So I made a point before I run my next session to read through all the new rules, and I found one that stood out as weird, down near the bottom of page 4:
Page 284—In Animal Companions, in both Nimble and
Savage Companion, at the end, add “Its attacks are magical.”
Now as I understand it, Animal Companions are basically just animals that have been trained sufficiently that they're given a template that lets PCs have a better bond with them. There's nothing to say that the gods have sent the animal or that it's some manifestation of magic or the natural power of the world--they're pretty much just a critter, right?
If so, giving them magical attacks seems weird within the narrative of the game. I get that you might well run into creatures in the game that can only be hurt by magic, and that unless an animal companion has magic paws or whatever, they might get sidelined--but those same creatures would sideline most characters too. That's what Magic Fang is for. I don't personally see why that's a change we'd want or where it came from.
I'm pretty sure druids and paladins have always had magical pets. Or at least it is heavily implied that the bond you share goes beyond the mere physical realm. Rangers always came across that way to me too, there's a divine (or now primal) bond between you and the animal. I always interpreted this as why your animal companion scales and doesn't have the same stats or abilities as other members of its species.
There was also various feats which kind of drove this point home. Aisimar had one that gave your animal the celestial template, for example. There was various stuff the Hunter had too.
I think the only one who didn't really fit this pattern was the cavalier. But their mounts scaled the same way everyone else's did with the exception of share spells. There was something going on there, even the cavalier couldn't tap into primal magic in any other way. That's why they can have only one mount at a time despite having Expert Trainer as a class feature. (Also, on the Glass Cannon they referred to the halfling cavalier's mount as a magical wolf all the time. It actually became a running joke.)
Damage reduction, hitting ghosts, and a plethora of other things that rely on your attacks being magical in nature to work.
That said, pretty much anything in the book now works as magic, from monk powers to alchemical items and even shieds made of thicker wood. The border between magic and supernatural got very blurry, and that's fine.
to alchemical items
Alchemical items are explicitly notmagic.
Well accept they require Resonance points to make or use them...so yeah, kind of magical.
I'm pretty sure druids and paladins have always had magical pets. Or at least it is heavily implied that the bond you share goes beyond the mere physical realm. Rangers always came across that way to me too, there's a divine (or now primal) bond between you and the animal. I always interpreted this as why your animal companion scales and doesn't have the same stats or abilities as other members of its species.
I don't mind that animal companions can be magical, or at least magically empowered with different spells and gear. I mind that as it stands that its the only option. There's an argument to be made that where you can satisfy folks who like their magical elf stories a little more gritty and grounded can at least have the option. There's different folks who play the game.
Y'know?
I'm pretty sure druids and paladins have always had magical pets. Or at least it is heavily implied that the bond you share goes beyond the mere physical realm. Rangers always came across that way to me too, there's a divine (or now primal) bond between you and the animal. I always interpreted this as why your animal companion scales and doesn't have the same stats or abilities as other members of its species.I don't mind that animal companions can be magical, or at least magically empowered with different spells and gear. I mind that as it stands that its the only option. There's an argument to be made that where you can satisfy folks who like their magical elf stories a little more gritty and grounded can at least have the option. There's different folks who play the game.
Y'know?
What are magical attacks good for? Dealing with things that ignore or resist non-magical attacks. A lot of people will be fine with that just being a thing that animal companions can eventually do. If not, you can:
- Ignore it. There's nothing visible at all about this- the only time you can even tell narratively is when there's a ghost. You can have your companion sit out those ghost fights like they would normally.
- Come up with another explanation for those effects. Work special salts into the claws as part of your daily preparations, or simply have it be nature's effectiveness against the unnatural.
- Not advance your animal companion. This is shooting yourself in the foot, yes. But, to a smaller extent, so is "I want my animal companion to be completely useless against ghosts, etc." There's also the option to grab an animal friend via a skill feat, depending on what you want from the companion.
- Try to give people a "useless against ghosts" option. That seems like what you're trying to do. I don't think that's a very useful core option, but I can see a non-magical option showing up in the future, maybe with some save bonuses.
- Houserule. This isn't a useful point, since it's always an option and this is the playtest. But it's exactly the sort of very minor houserule that there will be a lot of to support gritty, grounded games.
I'm pretty sure druids and paladins have always had magical pets. Or at least it is heavily implied that the bond you share goes beyond the mere physical realm. Rangers always came across that way to me too, there's a divine (or now primal) bond between you and the animal. I always interpreted this as why your animal companion scales and doesn't have the same stats or abilities as other members of its species.I don't mind that animal companions can be magical, or at least magically empowered with different spells and gear. I mind that as it stands that its the only option. There's an argument to be made that where you can satisfy folks who like their magical elf stories a little more gritty and grounded can at least have the option. There's different folks who play the game.
Y'know?
That option barely existed in PF1 though. Almost every class that got animal companion was magic and treated it as such. The default way to replace your animal companion is "a 24 hour ceremony of uninterrupted prayer." Share spells is a 1st level feature that lets the animal bypass one of the most pervasive spell restrictions in the game: self only spells. And don't get me started on the Paladin mounts, which are explicitly from a divine spirit, grant super animal intelligence, and can be teleported to your person. Even the caalvier had weird arbitrary limits on replacing an animal companion that are most easily handwaved as being poorly understood magic.
The PF2 animal companions only seem to have one magical thing going for them, and it is an afterthought mechanical gimme to bypass Resistance. Which is a default thing built into monks, for example, and always has been. Replacing a dead pet now isn't a magical process by default-- it just specifies a week of downtime and you can RP it how you want.
I think if you want to run a gritty and grounded game, odds are you probably aren't going to be using a lot of critters that require magical attacks to bypass their Resistance. At which point... The animal companions may as well not have that ability. It is a mechanic you can completely ignore.
However, in games like Golarion, which pathfinder is built around, your animal may very well need magical attacks to help at all. At which point it is both simpler and less taxing to simply give it to the pet for free at a certain level, rather than requiring player to spend money on handwraps of the mighty fist or whatever.