| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This thread kind of confuses me. It seems to be acting with the supposition that combat familiars that full attacked were some standard part of PF1 gaming that's now missing.
I know for myself, I'm not overly concerned with damage for combat: as I pointed out it's also for things like breaking glass, chewing through ropes, getting out of a paper bag, ect. There is something wrong when a familiar has to use a crowbar to pry open a window because it's unable to break a pane of glass.
From perusing the Bestiary, I realized that it has no combat capable Tiny animals at all except for swarms.This means that familiars/tiny animals can't get through any kind of barrier: a rat familiar is physically incapable of chewing through a sheet of paper as it seems it has to gum it's food... :P
There in lies the issue, 1dmg is too high, yet fractional damage is too low to bother tracking in most cases.
And what familiars get what fractional bonus, cats are way stronger than frogs... Yet frogs should be able to fight a fly or tiny sized spider.
And tiny spiders/centipedes often have debilitating venoms as well as being very hard to spot. Hmmm maybe level x10 in dim light to their stealth modifiers.
(I am making a facetious slippery slope argument of course, but when apply logic to things built around magical super hero combat gets to be a bit difficult after a certain point)
Personally I think a nice addition would be "the familiar can make strikes for 1 physical damage of a type appropriate to it's form against objects and against creatures of it's own size or smaller"
Maybe with a line along the lines of
"the GM arbitrates within reason any other hostile actions the familiar can reasonably make with this strike"
Which would upset people who don't want GM arbitration, but give and take.
Personally, if a GM asked me to roll to see if my rat could break out of a paper or hemp bag I would raise an eyebrow and consider not playing with them though. There is a point when pointless rolling isn't funny, it is just time wasting guff.
A lot of touch spells no longer actually require an attack roll anymore.
Wait. What?
Can you give a source for that, for those of us still stuck in the past?
I think my head might explode if my vampiric touch doesn't need a spell attack.
Yeah, damage is not the best way to model how a familiar interacts with the world. For any instance where you might be tempted to have a familiar do damage, there are better methods to determine success or effectiveness.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A lot of touch spells no longer actually require an attack roll anymore.Wait. What?
Can you give a source for that, for those of us still stuck in the past?
I think my head might explode if my vampiric touch doesn't need a spell attack.
BOOM
Touch Range
You can usually touch the target automatically, though the spell might specify that the target can attempt a saving throw or that you must attempt a spell attack roll.
Vampiric touch specifies a Fort save, but no spell attack.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's awesome!
|
That's awesome!
It really REALLY is!
The fact that TAC is now dead and gone is SUCH a huge boon for spellcasters that it's practically one of those "invisible" changes in terms of how far-reaching the impacts go.
Sure less spells a day feels bad, but Save/Suck spells are no longer crappy if they make their Save, hitting TAC has mostly been converted to an automatic hit, and damage+condition spells are EVERYWHERE now instead of the exception to the rule.
So, I didn't see it get resolved... if a familiar has hands can it use them to attack with a weapon? Talking RAW, here.
Manual Dexterity: It can use up to two of its limbs as if they were hands to use manipulate actions
Wielding Items: Some abilities require you to wield an item, typically a weapon. You’re wielding an item any time you’re holding it in the number of hands needed to use it effectively. When wielding an item, you’re not just carrying it around—you’re ready to use it.
Drawing a weapon: Interact Action
Interact (one action, Manipulate tag): You use your hand or hands to manipulate an object or the terrain.
It seems like they can use any weapon, just with a really bad +level to attack?
I think it makes total sense! I really like that they removed irrelevant rules like that. No reason to even bring up at the table. Your 2 ounce toad cannot inflict any damage. done :)
Unless he stabs you in the eye with his toothpick sword.
|
I still am of the belief that familiars should have a reliable means of delivering bad touch spells that DO still require an attack roll. Just level to hit will never, ever cut it.
I also think that most familiars (excluding ones without obvious natural attack like a toad) should be able to do SOMETHING in terms of being able to attack something. Let a ferret bite it’s way through some rope, or a cat claw through a bag. I’m not talking about the cheese tactics from 1e- I just think the fact that familiars went from having too much combat utility to almost none whatsoever.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I still am of the belief that familiars should have a reliable means of delivering bad touch spells that DO still require an attack roll. Just level to hit will never, ever cut it.
I also think that most familiars (excluding ones without obvious natural attack like a toad) should be able to do SOMETHING in terms of being able to attack something. Let a ferret bite it’s way through some rope, or a cat claw through a bag. I’m not talking about the cheese tactics from 1e- I just think the fact that familiars went from having too much combat utility to almost none whatsoever.
Your familiar couldn't actually chew through rope unless it is capable of dealing 3+ damage on an attack though, as standard adventuring rope has hardness 2. Industrial rope has hardness 4. Even a cloth sack has hardness 1. And 3 damage is more than the average damage many PCs will deal with their fists or a dagger. (10 strenght PC is only 2.5.) I don't really think your ferret should be able to do more damage than the average person with a dagger to another creature.
Which is why, as already mentioned in thread, in the rare scenario where your familiar needs to chew through a bag or a rope, attack and damage rolls shouldn't enter into it. It should just take a while for them to do. They can't really do it fast enough for it to be relevant in combat, so they don't need combat statistics.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It seems like they can use any weapon, just with a really bad +level to attack?
And 0 damage as they don't have strength. But yes, they can.
Let a ferret bite it’s way through some rope, or a cat claw through a bag.
You need rules for that???
"You walk into the tavern, make your walk check!
- 15.
- Ok, you walk nicely.
- I sit at a lonely table.
- Make your sit on a chair check.
- Natural 1...
- You fail miserably to sit on a chair!!!!"
Welcome to Familiars and Nitpicking...
I still am of the belief that familiars should have a reliable means of delivering bad touch spells that DO still require an attack roll.
I'm pretty sure there are none. All the spell attack roll spells are ranged.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems like they can use any weapon, just with a really bad +level to attack?And 0 damage as they don't have strength. But yes, they can.
+0 damage or total zero damage?
Also, if they have hands, but no strength rating, how much bulk can they carry anyway?
It seems like they can use any weapon, just with a really bad +level to attack?And 0 damage as they don't have strength. But yes, they can.
+0 damage or total zero damage?
If we assume a 1 strength they have a -5 modifier to their damage rolls if they had one.
If your PCs are tied up do you let them instantly get out without a check?Let a ferret bite it’s way through some rope, or a cat claw through a bag.You need rules for that???
If they have a reasonable way to cut the rope, yes. Do you need a roll to cut a rope with a knife?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You'd only need damage if you were trying to escape in encounter mode, which I'd agree is pretty impossible for most familiars. In exploration mode time scales, it might take a check for time spent but that is not a necessity.
|
If they have a reasonable way to cut the rope, yes. Do you need a roll to cut a rope with a knife?If your PCs are tied up do you let them instantly get out without a check?Let a ferret bite it’s way through some rope, or a cat claw through a bag.You need rules for that???
... if they're tied up how did they get a knife?
Anywho, with a knife yes they'd still have to damage the rope. And a knife is much sharper than a ferret's teeth.
If we assume a 1 strength they have a -5 modifier to their damage rolls if they had one.It seems like they can use any weapon, just with a really bad +level to attack?And 0 damage as they don't have strength. But yes, they can.
+0 damage or total zero damage?
Interesting. If we assume a 1 strength, they would be able to carry 0 bulk. Could be intentional, so that the hands are literally only for helping turn knobs and stuff...
Looking at other low level tiny creatures (since I can't find cat):
Bloodseeker -4
Faerie Dragon -2
Homunculus -1
Pugwampi -3
Viper -3
Sprite -3 (Who has a rapier!)
Based on these, it seems a bit strange to assume a -5 strength.