[3.5] Can familiars understand the Common Tongue?

[Duke of Urrel]

This may be a simple question, but it may not be simple enough for the RAW thread.

No matter which answer you give, yes or no, I am interested in the reasons you give for your answer.

Here's where the problem begins. On page 7 of the Monster Manual, we read:


Intelligence

A creature can speak all the languages mentioned in its description, plus one additional language per point of Intelligence bonus. Any creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher understands at least one language (Common, unless noted otherwise).

Familiars all have Intelligence scores over three. Can they, therefore, understand the Common Tongue as it is spoken, even though most of them (except for ravens) cannot speak until their master attains the fifth caster level?

I'll be honest. I've never assumed that familiars can understand the Common Tongue, and I don't believe the game designers intended them to. This is a possibility that occurred to me just today. However, my old assumption that familiars cannot understand the Common Tongue (unless perhaps they are ravens) may be far from universal, and I don't seem to have a strong argument for it, do I?

So what do you think?

[Forrestfire]

I've always assumed that familiars understood common, and generally in the games I've been in, it's been handwaved as them understanding all their master's languages. It just makes sense for a decently intelligent creature bound to someone's soul to be able to understand what they're saying.

[Duke of Urrel]

Thanks for your response. It's late and I'm going to bed, but I'll check for more responses tomorrow morning.

I'm beginning to like the idea that familiars understand the Common Tongue, and I think I'll embrace it as a rule, unless somebody persuasively throws cold water on the idea.

[Curmudgeon]

The basic issue here is one of rules hierarchy. Your Monster Manual quote is excerpted from the READING THE ENTRIES section of the Introduction chapter. Familiars are constructed from ordinary animals (none with an INT above 3 in their MM entries, and thus none with a language), with INT boosted via class features. Thus the rules which pertain to class features, in Player's Handbook, govern which languages (if any) a familiar understands. The problem is that those PH language rules are for "your character" (i.e. PCs) only, and don't talk about familiars. NPCs are always under DM control
It’s your job to portray everyone in the world who isn’t a player character. so it's going to be an issue for DMs rather than players to address.

Summarizing:

READING THE ENTRIES rules in Monster Manual apply to the base Animal, not the INT-boosted Magical Beast.
The Player's Handbook rules over the class features which give familiars their INT, but PH languages rules are for PCs, not familiars or other NPCs.
The EVERYONE IN THE WORLD rules for NPCs (Dungeon Master's Guide 103 and following) don't talk about languages.

[hamishspence]

This bit:


Any creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher understands at least one language (Common, unless noted otherwise).
seems like it applies to everything - PCs, NPCs, monsters, etc.

[Deophaun]

Here's where the problem begins.
I don't see a problem. That's the answer: creatures with an Int 3 or higher understand one language, and that language is Common unless otherwise stated. Unless there's a rule in the PHB that contradicts this for familiars, that crazy cat lady might not be so crazy after all.

[hamishspence]

Even if you ignore the MM - the Master and the Familiar gain the ability to speak to one another (in a common language that nobody else understands without magic) when the Master's 5th level:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/sorcererWizard.htm#familiars

Speak with Master (Ex)
If the master is 5th level or higher, a familiar and the master can communicate verbally as if they were using a common language. Other creatures do not understand the communication without magical help.

[Elkad]

Covered another way as well. Languages are skills. Familiar gains all his master's skills.

[Curmudgeon]

Covered another way as well. Languages are skills. Familiar gains all his master's skills.
No, only languages purchased with skill points are skills. Since all PCs start with Common as a language known without spending skill points, the master (and thus the familiar) cannot gain Common as a language skill.

[khadgar567]

simple sub question which gonna murky the waters a little what if familiar is proverbial iago aka parrot

[Psyren]

This bit:


seems like it applies to everything - PCs, NPCs, monsters, etc.

This. The Paladin's horse can understand her; to rule otherwise is ludicrous.

[Chronos]

Yeah, the Monster Manual rule says that they should understand Common. No rule anywhere contradicts that. Absent any contradiction, the hierarchy of sources doesn't come into play. So, they understand Common.

As a minor houserule, you might instead say that they understand their master's primary language, whatever that is. And yes, I know that there aren't any rules for which of a character's starting languages is their primary language, but that should usually be a fairly easy one to resolve.

[Duke of Urrel]

Thank you all for your responses. I shall have to do some more thinking. If I allow familiars to understand the Common Tongue – or their master's primary tongue, whichever that may be – I need to be stricter about what the Empathic Link can convey, I think. I was always pretty generous about what the Empathic Link could do, because I assumed that this was the familiar's only communication with the rest of the world. If familiars can understand the Common Tongue, I can afford to make the Empathic Link much more restrictive.

Spellcaster: I would like you to go and spy on those orcs for me.

Familiar: "Lazy, unwilling."

Spellcaster: There's an extra slice of bacon in it for you.

Familiar: "Greedy, willing."

Spellcaster: That's my Skulker!

[Psyren]

Familiars can become more intelligent than some humans, so I see no reason why they can't figure out how to nod yes or shake their heads no. Certainly it's a lot less headache for both parties than playing the emotions game for every yes/no request.

[Bronk]

simple sub question which gonna murky the waters a little what if familiar is proverbial iago aka parrot

Parrots are listed in Stormwrack on page 52... they gain the ability to speak one language chosen by its master as a supernatural ability, just like the raven does.

[Curmudgeon]

Yeah, the Monster Manual rule says that they should understand Common.
That Monster Manual rule is only for READING THE ENTRIES. If you have a monster entry for a familiar, with INT higher than 3, this rule applies. If you don't have such a monster entry, the rule doesn't apply.

No rule anywhere contradicts that. Absent any contradiction, the hierarchy of sources doesn't come into play. So, they understand Common.
It's not a matter of contradiction; it's a matter of the rule applying only where it says it does: in reading monster entries.

[Duke of Urrel]

Let's broaden my question a little.

If you don't allow familiars (or paladins' mounts) to understand the Common Tongue, how do you imagine the Empathic Link works as a means of communication? I formerly took a rather generous view, allowing it to work like a very basic telepathy that could only transmit three simple words per round. If you don't believe the rules allow familiars (or paladins' mounts) to understand the Common Tongue, how do you think the Empathic Link works, or (more importantly) how do you think the Empathic Link should work, particularly during the time when there is no other means of communication between the familiar (or the paladin's mount) and its master?

On the other hand, if you do allow familiars (or paladins' mounts) to understand the Common Tongue, how does this work for you?

Finally, regardless of what you may think about my original question, how do you limit the powers of familiars (and paladins' mounts)? Do you regard them as class features under the complete control of players, or do you regard them as monsters under the control of the dungeon master?

[Psyren]

How you did it above was fine (e.g. "lazy, unwilling"), I was just saying that for clarity/speed of play it should be able to gesture affirmatively or negatively to clearly indicate its next course of action (or inaction as the case may be.)

[hamishspence]

That Monster Manual rule is only for READING THE ENTRIES. If you have a monster entry for a familiar, with INT higher than 3, this rule applies. If you don't have such a monster entry, the rule doesn't apply.

Isn't it also a way to ensure that Awakened creatures (Undead, Constructs, etc) gain a language when their Int goes up?

[Deophaun]

Well... empathically? It just transmits emotions, nothing more. So you know when your familiar is distressed, angry, happy, inquisitive and the like. Any meaning behind those emotions still has to be divined by you.

Edit; And to the second part of your question, obviously as the DM, in order to make the empathic link work, I need some control over the mindset of the familiar. But, I have no interest in micromanaging it. So I consider that the role of the familiar is held in trust by the player. I am the final arbiter of the familiar's actions, but it's not something that I exercise often.

[Coidzor]

Familiars would be spectacularly useless and troublesome for the first 4 levels if their master had no way to communicate to them. Thus, I see no reason why I would want to have Familiars not understand commands given to them by their masters so long as those commands fall within their (initially) limited understanding.

I mean, what, were you requiring Handle Animal checks to get familiars to hold still? Keeping them on leashes? :smallconfused:

Or were you doing something with the empathic bond that's more than what is suggested by the rules text? :smallconfused:


That Monster Manual rule is only for READING THE ENTRIES. If you have a monster entry for a familiar, with INT higher than 3, this rule applies. If you don't have such a monster entry, the rule doesn't apply.

So homebrew has to explicitly say whether or not it abides by that rule? Or does by creating an entry and not saying one is breaking the rule, one is then abiding by it?

Seems awfully quantum that it'd only apply when something is formally written out, though. :smallconfused:

Like, I'm imagining a DM introducing some homebrew creatures which don't understand Common in the session where they're introduced but over the next week he gets around to fully writing their entry rather than just using a condensed form of them and then the ones the party captured last session magically know Common now.

[Mr Adventurer]

Also, there are a few familiars listed with their NPC masters in various places. Do they understand Common but PC ones don't?

[Ashtagon]

Familiars have Int 3+, so can understand a language. Unless the GM is feeling especially spiteful, that'll be Common.

However, they won'#t have the means to communicate with their master until the master is 5th level. Even then, their understandong of what was said is filtered through their Int score. They simply won't get most complex conversations.

[Duke of Urrel]

How you did it above was fine (e.g. "lazy, unwilling"), I was just saying that for clarity/speed of play it should be able to gesture affirmatively or negatively to clearly indicate its next course of action (or inaction as the case may be.)

I agree that gestures, especially for yes and no, should be within the capabilities of all familiars (and paladins' mounts).


Well... empathically? It just transmits emotions, nothing more. So you know when your familiar is distressed, angry, happy, inquisitive and the like. Any meaning behind those emotions still has to be divined by you.

Edit; And to the second part of your question, obviously as the DM, in order to make the empathic link work, I need some control over the mindset of the familiar. But, I have no interest in micromanaging it. So I consider that the role of the familiar is held in trust by the player. I am the final arbiter of the familiar's actions, but it's not something that I exercise often.

This is all very reasonable. I agree that the dungeon master should intervene only to prevent abuse. Familars and paladins' mounts are not automatons, but they do empathize with their masters. And it works the other way too, so that abusing one's familiar should simply be out of the question. If you can actually physically feel another creature's pain, you're not going to subject it to torture. (At least not very often.)


Or were you doing something with the empathic bond that's more than what is suggested by the rules text? :smallconfused:


Actually, that's exactly what I always did, before I considered allowing familiars to understand the Common Tongue, applying the rule from the Monster Manual.

[Coidzor]

Actually, that's exactly what I always did, before I considered allowing familiars to understand the Common Tongue, applying the rule from the Monster Manual.

So more like telepathy then?

[Duke of Urrel]

So more like telepathy then?

Yup. I allowed it to work like a very basic telepathy that could only transmit three simple words per round.

Now that I think of it, allowing familiars to understand the Common Tongue, but not to respond with anything but gestures of yes and no and empathic vibes, may be both easier to manage and less overpowered than forbidding them to understand the Common Tongue and making the Empathic Link the only available means of communication until the sorcerer or wizard attains the fifth caster level.


It's easier to manage, because as a sorcerer or wizard, you don't have to use such strongly simplified language when you speak to your familiar.


It's less overpowered, because the familiar is prevented from functioning fully as a Tiny-sized spy until the spellcaster attains the fifth caster level, something that I formerly tried to achieve with my house-ruled word limit.


As I said, I'm warming up to this idea.

[Curmudgeon]

Isn't it also a way to ensure that Awakened creatures (Undead, Constructs, etc) gain a language when their Int goes up?
No, that's covered by an explicit provision of the Awaken spell:
An awakened tree or animal can speak one language that you know, plus one additional language that you know per point of Intelligence bonus (if any). The spellcaster and the languages they know determine the languages of an Awakened creature. It's possible for a Druid spellcaster to have low languages known (possibly only Common and Druidic) and be forced to teach the creature Druidic as a requirement of casting Awaken, immediately making themselves ex-Druids (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/druid.htm#exDruids).

[Coidzor]

No, that's covered by an explicit provision of the Awaken spell: The spellcaster and the languages they know determine the languages of an Awakened creature. It's possible for a Druid spellcaster to have low languages known (possibly only Common and Druidic) and be forced to teach the creature Druidic as a requirement of casting Awaken, immediately making themselves ex-Druids (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/druid.htm#exDruids).

Hey. Well, then. That's definitely one angle on learning Druidic as a non-Druid I hadn't heard much about before, finding an animal Awakened by a Druid that knows Druidic as a result of being smarter than the Druid that awakened them. :smallamused:

[Curmudgeon]

That's definitely one angle on learning Druidic as a non-Druid I hadn't heard much about before, finding an animal Awakened by a Druid that knows Druidic as a result of being smarter than the ex-Druid that awakened them.
I fixed that for you.