The PFS Familiar FAQ entry out of date / incorrect

[Byakko]

The FAQ still says:

Quote:

It is intended that animal companions or familiars can not activate magic items.

Despite Michael Brock's post stating:

Quote:

Wand use doesn't require the book for those few improved familiars - brownie, faerie dragon, imp, lyrakien azata, mephit, quasit, sprite familiars - gained with the Improved Familiar feat

It can use a wand since it is slotless. It uses its master's UMD. No other animal companions or familiars can activate a magic item.

So what gives?

Ignoring the fact that this list is fairly arbitrary, it's in direct conflict with the PFS FAQ.
Instead of having to plumb ancient posts on the forum, can we just have an updated FAQ entry to reflect what is actually allowed in Society play?
Pretty please?

[FiddlersGreen]

Wasn't there also an exception for familiars and ioun stones?

[Auke Teeninga]

Certain Improved Familiars are a specific exception to the general rule.

[Byakko]

Auke Teeninga wrote:

Certain Improved Familiars are a specific exception to the general rule.

Yes, and I listed them.

Or are you saying that only the last sentence, which refers to Improved Familiars, applies to them?

I'm fairly sure the intent is for even Improved Familiars to be unable to activate magic items. As the posts granting a handful of familiars the ability to use wands is over 4 years old, it would appear that the newer FAQ entry supersedes them and renders them obsolete.

Why weren't these exceptions ever added to the official FAQ?

[Auke Teeninga]

IIRC the exceptions were part of the GTOP, but to save space they were taken out to be moved into the faq. Seems they got lost.

[The Great Rinaldo!]

Sounds like an oversight. Let's all hit the FAQ button on this.

[Byakko]

Ok, still awaiting clarification.

To further highlight the problematic wording of the FAQ, consider the question of whether an Improved Familiar with a human shaped body, such as a brownie, can wear, say, a magic belt.

Quote:

Additionally, animal companions have access to magical item slots, in addition to barding and neck, as listed on the inside front cover of the Animal Archive so long as they select the Extra Item Slot feat. The Animal Magic Item Slots table found in Animal Archive is not a legal except under the following conditions. First, an animal companion, FAMILIAR, or bonded mount, may choose one slot listed under its body type when taking the Extra Item Slot feat (this feat may be taken multiple times, each time selecting a different available magic item slot based on the creature’s anatomy). Second, access to specific magic item slots may be granted at a later date by another legal source. If you do not own a copy of the Animal Archive, your animal companion may only use barding and neck-slot items.

...

The brownie, faerie dragon, imp, lyrakien azata, mephit, quasit, sprite familiars, granted by the Improved Familiar feat, use the Biped (hands) section of the chart. The carbuncle and voidworm protean, familiars granted by the Improved Familiar feat, uses the Serpentine section of the chart. If you do not own a copy of the Animal Archive, your animal companion may only use barding and neck-slot items.

So... every part of this FAQ about Item Slots only refers to Animal Companions EXCEPT one sentence right in the middle. It later gives a list of familiars with humanoid shaped bodies and declares they use the Biped(hands) section of the chart. But what does this mean for Item Slots?

Okay, if we go conservatively here, and try to take Extra Item Slot (feet) for our brownie, we run into another problem:

Extra Item Slot wrote:

Prerequisites: Non-humanoid body shape.

Does this mean we can have our bird familiar wear a belt, but not our brownie? How does this make any sense!

[UndeadMitch]

Regarding the brownie: yes, as long as it takes Extra Slot (belt) as a feat.

The second selection you quoted means that the listed familiars use the entry for Biped (hands) from the table on the inside front cover of Animal Archive, if you have that book. As per that table, they can gain any item slot through the Extra Item Slot feat. The non-humanoid bit is just that it is not for creatures with the humanoid subtype. The aforementioned brownie could gain any slot it does not normally have access to, so anything besides barding and neck (which it already has access to). So it could gain the belt or feet slot if you so desire.

[DesolateHarmony]

Just how many feats does a familiar get? I know animal companions get feats as per the table in the druid section of the CRB.

But the wizard section only has this to say: "It retains the appearance, Hit Dice, base attack bonus, base save bonuses, skills, and feats of the normal animal it once was, but is now a magical beast for the purpose of effects that depend on its type."

In the animal archive, page 18, it says that: "This section presents new feats for animal companions and familiars, as well as for PCs that make use of these animals. Some feats might be available to other creatures that meet the prerequisites. Feats that are meant for familiars can be switched out for a familiar’s default feats (as listed in the familiar’s statistics) if the familiar meets the prerequisites. Such feat replacements must be made when the PC first acquires a new familiar, and—like all new feats from supplemental sources—the new feats should be approved by the GM before being integrated into play."

For most familiars, this means they get very few feats.

My understanding of the list of improved familiars with humanoid body shape was that they don't use the animal companion rule for body slots, but rather used the actual table. But I agree, the FAQ or GtOP needs to be updated to include the actual intent.

[rknop]

There are some feats you can take for your familiar by using up one of your own feats; some of these exist, for instance, in the Familiar Folio.

[FLite]

You can also swap out a familiars existing feats for familiar specific feats.

[rknop]

FLite: where is the reference that says you can do that?

[FLite]

Animal Archive, under familiar feats, I believe.

[FLite]

Sorry, Animal Feats

Quote:

This section presents new feats for animal companions and familiars, as well as for PCs that make use of these animals.
Some feats might be available to other creatures that meet the prerequisites. Feats that are meant for familiars can be
switched out for a familiar’s default feats (as listed in the familiar’s statistics) if the familiar meets the prerequisites. Such
feat replacements must be made when the PC first acquires a new familiar, and—like all new feats from supplemental
sources—the new feats should be approved by the GM before being integrated into play.

[rknop]

Oh, cool, I wasn't familiar with that. What was the source of the thing you excerpted?

[FLite]

The Animal Feats section of the Animal Archive. It is where familiar feats first were introduced.

[rknop]

Excellent, thank you! That's cool. I will probably take advantage of that.

[Byakko]

UndeadMitch wrote:

Regarding the brownie: yes, as long as it takes Extra Slot (belt) as a feat.

The second selection you quoted means that the listed familiars use the entry for Biped (hands) from the table on the inside front cover of Animal Archive, if you have that book. As per that table, they can gain any item slot through the Extra Item Slot feat. The non-humanoid bit is just that it is not for creatures with the humanoid subtype. The aforementioned brownie could gain any slot it does not normally have access to, so anything besides barding and neck (which it already has access to). So it could gain the belt or feet slot if you so desire.

I take it you're assuming we can ignore the non-humanoid body shape prerequisite of the Extra Item Slot feat then?

How about armor then. Most familiars wear barding, but those with humanoid body shape would, as I understand it, need to wear small/tiny armor. Would they need to take the Extra Item Slot feat for that too?

Now some of these questions could very easily be adjudicated and allowed by a reasonable GM, but seeing as this is PFS and making such a ruling would be in direct conflict with this FAQ... well, it would be good to have it updated.

Also, I am amazed that these questions haven't been brought up before. I've been holding back since I was hoping that the Familiar Folio would address these questions, but nope.

[rknop]

Does an animal need Light (etc.) Armor Proficiency as a feat to succesfully wear barding?

I've never put barding on a familiar.

[Kigvan]

rknop wrote:

Does an animal need Light (etc.) Armor Proficiency as a feat to succesfully wear barding?

I've never put barding on a familiar.

Nope, just as a human doesn't require armor proficiency to wear armor. Just be sure to take the normal non-proficiency penalty (apply armor check penalty if any to attack rolls).

[Byakko]

Granted, barding/armor isn't usually too effective on Tiny creatures as they only receive half the AC bonus. However, there are quite a few armor enchantments and special armors which remain quite effective.
(While I believe the general consensus is that you can't turn special armors into barding, I believe you can purchase such armors in any size, even Tiny)

As far as proficiency, familiars are of various creature types - refer to the base type to work out which, if any, armors they're proficient in.

For example, Outsiders:
"Proficient with whatever type of armor (light, medium, or heavy) it is described as wearing, as well as all lighter types. Outsiders not indicated as wearing armor are not proficient with armor. Outsiders are proficient with shields if they are proficient with any form of armor."

[UndeadMitch]

Like I said, it seems to me that non-humanoid body shape means that it can't be taken by something that is a humanoid, it's not for people. Brownies are not people, they are fey, and are fine to take Extra Slot. Per Mike's ruling, they are bipeds with hands. If you barding is just armor that's not for people, brownies can have barding.

As it is, there is no clarification needed.

[Byakko]

UndeadMitch wrote:

Like I said, it seems to me that non-humanoid body shape means that it can't be taken by something that is a humanoid, it's not for people. Brownies are not people, they are fey, and are fine to take Extra Slot. Per Mike's ruling, they are bipeds with hands. If you barding is just armor that's not for people, brownies can have barding.

As it is, there is no clarification needed.

There's a difference between the humanoid TYPE and having a humanoid body SHAPE. Many creatures of non-humanoid type are clearly shown as being able to wear normal armor and not barding. If the prerequisite was based on creature type, it would've said so.

In any case, the other concerns with the FAQ (such as wand usage) definitely need to be addressed.

[Lawrence Smith 2]

I just checked the FAQ, and it seems Mike Brock's clarification that the specified improved familiars can activate wands is still not official. His word is/was good enough for me, but I'd like to know, did I overlook something?

Byakko wrote:

The FAQ still says:

Quote:

It is intended that animal companions or familiars can not activate magic items.

Despite Michael Brock's post stating:

Quote:

Wand use doesn't require the book for those few improved familiars - brownie, faerie dragon, imp, lyrakien azata, mephit, quasit, sprite familiars - gained with the Improved Familiar feat

It can use a wand since it is slotless. It uses its master's UMD. No other animal companions or familiars can activate a magic item.

So what gives?

Ignoring the fact that this list is fairly arbitrary, it's in direct conflict with the PFS FAQ.
Instead of having to plumb ancient posts on the forum, can we just have an updated FAQ entry to reflect what is actually allowed in Society play?
Pretty please?