D&D 5E Familiars!

[Kobold Stew]

I don't like that the familiar is a spirit rather than a normal creature of its ilk. The spirit thing is neat, but for me it's not as cool as bonding with an actual creature.

This is my main objection -- I understand that it allows summoning/restoration and that it means you don't need to feed it; I'd prefer that it just be a regular animal with limited plot immunity (rather than a magical workaround.)

 

[cbwjm]

I actually quite liked how the 4e familiar worked with their passive and active states. Perhaps make them a little more active and I think they'd work well for 5e.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

This is my main objection -- I understand that it allows summoning/restoration and that it means you don't need to feed it; I'd prefer that it just be a regular animal with limited plot immunity (rather than a magical workaround.)

What you are describing is a pet though. A familiar is supposed to be something different:

Dictionary definition:

a demon supposedly attending and obeying a witch, often said to assume the form of an animal.

 

[DND_Reborn]

You’re quite confused.

I quoted post #14, your second post in this thread. You seem to think I quoted your first post in this thread.

In fact, I sailed past your first post without paying much attention to it or looking at who the post was by, and quoted your second post, without it ever occurring to me that the two posts had any relation to each other.

Now, your reply to me had no precedent except expecting me to have read a post other than the one I’d quoted.

You are correct. My mistake, I thought you had quoted from my first post. How silly of me!

And yes, I do expect people to read my posts (even the earlier ones) if they are going to ask me questions about it instead of expecting me to repeat myself simply for their convenience. You could have found the answer yourself in my first post.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

You are correct. My mistake, I thought you had quoted from my first post. How silly of me!

And yes, I do expect people to read my posts (even the earlier ones) if they are going to ask me questions about it instead of expecting me to repeat myself simply for their convenience. You could have found the answer yourself in my first post.

Woulda had to have been aware of any connection between the post I scrolled by with some house rules and some homebrew rules text or stat block or whatever, and the post I was replying to.

A simple, “this is why I do XYZ, in addition to the homebrew I mentioned before.” Or similar, would have indicated that your post was relevant/in reference to an earlier post. As stated, it appeared to simply be a statement that stood entirely on its own. In the context of the conversation it wasn’t even an odd statement. I’m sure there are people who apply exhaustion when a familiar beefs it, without boosting the familiar at all.

 

[Forgember]

I actually quite liked how the 4e familiar worked with their passive and active states. Perhaps make them a little more active and I think they'd work well for 5e.

4e familiars where the best!, truly the light in the darkness for that year I spent playing 4e.