Petition: Ban "Channel the Gift"


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 126 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Scarab Sages

Is no one going to touch base on the fact that this is a Deity specific spell?

Channel the gift is only available to followers of Nethys. So only followers of Nethys can consider this spell on their spell list, making most spell casters subject to Use magic device checks in order to use a wand of this spell. And even there, emulating a deity is not an option for UMD checks, so the wand is only usable by actual followers of Nethys without GM intervention.

Liberty's Edge ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Seattle aka The Great Rinaldo!

Inner Sea Gods, page 228 wrote:
Many of the spells in this chapter originated with the faithful of a particular deity and are more common among the worshipers of that god. Such spells are denoted with the god’s name in parentheses after the spell’s name. Worshipers of a spell’s associated deity always treat the spell as common, and need not research it in order to prepare or learn it. Despite this, all the spells in this chapter are available to members of other faiths, though some temples or religious organizations may proscribe the use of specific spells. Additionally, arcane spellcasters have unlocked the secrets of casting particular spells.

(emphasis mine)

Anyone can use it.

Shadow Lodge ****

Inner Sea Gods wrote:


Many of the spells in this chapter originated with the faithful of a particular deity and are more common among the worshipers of that god. Such spells are denoted with the god’s name in parentheses after the spell’s name.
Worshipers of a spell’s associated deity always treat the spell as common, and need not research it in order to prepare or learn it. Despite this, all the spells in this chapter are available to members of other faiths, though some temples or religious organizations may proscribe the use of specific spells. Additionally, arcane spellcasters have unlocked the secrets of casting particular spells.
Additional Resources wrote:

Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Inner Sea Gods

Equipment: all equipment and magic items on pages 250–271 are legal except demon mother's mask, father's forgehammer, gray gambler's hat, preklikin's book of cults and stagger-proof boots; Feats: all feats on pages 204–217 are legal except Dreamed Secrets; Gods: all of the gods listed in the appendix are legal choices except daemon harbingers, great old ones, infernal dukes, malebranche, nascent demon lords, orc deities, outer gods, qlippoth lords, and whore queens. A PC may worship a dead deity, but such gods grant no spells or other benefits; Misc.: all material in chapter 1 and 2 is legal except pages 92–99; Prestige Classes: the evangelist, exalted, and sentinel prestige classes are legal for play. The evangelist prestige class may not be taken as an option until 6th level. The sentinel's righteous leader class feature is replaced with a deity specific feat of the player's choice from pages 204–217 or the Persuasive feat; Spells: all spells on pages 228–245 are legal except ghoul hunger, spawn calling, and transplant visage. All variant spellcasting on pages 19–171 are legal except page 99; Subdomains: all subdomains on pages 224–227 are legal except arson; Traits: all traits on pages 218–223 are legal.

Scarab Sages **

andreww wrote:
Joe the Devout wrote:

This is tangential, but if you insist familiars use miniatures it really helps out with balance. Suddenly everyone remembers that the familiar also got hit with cone of cold, black tentacles and attacks of opportunities.

I've used Breath of Life on my familiar twice and had it die once more.

My general rule is that if your familiar is out, active and doing stuff then it needs to roll initiative and it is a valid target for stuff. If it is just passively providing its familiar bonus then I largely ignore it.

If you want the full benefit then you need to take the risk. Mostly it is fine, occasionally a riddywhipple gets chain lightnined to death by a Marut.

The worst part is getting hit with an ability that banishes outsiders. My wizard has had his azata familiar banished several times, though not by the banish spell. But other than that particular weakness, I've found a familiar is often tougher to kill than the wizard master. Having improved evasion helps their survival, many have DR and some have constant or at will spells/abilities that increase survival. Such as invisibility and freedom of movement.

Not to mention they can have buff spells put on them as well.

Shadow Lodge ***** ⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East aka thistledown

One of my clerics used this when he first got 3rd level spells and I couldn't come up with any other useful spells for the slot. Gave other casters in the party a bit of a boost. Wasn't that overpowered.

I can see problems if there was a lot of it per day though. So, easy solution - don't ban the spell, but ban it from being put into items like wands / scrolls / etc.

Scarab Sages **

James Anderson wrote:

One of my clerics used this when he first got 3rd level spells and I couldn't come up with any other useful spells for the slot. Gave other casters in the party a bit of a boost. Wasn't that overpowered.

I can see problems if there was a lot of it per day though. So, easy solution - don't ban the spell, but ban it from being put into items like wands / scrolls / etc.

If this does happen, it would at least be fairly easy to explain the reason given the spells flavor.

*****

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

From a balance perspective I think this would accomplish what needs to be done. But it increases the complexity of the system, which is why I did not suggest it.

Scarab Sages

Tony Lindman wrote:
Inner Sea Gods, page 228 wrote:
Many of the spells in this chapter originated with the faithful of a particular deity and are more common among the worshipers of that god. Such spells are denoted with the god’s name in parentheses after the spell’s name. Worshipers of a spell’s associated deity always treat the spell as common, and need not research it in order to prepare or learn it. Despite this, all the spells in this chapter are available to members of other faiths, though some temples or religious organizations may proscribe the use of specific spells. Additionally, arcane spellcasters have unlocked the secrets of casting particular spells.

(emphasis mine)

Anyone can use it.

My mistake, it was deity specific when first released in Faiths of Balance.

Scarab Sages *****

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:

I have some experience with the spell, several of my hunters use them for buff trading (Channel the Gift for a Heroism usually) and it save me from buying a wand of heroism.

A wand of channel the gift is pretty damn cost effective though, and it allows a character (or a group) to invest money to save on spell slots, which could result in plenty of unused spell slots at the end of the day.

I agree with Andrew though, after seeing too many improved familiars with wands (usually ill omen) and considering that you can get access to an improved familiar without levels in a spellcasting class, I think improved familiars are the problem.

I have to disagree I do not see a problem with improved familiars. I see more of a problem with charging cavalier hitting for 120, a raging barb with 5 attacks getting for 40 or more each hit and of course he only misses on a 2.

We can sit here and argue all day long about what we each personally think needs to be removed or just play the game and have fun.

Silver Crusade *****

andreww wrote:

If you want the full benefit then you need to take the risk. Mostly it is fine, occasionally a riddywhipple gets chain lightnined to death by a Marut.

Or a poor innocent non wand using fox gets viciously slain by a naaaaassssstttyyy GM :-) :-).

Sczarni **** Venture-Lieutenant, Connecticut—Manchester aka Cpt_kirstov

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've seen this mark a familiar for death later in a "the bad guy is watching and prepping for the PCs" scenario. The spellcasters was not happy when his familiar went down before he/it acted.

*****

Paul Jackson wrote:
andreww wrote:

If you want the full benefit then you need to take the risk. Mostly it is fine, occasionally a riddywhipple gets chain lightnined to death by a Marut.

Or a poor innocent non wand using fox gets viciously slain by a naaaaassssstttyyy GM :-) :-).

He was out in front when the ambush happened, totally not my fault.

Grand Lodge

Mahtobedis wrote:

My experience in high level play disagrees. It is not just about the haymakers. It is also a the lower level support spells and bring able to buff your allies. A balance that every prepared caster has to figure out. Unless they have a wand/scrolls of Channel the Gift. Then they just do both at impunity.

That may be an issue with class or playstyle but for my wizard in high level play it has not been a decision for a long time, lower level spells are to buff martials or in some way increase their success chances, higher level spells are for dealing with threats. And when I expect a tough combat I don't use scrolls of channel the gift, I use scrolls of whatever seems appropriate.

The other problem with familiars and wands isn't even unbalanced. I'd much rather have a familiar using his own action to haste, good hope, circle of prot, anything, as opposed to making my action free. High level casters can go all day. Removing this option can not and will not stop that, even if I admit its powerful. It also costs 11250~(?) Gold. You're giving up other items obviously to buy it. Until the game is throwing money at you its not worth buying, and from there you could argue you should be banking for even more powerful items. At its price point it may indeed be powerful, and one of the better items there. Is that a large, game breaking problem? I think not

The Exchange ***** Venture-Agent, Kentucky—Lexington

I'm having real difficulty (from a character optimization perspective) understanding how spending 225 gp per 3rd level spell slot "saved" is in any way considered broken, overpowered, useful, or desirable.

If I saw a PC use this tactic, I'd recommend they stop, because they are burning away their gold reserves for so little gain.

Can someone explain to me how this could ever be considered powerful? 225 gp a spell and an action, when they could simply buy a wand. The difference in caster level is irrelevant, since a Magician Bard can do the same (cast wands using their caster level) so if you ban this spell, you are required to ban Magician Bard archetype and all the other ways to use your CL for wands.

****

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
James Risner wrote:

I'm having real difficulty (from a character optimization perspective) understanding how spending 225 gp per 3rd level spell slot "saved" is in any way considered broken, overpowered, useful, or desirable.

If I saw a PC use this tactic, I'd recommend they stop, because they are burning away their gold reserves for so little gain.

Can someone explain to me how this could ever be considered powerful? 225 gp a spell and an action, when they could simply buy a wand. The difference in caster level is irrelevant, since a Magician Bard can do the same (cast wands using their caster level) so if you ban this spell, you are required to ban Magician Bard archetype and all the other ways to use your CL for wands.

The main thing is that the wand turns into a Wand of [Your Spellbook] with 50 charges. There are plenty of spells that are valuable from 3rd and below where this wand would me immensely helpful. I might even consider using it to tap allies that have buff spells I don't possess that I want.

It's particularly useful with 1 min/lvl buffs, though, from a personal standpoint. At 10th level, I probably won't want to devote a slot to Arcane Sight, but I will absolutely do so if I don't have to expend it "early" in the process. It's also good for scenarios with buff attrition mechanics - i.e. "it takes 2 hours to travel between locations" - that chew through your 10 min/lvl buffs.

Honestly, though, I fear this far less than whatever that wealth would otherwise obtain. It's good for a select few things and pretty bad otherwise. That 11k is likely delaying the upgrade from +4 to +6 on your headband, which is almost universally a bad idea as a caster. That said, though, it's certainly better than any other 3rd level wand in the game and on par with pre-errata Paragon Surge for versatility.

The Exchange ***** Venture-Agent, Kentucky—Lexington

Serisan wrote:
it's certainly better than any other 3rd level wand in the game and on par with pre-errata Paragon Surge for versatility.

Then we shall have to disagree. I believe every time you spend 225 gp to recharge a spell slot you make you mortgage your future power for gain today. It something to be avoided.

Wand of "Your Spellbook" is better as: Mnemonic Vestiment

Silver Crusade *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
andreww wrote:
Paul Jackson wrote:
andreww wrote:

If you want the full benefit then you need to take the risk. Mostly it is fine, occasionally a riddywhipple gets chain lightnined to death by a Marut.

Or a poor innocent non wand using fox gets viciously slain by a naaaaassssstttyyy GM :-) :-).
He was out in front when the ambush happened, totally not my fault.

For those who possibly think I'm being serious in my whinging, I should point out that Andrew was being nice and killed my familiar instead of a PC.

*****

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
James Risner wrote:
Serisan wrote:
it's certainly better than any other 3rd level wand in the game and on par with pre-errata Paragon Surge for versatility.

Then we shall have to disagree. I believe every time you spend 225 gp to recharge a spell slot you make you mortgage your future power for gain today. It something to be avoided.

Wand of "Your Spellbook" is better as: Mnemonic Vestiment

Would you consider it worth 1125 gold to give every single person in your party Barkskin +4 without impacting the availability of other spell slots for other spells?

Would you consider it worthwhile to pay 1125 gold to giver everyone in your party protection from energy?

Would you consider it worthwhile to pay 900 gold to give everyone in your party resistance to all 4 elements via Communal Resist Energy?

Would you consider it worthwhile to be able to throw an intensified empowered Shocking Grasp every turn as a magus without impacting the availability of other spells?

Would you consider it worthwhile to be able to staggerlock a boss with Frigid Touch for an entire combat without hurting your ability to cast other spells?

Would you consider it worthwhile to not have to wonder if you need to prepare 1 or 2 glitterdust, 1 or 2 hast, 1 or 2 delay poison, 1 or 2 unbreakable hearts ect...

I can keep going for a very very long time.

*****

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Paul Jackson wrote:
andreww wrote:
Paul Jackson wrote:
andreww wrote:

If you want the full benefit then you need to take the risk. Mostly it is fine, occasionally a riddywhipple gets chain lightnined to death by a Marut.

Or a poor innocent non wand using fox gets viciously slain by a naaaaassssstttyyy GM :-) :-).
He was out in front when the ambush happened, totally not my fault.
For those who possibly think I'm being serious in my whinging, I should point out that Andrew was being nice and killed my familiar instead of a PC.

If it were a witch I'd rather have the PC die.

*****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew Christian wrote:

Most spellcasters are SAD (single ability dependent) classes, and if optimized can get spell DCs that far outstrip the CR system. This is fine for the most part, if the balancing issues of action economy and diminishing resources is maintained. If you bypass either or both of these balancing factors completely, then the issue with SAD spell DCs becomes exponentially exacerbated by allowing the spam of save or suck spells and abilities that the monster will likely fail, and this is the crux, every single round of every single encounter.

Personal anecdote: had a player of a witch who's slumber hex was a really difficult DC, spam slumber every round, while his familiar used an ill omen wand, and made

** spoiler omitted **

To save to not fall asleep.

The problem isn't a spell that bypasses some of the balancing issues with a wizard, since it does require resources to achieve this mitigation. But rather the familiar that also bypasses the action economy built in to balance the spell.

The issue with Ill Omen on that monster is that it's at caster level 1. With that monster's SR of 24, it's impossible for the wand to have any effect.

It's interesting how you bring up the witch here: Channel the Gift doesn't really affect a witch's ability to spam save-or-suck effects with a DC equivalent to a top-level spell.

Ultimately, it appears that the Pathfinder Design Team, starting with the APG, decided that it was reasonable for classes to have at-will abilities with save DCs of this magnitude (see: witch, alchemist, shaman...). Unfortunately, I think the horse has bolted on this.

The Exchange ***** Venture-Agent, Kentucky—Lexington

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mahtobedis wrote:

1125 gold ... Barkskin +4

1125 gold ... protection from energy?
900 gold 4 elements via Communal Resist Energy?
intensified empowered Shocking Grasp every turn as a magus
staggerlock a boss with Frigid Touch for an entire combat
I can keep going for a very very long time.

Cost is too high.

Cost is too high.
Cost is too high and there is table variance on whether or not you can have 4 active resist energy effects without some of them being deactivated for "same spell different effect" stacking rules.
Pretty much is done already, or close enough that you expect a magus to be able to do similar and if not, they are poorly built.
Requires a to hit, have at it.

I can keep going on for a long time saying it isn't that much of a big deal.

There are literally hundreds of builds that can 1 shot every encounter in a day with little to no resource expended. You going to block all of them with bans?

*****

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
James Risner wrote:
Mahtobedis wrote:

1125 gold ... Barkskin +4

1125 gold ... protection from energy?
900 gold 4 elements via Communal Resist Energy?
intensified empowered Shocking Grasp every turn as a magus
staggerlock a boss with Frigid Touch for an entire combat
I can keep going for a very very long time.

Cost is too high.

Cost is too high.
Cost is too high and there is table variance on whether or not you can have 4 active resist energy effects without some of them being deactivated for "same spell different effect" stacking rules.
Pretty much is done already, or close enough that you expect a magus to be able to do similar and if not, they are poorly built.
Requires a to hit, have at it.

I can keep going on for a long time saying it isn't that much of a big deal.

There are literally hundreds of builds that can 1 shot every encounter in a day with little to no resource expended. You going to block all of them with bans?

Well clearly you and I place a different value on the rest of the party being very difficult to kill.

Also for frigid touch it needs to hit touch AC. That is very easy to pull off so I guess I will have at it.

From a pure gold cost (wands aside)

375gp for a one use Pearl of Power 3 that can also be used as a Pearl of Power 2 or 1 is much better than 9k for a full Pearl of Power 3. So much so that I cannot consider a single scenario where I would bother purchasing a Pearl of Power 3 now that I can spend prestige for "Channel the Gift".

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Pearls of Power suck past level 1. That doesn't mean channel the gift is broken if the difference is between an item I might buy and an item I wouldn't even with the surperior option gone, I'd rather keep the first option in play.

The Exchange ***** Venture-Agent, Kentucky—Lexington

How can you buy Channel with prestige?

*****

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

2PP one 750gp purchase

Level 3 scroll with two uses 750gp.

***

I have a character specialized to cast fireball. It would help him a great deal.

Not to mention wayang spellhunter and magical lineage.

The ability to spam over a 80 damage fireball that can slow and entangle every round would be pretty awesome.

Grand Lodge

Finlanderboy wrote:

I have a character specialized to cast fireball. It would help him a great deal.

Not to mention wayang spellhunter and magical lineage.

The ability to spam over a 80 damage fireball that can slow and entangle every round would be pretty awesome.

But one of them is enough to deal with 1/6th of any PFS encounter. :p

***

Kurthnaga wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:

I have a character specialized to cast fireball. It would help him a great deal.

Not to mention wayang spellhunter and magical lineage.

The ability to spam over a 80 damage fireball that can slow and entangle every round would be pretty awesome.

But one of them is enough to deal with 1/6th of any PFS encounter. :p

Bad guys have 480 HP? And can deal with a half of half movement while staggered?

Scarab Sages **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Finlanderboy wrote:
Kurthnaga wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:

I have a character specialized to cast fireball. It would help him a great deal.

Not to mention wayang spellhunter and magical lineage.

The ability to spam over a 80 damage fireball that can slow and entangle every round would be pretty awesome.

But one of them is enough to deal with 1/6th of any PFS encounter. :p
Bad guys have 480 HP? And can deal with a half of half movement while staggered?

The only thing this line of posts says to me is that those two traits together are rather powerful, and probably shouldn't be allowed to stack.

***

Lorewalker wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:
Kurthnaga wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:

I have a character specialized to cast fireball. It would help him a great deal.

Not to mention wayang spellhunter and magical lineage.

The ability to spam over a 80 damage fireball that can slow and entangle every round would be pretty awesome.

But one of them is enough to deal with 1/6th of any PFS encounter. :p
Bad guys have 480 HP? And can deal with a half of half movement while staggered?
The only thing this line of posts says to me is that those two traits together are rather powerful, and probably shouldn't be allowed to stack.

My example only uses one, but you can use both to make it worse.

Scarab Sages **

Finlanderboy wrote:
Lorewalker wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:
Kurthnaga wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:

I have a character specialized to cast fireball. It would help him a great deal.

Not to mention wayang spellhunter and magical lineage.

The ability to spam over a 80 damage fireball that can slow and entangle every round would be pretty awesome.

But one of them is enough to deal with 1/6th of any PFS encounter. :p
Bad guys have 480 HP? And can deal with a half of half movement while staggered?
The only thing this line of posts says to me is that those two traits together are rather powerful, and probably shouldn't be allowed to stack.
My example only uses one, but you can use both to make it worse.

To really make it powerful, combine it with a rod of selective spell. Then you can fireball even after your party has closed in with the enemy, or in small rooms.


Lorewalker wrote:


500 gp for an invisibility wand? A second level wand is 4,500 gp. But, if you used a vanish wand instead, that costs 750 gp.

Which as it is caster level 1, gives you exactly ONE round of invisbility.

****

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Lorewalker wrote:
But, if you used a vanish wand instead, that costs 750 gp.
Which as it is caster level 1, gives you exactly ONE round of invisbility.

Which works great for a Magus/Rogue combo with the wand wielder magus arcana.

Scarab Sages **

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Lorewalker wrote:


500 gp for an invisibility wand? A second level wand is 4,500 gp. But, if you used a vanish wand instead, that costs 750 gp.

Which as it is caster level 1, gives you exactly ONE round of invisbility.

Yup. To explain the logic if you did not read the chain of posts which lead to mine, my response included the context of the post I responded to that the character was going to use their standard to attack. Their familiar was also wielding the wand.

Since you are going to cast an offensive spell or use a weapon to attack in the next round you only need the one round of being invisible. You end up with wasted duration rounds and wasted coin using an invisibility spell when you really only need vanish in such a case.

Vanish is one of the better combat buff spells with a defensive bonus I know of, especially since it is cheaply used every combat round.

Since being invisible not only prevents you from being seen and attacks against you suffer a 50% miss rate, not only does it give you +2 to hit, it also ignores the dexterity bonus of the creature attacked. This last bit comes with the benefit of denying any dodge bonus the creature may have as well and many movement based protection abilities.


Lorewalker wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Lorewalker wrote:


500 gp for an invisibility wand? A second level wand is 4,500 gp. But, if you used a vanish wand instead, that costs 750 gp.

Which as it is caster level 1, gives you exactly ONE round of invisbility.

Yup. To explain the logic if you did not read the chain of posts which lead to mine, my response included the context of the post I responded to that the character was going to use their standard to attack. Their familiar was also wielding the wand.

Since you are going to cast an offensive spell or use a weapon to attack in the next round you only need the one round of being invisible. You end up with wasted duration rounds and wasted coin using an invisibility spell when you really only need vanish in such a case.

Vanish is a personal spell, the only thing a familliar could make invisible with the wand would be itself.

Scarab Sages **

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Vanish is a personal spell, the only thing a familliar could make invisible with the wand would be itself.

Vanish has a range of touch and a target of creature touched. Are you thinking about shield?


Lorewalker wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Vanish is a personal spell, the only thing a familliar could make invisible with the wand would be itself.
Vanish has a range of touch and a target of creature touched. Are you thinking about shield?

Could be... or I've never thought of casting it on someone else.

Scarab Sages **

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Lorewalker wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Vanish is a personal spell, the only thing a familliar could make invisible with the wand would be itself.
Vanish has a range of touch and a target of creature touched. Are you thinking about shield?
Could be... or I've never thought of casting it on someone else.

Then hopefully I've persuaded you to think otherwise, as it is a great spell when used on the right person, at the right time when there is available action economy. ^.^ (Pay no attention to the fact that I get paid commission for every vanish wand I sell)

*****

I don't think it is that bad, you ned to have a familiar (either giving up bonded item or taking a selection to obtain one) choose an improved familiar that can UMD and even then you still need to pay for the scrolls.
Glitterdust has a far greater affect on combat and game balance

*****

Just wanted to emphasize that most of the grand statements of "but what about *this*!" do require the wand-wielding familiar (I still say scroll UMD DC is too high for familiars), or the action economy just isn't worth it 90% of the time. Also to point out that everything described is doable without the familiar with a wand of mnemonic enhancer. Pricier of course, and a little different, but can be used after the fact, which is so much more action friendly.

*****

Can familiars activate scrolls given that in general familiars cannot activate magic items?

*****

andreww wrote:
Can familiars activate scrolls given that in general familiars cannot activate magic items?

Right, someone brought that up earlier. Not something I've kept track of personally.

*****

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

There is a lot of table variation on that point. I have generally seen more tables allow it than not.

I think the general consensus I have seen is that some familiars can use UMD to activate wands. UMD can activate scrolls. If you can use UMD to activate wands then it should work for scrolls too.

The Exchange ***** Venture-Agent, Kentucky—Lexington

Wand DC = 20
Scroll DC = 20+CL

So while you "can" usually you can't.

Grand Lodge **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento aka FLite

I would like to point out that familiars are meant to be a fairly significant power boost to a character, and improved familiars even more so.

It takes roughly the same number of feats to get a familiar as to get an animal companion, and another feat beyond that to get an improved one. And a lot of the cheaper ways to get familiars don't get ones that can be upgraded to improved.

Scarab Sages **

Majuba wrote:
andreww wrote:
Can familiars activate scrolls given that in general familiars cannot activate magic items?
Right, someone brought that up earlier. Not something I've kept track of personally.

Animal Companion and Familiar magic item use FAQ

The first sentence before the FAQ further explains the few magic items that can be used by a familiar...(constant effect items and ioun stones, if their master puts it on them, and they can activate a wand if they are in a specific list given). Pertinent quote from the FAQ.

"It is intended that animal companions or familiars can not activate magic items."

List of improved familiars that may use a wand with UMD.(but their spell list will not allow them to use a wand freely, they must always UMD)

"brownie, faerie dragon, imp, lyrakien azata, mephit, quasit, sprite familiars"

From Mike Brock

"No other activated item may be used, to include scrolls, by any animal companion, familiar, or improved familiar."

Scarab Sages **

Jared Thaler wrote:

I would like to point out that familiars are meant to be a fairly significant power boost to a character, and improved familiars even more so.

It takes roughly the same number of feats to get a familiar as to get an animal companion, and another feat beyond that to get an improved one. And a lot of the cheaper ways to get familiars don't get ones that can be upgraded to improved.

Also familiar death holds a much greater penalty than animal companion death.

"If a familiar is dismissed, lost, or dies, it can be replaced 1 week later through a specialized ritual that costs 200 gp per wizard level. The ritual takes 8 hours to complete."

This costs more for certain classes and archetypes, such as the witch which pays 500 gp per level.

*****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks Lorewalker!

Lorewalker wrote:

From Mike Brock

"No other activated item may be used, to include scrolls, by any animal companion, familiar, or improved familiar."

Fixed the link.

51 to 100 of 126 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Petition: Ban "Channel the Gift" All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.