| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well this thread has convinced me that using familiars to scout should use PC stealthing rules. You shouldn't invalidate PCs with a feat. I've also come to see familiar abilities as fluff abilities to shape your rp with your buddy, and master abilities as mechanical ones to augment your caster's power (largely by being a spell battery). I think that's a good spot for familiars to be for the cost of one or two feats depending on how many abilities you want. The only exception is witch and maybe wizard (though thesis plays a smaller part to power budget than a witch's familiar).I don't think anyone is arguing they aren't subject to the same PC stealth rules. Just pointing out the consequences of then failing a stealth check are not necessarily the same.
To be fair, some people are. Or at least arguing something of equivalent power. Being able to gather information without any risk of failure and consequences does seem like a gimmick that is too good to be true.
And while a familiar can provide a retinue of caster augmentation, they can also INSTEAD invest those abilities into scouting. If familiars weren't meant to scout, why are things like Darkvsion and Share Senses even options? Especially options with such opportunity cost.
And to everyone but the which there's a huge risk your familiar just gets killed, and the witch frankly needs that edge by most estimations.
Witch even more so doesn't want their familiar to die since you have to have your familiar in order to Refocus.
What opportunity cost? It can pick out new abilities the next day.
The opportunity cost mentioned is the other familiar abilities that you could have chosen that day instead of spending them on stealth skills and ability. Abilities that will be chosen the next day aren't an opportunity cost. That's not how opportunity cost works.
Well this thread has convinced me that using familiars to scout should use PC stealthing rules. You shouldn't invalidate PCs with a feat. I've also come to see familiar abilities as fluff abilities to shape your rp with your buddy, and master abilities as mechanical ones to augment your caster's power (largely by being a spell battery). I think that's a good spot for familiars to be for the cost of one or two feats depending on how many abilities you want. The only exception is witch and maybe wizard (though thesis plays a smaller part to power budget than a witch's familiar).I don't think anyone is arguing they aren't subject to the same PC stealth rules. Just pointing out the consequences of then failing a stealth check are not necessarily the same.To be fair, some people are. Or at least arguing something of equivalent power. Being able to gather information without any risk of failure and consequences does seem like a gimmick that is too good to be true.
And while a familiar can provide a retinue of caster augmentation, they can also INSTEAD invest those abilities into scouting. If familiars weren't meant to scout, why are things like Darkvsion and Share Senses even options? Especially options with such opportunity cost.
And to everyone but the which there's a huge risk your familiar just gets killed, and the witch frankly needs that edge by most estimations.
Witch even more so doesn't want their familiar to die since you have to have your familiar in order to Refocus.
What opportunity cost? It can pick out new abilities the next day.The opportunity cost mentioned is the other familiar abilities that you could have chosen that day instead of spending them on stealth skills and ability. Abilities that will be chosen the next day aren't an opportunity cost. That's not how opportunity cost works.
Right, the familiar can do a lot of individual things, but it can never do all the things at once.
On refocusing: I suppose in all fairness I haven't had the feat space to get a decent focus spell yet, so that hasn't come up yet.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This still doesn't make any sense. There is absolutely zero option for a familiar to outclass an Investigator in the scope of breaking into places, searching for clues, and other stuff.
*shrug* If you can't see it, I can't make you. IMO, I've given plenty of examples.
Can they really in practice though? Adventures don't always let you pause for a full day just so you can reconfigure your familiar load out. Even if they do, the intelligence you gathered is now a day old and may no longer apply. In a very static environment with no time pressure, you can then readjust your familiar to get your extra focus point and cantrip or whatever, but even then most parties I've played with aren't super receptive to that level of 15 minute adventuring day.
Well, compare it to a wizard's ability to switch out spells: I've seen PLENTY of people say wizards are great because they can tailor their spells and this is the same thing. If a prepared caster that loaded up on mental spells takes a day out to swap spells after hearing about a lot of undead around, then the familiar can swap too. And as I side note, I've seen a day taken out to alter things IN PRACTICE multiple times.
And what do you use as your default familiar load out at that point? Do you keep your familiar passive/master focused while you are going about town in case orcs attack? Or do you keep it scouting focused in case a sink hole opens in the town square and you need to explore it?
Myself? I generally focus on master abilities or familiar abilities that help the owner as I never know if the game I sit at would even allow scouting. Now IF I know scouting works and IF I know I'll be scouting something, I might set it to scouting.
I've yet to significantly deviate from my witch's default loadout because I don't have perfect information about what a day's challenges will bring.
Who needs perfect? Quite often you have an idea what challenges you're headed towards. You get a lead that something is up an the old fort, you might change for scouting. No one is saying anything about sudden instances or swapping from room to room or anything.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The opportunity cost mentioned is the other familiar abilities that you could have chosen that day instead of spending them on stealth skills and ability. Abilities that will be chosen the next day aren't an opportunity cost. That's not how opportunity cost works.
Generally the type of scouting I'm talking about is the only thing they'd be doing for the day. Reconnoiter an area like a fort, hold, town, house ect. Then the party prepares and goes the next day. Or the party is on an overland trek. I'm thinking more sandbox than you guys I suspect and less dungeon crawl.
This still doesn't make any sense. There is absolutely zero option for a familiar to outclass an Investigator in the scope of breaking into places, searching for clues, and other stuff.*shrug* If you can't see it, I can't make you. IMO, I've given plenty of examples.
You have listed a bunch of whiteroom theorycrafting - usually that is rather vague. You haven't listed out any concrete examples. Things like: this character with these stats had this familiar with these abilities chosen. Then this other character with these stats and these relevant feats was being outclassed by the familiar generally or in this specific circumstance that came up more than once during the session. The player was then upset with that because of these reasons and this conversation happened between the players.
Like I mentioned: I haven't ever seen anything like this. I can't even understand how it would come into being. So it doesn't make any sense to me to proactively cripple the familiar into non-existence just to prevent a problem that only happens in theory.
Well, compare it to a wizard's ability to switch out spells: I've seen PLENTY of people say wizards are great because they can tailor their spells and this is the same thing. If a prepared caster that loaded up on mental spells takes a day out to swap spells after hearing about a lot of undead around, then the familiar can swap too. And as I side note, I've seen a day taken out to alter things IN PRACTICE multiple times.
This is talking about prepared spellcasting, yes? I would agree that the ability to change out familiar abilities every day is very similar to a prepared spellcaster's ability to change out their spell loadout every day.
And yet there are still people who prefer spontaneous spellcasting. People even argue that it is more powerful in some cases.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yep, if you want any police/military dogs during training exercise, they will follow your last order and wait until you tell them to do something else. If you see those dudes in the cloth fat suits and the dog bites the arm, the dog will keep holding on, even at risk to itself, until it's trainer says it can let go,
What you’re describing is pretty much the opposite of needing orders every round. If the dog is a minion and isn’t independent, then in Pathfinder 2E he’d require an order to maintain the grapple, which would otherwise last only until the end of his next turn.
What's the reasonable maximum distance of commanding your familiar? As long as you can see it and it can hear you, you can make commands. Would message work to quietly command your familiar from a distance?
Officially, I don't know/rules don't say.
Unofficially, I would want the communication to be two-way. So Message along with Speech ability or Share Senses would work for me. Just so long as you can either query what is going on when you can't actually see it yourself, or be able to see/hear what is going on so that you can give accurate instructions.
I wonder what would happen if someone emulated your voice to give your familiar a false order.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder what would happen if someone emulated your voice to give your familiar a false order.
Deception to Impersonate at the very least. Probably wouldn't work at all if the master is still within sight/hearing of the familiar.
I probably wouldn't allow it at all. Give some fluff reason like what aobst128 mentioned. It is too much of a violation of player agency.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Arguments
The thing is, you frame your arguments by RAW and disprove anything out of it to the point of absurdity
We all agree that the rules for minions out of encounter mode are vague and unclear, but for you that means they are nonexistant and it should fall back to encounter rules for every and all it's interactions with the world.
That narrow view only leads to even more absurdity and even more "gamey" situations where it feels we're playing a computer RPG.
Do you really need to command it at all times with a powerful voice every 6 seconds, whole day, every day if you want it to follow along?
What happens if you get separated for more than a minute, out of sight/hearing range? does it act on it's animal instincts and just goes away to live in the wild?
Can you technically order your minion to death by not ordering it to drink or eat and not giving it a minute to let it's instincts kick in?
Do you also read other encounter rules literally like minions and transfer it to other modes of play?
where do you draw the line of absurdity?
As a GM what would you say to a player who wants her talking bird familiar to fly over distant(2000ft) castle ruins and report back what it saw?
I wonder what would happen if someone emulated your voice to give your familiar a false order.
The GM would roll a Deception check with modifiers....
The thing is, you frame your arguments by RAW and disprove anything out of it to the point of absurdity
RAW is RAW even if the results of it lead to absurdity.
We all agree that the rules for minions out of encounter mode are vague and unclear, but for you that means they are nonexistant and it should fall back to encounter rules for every and all it's interactions with the world.
Not so: IMO there is RAW in the Improvising Exploration Activities to change the Command action into an exploration activity.
That narrow view only leads to even more absurdity and even more "gamey" situations where it feels we're playing a computer RPG.
If that's how you feel, then it sounds like you'd want to houserule some things.
Do you really need to command it at all times with a powerful voice every 6 seconds, whole day, every day if you want it to follow along?
Yes.
What happens if you get separated for more than a minute, out of sight/hearing range? does it act on it's animal instincts and just goes away to live in the wild?
In general it just sits there unless it's in danger. We aren't told familiars are sapient and they do not have an INT stat so both "animals follow their instincts" and 'sapient minions act how they please" are possibilities but neither of them is follow an extended command.
Can you technically order your minion to death by not ordering it to drink or eat and not giving it a minute to let it's instincts kick in?
Well I guess if you want to give it commands every 6 seconds, 24/7... Who was it that complained about people going to "the point of absurdity" again?
Do you also read other encounter rules literally like minions and transfer it to other modes of play?
The Improvised Exploration Activities section is there for a reason. I can't think of a way to read that we're meant to NOT transfer things along the guidelines they give.
where do you draw the line of absurdity?
There is no line for RAW really: if you get an absurd result following the rules then something is wrong with the rules. "If a rule seems to have wording with problematic repercussions or doesn’t work as intended, work with your group to find a good solution, rather than just playing with the rule as printed." if you find it problematic, it doesn't mean it's not a rule [RAW] but that you should "find a good solution": IE a houserule.
As a GM what would you say to a player who wants her talking bird familiar to fly over distant(2000ft) castle ruins and report back what it saw?
Since PF2 doesn't really do actual distances for senses, I'll go with 'human' hearing distances. So in general, the normal intelligible outdoor range of the male human voice in still air is 180 m (590'). So once it hits that point it's not commanded any longer and the familiar stops doing anything except to take an action to fly every round as it can "escape obvious harm" without a command.
Since PF2 doesn't really do actual distances for senses, I'll go with 'human' hearing distances. So in general, the normal intelligible outdoor range of the male human voice in still air is 180 m (590'). So once it hits that point it's not commanded any longer and the familiar stops doing anything except to take an action to fly every round as it can "escape obvious harm" without a command.
The absurd starving question was just there for me to figure out how absurd are you willing to go in a given game.
in your last comment, you're quite willing to assume and make rulings, but in the case of minions, you won't assume anything and just apply RAW.
where do you see range in command action? why assume it has only 590ft range if we only bother with RAW?
If you present your logic to the said player and tell him that's impossible bc RAW, what would you tell him if he asks to show him where is command range limited by RAW?
what would you say to a player asking why he can't enter and stay for 7 seconds in another persons 5ft square out of encounter mode? or pass through a 80ft hallway fully occupied by his allies?
The opportunity cost mentioned is the other familiar abilities that you could have chosen that day instead of spending them on stealth skills and ability. Abilities that will be chosen the next day aren't an opportunity cost. That's not how opportunity cost works.Generally the type of scouting I'm talking about is the only thing they'd be doing for the day. Reconnoiter an area like a fort, hold, town, house ect. Then the party prepares and goes the next day. Or the party is on an overland trek. I'm thinking more sandbox than you guys I suspect and less dungeon crawl.
Looks like it. Remind me, do you ordinarily play PFS, modules, Adventure Paths, or homebrew worlds? Because I think this level of necessary adjudication seems most prevalent in homebrew games where not much is actually codified ahead of time, and that might also be playing a part in how you're viewing it over Morgan and Breith, who I believe do APs more if memory serves.
Yep, if you want any police/military dogs during training exercise, they will follow your last order and wait until you tell them to do something else. If you see those dudes in the cloth fat suits and the dog bites the arm, the dog will keep holding on, even at risk to itself, until it's trainer says it can let go,What you’re describing is pretty much the opposite of needing orders every round. If the dog is a minion and isn’t independent, then in Pathfinder 2E he’d require an order to maintain the grapple, which would otherwise last only until the end of his next turn.
I guess so, I forgot you technically need to maintain grapples in PF2, since no one at any of my tables really goes for them, I oft forget how they function.
The opportunity cost mentioned is the other familiar abilities that you could have chosen that day instead of spending them on stealth skills and ability. Abilities that will be chosen the next day aren't an opportunity cost. That's not how opportunity cost works.Generally the type of scouting I'm talking about is the only thing they'd be doing for the day. Reconnoiter an area like a fort, hold, town, house ect. Then the party prepares and goes the next day. Or the party is on an overland trek. I'm thinking more sandbox than you guys I suspect and less dungeon crawl.
Ah yes. The super secret adventuring during downtime game mode.
Yeah, I can see how that would be a problem - with the players, not the game rules. Since this is explicitly against what downtime mode is listed as being used for.
It is a cool houserule. But like with all other houserules you will have to be aware of problems that the houserule causes. Such as having one player decide to abandon their team and go try and solo the entire adventure.
So not really something that I think we should be accounting for when trying to adjudicate how familiars work in general.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I can see how that would be a problem - with the players, not the game rules. Since this is explicitly against what downtime mode is listed as being used for.
I fail to see what's against the rules here if you play familiars as being able to do there own thing out of combat: please point out what rule got violated? And how it would be ok to do a similar thing in exploration when the party is in the the next room? In fact, Scout Location is a downtime activity from the gamemastery book's Infiltration subsystem: "You spend time observing the place or group you wish to infiltrate."
Remind me, do you ordinarily play PFS, modules, Adventure Paths, or homebrew worlds? Because I think this level of necessary adjudication seems most prevalent in homebrew games where not much is actually codified ahead of time, and that might also be playing a part in how you're viewing it over Morgan and Breith, who I believe do APs more if memory serves.
I play everything except PFS at multiple tables.
The absurd starving question was just there for me to figure out how absurd are you willing to go in a given game.
*shrug* If you thought the question had some merit, then why call others out if you think they used the same tactic?
in your last comment, you're quite willing to assume and make rulings, but in the case of minions, you won't assume anything and just apply RAW.
I rarely DM but when I do I play as close to RAW as possible and only houserule things when they are truly broken: That isn't the case with familiars as they work fine in all modes of the game as they have multiple ways to be useful in every mode, just not in the way that they need their own activity.
where do you see range in command action? why assume it has only 590ft range if we only bother with RAW?
I thought I explained it. That's the "normal intelligible outdoor range of the male human voice" and Command is an action with the auditory trait: you have to hear it. Since the game doesn't give exact limits to senses, I'm going off the best guess I have, humans.
If you present your logic to the said player and tell him that's impossible bc RAW, what would you tell him if he asks to show him where is command range limited by RAW?
I'd tell him the familiar can't hear him and then ask him to point out hearing ranges. If further complaints happen then I'd explain that if we throw out sensible ranges for hearing then the same thing applies to monsters and that the enemies must then be able to hear the party 2000' away too from the castle...
what would you say to a player asking why he can't enter and stay for 7 seconds in another persons 5ft square out of encounter mode? or pass through a 80ft hallway fully occupied by his allies?
I have no idea what this has to do with the topic at hand. Your answers though are:
"You can’t end your turn in a square occupied by another creature, though you can end a move action in its square provided that you immediately use another move action to leave that square.": so no to that, it's RAW you can't unless the other person is dead and therefor an object.
"or pass through a 80ft hallway fully occupied by his allies?": this is fine as long as they have enough movement to make it through in a round. So for instance, a Spindly Anadi with a movement of 30' can start at one end and push their way through while a dwarf with a movement of 20' find that they can't push there way through.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Generally the type of scouting I'm talking about is the only thing they'd be doing for the day. Reconnoiter an area like a fort, hold, town, house ect. Then the party prepares and goes the next day. Or the party is on an overland trek. I'm thinking more sandbox than you guys I suspect and less dungeon crawl.Ah yes. The super secret adventuring during downtime game mode.
What’s downtime got to do with this? What graystone was describing sounds to me like Exploration Mode.
Yeah, I can see how that would be a problem - with the players, not the game rules. Since this is explicitly against what downtime mode is listed as being used for.
Maybe, but it’s right in line for what Exploration Mode is used for.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing is, you frame your arguments by RAW and disprove anything out of it to the point of absurdityRAW is RAW even if the results of it lead to absurdity.
If your reading of "RAW" leads to absurd results, it is incorrect and should be discarded by RAW.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If your reading of "RAW" leads to absurd results, it is incorrect and should be discarded by RAW.The thing is, you frame your arguments by RAW and disprove anything out of it to the point of absurdityRAW is RAW even if the results of it lead to absurdity.
"If a rule seems to have wording with problematic repercussions or doesn’t work as intended, work with your group to find a good solution, rather than just playing with the rule as printed."
The game suggests that you make a houserule in that situation: what it doesn't do is alter the RAW. For example, I think Bulk leads to absurd results, but that in no way makes it not RAW or that it's incorrect. For instance, the RAW rules allow a small creature with a 12 str to carry 2 people their own size or 1 person a size bigger around ALL day without it slowing them down or causing a penalty. IMO it's both absurd and RAW, but that doesn't make it less a rule of the game written in the book.
"You can’t end your turn in a square occupied by another creature, though you can end a move action in its square provided that you immediately use another move action to leave that square.": so no to that, it's RAW you can't unless the other person is dead and therefor an object.
"or pass through a 80ft hallway fully occupied by his allies?": this is fine as long as they have enough movement to make it through in a round. So for instance, a Spindly Anadi with a movement of 30' can start at one end and push their way through while a dwarf with a movement of 20' find that they can't push there way through.
Yeah, you're kinda willing to take it pretty far I guess.
Well then....I totally understand your view and your arguments(and you are 100% right by RAW). Physics would work so damn weird in your game to the point that it might even be fun to play, although having common sense wouldn't be as useful as one might hope.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If your reading of "RAW" leads to absurd results, it is incorrect and should be discarded by RAW.The thing is, you frame your arguments by RAW and disprove anything out of it to the point of absurdityRAW is RAW even if the results of it lead to absurdity.
Graystone wants official rulings on familiars during exploration mode or for long-term scouting or what not. A lot of other people probably want that too.
You can play like Raving Dork where you allow things to occur for story reasons by DM fiat. But that can vary from table to table and isn't covered in the rules where you all familiars to do whatever because they look like small animals and you assume none of the guards or enemies care. That's more a narrative method to handle the use of familiars than using the mechanical rules. I think Graystone would prefer something written down.
Yeah, you're kinda willing to take it pretty far I guess.
Well I'm posting how I think things are and how I feel about them, so why wouldn't I?
Well then....I totally understand your view and your arguments(and you are 100% right by RAW). Physics would work so damn weird in your game to the point that it might even be fun to play, although having common sense wouldn't be as useful as one might hope.
You'd be amazed how often people don't agree on what's common sense. IMO, having a stark difference between in combat and outside combat familiar actions wouldn't be common sense to me but it seem like other don't think so.
How does one not get the extra abilities for the familiar with the dedication? It does say you gain the familiar feat. It gives you a witch's familiar and basic witchcraft specifically says your familiar no longer get one less ability
Are you talking the witch multiclass dedication? If so, it's commonly assumed that when it says "Your familiar has one less familiar ability than normal" that means 1 less than what a witch starts out with: and Witch says "Your familiar gains an extra familiar ability, and gains another extra ability at 6th, 12th, and 18th levels." So normally a Witch starts out with 3 abilities, but the archetype drops that to 2 and Basic Witchcraft would return that back to the 'normal' 3.
On the flip side, it can be read that it follows the familiar abilities alone, so it'd start with 2 [as is normal for familiars] and lose one from the dedication. Best bet is to ask your DM.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think Graystone would prefer something written down.
100% correct, even if I 100% hate whatever rule it was: That way when I join a game, all I have to ask is 'do you have any houserule' and we both know what that means for familiars. As/is, it's a much more complicated discussion, which wouldn't be an issue in a vacuum, but with all the other 'rules' in the game that are felt up to the DM it can end up being a whole lot of different discussion just to get on the same page.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can play like Raving Dork where you allow things to occur for story reasons by DM fiat.
Who's that?
What’s downtime got to do with this? What graystone was describing sounds to me like Exploration Mode.Generally the type of scouting I'm talking about is the only thing they'd be doing for the day. Reconnoiter an area like a fort, hold, town, house ect. Then the party prepares and goes the next day. Or the party is on an overland trek. I'm thinking more sandbox than you guys I suspect and less dungeon crawl.Ah yes. The super secret adventuring during downtime game mode.
Taking an entire day doing one thing (in this case scouting) would be something I would run as downtime mode. But scouting is generally something that I would run in exploration mode because it is part of adventuring.
Yeah, I can see how that would be a problem - with the players, not the game rules. Since this is explicitly against what downtime mode is listed as being used for.I fail to see what's against the rules here if you play familiars as being able to do there own thing out of combat: please point out what rule got violated?
OK.
When the party isn’t adventuring, the characters are in downtime.
So scouting in an enemy camp where the scout is likely to be detected and attacked doesn't really qualify as "isn't adventuring" IMO.
and
Downtime mode is played day-by-day rather than minute-by-minute or scene-by-scene.
If you are summarizing one activity for an entire day, that would be downtime mode.
Taking an entire day doing one thing (in this case scouting) would be something I would run as downtime mode. But scouting is generally something that I would run in exploration mode because it is part of adventuring.
I was talking about exploration and left the duration vague: the only thing in question for the day was the scouting for the example, not that it was the only thing they could do in the day. That said, downtime works too.
So scouting in an enemy camp where the scout is likely to be detected and attacked doesn't really qualify as "isn't adventuring" IMO.
if that was true, there wouldn't be a Scout Location downtime activity that requires "normal, hard, or very hard DC Perception, Society or Stealth check" to do: listed obstacles include Guard Posts [requiring standard-very hard Deception, Diplomacy, or Stealth], Locked Doors [requiring hard-very hard Athletics or Thievery] and Traps [requiring hard-very hard Thievery]. So your perception of the quote you had doesn't seem to match the activities available.
If you are summarizing one activity for an entire day, that would be downtime mode.
I don't see how it would make a difference it it was.
So scouting in an enemy camp where the scout is likely to be detected and attacked doesn't really qualify as "isn't adventuring" IMO.if that was true, there wouldn't be a Scout Location downtime activity that requires "normal, hard, or very hard DC Perception, Society or Stealth check" to do: listed obstacles include Guard Posts [requiring standard-very hard Deception, Diplomacy, or Stealth], Locked Doors [requiring hard-very hard Athletics or Thievery] and Traps [requiring hard-very hard Thievery]. So your perception of the quote you had doesn't seem to match the activities available.
Hmm... Perhaps not on the details.
But downtime is meant for things that are no-risk. And things that aren't adventuring. Things that one character of the party would be doing on their own without stepping on the toes or feelings of the rest of the players at the table.
Because the same thing would happen if it was any other single character doing all of the meaningful things for that game session. If the Rogue went on a solo mission to scout and the rest of the party was cooling their heels in town doing nothing important... Still doesn't feel good unless that is what the entire table decided on to begin with. So that isn't a problem with the Minion and familiar rules.
But downtime is meant for things that are no-risk.
The difference in modes is mostly how bit the chunks of time are between the actions/activities.
And things that aren't adventuring.
Not so. Hexploration and Infiltration are 2 examples of doing just that but with a different time scale. For instance, Hexploration gives activities you can do from 1/2 to 4 per day and it gives specifics for what happens if you switch out of it.
"Switching out of Hexploration
Gamemastery Guide pg. 173
Most short encounters do not affect the number of hexploration activities that the PCs can perform during the day, but when the PCs take on multiple encounters or engage in activities that take hours rather than minutes, you’ll want to deduct the time from their available hexploration activities. For the story’s sake, it’s best to think of hexploration activities as the various things that the PCs have time to do in the daylight hours. For instance, maybe the group spends 2 of their 3 hexploration activities Reconnoitering a hex, finding a tengu monastery, and learning that it is a sprawling complex underneath a small wooded hill. You might decide that the PCs found it in the evening, and they have the choice between making a foray into the complex late in the day or pursuing some individual activities, camping for the night, and starting off fresh in the morning." And note Reconnoitering is an option.
Things that one character of the party would be doing on their own without stepping on the toes or feelings of the rest of the players at the table.
Not always: Cooperation [Core Rulebook pg. 500], "Multiple characters can cooperate on the same downtime task." There is also the issue with someone doing the downtime you spec'd for while also doing another activity... Do you really think someone couldn't feel miffed if someone can have their familiar scout something out while they retrain while you are stuck with just doing one of them?
Because the same thing would happen if it was any other single character doing all of the meaningful things for that game session.
It's less impactful for someone in a different niche, but yes it can happen: it's just twice likely with a familiar & PC as it'd be 2 activities that might be "doing all of the meaningful things for that game session."
If the Rogue went on a solo mission to scout and the rest of the party was cooling their heels in town doing nothing important...
Sure... but with a familiar it can be "the Rogue went on a solo mission to scout and the rest of the party was cooling their heels in town doing nothing important... AND then his familiar went on a solo mission to gather information and "the rest of the party was cooling their heels in town doing nothing important..." and now the rest of the party had to cool their heels twice. Or 'the familiar familiar scouts something out while the PC retrain while the other PC's are stuck with just doing retraining.
Still doesn't feel good unless that is what the entire table decided on to begin with. So that isn't a problem with the Minion and familiar rules.
The minion rules were made to specifically cut down on the impact of a minion so that picking one up doesn't net you a pile of independent actions: The "problem" would be when you toss that out when not in combat and return to allowing them to be activity multipliers that the minion trait tamped down on.
You'd be amazed how often people don't agree on what's common sense. IMO, having a stark difference between in combat and outside combat familiar actions wouldn't be common sense to me but it seem like other don't think so.
common sense is required to realize that weird encounter mode rules are there for encounter mode balance and not as representation of "reality"
playing familiars as RAW voice operated machines with adjustable features, or taking movement/spacing rules as literal rules of physics, or treating your PC as bunch of stats and not a fictional person are all 100% RAW, but it all lacks common sense IMO
Often disagreeing with people about common sense might be a sign that one should reevaluate ones sense of common sense
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
common sense is required to realize that weird encounter mode rules are there for encounter mode balance and not as representation of "reality"
SUPER HARD disagree: Encounter mode rules set the tone for how familiars and other minions are restricted as opposed to to PF1 where each companion creature had it's full turn of actions. Common sense to me tells me that there is no reason to restrict them in PF2 for encounters and then flip everything and let them do what they rules against in other modes. Also, NO mode of the game is a "representation of "reality"" which is why even a "common sense" approach can be at odds with rulings meant to be there for balance: nothing about a halfling picking up a 300 lbs fleshwarped, tucking it under it's arm and walking 8 hours without impairment makes the least bit of sense but it's the reality of PF2.
taking movement/spacing rules as literal rules of physics
They are the literal rules of the game". Any time spaces are recorded and used, the rules apply. So in that example of going through 80' of friendly people, you can't but if, for example, you're going through a crowded market that's technically the same but you aren't counting spaces and rounds you can because you never mark the end of a round or ending in any square.
treating your PC as bunch of stats and not a fictional person are all 100% RAW
Well I'll disagree on 2 fronts. #1 the books DO talk about roleplaying and #2 the book even says that "some players like to sit back and let the Game Master control everything": it's fine and expected that some players don't engage much and/or take an active role. If someone wants to play magic using guy #21 and the group is cool with that then it's fine. Not everyone is in the game for the same reasons and will have as much fun playing the stat of a PC as they would a tank or unit in a war game and that's not wrongbadfun.
playing familiars as RAW voice operated machines with adjustable features
Why is it against common sense? Nothing in the rules says they are anything else. Where does it say that they are roleplayed as full NPC's? They have no stats, must be controlled to get actions and no where in the rules does it state that they are sapient. They can be as animatronic or fully fledged as the Dm says they are.
Often disagreeing with people about common sense might be a sign that one should reevaluate ones sense of common sense
LOL Not at all, especially in PF2 where a LOT of the rules are left as DM fiat or as grey area. This means that there can be times when there isn't a correct answer or both sides are right [or wrong]. There is also the fact that I have a different set of expectations from the game then others do: I do not play with a single group but I play with multiple ones with different people and I get to see just about every way to read/play the game and get to see just how often common sense doesn't match between various players [myself included] and DMs.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I find this hard to believe when 3.5 (and PF1!) is in the picture, the game for which there is a specified DC in the rules for balancing on a 50 degree, wet slope in rough water that is 11 inches wide vs 13 inches.
Objectively, PF2 has more GM fiat than that.
yeah, it has that, but also convoluted, non streamlined, unclear rules on many key points, gaping unbalances, and many other shortcomings, which is why we have PF2 now, and it's much better in those regards than previous editions. Objectively.
but we digress
|
I think Graystone would prefer something written down.100% correct, even if I 100% hate whatever rule it was: That way when I join a game, all I have to ask is 'do you have any houserule' and we both know what that means for familiars. As/is, it's a much more complicated discussion, which wouldn't be an issue in a vacuum, but with all the other 'rules' in the game that are felt up to the DM it can end up being a whole lot of different discussion just to get on the same page.
This is surely overstating things. Sure, there are quite a few underdefined things in the game but you only have to ask about the ones that YOU care about for THAT character.
Its not likely that you really need to know about animal companions, familiars, wild shape, etc on the same character.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I find this hard to believe when 3.5 (and PF1!) is in the picture, the game for which there is a specified DC in the rules for balancing on a 50 degree, wet slope in rough water that is 11 inches wide vs 13 inches.
Objectively, PF2 has more GM fiat than that.
yeah, it has that, but also convoluted, non streamlined, unclear rules on many key points, gaping unbalances, and many other shortcomings, which is why we have PF2 now, and it's much better in those regards than previous editions. Objectively.
but we digress
I think the discussion here, as well as this greater thread, isn't making the distinction between "GM fiat" and "GM rulings". "GM fiat", as per the 'official' meaning of 'fiat': "An (arbitrary) order, decree, or command." Which means there is absolutely untreaded ground and rules need to be made on the spot for such a circumstance, or the rules are horrid and get overruled because using them sux. "GM ruling", as per what a judicial body does, is take existing rules that seem vague or don't perfectly cover the scenario we're in but fit others perfectly, and adapt them or the scenario to conform to precedent. Where this difference and complication comes is that some people are arguing for "rulings" (taking existing rules as trying to fit them around a different case: graystone) while other argue for "fiat" (make up rules on the spot, potentially using existing rules as a template, but not actually using those exact rules to solve the conundrum: breithauptclan/ravingdork).
This thread is essentially a jury box trying to make case law about familiars, while also pleading the legislature (Paizo) to make concrete laws to begin with! I love legal analogies.
Oh, just some weird blind, gray-haired eccentric who frequents these boards. I find him amusing, but I don't think you'd like him.You can play like Raving Dork where you allow things to occur for story reasons by DM fiat.Who's that?
Yeah, you're probably right. Sounds like a total deviant.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
TBH while I agree that familiars need to be run with some flexibility I think all the talk of GM fiat is missing one of the better points here.
Picking up a familiar is one singular feat for most spellcasters. It occupies a level where it competes with things like Eschew Materials, Widen Spell, Alchemical Savant, and Raise A Tome, etc. and anyone else can pick one up for a second level feat. A handful of ancestries can pick one up fairly easily too.
Some of the suggestions in this thread seem fairly out of line with that kind of power budget and I think that's worth keeping in mind when talking about RAW/RAI and 'common sense'