all 1st level feats have the potential to wreck havoc in the hands of well built 20th lvl characters in niche situations, what's your point? That it should stay gimped at 1st lvl bonuses?
So Eschew Materials can "potential to wreck havoc" at some level? Secondly, those examples aren't very niche: skill actions are pretty common. Is a bonus on EVERY Deception or Thievery skill check [Partner in Crime] niche? Not in my book.
Yup, that what it says RAW, along with "unlimited" range of command and some other silly interactions all over the game. We already established that most RP games are unplayable by strict RAW. Too many situations don't have rules elements, assuming that players will fill in the blanks to their liking(or just use "common sense" or "real world" experience)
We DO have a limit on Command as it has the auditory trait so it's whatever limit you put on hearing so it's not unlimited. And I don't recall ever agreeing that most games can't be played RAW: I play most RAW: "fill in the blanks" isn't altering RAW by the way. It's only not playing RAW when you actually change what the rules say.
Minions don't traditionally have reactions and thus can't usually aid anybody.
There are a series of abilities that specifically allow them to do so for specific skills/skill actions: for instance, Partner in Crime: I thought it would be clear I was referring to them because normal Aid use does not include automatic successes and automatic crits on the rolls like the familiar abilities do [and that I referenced in the examples].
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No one disputes those abilities. They are explicitly allowed. If anything it gives more weight to the argument that allowing familiars to do things that the player cobbles together from various multiple ability interactions is allowed. Because the power level of a familiar should be that high.
There is nothing wrong with doing allowed abilities... I don't know of us debating allowed options though in those "cobbles together from various multiple ability interactions". We're debating on what's allowed or not: if it was purely based on what was allowed, then we'd clearly be cobbling based on the Command [the allowed was to give familiar actions] out of combat. There is a difference between "the power level of a familiar should be that high" and 'the power level of a familiar should be that high, so they should have the full autonomy of a PC out of combat': they already have a high power level so I don't see why it needs MORE, so the weight you see added just seems to me like you trying to overload a 1st level feat with way too much power.
Perhaps you are the one over reacting because of your history with PF1 familiars?
Nope: PF1 familiars weren't action limited like PF2 and you had to go out of your way to buff them into doing crazy things like take an archetype or take an improved one. Most of my familiars do/did the same thing as PF2 and that's sit in a backpack out of the way.
My point is that the familiar is unsatisfying if run with a restrictive interpretation.
Sure, to YOU it is. I'll stipulate that. What I don't agree with is that they'd be unsatisfying as a general statement.
Even the role playing can get shut down. A familiar can't set up the tent, cook breakfast, deliver notes or spoken messages to other party members in a different room, or even carry on a conversation with you. Why? Because they can't use items, speak unless commanded, or remember what they are doing for more than 6 seconds. It portrays the familiar as a complete and total imbecile.
What you're doing isn't really what I'd say is role play: I was more talking about talking back and forth not having a manservant do chores for you. It's in no way treated as a "total imbecile", but as a "mystically bonded creatures tied to your magic" "that directly serve" you when you Command, that has no stats. It's has limits because it's a minion.
If you want a little role-play buddy that has no mechanical benefit, take a look at Bonded Animal.
You should note that they to have to use Command an Animal which requires you to spend as many actions as whatever activity you want them to do: so if you have a monkey and want them to put up a tent, you'd spend EXACTLY the same number of actions you'd spend to do it yourself. So really, it not is a much better place than a familiar. The main issues are still there.
No one disputes those abilities. They are explicitly allowed. If anything it gives more weight to the argument that allowing familiars to do things that the player cobbles together from various multiple ability interactions is allowed. Because the power level of a familiar should be that high.There is nothing wrong with doing allowed abilities... I don't know of us debating allowed options though in those "cobbles together from various multiple ability interactions". We're debating on what's allowed or not: if it was purely based on what was allowed, then we'd clearly be cobbling based on the Command [the allowed was to give familiar actions] out of combat. There is a difference between "the power level of a familiar should be that high" and 'the power level of a familiar should be that high, so they should have the full autonomy of a PC out of combat': they already have a high power level so I don't see why it needs MORE, so the weight you see added just seems to me like you trying to overload a 1st level feat with way too much power.
I'm not arguing that they should have the full autonomy of a PC when not in combat. The actual ruling that I use is that commands can last for 1 minute or 10 minutes if the familiar is the equivalent of trained in the skill being used (which, I would point out, doesn't actually violate any printed rules). All that this means is that the familiar can actually do something without constant supervision or causing activities to become exhausting. It doesn't allow familiars to go off doing things completely independently.
And again I would point out that using an activity cobbled together from various abilities comes at the cost of being able to do the arguably more powerful explicit abilities like Familiar's Focus or the various Aid reaction abilities. A basic familiar doesn't have the ability slots to do both.
Basically I just want familiars to be able to do what it says on the tin. Rather than having rules lawyers telling me that even if I pick some cool sounding abilities, the familiar still can't actually do anything.
But anyway, it feels like I am talking in circles again. So unless there is something new to say or the rules actually get fixed...
So Eschew Materials can "potential to wreck havoc" at some level?
yes, ofc, when your stripped naked wizard is able to Wish away enemy fiends for example. there is a niche situation for all of them. One more thing to point out, you can't ever loose eschew materials due to enemy fireball
We DO have a limit on Command as it has the auditory trait so it's whatever limit you put on hearing so it's not unlimited.
Right, and familiar hearing range by RAW is? non existent? like stats of familiars?
so is it zero or unlimited by RAW?in one example you're willing to fill in the gaps with common sense, but in the other you don't wanna do that. Why so? Why would you limit them with your logical assumptions on familiar hearing range, but wouldn't allow them some other logical stuff a magical trained animal would be able to do easily?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So Eschew Materials can "potential to wreck havoc" at some level?yes, ofc, when your stripped naked wizard is able to Wish away enemy fiends for example. there is a niche situation for all of them. One more thing to point out, you can't ever loose eschew materials due to enemy fireball
We DO have a limit on Command as it has the auditory trait so it's whatever limit you put on hearing so it's not unlimited.Right, and familiar hearing range by RAW is? non existent? like stats of familiars?
so is it zero or unlimited by RAW?in one example you're willing to fill in the gaps with common sense, but in the other you don't wanna do that. Why so? Why would you limit them with your logical assumptions on familiar hearing range, but wouldn't allow them some other logical stuff a magical trained animal would be able to do easily?
Because one interpretation breaks balance in a way the system set itself out to purge and the other doesn't. Autonomous creatures breaking action economy was the sole reason why summons and the Summoner class is nerfed in this edition.
Yep the entire reason for nerfed companions and the weirdness that is the entire Summoner class is that Paizo didn't want to deal with extra actions.
So making familiars, animal companions, and to a lesser extent Eidolons better just does not work as Paizo is making them.
If you want companions that are more realistic give them full action economy.
And are you meaning this just for in-combat action economy, or are you applying this to exploration action economy too?
yes, ofc, when your stripped naked wizard is able to Wish away enemy fiends for example. there is a niche situation for all of them. One more thing to point out, you can't ever loose eschew materials due to enemy fireball
If you want a super-niche use, it's the naked wizard senerio... And by RAW, you never ever lose your materials do to a fire ball unless it's not on you: attended objects don't get affected and even unattended ones aren't damaged by default. "Damaging an unattended item usually requires attacking it directly, and can be difficult due to that item’s Hardness and immunities. You usually can’t attack an attended object (one on a creature’s person)." Core Rulebook pg. 461
Right, and familiar hearing range by RAW is? non existent? like stats of familiars?
so is it zero or unlimited by RAW?in one example you're willing to fill in the gaps with common sense, but in the other you don't wanna do that. Why so? Why would you limit them with your logical assumptions on familiar hearing range, but wouldn't allow them some other logical stuff a magical trained animal would be able to do easily?
Hearing range is whatever you allow for PC's: it really isn't that hard. Do you let your PC's hear an unlimited range? Can they hear what's happening 3 countries away? No, you don't, so the Dm picks a reasonable distance depending on the situation. What wouldn't makes any sense [common or not], is for familiars to hear unlimited and PC's could only hear a reasonable distance.
On Common sense, I'm JUST asking you to use the same thing you'd rule for PCs [familiars do not have any boost in hearing]. That's all. Conflating this and full familiar autonomy is a HUGE leap of logic. That's because the hearing range is the same in all modes while full autonomy wouldn't be: therefor to me, common sense gets ignored to allow autonomy while it gets preserved for hearing.
The way I see it exploration and downtime are abstraction of the combat rules. If the combat rules say they get 3 actions, they get full action in the downtime rules. If they get the RAW combat rules, they get the abstract version of that during downtime. For better or worse.And are you meaning this just for in-combat action economy, or are you applying this to exploration action economy too?Yep the entire reason for nerfed companions and the weirdness that is the entire Summoner class is that Paizo didn't want to deal with extra actions.
So making familiars, animal companions, and to a lesser extent Eidolons better just does not work as Paizo is making them.
If you want companions that are more realistic give them full action economy.
So if I command a familiar for an uninterrupted 30 seconds, then it can do a 1 minute activity? Or command it for 5 minutes and it can then do a 10 minute activity?
This is at least a new interpretation.
I'm not arguing that they should have the full autonomy of a PC when not in combat. The actual ruling that I use is that commands can last for 1 minute or 10 minutes if the familiar is the equivalent of trained in the skill being used (which, I would point out, doesn't actually violate any printed rules). All that this means is that the familiar can actually do something without constant supervision or causing activities to become exhausting. It doesn't allow familiars to go off doing things completely independently.
The thing is, out of encounter mode, 1-10 min isn't substantially different than full autonomy IMO. It still allows for double the activities from the PC with a familiar. And as for "doesn't actually violate any printed rules", I'll say it doesn't follow the guidelines for improvising activities: so it violates the intent of the rules if nothing else. And even then, it DOES allow them to be independent for 1-10 min which can be a lot of time. They can still scout out someplace in 10 min chunks or do another project with minimal contact from the PC.
And again I would point out that using an activity cobbled together from various abilities comes at the cost of being able to do the arguably more powerful explicit abilities like Familiar's Focus or the various Aid reaction abilities. A basic familiar doesn't have the ability slots to do both.
Sure if you're looking at it as either or but it doesn't have to be: for instance, you can scout out someplace today [in 10 min blocks], rest and then have your 'power' load-out the next day.
Basically I just want familiars to be able to do what it says on the tin. Rather than having rules lawyers telling me that even if I pick some cool sounding abilities, the familiar still can't actually do anything.
Well, it'd be nice to have CLEAR rules for a lot of things in the game like Recall checks and this. We didn't get that though. The simple answer is to "pick some cool sounding abilities" that do not require your familiar to act on it's own. There are plenty of abilities that don't to pick from. That's what I do: at least you aren't stuck only picking set abilities.
But anyway, it feels like I am talking in circles again. So unless there is something new to say or the rules actually get fixed...
Well, I've already said I'd like to see guidelines for rules like this. It's one of my issues with the game, that SO much has been left for us to figure out how it's meant to work without much if any guidelines...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
as for "doesn't actually violate any printed rules", I'll say it doesn't follow the guidelines for improvising activities: so it violates the intent of the rules if nothing else.
Well, you have to first rule that commands only last 6 seconds before the need for improvised activity guidelines comes into play. So using the improvised activity guidelines as evidence to prove your argument is circular.
But the rest of your reply there I can agree to disagree on.
And yes, I think both of us would like to have errata for this particular problem. If nothing else, to avoid these endless arguments.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, you have to first rule that commands only last 6 seconds before the need for improvised activity guidelines comes into play. So using the improvised activity guidelines as evidence to prove your argument is circular.
Following the existing guidelines is circular? How. It literally tells you how to convert encounter actions into exploration activities. The guidelines just are: it's not a circular argument to point out when adding a red dye to a shirt, the shirt should end up red: it's just the logical conclusion to come to as an expected outcome and you have to have something unexpected happen for a different outcome. I don't see the unexpected event here that changes it to something outside the guidelines.
IMO, it's a logical leap to expect a dramatic alteration of command length because of the mode change even though the guidelines do not support it. I don't see a way to get commands to be a different length in the rules framework we have without handwaving the guidelines away, as there really isn't a time where you move from encounter to exploration when the improvised activity guidelines wouldn't come into play for a new activity: you're changing command [1 action] to an activity [a activity] and there isn't anyplace in-between to alter the duration. Activities are "based on the equivalent of 1 action per 6 seconds" or "2 actions per 12 seconds, averaging to 1 action per 6 seconds": the results are the same for them though. There are no examples of an action charging into an activity with a different duration: while there are activities that are 10 min like Affix Talisman, they aren't actions first while the ones that where actions are just a series of actions strung together with no set end.
So IMO, you have to move outside the rules framework given to get commands of anything past 6 seconds. That's cool is you want to do so, but I wouldn't say it follows any rule and it ignore the guidelines: I'd personally put it in the houserule box.
But the rest of your reply there I can agree to disagree on.
And yes, I think both of us would like to have errata for this particular problem. If nothing else, to avoid these endless arguments.
Agreed.
Following the existing guidelines is circular? How.
I stated how it is circular. The improvised activity guidelines are for when you are doing something at a rate of one action per six seconds for an exploration activity. That is the only time that the improvised activity guideline is needed.
So if you want to use the improvised activity guideline in a proof, you have to first state that commanding a familiar must be done at a rate of one command per six seconds - otherwise the improvised activity guidelines wouldn't apply. Since that six second command duration is what is being disputed, it can't be used as a premise of your argument. That is circular logic.
So as with all other circular arguments, if you accept any one of the statements, then the rest follow. But it is also valid logic to reject the entire lot of them. In this case, rejecting both that commands to a familiar outside of combat only last six seconds and that the improvised activity guidelines apply to this scenario.
So IMO, you have to move outside the rules framework given to get commands of anything past 6 seconds. That's cool is you want to do so, but I wouldn't say it follows any rule and it ignore the guidelines
Well, there is also the 1 minute guideline in the Minion trait for when the minion mechanically comes under GM control. That is also a printed rule.
But still the underlying problem is that the Minion trait managed to forget a rather important case.
if (gameMode == GameMode.Encounter) {
master.spendAction(1, 'command minion');
minion.gainAction(2);
} else {
// Other game modes
if (minion.commandList == null) {
wait(60000); // argument unit in milliseconds
minion.commandedBy = player.GM;
} else {
throw new NotImplementedException();
}
}
And by RAW, you never ever lose your materials do to a fireball unless it's not on you
I was referring to your familiar getting blasted, and all his abilities with him. The wizard freed himself from the shackles after getting caught by the BBEG, so he was naked, and then he used Wish to Banish 8 fiends guarding the rest of the party
Hearing range is whatever you allow for PC's. Do you let your PC's hear an unlimited range? Can they hear what's happening 3 countries away? No, you don't, so the Dm picks a reasonable distance depending on the situation. What wouldn't makes any sense [common or not], is for familiars to hear unlimited and PC's could only hear a reasonable distance.
So now you have an issue with extrapolating rules to absurdity? Why is hearing different than spacing or minion rules?
I don't let my PCs have unlimited hearing range, but by RAW, there is nothing on that in the rules(in any mode), same as there is nothing on familiars, pets, companions, trained animals, henchmen or any other kind of underling outside of encounter mode. So you use same common sense and allow minions to perform simple tasks like standing on guard or birds eye view of something more distant than your voice range. Nothing that would brake the balance, just a bit of RP utility. Sure there will be niche situation where they will shine or even save the day, but that's ok.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because one interpretation breaks balance in a way the system set itself out to purge and the other doesn't. Autonomous creatures breaking action economy was the sole reason why summons and the Summoner class is nerfed in this edition.
No it doesn't. All of us still participating in this discussion play them RAW during initiative. And vast majority agrees that any kind of complex tasks require constant command and supervision even during exploration mode, but for flying familiar to not be able to fly straight up 1200ft and look around and then report back is an extremely limiting interpretation by any standard.
What do you say to a player that picked flight and speech as a GM?
"Congrats, you just played yourself, your familiar can speak, but it doesn't have mental stats, so all you hear is mrrghhhbrghhrrr, or it can repeat what you order it to say, so you should have made it into a backpack battery"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And by RAW, you never ever lose your materials do to a fireball unless it's not on youI was referring to your familiar getting blasted, and all his abilities with him. The wizard freed himself from the shackles after getting caught by the BBEG, so he was naked, and then he used Wish to Banish 8 fiends guarding the rest of the party
Hearing range is whatever you allow for PC's. Do you let your PC's hear an unlimited range? Can they hear what's happening 3 countries away? No, you don't, so the Dm picks a reasonable distance depending on the situation. What wouldn't makes any sense [common or not], is for familiars to hear unlimited and PC's could only hear a reasonable distance.So now you have an issue with extrapolating rules to absurdity? Why is hearing different than spacing or minion rules?
I don't let my PCs have unlimited hearing range, but by RAW, there is nothing on that in the rules(in any mode), same as there is nothing on familiars, pets, companions, trained animals, henchmen or any other kind of underling outside of encounter mode. So you use same common sense and allow minions to perform simple tasks like standing on guard or birds eye view of something more distant than your voice range. Nothing that would brake the balance, just a bit of RP utility. Sure there will be niche situation where they will shine or even save the day, but that's ok.
Wish being used in that manner is beyond the scope of the spell (without repercussions, anyway), so it's still pretty contrived.
Hearing has less actual rules to it by comparison. What's a trait with an entry compared to an entire rules chapter dedicated to it? Not very fleshed out by comparison, which means the intent for GM FIAT to take precedence is much more required in that case. Compared to arguing that 3 feet matter in a grid spaced out to 5 feet per square, it's clear which requires more or less GM FIAT.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because one interpretation breaks balance in a way the system set itself out to purge and the other doesn't. Autonomous creatures breaking action economy was the sole reason why summons and the Summoner class is nerfed in this edition.No it doesn't. All of us still participating in this discussion play them RAW during initiative. And vast majority agrees that any kind of complex tasks require constant command and supervision even during exploration mode, but for flying familiar to not be able to fly straight up 1200ft and look around and then report back is an extremely limiting interpretation by any standard.
What do you say to a player that picked flight and speech as a GM?
"Congrats, you just played yourself, your familiar can speak, but it doesn't have mental stats, so all you hear is mrrghhhbrghhrrr, or it can repeat what you order it to say, so you should have made it into a backpack battery"
Exploration and downtime rules are the big issue, not encounter rules. And that's because their viability is 100% in GM FIAT territory. You can't reasonably rely on a familiar from table to table, a big issue in PFS of all places. And home games vary as well.
I could do that, since by RAW they have no attributes whatsoever, but even if I permit it, the odds of those choices being impactful are pretty slim. Flight is limited across the board, which encounter design takes into consideration, and speech is niche unless you specifically plan engagements around it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I stated how it is circular. The improvised activity guidelines are for when you are doing something at a rate of one action per six seconds for an exploration activity. That is the only time that the improvised activity guideline is needed.
Yes... That's what happens when you take something that takes an single action and translate it into exploration. You have to ignore this to go forward with something else.
So if you want to use the improvised activity guideline in a proof, you have to first state that commanding a familiar must be done at a rate of one command per six seconds - otherwise the improvised activity guidelines wouldn't apply. Since that six second command duration is what is being disputed, it can't be used as a premise of your argument. That is circular logic.
It's not circular: it just IS. That is what the Encounter action Command does, full stop. There is a formula to change it into an encounter activity, full stop. None of that presumes anything.
"If the activity is similar to an action someone could use in an encounter, such as Avoid Notice, it usually consists of a single action repeated roughly 10 times per minute (such as using the Sneak action 10 times) or an alternation of actions that works out similarly (such as Search, which alternates Stride and Seek)."
Is commanding a familiar similar to an action you can do in an encounter?: yes
Then "it usually consists of a single action repeated roughly 10 times per minute".
Well, there is also the 1 minute guideline in the Minion trait for when the minion mechanically comes under GM control. That is also a printed rule.
And 100% meaningless. At best, it turns the familiar into a DM NPC out of your control as you are, by definition, ignoring it and not controlling it for 1 min. SO I don't see how it adds to a debate on how your familiar does anything for you out of combat: as an animal, it can just follow it's instincts and go chase mice...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was referring to your familiar getting blasted, and all his abilities with him. The wizard freed himself from the shackles after getting caught by the BBEG, so he was naked, and then he used Wish to Banish 8 fiends guarding the rest of the party
A wizard that can cast wish, has his Pet Cache and ignores that blasting to his familiar...
So now you have an issue with extrapolating rules to absurdity?
If you recall YOU where the one with an issue with it: I just called you out on the hypocrisy of of then using it yourself. :P
Why is hearing different than spacing or minion rules?
I don't get what you mean by spacing and minion rules do not affects every creature with hearing, so by default it much be different than something that is limited so specific creatures.
I don't let my PCs have unlimited hearing range, but by RAW, there is nothing on that in the rules(in any mode), same as there is nothing on familiars, pets, companions, trained animals, henchmen or any other kind of underling outside of encounter mode.
Sure, but again it's different because it works BOTH ways: if you give a ridiculous range to hearing, the bad guys have it too. That's fundamentally different from Minions as it's an exclusive rule, not an inclusive one like hearing.
So you use same common sense and allow minions to perform simple tasks like standing on guard or birds eye view of something more distant than your voice range.
But that NOT by any stretch of the imagination common sense IMO. It's a false equivalency between minion rules, with HAVE a mechanism to translate Command into an activity, and hearing which is an inclusive rule which equally impacts every creature.
Nothing that would brake the balance
Not true: 2 activities is inherently breaking the balance put in place of PC's only getting 1.
just a bit of RP utility
By getting twice what other PC's get.
Sure there will be niche situation where they will shine or even save the day, but that's ok.
IMO, no, it's not ok as Eidolons needed a SPECIFIC ability to get Exploration activities and you want t give it to familiars for free.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like the difference between minions in exploration mode and encounter mode is the difference between "going on a walk with your dog" and "giving commands to your dog in order to complete the agility course in the right order".
In the former case the dog will go where it goes but will generally stick with you, but in the latter it won't know to go through the weave poles instead of up the ramp or through the tunnels unless you give the appropriate commands.
Wish being used in that manner is beyond the scope of the spell (without repercussions, anyway), so it's still pretty contrived.
whaa? just use it as 9th lvl banishment if you have brains
but you missed my point by a mile in your eagerness to correct my silly example that I only posted to show both Graystone and you that every feat has it's niche situation where it kicks ass. So do familiars
I feel like the difference between minions in exploration mode and encounter mode is the difference between "going on a walk with your dog" and "giving commands to your dog in order to complete the agility course in the right order".
This doesn't follow for me because PC's don't have that difference: the basics of exploration is doing the exact same action every 6 seconds so why are we expecting familiars to be different? Avoid Notice is Sneak used repeatedly, Defend is Raise Shield used repeatedly, Detect Magic is Cast a spell done repeatedly but for some reason people don't want to follow the pattern with Command.
In the former case the dog will go where it goes but will generally stick with you, but in the latter it won't know to go through the weave poles instead of up the ramp or through the tunnels unless you give the appropriate commands.
IMO, passively following is outside the scope of the rules: even non-minion animals require actions to get them to do things. In fact, the rules specifically say "It forgets all commands beyond what it can accomplish on its turn": this means that even something as simple as 'follow me' gets forgotten 6 seconds later BY RAW. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I only posted to show both Graystone and you that every feat has it's niche situation where it kicks ass.
I still haven't seen the kick ass of eschew materials... It the VERY BEST light, it has a VERY NARROW niche where it isn't useless.
EDIT: to be fair, it's not 100% useless as it does save you a whole 5 sp. :P
So do familiars
I've always said that familiars are a powerful feat: I just disagree that they NEED to have unfettered out of combat actions/activities for that to be true.
A wizard that can cast wish, has his Pet Cache and ignores that blasting to his familiar...
oh, so it's a feat and a spell slot investment to be fully functional?
in that case it's much worse than any other 1st level feat right? even without you misinterpreting it as: "very limited range voice operated drones that fall down from the sky and die if not commanded to continue to fly that round" and then calling it common senseIf you recall YOU where the one with an issue with it: I just called you out on the hypocrisy of of then using it yourself. :P
So basically you're just trolling now? I made an honest effort to try to make you see your own hypocrisy in sticking blindly to RAW in one case, and then going all "real world examples" and "common sense" in another case. YOU were the one that advocated spacing to absurdity, but refuse to do so on hearing because......it's more silly?
You see, everybody draws a line somewhere, you just drew it 2 miles further than most of us. For you it's hearing I guess
"If the activity is similar to an action someone could use in an encounter, such as Avoid Notice, it usually consists of a single action repeated roughly 10 times per minute (such as using the Sneak action 10 times) or an alternation of actions that works out similarly (such as Search, which alternates Stride and Seek)."
Is commanding a familiar similar to an action you can do in an encounter?: yes
Then "it usually consists of a single action repeated roughly 10 times per minute".
Don't confuse the amount of time it takes to do the action with the amount of time that the effect of the action lasts.
For example if I want to repeatedly cast Bullhorn as an activity, I don't need to use the improvised activity rules to do it. Because the Bullhorn cantrip lasts for 10 minutes even though it costs two actions to use.
Casting the Shield cantrip would take an action repeated 10 times per minute.
So do you see why if we assume that familiar commands last 6 seconds then we have to use the improvised activity rules - but if we don't assume that, then the improvised activity rules don't apply. If we instead assume that commands last for 1 minute, then the master only has to give commands to the familiar at a rate of 1 per minute, not 10 per minute.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Literally nothing in the game says that commands last for 1 minute.
In fact it's the exact opposite. You are told explicitly that you must use the command action every turn.
IF Paizo had said that familiars minions follow the command for 1 minute or until you gave them another command. But that is explicitly not what was done.
Again, that is the whole point of the problem here. Literally nothing in the game says that commands last any specified amount of time when not in combat. Read the Minion trait again.
Your minion acts on your turn in combat, once per turn, when you spend an action to issue it commands.
And when not in combat???? The rules literally say nothing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So we have 330 odd posts about a major class feature/feat choice that people can not agree on how it works. And we are told that there are worse undefined, vague important game mechanics. Wow - and people are ok with Paizo not offering up any type of answers
All that proves is that people like to argue. The answers are already in the book for people willing to see them.
The rule is clear: Exploration activities are alternating between 2 combat actions in 12 second intervals.
The application is clear: Use it when trying to figure out a new activity that we have not...
Do you deny any of what I said about the improvising new activities guidelines?
You keep making the same error over and over again.
Don't confuse the amount of time it takes to do the action with the amount of time that the effect of the action lasts.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wish being used in that manner is beyond the scope of the spell (without repercussions, anyway), so it's still pretty contrived.whaa? just use it as 9th lvl banishment if you have brains
but you missed my point by a mile in your eagerness to correct my silly example that I only posted to show both Graystone and you that every feat has it's niche situation where it kicks ass. So do familiars
Nothing about Wish says you use automatically heightened effects of spells you mimic. And even if you do, they still get saves. It's not automatic. The odds of 8 credible-threat enemies failing their saves, at best, is very, very slim, still making this very, very contrived. You might get 4 of them on average, but that's still 4 appropriate level demons beating down a naked wizard and their friends for attempting escape.
The example doesn't matter anyway because we are using 1st level feats to do things that require incredible investment from actual PCs to accomplish for exploration and downtime activities. Instead of a Druid or other spellcaster using a higher level spell slot, why not just use a 1st level Familiar feat instead?
Anyone who's played PF1 knows the Leadership feat is the most overpowered feat in that edition, bar none. This is the equivalent of the Leadership feat being permitted to Familiars, and GMs were encouraged in PF1 to curtail the followers in PF1 as well. This is no different.
The rule is clear: Exploration activities are alternating between 2 combat actions in 12 second intervals.
The application is clear: Use it when trying to figure out a new activity that we have not listed.
The edge cases are clear: Actions with a duration longer than 1 round will use up less actions in a 10 minute interval, but they still need to be accounted off (no free actions)
The limitations are clear: You cannot get ahead of other options when improvising an activity. Also spending 2 actions every 6 seconds for longer than combat will exhaust you.Do you deny any of what I said about the improvising new activities guidelines?
The problem isn't with improvising new activities. It is with knowing when to apply improvising new activities.
Look at the two cantrips Shield and Bullhorn again.
Shield costs 1 action to use and lasts 1 round. So if you want to constantly keep Shield up you have to cast it once per round - which equates to 10 times per minute. So applying the improvised activities rule here makes sense.
Bullhorn costs 2 actions to use and lasts 10 minutes. So if I am announcing for a two-hour-long sporting event, how often do I need to cast Bullhorn? It isn't two actions per round (which would be an exhausting activity). Why not? The cantrip does indeed cost two actions to cast. The reason is because of the duration of the effect. Because it lasts 10 minutes, I only need to cast the cantrip at a rate of once per 10 minutes. Much, much longer than the 10 times per minute that the improvising new activities rules apply to.
So like I said: don't confuse the amount of time that it takes to do the action with the length of time that the effect of the action lasts. It is the length of time that the effect lasts that determines how frequently you have to repeat the action when using it as an exploration activity.
So now apply that line of thinking to commanding a familiar. In combat a familiar will follow a command for two actions. So if you want to have a familiar do something while you and your buddies are holding off a group of monsters, you have to give commands at a rate of 1 per round. But nothing in the Minion trait tells us how long the minion will follow commands when not in the thick of a battle. If you rule that commands outside of battle also only last 4 seconds and therefore have to be repeated at a rate of 10 per minute, then the improvised activity rule would apply.
But there are other equally valid lengths of time that a command to a familiar could be considered to last for. 1 minute. 10 minutes. Indefinitely. Because the Minion trait doesn't actually specify. It only gives a duration of the commands when in combat.
And any length of time other than 2 actions means that the improvised activity rule is not meaningful. Because you don't have to repeat the commands 10 times per minute. Much like the example with Bullhorn. If the command to the minion lasts for 1 minute, you only need to repeat the command once per minute.
And I don't know how much more clearly I can explain this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now that we got those straight minions we are told need to be commanded every round for them to follow commands. Not every other round, not every minute, every round.
In combat.
You are forgetting the 'in combat' part of that rule sentence again.
Your minion acts on your turn in combat, once per turn, when you spend an action to issue it commands.
If you don't see that the rule doesn't specify the action economy for minions when not in combat where rounds and turns are not even defined, then there is no way that this conversation is going to be meaningful. We can't possibly come to any ground similar enough to even agree to disagree on.
Not really - the people are saying that the answers do not exist in the book. If the answer is "use your own judgement or interpolate" then that is not an answer as to how it works, it is a work around for an undefined rule/mechanic.So we have 330 odd posts about a major class feature/feat choice that people can not agree on how it works. And we are told that there are worse undefined, vague important game mechanics. Wow - and people are ok with Paizo not offering up any type of answersAll that proves is that people like to argue. The answers are already in the book for people willing to see them.
Yep its amazing people are still driving around the same block on this one.
You either accept in it your game or you don't.You either like that Paizo have done this or don't.
I'm not really seeing any new information past the opening few statements.
Its a very subjective taste thing so no decision is going to be forthcoming. Especially as Paizo will now realize how split their customers are, and are very likely to give us a vague centrist do what you like answer or nothing at all.
oh, so it's a feat and a spell slot investment to be fully functional?
in that case it's much worse than any other 1st level feat right? even without you misinterpreting it as: "very limited range voice operated drones that fall down from the sky and die if not commanded to continue to fly that round" and then calling it common sense
I don't know WHY you insist on taking everything to the nth degree. You where talking about a caster using wish spells to banish 8 outsiders at a time... By that level, I think they can manage to toss out a 1st level slot to stash a familiar: tossing them in a backpack does just as well in most cases though.
So to reply:
Does it need a 1st level slot?: no
Is it worse than other 1st level feats? No
Am I misinterpreting familiar rules? Not IMO, as no one has shown anything else that's based on actual rules or guidelines.
Is it common sense? It matches mine, yes.
So basically you're just trolling now? I made an honest effort to try to make you see your own hypocrisy in sticking blindly to RAW in one case, and then going all "real world examples" and "common sense" in another case. YOU were the one that advocated spacing to absurdity, but refuse to do so on hearing because......it's more silly?
You see, everybody draws a line somewhere, you just drew it 2 miles further than most of us. For you it's hearing I guess
Sigh... If anyone is pushing things it's the person in your mirror. 'I used hypocrisy because I think you're a hypocrite!!!' And I'm trolling... Somehow ruling a sensible hearing distance was 2 miles too far. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Don't confuse the amount of time it takes to do the action with the amount of time that the effect of the action lasts.
I don't see how I am.
For example if I want to repeatedly cast Bullhorn as an activity, I don't need to use the improvised activity rules to do it. Because the Bullhorn cantrip lasts for 10 minutes even though it costs two actions to use.
Agreed: so what happens when you cast something that only lasts a round? That's Command.
Casting the Shield cantrip would take an action repeated 10 times per minute.
Yep, JUST like Command.
So do you see why if we assume that familiar commands last 6 seconds then we have to use the improvised activity rules - but if we don't assume that, then the improvised activity rules don't apply. If we instead assume that commands last for 1 minute, then the master only has to give commands to the familiar at a rate of 1 per minute, not 10 per minute.
So I'm to assume a something that doesn't apply: We know that Command lasts 6 seconds: it a fact. As such, there isn't any assumption. You can insist on any time frame you wish but it's not based on anything but pure fiat.
So it's pure handwaving or using the guidelines the system presents for such things... The assumption, IMO, is is that you'd use anything other than the guidelines presented.
I don't know WHY you insist on taking everything to the nth degree.
Just trying to help you realize how the game becomes silly if you just extrapolate combat rules to the whole thing in all situations
It becomes silly on many accounts, but none of it bothered you and you advocated that it should be played like that always bc that i RAW
I said that no one really plays like that, and then you and Darksol stated that you do play like that and across multiple tables
but when we came to 27th issue with literal interpretations, there you drew the line and started using real world examples to make up rulings bc it REALLY doesn't make sense to work that way
Somehow ruling a sensible hearing distance was 2 miles too far. :P
nah, you're 2 miles too far bc of minion and spacing rules you advocate compared to vast majority of people i ever interacted with. But making up sensible rules where they are omitted, even that far down the line, is a sign that there is still hope for you.
I think you just don't like magical pets and cheesy players, and that's totally fine
EDIT: By your interpretation of minion rules, carrier pigeons are impossible by RAW...their task/command lasts for hours or even days....so something humanity has used for thousands of years and is a staple in all medieval and fantasy tropes is impossible. So my "2 miles too far" is a generous assessment
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just trying to help you realize how the game becomes silly if you just extrapolate combat rules to the whole thing in all situations
You mean actually follow the guidelines the game gives you? What monster would do that? :P
It becomes silly on many accounts, but none of it bothered you and you advocated that it should be played like that always bc that i RAW
It didn't bother me per se, but it wasn't having the effect you thought it did: it just made your posts seem silly for no apparent reason. If what I'm proposing is silly, then by definition the game is silly as I'm following the guidelines to a tee.
I said that no one really plays like that, and then you and Darksol stated that you do play like that and across multiple tables
And mind you, it's in SEVERAL games I play in and I'm not the DM: it's not the rarity you think it is.
but when we came to 27th issue with literal interpretations, there you drew the line and started using real world examples to make up rulings bc it REALLY doesn't make sense to work that way
That's the thing though: it's never been a matter of literal interpretations but following the guidelines. As to the hearing part, I'm not sure what you have an issue with: PC, familiars and every other creatures have the same hearing range be default: what is controversial there? If a familiar can hear your PC to take commands when flying over the castle, so to can the castle inhabitants. Seems like a no brainer.
nah, you're 2 miles too far bc of minion and spacing rules you advocate compared to vast majority of people i ever interacted with. But making up sensible rules where they are omitted, even that far down the line, is a sign that there is still hope for you.
That's the thing: the rules weren't omitted as there is expressly a way to translate encounter actions into activities but since you don't like the outcome, you ignore it. And if sensible was your goal, then I have no idea why you threw a fit over hearing ranges... And as stated, you should be carful throwing around how many people play a particular way: neither of us knows which method is popular and your position isn't even monolithic as there are variables like duration, command, skills needed, ect that vary from houserule to houserule. At least my position comes out stable by using the guidelines.
I think you just don't like magical pets and cheesy players, and that's totally fine
You haven't been following my posts very well then: I mostly DO NOT DM and have run into it plenty and have played with familiars using the rules without issue.
As to my feeling about it... They really do not enter it: it boils down to what the rules are and is they work. The fact is that they work by following the rules and they perform better than most 1st level feats and just get better as you level and all that without needing to houserule free exploration activities to them.
It really just boils down to follow the guidlines or make a houserule to fit what you like. Ambiguous 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." The rules tell you it's ok to houserule if something seems to be a problematic for you.
So why you go point by point addressing Debelinho's post but not the part about the carrier pigeon?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So why you go point by point addressing Debelinho's post but not the part about the carrier pigeon?
For the same reason that we don't allow Wish to automatically banish 8 appropriate-challenge demons: It's contrived, not RAW, and absolutely has no basis in our arguments. It's about as relevant as D&D5E rules, really.
Especially when the rules say it's only possible via magic. And even that has its limitations. Since the rules already set a precedent for "messenger pigeons" being restricted to a magical sense, the argument becomes invalid.
We know that Command lasts 6 seconds: it a fact. As such, there isn't any assumption. You can insist on any time frame you wish but it's not based on anything but pure fiat.
Really? Where does it say that as a fact?
I see in the Minion trait where is says that in combat a command lasts for 2 actions.
But where does it say that a command lasts 6 seconds in exploration mode?