D&D 5E How you want familiars to be in your campaign...

[John R Davis]

I did not see an option for not at all, so I chose easy to kill.

Yeah. Really not a fan when the familiar " scouts" etc better than a pc who has that role.

Plus, player, know what they can / can't do so they don't slow things down.
Grumpy intervention over, back to being a snot-filled Covid case!!

 

[Burnside]

I want my familiars to have human intelligence. I want them to be able to converse with their masters, and optionnaly other members of the party if appropriate language is designed, not a 2 INT creature that would have trouble differentiating between friend and foes because "all two-legged are alike and I can't remember what I saw during my exploration tour".

I think part of the problem is that D&D horribly under-rates the intelligence levels of animals. Ravens in D&D have an intelligence of 2. In real life, ravens can remember facts and locations for literally years, can recognize individual human faces and remember them as different people (again, even if years have passed since last seeing the person) and have been observed practicing basic tool use and engaging in relatively complex problem-solving. Octopuses can count, have been observed playing recreationally, and can build clever defensive/camouflaged structures, and can differentiate and remember different humans they encounter. Nobody who owned a cat would argue that they can't differentiate between one person and another, or know friend from foe. The ability of a raven, hawk, owl, or octopus to "remember what it saw during its exploration tour" would likely be superior to a human, because understanding and mentally mapping their environments is a huge evolutionary priority for those species.

The 1-18 ability scores are a total construct, but animals get a short shrift in D&D either for game balance reasons or because the designers place a huge emphasis on spoken language as an indicator of intelligence. Regardless, a raven should easily have a 5 and arguably as high as a 7 intelligence.

 

[Casimir Liber]

I have put "energy in the form of creatures", taking in that you mean "a spirit" as per the rules, and for me it's the right balance.

Yeah that's what I mean...like a pokemon

 

[Casimir Liber]

Animal companions are a huge part of my world. Every Kin (human, halfling, goliath) has one.
The companion dying requires a wisdom save or the character takes that companion's HP max in psychic damage.
Those without spell or spell-like abilities can take several rests to replace their companion.

this is an intriguing idea. I was musing on something like "mourning", which would be something like make a DC WIS save each morning or suffer one level of exhaustion the whole day, for a week..?

 

[bedir than]

this is an intriguing idea. I was musing on something like "mourning", which would be something like make a DC WIS save each morning or suffer one level of exhaustion the whole day, for a week..?

We also don't use the familiars in combat unless they are specifically participating. Targeting one is an escalation and indication that the fight will be to the death.

 

[J.Quondam]

We also don't use the familiars in combat unless they are specifically participating. Targeting one is an escalation and indication that the fight will be to the death.

I really like your spin on familiars. It's reminiscent of the soul-like daemons in the "His Dark Materials" trilogy.

 

[Stormonu]

Anything that makes them more than baggage.

After reading some posts, I think I'd like them to be primarily a small, cantrip level boost or so for the most part (perhaps actually being the one that grants you cantrips or certain bonus spells), but you can attempt to risk them for more concrete advantages - like scouting, messenger or the like.

 

[billd91]

I'm reasonably content with them in 5e. In other editions, when they're a real creature, there's often too much effort put into not killing them because the penalty for doing so is so severe (damage/loss of a class feature for a significant time), making them largely useless or hardly used at all. I'd rather have them be non-real in the sense that they're not real animals, easy to kill, and easy to restore.

 

[Shiroiken]

My preference for familiars is for them to be animals imbued with power, gaining a level of senescence, and thus have their own personalities. They're bound to do what they're commanded to do, but will do it in their own way, never sacrificing themselves. They're slightly smarted than the average beast of their type, but cannot speak (caster understands general feelings and mood). Chain pact familiars are slaves, and they're going to react to their master based on how their treated. They might be forced to do a specific action, but they're free to do negative things in retribution (such as destroying treasure, attracting attention, etc.). This encourages the PC to treat them well, rather than abusing them.

As for usefulness, I feel they should be a double edged sword. They should grant some benefit based on the type of creature, with only predators being useful in combat. However, not only would you lose the benefit if they die, but you suffer an additional penalty as well. They should be slightly harder to kill, but also not something that should be easy to replace (maybe a week casting time for the spell). They don't have an initiative, but act simultaneously with their master.

 

[Casimir Liber]

My preference for familiars is for them to be animals imbued with power, gaining a level of senescence, and thus have their own personalities. They're bound to do what they're commanded to do, but will do it in their own way, never sacrificing themselves. They're slightly smarted than the average beast of their type, but cannot speak (caster understands general feelings and mood). Chain pact familiars are slaves, and they're going to react to their master based on how their treated. They might be forced to do a specific action, but they're free to do negative things in retribution (such as destroying treasure, attracting attention, etc.). This encourages the PC to treat them well, rather than abusing them.

As for usefulness, I feel they should be a double edged sword. They should grant some benefit based on the type of creature, with only predators being useful in combat. However, not only would you lose the benefit if they die, but you suffer an additional penalty as well. They should be slightly harder to kill, but also not something that should be easy to replace (maybe a week casting time for the spell). They don't have an initiative, but act simultaneously with their master.

probably makes sense to treat them (wizard animals vs warlock critters) separately in some respects then.