| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Long story short, I am making a gnome character whose distinctive feature is having a lot of hair. Thick Hair, facial hair and body hair. For fluffy reasons I want some of his abilities to be related to his hair. That is how I came up with the beard familiar Idea.
Before you go at me saying there is no such things as a beard familiar, this would actually be a tumor familiar. I am just going to pretend it is my character's beard.
The character is multiclass and his main role is melee combat mounted on a wolfdog animal companion. I plan on taking 3-4 alchemist levels for strength mutagen and utilities + the tumor familiar discovery.
I am interested in taking the Thrush as the animal template for the familiar. This would give my character + 3 to diplomacy thanks to his magnificent beard. The beard would also have the ability to talk and fly and possibly use wands ?
I am also interested in taking the ''valet'' archetype for the familiar. My character will sideline as an alchemy crafter so the bonus to crafting would be welcome. I also have the ability to share teamwork feats with my mount, so having those feats also work with the familiar would be icing on the cake.
My main concern is protecting the said beard from being killed during combat. It would be rather exposed if just sitting on my face. This is where the valet archetype becomes a problem as it removes the Improved Evasion feature and makes the familiar even more so vulnerable.
Here are some relevant points I can think of:
-This campaign is already started. My character is now Cavalier 2, Alchemist 1, Brawler 1. I will get the beard familiar upon taking Alchemist 2.
-My character has decently High HP. 17 constitution + most of his HD are d10. So that should help the familiar tankiness a bit.
-I could always have the beard fly off to safety during combat to prevent it from taking damage, but I would rather if possible have the ability to keep it on my face.
- I suspect my GM will be amused by the beard familiar concept and probably will give me a break by not specifically targeting my beard all the time. However that does not help vs AOE attacks.
-I am not sure how people usually protect their tumor familiar when they are about their bodies. The +5 fast healing is nice but that does not protect you from a fireball one-shot when you do not have Improved evasion. Can they be considered as having ''cover'' from your body ?
-The Thrush template and Valet archetype are not mandatory. At this point those would be my preferences but if you have better ideas I am listening.
- An Idea I had was taking a 1 level witch dip with the Synergist archetype to protect the familiar from damage, but I am not even sure this would stack with the tumor familiar, and I would rather not take a witch dip ideally.
-I am also looking for ways to benefit from my familiar in combat. With a valet I could get some benefit out of teamwork feats. The feat ''Shake it off'' for exemple would be of interest. If both my beard and my mount have it, that means +2 to all saves to everybody. If that is allowed but I think it is.
-What about equipment? Can a tumor familiar have armor or other things that could help it survive one-shots by AOE spells ?
So there you have it. I am looking for interesting suggestions and ideas on how to get the most out of this concept. Any help is welcome!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My understanding is when the tumor isn't detatched, it isn't a separate creature and can't really be targeted or damaged by anything.
If what you guys are saying is true, then that would solve a lot of problems. But I am not sure that the tumor is intended to be untargetable and/or otherwise immune to AOE when it is attached to you.
This is explicitly described as being the case for the Synergist familiar, but I see no such detail in the tumor familiar description.
Any solid reference on the question ?
|
@OP: You're good. Nothing can target your familiar unless it's detached.
One warning: There's a sort of 'unspoken truce' between most GMs and familiars. So long as the familiar doesn't act in combat your GM will almost certainly ignore it. Familiars become 'fair game' when they take a turn in combat. While this isn't anywhere in the rules, it's how most GMs operate.
In this case, of course, it's not even rules-legal for the GM to target your tumour familiar unless it detaches.
I mean, in the ability description it states that 'when detached' it functions as a separate creature, implying that its not a creature when attached.
As a standard action, the alchemist can have the tumor detach itself from his body as a separate creature vaguely resembling a kind of animal suitable for a familiar (bat, cat, and so on) and move about as if it were an independent creature.
An alternative reading is that that text is only regarding the very first detachment. There is other text that implies the tumor is still there when reattached, like the die for your master feat from the same source.
If your tumor familiar is attached, and you would be reduced to 0 or fewer hit points by damage in combat (from a weapon or other blow, not a spell or special ability), the familiar throws itself in the way of the attack as an immediate action. If it makes a Reflex saving throw (DC = damage dealt), it takes all the damage from the attack; if it fails, it takes half damage and you take half damage.
The familiar must be aware of the attack and able to react to it in order to use this ability, and it can only do this once per day—if it is denied its Dexterity bonus to AC, it can’t use this ability. Since this effect would not normally allow the familiar to make a Reflex save for half damage, its improved evasion ability does not apply on this saving throw.
This tells us that an attached familiar can be aware, can react, can move, can take actions, can make saving throws, can apply its dexterity bonus to AC and can take damage.
Ultimately, you’ll need to just ask your DM, but there is certainly evidence that your familiar still counts as a creature and can still be available for attacking once it’s reattached.
I mean, in the ability description it states that 'when detached' it functions as a separate creature, implying that its not a creature when attached.
As a standard action, the alchemist can have the tumor detach itself from his body as a separate creature vaguely resembling a kind of animal suitable for a familiar (bat, cat, and so on) and move about as if it were an independent creature.
I can see the merit of this interpretation. From my perspective, I interpreted "separate creature" as opposed to a "conjoined creature". I pictured the tumor familiar as some nasty conjoined twin. A kind of growth with a snarling face and maybe some tiny hands protuberating out of you. ( Hands If you took monkey familiar ). I imagined it acting on its own, maybe handling things like a wand or holding stuff for you during combat. I felt that such a thing would be targetable during combat. I think this interpretation was compatible with RAW.
But I now think your interpretation is the intended one. I just read an additional bit on the "Protector archetype" page that seems to indicate that the tumor, while in tumor form, is intended as just a part of your own body that is not specifically targetable.
Restriction: Tumor familiars can’t take this archetype since they are originally part of an alchemist’s body.
Protector familiars are so devoted that they would give their lives for their masters. A tumor familiar can’t be a protector.
The wording here not only says that the tumor is just part of you, but also there would be no real reason to deny a tumor the taking of this archetype unless the tumor is indeed untargetable. Then using this archetype would allow for a massive amount of cheese and would basically make you super tanky for free. Hence, they blocked that possibility.
This being said, I think that for all this to make sense, an attached tumor familiar should not be allowed to make unrestricted actions during combat, beside maybe some cherry picked stuff that makes sense and some specifically allowed stuff like using the "die for your master feat". If a monkey tumor is out on your shoulder poking around your backpack and throwing alchemist fire around, the thing should be targetable in combat.
But I am quite happy to let my beard mostly idle during combat and just give me some passive bonus from teamwork feats, that would already be very nice. If I want it to do funky stuff it can always fly off and become independent, at the risk of being killed.
The protector wording is that the tumor was originally part of you, implying that it is no longer so.
After thinking on it some more, I believe it was never intended for an attached tumor familiar to be subjected to a blanket rule regarding how it is targetable or not during combat. I think it is meant to be addressed on a case by case basis depending on how the tumor is described and used. Just like for a normal familiar actually.
If you say your viper familiar is hiding coiled in your bag during combat and it takes no action, it would be a cheap move from the GM to claim it is also affected by an incoming fireball. But if you have a parrot sitting on your shoulder, throwing insults at the enemies and hurling magic missiles with a wand in its beak, it is fair game for the fireball. Same thing for your tumor, if it is a nut sized mole on your back, under your armor, hidden from sight and doing nothing during combat, I think the fireball should not affect it. However if you describe and use your tumor as a monkey torso sticking out of your shoulder, picking up stuff in your bag and throwing alchemical weapons around, It becomes fair game.
That is easy enough to deal with when you have rather obvious exemples like those I gave. But some exemples are less obvious. Such as my beard idea I guess. Even if it does nothing during combat, it is still there, exposed. To what degree should a player be penalized for fluff elements?
I suppose you could solve this issue in a reasonable way by using the same rules as for sundering and damaging items. From the standard rules in the CRB, your equipment is considered safe from an AOE spell effect until you roll a 1 on a reflex save. Then one of your item is potentially damaged. You roll more dice to know what happens. I think a passive familiar on your person could be considered as equipment in such circumstance. If the familiar is somewhat visible, and an enemy knows it for what it is, it can attempt an attack on it by using the same rules as for sundering items. Making a Combat maneuver to sunder vs the Masters CMD to try to damage the tumor, little bird in your pocket or whatever familiar setup you happen to sport. If the maneuver succeeds, make another attack roll VS the familiar itself, considering it as Flat-footed.
I will discuss it with my GM.