Unusual Familiars (MM pg. 347 variant familiars)

[Greywander]

Any spellcaster that can cast the find familiar spell (such as an archmage or mage) [MM] (such as an apprentice, warlock, or wizard) [Volo] is likely to have a familiar. The familiar can be one of the creatures described in the spell (see the Player's Handbook) or some other Tiny monster, such as cranium rat [Volo], a crawling claw, a gazer [Volo], an imp, a pseudodragon, or a quasit.
- Monster Manual pg. 347, Volo's Guide to Monsters pg. 213
ლ(╹ε╹ლ)

Let's browse through the list of Tiny monsters in the Monster Manual and Volo's Guide. Which of these, if any, would you allow a player to take as a familiar in your game, and would they need to be a Pact of the Chain warlock?

Monster Manual:

Crawling Claw (CR 0, pg. 44)
Demilich ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) (CR 18, pg. 48)
Quasit (CR 1, pg. 63) already a legal Pact of the Chain familiar
Imp (CR 1, pg. 73) already a legal Pact of the Chain familiar
Faerie Dragon (CR 1 or 2, pg. 133)
Flameskull (CR 4, pg. 134)
Homunculus (CR 0, pg. 188)
Intellect Devourer (CR 2, pg. 191)
Pixie (CR 1/4, pg. 253)
Pseudodragon (CR 1/4, pg. 254) already a legal Pact of the Chain familiar
Slaad Tadpole (CR 1/8, pg. 276)
Sprite (CR 1/4, pg. 283) already a legal Pact of the Chain familiar
Stirge (CR 1/8, pg. 284)
Will-o'-Wisp (CR 2, pg. 301)

Volo's Guide to Monsters:

Gazer (CR 1/2, pg. 126) variant familiar
Cranium Rat (CR 0, pg. 133)
Velociraptor (CR 1/4, pg. 140)
Neogi Hatchling (CR 1/8, pg. 179)
Quickling (CR 1, pg. 187)
Vargouille (CR 1, pg. 195)

There's a few interesting options here that would add a lot of variety and flavor to wizards/warlocks with familiars. Of the ones listed above, I'd probably only outright ban the demilich and the intellect devourer, although those both conjure up some interesting images.

[eryrwyn]

ლ(╹ε╹ლ)
Demilich ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) (CR 18, pg. 48)


Damn... I know what kind of familiar my BBEG will have then. :smalltongue:

[Greywander]

This sets you up for an epic plot twist where the demilich feeds its master to their phylactery, returning themselves to a full lich status again, and takes on the role of the new BBEG.

This is also why I'd be wary of actually using a demilich for a familiar.

[Azgeroth]

for a wizard familiar i dont think its overly important on the form it takes, provided it is still tiny..

however, the Find Familiar spell explicitly states the familiar cannot take the attack action, what about 'Cast a Spell'? or some other action using ability?? if you assume that it isn't banned, then you need to consider what it means to give a familiar that can cast a spell, or use an ability..

not a concern for PoC warlocks, their familiars can already attack, and cast spells (if able) so its more toward warlocks i would be granting just about any familiar.. but not at level 1.

for a wizard they would have to put a lot of work in to getting one, and it best be thematic for the setting/campaign/story arch. (Gazer guarding the wizards lab?)

[Azgeroth]

This sets you up for an epic plot twist where the demilich feeds its master to their phylactery, returning themselves to a full lich status again, and takes on the role of the new BBEG.

This is also why I'd be wary of actually using a demilich for a familiar.

what if it was a... good lich?? it happens! they exist!!

[Greywander]

for a wizard familiar i dont think its overly important on the form it takes, provided it is still tiny..

however, the Find Familiar spell explicitly states the familiar cannot take the attack action, what about 'Cast a Spell'? or some other action using ability?? if you assume that it isn't banned, then you need to consider what it means to give a familiar that can cast a spell, or use an ability..

not a concern for PoC warlocks, their familiars can already attack, and cast spells (if able) so its more toward warlocks i would be granting just about any familiar.. but not at level 1.

for a wizard they would have to put a lot of work in to getting one, and it best be thematic for the setting/campaign/story arch. (Gazer guarding the wizards lab?)
It's probably a good rule of thumb to restrict wizards to beast familiars, although anything with a CR of 0 or 1/8 would probably also be fine. For chainlocks, a good rule of thumb would be nothing over CR 2. At the end of the day, though, the imp still seems like the best utility familiar. Although if you just want to blast then flameskull has you covered.


what if it was a... good lich?? it happens! they exist!!
I've been working on a lich/undead race/template specifically because I wanted to play a lich. This type of lich doesn't need to feed souls to a phylactery (and doesn't actually have a phylactery) so you don't have to worry about the morality of being such a lich. The flameskull seems like it would make a suitable familiar for such a character, but I still prefer the utility offered by the imp.

By the way... is it possible to summon a celestial imp? The Find Familiar spell says you can make the familiar celestial, fiend, or fey, so...

My understanding is that the familiar isn't actually the creature that it takes the form of, e.g. it's not actually an imp, it's just a spirit in the form of an imp. So a celestial imp might be possible. Also, I'm assuming that if this is the case then your familiar won't try to subvert you to evil even though it's an imp (since it's not actually an imp).

[Requilac]

You forgot about flumphs. Those guys are tiny and only Cr 1/8.

[bc56]

My thoughts: chainlock anything up to CR 1, normal caster CR 1/8.

Also, you missed the beasts as tiny creatures, there are probably a bunch more tiny creatures in the MM.

For a complete list of tiny monsters, go here (https://donjon.bin.sh/5e/monsters/) and set search parameters to tiny.

[Glorthindel]

ლ(╹ε╹ლ)

Which of these, if any, would you allow a player to take as a familiar in your game, and would they need to be a Pact of the Chain warlock?

To be honest, I would allow any of them (yes, even the Demilich, would make a formidable familiar for a high-level necromancer), with the exception of ones which are young forms of larger creatures (this feels like cheating around the restrictions) - however, they would strictly require a roleplay opportunity. Obtaining a familiar like this is a good future goal for a player to have, and one I would certainly accommodate within reason, but it is certainly not something I would hand out just for casting an easily available spell.

[Millstone85]

You forgot about flumphs. Those guys are tiny and only Cr 1/8.Flumphs are Small.


with the exception of ones which are young forms of larger creatures (this feels like cheating around the restrictions)It is possible this guy in XGtE had no such qualm.

https://i.imgur.com/sGusM4A.jpg

That's a baby ki-rin (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/943561921902526464) on his shoulder.

[Dr. Cliché]

I like the idea of a Will-o'-Wisp familiar.

[Ninja_Prawn]

I love me some familiars (as (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2017/06/familiars-cute-as-button.html) anyone (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2017/05/familiar-animated-objects.html) who (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2017/07/familiars-under-sea.html) knows (https://nailsofvecna.tumblr.com/image/168387473600) me (https://78.media.tumblr.com/b3c6d42731c7a6ce5e53c6a35d7609a9/tumblr_opl5fqQcks1w946k6o2_r1_500.png) might (https://78.media.tumblr.com/126580659b281c8a61587fc96c05e446/tumblr_onqdhmi3Hc1w946k6o1_500.png) have (https://78.media.tumblr.com/479f5ce014bc1eeb964d0ee78de1cba7/tumblr_onqcziNEOm1w946k6o1_500.png) guessed (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=20514984&postcount=15))!

I'd be fine with any tiny CR 0 form for a wizard's familiar. More than that seems against the spirit of it, maybe. For chain-pact warlocks, I wouldn't challenge anything at CR 1/4; higher than that would need to be vetted on a case-by-case basis but most up to CR 1 are probably ok.

Of course, I wouldn't let a creature use its own spellcasting abilities if it was a familiar. If the spell allowed non-beasts as written, it would almost certainly include that corollary.

I do like the idea of a will-o'-the-wisp familiar, but my preferred method for that would be to write a new, higher level spell. Find Greater Familiar or something.

[Tboy1492]

My DM handles things a bit, differently lol
we started in 3.5 so I started with a familiar, converting to 5e now and I got to keep it. had a massive background roller that took all kinds of stuff into account and gave my character a shadow hound for a familiar. Though its just a baby right now, basically a living shadow in his pocket that cant do much yet till higher levels. Picked between two deities, the god of magic clourie(spelling?) and his races patron deity Hades. Took the patron deity, which made it the shadow hound instead of a wisp thing that basically always has a daylight spell from it and can do some nifty light stuff.
It would be nice to have the continuous light but I think the shadow hound is cooler :)

I always like having additional options and a degree of chance in things like this :)

[Naanomi]

I've allowed Crawling Claw and Cranial Rat before; and Gazer, Vargouille, and Stirge for Warlocks. Only the Gazer saw play though

[Regitnui]

what if it was a... good lich?? it happens! they exist!!

Baelnorn in the Forgotten Realms, and Undying in Eberron.

[Dr. Cliché]

I love me some familiars (as (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2017/06/familiars-cute-as-button.html) anyone (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2017/05/familiar-animated-objects.html) who (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2017/07/familiars-under-sea.html) knows (https://nailsofvecna.tumblr.com/image/168387473600) me (https://78.media.tumblr.com/b3c6d42731c7a6ce5e53c6a35d7609a9/tumblr_opl5fqQcks1w946k6o2_r1_500.png) might (https://78.media.tumblr.com/126580659b281c8a61587fc96c05e446/tumblr_onqdhmi3Hc1w946k6o1_500.png) have (https://78.media.tumblr.com/479f5ce014bc1eeb964d0ee78de1cba7/tumblr_onqcziNEOm1w946k6o1_500.png) guessed (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=20514984&postcount=15))!

The idea of a Winter Wolf Pup as a familiar is an interesting one (in addition to being a very, very cute one :smallwink:). I wonder what would happen when it grew up?


I do like the idea of a will-o'-the-wisp familiar, but my preferred method for that would be to write a new, higher level spell. Find Greater Familiar or something.

I love this idea.

[Consensus]

Undying in Eberron.
I wouldn't really call the undying court liches, since they don't have a phylactery or anything like it. (Unless you want to argue the collective belief of elves is a phylactery, but it does't really make sense because it's not about the individual souls of undying, it's about all of them) They're similar, but distinctly different. The presence of Erandis Vol shows that eberron does have regular liches too.

[Regitnui]

I wouldn't really call the undying court liches, since they don't have a phylactery or anything like it. (Unless you want to argue the collective belief of elves is a phylactery, but it does't really make sense because it's not about the individual souls of undying, it's about all of them) They're similar, but distinctly different. The presence of Erandis Vol shows that eberron does have regular liches too.

The Undying Gestalt is maintained by worship, but the individual councillors can be considered positive-energy liches. And the request was for "good liches". Of course Eberron has regular liches too. They're iconic.

[Consensus]

The Undying Gestalt is maintained by worship, but the individual councillors can be considered positive-energy liches. And the request was for "good liches". Of course Eberron has regular liches too. They're iconic.
I'd consider them positive energy undead, but not liches, as like I said before: they don't have a phylactery.

[Blacky the Blackball]

For normal wizardly use of the Find Familiar spell (or anyone else who takes it via Magic Initiate or casts it from an item or whatever) I limit* the possible forms the familiar spirit can take are limited to tiny beasts. It can be something off the standard list (e.g. a hedgehog or a newt or a dove) but it will have the stats of the nearest equivalent from the standard list.

For chain-pact warlocks, I'm a lot more flexible. I tend to assume that a campaign is going to go on till high level (almost all of mine go to level 15+) so I don't mind if the familiar is something that's a bit overpowered for the first couple of levels if that means it remains useful for longer.





*Or at least I would if someone asked - various players in my game have had familiars, but they've all been happy to choose from the standard list; a player asking for something unusual hasn't cropped up.

[Blacky the Blackball]

Demilich ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) (CR 18, pg. 48)


Damn... I know what kind of familiar my BBEG will have then. :smalltongue:

I've actually done something similar to that.

One of the antagonists for the campaign was a demilich, and he wasn't content just sitting around in a vault; so he got himself a minion who was a rogue mind flayer.

As far as anyone knew, the mind flayer was in charge of the conquering army. Everyone guessed that the staff (with a skull on top) that it carried was magical, but it didn't occur to anyone that the skull on top of the staff was the real boss and the mind flayer carrying it around (and in mental contact with it in order to relay its commands) was just his lieutenant.

The PCs got a big surprise when they ambushed him and blew their disintegrate spell on the mind flayer, only to have the skull from the top of his dropped staff rise up and start sucking their souls...

[Asmotherion]

And you just made a new character concept indirectly for me;

Undying Patron Warlock with a Demilich Patron
Flaming Skull Fammiliar (Pact of the Chain).
Shadow Sorcerer Multiclass

I'll either talk to the other DM about making this in his next one shot, or turn him into the next BBEG of my Campain.

[sambojin]

You might want to keep your characters away from faerie dragons too. Between their breath action (so they sort of can "attack" in combat) and their spellcasting (even CR1 yellow dragons give a fair few freebies) they can be pretty brutal. A lot more lock down than you'd usually want to give out of a lvl1 spell, even for PoC.

[Foxhound438]

-general blanket statement-, use the forms listed in the spell.



Pixie (CR 1/4, pg. 253)

in a word, "no"

in four words, "find a new table"

[Trippic]

never been one to adhere strictly to the familiar rules
usually work with player for something 'cool' that falls in line with their character, Chainlock gets a lil more leeway
so id prob allow an intellect devourer...though with a slight hit of the nerfbat

-edit or tiny mimic, 6"w x 4"h x 4"d ish (basically a small jewelry box version of the luggage in discworld)

[Aaron Underhand]

Thing is ... if your familiar dies you can resummon it in another form... The danger of an expanded list is familiar 'flipping' to have the most useful for a particular environment,,,

[bc56]

never been one to adhere strictly to the familiar rules
usually work with player for something 'cool' that falls in line with their character, Chainlock gets a lil more leeway
so id prob allow an intellect devourer...though with a slight hit of the nerfbat

-edit or tiny mimic, 6"w x 4"h x 4"d ish (basically a small jewelry box version of the luggage in discworld)

OH YEAH! I would totally want the Luggage for a familiar! That would be so much fun!

[Asmotherion]

-general blanket statement-, use the forms listed in the spell.


in a word, "no"

in four words, "find a new table"

In 7 words "when RAW killed the fun in D&D". Or was that 11 words?

I don't think I would be interested in playing at a table were a DM would remove his invitation to a player over intention to play a slightly different concept.

A DM does not have to compromise; That said, a DM does not have to be bad mannered about it.

[DivisibleByZero]

It's like to point out that those rules for variant familiars are intended for NPCs. (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/01/02/are-the-variant-familiars-rules-intended-for-players-and-npcs-or-just-npcs/) so the question is not which ones you might allow, or for which classes, but whether you would allow any of them to begin with. If so, then those questions will need to be answered.


Thing is ... if your familiar dies you can resummon it in another form... The danger of an expanded list is familiar 'flipping' to have the most useful for a particular environment,,,
That's not how the optional variant familiars work. That's how the normal find familiar spell works.
The spell brings a spirit, and you can choose its form. If you get an optional variant familiar, it isn't a spirit whose form can shift, it's a creature with a set form.
The idea is that you're trading potential versatility for cooler abilities.

[Millstone85]

That's not how the optional variant familiars work. That's how the normal find familiar spell works.
The spell brings a spirit, and you can choose its form. If you get an optional variant familiar, it isn't a spirit whose form can shift, it's a creature with a set form.
The idea is that you're trading potential versatility for cooler abilities.Well, there are at least four different sets of rules regarding familiars.

* The vanilla find familiar spell.
As described in the PHB. Summons a celestial, fiendish or fey spirit in one of several beast forms.

* The chainlock's find familiar spell.
Same as before, with the imp, pseudodragon, quasit and sprite added to the list of possible forms.

* Familiar variants of creatures.
As described in specific entries of the MM and VGtM. The actual creature enters a contract of sort with another.

* The NPC's find familiar spell.
The one quoted in the OP. If "any spellcaster that can cast the find familiar spell" can have "one of the creatures described in the spell" or "some other Tiny monster", we must be talking about an expanded list of forms for the spirit.

[Dr. Cliché]

Personally, I'm not a fan of the whole 'fey spirits' thing.

I'd much rather have the familiar be a 'proper' creature, rather than just something taking the form of such.


That said, I do like that familiars can be revived via the spell and that the caster isn't punished if they die.

[Tanarii]

None. These are variant rules for Monsters/ NPCs, not for PCs.

[Ganymede]

The idea of a Winter Wolf Pup as a familiar is an interesting one (in addition to being a very, very cute one :smallwink:). I wonder what would happen when it grew up?

Presumably, since a familiar is really a spirit of some sort and its physical form is merely a guise, it would never grow up.

[Millstone85]

Here are forms I think could be safely added for PCs:
* badger
* cranium rat (PotC only)
* crawling claw
* flying snake
* neogi hatchling
* quickling (PotC only)
* scorpion
* stirge
* velociraptor

[Greywander]

Also, you missed the beasts as tiny creatures, there are probably a bunch more tiny creatures in the MM.
I was feeling tired and didn't want to make the effort to search through all the beasts. I imagine that most tiny beasts wouldn't be as interesting as the tiny monsters, but for anyone that's not a chainlock it would be worth looking into.


It's like to point out that those rules for variant familiars are intended for NPCs. (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/01/02/are-the-variant-familiars-rules-intended-for-players-and-npcs-or-just-npcs/)
Ah, that does make a difference. Still, I'd probably allow a player to take an unusual familiar unless I knew it would cause a problem.


* The vanilla find familiar spell.
As described in the PHB. Summons a celestial, fiendish or fey spirit in one of several beast forms.

* The chainlock's find familiar spell.
Same as before, with the imp, pseudodragon, quasit and sprite added to the list of possible forms.
I've been wondering if this means you could summon a celestial imp, and how this would work for, say, an undead familiar (would it be both celestial/fey/fiend and undead?). I've also been wondering if an imp familiar obtained via the spell would try to subvert you to evil. Technically, it's not actually an imp, it's a familiar spirit in the form of an imp. Or at least so I heard from someplace I can't remember.


Presumably, since a familiar is really a spirit of some sort and its physical form is merely a guise, it would never grow up.
Exactly, a baby familiar would never grow up into its adult form. Unless your DM is feeling generous. This is one thing that would separate using the find familiar spell to get a familiar, and making a contract with a real creature to become your familiar. Although that begs the question of if you could use the spell to revive your familiar in that latter case, or if you could have two familiars at once (one via spell, the other via contract).

[Millstone85]

I've been wondering if this means you could summon a celestial impI am going to argue in two directions.

Why your imp can only be a fiend.

The spell says that:
1) You choose one of several animal forms for the spirit.
2) You replace "beast" with "celestial", "fey", or "fiend".

If, thanks to your pact boon, you summon the spirit in an non-animal/non-beast form, you don't get to make it a celestial, fey, or fiend.

Why a celestial imp is on the table.

The previous reasoning is pretty rules-lawyery, and goes against the intuitive fluff that the spirit was of celestial, fey or fiendish nature before you summoned it.

Now, summoning a celestial spirit in the form of a fiend is probably a most cruel act. But maybe so is binding a celestial spirit to your service in the first place (more on that later).


and how this would work for, say, an undead familiar (would it be both celestial/fey/fiend and undead?)5e seems to avoid giving more than one type to a creature, unless it is a subtype or secondary type like "fiend (devil, shapechanger)".

Come to think of it, would that make the celestial imp a "celestial (devil, shapechanger)" or just a "celestial (shapechanger)"?

That's why the rules-lawyery answer might be best after all.


I've also been wondering if an imp familiar obtained via the spell would try to subvert you to evil. Technically, it's not actually an imp, it's a familiar spirit in the form of an imp.By the spell, it always obeys your commands. It doesn't sound like it has a choice. So just order it to cut it out.

Of course, some DM would interpret that it always obeys the letter of your commands, and will delight in knowingly going against their meaning. So who knows what your imp would cut out, perhaps literally?


that begs the question of if you could use the spell to revive your familiarHere, I am sure the answer is no. If the familiar wasn't obtained through the spell, there is no connection to the spell whatsoever.


or if you could have two familiars at once (one via spell, the other via contract).Again, the Variant: Imp Familiar sidebar in the MM p69 has nothing to do with the find familiar spell (unlike the MM's other sidebar on page 347 ; I know, it is messy). And I don't see any limit to how many contract familiars a character could have.

[sir_argo]

Thing is ... if your familiar dies you can resummon it in another form... The danger of an expanded list is familiar 'flipping' to have the most useful for a particular environment,,,

Why is that a danger? About to go underground, change your familiar into something that has darkvision. About to take the plunge into an underwater adventure, change your familiar into a small fish. That's not broken, that's a feature.

[Maxilian]

In Tomb of Annihilation, the players get the option of 2 other familiars, the flying monkey and the Almiraj.

These 2 familiars option break the normal rule as they are small creatures instead of tiny.

Also... if you play curse of Strahd

Your familiar become an undead version of itself but its inmune to features that turn undead

The Tressym is another optional familiar (comes in SKT adventure) -this one is under the find familiar normal restrictions, unlike the flying monkey or the Almiraj)