Rules question

[Trueshots]

If a familiar that is in same square as you is he considered "adjacent"? It seems on Paizo forums he is, but I don't see a 100% definite from a Paizo personnel. Want to make sure

[kane280484]

I remember there was a talk about the difference between "adjacent" and "adjacent square". "Adjacent" needs to be taken literally, according to the definition of this word, while "adjacent square" means adjacent square and nothing else. Can't find it now, though :/

[cmdisc]

Anyone within 5 feet of you is considered 'adjacent'. A familiar sharing your square is adjacent to you as he is within 5 feet.

https://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/combat.html#melee-attacks

[Trueshots]

Anyone within 5 feet of you is considered 'adjacent'. A familiar sharing your square is adjacent to you.

https://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/combat.html#melee-attacks

I figured that much but can the Familiar be hanging on my side or in my backpack? or does he have to be on the ground beside me?

[HoloGnome]

Familiar Satchel

Price 25 gp; Weight 6 lbs.

This armored case PROVIDES TOTAL COVER to any Tiny or smaller creature contained within it. It includes air holes (which can be plugged with cork stoppers if you need to go underwater) and two receptacles for food and water.

https://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateEquipment/gear/adventuringGear.html

The beauty of the SRD at work.

(Note the significance of this wording vis-a-vis spell type descriptions for Burst Spells, etc.)

[cmdisc]

I figure based on the definition of a Melee Attack, he can be anywhere within 5 feet of you and still be adjacent:

On the ground
In your backpack
Sitting on your head
Tucked into your cloak
etc.

:)

Take the Stirge as an example. It has 0 reach and occupies your square when attached, but you can still attack it because it is adjacent.

[Trueshots]

PROVIDES TOTAL COVER
The beauty of the SRD at work.
So a familiar that is providing a teamwork combat maneuver bonus to me can stay in a pouch in my bag with no chances of getting hit yet I get all the bonuses?


I'd say at the bare minimum the familiar will have to be visible and involved in the combat to gain the advantage of any teamwork feats they might possess. Not hidden in a bag or pouch. That would mean they could be attacked by intelligent creatures who realised they were causing an advantage, so have their melee stats handy (ac and he primarily) as they could be attacked.


It's not 100%, however it adjacent enemies are considered adjacent if they "are within 5 feet". By this definition, it works. My books aren't handy, but I believe its the CRB in the standard attack section.
Talk to your GM though. If you are using your familiar for combat feat / shenanigans, they are open season for the GM in combat though. I prefer to keep mine in its satchel where its safe...

Don't get me wrong I want more than anything for that familiar to stay in my bag during the maneuvers, but there's obviously a difference in opinion....

[Trueshots]

Rule Question #2



White Hair (Su)
At 1st level, a white-haired witch gains the ability to use her hair as a weapon. This functions as a primary natural attack with a reach of 5 feet. The hair deals 1d4 points of damage (1d3 for a Small witch) plus the witch’s Intelligence modifier. In addition, whenever the hair strikes a foe, the witch can attempt to grapple that foe with her hair as a free action* without provoking an attack of opportunity, using her Intelligence modifier in place of her Strength modifier when making the combat maneuver check. When a white-haired witch grapples a foe in this way, she does not gain the grappled condition.

Constrict (Ex): At 2nd level, when the white-haired witch’s hair successfully grapples an opponent, it can begin constricting her victim as a swift action*, dealing damage equal to that of its attack.

From the entire context above a I have determined the following.

The damage from hair is (human): 1d4 + STR + INT. The wording says plus NOT in place of. What are your thoughts?

Also constrict is now a move action, no longer a swift.( as if WHW wasn't gimp enough) So I could constrict one enemy 2x per round if I used a move and a standard, correct?

Also from Brawler I get this feat:



Strangle (Ex)
At 1st level, a strangler deals +1d6 sneak attack damage whenever she succeeds at a grapple check to damage or pin an opponent. The strangler is always considered flanking her target for the purpose of using this ability. This damage increases by +1d6 at 2nd, 8th and 15th levels.

So, hypothetically, if I have 3d6 from 3 rouge levels and 1 snakebite striker (1 brawler) and 2d6 from strangle (2 Brawler). Anytime I succeed a grapple check I get damage dice(1d4+STR+INT) plus 5d6 sneak attack damage, correct?

So lastly if its a move action and I get it twice I can do damage 2x and sneak attack 5d6 2x per round on the same opponent.......Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Thank you for enjoying my uber build with me.....

[cmdisc]

I'm unclear on the Hair damage, but if we read it literally it doesn't say you get to add STR damage. It only says 1d4 (1d3) plus INT. We can assume it adds STR damage to 1d4+INT just as much as we can assume that it adds INT instead of STR damage. So you can really go either way on that depending on which way you're assuming. I've seen arguments for or against anyway.

Personally, I agree with many folks on the Paizo site that it is a poorly written Archetype no matter which way you lean.

Regarding the rest, can Snakebite Striker and Strangler be mixed? And if so, does Sneak Attack automatically stack dice? Or does the ability have to say it stacks with other sources (like how Arcane Trickster has it worded)? I don't have experience with builds that mix an assortment of SA sources so I could only guess.

[lachancery]

Re: White Hair (Su)

As GM, I would rule that, because the following sentence on the grapple ability clearly replaces Strength with Intelligence as the ability that determine the effectiveness of the White Hair, the damage of the attack would not include Strength.

Re: Constrict (Ex)

Where is the reference that this ability became a move action? A player only ever gets one swift action per round; you cannot use a move action to execute a swift action.

Strangle (Ex)

The text "for the purpose of this ability" is key in the description of this ability. It does not provide flanking benefits for any other ability.

Thank you for enjoying my uber build with me

Huh, no, it's an abomination. If you showed up with this build at a PFS game I GM'ed, I wouldn't be dragged into researching its PFS legality and arguing it with you. I would politely decline your presence at the table.

[Trueshots]

Heres what I'm reading about hair damage on Paizo:


1. At 1st level, a white-haired witch gains the ability to use her hair as a weapon. This functions as a primary natural attack with a reach of 5 feet.
As a primary natural attack, you use BAB + Str Mod. +4 Str mod = +4 to hit at level 1

2. The hair deals 1d4 points of damage (1d3 for a Small witch) plus the witch’s Intelligence modifier.
This is the hair's base damage, not replacement damage. You would also add your Str mod to this, or 1.5x your Str mod if you only have one natural attack. So base damage with +4 Str and +2 Int = 1d4+8 on initial attack. Not bad. But at level 2 it starts to shine.

3. In addition, whenever the hair strikes a foe, the witch can attempt to grapple that foe with her hair as a free action* without provoking an attack of opportunity, using her Intelligence modifier in place of her Strength modifier when making the combat maneuver check. When a white-haired witch grapples a foe in this way, she does not gain the grappled condition. Constrict (Ex): At 2nd level, when the white-haired witch’s hair successfully grapples an opponent, it can begin constricting her victim as a swift action*, dealing damage equal to that of its attack.
You hit with your attack (now +5 to hit) and make a grapple attempt (+2 since it's Int based, not great but imp grapple might help). If you land the grapple attempt you immediately do an additional 1d4+8 damage and have immobilized them. So a double success equals 2d4+16 damage. If the creature tries to escape on its next turn and you win (+7 this attempt) you can deal an additional 1d4+8 damage. Then we factor in AOO
These questions all apply to the White-Haired Witch archetype from the Dragon Empires Primer.


1) Does the hair attack add Strength to the attack roll and to damage (in addition to Intelligence)?
2) If the hair is the W-HW's only natural attack (which is likely) does it add 1 1/2 times the W-HW's Strength modifier to damage (in addition to intelligence)?
3) Can the entire reach be used for attacks of opportunity?
4) Since Pull is a free action, can the W-HW use it multiple times in a single turn to reel in an enemy?
1. Yes, all weapons add the relevant stat bonus to hit and damage, this one just adds Int bonus also.
2. Correct but remember only the Str bonus is increased by 1.5 times.
3. Yes, anything within the full range of the hair that provokes will trigger an AoO from the hair.
4. Pull is no longer a free action, it has been errata'ed into a swift action in the thread regarding that sourcebook.
Finally this is a very broken archetype when used as a dip class for a martial class. I'd be HIGHLY hesitant to allow this into a game without some firm guidelines on it's use.

That was also something I left out. If theres only one natural attack, which hair is, it 1.5x the damage modifier. but it seems for the INT mod only, the STR mod is just added at the end. So a witch that has a +3 STR and a +4 INT would get 1d4+6+3= 1d4+9?

[Malkavian_Andi]

As for the hair damage, take a look at this:


Beast Totem, Lesser (Su): While raging, the barbarian gains two claw attacks. These attacks are considered primary attacks and are made at the barbarian's full base attack bonus. The claws deal 1d6 points of slashing damage (1d4 if Small) plus the barbarian's Strength modifier.It's the same kind of language as the hair, but would anyone try to tell me the claw's damage is 1d6 plus twice the Str-modifier? I think not.
That kind of syntax just tells you which ability modifier to add to the damage die.

[Trueshots]

Personally, I agree with many folks on the Paizo site that it is a poorly written Archetype no matter which way you lean. we can all agree on this!

Regarding the rest, can Snakebite Striker and Strangler be mixed? And if so, does Sneak Attack automatically stack dice? Yes sneak attack from different sources stacks


Re: White Hair (Su)
As GM, I would rule that, because the following sentence on the grapple ability clearly replaces Strength with Intelligence as the ability that determine the effectiveness of the White Hair, the damage of the attack would not include Strength. this issue most people are having is its on INT to damage you still have to hit with STR or DEX(weapon finnesse). This is why its absurd to use this class more than 2 or 4 levels. I think from reading the forums it seems because they don't give you Int to hit they are making up for it by giving you INT on top of your normal damage. for example if they are replacing something they clarify it:


Wind Blast (Su): As a standard action, you can unleash a blast of air in a 30-foot line. Make a combat maneuver check against each creature in the line, using your caster level as your base attack bonus and your Wisdom modifier in place of your Strength modifier. Treat the results as a bull rush attempt. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier.

Seems pretty straight forward to me.....



Re: Constrict (Ex)
Where is the reference that this ability became a move action? A player only ever gets one swift action per round; you cannot use a move action to execute a swift action.
sorry i was thinking free to swift found HERE (https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nkor?How-Do-We-Accomplish#31)
But maintaining a grapple is a move action is what I mean. Which means i can make 2 move actions in a round, thus dealing damage twice.



Strangle (Ex)
The text "for the purpose of this ability" is key in the description of this ability. It does not provide flanking benefits for any other ability. Yes using the ability puts the enemy into a position of being flanked, anytime you flank you deal all your sneak attack damage not just part of it, its absurd to think you only deal part of your total sneak attack die.



Huh, no, it's an abomination. If you showed up with this build at a PFS game I GM'ed, I wouldn't be dragged into researching its PFS legality and arguing it with you. I would politely decline your presence at the table. That's your prerogative for sure. This is why before I get to a table I have the answers so I don't turn 4 hour games into 8 hour games arguing rules. Precisely what I'm trying to do now, get clarification.

[Trueshots]

It's the same kind of language as the hair
Yea I understand, I have no problem if that is ruled INT only for damage. But the other parts to me seem very clear. Especially about applying the sneak attack damage.

[JohnD]

Reading this has reminded me why I love Castles & Crusades so much.

[Trueshots]

Reading this has reminded me why I love Castles & Crusades so much.

Ive never played it, I can't bear the thought of attempting to learn something different, this is way too much for me as is lol

[Trenloe]

So a familiar that is providing a teamwork combat maneuver bonus to me can stay in a pouch in my bag with no chances of getting hit yet I get all the bonuses?

Don't get me wrong I want more than anything for that familiar to stay in my bag during the maneuvers, but there's obviously a difference in opinion....
As teamwork feats require the "team" to be active then I'll re-iterate what I said - the familiar with the teamwork feat being used would have to be active in combat. For example, the base teamwork feat description says "Note that allies who are paralyzed, stunned, unconscious, or otherwise unable to act do not count for the purposes of these feats." Your familiar hiding in your pouch is essentially unable to act in the combat so they shouldn't be able to make use of teamwork feats. Remember that these feats aren't magical abilities that just happen because someone is adjacent to you - they require someone else doing "something" to give you the bonus -hiding in a bag and not participating in the combat should not give the advantages bestowed by a teamwork feat. The teamwork feat description also says "In most cases, these feats require an ally who also possesses the feat to be positioned carefully on the battlefield." I know you might think that your familiar being in a bag is being "positioned carefully" but not for the benefit of teamwork feats. ;)

[Trenloe]

But maintaining a grapple is a move action is what I mean. Which means i can make 2 move actions in a round, thus dealing damage twice.
What feat/ability makes maintaining a grapple a move action?

And I agree with the argument that you only get your INT bonus as a bonus to damage for the white hair damage, you don't get your STR bonus as well.

[Trueshots]

Your familiar hiding in your pouch is essentially unable to act in the combat so they shouldn't be able to make use of teamwork feats. Remember that these feats aren't magical abilities that just happen because someone is adjacent to you - they require someone else doing "something" to give you the bonus -hiding in a bag and not participating in the combat should not give the advantages bestowed by a teamwork feat. Exactly my thoughts, the beauty of using the SRD but not MANIPULATING it


What feat/ability makes maintaining a grapple a move action? I want to say its final embrace or imp/greater grapple, Malkavain_Andi will know better he's to one you guys can blame for helping for the last week on this build ;)


Greater Grapple (Combat)
Maintaining a grapple is second nature to you.

Prerequisites: Improved Grapple, Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +6, Dex 13.
Benefit: You receive a +2 bonus on checks made to grapple a foe. This bonus stacks with the bonus granted by Improved Grapple. Once you have grappled a creature, maintaining the grapple is a move action. This feat allows you to make two grapple checks each round (to move, harm, or pin your opponent), but you are not required to make two checks. You only need to succeed at one of these checks to maintain the grapple.
Normal: Maintaining a grapple is a standard action.

[Malkavian_Andi]

yep, it's the Greater Grapple.
One important thing about this build is of course that it requires a lot of levels and feats to work that way. Also, it requires the character to have a good number of ability scores at a good value.

[cmdisc]

I looked at a Hexcrafter/WHW build once, but she wasn't going to be very fun to play until level 7, which was just about past her entire career anyway. So I moved on to more fun builds. The concept was to use the WHW hair only to qualify for Final Embrace and then to use the Prehensile Hair Hex as her main form of attack, grapple, constrict, etc. But again, this wasn't all together until Lvl 7. I'm not that patient.

[Trueshots]

I hear ya for sure. I put my level 2 character into the last game I ran to test her out in combat. There was one enemy that killed half the party when I ran this game at the 6-7 subteir. So I went Mano I Mano with him. My level 2 witch/brawler kill him with 3 hp left ;)

[kane280484]

Reading this has reminded me why I love Castles & Crusades so much.Yeah, this increasing number of rules and options in PFRPG feels again like D&D 3.5. I left 3.5 because of that. Gonna stick to D&D 5E more & more. I am rather a storytelling GM, not very good with the rules, so these stuff makes me dazed fatigued.

[Trueshots]

Yeah, this increasing number of rules and options in PFRPG feels again like D&D 3.5. I left 3.5 because of that. Gonna stick to D&D 5E more & more. I am rather a storytelling GM, not very good with the rules, so these stuff makes me dazed fatigued.
I think the issue personally is that GM's and players alike have become so obsessed with what they can and can't do, that they have taken the element of the true goal out of it. The true goal being that GM and player alike are to have fun first and foremost. No player wants to be blasted about everything thing that may or may not be completely and perfectly correct. On the same token no GM wants to be questioned and provoked 50x a game for making the "best call" he/she can at a give time. There comes a point that there are so many damn rules that literally the GM and Players are both spending 30-40% of game time looking things up to see if they are legal....Its just craziness!

[cmdisc]

I actually think that for some GMs and Players the bickering/haggling/musing over the rules is part of the fun. Different people play the game in different ways, I guess.

[JohnD]

If everybody gets a +2 bonus, nobody gets a +2 bonus is how I look at it.

[Trueshots]

If everybody gets a +2 bonus, nobody gets a +2 bonus is how I look at it.

Lol John! just as long as the enemy doesn't get a +2 bonus ;)

[Trueshots]

[B]Strangle (Ex)
The text "for the purpose of this ability" is key in the description of this ability. It does not provide flanking benefits for any other ability.



Your familiar hiding in your pouch is essentially unable to act in the combat so they shouldn't be able to make use of teamwork feats.

Guy thought you may want to know this. I was referred by the Venture Captain in North Carolina to a gentleman in regards to rules questions, I'm not sure if he a VL or what. But he has stated that because of the way "coordinated maneuvers" is worded it is effective with the familiar inside your backpack....I was wowed by this tbh!

Also that the strangle ability is sneak attack damage and all valid forms of sneak attack are applied upon valid sneak attack.

Bad news is that he tells me my snakebite striker and strangler (brawler) don't stack so I had to remove SB Striker ;(

[Trenloe]

Guy thought you may want to know this. I was referred by the Venture Captain in North Carolina to a gentleman in regards to rules questions, I'm not sure if he a VL or what. But he has stated that because of the way "coordinated maneuvers" is worded it is effective with the familiar inside your backpack....I was wowed by this
Just because some guy, somewhere gives you a rules interpretation doesn't make it any more valid than us discussing it on these forums. Unless that person is part of the Paizo rules FAQ team and that decision has been published in the FAQ or a recognized Paizo forum by said Paizo employee/s.

I'll refer you to the description of teamwork feats: "Teamwork feats grant large bonuses, but they only function under specific circumstances. In most cases, these feats require an ally who also possesses the feat to be positioned carefully on the battlefield. Teamwork feats provide no bonus if the listed conditions are not met. Note that allies who are paralyzed, stunned, unconscious, or otherwise unable to act do not count for the purposes of these feats."

As usual, where rules as written isn't covering clearly what you're trying to do expect some GM variation. Some GMs might allow it, but I would imagine that a lot of GMs would require your familiar being actively involved in combat and not hiding in your backpack, which is how I will rule in any games I run.

[Victor]

Wow what a long, rambling, multi-topic, lawyer-laden thread. :)
TS, you are a bit of a pot calling the kettle black when it comes to going over rules ad infinitum. :) I kinda don't mind some rules stuff in game so long as it doesn't take too much time or get contentious. I constantly learn stuff.
Aaaaanyhow, just wanted to say I read the very short bit on coordinated maneuvers and if 'adjacent' means anywhere within 5 feet of you, then yea, it seems clear your familiar could be in your backpack in a pouch. That's still only because its terribly written, but "the intent of the law, your honor..." blah blah :) *shrug* I think unless Paizo wants to make a definite rule, or change some wording, its a purely DM call.

2 cents

[Victor]

Note that allies who are paralyzed, stunned, unconscious, or otherwise unable to act do not count for the purposes of these feats."

Yea, there ya go. Specific beat General. I take back my last post, you are screwed TS buddy. ;)

[cmdisc]

I am another GM who would rule that the familiar must be engaged in the combat (out in the open where it can attack, move, or be attacked as opposed to stuffed away in a pack somewhere) in order for any Teamwork feats to activate.

[Lord Kavos]

For those people saying they will stick to 5e because of pathfinder's plethora of broken rules I give u this...

Warlock with hex spell, with disadvantage on STR checks for the target... Plus grappling pc, means shutting down a bad guy is almost too easy to compute.

Saw this one in action in my last 5e game. As broken as any of the issues flagged in this thread IMO.

Personally as a gm I only have issues with pcs that do this type of stuff - shutting down fights single handedly & generally spoiling the fun for the rest of the players (cavalier/thug/demoralizers come to mind as well). I don't mind a little cheese (heck I'm guilty of using a bit for my pcs as well), but when 1 player's abilities spoil the game for the other players, that's what annoys me.

That's probably worth more than 2c, but that's my take on things...