[3.5] Familiars and Feats

[Thurbane]

So, we know familiars do not gain HD or levels as they serve, and therefore do not gain new feats.

However, as a DM (or player), do you think it's reasonable for a player to select his familiar's starting feats, instead of the default feats for creatures of that type? Or is this too open to abuse (i.e. my Raven has the Wild Cohort feat)?

Also, what other RAW methods are there for granting feats to a familiar? If it has the right body slots, magic items that grant feats (http://home.comcast.net/~ftm3/JHtB/feats.html) will work. How about magical locations, like the Otyugh hole? And spells like Heroics would also work, although temporarily. Dark Chaos Shuffle (ewww, cheesy!).

All thoughts and suggestions welcomed - T

[Spuddles]

Arent feats an effect related to hit dice? Or does that overly broad interpretation of effect only apply to By Crom iron heart surge?

[Fates]

A familiar is treated for most purposes as having the same number of HD as its master- I thought that arguably meant that it got feats accordingly? I've not heard anyone suggest otherwise- is there some catch I'm not aware of?

[TuggyNE]

However, as a DM (or player), do you think it's reasonable for a player to select his familiar's starting feats, instead of the default feats for creatures of that type? Or is this too open to abuse (i.e. my Raven has the Wild Cohort feat)?

It's potentially cheesy, but it makes a certain amount of sense; when you summon a familiar, it's no longer a normal creature, so having different feats is plausible.

However, those feats should be vetted more strictly than PC feats, since it's less intelligent and less trained, so overly complicated or powerful feat selections are not proper.


A familiar is treated for most purposes as having the same number of HD as its master- I thought that arguably meant that it got feats accordingly? I've not heard anyone suggest otherwise- is there some catch I'm not aware of?

Only for effects relating to number of HD (blasphemy, color spray, etc). Feats gained on level-up are not an effect, and they don't really related to the number all that much either.

Psicrystals, on the other hand, actually gain those HD in every respect, and unambiguously do gain feats for them.

[Spuddles]

How are feats not an effect related to hit dice? It isnt character levels that give you feats, but the acquisition of hit dice. Since most character levels are in the form of hit die granting class levels, player characters typically gain feats when they level. Savage progressions, racial classes, and template classes that advance your level but not your hit dice dont add hit dice, for instance.

[137beth]

How are feats not an effect related to hit dice? It isnt character levels that give you feats, but the acquisition of hit dice. Since most character levels are in the form of hit die granting class levels, player characters typically gain feats when they level. Savage progressions, racial classes, and template classes that advance your level but not your hit dice dont add hit dice, for instance.

Also, monster hit-dice give feats.

[Phelix-Mu]

How are feats not an effect related to hit dice? It isnt character levels that give you feats, but the acquisition of hit dice. Since most character levels are in the form of hit die granting class levels, player characters typically gain feats when they level. Savage progressions, racial classes, and template classes that advance your level but not your hit dice dont add hit dice, for instance.

I think the basic complication is that familiars are treated as having HD=master's HD. They don't ever "gain" a HD. When the master gains a HD, the familiar's HD doesn't increase, rather it's reset to the new total. This is evidenced by the familiar not gaining much of anything related to HD: no skill points, no hp, no increase to BAB or saves. The only things the familiar gets are noted on that table.

But that is just my general recollection. I'll be interested to see any evidence to the contrary, as it will grant material assistance to several treasured character concepts of mine.

[TuggyNE]

How are feats not an effect related to hit dice?

Mostly because gaining a feat from levels is not an effect as D&D understands it, never mind an effect "related to number of hit dice".

Similarly, when you level up and have more spells/day, that's not an effect either.

[Thurbane]

I think it's pretty safe to assume the common interpretation is that familiar do not gain feats under the "HD treated as equal to master's" clause.

So how about other methods whereby a familiar can get feats?

[Coidzor]

I think it's pretty safe to assume the common interpretation is that familiar do not gain feats under the "HD treated as equal to master's" clause.

So how about other methods whereby a familiar can get feats?

Maybe there's some way using UMD/UPD and Fusion + Astral Seed? :smallconfused:

[Thurbane]

Any more thoughts?

On how to snag bonus feats for familiars, or suggestions for good feats if you can allocate a familiar's (or improved familiar's) starting feats?

[Fouredged Sword]

Well, nothing is stopping them from attending the magical locations that grant feats. That would give it a select few feats.

I allow a character to use psionic reformation on a familiar to pick new starting feats, but they always start per the stat block on the srd.

[ahenobarbi]

Arcane Hierophant stacks Animal Companion progression on top of your familiar, giving it more HD.

EDIT: Correction. It adds familiar benefits to animal companion.

[Bronk]

You could pay to have your familiar spend some time in the 'Otyugh Hole' to get Iron Will, then use magic or psionics to switch it out for something more useful...

[ShurikVch]

What if you awaken your familiar?
Plus 2 HD per cast, thus 2 feats per 3 casts...

[ahenobarbi]

What if you awaken your familiar?
Plus 2 HD per cast, thus 2 feats per 3 casts...

That won't work. Familiar is has magical beast type, not animal type (see srd (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/sorcererWizard.htm#sorcererFamiliar)).

[ShurikVch]

That won't work. Familiar is has magical beast type, not animal type (see srd (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/sorcererWizard.htm#sorcererFamiliar)).
Awaken Magical Beast (Dragon #304) - as Awaken (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/awaken.htm), except for Magical Beasts, 9th lvl and 500 XP cost.

[ahenobarbi]

Awaken Magical Beast (Dragon #304) - as Awaken (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/awaken.htm), except for Magical Beasts, 9th lvl and 500 XP cost.

Good to know, thanks :)

[nedz]

Familiars
A familiar is a normal animal that gains new powers and becomes a magical beast when summoned to service by a sorcerer or wizard. It retains the appearance, Hit Dice, base attack bonus, base save bonuses, skills, and feats of the normal animal it once was, but it is treated as a magical beast instead of an animal for the purpose of any effect that depends on its type. Only a normal, unmodified animal may become a familiar. An animal companion cannot also function as a familiar.

So you cannot change the feats or HD


Hit Dice
For the purpose of effects related to number of Hit Dice, use the master’s character level or the familiar’s normal HD total, whichever is higher.

So even if you are using the master’s character level against an effect, this does not change the familiar's HD.

[ahenobarbi]

So you cannot change the feats or HD

Still you could Psychic Reform[ation] or Chaos Shuffle them for something else.

[Phelix-Mu]

I kind of want to use Extra Familiar on a Cerebremancer and coming up with some way of combining all the familiars into a Megazord creature with more feats.

[Thurbane]

So you cannot change the feats or HD
That quote talks about animals - does it also apply to Improved familiars, like Imps?

[Urpriest]

Psychic Reformation should apply.

In terms of picking its starting feats...back in 3.0, you actually went out and captured a real animal, then made it into your familiar. In 3.5, the implication is that you summon or create one somehow. Still, it says that it starts out as an animal. I'd allow it to start with different feats than the MM ones, because many animals in the world will have different feats, but they have to be feats it would have qualified for before becoming a familiar.

As for the "master's level" clause, typically "effect" means something like "spell, condition, or ability". WotC didn't define it because they didn't have a concept of making rules by which one could play a game, but this seems to be what they assumed was in the magic rulebooks in the sky.

[Phelix-Mu]

WotC didn't define it because they didn't have a concept of making rules by which one could play a game, but this seems to be what they assumed was in the magic rulebooks in the sky.

Quoted and bolded for much truth.

It's my general opinion that all the rules lawyers and sticklers for internal consistency and completeness worked over in the Magic: the Gathering department, leaving a ragtag bunch of writers and fanboys/girls to cobble together the ruleset for 3.x. Lack of a systematic approach to terminology can quickly dismantle a game that aims for the level of complexity present in 3.5. TSR could get away with it because houserules were essentially a pre-req for a functional experience, but 3.x makes a good effort to look well-conceived, while having some rather glaring omissions.

This comes from my combined background in math and English. They pretty much fail hard on both accounts. But it's easy to throw these stones in retrospect.

[nedz]

That quote talks about animals - does it also apply to Improved familiars, like Imps?

Improved Familiar [General]
Improved familiars otherwise use the rules for regular familiars, with two exceptions: If the creature’s type is something other than animal, its type does not change; and improved familiars do not gain the ability to speak with other creatures of their kind (although many of them already have the ability to communicate).
Not really, this is all it says.

Still you could Psychic Reform[ation] or Chaos Shuffle them for something else.
Or just the retraining rules, possibly involving Animal Handling, though familiars are Magical Beasts ?

Psychic Reformation should apply.

In terms of picking its starting feats...back in 3.0, you actually went out and captured a real animal, then made it into your familiar. In 3.5, the implication is that you summon or create one somehow. Still, it says that it starts out as an animal. I'd allow it to start with different feats than the MM ones, because many animals in the world will have different feats, but they have to be feats it would have qualified for before becoming a familiar
Sounds very reasonably, though it's a DM's call. You do just summon a typical animal though.

Quoted and bolded for much truth.

It's my general opinion that all the rules lawyers and sticklers for internal consistency and completeness worked over in the Magic: the Gathering department, leaving a ragtag bunch of writers and fanboys/girls to cobble together the ruleset for 3.x. Lack of a systematic approach to terminology can quickly dismantle a game that aims for the level of complexity present in 3.5. TSR could get away with it because houserules were essentially a pre-req for a functional experience, but 3.x makes a good effort to look well-conceived, while having some rather glaring omissions.

This comes from my combined background in math and English. They pretty much fail hard on both accounts. But it's easy to throw these stones in retrospect.
I once downloaded the Writer's Guide. Writers were encouraged to come up with new spells, feats, monsters, PrCs etc. There were no guidelines about rules, supposedly they had editors or something though they definitely had tight deadlines. Their focus was on creativity not consistency.

[Phelix-Mu]

I don't mind an emphasis on creativity. What I do mind is that they generally portrayed the ruleset as geared toward making the rules usable by anyone, and the splats as being great tools for increasing options and so forth. If they were intentionally cutting some corners on consistency, they should have given some more thorough guidelines on being a DM absent a clear rule, how to make judgement calls, what to do if the rules don't make sense, some errata, a coherent statement on primary sources, and generally maintained the theme.

The problem I have is that, in some places, the rules are quite good, and allow for some very sophisticated levels of interaction and effectiveness. In other places, the rules are botched, dysfunctional, or just not useful (Flurry of Blows). In one area, the rules allow even a novice DM to be pretty sure how stuff works. In another area, the same novice DM is not going to know what to do after the rules chuck him/her in the deep end of spot judgement calls.

But, clearly, I am not unbiased. I have loved this game since the early 90s, and much too much at times. That it was treated with anything less than all due care and contemplation makes me more than a little upset. Plus, my inner Grammar Nazi, Editor, and Logician all are regularly up in arms as I read stuff in the books.

But I've also been reading Exalted 2e. That's even worse. At least D&D is written in mostly decipherable language. The Exalted Core Rulebook just hurts my eyes.

[Bullet06320]

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/sb/sb20011020a

get a scroll of planar familiar, adds sum benefits at least