Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 9478329" data-attributes="member: 48965">Well there is a difference you let the PC control the pet... they didn't control the sidekick.  That said it still seems like this isn't a strict players only play their PC's and you play everything else situation.  Why do you find it permissible to let the ranger control the actions of the pet unless he's chosen to abuse it, when earlier this is exactly the type of division of narrative control you called videogamey. Again the familiars actions (at least in combat but I assume some downtime as well) is being controlled by the warlock, even if only partially... how is this not going against your stance?</blockquote>