As a GM what familiar abilities would you require your player select to have their familiar represent a basic cat, if any?
Why?
I'm asking as a player who wants to avoid potential surprises while making my witch character.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Speech is absolutely mandatory.
Scent seems logical based on similar cases, but I personally wouldn't force the issue as a GM if the PC thinks their cat has a bad nose.
|
I would say Fast movement.
Cats are really fast when they need to be. It fits the speed of the Cat Animal Companion too.
Maybe Scent too since the Cat AC has it.
These are the abilities I can see a GM requiring for a Cat Pet.
For a Familiar, due to their magical nature, I would make no requirements though.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would say Fast movement.
Cats are really fast when they need to be. It fits the speed of the Cat Animal Companion too.
Maybe Scent too since the Cat AC has it.
These are the abilities I can see a GM requiring for a Cat Pet.
For a Familiar, due to their magical nature, I would make no requirements though.
Climb would also be valid.
Required abilities for familliars are weird. If you get too deep into the weeds you could easily end up needing 3-4 abilities to cover what the base animal has naturally. Personally, unless the rules specifically call out a requirement (e.g. A sprite's special Corgi must have scent) or the animal flies (You picked a flying animal becaise you wanted it to fly), I'm not going to require a specific trait.
Are stats for familiars in here anywhere? I can't seem to find them.They aren't in the Bestiary at all. Familiars function differently in this edition; see pages 217–218 of the Core Rulebook for rules on how they're created.I realize that, but it seems that we do still need to know the baseline stats when picking Familiar Abilities.
If your familiar is an animal that naturally has one of these abilities (for instance, an owl has a fly Speed), you must select that ability.It is pretty obvious which animals have flight, but I'm not so clear on some of the other abilities like Scent.
And do they lose their natural attacks when they become Familiars? If not then we need those stats.
The rules for creating familiars are very much intended to give the familiar's owner greater flexibility.
Taking senses as an example: All familiars have low-light vision. If you want it to have scent, that needs to be one of the abilities you grant it, whether or not a "monster" version would have scent or not. You don't get scent for free.
Moving on to movement; your familiar has either a land speed of 25 or a swim speed of 25. If you pick a hawk as a familair, it makes sense that you'd choose Land speed 25, but you don't gain flight for free. "Flier" is an ability you have to select for it from the two abilities afforded you for the day.
Familiars are based on real-world animals, so the game expects us all to use that knowledge as to whether or not a familiar can fly. You COULD build an owl familiar that couldn't fly simply by choosing two other abilities (say, damage avoidance and darkvision), but thematically, that would suggest you don't really want an owl.
Familiars don't have their own attacks. In 2nd edition, they're not intended to be combat buddies; that's the role of an animal companion, not a familiar. In time, as we expand the game, we'll eventually expand options as well, and that might include the option of giving them attacks, but as of the base game, familiars don't have attacks—again, because they're not intended to be combat buddies in that way.
|
|
I would say Fast movement.
Cats are really fast when they need to be. It fits the speed of the Cat Animal Companion too.
Maybe Scent too since the Cat AC has it.
These are the abilities I can see a GM requiring for a Cat Pet.
For a Familiar, due to their magical nature, I would make no requirements though.
Climb would also be valid.
Required abilities for familliars are weird. If you get too deep into the weeds you could easily end up needing 3-4 abilities to cover what the base animal has naturally. Personally, unless the rules specifically call out a requirement (e.g. A sprite's special Corgi must have scent) or the animal flies (You picked a flying animal becaise you wanted it to fly), I'm not going to require a specific trait.
The Cat AC does not have a Climb speed.
And while cats are very good at jumping and at climbing trees, they have no special ability to stay immobile halfway a wall.
As a GM what familiar abilities would you require your player select to have their familiar represent a basic cat, if any?
None.
Why?
Because I don't see the point of limiting the player. Of course, the Familiar wouldn't get any benefit from an ability it doesn't have, like if you have a dog and don't take Scent then your dog can't do anything with its scent.
I would say Fast movement.
Cats are really fast when they need to be. It fits the speed of the Cat Animal Companion too.
Maybe Scent too since the Cat AC has it.
These are the abilities I can see a GM requiring for a Cat Pet.
For a Familiar, due to their magical nature, I would make no requirements though.
Climb would also be valid.
Required abilities for familliars are weird. If you get too deep into the weeds you could easily end up needing 3-4 abilities to cover what the base animal has naturally. Personally, unless the rules specifically call out a requirement (e.g. A sprite's special Corgi must have scent) or the animal flies (You picked a flying animal becaise you wanted it to fly), I'm not going to require a specific trait.
The Cat AC does not have a Climb speed.
And while cats are very good at jumping and at climbing trees, they have no special ability to stay immobile halfway a wall.
Sure, but this is a fantasy game. If a player really wants the climb speed for their pet kitty, I'm not going to rain on their parade. Especially when slughtly fantastical pets like, say, an Amphibious Azarketi Feline are quite reasonable.
Yeah but we're talking about what a GM might require, not what a player might want.
Familiars are such a strange thing.
They are mostly not of any combat benefit.
They are good as another set of senses and because of this how they get around and how they sense is important.
The rules allow the abilities to be changed i just figure the familiar is not really a normal cat just like a familiar monkey is not really a monkey.
If a monkey would normally have manual dex and climb for example and my player wants wings and shared senses today the monkey can lose arms for wings for the day. No problem.
I just would jeep fixed anything gained like the druids leshy familiar getting plant for free. That cant be swapped out.
Yeah but we're talking about what a GM might require, not what a player might want.
Sure, I'm just advocating for flexibility, and reminding GMs that many of animals that are ordinary by Pathfinder standards (E.G. Blue scaled Pangolins the size of ponies) would be considered fantasy in our own world
What the others are pointing out is that this:
Sure, but this is a fantasy game. If a player really wants the climb speed for their pet kitty, I'm not going to rain on their parade. Especially when slughtly fantastical pets like, say, an Amphibious Azarketi Feline are quite reasonable.
is something that has to be paid for with familiar abilities. You don't get to have a standard familiar and claim that it looks like a cat and therefore it should get a climb speed for free.
You can either forego paying the ability because being a cat does not require a climb speed, and have a cat familiar that doesn't have a climb speed...
Or you can pay the ability to give the cat familiar a climb speed. Either temporarily for the day, or permanently because it is thematically required for being shaped like a cat.
And that last part is what Ravingdork is asking about. If the character has a familiar that is shaped like a cat, is a climb speed going to be an ability that GMs will commonly require for that shape that has to be paid for every day?
I am a bit sad to find "For example, you couldn’t choose not to give a raven familiar flying." in the Selecting Familiar and Master Abilities chapter.
I would allow it. Your raven would just not do any flying for the day.
Or the raven has a lame wing. Or the raven is particularly old and frail.
I think in general the community has matured beyond requiring much, and those examples are now just not meaningful.
|
The fluidity of familiars made me wonder if a familiar even needs to look like a real world animal. Could I have a familiar that looks like a cross between a dragonfly and a python or opossum and a fox? Basically an amalgam of multiple creatures whose form is cosmetic only and doesn't necessarily mean they have any specific abilities. I could live with specific features requiring specific abilities according to the base animal's form but it seems cooler if my BatMonkeyDingo could have wings but not have fly today. Maybe having the familiar morph new features depending on abilities chosen for each day?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The fluidity of familiars made me wonder if a familiar even needs to look like a real world animal. Could I have a familiar that looks like a cross between a dragonfly and a python or opossum and a fox? Basically an amalgam of multiple creatures whose form is cosmetic only and doesn't necessarily mean they have any specific abilities. I could live with specific features requiring specific abilities according to the base animal's form but it seems cooler if my BatMonkeyDingo could have wings but not have fly today. Maybe having the familiar morph new features depending on abilities chosen for each day?
There is no mechanical or rules reason why they couldn't.
It would be a campaign decision if such a familiar would match the theme and tone of a particular game and the other characters at that table.
|
|
The fluidity of familiars made me wonder if a familiar even needs to look like a real world animal. Could I have a familiar that looks like a cross between a dragonfly and a python or opossum and a fox? Basically an amalgam of multiple creatures whose form is cosmetic only and doesn't necessarily mean they have any specific abilities. I could live with specific features requiring specific abilities according to the base animal's form but it seems cooler if my BatMonkeyDingo could have wings but not have fly today. Maybe having the familiar morph new features depending on abilities chosen for each day?There is no mechanical or rules reason why they couldn't.
It would be a campaign decision if such a familiar would match the theme and tone of a particular game and the other characters at that table.
In PFS I sometimes play with a Sorcerer who casts spells while reclining on the sofa he uses as a mount.
The fluidity of familiars made me wonder if a familiar even needs to look like a real world animal. Could I have a familiar that looks like a cross between a dragonfly and a python or opossum and a fox? Basically an amalgam of multiple creatures whose form is cosmetic only and doesn't necessarily mean they have any specific abilities. I could live with specific features requiring specific abilities according to the base animal's form but it seems cooler if my BatMonkeyDingo could have wings but not have fly today. Maybe having the familiar morph new features depending on abilities chosen for each day?
Strictly speaking, your Familiar is an animal by RAW unless you take an option that specifies otherwise.
This restriction serves no purpose because your familiar's actual stats are prescribed and amorphous regardless of how you describe your familiar.
Like the 'required abilities' rule it just seems like a way to restrict players who have a specific theme in mind, and since it has no mechanical value it's the kind of thing that should be safely ignored.
Even the most strict RAW interpretation that I can come up with doesn't prevent a character from having a Tatzelwurm as their generic animal familiar.
Even the most strict RAW interpretation that I can come up with doesn't prevent a character from having a Tatzelwurm as their generic animal familiar.
Even the most strict RAW interpretation that I can come up with doesn't prevent a character from having a Tatzelwurm as their generic animal familiar.Tatzelwurms are dragons in Pathfinder.
A Tatzlwyrm is also medium size and wouldn't be valid as a familiar.
So a Tatzelwurm is still fair.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even the most strict RAW interpretation that I can come up with doesn't prevent a character from having a Tatzelwurm as their generic animal familiar.
Both the pre and post remaster rules specifically say you pick a tiny animal. Why, I have no idea, but it is what it is.
It can be a very young tatzelwurm I suppose. Do we have any information on maturing rates?
Or just an extremely tiny one, with the equivalent of of whatever makes little people in real life.
Also, TECHNICALLY the remaster opened up the door for non-animal familiars without using specific familiars by adding abilities to make your familiar a dragon, plant, construct, or elemental.
Unfortunately, only elemental and construct have mechanical benefits on their own, and these all cost you a precious ability slot. So in practice, while they built in more rule support for being a non-animal they made it harder to justify reskinning to accomplish that goal, so it is kind of worse.
That said, specific familiars have a lot of really good abilities and come in many fun flavors. They just require a high level of investment than what's being discussed here.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Even the most strict RAW interpretation that I can come up with doesn't prevent a character from having a Tatzelwurm as their generic animal familiar.Both the pre and post remaster rules specifically say you pick a tiny animal. Why, I have no idea, but it is what it is.
Yes. That's fine.
So if I have a familiar that is a tiny size animal with the head of a cat, the front arms of a lizard, and the body and tail of a snake... what rule are you using to say that isn't allowed?
The existence of a medium size dragon that looks similar certainly isn't a rule preventing my familiar.
That would be like saying that I can't have a raccoon as a familiar because Tanuki is a playable ancestry and therefore not a valid choice for a familiar.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The important thing is not to tell your GM what your familiar is and instead just tell them it has the following traits you've selected. As far as I can tell there's no rule that you can't make up your own familiar, only that if you select a familiar based on an animal it has to take traits that represent that animal (which is subject to debate).
So the easiest thing is to not select any animal that your GM might be familiar with.
But most reasonable GMs will understand that even if your familiar looks like an owl, if you don't give it flight then the companion has the drawback of not being able to fly but will be good at other things. Maybe your owl-like creature is a mini owl-bear (which can't fly) or maybe it's a owl with damaged wings no longer able to fly.
Not having a specific ability is already it's own drawback, it's not like selecting a creature gives you free abilities.
I'd not give it wings at all: flying non-winged cat would be much more funny, especially if it were very awkward at it
That's right, fool! Now I'm a flying talking donkey cat!
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM what familiar abilities would you require your player select to have their familiar represent a basic cat, if any?
Why?
I'm asking as a player who wants to avoid potential surprises while making my witch character.
It must be able to smile and turn invisible!
...
But most reasonable GMs will understand that even if your familiar looks like an owl, if you don't give it flight then the companion has the drawback of not being able to fly but will be good at other things. Maybe your owl-like creature is a mini owl-bear (which can't fly) or maybe it's an owl with damaged wings no longer able to fly.
...
Or maybe it is a tiny version of this flightless owl.
It must be able to smile and turn invisible!
My current cat familiar actually has Levitator, Speech, and phase familiar so as to better emulate the Cheshire Cat. He's often described as never being fully phased into reality.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is meowing at a half empty bowl of food a familiar ability? If it is, that one.