Can one make an Item Familiar out of a Homunculus?

[XeraEternal]

I have a question regarding Item Familiar creation. Reading over the creation rules, it appears at first glance that one could craft a homunculus to use as their Item Familiar, except for one line that I'm unsure of: "Must be usable by the character". This brings me to question, what exactly does it mean to be "usable" to a character, and does a homunculus meet that prerequisite? I mean, I can certainly think of ways to use a homunculus, but I'm simply unsure what the game rules see as being "usable". Anyone have any thoughts on this?

(and yes, I realize that there are very certainly power level concerns to be had by letting one combine the two, but I'm simply curious if its RAW-worthy at the moment.)

[ComaVision]

I'm no Curmudgeon but I'm unaware of any game definition of "usable". I think the RAI is probably that it's a worn item but I don't have any RAW reason that a homunculus isn't legal.

[frogglesmash]

The criteria that a item must follows to become a item familiar are as follows:
1.Be a magic item.
2.Have a price of at least 2,000 gp.
3.Be usable by the character (if it is a weapon, the character
must be proficient with the appropriate category of weapon).
4.Have a permanent magical effect that the character can
(and knows how to) use.

Homunculi can potentially satisfy all of these criteria except the first as they are creatures and not constructs (and maybe the second, I don't remember how much it costs to make the).

[XeraEternal]

I'm specifically looking that the Artificer Homunculi, I thought they were actual constructs?

[noob]

"Homunculi can potentially satisfy all of these criteria except the first as they are creatures and not constructs (and maybe the second, I don't remember how much it costs to make the). " which manual are you using in all my manuals homonculi are constructs.

[frogglesmash]

I'm specifically looking that the Artificer Homunculi, I thought they were actual constructs?

which manual are you using in all my manuals homonculi are constructs.

All constructs are creatures, including constructs made by Artificers.

[noob]

Yes and why being a creature make you less an item?
Chickens are items and no rules forbid from enchanting them and taking them as item familiar.
In fact nothing says a wizard is not an item and no rule prevents from enchanting a wizard.

[XeraEternal]

Okay, so here's the closest thing I found concerning Homunculus being Creatures.

From DMG 1, concerning Intelligent Items (which are able to be Item Familiar'd): "Intelligent items can actually be considered creatures because
they have Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores. Treat them as constructs (see page 307 of the Monster Manual)."

Now, I'm not sure if that would make for RAW support, but if an intelligent item is a creature (construct no less) AND an Item, and a homunculus has identical creature traits to an intelligent item... I can see it working. Still digging though, anyone else finding anything?

[frogglesmash]

Yes and why being a creature make you less an item?
Chickens are items and no rules forbid from enchanting them and taking them as item familiar.
In fact nothing says a wizard is not an item and no rule prevents from enchanting a wizard.

Items are distinct from creatures, I'm not sure where you'd look for an explicit statement on on this matter but there loads if evidence in the rules. For Example:
1. Spells specify on a regular basis whether or not they target creatures or objects. Shrink Item targets "One touched object of up to 2 cu. ft./level" whereas Reduce Person Targets "One humanoid creature," Polymorph Any Object on the other hand targets "One creature, or one nonmagical object of up to 100 cu. ft./level"
2. Size categories treat objects and creatures differently, a longsword (medium) is significantly smaller than a than a full sized human (medium)
3 Objects have hardness, creatures have DR.
4. Creatures get saves, objects only get saves if they're magical or attended.
5. Creatures can't be "attended."
6. You can't sunder a creature.
7. You can't wield a creature.
8. objects have hitpoints based of of their volume and composition (and iirc, whether or not they're magical), these hitpoints are not variable and never change from one object to another. Creatures have variable hitpoints base off of hit dice.
9. Most importantly creatures have hit dice, BAB, Cha and Wis scores, base save bonuses etc. etc.

To sum up: If it's got Hit Dice and a stat block, it's a creature.


Okay, so here's the closest thing I found concerning Homunculus being Creatures.

From DMG 1, concerning Intelligent Items (which are able to be Item Familiar'd): "Intelligent items can actually be considered creatures because
they have Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores. Treat them as constructs (see page 307 of the Monster Manual)."

Now, I'm not sure if that would make for RAW support, but if an intelligent item is a creature (construct no less) AND an Item, and a homunculus has identical creature traits to an intelligent item... I can see it working. Still digging though, anyone else finding anything?

Intelligent items are a weird one because they don't have hit dice but they do have Cha and Wis scores so I'm pretty sure they count as both an item and a creature.

[XeraEternal]

How do you reconcile the fact that Craft Construct is an Item Creation feat? One would think that, considering that it is a feat detailed for creating an item, and that the creation mechanics are identical to those of any other magic item, that it would count as an item (and a creature).

Not trying to be a jerk, mind you, I'm just really trying to find a way to make this work.

[frogglesmash]

How do you reconcile the fact that Craft Construct is an Item Creation feat? One would think that, considering that it is a feat detailed for creating an item, and that the creation mechanics are identical to those of any other magic item, that it would count as an item (and a creature).

Not trying to be a jerk, mind you, I'm just really trying to find a way to make this work.

Specific trumps general. Item creation feats let you create magic items is the general rule. Craft construct lets you create magically animated Constructs (in other words, creatures) is the specific rule. Might I ask what you expect to gain from having your item familiar be a Homunculus?

[XeraEternal]

Specific trumps general. Item creation feats let you create magic items is the general rule. Craft construct lets you create magically animated Constructs (in other words, creatures) is the specific rule. Might I ask what you expect to gain from having your item familiar be a Homunculus?

It's equal parts what I seek to gain from my item familiar being a homunculus (which is, something that feels more like a traditional familiar and less like the One Ring), as well as what I want from my homunculus being an item familiar (having the homunculus be more intelligent, and have more enhancements for cheaper), but honestly I'm mostly just interested in it for the roleplaying aspects. Less like a hordeficer, and more like having one, particularly powerful, artificial partner.

[frogglesmash]

It's equal parts what I seek to gain from my item familiar being a homunculus (which is, something that feels more like a traditional familiar and less like the One Ring), as well as what I want from my homunculus being an item familiar (having the homunculus be more intelligent, and have more enhancements for cheaper), but honestly I'm mostly just interested in it for the roleplaying aspects. Less like a hordeficer, and more like having one, particularly powerful, artificial partner.

I currently can't think of any RAW method of cheesing your way into a homunculus familiar (maybe something with polymorph any object and mindswitch), but assuming your DM is even a little bit lenient you probably wouldn't have to much of an issue convincing them to let you do this, alternatively you could just play off of your DM's potential ignorance of the Item familiar rules and try to slip it past him without him realizing the illegality of it.

[noob]

You know why is a chicken an item?
Simply there is a column with trade goods and at the top there is written item meaning that the elements inside of the column are items and inside of this column there is chickens.
now the problem is to enchant them but it is rather easy they count as items and creatures awaken a chicken and convince him to become a kensai(some mind rape might help) and monk now his unarmed strike is his body and as a kensai he can enchant its unarmed strike and so increase the value of its body and be counted as magical and an item too.

[frogglesmash]

You know why is a chicken an item?
Simply there is a column with trade goods and at the top there is written item meaning that the elements inside of the column are items and inside of this column there is chickens.
now the problem is to enchant them but it is rather easy they count as items and creatures awaken a chicken and convince him to become a kensai(some mind rape might help) and monk now his unarmed strike is his body and as a kensai he can enchant its unarmed strike and so increase the value of its body and be counted as magical and an item too.

The chicken appears in the table not because it is an item but because it is commonly used as a trade commodity and therefore has an established monetary value. Fists on the other hand appear because they have weapon statistics (on a side note: What page of what book do chicken sale values get listed in?). Just because they are on a table does not mean they are a item/object, if that were true you'd be able to purchase yourself an extra pair of fists. But if nothing I've said 'till now has you convinced then these quotes straight from the srd (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm) should do the trick.
1. "Anything with no Charisma score is an object, not a creature. Anything without a Charisma score also has no Wisdom score."
2. "Anything with no Wisdom score is an object, not a creature. Anything without a Wisdom score also has no Charisma score."

These tell us three things.
1. Cha and Wis are a package deal.
2. If it doesn't have Cha and Wis it is an object.
3. Being an object precludes being a creature.

These facts are explicit, and irrefutable.

[Orderic]

The chicken appears in the table not because it is an item but because it is commonly used as a trade commodity and therefore has an established monetary value. Fists on the other hand appear because they have weapon statistics (on a side note: What page of what book do chicken sale values get listed in?). Just because they are on a table does not mean they are a item/object, if that were true you'd be able to purchase yourself an extra pair of fists. But if nothing I've said 'till now has you convinced then these quotes straight from the srd (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm) should do the trick.
1. "Anything with no Charisma score is an object, not a creature. Anything without a Charisma score also has no Wisdom score."
2. "Anything with no Wisdom score is an object, not a creature. Anything without a Wisdom score also has no Charisma score."

These tell us three things.
1. Cha and Wis are a package deal.
2. If it doesn't have Cha and Wis it is an object.
3. Being an object precludes being a creature.

These facts are explicit, and irrefutable.

Where does it say that an object cannot be a creature? It merely says that not having Cha and Wis means that it is an object. This does not preclude something with those ability scores from being an object as well.


By the way, I certainly know a few ways to "use" a homunculus...

[Curmudgeon]

Where does it say that an object cannot be a creature?
In the Glossary (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_creature&alpha=C):
creature

A living or otherwise active being, not an object. The terms "creature" and "character" are sometimes used interchangeably.

[frogglesmash]

Where does it say that an object cannot be a creature? It merely says that not having Cha and Wis means that it is an object. This does not preclude something with those ability scores from being an object as well.


By the way, I certainly know a few ways to "use" a homunculus...

No, it says "Anything with no Wisdom score is an object, not a creature," meaning that if you are one you cannot be the other, but if that still hasn't convinced you guys, curmudgeon's got my back.

[noob]

"No, it says "Anything with no Wisdom score is an object, not a creature," meaning that if you are one you cannot be the other, but if that still hasn't convinced you guys, curmudgeon's got my back. "
it only means if thing have "no wisdom score" then thing is an object is true and thing is a creature false.
But if does not says anything on things with a wisdom score so maybe they might be all both.
mathematics does not agree.
The definition of object was never given there was only two sufficient conditions for being an object.
there was never given any necessary condition for being an object because it would be things like "You can be an object only if you fill condition A"
and there was only things like "if you fill condition A you are always an object" (A imply B never means non A imply non B it is extremely false in logic to think that it is the case)

[frogglesmash]

"No, it says "Anything with no Wisdom score is an object, not a creature," meaning that if you are one you cannot be the other, but if that still hasn't convinced you guys, curmudgeon's got my back. "
it only means if thing have "no wisdom score" then thing is an object is true and thing is a creature false.
But if does not says anything on things with a wisdom score so maybe they might be all both.
mathematics does not agree.
The definition of object was never given there was only two sufficient conditions for being an object.
there was never given any necessary condition for being an object because it would be things like "You can be an object only if you fill condition A"
and there was only things like "if you fill condition A you are always an object" (A imply B never means non A imply non B it is extremely false in logic to think that it is the case)

Yes, you're right, if you read the rules in an incredibly obtuse manner then you're right, if you ignore curmudgeon's quote anyway. With curmudgeon's quote there's a very clear distinction between object and creature.

[noob]

Some people says that particular override generic so a chicken being put in a table of items is very particular and so override the generic and is a creature and an object because it is particular(being put on one small table instead of being a rule who apply in all the universe to all the creatures who does not says they do not)
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/wealthAndMoney.htm is where they say that chickens are item.

[frogglesmash]

Some people says that particular override generic so a chicken being put in a table of items is very particular and so override the generic and is a creature and an object because it is particular(being put on one small table instead of being a rule who apply in all the universe to all the creatures who does not says they do not)
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/wealthAndMoney.htm is where they say that chickens are item.

I did a word search and could not find the word "object" anywhere on that page. The table provided lists trade goods. Neither I, nor RAW has a problem with a creature being a trade good.

[prufock]

"Magic items are divided into categories: armor, weapons, potions, rings, rods, scrolls, staffs, wands, and wondrous items." - SRD

A homunculus does not fall into any of these categories; therefore it is not a magic item; therefore it can not be made into an item familiar.

[SkipSandwich]

It's equal parts what I seek to gain from my item familiar being a homunculus (which is, something that feels more like a traditional familiar and less like the One Ring), as well as what I want from my homunculus being an item familiar (having the homunculus be more intelligent, and have more enhancements for cheaper), but honestly I'm mostly just interested in it for the roleplaying aspects. Less like a hordeficer, and more like having one, particularly powerful, artificial partner.

The Improved Familiar Feat already allows for a caster to gain a homunculus as a familiar, though RAW requires the character be undead for some reason. If you are a Artificier it may also require the Obtain Familiar feat first, but it would be a 100% rules-legal way of having a Homunculus with all the standard familiar benefits.

If you specifically want the benefits from Item Familiar, though, I think you're out of luck unless you give up on the homunculus entirely and do something like designate an Apparatus of the Crab as your Item Familiar instead.

[Mehangel]

I am surprised that I did not see more people mention that object and item are two separate words. Thus by RAW I can see alot of argument for Homunculi being a viable target for item familiar.

[Segev]

The weird bit to me is that homonculi are already practically familiars just by their base rules. In fact, for many purposes, they're better: you can see through their eyes and hear through their ears, and communicate with it telepathically.

[Rubik]

Build the homunculus's body first, without imbuing it with (for want of a better term) life, give it some magical enhancements (such as turning it into a repeating magical trap) and use Item Familiar on it. Then turn it into a fully functional homunculus.

And voila.

[frogglesmash]

I am surprised that I did not see more people mention that object and item are two separate words. Thus by RAW I can see alot of argument for Homunculi being a viable target for item familiar.

While that may or may not be true, "magic items" fall into some very specific parameters.

[XeraEternal]

The Improved Familiar Feat already allows for a caster to gain a homunculus as a familiar, though RAW requires the character be undead for some reason. If you are a Artificier it may also require the Obtain Familiar feat first, but it would be a 100% rules-legal way of having a Homunculus with all the standard familiar benefits.

If you specifically want the benefits from Item Familiar, though, I think you're out of luck unless you give up on the homunculus entirely and do something like designate an Apparatus of the Crab as your Item Familiar instead.

I suppose I could do that, except that Improved Familiar specifically only states the "Homunculus" entry in the MM, which wouldn't include the artificer options in Eberron. That being said, I suppose that would be a manageable way... 2 feats and 9th (7th for the feat, which means next feat level is 9) level seems like a bit of a steep price to pay though. It's an awful long time to wait before being able to get what I'm looking for... Plus, I kinda like the cake bonuses from Item Familiar, and while I could probably suck it up and just use the Improved Familiar feat-chain, I'm also interested in knowing if it's even possible to do what I was suggesting.


Build the homunculus's body first, without imbuing it with (for want of a better term) life, give it some magical enhancements (such as turning it into a repeating magical trap) and use Item Familiar on it. Then turn it into a fully functional homunculus.

And voila.

Would this work? o_O I mean, I'd likely have to make the homunculus body into a custom-formed Wonderous Item, but does anyone know if it would work, RAW? Would you still be able to complete the homunculus awakening, if you'd already enchanted it as something else?

[Rubik]

Would this work? o_O I mean, I'd likely have to make the homunculus body into a custom-formed Wonderous Item, but does anyone know if it would work, RAW? Would you still be able to complete the homunculus awakening, if you'd already enchanted it as something else?As per the rules in the MIC, you can add the magical properties from one item onto another item for a +50% surcharge on the least expensive enhancements, and the Item Familiar rules don't preclude such things in the least.

Just find an item enhancement that can be conceivably added to part (or all) of the homunculus's body that's worth at least 2,000 gp. For instance, giving it a hand shaped like a spiked gauntlet and enhancing it as a +1 weapon. Seriously, that's all it takes.

[SkipSandwich]

As per the rules in the MIC, you can add the magical properties from one item onto another item for a +50% surcharge on the least expensive enhancements, and the Item Familiar rules don't preclude such things in the least.

Just find an item enhancement that can be conceivably added to part (or all) of the homunculus's body that's worth at least 2,000 gp. For instance, giving it a hand shaped like a spiked gauntlet and enhancing it as a +1 weapon. Seriously, that's all it takes.

Of course this could potentially lead to the amusing DM ruling that the Spiked Gauntlet is your item familliar, it just happens to be worn by the Homuculus you created. I now imagine a Homunculus wandering around at random while being berated by a a tiny gauntlet that speaks while making sock puppet movements with its fingers.

Or else your homunculus is shaped like a human hand and scuttles around a-la Thing from the Addams Family, which would also be pretty awesome.

[noob]

Or make a normal homonculus body and use a spell like masterwork transformation(PF sadly I would really have liked having that outside of PF) and now the entire body can be enchanted.
Or craft the Body as a masterwork sculpture then say that it can be used as a weapon(improvised weapon) but that it is also masterwork and so that it is a masterwork weapon and enchant-able.

[XeraEternal]

Of course this could potentially lead to the amusing DM ruling that the Spiked Gauntlet is your item familliar, it just happens to be worn by the Homuculus you created. I now imagine a Homunculus wandering around at random while being berated by a a tiny gauntlet that speaks while making sock puppet movements with its fingers.

This would be worth doing for the lulz factor alone!

The way that I'm looking at it presently (assuming that it works) is make the base body a modified wondrous item, Item Familiar it, then homunculify that.

Since this seems to be RAW-legal, now the question becomes: what wondrous item effects would be the most fun? Right now I'm looking at the eversmoking bottle effect, or perhaps an eternal wand effect. Keep in mind that once it's been familiamunculified it should be able to activate itself...

[Calimehter]

Since this seems to be RAW-legal, now the question becomes: what wondrous item effects would be the most fun? Right now I'm looking at the eversmoking bottle effect, or perhaps an eternal wand effect. Keep in mind that once it's been familiamunculified it should be able to activate itself...

Murlynd's Spoon. Familiamunculify it into a vaguely bird-shaped form and have it regurgitate edible mush into your teammate's food bowls.

[frogglesmash]

Since this seems to be RAW-legal, now the question becomes: what wondrous item effects would be the most fun? Right now I'm looking at the eversmoking bottle effect, or perhaps an eternal wand effect. Keep in mind that once it's been familiamunculified it should be able to activate itself...

Portable hole effect could give an interesting form of transportation, or maybe one of the figurines of wondrous power.

[XeraEternal]

Hmm... Since we're well into the realm of Theoretical Optimisation silliness now, would it be possible to do a Polymorph Any Object -> True Mind Switch shtick to turn your player into its own familiar? would you keep the benefits from Item Familiar... AND gain the benefits of BEING an Item Familiar..? Because if that's the case, I can see all sorts of funsie abuses to be had here... It raises a lot of questions... would you gain HD when you level up due to taking another class level? would you also be able to further enhance yourself... thus adding more HD... not to mention as you gain power/wealth which you invest into your new body... Item Familiars get an Ego Score... Hmmm...

[unseenmage]

Beware the 'Creatures aren't Items and Items Aren't Creatures' argument as according to RAW Animated Objects cease to be objects and can't be used for their original purpose anymore.
No tying knots with Animated rope, no cutting rope with Animated Swords, and absolutely no wearing Animated armor. No sitting at Animated tables, nor on Animated chairs (that sir is a Ride check! Roll.), no writing on Animated paper... You get the idea.

To my mind it is much sillier that swords stop being sharp and/or lose their handles when they become Animated Objects than it is for a spellcaster to combine their Wondrous Magic Item with their Homunculus.

Some Constructs come with built in weapons, could build yourself a Caryatid Column from Fiend Folio or a Brass Golem from MM2(?). Make the sword or ax the intelligent, Item Familiar, Ancestral Relic, etc etc item. Is it your Item Familiar or is it the Construct's though? As the Construct cannot make use of it and you command/use the Construct for your every whim I'd say it's yours.


There's also a FAQ out there somewhere where one of the WotC staff flat out says that Constructs are Magic Items. It's useless in a RAW discussion but it is contributing evidence.


As to True Mind Switching with one's Homunculus; Not sure if this helps but in the 3.0 Savage Species book there is a section that gives Homunculus a Level Adjustment. The exact page reference should be in the list of playable monsters in my sig. I sure was surprised to see it there. I love playing Costructs and was unaware of that little morsel until I made the list.