Familiar Replacment?

[Glussell]

A player in my campaign is set to make up a wizard character but does not want a familiar as it doesn't really fit with the character concept and is wondering if he can change that ability in for something else. Now I am not really sure what I should let him trade it in for. I am thinking a few extra feats (spread out over a few levels of course) but that seems to boring to me, I was also thinking that I should maybe let him learn a few extra spells (like 3 per level instead of 2) but I am kind of stuck here. Any suggestions here?

 

[Furn_Darkside]

Replacing the familiar with other game mechanics is a touchy deal.

The familiar balances itself out- it gives benefits, but is a liability by its existance.

How about a limited leadership feat - when he meets the standard requirements- that gives the wizard an apprentice?

I would not offer feats or more spells because a player decided not to take a familiar. It is a minor aspect of the class.

What is the character's concept? Perhaps we can think of something appropriate.

FD

 

[Glussell]

Actually it is for an epic campaign that I am going to DM. He is going to be a Human 7th level wizard/4th level fighter/8th level Elder Druid (from the Shannara Dragon Magazine). And the way he has described the character and the background to me he seems kind of like a fantasy version of a Jedi (mind you all things cool get compared to Jedi's by me), a lightly armored fighter who uses cool powers to compliment his abilities while being an ultimate champion of good.

Now on a side note, I am normally against starting campaigns past 1st level, but I have been itching to use the Epic Book and I have a very special surprise for this campaign (he he he).

But thanks I do like the leadership style feat with the aprentice, I will seriously consider that one.

 

[Crothian]

I don't think he should get anything. It's like a fighter choosing to not use heavy armor. It's his choose not to use his class abilities.

 

[Mr.Binx]

I don't think he should get anything. It's like a fighter choosing to not use heavy armor. It's his choose not to use his class abilities.

I agree. On an added note, Skywalker did have his loyal companion R2D2 and Anakin had C3P0 during his jaunt as a jedi before joining the darkside. hehe... Tell him to choose a clockwork familiar that beeps alot which only he can understand.

 

[EOL]

A player in my campaign is set to make up a wizard character but does not want a familiar as it doesn't really fit with the character concept and is wondering if he can change that ability in for something else.

The fact that he wants to change the familiar ability for something else smacks of someone trying to min-max their character. I agree with Crothian I don't think he should get anything in place of a familiar.

 

[Crothian]

While I wouldn't give him a new ability, I would work with him to find a familar that works. You might look into the Dragon magazine that has all sorts of familar options it it or Spells and Spellcraft that also has many new types of famliars in it. Personally, I don't like saying no to players, I like helping them find a way to have something fit.

 

[Furn_Darkside]

I don't think he should get anything. It's like a fighter choosing to not use heavy armor. It's his choose not to use his class abilities.

You know- I was about to say the same thing and use the same example, but then I thought about it.

If the character was using a character from a desert-area, then it makes sense they would not have the heavy-armor feat.

I don't think there is a problem with tweaking a class to fit the player's image.

But- as I said in my first post, the trade off has to be appropriate. The familiar is too much of a mixed bag for a straight trade off to be easily done.

FD

 

[Furn_Darkside]

And the way he has described the character and the background to me he seems kind of like a fantasy version of a Jedi..

You could give him a magic item and have it work similar to some of the powers given to the familiar, but at the same cost if it is destroyed/lost.

Perhaps a staff that improved with him as he adventured.

FD

 

[Crothian]

You know- I was about to say the same thing and use the same example, but then I thought about it.

If the character was using a character from a desert-area, then it makes sense they would not have the heavy-armor feat.

But then where do you draw the line? I have a ranger that knows all simple and martial weapons. I use a bow and a spear, that's it. It'd be great to get rid of the other pesky weapon proficiencies for something useful. Same with medium armor and a shield.

When a PC does ask to trade things in like that and they are set in there ways, I make sure they recieve diminished returns. It's too easy to min max by trading character abilities like this.