Rat: The rat is a dirty creature, but at the same time he digs through where other creatures stop. This is just the type of familiar for a cluttery disorganized but infinitely curious wizard who seeks to find secrets where others were unwilling to search.
Cat: Cats are proudly independent, but appreciative of affection. On the negative side cats are arrogant, but on the positive side they are graceful. This is the type of familiar for a confident (if arrogant) wizard who relies on grace and finesse in situations rather than straight force.
Bat: A bat is a cave dweller by nature, but their keen ears help them keep on the ball. Bats come out at night to feast at dusk on bugs and other things. Patient but open-eared, a bat familiar is for the wizard who waits in safety until it is just the right time. Patience is a virtue.
Toad: Complacency is the word. Toads are creatures that live in a swamp and are happy to be there. Happy with their lot in life, toads stubbornly stay in their comfortable moist areas. After all, drier ground would dry them out and underwater would drown them. A master of a toad familiar is complacent in his life and looks to keep it that way. No need to stir up trouble.
Lizard: In stark contrast to the toad, lizards are always willing to exert themselves to get to better places. Adaptable lives and willingness to climb great obstacles to achieve or explore is grand in a lizard masters eyes. Lizards are for the ambitious explorer wizards, which are sadly too few.
Hawk: Day predators, hawks are quick to strike. A hawk master is the same way, making fast decisions and not dawdling. Hawk masters are not blind fools, and while acting fast, don't act without thinking, though they tend to lack deep thinking and great rationalization.
Owl: Opposite a hawk master, the owl master looks deep into every decision making careful wise decisions. However, this can lead to over-analyzation which can waste time and effort or even inevitably lead to the wrong conclusion. Deep rationalization is always their answer.
Raven: The smartest of all birds, ravens are a favorite for many great wizards. The raven's intellect seems to rub off on the master. A raven master is not actually smarter than other masters, but more prone to study. These bookish types are the stereotypes of wizards everywhere. To them, knowledge and preparation are paramount.
Snake: Snakes are classically venomous and slippery. Snake masters rarely aren't the same way. Liars and misleaders, when not spouting hurtful venomous comments at others, snake masters are rarely pleasant people to be friends with. If they are ever pleasant, it's to fulfill some agenda. Often enough, snake masters conceal their snake familiars because they know how much of an indicator they can be.
Weasel/Ferret: Often enough, weasel masters are stereotyped as being like snake masters, but that isn't accurate. Weasel masters are simply adept at getting themselves out of potentially dangerous situations using quick wit and flexibility, they get in and out of trouble with hardly a scratch, much to the chagrin of their less weaselly friends.
That's MY favorite.
I love the idea, although I have to disagree with some of the characterizations. You should expand this for the higher level familiars.
For example, there is just as much reason for a studious back line planner type wizard to take the Hawk familiar as a brash impulsive one. After all, the hawk flies, has a great spot check, and makes for an all around wonderful reconnaissance platform/spy satellite. The wizard could easily sit back where it's safe and send the hawk out to scout the area, make sure it's safe, etc. At higher levels, (s)he can send the hawk flying over/around dangers until they find a safe spot, look around, and then Teleport to them.
The Bat can also see many things that the Wizard/Sorcerer cannot. They see perfectly well in pitch black, and can easily detect invisible creatures with echolocation. Being right at home in a cave, it can just as easily belong to an adventuring dungeon diving mage. Especially a fireball happy dungeon delving mage.
The lying, venomous reputation of snakes is also a very European centric view of the animal, because of the Bible and the Torah saying that Satan took the form of a snake in the Garden of Eden. The Aztec worshipped the snake as a symbol of immortality and rebirth (because of how it shed it's skin), the Chinese revered them, and I believe it was the Amazonians that saw the snake as a symbol of good luck and fertility.
Not that anything you've said is wrong, and you did preface it with saying it was your take on them, but everybody should remember that the key method in determining a familiar should be what fits the character best from a roleplaying standpoint, while the mechanical bonuses (if any) should be a secondary consideration.
This is a good post (anything that makes some people see a familiar as more than just an extra ability bonus is a good thing). The only problem I can see is that the characterization of some of the familiars isn't that spot on, IMO.
For example, there is just as much reason for a studious back line planner type wizard to take the Hawk familiar as a brash impulsive one. After all, the hawk flies, has a great spot check, and makes for an all around wonderful reconnaissance platform/spy satellite. The wizard could easily sit back where it's safe and send the hawk out to scout the area, make sure it's safe, etc. At higher levels, (s)he can send the hawk flying over/around dangers until they find a safe spot, look around, and then Teleport to them.
The Bat can also see many things that the Wizard/Sorcerer cannot. They see perfectly well in pitch black, and can easily detect invisible creatures with echolocation. Being right at home in a cave, it can just as easily belong to an adventuring dungeon diving mage. Especially a fireball happy dungeon delving mage.
The lying, venomous reputation of snakes is also a very European centric view of the animal, because of the Bible and the Torah saying that Satan took the form of a snake in the Garden of Eden. The Aztec worshipped the snake as a symbol of immortality and rebirth (because of how it shed it's skin), the Chinese revered them, and I believe it was the Amazonians that saw the snake as a symbol of good luck and fertility.
Not that anything you've said is wrong, and you did preface it with saying it was your take on them, but everybody should remember that the key method in determining a familiar should be what fits the character best from a roleplaying standpoint, while the mechanical bonuses (if any) should be a secondary consideration.
I definitely love it when people make intelligent commentary on my writing.
Hawks have always been considered aggressive with an edge of impulsive, despite what the animal is actually like in reality. Hence the term "War Hawk".
I never said that a bat master doesn't travel, I just mentioned they wait in safety whenever there is danger around until the right time. (Some see this as cowardice maybe :P) Bat masters just keep saying "Wait and see..."
Snakes have been lauded in some cultures, but are generally considered liars. The term "Forked tongue" generally means a liar or someone who talks behind your back, and it comes from the shape of a snake's tongue. Anyway, the snake provides a bonus to bluff checks, so my description is as much derived from that as well.
I then had a devil's advocate kind of idea that I offer up not to nay-say what's been posted so far, but rather to offer up other considerations. Familiars are not totem animals - they are mundane animals attracted by the arcanists magic and augmented by it. One could therefore argue that familiars acquire a personality from their masters, rather than the other way around. For example, a lazy survivor wizard (a la toad familiar in the initial post) might WANT an intrepid bat to do his cave scouting for him, but he might find that over time, as his personality rubs off, that his bat is becoming lazier and complacent as well!
This also offers DM's a chance to offer a player feedback on how we see their personality developing.
That being said, I heartily agree that picking a familiar for stats is a little metagaming'ish. Perhaps we should encourage a dialogue with our arcanist PC's about what traits they want in their familiar ad they see it matching their personality - change the game bonuses and then keep the list to yourself and right up a non-stat trait list for the players to review. That way players can't pick on stats but can pick personality traits.
That being said, I heartily agree that picking a familiar for stats is a little metagaming'ish.
AD&D didn't have a metagaming problem with familiars. A wizard would cast the 1st level Find Familiar spell and roll a d20 to see which familiar he would get. If metagaming familiars bothers a DM then he could easily create a table to randomly roll up familiars.
There's nothing wrong with looking at the previous editions for ideas and going old school on your players.
My gnomish wizard had a raven familiar because it fit his personality so well -- cheerful, but easily distracted by shiny things, and infinitely curious into the workings of everything. He never met a lever he wouldn't pull.
That said, there is a lot of versatility in the animal conceptions. Some examples:
The Rat, in an eastern sense is a clean, clever creature, with a naturally curious disposition. That is why Japanese rats make such wonderful pets, and can be trained to do a variety of tricks. I once saw two which had been trained to play basketball against each other on a miniature court. Such a familiar would be appropriate for any court mage standing beside the imperial king.
The Rat, in the western sense is a dirty, filthy, disease-infested vermin. Thus, this rat would be a wonderful companion for a Cancer Mage, Necromancer, or any other dark and scurrilous mage intent on petty and evil motives.
The image of a Raven varies in the same way from the "stately Raven of the saintly days of yore" and the "thing of evil! - prophet still, if bird or devil!" within little more than a few sets of verse.
So, your players do still have some variance in choice, as most any mage can come up with appropriate justifications for several different familiar choices. I think the real outcome should be DMs who require that sort of justification for their wizards to cut down on the "toad in the pocket syndrome" that pops up so often.
Illusionist/Cook/Crafter. Toad. She does like to putter safe at home in the lab, but rarely gets the chance. Aside from teaching her alchemy and spellcraft her toad mostly sits on her pack and observes, but sometimes will lash out with a shocking-grasp tongue to the surprise of everyone.
Flashy telekenetic oriented social sorceress who likes to take chances. Started with Hawk (she began her career avenging the death of her husband at the claws of hippogriffs) but after the hawk got more aggressive and nearly died, she dismissed it as incompatible (it self-stabilized at -9hp at the foot of a hydra...). She's now spending a year thinking about familiars, with Raven being a likely next choice, possibly tricked out with a couple command-word magic items that she doesn't have slots free for. However it is not impossible she'll go back to a hawk, she does miss its alertness and will have some nice spells to share that it can use better than her. It might work out ok since the familiar will be a lot smarter and will be better able to communicate. The other familiars don't really interest her (snakes, rats, toads and weasels just don't work socially).
Arcane Archer. His one level of wizard will give him access to a bat, which he intends to use to hover over invisible targets so he can pinpoint their location and fire volleys into the square. He is a patient hunter, with keen senses, and the characterization of a bat as that archetype certainly fits, even though his home location is a forest, not a cave.
Acrobatic/grappling monk who may get a level or three of wizard after level 12. If he does the familiar will be a weasel. Weasels balance well, climb well, can make good use of his tumble ranks and when they latch onto somebody they don't let go. The weasel is a "mini-me!" From a more practical standpoint, continuing to boost his reflex save is a good thing, as is the scent ability that will let him warn his master of enemies or even pinpoint them for him. Again, the chosen archetype fits pretty well.
A familiar is a bond between two creatures. They partially share skills, saves, an empathic link, and several other groovy abilities. But it's this empathic link that jumped out at us. It's not that the Familiar just mirrors the Caster, or the Caster mirrors the Familiar in anyway. Its a long standing Magical relationship during which they are in constant empathic link. (Well as long as the familiar and Master don't get too far apart but why would you leave your familiar that far from you?. In essence yes the Master would Mirror some of the traits of the Familiar and the Familiar share and Mirror its Master.
But merely looking at a whole Race as the Base familiar is also folly. It'd be like judging all Humans on what Lord Denethor of Gondor was. Each familiar is a different animal that yes shares a common race but has as much individuality as the Humans who observed them. (I.e. the aforementioned eastern Rats vs the western Rats, or the differences between different ravens.)
Oh and for a pyro wiz, I thought maybe use an elemental familiar.
Snake: Snakes are classically venomous and slippery. Snake masters rarely aren't the same way. Liars and misleaders, when not spouting hurtful venomous comments at others, snake masters are rarely pleasant people to be friends with. If they are ever pleasant, it's to fulfill some agenda. Often enough, snake masters conceal their snake familiars because they know how much of an indicator they can be.
Snakes have also been associated with healing. It's why, even today, the symbol of the American Medical Association includes the snake. This actually may work well with the deceptive nature of the snake. When dealing with a wizard with a snake it can be unclear as to whether the wizard is a healer or a venomous type.
I like the dichotomy and the way that it can lead to roleplaying options.
So, you can see why THAT symbol would be used by a medical society, since it is a sign of healing. Also, how do you kill a snake? With a staff.
Snakes have also been associated with healing. It's why, even today, the symbol of the American Medical Association includes the snake. This actually may work well with the deceptive nature of the snake. When dealing with a wizard with a snake it can be unclear as to whether the wizard is a healer or a venomous type.
Asclepius, from Greece. There was, or were, snake or snakes around his staff.
As said, the roles of animals vary amongst cultures. But this is certainly inspiring to read.
Do understand that a great deal of "Greek Mythology" that is taught as being so "ancient" and "foundational" was really just recent rip-offs of the much older (Persian, Syrian, Jewish) cultures of the surrounding area. Josephus (First Century) even makes fun of the Greeks for thinking that there stuff is so old when their oldest stuff is less than 500 years old. (He, being a Jew, mentions the MUCH more ancient Egyptian writings as well as the equaled ages Jewish religious text). Thus, Pandora is a deviation of the Garden and the Fall along with a touch of the Ark of the Covenant (when it is captured by the Palestinians), the Flood (though that story can be argued as more universal than derivative), Hercules is a deviation off of Sampson (and also other influences, such as Gilgamesh).
Anyway, that does not refute that it is possible for some culture to think of the serpent as a healer. In Norse mythology, it is more closely connected with time (the world snake eternally swallowing its tail). In Aztec cultures, the snake is a symbol of wisdom (something not out of line with the Garden account in Jewish writings, just a different connotation on wisdom). So, the real issue is not what the archetype of the familiar animal CAN be, since for most animals there is a great deal of variety, but rather what archetype does that animal have within the campaign world you are playing.
A healer snake would not be a good choice in a campaign plagued by Yuan-ti, who give an evil connotation to snakes in the campaign world. In a campaign where the aggressive imperialistic nation to the north has a falcon on their banner, a falcon would likely be a poor choice for a wizard from the southernly nation.
In other words, while it is good to make sure that the animal archetype does match the characteristics of the character who summons it, it must also fit the themes and archetypes of the campaign world.
If anything, the rat familiar would, in my opinion, be the perfect companion for a wizard that seems to just never ever give up. Their choice of spells seems to lack any rhyme or reason, but when you get right down to it, they somehow always seem to have the right tool for the job. Think of them as the MacGyver of the Arcane. Sure, not everyone thinks of him as the handsomest wizard in the world, but he's always there, always handy. And if you look close enough, you might see that the rat can be as cute and fluffy as a squirrel (sans the tail). Likewise with our wizard (sans the taste in clothing, maybe).
Of course, my viewpoint is kind of biased due to the fact I am rather fond of these creatures, but I thought it might be nice to show the rat in another light.
What do people think about familiars gained through improved familiar? I'm of course talking about the homunculus, shocker lizard, mephits, celtial animals, feindish animals, and elementals as well as the krenshar, worg, blink dog, hell, hound, hippogriff, howler and winter wolf you can get with the complete adventurer style familiar feat. Any ideas?
Apart from the shocker lizard, DMG improved familiars are pretty obvious. Homunculi are an extension of the creator's self to start with, so it's guaranteed to be a perfect match. Mephits and elementals would go to elemental obsessed casters. Celestial and fiendish animals match up with whatever the normal animal would, save the caster has a passion for promoting their alignment's ideals(like a mystic theurge).
Shocker Lizard-The master of a shocker lizard is a tactician at heart. He is a master at pooling his ally's abilities to get the most effect. He is usually passive and willing find a nonlethal way to end a confrontation, such as offering surrender after dealing a single, powerful attack with his allies.
Is that the guy in Greek mythology who had his ears cleaned out by snakes so that he could hear animals speak (the only fellow in Greek mythology I can think of to justify snakes as healers)?Asclepius, the god of medicine. He was taught by Chiron (the centaur who taught most heroes), and could raise the dead. Zeus feared that this power could disturb the order of world and thus killed Asclepius. After that Asclepius was set to the sky, holding a curative serpent, and became a god.Do understand that a great deal of "Greek Mythology" that is taught as being so "ancient" and "foundational" was really just recent rip-offs of the much older (Persian, Syrian, Jewish) cultures of the surrounding area. Josephus (First Century) even makes fun of the Greeks for thinking that there stuff is so old when their oldest stuff is less than 500 years old. (He, being a Jew, mentions the MUCH more ancient Egyptian writings as well as the equaled ages Jewish religious text). Thus, Pandora is a deviation of the Garden and the Fall along with a touch of the Ark of the Covenant (when it is captured by the Palestinians), the Flood (though that story can be argued as more universal than derivative), Hercules is a deviation off of Sampson (and also other influences, such as Gilgamesh).
I won't start debating if the Greek mythology comes from Hebrew or other way around, but surely, both of them have similar roots. The Jews were monolatric to begin with, only turning monotheistic later, so they took influences from elsewhere quite readily. The slavery in Egypt forced them to reinforce their culture. For example, the flood of Bible is quite clearly copied from Gilgamesh. It is a common myth in that region, so it probably has some basis on real, in scientific sense, events.
The reason why I mentioned Asclepius is because I am passingly familiar with Greek mythology, much less with the others.Anyway, that does not refute that it is possible for some culture to think of the serpent as a healer. In Norse mythology, it is more closely connected with time (the world snake eternally swallowing its tail). In Aztec cultures, the snake is a symbol of wisdom (something not out of line with the Garden account in Jewish writings, just a different connotation on wisdom). So, the real issue is not what the archetype of the familiar animal CAN be, since for most animals there is a great deal of variety, but rather what archetype does that animal have within the campaign world you are playing.
Exactly my point.A healer snake would not be a good choice in a campaign plagued by Yuan-ti, who give an evil connotation to snakes in the campaign world. In a campaign where the aggressive imperialistic nation to the north has a falcon on their banner, a falcon would likely be a poor choice for a wizard from the southernly nation.
Unless one has a chaotic character who wishes to crumble stereotypes, of course...