D&D 5E How should familiars be handled in 5e?

[Savage Wombat]

I like familiars - many other players don't.

From what we've seen of 5e, familiars should clearly be a feat. That way the characters who don't want one can clearly see how much it's worth to "trade it away".

To that end, the familiar should be designed so as to be as powerful a choice for a spellcaster as any of the other intended-for-first-level feats, such as the infamous javelin of fire. 3e familiars, frex, didn't cut it.

 

[avin]

Reading above suggestions I would pick Ritual, with components and improving as their master improves.

 

[Klaus]

I'd prefer it if Familiars/Animal Companions/Mounts were acquired outside the class structure, possibly as a theme (hello, Fey Beast Tamer!).

 

[steeldragons]

What's your rationale behind only allowing the "familiar-getting ritual" at level-up, as opposed to at any time once you've got the feat/spell? Or do you mean you can gain the feat/spell at the same time as you get other such things, i.e at level-up?

Honestly, I didn't really have one. hahaha.

If it's a spell in your spellbook, then yeah, sure, I guess there's no "in game" reason you couldn't cast it whenever you want.

If it is a "class feat/feature/ability", then those obviously get selected at level-up.

I'm guessing that in my brain, somehow, the second option which you verbalized beeeeautifully was what I was thinking.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

4e I liked the best, they mainly kept familiars as completely optional (disregarding some subclasses though) and made it not that big of a deal if the familiar is "killed" in combat. I also liked how it was more of a spirit in physical form, rather than a physical creature imbued with your spirit.

It definitely shouldn't be something that's mandatory like it was in 3e, as it was often house-ruled out in many campaigns or mostly replaced with other options like "bonded items" in Pathfinder.

 

[CM]

4e I liked the best, they mainly kept familiars as completely optional (disregarding some subclasses though) and made it not that big of a deal if the familiar is "killed" in combat. I also liked how it was more of a spirit in physical form, rather than a physical creature imbued with your spirit.

It definitely shouldn't be something that's mandatory like it was in 3e, as it was often house-ruled out in many campaigns or mostly replaced with other options like "bonded items" in Pathfinder.

Where else can you get a tiny gelatinous cube familiar?

Tiny Gelatinous Cube
This palm-sized ooze tickles you with its weak acid.
Speed 2

Constant Benefits* You gain resist 5 acid. If you already have resist acid, increase the resistance by 2.

Active Benefits
Cleaning: The familiar consumes nonliving organic objects that it touches at a rate of 1 pound of material per round.
Transparent: The familiar is invisible.​

 

[CleverNickName]

I've never had a problem with the way that familiars are handled in 3.5E, but that is because I have never had a player select one. On the rare occasion that someone wants to play an arcane spellcaster, he or she has never bothered with calling a familiar. Players usually want to spend their starting gold on potions and scrolls, and by the time they can afford a familiar, they have forgotten all about them.

 

[the Jester]

4e has the best take on my familiars IMHO; in essence, they're in "passive mode" and aren't really there unless you're actively using them. IMHO this perfectly mirrors decades of pc wizards' attitudes towards them.

 

[TarionzCousin]

4e has the best take on my familiars IMHO; in essence, they're in "passive mode" and aren't really there unless you're actively using them. IMHO this perfectly mirrors decades of pc wizards' attitudes towards them.

As seen in the Order of the Stick webcomic.