| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To avoid further derailing this thread about wizard balance, I'm moving this discussion on familiars here.
TLDR: What is your take on how familiars are (1) intended to be run or (2) should be run? How are they generally run at your tables? It seems to me that there are two extremes: living breathing familiars, and pet rocks. Which do you think makes for a better game experience? Verisimilitude and immersion, or mechanical balance?
Additional context/cross posts from the original thread:
You all seem to have VERY different experiences with familiars than I. I positively love them.
It's true their abilities were reduced in this edition, particularly in encounters. Even so, my familiars have successfully acted as messengers, scouts, spies, saboteurs, trackers, night watch, shoppers, and a variety of other useful roles.
My wizard's bird familiar (with touch telepathy) would make use of my comprehend languages spell to eavesdrop on people's conversations, then report back to me what they heard simply by landing on my shoulder.
My cat familiar would trail suspects and perform stake outs while my witch rested for the night. When morning came, she would grant it speech so that it could tell her about the suspect's lair and/or plans.
My sorcerer's mouse familiar would sneak into the enemy camp at night and wittle the hours away nibbling on bow strings, backpack straps, belts, ropes, and tack in preparation for the party's pre-dawn ambush.
Familiars are only as useless as you choose for them to be.
That's all GM FIAT though, which is not reliable rulings or RAW, which is what matters when discussing their potential.
A bird trying to be innocuous while understanding what is being discussed would technically call for a Deception check if a PC was in the same boat. Last I checked, their skills aren't that great past, like, 8th level or so. That bird should have been discovered and taken for an early breakfast special, most likely, especially if the conversation is had between appropriate level challengers. Technically permissible by RAW, but as advisable as making a Strike with a -10 MAP.
The cat is still a living, breathing creature that needs rest, the same as all the others. If it has been adventuring with you all day, then it needs to rest as well. If not, then it gets Fatigued and can't technically tell you what's up, since exploration activities are forbidden. Even if we argue that the cat was asleep the whole time and is nocturnal, this once again falls into GM FIAT, and isn't the baseline rules expectation.
A GM who let's Familiars that can't make attack rolls deal enough effective damage to break and/or destroy items is basically giving free reign to the Familiar owner that has no rules basis whatsoever. In fact, a Rogue needs a feat to do just that. Once again, GM FIAT takes the cake.
I'm getting seriously irritated with people using GM FIAT interpretations as actual rules sources for familiar gameplay. It's spreading misinformation, setting incorrect expectations (which leads to player entitlement, a bad behavior to have at a table), and getting people's hopes up in thinking Familiars are special and cool and can do good in an adventuring party.
I both love and hate this sentiment.
One, you [Darksol] are absolutely correct. The strict RAW on familiars is completely broken. They effectively do nothing. Nothing practical and useful anyway. Nothing in combat aside from some very niche uses. Nothing out of combat. Additional resource battery is about all that they are. From a strict RAW interpretation of the rules.
But most of us, when we are actually playing the game rather than arguing over the rules of the game, want our characters and the characters of our friends that we are playing with, to be useful, fun, and effective. So when we see rules like this that are not fun, not useful, and not working - we follow the 'too bad to be true' rule of the game and make something that does actually work.
And you are right that treating our own houserules that make familiars actually functional should not be taken as official rules or be the expectation in games that you play with new people.
But temper that with the idea that people do like to play their characters - even their characters that have familiars.
So your post struck me at least as 'All you guys having fun playing characters with effective familiars are ruining the game for the rest of us. Stop doing that.'
This happens a lot on RPG forums. People like to assume that every GM is as permissive as theirs is, or talk about class effectiveness not accounting for house rules they've been using for the past couple of years, etc. This isn't useful information to the average forum goer as they don't play at those tables.
More useful is analyzing things from a strict RAW perspective and assuming a GM that never pulls punches, rarely grants favors, and which runs a table that requires some degree of optimization to be successful. My reasoning is that anything that works with the above GM will work at other tables and anything that seems weak at that kind of table is at least objectively pegged against set expectations so people can judge how it might do at their table.
Technically a familiar can use untrained skill actions for all skills using its level as a modifier. Which is better than PCs get as they don't even get level on untrained skills.
So yes a bird familiar can make Deception checks.
GMs often hand way skill checks if they think they should just automatically succeed. The whole genre is rather artificial in the way it sets us against level relevant challenges and opponents. Not every roll has to be a challenge. Not every NPC on the world will be at the players level, so yes familiars could be very useful.
Not allowing familiars to Strike or activate magic items is an important game limit, but it is not absolute. GMs are supposed to interpret what it means. That is a core part of the game. Chewing through a backpack strap seems apprpriate.
To a point [breithauptclan]. I'm not upset that players are finding ways to have fun with familiars. The problem I have with them expressing those experiences are making claims stating that it's RAW and it's totally permissible across all tables of play, when in actuality, it's not at all RAW, and is subject to table variation at-best, or outright denied at-worst. The whole YMMV argument, even if it comes across as agitated, since it's been done constantly. I believe that Familiars could most definitely use an affirmative boost of some sort to make them more combat-capable and not just a spell battery, and that home games are doing just that. Which is fine. But I want it to be clear; it's not RAW. It's houseruling/GM FIAT. You can't do half of those things in PFS, and even if you can do so without mechanical hangups, chances are the numbers are against you. (Making the success all more incredible, sure, but also sets poor expectations for the overall aptitude of the operation.)
Coming from PF1, our previous group had a very potent familiar have use in numerous combats across our adventuring career of over 14 levels, and out of combat use as well. They felt like a valuable asset to the party and didn't have extremely restricting rules or features in place that made them feel like they were a liability. They were a genuine part of the group, and contributed their fair share. In fact, the familiar was our group mascot, and we always joked about how, when it was pulled out, that the fight was instantly over. I mean, come on; the Familiar was suplexing appropriate-level goblins, annoying the heck out of larger enemies, and serving as a conduit of safe and clandestine spell delivery. It was clever and cool and effective; I couldn't ask for a better use of a Familiar. And that was without Improved Familiar feats and such.
Now? Even most characters can't do that anymore. A Familiar in PF2 can't do even half of those things without rules issues or lack of mechanical back-up for it. Want to carry something to someone? Oh, you need a Bulk capacity, which is Strength-based, and they don't have a Strength score, making it undefined. Want to forcefeed a potion or elixir? Sorry, that's activating an item, which they are expressly forbidden to do except in cases X, Y, and Z. Want to determine overall sentience to see if they are smart enough to do a certain action? Similarly, it can't be done, because it has no mental ability scores or modifiers. How many actions does it have? Depends on what feats and abilities you took, and how those are worded, which, as you can see, have been met with ambiguity and contention in this very thread. It's not only objectively worse (and bad in general), but it's also inconsistent and basically unfinished. Even compared to their more combat-oriented counterparts, Familiars are just a largely unfinished product that gets support in areas it doesn't need and gets ignored at very crucial parts of the game. It's like getting new spinner rims and a beastly subwoofer for a vehicle that doesn't even have a functioning motor and battery. If the vehicle doesn't run properly, why bother sprucing it up with auxillary features at best?
My problem with this isn't power level or player fun. It's world versimilitude.
Mechanics aside, either a familiar can, in world, do lots of cool stuff or it can't. If it can then at least a great many opponents know that and will actively be trying to protect against rats, cats, birds etc. I do NOT want a world where only PCs have figured out how to weaponize familiars (not unless it's a major focus of the campaign, at least).
One question I always ask when players push is how happy they'd be if the enemies did the same thing to them. They wake up to find all their bowstrings eaten. How loudly would they claim foul?
There is the secondary problem that it's a game. There has to be some risk involved, even if it is only the risk of failure. Otherwise familiars run the risk of being better than PCs and I don't want to see that again (it could definitely happen in PF1). Which means familiars really need rules and not just GM fiat.
IMO, in the case of familiars there's an overcorrection here that is going to be just as impactful on the potential for people's enjoyment as what you're talking about here. There's clearly a large difference in how familiars are run between tables, and telling everyone that they should assume familiars are going to be next-to-useless and only useful to roleplay a cute little buddy is just going to make people ignore them. I'm not even commenting on the accuracy of that view if one follows the laid-out rules in the CRB, just that it's not representative of quite a few tables. I've seen a lot of content passed up in tRPGs because the general consensus is that they're not useful, when table variation means that it's not actually that universally true (whether that be because of varying optimisation levels, campaigns happening in different niches, GMing style, etc).
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
We have both RAW, as in the actual rules as written for familiars, as well as RAI as a Paizo developer has clarified a rules interaction many people used to make familiars into action economy boosters. It's pretty clear that Paizo sees familiars as being very restricted in what they can accomplish. It's also very clearly against the design ethos of PF2 for a familiar to invalidate a Rogue or Ranger in the scouting and sabotage role, which is what you seem to think they should be used for.
Can I ask why you think it's okay to have a familiar be a better scout than a character literally built around stealth?
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
We have both RAW, as in the actual rules as written for familiars, as well as RAI as a Paizo developer has clarified a rules interaction many people used to make familiars into action economy boosters. It's pretty clear that Paizo sees familiars as being very restricted in what they can accomplish. It's also very clearly against the design ethos of PF2 for a familiar to invalidate a Rogue or Ranger in the scouting and sabotage role, which is what you seem to think they should be used for.
Can I ask why you think it's okay to have a familiar be a better scout than a character literally built around stealth?
First, I don't think that. Second, I REALLY hate it when people try to reframe another person's argument by putting words in their mouths. Please avoid doing that. I consider it rude.
But to answer your question: Because nobody ever pays attention to birds and cats. It's not about being "better." I'd wager the rogue or ranger has a better Stealth modifier AND more options when it comes to sneaking and sabotage. The difference is in how NPCs and monsters react to their presence. A humanoid getting caught is likely to end with an alarm being sounded, combat being initiated, or a chase scene starting. A rat or cat though? Most spotters likely ignore it, or do something minor, such as shoo it away.
Some people call this "GM fiat" which I think is somewhat disingenuous and definitely loaded with undeserved negative connotations. I call it "the GM roleplaying the NPCs like they always have." Some characters might kill harmless animals (perhaps for food) forcing the familiar to flee for their life, whereas others might try to feed or befriend it. A great many probably just shoo it away or ignore it altogether unless it does something atypical.
From the other thread:
So how would you use a familiar if your GM ruled something like:
"Familiars all have obvious tells that show that they are magical beings and not typical animals. A cat familiar might have human eyes and a face that more resembles a baby than a feline. A bird may give off an unsettling aura that an alert foe can feel."
In such a game nothing is given to the familiar just for existing and all forms of familiar have equal benefits and drawbacks rather than some types getting a pass for being animals and others not getting the same due to having a different form.
I would call that a house rule. Assuming the entire table agreed to it, I'd be investing in Deception and Stealth on my familiar with the shared understanding that it could conceal its alien nature with a check.
If a GM didn't allow me that small amount of leeway would either not have me as a player, or at least not one that had characters with familiars.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
First, I don't think that. Second, I REALLY hate it when people try to reframe another person's argument by putting words in their mouths. Please avoid doing that. I consider it rude.
You are advocating for a familiar to scout better than any player character can simply because it has the form of an animal.
But to answer your question: Because nobody ever pays attention to birds and cats.
So all characters should only take animal-shaped familiars then? In your world players take a massive nerf if they want a small dinosaur or an imp as a familiar as these ones need to make dice rolls to do a task that another familiar can just do for free.
It's not about being "better." I'd wager the rogue or ranger has a better Stealth modifier AND more options when it comes to sneaking and sabotage. The difference is in how NPCs and monsters react to their presence. A humanoid getting caught is likely to end with an alarm being sounded, combat being initiated, or a chase scene starting. A rat or cat though? Most spotters likely ignore it, or do something minor, such as shoo it away.
In a world with familiars, why is this your default assumption? Why isn't the default more akin to what is done to ravens, rats, and other vermin in Wheel of Time*.
*For those that don't know in that series these animals can serve as eyes for evil creatures and are killed on sight in most cities.
I would call that a house rule. Assuming the entire table agreed to it, I'd be investing in Deception and Stealth on my familiar with the shared understanding that it could conceal its alien nature with a check.
If a GM didn't allow me that small amount of leeway would either not have me as a player, or at least not one that had characters with familiars.
So my way of playing is an obvious house rule and wrong bad fun but yours, which violates RAW is the correct way to play? How did you come to this revelation exactly?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
First, I don't think that. Second, I REALLY hate it when people try to reframe another person's argument by putting words in their mouths. Please avoid doing that. I consider it rude.You are advocating for a familiar to scout better than any player character can simply because it has the form of an animal.
Animals just are better scouts in certain circumstances, not others.
But a familiar is not the only way to get an animal scout. There are a lot of polymorph options, and Beast Sense options.
But to answer your question: Because nobody ever pays attention to birds and cats.So all characters should only take animal-shaped familiars then? In your world players take a massive nerf if they want a small dinosaur or an imp as a familiar as these ones need to make dice rolls to do a task that another familiar can just do for free.
It's not about being "better." I'd wager the rogue or ranger has a better Stealth modifier AND more options when it comes to sneaking and sabotage. The difference is in how NPCs and monsters react to their presence. A humanoid getting caught is likely to end with an alarm being sounded, combat being initiated, or a chase scene starting. A rat or cat though? Most spotters likely ignore it, or do something minor, such as shoo it away.In a world with familiars, why is this your default assumption? Why isn't the default more akin to what is done to ravens, rats, and other vermin in Wheel of Time*.
*For those that don't know in that series these animals can serve as eyes for evil creatures and are killed on sight in most cities.
Good luck trying to exterminate rats from cities with people. But yes there should be in game responses, and that is a reasonable world building response.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You are advocating for a familiar to scout better than any player character can simply because it has the form of an animal.
If you keep reframing my statements to your liking, I'm simply not going to debate you any further. I'll give you the benefit of a doubt for now and attempt to answer some of your questions.
So all characters should only take animal-shaped familiars then? In your world players take a massive nerf if they want a small dinosaur or an imp as a familiar as these ones need to make dice rolls to do a task that another familiar can just do for free.
A player taking a mundane looking familiar likely intends it to be at least somewhat discreet. A player who chooses to have their character followed by an obviously magical creature clearly has other priorities.
In a world with familiars, why is this your default assumption? Why isn't the default more akin to what is done to ravens, rats, and other vermin in Wheel of Time*.
*For those that don't know in that series these animals can serve as eyes for evil creatures and are killed on sight in most cities.
I imagine most players base NPC responses on either what they know from the real world, or from the description of the campaign world or their experiences within it.
As a player who largely plays Pathfinder in the Lost Omens campaign setting, I do not assume a Wheel of Time reaction to be the norm as nothing I've seen outside these forums have event hinted at that kind of behavior being common place.
So my way of playing is an obvious house rule and wrong bad fun but yours, which violates RAW is the correct way to play? How did you come to this revelation exactly?
I never said it was bad or wrong, and I think you know that. What I actually intoned was that I would have little interest in that play style.
Like most people, I base my ideas and play style on what is fun, and what I see the perceived majority of roleplers doing in their games.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know why you think "nobody ever pays attention to birds and cats." when that's not even true in our world, either in the past or present. And rats & mice, those are outright targets for many people, especially if they have a weapon handy and are perhaps bored guarding.
Move this into Golarion where superstitions are very often true and shapeshifters and familiars are definite beings, and guards should be paying even more attention to such critters.
At low levels it might amount to:
"That cat look odd to you?"
"Didn't see it. Was it a calico. You know they're evil, right?"
"It was! We'd better track it down or tell somebody right quick."
OR
"It wasn't, so I guess it's okay as long as it doesn't try to sneak past us and bother the boss."
Elite guards might actually examine the cat or bird, talk to it in hopes of getting a reaction that gives away it knows languages. Or they might kill on sight as a matter of routine, just to be sure or because they're cruel and bored. I'd think crows & ravens would be as vulnerable as black cats in this regard (unless Golarion uses different quintessential familiars).
Any Witch PC of mine would never let their familiar wander out of sight, much less go on missions where who knows what are. Guard dogs (perhaps supernatural ones) are fairly common after all. I don't treat familiars as participants in dangerous activities, nor as rocks (which I'd prefer!), but as squishy pets (albeit soul-linked) that need protection, especially in PF2 without Improved Evasion.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
People using RAW to determine that familiars are nearly useless are generally breaking RAW.
Familiars are 1. intended to, and 2. should be run as fairly versatile. Especially in exploration mode. Preparing for a heist? Familiars are an excellent resource. In encounter mode, they don't stand out or provide particular advantage, but that is just fine.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Most familiars were originally animals, though the ritual of becoming a familiar makes them something more.
Who knows if this even means the familiar will have an obvious tell that it isn’t a “real” animal of its type.
Anyway, saying that ordinary cat/dogs/whatever don’t need stealth checks effectively makes Pest Form subsume the entire role of the Stealth skill out of combat.
What familiars can and can’t do with stealth isn’t super relevant for the games I tend to run - mostly dungeon environments, the monsters don’t really care if its an ordinary cat or a familiar, it looks like a snack all the same. I’m willing to bet that higher level guards might have some form of magic sense in the form of an ability to cast Detect Magic or elsewise - does a familiar ping magical?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A player taking a mundane looking familiar likely intends it to be at least somewhat discreet. A player who chooses to have their character followed by an obviously magical creature clearly has other priorities.
What do you do for the player who wants an exotic familiar to make up the difference in utility?
I imagine most players base NPC responses on either what they know from the real world, or from the description of the campaign world or their experiences within it.
I know the cats in my area and might have a handle on a couple of the crows as well. I've noticed when the crows decide to follow me or if a cat is out an about. I don't see why people more in tune with nature and in smaller tighter knit groups wouldn't notice such things.
I never said it was bad or wrong, and I think you know that. What I actually intoned was that I would have little interest in that play style.
You called my ruling a houserule and failed to acknowledge that your style is just as much of one. Mine at least has support in the books.
"Most familiars were originally animals, though the ritual of becoming a familiar makes them something more."
That something more being obvious is an easy way to make all familiars equally useful so that a bird or a cat isn't strictly better than a toad or imp.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
So unless NPCs know of the given character has a specific familiar for some reason, they will treat it like a normal version of whatever it is. That might be something they will ignore (like cats or rats) or it might be something that draws attention (like some kind of animal that is rare around here).
In terms of "what can familiars do" I would run "basically anything you can describe that seems reasonable" with the caveats that 1) A familiar cannot wield things, and 2) a familiar cannot activate things.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
It seems to me that there are two extremes: living breathing familiars, and pet rocks.
Nope, no bias showing here. LOL.
------
Anyway. My houserules that I am running with:
Minion commands last 1 minute out of combat for skills that they are not trained in. If they are trained in a skill, then the command lasts 10 minutes. Familiars are considered trained in a skill if they add your spellcasting modifier to the skill bonus - so Acrobatics and Stealth automatically, and any skills that they get the Skilled ability for.
If the familiar has manual dexterity (or valet), it can carry items up to light bulk. It can also carry or drag items up to 1 bulk, but gets the encumbered condition.
If it has toolbearer, it can carry the tools with no penalty no matter their bulk. The familiar can also use them when doing skill actions.
-----
So far, that has covered the scenarios that we have encountered. Things like long-term scouting work somewhat. The 10 minute time limit becomes a bit of a problem, but the familiar ability Share Senses and the Message cantrip can allow long-range commands to be given every 10 minutes.
Though there is still the problem with the skill bonuses. Level + MOD isn't a great skill bonus. And I do ask for deception checks instead of stealth checks when an animal familiar tries to do scouting in plain sight. It has to play itself off as being a normal animal - that is a lie - therefore Deception. They could also use Stealth if they are actually trying to stay out of sight. But they don't have any access to skill feats like Terrain Stalker, so that often doesn't work well.
My rating on using a familiar as a scout: Better than nothing if you are in a pinch - not better than an actual character with skill training and skill feats in stealth/scouting/infiltration. Which seems like a good place for a familiar to be in.
Some other uses: Medic in a pinch. Item repair. Knowledge in a recall knowledge skill no one else has.
And my favorite so far: An Android character's social presence service animal - Speech, Trained (diplomacy), Independent. The familiar can then be the translator/go-between for the Android trying to navigate through social interactions.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm hoping that if a bird has to make a Deception check to pretend to be a bird at all, that it at least gets a sizeable circumstance bonus to the check.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really don't care about familiars in exploration mode myself. Exploration mode can be handled in so many different ways whether a rogue scouting, divination spells, simply looking at what you want to see from a distance, druid shapeshifting and flying over, etc, etc.
I care only about what famliars can do in encounter mode during combat. That is what decides how effective they are. Exploration mode abilities are fluff in my experience because no DM will stop an adventure due to a failure during exploration.
What can a familiar do during encounter mode in combat? Sell me on familiars in that situation using the available rules.
So far I've seen the following:
1. Get a focus point once a day.
2. Blow them up using the final sacrifice spell once a day.
3. Try to use the breath weapon of a faerie dragon and hope it lands.
4. Use them as a targeting platform with Familiar Master using the metamagic feat that lets you originate spells from their location.
What are other encounter mode uses of a familiar that comply with the rules?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So unless NPCs know of the given character has a specific familiar for some reason, they will treat it like a normal version of whatever it is. That might be something they will ignore (like cats or rats) or it might be something that draws attention (like some kind of animal that is rare around here).
In terms of "what can familiars do" I would run "basically anything you can describe that seems reasonable" with the caveats that 1) A familiar cannot wield things, and 2) a familiar cannot activate things.
How do you feel about the fact that this will often make more exotic familiars feel like second-class citizens? These familiar scouting rules that people are fond of really just serve to punish people for adding flair to their familiars and taking jobs away from party members who may have built for scouting.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can choose a Tiny animal you want as your familiar, such as a bat, cat, raven, or snake. Some familiars are different, usually described in the ability that granted you a familiar; for example, a druid's leshy familiar is a Tiny plant instead of an animal, formed from a minor nature spirit. A familiar has the same level you do.
So to answer the OP, I think pet rocks aren't allowed by RAW, except for Baba Yaga Witches, who get an inanimate object familiar.
Maybe Kitsunes too, depending on if you count Star Orbs as a type of rock.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
People using RAW to determine that familiars are nearly useless are generally breaking RAW.
Familiars are 1. intended to, and 2. should be run as fairly versatile. Especially in exploration mode. Preparing for a heist? Familiars are an excellent resource. In encounter mode, they don't stand out or provide particular advantage, but that is just fine.
I missed this one.
Can you show me where it says that familiars can do anything as complex as scouting? The rules I have seem to call for their owner to command them at least once each round to make them do anything of value unless they have traits that allow them to do a VERY specific and narrow thing.
The rules I have seem to call for their owner to command them at least once each round to make them do anything of value unless they have traits that allow them to do a VERY specific and narrow thing.
That is very hotly contested.
To summarize: The rules specify commands for a minion during combat very well. But when not in combat, the term 'rounds' isn't defined. The closest we have to a definition for how long commands last when not tracking time in rounds is the statement in the Minion trait that says essentially that a minion will get bored after 1 minute and start doing its own thing. But whether that means that it was following your commands for that minute before getting bored or if it stopped doing anything after 4 seconds after you last said something to it is not specified in the rules.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The rules I have seem to call for their owner to command them at least once each round to make them do anything of value unless they have traits that allow them to do a VERY specific and narrow thing.That is very hotly contested.
To summarize: The rules specify commands for a minion during combat very well. But when not in combat, the term 'rounds' isn't defined. The closest we have to a definition for how long commands last when not tracking time in rounds is the statement in the Minion trait that says essentially that a minion will get bored after 1 minute and start doing its own thing. But whether that means that it was following your commands for that minute before getting bored or if it stopped doing anything after 4 seconds after you last said something to it is not specified in the rules.
In either case, one minute of action doesn't scout anything worth scouting.
EDIT: Also, if familiars are meant to scout why don't they get any rules related to that? We have class features and feats that help you scout so it clearly isn't something the design team just didn't think about.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can choose a Tiny animal you want as your familiar, such as a bat, cat, raven, or snake. Some familiars are different, usually described in the ability that granted you a familiar; for example, a druid's leshy familiar is a Tiny plant instead of an animal, formed from a minor nature spirit. A familiar has the same level you do.So to answer the OP, I think pet rocks aren't allowed by RAW, except for Baba Yaga Witches, who get an inanimate object familiar.
Maybe Kitsunes too, depending on if you count Star Orbs as a type of rock.
I would count Aeon Wyrd too.
How do you feel about the fact that this will often make more exotic familiars feel like second-class citizens?
Despite your pessimistic phrasing, I think that would be totally fine.
Most people who seek out exotic familiars generally do so either for (1) specific powers or (2) to stand out and get attention in some way, so I don't really see it as being a likely issue.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really don't care about familiars in exploration mode myself.
I care only about what famliars can do in encounter mode during combat. That is what decides how effective they are. Exploration mode abilities are fluff in my experience because no DM will stop an adventure due to a failure during exploration.
Ah. Now this - this is an important, fundamental difference in expectations about the game. This is useful to discuss.
My expectation is that if you want a minion that is powerful during combat, you should have an animal companion or similar. Something that is meant to be powerful in combat.
What can a familiar do during encounter mode in combat? Sell me on familiars in that situation using the available rules.
So far I've seen the following:
1. Get a focus point once a day.2. Blow them up using the final sacrifice spell once a day.
3. Try to use the breath weapon of a faerie dragon and hope it lands.
4. Use them as a targeting platform with Familiar Master using the metamagic feat that lets you originate spells from their location.
What are other encounter mode uses of a familiar that comply with the rules?
Spell delivery - followed by Final Sacrifice since they are going to end their turn immediately adjacent to an enemy.
Independent + Spellcasting. Have them cast Bless and they can spend their action either moving the emanation or expanding its radius.
But yeah, familiars are notably terrible in combat. From how terrible, I can only assume that this was by design - and that the design space for making useful familiars is in out of combat situations such as exploration mode.
Maybe what you are looking for is a class archetype that lets you trade out a familiar for an animal companion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really don't care about familiars in exploration mode myself.
I care only about what famliars can do in encounter mode during combat. That is what decides how effective they are. Exploration mode abilities are fluff in my experience because no DM will stop an adventure due to a failure during exploration.
Ah. Now this - this is an important, fundamental difference in expectations about the game. This is useful to discuss.
My expectation is that if you want a minion that is powerful during combat, you should have an animal companion or similar. Something that is meant to be powerful in combat.
What can a familiar do during encounter mode in combat? Sell me on familiars in that situation using the available rules.
So far I've seen the following:
1. Get a focus point once a day.2. Blow them up using the final sacrifice spell once a day.
3. Try to use the breath weapon of a faerie dragon and hope it lands.
4. Use them as a targeting platform with Familiar Master using the metamagic feat that lets you originate spells from their location.
What are other encounter mode uses of a familiar that comply with the rules?
Spell delivery - followed by Final Sacrifice since they are going to end their turn immediately adjacent to an enemy.
Independent + Spellcasting. Have them cast Bless and they can spend their action either moving the emanation or expanding its radius.
But yeah, familiars are notably terrible in combat. From how terrible, I can only assume that this was by design - and that the design space for making useful familiars is in out of combat situations such as exploration mode.
Maybe what you are looking for is a class archetype that lets you trade out a familiar for an animal companion.
It would be nice to be able to trade out class features. I know the one player that really likes playing witches would take an AC over a familiar all the time, every time.
So spellcasting is an option. Some spells that would be useful if used by a familiar.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
How do you feel about the fact that this will often make more exotic familiars feel like second-class citizens? These familiar scouting rules that people are fond of really just serve to punish people for adding flair to their familiars and taking jobs away from party members who may have built for scouting.So unless NPCs know of the given character has a specific familiar for some reason, they will treat it like a normal version of whatever it is. That might be something they will ignore (like cats or rats) or it might be something that draws attention (like some kind of animal that is rare around here).
In terms of "what can familiars do" I would run "basically anything you can describe that seems reasonable" with the caveats that 1) A familiar cannot wield things, and 2) a familiar cannot activate things.
A basic principle of GMing I think is important is to give the players what they want, and to have the game world respond to their choices. If you're deliberately picking something weird for your familiar, you would probably appreciate the game world to sometimes treat it as such. There's a difference however, from "An NPC remarks 'that's a strangely colored bird' when your brightly colored parrot familiar flies over the camp" and that same NPC actually putting 2 and 2 together before it's too late. Though I do think that when the party shows up with that parrot in tow someone responding "I knew something was up with that bird" seems appropriate.
I mean, my one character with a familiar is a Witch with Baba Yaga as his patron, and his familiar is a fine top hat made from spider silk and shadows, that when he's not wearing it opens its eyes, unfolds its fangs, and sprouts spider legs. If someone sees a fancy hat lying around they may think "what's that doing here" and if they see it scuttle away, they're probably going to freak out at least a little bit.
Delivering auras is not a bad idea. Does it work with anything other than bless or bane?
Would work with anything that is still relevant when cast at 5 levels lower than your highest level spell slots. So Bless/Bane would be the obvious choices. There may be others too.
If the spell is sustained, the familiar would be the one doing the sustain actions. Bless/Bane technically aren't sustained. There is a special action that may be taken, but failing to take the action doesn't end the spell.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
It would be nice to be able to trade out class features. I know the one player that really likes playing witches would take an AC over a familiar all the time, every time.
The point of class archetypes is to be able to trade out class features. So if we do ever get something official that does this, that would be what it comes packaged as.
The difficulty with Witch and class archetypes is that it is baked in to the rules for class archetypes generally that they have to have a 2nd level class feat that is mandatory to take. It is not rules-legal to create a class archetype that doesn't take up your 2nd level class feat slot.
And of course that feat slot for Witch characters is already taken up by Basic Lesson. Because a Witch without a good Hex is nothing more than a nerf'ed Wizard with a choice of tradition.
Please Paizo, can we get errata to put Basic Lesson as a 1st level class feature in place of Phase Familiar.
Delivering auras is not a bad idea. Does it work with anything other than bless or bane?Would work with anything that is still relevant when cast at 5 levels lower than your highest level spell slots. So Bless/Bane would be the obvious choices. There may be others too.
Having the Familiar cast Spiritual Weapon would be amusing. It wouldn't do all that much damage being cast at such a low level. But more than none since it would still be using your spell attack modifier. And would be using its own MAP progression just like Animal Companions would.
And let's not forget the ever-humble but ever-helpful earth whisp, either.
Hah. Indeed. The very definition of a pet rock.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The rules I have seem to call for their owner to command them at least once each round to make them do anything of value unless they have traits that allow them to do a VERY specific and narrow thing.That is very hotly contested.
To summarize: The rules specify commands for a minion during combat very well. But when not in combat, the term 'rounds' isn't defined. The closest we have to a definition for how long commands last when not tracking time in rounds is the statement in the Minion trait that says essentially that a minion will get bored after 1 minute and start doing its own thing. But whether that means that it was following your commands for that minute before getting bored or if it stopped doing anything after 4 seconds after you last said something to it is not specified in the rules.
Improvising New Activities under Exploration Activities explains how to translate "single action repeated roughly 10 times per minute", IE Command in exploration, into an Exploration activity. As such, rounds do still exist in exploration and are tracked by it: the fact that it's mostly glossed over is moot. You can also see Repeat a Spell for doing something described in combat actions repeatedly in exploration. Or Defend. So I can't see why Command would be treated differently.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Improvising New Activities under Exploration Activities explains how to translate "single action repeated roughly 10 times per minute", IE Command in exploration, into an Exploration activity. As such, rounds do still exist in exploration and are tracked by it: the fact that it's mostly glossed over is moot. You can also see Repeat a Spell for doing something described in combat actions repeatedly in exploration. Or Defend. So I can't see why Command would be treated differently.The rules I have seem to call for their owner to command them at least once each round to make them do anything of value unless they have traits that allow them to do a VERY specific and narrow thing.That is very hotly contested.
To summarize: The rules specify commands for a minion during combat very well. But when not in combat, the term 'rounds' isn't defined. The closest we have to a definition for how long commands last when not tracking time in rounds is the statement in the Minion trait that says essentially that a minion will get bored after 1 minute and start doing its own thing. But whether that means that it was following your commands for that minute before getting bored or if it stopped doing anything after 4 seconds after you last said something to it is not specified in the rules.
We have already hashed this out before. The summary of my stand on it is that a rule for improvising ad-hoc actions that players surprise the GM with shouldn't be used for something as central to the game as a Minion character. Especially since following this rule horribly breaks the game in several places such as chase scenes and stealth missions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We have already hashed this out before. The summary of my stand on it is that a rule for improvising ad-hoc actions that players surprise the GM with shouldn't be used for something as central to the game as a Minion character. Especially since following this rule horribly breaks the game in several places such as chase scenes and stealth missions.
Do you have anything in the rules text that supports this stance because this seems like a house rule that flies in the face of what the text of the rules tells you about actions out of combat.
|
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
How do you feel about the fact that this will often make more exotic familiars feel like second-class citizens? These familiar scouting rules that people are fond of really just serve to punish people for adding flair to their familiars and taking jobs away from party members who may have built for scouting.So unless NPCs know of the given character has a specific familiar for some reason, they will treat it like a normal version of whatever it is. That might be something they will ignore (like cats or rats) or it might be something that draws attention (like some kind of animal that is rare around here).
In terms of "what can familiars do" I would run "basically anything you can describe that seems reasonable" with the caveats that 1) A familiar cannot wield things, and 2) a familiar cannot activate things.
It's quite odd to me to phrase this as "familiar scouting rules" instead of what it is - an aim to make the world react consistently. That's not a judgement call - many people in this discussion have mentioned that they're simply interested in dungeons or similar environments, and don't care about the rest of the world, and that's a different way to play that is no better or worse. But when a GM is saying 'the bandits see a bat fly over their camp in the evening hours and they take no notice of it', it's not some codified rule system for familiar scouting - it's trying to make the world react consistently. If they attacked every bat that flew over the camp, that's a different way to characterise them (maybe bats are the enemy of their favoured animal) - but then if the players unleash bats to distract them while they sneak past, this sort of GMing style is saying they should be distracted. If they only attack the familiar bat, despite looking the same and doing the same thing, it's inconsistent and not the sort of game that's trying to be run.
This does give an advantage in different situations for different sorts of familiars - if your familiar is a baby deer, it might not stand out in the forest, but it'll attract a lot of attention in the city. If your familiar is a house cat, it'll be fine in most parts of the city, but would be out of place in the wild - or in fancier parts of the city. If your familiar is a luxury pet, they'd fit in well to a noble's party but not to the slums of the city. Most of the unique familiars will stand out in most situations, but also have unique abilities for you to use. That is to say, 'exotic' familiars will have different situations they'll be more suited to.
But is that making them a second-class citizen if your campaign takes place in a setting where that doesn't come up? I don't think anymore so than it makes uncommon and rare ancestries second-class citizens if you're not playing near where they're commonly found, or people using weapons not found in the local area, or even just people who aren't natives of the region. If someone is a local of the village we're in, I'm obviously going to give them more knowledge about everything to do with the local area than an equally skilled character who has never visited the location. I'm going to ask the party how they're planning on infiltrating the primarily-human cult if one of them is a sentient fragment of an outsider with a wood shell, or looks like an anthropomorphic cat when they're far away from anywhere that may have been seen. I don't think that's making any of them second-class citizens; that's making the world react to their choices, which I presume is part of the reason they made those choices. I think my games would be far less interesting if your Goloma from the Mwangi Expanse had the same experience as another player's Jadwiga when we're playing in Irrisen. Similarly, I don't think it's taking a job away from a gather-information focused party member if that Irriseni local already knows about the widely-accepted rumour that the local ruler is distantly related to Baba Yaga, unless you do it constantly - it's just a consequence of the established truths of the fiction we're telling.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We have already hashed this out before.
Yes we have and as I disagree on your summary, I posted. If it's cool for your post, it's cool for mine to give both sides.
The summary of my stand on it is that a rule for improvising ad-hoc actions that players surprise the GM with shouldn't be used for something as central to the game as a Minion character. Especially since following this rule horribly breaks the game in several places such as chase scenes and stealth missions.
I'm not sure how it breaks anything. There is a Chase subsystem that uses rounds and not an activity so I have no clue there and Avoid Notice is a thing for Exploration stealth: I'm not sure what difference it causes by being a recurring action as the activity specifically has you make Stealth rolls.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
We have already hashed this out before. The summary of my stand on it is that a rule for improvising ad-hoc actions that players surprise the GM with shouldn't be used for something as central to the game as a Minion character. Especially since following this rule horribly breaks the game in several places such as chase scenes and stealth missions.Do you have anything in the rules text that supports this stance because this seems like a house rule that flies in the face of what the text of the rules tells you about actions out of combat.
If left unattended for long enough, typically 1 minute, mindless minions usually don't act, animals follow their instincts, and sapient minions act how they please. A minion can't control other creatures.
"Sapient minions act how they please" - it flies in the face of any reasonable interpretation of the world that a familiar you have a non-antagonistic relationship with will sit around and do nothing while you're being chased, or will suddenly start loudly making noises/requiring you to yell at them every six seconds in the middle of a stealth mission. For familiars I guess you could argue that they come under the 'animals' category there given the unclear state of their mental capabilities (though I don't think it's particularly the intent, given they can speak), but even then - I think most animals are going to run away from something chasing them, or chase after something running away from them.
We have already hashed this out before. The summary of my stand on it is that a rule for improvising ad-hoc actions that players surprise the GM with shouldn't be used for something as central to the game as a Minion character. Especially since following this rule horribly breaks the game in several places such as chase scenes and stealth missions.Do you have anything in the rules text that supports this stance because this seems like a house rule that flies in the face of what the text of the rules tells you about actions out of combat.
Which part? The part about Improvising New Exploration Activities being designed for unexpected activities that the character does? The part where it is defining how much effort it takes the character to do the action, but doesn't say anything about how long Minions follow the instructions? Or the idea that if you have to do two actions each round (move and command minion) that means that you will get exhausted when you try to keep up in a chase scene?
Most likely you are meaning the part about the Improvised activities not being relevant to Minion characters. Yeah, if you have to give commands every round, then you could give commands at a rate of 1 per round and use that as a basis for a new improvised exploration activity. But nothing in that actually says that giving a command to a Minion when not in combat means that the Minion can't follow a particular command for more than 2 actions.
We have already hashed this out before.Yes we have and as I disagree on your summary, I posted. If it's cool for your post, it's cool for mine to give both sides.
Absolutely. My point in linking to and pointing out the other thread is that we don't necessarily need to go over everything again in this thread. And I will definitely agree that we did not come to a consensus in the previous thread. Nor do I think we will now by going over it again for a second time since none of the relevant rules have been changed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's quite odd to me to phrase this as "familiar scouting rules" instead of what it is - an aim to make the world react consistently.
The rules explicitly call out familiars as not being normal animals. Thus you are 100% making a call to have people treat them as normal animals of their species. Just as you make a call by allowing them to scout for more than a minute at a time.
This does give an advantage in different situations for different sorts of familiars.
This is pretty much ignoring the issue and pretending it isn't one. The player who decides their cat familiars actually looks more like a jumbled pile of bones stuffed into a cat skin will always be at a disadvantage at your table compared to a player who just took a plain black cat. There is no getting around the fact that your ruling actively punishes a character for trying to make their familiar unique.
Also, how is a familiar, especially a flying familiar, being used as a scout anywhere in the same league as having an NPC pass along plot information after the party takes time to gather information?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Most likely you are meaning the part about the Improvised activities not being relevant to Minion characters. Yeah, if you have to give commands every round, then you could give commands at a rate of 1 per round and use that as a basis for a new improvised exploration activity. But nothing in that actually says that giving a command to a Minion when not in combat means that the Minion can't follow a particular command for more than 2 actions.
Where do the rules give permission for a familiar to follow those commands for more than two actions?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Absolutely. My point in linking to and pointing out the other thread is that we don't necessarily need to go over everything again in this thread. And I will definitely agree that we did not come to a consensus in the previous thread. Nor do I think we will now by going over it again for a second time since none of the relevant rules have been changed.We have already hashed this out before.Yes we have and as I disagree on your summary, I posted. If it's cool for your post, it's cool for mine to give both sides.
Cool: we'll agree to disagree then. ;)
"Sapient minions act how they please" - it flies in the face of any reasonable interpretation of the world that a familiar you have a non-antagonistic relationship with will sit around and do nothing while you're being chased, or will suddenly start loudly making noises/requiring you to yell at them every six seconds in the middle of a stealth mission. For familiars I guess you could argue that they come under the 'animals' category there given the unclear state of their mental capabilities (though I don't think it's particularly the intent, given they can speak), but even then - I think most animals are going to run away from something chasing them, or chase after something running away from them.
How does an animal twisted by magic into being a vessel for their master's magical might please? I'd be very interested to hear your answer and see what in the rules text supports it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Most likely you are meaning the part about the Improvised activities not being relevant to Minion characters. Yeah, if you have to give commands every round, then you could give commands at a rate of 1 per round and use that as a basis for a new improvised exploration activity. But nothing in that actually says that giving a command to a Minion when not in combat means that the Minion can't follow a particular command for more than 2 actions.Where do the rules give permission for a familiar to follow those commands for more than two actions?
In the same non-existent place where it says that they can't follow instructions for more than 2 rounds when not in combat.
Cool: we'll agree to disagree then. ;)
More than that. Whenever the subject comes up, I'll link people to the thread where you thoroughly beat the snot out of me with the rule book and convinced me that the the rules for Minions are ambiguous enough that the pessimistic ruling where Minions have to be commanded every 6 seconds is actually a valid reading of the rules.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Most likely you are meaning the part about the Improvised activities not being relevant to Minion characters. Yeah, if you have to give commands every round, then you could give commands at a rate of 1 per round and use that as a basis for a new improvised exploration activity. But nothing in that actually says that giving a command to a Minion when not in combat means that the Minion can't follow a particular command for more than 2 actions.Where do the rules give permission for a familiar to follow those commands for more than two actions?
The part that says not to interpret the rules to absurd results. Check your rulebook. RAI is RAW.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The part that says not to interpret the rules to absurd results. Check your rulebook. RAI is RAW.Most likely you are meaning the part about the Improvised activities not being relevant to Minion characters. Yeah, if you have to give commands every round, then you could give commands at a rate of 1 per round and use that as a basis for a new improvised exploration activity. But nothing in that actually says that giving a command to a Minion when not in combat means that the Minion can't follow a particular command for more than 2 actions.Where do the rules give permission for a familiar to follow those commands for more than two actions?
If we go with that then I'd throw out needing a command every 6 seconds in combat: If we're following it for combat though, I don't see how it's absurd out of it. Any argument works as well for both in and out of combat.