he select another Celestial Hawk or would he be able to choose an a Elemental instead?
(5) At 5th level, if the Celestial Hawk wasn't killed, would he be able to voluntarily replace it with an Elemental the way that he replaced the Cat with the Celestial Hawk?
Btw, a Celestial Cat is not a Cat. They're two distinct creatures, I'm afraid.
That's been my opinion as well.
Btw, a Celestial Cat is not a Cat. They're two distinct creatures, I'm afraid.That's been my opinion as well.
But "kind" is a very vague term, that doesn't seem to have any in game definition. To take it further, the cat and the hawk could be considered the same kind of creature, because they both have the animal type.
I'm glad to see Improved Familiar has been clarified and even more glad that my girlfriend's PC who would no longer have qualified to have a faerie dragon after the FAQ was in a campaign which finished up a while back.