Changeling Wizard Abuse

[ATHATH]

Take a look at the 5th level Changeling Wizard substitution level:

Morphic Familiar (Su): At 5th level, a changeling wizard's familiar gains the ability to alter its form on command. As a full-round action, the familiar can change its form to that of any creature that the wizard could normally have as a familiar. The wizard gains the new benefit of the familiar while losing the previous benefit. If the changeling wizard does not have a familiar, this ability has no effect until he gains one.

This substitution feature replaces the standard wizard's bonus feat gained at 5th level.

How does this interact with the Improved Familiar and Dragon Familiar feats? Can a familiar repeated transform into and out of, say, the Imp form to spam the Imp's 1/day and 1/week SLAs? Can one use this ability to break a Baleful Polymorph effect or the like on their familiar? Does the familiar keep its buffs between forms?

[Inevitability]

It pretty clearly says the familiar can turn into anything you could normally have, so it's indeed incredibly good with Improved Familiar. Breaking Baleful Polymorph seems to work too, though arguably the spell effect could carry over.

[Dagroth]

Although it does not say that the Familiar gains the "shapechanger" subtype, it seems that it clearly does. Therefore, just like any shapechanger, it would be affected by polymorph but able to change itself when it wanted.

Also, I believe there's a ruling where you can't get multiples of a 1/day ability just by changing into that form multiple times.

Interestingly, an Imp or Quazit has an alternate form ability which, though animal forms are suggested, could easily be a humanoid.

And don't forget, if you have Improved Familiar you gain one of its abilities... so, with Improved Familiar (and a high enough class level) The Wizard can change into any form that he could legally have as a familiar.

[MHCD]

Some people interpret "normally" to mean only the base wizard without any other feats or options, but I interpret it the same way as Inevitability - and as far as I am aware, the general consensus is that is the correct interpretation.

It's also fun using racial emulation to take elven wizard racial substitution level(s). The third level doubles the bonus granted by your familiar, so being able to change that at will makes the benefit even much more worthwhile.

[Uncle Pine]

It's a known trick and it's quite amusing, especially if you add Arcane Hierophant to the mix: now your familiar is a bear, now it's not!

[Segev]

I do agree that it can let your familiar become anything on the Improved Familiar list if you have that feat. However, even if it becomes an imp, uses a 1/day ability, then a toad, than an imp again, it doesn't get another use of that 1/day ability. It's still used it's 1/day imp ability already.

Even so, it's amazingly powerful if you build for it right. And yes, Arcane Hierophant makes it even more amazing, as now you have any druid animal companion you could normally get.

[MHCD]

It's a known trick and it's quite amusing, especially if you add Arcane Hierophant to the mix: now your familiar is a bear, now it's not!


I do agree that it can let your familiar become anything on the Improved Familiar list if you have that feat. However, even if it becomes an imp, uses a 1/day ability, then a toad, than an imp again, it doesn't get another use of that 1/day ability. It's still used it's 1/day imp ability already.

Even so, it's amazingly powerful if you build for it right. And yes, Arcane Hierophant makes it even more amazing, as now you have any druid animal companion you could normally get.

While Rule of Cool says this should work, it's another one of those tricks that gets passed around but isn't a thing by RAW.



Companion Familiar: Upon becoming an arcane hierophant, you must dismiss your familiar, if you have one (You do not risk losing XP for doing so.) You may retain any one animal companion you already possess. [...] In addition, your animal companion (if any) gains many of the abilities that a familiar would normally possess. You add your arcane hierophant class level to your arcane spellcasting class level, and determine the Intelligence bonus and special abilities of your animal companion accordingly (see the sidebar Familiars, page 53 of the Player's Handbook).
The "companion familiar" or "familiar companion" as it also is described is explicitly not a familiar, and it is only given the familiar goodies that come from your caster level (which is still an upgrade from being dependent on your class level).

[Segev]

Ehhh.... it says your animal companion gains abilities your familiar would normally possess. This would include that shapeshifting ability.

[ATHATH]

Ehhh.... it says your animal companion gains abilities your familiar would normally possess. This would include that shapeshifting ability.
It says that it gains MANY of them, not all of them.

[Dagroth]

It says that it gains MANY of them, not all of them.

In this case, the "Many" is clearly referring to "however many it qualifies for based on your Wizard/Sorcerer level".

[MHCD]

It says, "your animal companion (if any) gains many of the abilities that a familiar would normally possess", and then it enumerates exactly what those abilities are. There's not room for interpretation either other than just deciding what one wishes it meant since there is no language like "it gains all the abilities any familiar would be given from any source, including, but not limited to...".

Don't get me wrong - I have houseruled that to work because it's cool, but it's still a houserule.

Edit: so many ninjas...

[Fouredged Sword]

Worst case situation you take wizard 5 after hirophant 1 so that the class feature applies directly to your companion familiar as your familiar. It is pretty clear to me that a companion familiar is both a companion and a familiar.

[Dagroth]

It says, "your animal companion (if any) gains many of the abilities that a familiar would normally possess", and then it enumerates exactly what those abilities are. There's not room for interpretation either other than just deciding what one wishes it meant since there is no language like "it gains all the abilities any familiar would be given from any source, including, but not limited to...".

Edit: so many ninjas...

Sadly, most books don't take other books into account. Especially if said book was published after the first book.

Further, WotC was notorious for not providing errata for situations such as this. The best you could hope for was someone would ask the question in a Dragon Magazine and get some vague "Sage Advice" non-answer.

[Segev]

It says, "your animal companion (if any) gains many of the abilities that a familiar would normally possess", and then it enumerates exactly what those abilities are. There's not room for interpretation either other than just deciding what one wishes it meant since there is no language like "it gains all the abilities any familiar would be given from any source, including, but not limited to...".I don't see it spelling out a list of abilities. I see it spelling out that you add your wizard and druid levels together to calculate Int and NAC.

I suppose I can see why you'd read it as a limiting list, but I am not sure I agree that it's iron-clad RAW.


Don't get me wrong - I have houseruled that to work because it's cool, but it's still a houserule.
Maybe. I'm not convinced. But it probably is something that will vary based on DM, regardless of which ruling is per the RAW and which is the house rule.

[MHCD]

Worst case situation you take wizard 5 after hirophant 1 so that the class feature applies directly to your companion familiar as your familiar. It is pretty clear to me that a companion familiar is both a companion and a familiar.

While I would allow combining these things as a DM, it still does not work by RAW. While it resembles a familiar in "many" ways, the companion feature is a new and distinct class feature and does not play well with most feats and features related to your actual familiar.


Sadly, most books don't take other books into account. Especially if said book was published after the first book.

Further, WotC was notorious for not providing errata for situations such as this. The best you could hope for was someone would ask the question in a Dragon Magazine and get some vague "Sage Advice" non-answer.

The other books have nothing to do with this, though. If the text said, "you dismiss your familiar, your animal companion becomes both your companion and your new familiar, and it gains the benefits that your animal companion or familiar would gain", that's still pretty open-ended, and it doesn't reference any text in any book - but it clearly works for any order of applying any familiar benefits.

The actual companion familiar ability is not vague or confusing due to so many other published books or poor editing - it specifies "many" things then tells you exactly what those things are with no wiggle room.

[MHCD]

I don't see it spelling out a list of abilities. I see it spelling out that you add your wizard and druid levels together to calculate Int and NAC.

I suppose I can see why you'd read it as a limiting list, but I am not sure I agree that it's iron-clad RAW.


"You add your arcane hierophant class level to your arcane spellcasting class level, and determine the Intelligence bonus and special abilities of your animal companion accordingly (see the sidebar Familiars, page 53 of the Player's Handbook)."

There's your list of abilities, page 53 of the Player's Handbook.

[Segev]

The actual companion familiar ability ... specifies "many" things then tells you exactly what those things are with no wiggle room.

The bolded part is the part where I think you're reading it wrong. That list of "special abilities" is modified by the Changeling Wizard ACF, and so applies.

[MHCD]

The bolded part is the part where I think you're reading it wrong. That list of "special abilities" is modified by the Changeling Wizard ACF, and so applies.

I would absolutely agree with you if the text of the ability was "your animal companion (if any) gains the abilities that a familiar would normally possess". It's the "many" which means "not all". So how do we know which abilities it does and does not grant? The only way to decide without fundamentally changing the meaning of the feat is to either grant everything except for what it says not to or to only grant what it says it does give. In this case, it's the latter, being the familiar abilities described in the PHB.

Otherwise, literally any feat or ability that applies to a familiar applies to the companion familiar, and you have written a new feat. It may seem pedantic, but that one word does matter.

[Segev]

I would absolutely agree with you if the text of the ability was "your animal companion (if any) gains the abilities that a familiar would normally possess". It's the "many" which means "not all". So how do we know which abilities it does and does not grant? The only way to decide without fundamentally changing the meaning of the feat is to either grant everything except for what it says not to or to only grant what it says it does give. In this case, it's the latter, being the familiar abilities described in the PHB.Technically, the fact that it's level-limited means that you don't get "all." Which is at least as valid a reading as the one you're giving it, and doesn't require us to divine arbitrary lines.


Otherwise, literally any feat or ability that applies to a familiar applies to the companion familiar, and you have written a new feat. It may seem pedantic, but that one word does matter.I...don't see why this wouldn't be the case, honestly. Except it's not a new feat. It's just that your familiar feats work on your companion familiar.

[Dagroth]

There is a list of abilities that the Companion Familiar doesn't get... it's the skill/save bonus that a familiar provides.

Of course, that comes down to "there's not a Wolf/Bear/etc. on that list".

[MHCD]

Technically, the fact that it's level-limited means that you don't get "all." Which is at least as valid a reading as the one you're giving it, and doesn't require us to divine arbitrary lines.

The lines with this interpretation are actually the least arbitrary you can get, since adds or takes away nothing from the text of the feat. And I know of no other ability in 3.X that uses that grants "many" abilities, lists a reference of those abilities (which reference already includes a level-limited distribution), wherein the "many" really meant "all, but only in a level-limited distribution, which we already said by giving you the table; while editing is not perfect, there is the "unless it says it does that, it doesn't do that" rule. Note: I'm really not trying to sound sarcastic or passive-aggressive here - if there is a good precedent for this other interpretation of abilities granting more than they say I'm not aware of, please do enlighten me.

Edit: Excellent catch, Dagroth! The fact that a reference for the "many" abilities granted is contained within the same part of the text is still hard to get around with out language like "including", but your point at least means it's open to interpretation.

[Segev]

I'd have to sit down and carefully read the full text of all abilities, and I haven't done that in this context yet. But it seems like this is one of those things where the real question isn't whether it's legal by the RAW, but whether your DM will allow it. Because it probably requires some interpretation/ruling on what the RAW means, if we're having this much trouble parsing it absolutely.

What has been written in this thread, at the least, seems to me to allow it by the RAW, but obviously others disagree as their quotes of the RAW that I'm reading are what they're holding up as evidence that it is NOT allowed.

[MHCD]

I'd have to sit down and carefully read the full text of all abilities, and I haven't done that in this context yet. But it seems like this is one of those things where the real question isn't whether it's legal by the RAW, but whether your DM will allow it. Because it probably requires some interpretation/ruling on what the RAW means, if we're having this much trouble parsing it absolutely.

What has been written in this thread, at the least, seems to me to allow it by the RAW, but obviously others disagree as their quotes of the RAW that I'm reading are what they're holding up as evidence that it is NOT allowed.

Well even if we forever disagree on the RAW, I'm with you on allowing it as a DM. It's fun, and it's not like it's going to ruin anything. On a wizard/druid, there are already people who think you're either already overpowered or crippled, and letting that ability work for all familiar related stuff won't change that either way.

[animewatcha]

The ruling of the 1/day thing. IIRC, that may have been done in the FAQ which isn't RAW unfortunately. People tend to take the FAQ with a grain of salt since it contradicts itself in places ( according to them ).

Meaning that constantly shapeshanging into a 'different' zohar would mean more 1/day wishes in one day by RAW.

[Dagroth]

The ruling of the 1/day thing. IIRC, that may have been done in the FAQ which isn't RAW unfortunately. People tend to take the FAQ with a grain of salt since it contradicts itself in places ( according to them ).

Meaning that constantly shapeshanging into a 'different' zohar would mean more 1/day wishes in one day by RAW.

Obviously broken and would not fly at any table I've ever heard of.

Not that a Zohar is a valid form for the ability in question, anyway.

[Segev]

So far as I know, it's not a FAQ thing. It's just a strict reading of the rules. Let's go ahead and use the Zohar and its 1/year wish as our example.

You turn into a Zohar. You use your wish (Su) ability. Nobody is going to argue that you can do so again, as long as you remain a Zohar, until a year has passed. I hope, at least, we all agree on that.

Now, you turn back into the elf mage you really are, then turn into a Zohar again.

One argument is that you turn into a "fresh" or "new" Zohar each time, fully stocked with all X/time-period abilities, and can make another wish.

However, that would require that each shapeshifting "creates" a new instance of the entity. That isn't what's happening, though: each time, you're still you, just now as a Zohar. And you, as a Zohar, used your wish power already. You still have to wait a year for it to recharge.

A Zohar who magically turns into a Lantern Archon and then changes back doesn't regain his uses of wish. The same principle applies. You aren't turning into a different creature each time. You're turning into the same creature - yourself as that creature type - each time. Expended abilities remain expended until their recharge time is passed.