I don't see a link with regards to the companion keeping its abilities. If the master is knocked unconscious, the companion keeps functioning. Death should be no different. There are no skill checks for keeping a companion, just to get it to do what you want.
I'm also not sure on how the serve trick works. I assumed you had to choose the recipient during the training.
Quote: Serve (DC 15): An animal with this trick willingly takes orders from a creature you designate. If the creature you tell the animal to serve knows what tricks the animal has, it can instruct the animal to perform these tricks using your Handle Animal bonus on the check instead of its own. The animal treats the designated ally as friendly. An animal can unlearn this trick with 1 week of training. This trick can be taught to an animal multiple times. Each time it is taught, the animal can serve an additional creature you designate. Yeah. So there is no last minute command to obey someone. Rather the companion was trained over time to obey a pre-specified person.
While it would be pretty silly if a roc suddenly grew three sizes that day, or exploded in a meat shower because the druid died and it now has -127 out of 8 hit points, eventually its going to become not an animal companion. Nature sends animals to serve its druids who serve nature. As you're not a druid, nature isn't letting you keep the animal for very long.
The dead Druid is still a Druid though. At least until it gets naturally reincarnated as something else.
Quote: When a living creature dies, its soul departs its body, leaves the Material Plane, travels through the Astral Plane, and goes to abide on the plane where the creature's deity resides. If the creature did not worship a deity, its soul departs to the plane corresponding to its alignment. Bringing someone back from the dead involves magically retrieving his soul and returning it to his body. So basically, dying just puts you on another plane. I suppose it is possible you could release the bond from that other plane though. And if the player has abandoned the character, you could say the newly minted NPC has chosen to release their companion from the afterlife.
Or, even more likely, death breaks bonds.
Cavall wrote: Or, even more likely, death breaks bonds. That'd screw over any companion master who dies and gets resurrected though.
The issue is he's asking can I keep an animal companion after I make a new character. That's it and the answer is no. He never said my character is dead what can I do with my companion until I'm raised. He said I'm making a new character can I keep something from my old character with the party. That something is his companion which is his old character's class ability. Again the answer is no. Animal Companions are a class ability. When you are no longer that class you lose that class ability.
Melkiador wrote: Cavall wrote: Or, even more likely, death breaks bonds. That'd screw over any companion master who dies and gets resurrected though. Why? Does it stop being a character ability when he comes back to life?
Cavall wrote: Melkiador wrote: Cavall wrote: Or, even more likely, death breaks bonds. That'd screw over any companion master who dies and gets resurrected though. Why? Does it stop being a character ability when he comes back to life? If the bond were broken, it'd take a 24 hour ritual to reform it. And then it'd be questionable if it had any of its starting tricks. So you'd have to retrain it.
That's death for you. A 24 hour inconvenience.
Cavall wrote: N N 959 wrote: Lady-J wrote: doesn't the animal companion lose all benefits from being an animal companion of the druid dies and just become a normal animal? People keep claiming that, but no one has yet to show anything from RAW. "An animal companion’s abilities are determined by the druid’s level."
Already quoted it. You're just skipping over it.
Druids level? 0. Defunct. Non existing upon this mortal plane.
RAW. RAI. Core rules. Like..almost first sentence. No, you didn't quote anything that says "when a druid dies, the animal loses all its levels/abilities/etc." You quoted me a passage that says how the animal advances. You've made an inference that if the druid dies, the animal loses its abilities, but that isn't RAW. I asked for RAW and you're given me RAI. Not the same thing.
Lacking specifics that the animal loses all its advancements, it's up to the GM. As someone has pointed out, the Nature Bond is an EXtraordinary ability, not magical. It's entirely reasonable to say that some of companion's advancement is a permanent effect which results from the animal's adventuring and gaining experience and implemented as a function of the master's level, not magically bestowed. I see nothing in RAW preventing the animal from retaining all its abilities in the event that its master is resurrected. Obviously if the druids dismisses the animal, any of the co-dependent abilities become moot.
Java Man wrote: I'm still comfused, why sould anyone, ever, get to use a deadguy's class features? That fact that this is a class feature is irrelevant. The animal is real, not a manifestation of the druid's psyche or spiritual energy. The question is what is the nature of the animal's advancement in-character? The rule book tells us we determine it based on the druid's level, but it says nothing of what happens if the bond is broken or the druid dies. RAI might be the animal reverts to normal or it might be the animal remains advanced.
Whether it stays with the party is entirely up to the GM. Just as it is entirely up to the GM as to wether the animal reverts and if so, how long it takes. There might be a reason it sticks around, for example the party communicates to the animal that the character will be revived, or maybe it leaves immediately, never to be seen from again.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
So if the dead guy's AC is treated as an NPC and the GM wants to determine its actions and future, that makes perfect sense and has some cool dramatic potential. What I have been taking a position against is the OP's idea that the critter could just be kept around as a resource by the party.
Animal as npc is square in the lap of GM in their role as story teller. Party using deadguy's special abilities is squarely in the land of rules shenanigans. The distinction might be thin, but I think it is an important one.
I don't think it's thin at all. It's akin to using your rogues hand to sneak attack because he's dead but it's still level 13.
Cavall wrote: I don't think it's thin at all. It's akin to using your rogues hand to sneak attack because he's dead but it's still level 13. but how else is my body bludgeon barbarian going to get sneak attack?
Lady-J wrote: Cavall wrote: I don't think it's thin at all. It's akin to using your rogues hand to sneak attack because he's dead but it's still level 13. but how else is my body bludgeon barbarian going to get sneak attack? But doesn't body bludgeon require a living body? Once you're swinging a corpse it's just an improvised weapon...
Java Man wrote: Lady-J wrote: Cavall wrote: I don't think it's thin at all. It's akin to using your rogues hand to sneak attack because he's dead but it's still level 13. but how else is my body bludgeon barbarian going to get sneak attack? But doesn't body bludgeon require a living body? Once you're swinging a corpse it's just an improvised weapon... pretty sure it just allows you to use other creatures as improvised weapons anyway
I have wondered if a possessed autonomous hand could live on after its master dies.
FYI - Possessed Hand feats do exist.
Java Man wrote: So if the dead guy's AC is treated as an NPC and the GM wants to determine its actions and future, that makes perfect sense and has some cool dramatic potential. What I have been taking a position against is the OP's idea that the critter could just be kept around as a resource by the party.
Animal as npc is square in the lap of GM in their role as story teller. Party using deadguy's special abilities is squarely in the land of rules shenanigans. The distinction might be thin, but I think it is an important one.
The OP asked if after given the "serve" command (assuming the target is valid), would the animal continue to serve after the master's death?
Totally up to the GM. There's no rule based reason why the animal might not continue to serve the last person ordered to serve. And since this isn't based on what real animals do, we can throw that out the window. The animal has been taught some tricks. If Serve were one that were taught, and not a bonus trick, no reason why that trick wouldn't persist along with others that were taught after the master's death.
What's kind of silly about this is so what if the animal sticks around? It's not like the GM isn't going adjust the combats to compensate. The controlling PC still has to handle the animal and it isn't going to be as a Free action, nor will the creature ever advance any further. The only real downside for the GM and potentially the players is you now have to track an NPC i.e. more hassle.
To be clear, there is no "serve command". The serve trick teaches the animal to obey a person chosen at the time of training. That's why the trick has its own rules for retraining.
Melkiador wrote: To be clear, there is no "serve command". The serve trick teaches the animal to obey a person chosen at the time of training. That's why the trick has its own rules for retraining. Yes, thank you for pointing out that technicality. I think it lends more credence to the companion continuing to take commands from the designated target. If it was a command, one might easily argue that the animal forgets it after a day. But as the animal has been trained to take commands from another without any HA check from the master, I see no reason why this wouldn't persist. Though, in fairness, Serve allows the target to use the master's HA bonus and this opens the door to questions what happens when the master dies. So...YMMV.
I as a GM would rule the animal leaves. Here's my whole issue with it. The animal companion is a Class ability. It's the same as a Monk's Flurry of Blows or a Rogue's Sneak Attack damage, or a Alchemist's Bombs or Mutagen. These are abilities that a class get and what separates them from other classes. Now the question asked is I a player have died and am making a completely new class, can I keep one class ability from my dead character around to use. The player implied the new class whatever it is doesn't have an animal companion class ability. The answer should be no. It's like asking he was instead an Alchemist and then died his new character is a Cleric but he wants to have in addition to his Clerical abilities the Mutagen ability of his now dead Alchemist.
It doesn't matter what the class ability is once that character died his abilities go away with him. The Sneak attack, the flurry of blows, the animal companion. Those abilities are class abilities. You are no longer of a class that gets that ability you don't have it or get to keep it. End of story.
I'm all for maximizing the fun at my table. That said, if the animal existed within the party for a significant period of time I would treat the animal companion as a team mascot, nothing more.
Derek Dalton wrote: End of story. The animal is not the class ability. Nature's/Hunter's Bond is the class ability. The class ability is the "bond" with the animal.
PRD wrote: The second option is to form a close bond with an animal companion. When the PC dies, the bond dissolves at some point, but not the animal. The animal remains. Whether it stays with the party or loses its abilities is not answered by the rules, and probably should not be (except in the case that the PC is raised from the dead). But claiming the animal is a "Class Ability" is incorrect. Comparing the animal itself to sneak attack, is just flat inaccurate.
The animals abilities and bond come from that ability. Without that there is no abilities for that animal and certainly no bond to anyone or anything. The animal leaves. Handle animal could get him to stay but his abilities still come from that bond that doesn't exist.
Nothing actually says death breaks the bond though. It'd be like saying the bond breaks, if you and the companion are on different planes. I'd still rule that the abandoned PC would choose to break the bond from the afterlife though. You'd want to set your animal buddy free if you weren't going to be around to take care of him.
Melkiador wrote: Nothing actually says death breaks the bond though. It'd be like saying the bond breaks, if you and the companion are on different planes. I'd still rule that the abandoned PC would choose to break the bond from the afterlife though. You'd want to set your animal buddy free if you weren't going to be around to take care of him. It seems you want a clear indication of what abilities skills spells and action you can take while dead.
Cavall wrote: The animals abilities and bond come from that ability. Without that there is no abilities for that animal and certainly no bond to anyone or anything. The animal leaves. Handle animal could get him to stay but his abilities still come from that bond that doesn't exist. That's not what the rules actually say. The animal advances because of the bond. That doesn't mean that the advancement isn't permanent. Just like a Wizard who stops training as a Wizard and starts training as a Fighter, doesn't lose what it learned as a Wizard. The animal cannot continue to advance without the Bond, but absolutely nothings says it doesn't retain what it learned while bonded.
Perhaps a better example is someone who takes performance enhancing drugs to build muscle mass. The muscles created from using the drug remain long after the drugs have worn off.
Melkiador wrote: Nothing actually says death breaks the bond though. You're right, technically nothings says it breaks. But it's a reasonable assumption that in normal circumstances the Bond ends with the PC's death and I'm not going to fault a GM for ruling as such.
A wizard who stops taking levels as wizard is still a wizard. The better analogy would be a wizard retraining all his wizard levels into fighter but still wants to cast his spells.
I'd say once the source of the animal companions power is gone, it is free to leave and will usually do so. Of course any GM can rule it sticks around. But that is because a GM can rule about anything, not because the players have any right to keep it. Animals think different than humans and we are (usually) talking about wild animals here and not some domesticated dog.
Mind you as a GM I might still allow my players to keep an animal companion after its master dies, but only if they seem to like it for more then its combat statistics. Then again I certainly wouldn't hesitate to remove some or all of its advancements (to a 2 HD animal companion without class features) if they tried to use it in combat regularly.
N N 959 wrote: Melkiador wrote: Nothing actually says death breaks the bond though. You're right, technically nothings says it breaks. But it's a reasonable assumption that in normal circumstances the Bond ends with the PC's death and I'm not going to fault a GM for ruling as such. It might be a reasonable house rule. But I wouldn't say it's a reasonable assumption when you are already explicitly told what breaks a bond and you're in a game where there are multiple ways to come back from being dead.
If death breaks the nature bond, then is the Druid free to choose a domain instead when he comes back to life?
My way of handling this as a GM is that the (former) animal companion would slowly revert to the form and nature of a normal animal of that type. They might stick around the party for a time, but probably wouldn't participate in combat.
Without wild empathy, most wilds animals are just going to be scared and or aggressive towards the party and either try to harm them or leave. Ostensibly, the animal companions come from wild animals. Though it's not impossible to make a captured animal into an animal companion, just probably unlikely.
NN no my analogy is correct. I may have not called it by it's proper name but my argument is valid and correct. I as a Druid have the option to choose a Domain or an animal companion. For this discussion he chose an animal companion. Whatever animal he chose it is comparable to a first level character. This is before the druid does anything. 2d8 HD a feat and a BAB of +1. Half the classes I know of don't get a +1 starting BAB and the only class the gets close to the same starting HD is a Barbarian with a D12. This is before the Druid does anything this is the animal showing up. It is the same with the Summoner and the Spiritualist. Their companions Eidolon and Phantoms respectively start off similar in power to a first level character. I as a Alchemist, Monk or Rogue do this because I don't have that class ability. I have other abilities but not that.
Another point in saying it's a Class ability is as I level as a Druid, Summoner or Spiritualist my companion improves similar to a player character. My companion's ability to improve is based off my respective class level. So I play a Druid for three levels my companion will be a third level character. I play to twentieth level my companion will be a twentieth level companion. Note class level not actual character level. I play as a Druid for seven levels then switch to something else. My Class ability companion is stuck at seventh level because I stopped being a Druid, where I got that ability from. I may not have called it by it's proper name but it is a Class Ability.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
The reason this isn't spelled out clearly is because it is common sense that, if the player chooses to not continue playing a character then things like companions should end. Otherwise it leaves the door open for abuse. In the examples given as to why, the character still alive and a pc. Also, if paizo stated that, upon death, you loose the bond to your AC, familiar, etc then it would open a whole can of worms. Just because it isn't explicitly stated in the rules doesn't mean it's right. As a DM I've had to field some fun rules arguments. Take falling, for example. It says you take 1d6 damage for every 10ft you fall. There is no mention of having to hit anything to take the damage. A player tried to argue that a fleeing wizard would take 6d6 falling damage every round he fell using feather fall. Common sense says that you don't take falling damage until you hit a surface. Still, it was debated. This reminds me of that.
I do agree with others that gave role playing reasons for the AC to stay (party mascot for example), but it wouldn't be usable in the adventure. So no combat, no telling the parents that Billy fell in the well, etc
Lintecarka wrote: A wizard who stops taking levels as wizard is still a wizard. The better analogy would be a wizard retraining all his wizard levels into fighter but still wants to cast his spells. No, that would not be a better an analogy. That does not represent what happens. The animal doesn't make any choice to retrain, nor do the rules mandate such a thing happening. The Bond is arguably just a catalyst. It allows the animal to advance, it is not necessarily the source of advancement. One way to imagine it is that the Bond opens up avenues of learning for the animal that are not normally accessible, but the Bond itself is not a battery or power storage. The Bond is not magical, it's just not ordinary. As I've stated, there's nothing in RAW that says the advancement isn't permanent once it occurs.
Quote: I'd say once the source of the animal companions power is gone, it is free to leave and will usually do so. Of course any GM can rule it sticks around. But that is because a GM can rule about anything, not because the players have any right to keep it. Animals think different than humans and we are (usually) talking about wild animals here and not some domesticated dog. The reason why we are talking about it in this forum is that we are trying to determine what the rules mandate. It seems we'd agree that the rules are silent as to what happens and that it's up to the GM. There's no reason for me to debate or disagree with what others find reasonable in this forum as that is not a rules question.
Melkiador wrote:
If death breaks the nature bond, then is the Druid free to choose a domain instead when he comes back to life?
That's a great counter-argument to PC death not breaking the bond.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Doesn't Animal Archive, Cohorts and Companions, or some similar source cover what happens when the PC dies, leaving a companion behind?
Ravingdork wrote: Doesn't Animal Archive, Cohorts and Companions, or some similar source cover what happens when the PC dies, leaving a companion behind? I've searched through AA and U Campaign and couldn't find anything that specifically covers PC death or what happens to the animal after it is dismissed. Replacing or death of the animal is covered but not death of the PC. I could have sworn I read something that said a dismissed animal reverts back to a normal animal, but I can't find it.
NN you are looking at the Bond the wrong way. It does two things the first it allows you to get a special animal. You get to pick an animal from a huge list available. The animal itself is actually on par with first level characters. The bond if it stopped there wouldn't be worth calling as a Class ability. It's the second part that makes it a potent ability which is why I address it as a class ability. You get to level the animal companion. Think about that for a moment. For playing a Druid you get to play essentially a second character. Your animal whatever it is stays as powerful as you make it and your character.
Derek Dalton wrote: NN you are looking at the Bond the wrong way. It does two things the first it allows you to get a special animal. You get to pick an animal from a huge list available. The animal itself is actually on par with first level characters. The bond if it stopped there wouldn't be worth calling as a Class ability. It's the second part that makes it a potent ability which is why I address it as a class ability. You get to level the animal companion. Think about that for a moment. For playing a Druid you get to play essentially a second character. Your animal whatever it is stays as powerful as you make it and your character. Apologies, but I am having trouble parsing your last couple of posts. The Bond is a class ability. The animal is not an ability, it's an animal. The Bond facilitates the animal becoming stronger and achieving things that the companion could not otherwise.
However, this is a game system, not a robust virtual reality engine. As others have pointed out, in some cases, the companion starts off weaker than the non-companion version. That means that we're not going to find a perfectly accurate way to describe this in IC/game reality. What matters in this thread is what do the rules as written say about the companion upon the PCs'd death? Nothing. We don't have rules that tells us what happens to the animal or its advancement by virtue of the Bond class ability.
What we do know is that the class ability is the Nature's/Hunter's Bond. The Bond is the link between a real animal and the PC. The Bond doesn't create the animal, it creates a relationship between an already living animal and the PC and essentially binds that creature to the PC and facilitates the animal's changing over time. Are the changes permanent or simply emergent? We don't know. Rational minds can disagree about what is suppose to happen, but there is no RAW which tells us specifically one way or the other.
Quote: You get to pick an animal from a huge list available. As written, the animal you get is suppose to come from animals local to the area, not a huge list. However, at 1st level, a character can create a backstory that allows he or she to acquire any starting animal the GM approves.
PRD Ultimate Campaign wrote: Choosing an animal companion requires 24 hours of prayer. The ceremony can also be used to attract and bond with an animal appropriate to the local environment. This reinforces the notion that you're bonding with an existing animal, not creating one out of thin air.
The question is not so much what happens with a character dying. The player is switching classes after his character died. He is asking can I keep my companion from my old class while I play a new one. That's the question and I feel the answer is no. To me it is the same as asking if I played a Rogue with a brutal sneak attack who died can I keep the sneak attack ability and damage even though I've changed to say a Bard. The Bard doesn't offer me that option. His new class doesn't offer the Bond he shouldn't be able to keep the benefits of it, which is the animal.
Derek Dalton wrote: The question is not so much what happens with a character dying. Yeah, that was the question I was trying to answer because several of the early posts were insisting the animal reverts to normal and I wasn't able to find RAW to confirm that.
DD wrote: The player is switching classes after his character died. He is asking can I keep my companion from my old class while I play a new one. Let's read what the OP actually typed:
OP wrote: If my druid character dies but my animal companion lives, could he using the "serve" trick stay with the group permanently as I make a new character? I could not find anywhere it saying it is not allowed I read that as asking if the animal stays with the group and continues to serve a PC it was trained to serve. I don't read that as asking for his new character to suddenly get a free animal companion Class Ability or anything close to it.
Quote: His new class doesn't offer the Bond he shouldn't be able to keep the benefits of it, which is the animal. He wouldn't be getting the benefit of Nature's Bond. The "party" would have an NPC animal that is willing to take HA commands from one existing PC, ostensibly using the benefit of the dead PC's HA bonus. That would specifically not be the new PC the OP is creating. The animal is not going to "serve" the new PC at all. Nor would the animal have any way of advancing beyond its current state.
Rules wise, there is certainly an argument that the animal would stick around and continue to serve the living PC. Whether Paizo would officially endorse that is a different question, and probably one better left unanswered.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Not Pathfinder per se, but this is how they handled it in 3.5:
"Death of a Master:
If you die, and your animal companion survives, it is effectively dismissed. As a house rule, you might want to delay the companion's loss of abilities for a short time, say one day for each character level you have.
If you are later brought back from the dead, the link between you and your surviving animal companion is reestablished automatically."
Since PF is an offshoot of 3.5, I generally default to 3.5 rules when I can't find a precedent in PF RAW. I've used the delayed loss of ability part of the rule above for familiars and animal companions in my campaigns and it's never been an issue.
Using this rule, I see no reason you couldn't teach your animal Serve and then have a fellow PC babysit your companion while the party is trying to get you raised. If you're never raised and the GM allows it, the party could adopt your animal companion as a pet but it would eventually lose all of its AniComp mojo.
My $0.02.
So I just saw and had a question if anyone might be able to answer it for me. Currently building a druid and was looking at the Animal Companion page. It shows that at lvl 3 the Animal Companion gets a +2 natural armor bonus, and in section down below it says it is an improvement to their existing bonus. So that means it adds to it. If they have a bonus of +1, at lvl 3 it is a total of +3 yes?
danielct18579 wrote: So I just saw and had a question if anyone might be able to answer it for me. Currently building a dr So that means it adds to it. If they have a bonus of +1, at lvl 3 it is a total of +3 yes? Yes, the table shows the cumulative additional benefit at that level.
Velcro Zipper wrote: Not Pathfinder per se, but this is how they handled it in 3.5: Yeah, I read those pages years ago, so that must be where i got the notion.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
