| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1moonbeastJul 25, 2015 6:23:07 | So, flipping the pages of 5e PHB and MM, I see that 5th Ed went back to "simple animal" familiars, with the exception of Warlocks who can be bestowed one of the special familiars (imp, quasit, pseudogragon, sprite).
In PHB, the Find Familar spell only allows the wizard to choose from simple animals like rat, bat, raven, weasel. But when you flip through the pages of MM, the specific entries for Imp, Quasit and Pseudodragon specifically gives Optional Rules for using those small monsters as spellcaster familiars.
Unlike earlier editions of D&D, the 5th Edition does not have the spell "Find Greater Familiar" or "Improved Familiar" (feat). So not sure if anybody has come up with a comprehesive list of "special creatures" that can be used as 5e familiars. I looked up Homonculus in the MM, and sure enough the text hints that it could also be used in the service of a spellcaster. But it was not specifically mentioned to be used as a familiar. Rather, the Homonculus in the MM is presented as an artificial construct..... just like golems. Yes, sure golems are specllaster servitors, but they are not considered familiars. The rules are clear that a spellcaster can only have one familiar at a time. So in theory he can have both a familiar AND a golem (construct) servitor at the same time.
I'm curious how are you guys treating this familiar business in 5th? Are are you just satisfied with the basic "plain animal" familiars that 5e is stressing? (exception of course is the Warlock, which have special rules for pact familiars)
I have a gut feeling that maybe wizard familiars were abused in 3.5 and 4e so much by the powergamers, they became a DM headache and rules-mongering liability that WotC eventually decided to de-emphasize them in 5th. |
| #2JaxairJul 25, 2015 12:40:50 | Another thought is that common animals are historically what you see in fantasy literature--along with your imps/small demons. |
| #3cowleymenJul 25, 2015 22:33:22 | all those special creatures, when not used as a warlock familiar, can make special pacts outside of the find familar spell. For the most part, its pretty fun though, I have a warlock that has an imp/raven familiar. He tries to make jokes and have him do stupid stuff so occasionally i have the imp tell him to **** off |
| (Reply to #3)moonbeast |
|
| #5Tempest_StormwindJul 26, 2015 17:52:55 |
|
| #6SerpineJul 26, 2015 14:52:34 |
|
| #7MechatarrasqueJul 27, 2015 7:32:05 | My interpretation of the variant familiars is that your PC finds them instead of summons them and makes a deal with them instead of magically compell them (unless he/she uses planar binding on them). From that, I would go with them:
1) Being available for any class 2) Acting independently, so no player action necessary to get them to attack something (and keep attacking something), BUT 3) Not controlled by the PC outside of any contract or binding used on them, so if they aren't happy with the PC's progress to the dark side, they can lie to your PC, betray them, and you can bet that if the PC gets dropped and has to make death saves, the imp/quasit will attack the PC on its turn to kill the PC and drag his/her soul to the Pit. |
| #8moonbeastJul 27, 2015 12:43:39 |
|
| (Reply to #8)Mechatarrasque |
|
| #10Tempest_StormwindJul 27, 2015 15:11:03 |
|
| (Reply to #10)Mechatarrasque | [quote="Tempest_Stormwind"]
|
| #12Be3Al2Aug 01, 2015 11:52:37 | I haven't checked the rules recently, but the FInd Familiar spell and relevant familiars should be available to PCs without considerations. However, any creature listed as potential familiar in the Monster Manual are creatures that would fit as such for plot reasons. Thus, if the MM is the only source listing a creature as a suitable familiar I would say no problems giving them to NPCs for plot reasons, but think twice (and compare the power level) before giving them to PCs. And if they are given to a PC I would also suggest making it a plot point. |