Upgrading your old mount/companion/familiar: How to say goodbye to your old pal?

So this tragic mess is happening in my Pathfinder game right now. I want turn trade in my old owl familiar for an imp, but I've grown attached to the ornery little feather duster. I don't want to tell my best bird bud, "Hey, you've been great, but the newer model is out and you've got to go." Is there a way to keep my owl pal around and relevant as the campaign progresses past his power level?

2 words: stud farm.

Fauchard1520 said:

So this tragic mess is happening in my Pathfinder game right now. I want turn trade in my old owl familiar for an imp, but I've grown attached to the ornery little feather duster. I don't want to tell my best bird bud, "Hey, you've been great, but the newer model is out and you've got to go." Is there a way to keep my owl pal around and relevant as the campaign progresses past his power level?

Click to expand...

Convince your DM to allow your owl to have been an imp shapechanged into an owl all along so that you will have continuity.

When I wrote up my house rules for familiars, I wrote it so that this was explicitly always the case, just so players wouldn't have to deal with this sort of heartache.

Typically, I let a player "upgrade" their companion, same companion, new stats. When the companion is represented as an intelligent spirit, this is simple, it just takes on a newer, more powerful form. When the companion is represented as a physical beast, I'll usually just let the player use the stats of the new creature unless they are grossly different (ie: a snake to a lion).

For classes that had such harsh punishments for losing a companion, I always found the "trading out" mechanics at certain levels to be silly.

shidaku said:

When the companion is represented as an intelligent spirit, this is simple.

Click to expand...

That's the 5e approach, right? Interesting... I hadn't thought to apply it to Pathfinder.

Fauchard1520 said:

That's the 5e approach, right? Interesting... I hadn't thought to apply it to Pathfinder.

Click to expand...

For the "familiars" yes, I don't think its the case with the druid or the ranger animal companions.

But is not a terribly difficult fluff change, instead of a real physical animal, they now have a "spirit animal" (much more literal than the tribal metaphysical associations of the term) or something along those lines that "improves" and alters its form as the character levels up. IMO it can add good flavor, rather than just some beast that pals around with the character.

shidaku said:

For the "familiars" yes, I don't think its the case with the druid or the ranger animal companions.

But is not a terribly difficult fluff change, instead of a real physical animal, they now have a "spirit animal" (much more literal than the tribal metaphysical associations of the term) or something along those lines that "improves" and alters its form as the character levels up. IMO it can add good flavor, rather than just some beast that pals around with the character.

Click to expand...

One can allow a cheap resurrection ritual that is tied to the bond between them 4e did that with ranger beasts it might sometimes act like yea old Reincarnation ritual sometimes bringing back the soul bonded animal in the new form...

I would have the beast sacrifice itself for its friend for extra heart jerking fun about the transition.

Garthanos said:

One can allow a cheap resurrection ritual that is tied to the bond between them 4e did that with ranger beasts it might sometimes act like yea old Reincarnation ritual sometimes bringing back the soul bonded animal in the new form...

I would have the beast sacrifice itself for its friend for extra heart jerking fun about the transition.

Click to expand...

Yeah, some kind of mystical ritual would work as well for a "it's made of meat" animal.

It really comes down to A: I don't want to place artificial roadblocks between players and their class abilities, and B: I don't want to impart my dislike of the rules upon players who may enjoy them just fine.

shidaku said:

Yeah, some kind of mystical ritual would work as well for a "it's made of meat" animal.

It really comes down to A: I don't want to place artificial roadblocks between players and their class abilities, and B: I don't want to impart my dislike of the rules upon players who may enjoy them just fine.

Click to expand...

Admirable of not wanting roadblocks (the Ranger I mentioned got the ability to do the resurrection as a class feature)

Back in AD&D adapting the rules let alone changing them out brashly was considered part of the rules ;p particularly in largely cosmetic ways.

That said, generally speaking now advancement of the character is mostly an off screen narrated effect (you spend a feat and can pretty much just narrate how you have a new language did you get the seed of it when you touched that ancient artifact or did you find a teacher for 3 months or spend a lot of free time in a brothel with a lass who spoke only that language have fun with it) within that context I would say how it is worked out to occur is not exactly the same as the onscreen. For one thing building in a punishment for the death of the familiar is a rule associated with preventing someone abusing their familiar ... ie in story when a familiar decides to take a shot for a character in self sacrifice which was my recommendation it's a story about loyalty beyond the pale and not about abuse.

And if upgrading a familiar came along more than once, I would use different stories , like the recommendation about it always having been an imp for one players character and another distinct story for the next...

The familiars are spirits and do not really suffer death nor are strongly attached to form solution seems to be the post 3.x solution.

Step 1: Obtain a good, straight 5 foot length of branch, a heavy crossbow, and a +1 bolt of animal bane.
Step 2: Call a taxidermist.
Step 3: ...
Step 4: Affix your new stuffed owl to the top of the 5 foot branch.
Step 5: Enchant your new staff.
Step 6: Profit.