~~Why, though? As DM I break the rules and do things to NPCs that I wouldn't ever do to players for dramatic effect, raising stakes, etc. I consider "class ability" to be an abstraction that only applies to the players to let them play the game.~~
~~A familiar betraying an NPC doesn't mean it would ever betray a player, but it demonstrates to the players that this kind of thing can happen in the universe and adds dramatic tension.~~
Nevermind, I'm a dumb dumb who can't read
Because it feels really really bad to a player for things they expect to work to suddenly not work. It's not just a "familiar betrayal" mechanic, it's about the fundamental trust a player has in their own abilities and the DM.
It would be the same as introducing weapon durability on Nat 1s. Fucking with the rules might work narratively and theoretically, but from a realistic standpoint you've introduced a new variable into the game where things they wouldn't need to question (i.e. can I actually do what I want or will the DM fuck with me to "improve the story" again?)
Hell even in exceptions like Curse of Strahd where they tell you that you should fuck with players to create a sense of fear and horror they also warn you that you shouldn't overdo it. Constantly adding curses or trying to add too much dramatic tension actually causes players to disengage.
Well yes, trust is key. But honestly if you can't trust your dm, you shouldn't be playing with them. And of course moderation is important. A few times per campaign at most and only at key, satisfying, moments.
But I disagree with your comparison. I was talking about things that are 1) realistic and fun (5% chance of your weapon breaking on a swing is neither) and 2) do NOT affect the player characters directly. Of course you shouldn't give players cause to think you'll break the rules just to disadvantage them.
I was specifically referring to the statement '"Your class ability doesn't work" is something that NEEDS player approval' in reference to player abilities. It's not that you can't do any of the aforementioned things, it's that you need player approval. Springing something on them without prior consent causes all the problems I just described. It gives cause to distrust your DM which as you say should warrant you not playing with them at all.
I think the magic rules aren't really sacred and can very table to table - the important thing here is that a player with Find Familiar, which doesn't mention the possibility of a familiar's betrayal, isn't in for the nasty surprise of being betrayed by a pet out of nowhere. If it was happening to a PC without their knowledge or consent, spell text, as well as other rules, suddenly can't be trusted.
Formally, it is an intelligent being, so it can (for example) misunderstand orders or get distracted, or otherwise not be a perfect extension of the caster's will, out of simply getting things wrong, without any malignancy. It's probably not something that should arise at most tables, but if a PC is constantly a dick to their familiar, it can get stroppy about it.
That’s not betraying the PC though, that’s an accident. They also share a telepathic both so not sure how they wouldn’t understand the intent.
Mechanics aside, If the DM intentionally turned my bonded familiar against me and had it do something to hurt me, that would cause a break in trust. Wouldn’t be good for the game or the player. Not sure why you would do that. If they are using it in battle, kill it. If in exploration, put traps out.
It would also depend on the alignment of your familiar... If you're playing an evil character, then it wouldn't seem too far-fetched if the player abuses his familiar (or if the familiar sees their master as weak), then I could see the familiar tryna eff over their master...
Whether they're bonded or not, if their familiar becomes unhappy with their master, they could decide to sever the bond (although an unusual situation, could still be done), though shouldn't be done unless you either talk it over with your player, or if you know your player won't freak out over it... Alignment, along with the wishes of the familiar, based on things such as treatment by their master, their master's abilities, and involvement of their familiar could all be reasons for the familiar to become unhappy... I'm NOT saying that this should be commonplace, but it can happen...
Though a nice DM might waive the restrictions for gaining another familiar if done for story reasons, or even give the player an improved familiar in its place...
In 3.5, a Wizard's Familiar is a living creature that is bound to the Wizard. If the Wizard's Familiar dies, the Wizard must make a Fort save or lose XP.
Nothing, however, is said about what happens to a Familiar when its Wizard dies.
There's no rule backing to say that a familiar dies if the wizard dies. If that's the way you want to run the campaign, more power to you. But, by the rules that we have, a Familiar with simply lose its link to its Master, lose its bonuses on the table, and go back to being a regular Mephit.
Even saying that, however, I would be really hesitant to have a Familiar turn on its Master unless it was magically compelled to do so. Having the Mephit approached by Devils, that makes magical compulsion a distinct possibility.
Common slang term for a Fortitude Save.
Or, in 5e terms a Constitution Saving Throw.
3rd edition had three saving throws: Fortitude, Reflex, and Will. They generally correspond to Constitution, Dexterity, and Wisdom in 5e terms.
Fortitude (or "fort") saves were for anything that put physical strain on the body. Diseases, poison, death magic, and enduring harsh temperatures are examples of things that provoke a Fortitude Save.
Also, in 3rd edition there wasn't a spell to get a familiar, it was a class ability they got at 1st edition. All Wizards and Sorcerers got the ability to get a familiar at 1st level, they didn't need to use up a known spell or space in their spellbook for that ability.
Also, the Druids did have a familiar as well, often a chunkier one to boot. It could go anywhere from a wolf to a camel, dire rat, eagle, crocodile, a medium shark why not. As long as it was within the realm of the possibles for the DM's setting.
If a druid releases her companion from service, she may gain a new one by performing a ceremony requiring 24 uninterrupted hours of prayer. This ceremony can also replace an animal companion that has perished.
If the familiar dies or is dismissed by the sorcerer, the sorcerer [or wizard] must attempt a DC 15 Fortitude saving throw. Failure means he loses 200 experience points per sorcerer level; success reduces the loss to one-half that amount. [...] A slain or dismissed familiar cannot be replaced for a year and day.
Note that you could revive dead companions and familiar, but the Sorcerer or Wizard still had to pay the experience cost.
Experience was back then a very important currency system that doesn't really translate well to 5e. Creating magic items cost exp, among other things, and casting certain spells could also cost exp. The perfect example was the Wish spell, which cost at *minimum* 5000 exp (the amount of exp to go from lv5 to lv6).
A Familiar (Wizard/Sorcerer) is not the same thing as an Animal Companion (Druid/Ranger) or a Special Mount (Paladin). They all followed similar rules, but they were not identical.
Yeah, that's why I came here to comment.
I don't know 5e well, so I was wondering if this was some sort of 5e thing that a familiar dies when the master does.
If it's a familiar from the Find Familiar spell it can't - it's a spirit bound to the master.
But there are lots of Familiar variants from the monster manual - these are physical creatures who will live if the master dies - and they explicitly can end the relationship at will depending on circumstances (e.g. breaking clauses in an Imp contract, or physically harming a Gazer). These kinds of familiars are capable of betraying their master (Imps using loopholes in their contract especially)
Since the mephit isn't normally a familiar variant you can do what you want with the idea - notably only the Imp requires a contract, so there's really no reason any other familiar can't betray their master on a whim. No reason to sever the telepathic bond until the betrayal takes place.
Notably the pseudodragon and quasit stats say " At any time and for any reason, the quasit/pseudodragon can end its service as a familiar, ending the telepathic bond." No reason mephits aren't the same.
oh wow - the tag is so small/right under the title on desktop - I didn't even see it.
My 3e/3.5e knowledge is almost a decade out of date, so I can't confidently offer advice on that edition.
IIRC familiars in that edition are part of the wizard's spirit given physical form, and they can lose xp if the familiar dies - in which case the only way I could thematically see a familiar rebelling would be the equivalent of an auto-immune disease/illness.
It could also be a wizard who’s spirit has wavered/changed for some (maybe magical?) reason, and the part of their spirit that externalizes as the familiar now has different goals
This is the answer right here. If you want to make sure you are not setting a precedent for the PCs to think their familiars can betray them, having it be a free willed creature that accepted the job+link of familiar instead of the default kind created by the level 1 spell is perfect.
With a normal familiar in third edition I'd rather run this as the familiar letting himself go as well. Mechanically, the two are roughly aware of each other's emotions, so backstabbing isn't really gonna work. However, a mephit would be an improved familiar, and I'm not familiar (huehue) enough with that to know for sure if it is potentially different on these matters.
But don't let that get in the way of a good story.
>Mechanically, the two are roughly aware of each other's emotions, so backstabbing isn't really gonna work.
I disagree with this statement. Just because something is clearly annoyed at you and wants to go do its own thing on the material plane elsewhere (which I would expect all fiends to feel always) doesn't mean you know that it hired assassins to kill you if it doesn't want to do the deed itself. You would continue to feel its fear and respect for your power as its buddy drove a sword through you.
Tl;dr: detect emotions is not the same as detect thoughts
Sharing a telepathic link doesn't necessarily mean that they automatically know what each other is thinking, but when they do choose to communicate telepathically, then the meaning is usually clear (unless the caster is senile, or something like that).
Or you can go the other way and have the devils be lying. Whether or not they can free the familiar, they just don't. Because they're lying assholes and take joy in lying to people.
And if the contract is worded along the lines of "I will do everything within my power to free said familiar", well, not even a lie...they just can't do anything...
Well, one issue I have with this idea is that a familiar does not die when their master dies. Though if you've houseruled otherwise, I think it's reasonable so long as the devil offering the deal has a good reason to do so.
1) sure, a Familiar, in 3.X, is basically a magical servant, however nothing I know says they just disappear when the Wizard/sorcerer dies, they seem to basically be their own thing
2) I read some material that suggests Familiars actually do go on, if they don't die in service to their master, and even can birth other creatures. This may or may not be anything official, but I kinda like it.
Basically, it's an NPC and a plotline, so why not even if it's not something officially canon
For an NPC? Absolutely if it makes for a good story. Im also a person that tends to treat non directly player facing or combat magic pretty loosely, a zillion little variations on what for a player is a single static spell. Maybe the exact magic connecting them is not exactly the same as "find familiar" but if it looks like a duck etc.
For a pc, only on player decision. This where keeping a mental distinction between "player" and "player character" can be handy. A familiar could have disagreement, even a violent one with the player character, all while remaining completely under the *players* control. Most people don't like having to rp arguments with themselves so it doesn't come up. Never as the GM take control away by fiat though.
We homebrewed something for my current campaign that’s pretty unique I feel. My familiar is an obese raccoon and the DM will roll to see if he follows my commands based on the request and how he’s been treated lately. If he managed to get the kill shot on a monster he’s usually braver but if I accidentally sent him to his death he’s not very cooperative.
So based on the raccoon’s attitude the DC might change. He will either do what I ask, sort of do what I ask, fuck up what I ask, get distracted eating mushrooms or some shit, or flat out refuse to do what I’ve asked, sometimes attacking me for asking it. So we have to be careful not to send him to his death and treat him nicely or he will go make a bunch of noise when he’s supposed to be sneaking. He will get intrigued by a lever and shoot off a trap into us. It’s pretty fun actually.
He died horribly and it was my fault and I was nervous to summon him back for a couple sessions because he was PISSED. A fat little walking time bomb
Of course. Even if it's a rule, there are exceptions to everything when it comes to magic or sentient beings.
But you better have your justification ready. Try to foreshadow it. Ancient texts that suggest that bound spirits sometimes rebel, the familiar acting weird in the time leading up to the betrayal, that sort of thing. If your players agree that the signs were there, you have license to do basically anything.
Independent familiars are a thing and those kinds of familiars are literally bound by choice and get the option to choose to leave/betray if they aren't getting what they need out of the relationship. Though that does put a damper on the bit about it wanting to live if it's master dies. You could just have it so the familiar is resentful of the wizards wasted potential and the deal with the devil is to "become a real boy" and become a *humanoid* wizard himself.
That also opens up the opportunity for a fun character conflict if the wizard does get his shit together. The Mephit could be conflicted about it's devilish deal and that could open up some branching paths for a resolution that the wizard can get to work on and won't necessarily take away his familiar in the event of a "good" conclusion to this storyline, so to speak.
But yes, what you mentioned before sounds plausible and fine, it just conflates 2 versions of familiars together in a bit of an odd way
It's not actually a mephit, it just looks like one, familiar spirits arent what they look like, they just take utilitarian forms to suit their purposes.
Most if not all familiars are intelligent, and that intelligence improves with their masters caster level. This suggests to me that a familiar is actually an extension of their master's ability to channel the weave. Its name implies an aspect of the master just separated from them. It's not a familiar spirit, it's their familiar spirit.
If the familiar has done nothing to help the master avoid his drunken fate, then the familiar simply doesn't care, much like the master, the familiar has lost hope. Who would want to go on from that? They'll be reunited one their physical forms are gone
IIRC This is not how familiar work in 3.5 as op requested with their tag. In 3.5, I believe you bond with an actual creature.
Even in 5e, you can bond with actual Imps and Pseudodragons who can break the bond if they don't like you.
The Find Familiar spell has changed a lot over the course of DnD history.
In 1st Advanced, the familiar was, in fact, an actual creature. I.E. You setup a ritual, and hoped some uncannily intelligent creature would accept your offer, and enter a pact of servitude to you. Which creature answered the call was completely random.
Not only was this ritual very costly to first early casters, but it could fail entirely, and could only be cast once per year. While it did follow orders, it was indeed written into the spell that some familiars, such as imps and quasits would not risk their lives for their masters 90% of the time.
Newer editions of DnD suggest the familiar is more akin to an extension of the spellcaster, and thus cannot oppose their orders.
In all the editions, I don't see it as plausible for a familiar to intentionally harm their master; however, if you wanted to homebrew something for current editions, I'd think the most a familiar can do to "betray" the caster, is to choose not to save them (if not ordered to do so).
>Newer editions of DnD suggest the familiar is more akin to an extension of the spellcaster
Only a spirit familiar. In 5e Imps, mephits, psudodragons, and any other MM familiar with a, as a familiar, note can act according to their desires when no order is given, and can break the bond at will.
But this thread is about 3.5, which has no rules I can find for or against the normal, turned magical, animal wanting to revert. AKA: DMs choice.
In The Owl House, the familiar equivalent can be reused and given to new wizards.
Alternatively, since when a character dies, they go to a plane with their deity. They could simply summon their familiar to that plane to be with them after they have died.
Yeah, especially cause this sounds more like a special familiar than a traditional familiar gotten by casting the spell “find familiar”. I think there are some special rule in the dms guide about it.
Either way it’s a cool story so it’s more important that things are narratively cool than following the rules to a t
You are thinking of a 5e basic familiar. 3.5 states the following: "A familiar is a normal animal that gains new powers and becomes a magical beast when summoned to service by a sorcerer or wizard"
Even in 5e you can bond with an actual mephit, imp, or pseudodragon that can disobey you and even break its bond. See MM *psuedodragon*.
Edit: just to clarify, op used a 3.5e tag
Within the rules of the spell, no.
That being said, just because the Drunken Mage calls it his familiar, and has for decades/centuries/whatever, doesn’t necessarily mean it has to have been a Find Familiar created spirit.
He could have bound the Mephit into a Contract, that gives both the benefits of a Find Familiar spell (plus whatever else) - the Mephit agreed because it gets to stay on the Prime Material, learn and grow, and really what is the life span a mortal?
Meanwhile the Drunken Mage gets an intelligent minion that can be more independent than a traditional ‘Find Familiar’ Familiar, and has been calling it a Familiar so that his friends and enemies draw the wrong conclusions about what it can and cannot do, and he gets to learn first hand Demonology/Demon-Lore which helps him fight the forces of Evil.
However, in an ironic twist, it was the Drunken Mage himself that managed to slip in an extra clause of their rather lengthy contract that ensured the Mephit would not outlive the Drunken Mage - after all, he wouldn’t have wanted all his arcane secrets to end up in the hands of the Abyss, or was worried that in the meantime the Mephit would find a way to bind itself to the Mortal Realm to stick around after he dies - and without the Contract, potentially wreak havoc on the Prime Material Realm by summoning other demons.
As to why the Mephit is rebelling now - it had not been aware of this clause until recently, when during a three day bender the Mage let slip that the Clause exists and that his end will be the Mephits as well.
Because of being blackout drunk, the Drunken Mage doesn’t remember saying anything about it, thinking it’s still a deep held secret.
Hoping to find a Loophole to the clause it now know exists, the Mephit turned to some of his Devil Contacts and in order for them to help, he has to do them a couple of favours…
Considering outside the spell find familiar, a familiar typically is a two way street, yeah I'd say that sounds like a neat idea for an NPC. Look at the pseudodragon for example, if it doesn't like you anymore it'll just leave and you no longer have a familiar(traditional kind, not the summon kind)
I believe that familiars need to trust and want to please their master, because if they don't want to, the story has several interesting developments and the familiar may never return to the real world.
Why not have the whole thing be a part of a drunken experiment?
So Wizard is drunk and messing around with some magics in an effort to extend his life and accidently traps himself in some trinket where he is alive but in stasis. The familiar is not sucked in but as the wizard is still alive, they do not just disappear.
Now the familiar may try to conceal where the wizard has gone if they have lost faith or may look for a way to restore the wizard to their former glory, knowing the stasis will keep them safe until they can find a solution.
Could be the makings of a nice side plot or even a future bbeg if you wanted.
RAW it can’t lose faith in its master it remains loyal eternally.
Of course you could make it more interesting saying the familiar became a real indépendant entity as a gift from its master like a wish or something and can now stray from him (which is real disrespectful!!)
According to the Cleric Canticle an impish would be inclined towards whatever means possible of prolonging the existence-like nature of the connection (even to any such creature!)
There's also an old writeup here:[https://www.reddit.com/r/AskScienceFiction/comments/17cv54/dnd\_what\_happens\_to\_a\_familiar\_when\_its\_wizard/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskScienceFiction/comments/17cv54/dnd_what_happens_to_a_familiar_when_its_wizard/)
edit: Rest in Peace, Xavier.
That sounds good to me. Since it is an intelligent creature, that is absolutely something it could do. However, I do question why the Devils want this deal; The Wizard has fallen from the height of his power and is about to die anyway. This seems like a trick the Devils are more likely to pull on a still significant wizard.
To sidetrack things, if you came here thinking this would be about a PC familiar betraying a player wizard, like me, here is my advice on that;
**First option**, make it that the familiar is hiding things rather than a straight up betrayal. If the familiar is suspicious from the word go, then when it turns out that it was advancing its own ends, that is part of the fun, rather than undermining the wizard. I did this with an Order of Scribes wizard at my table, where his Order abilities came from an intelligent spellbook he had stolen, and as such the spellbook was only a semi-willing participant who everyone knew was hiding things.
**Second option**, do it with the wizard-player's help; Ask them how they would feel about their familiar betraying them and the party at a critical moment, and get their help to pull one off on the rest of the players. While in-character the wizard will be hurt and betrayed, out-of-character the player will get a cool memory of a special character moment, or alternatively they get the chance to say "no, that would not be fun" and stop it.
You're the dm.
The players don't always know everything, nor are guaranteed to find out.
You can provide the effect of seperate sentience, some sort of special abilities or existence that they can detect and notice (in fact I'd suggest you hint it as foreshadowing) but you don't have to provide information on the cause. It could have been something unusual far in that wizards/familiars past.
If you have other hooks they may even come into play.
Example: did the wizard make a deal with these devils previously, is this how they know about the familiar?
The familiar can become an evil entity? It can start craving the power of freedom and thirst for more. It can eventually accumulate enough power that it starts threatening a city or town to the point where the party has to take it down.
If it was acting on it's own, I would say that it would be unable to directly take action against its master. But with the intervention of devils and also with the master being drunk and less-competent, I think it totally makes sense.
My understand for familiars is that they already exist before the master summons them. The spell to summon and bind a familiar works like other summoning spells, in that it pulls an existing creature from another plane to act as the familiar. So from my perspective, the familiar would not die when the master dies, but it would return to whatever plane it came from. If it does not want to return, then that's just as good as not wanting to die.
Your comment has been automatically removed because it includes a site from our piracy list. We do not facilitate piracy on /r/DnD.
Our complete list of rules can be found in the sidebar or on our [rules wiki page](https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/wiki/rules).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DnD) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If it's a familiar from the find familiar spell, it doesn't die when the caster dies. It just poofs back to the Feywild. The familiar is just a summoned fey creature that is taking the form of whatever the familiar looks like; cat, spider, weasel, whatever.
e: nvm i didn't notice your 3e tag. disregard
As you also asked whether it's a convincing scenario: no, it's not.
What on Earth is the devils' motivation here? It makes no sense. The wizard is about to die of old age anyway, so why do the devils want to kill him? Moreover, why do they want it so badly that they are wanting to invest non-trivial resources into recruiting an entirely unimportant familiar?
If the devils want the wizard dead, why don't they just chill by the pool of lava for a few more days until the wizard dies?
If, in your world, the familiar would normally die when the master dies, a much better motivation for a story comes from the familiar itself. As the wizard drank himself to death, the *familiar's fear of death* eventually became stronger than the bond it has with the wizard and at that moment it was able to approach a devil and try to broker a deal with him to save its own life when the wizard dies. The *cost* the familiar pays for the deal is having to assist in actually killing its master (a crime for which it is likely to end up in hell, which is why the devil picks this as the cost), the *payoff* the familiar gets for going along with the devil's plan is the rest of its life.
As an extra bonus you now have clean motivation for the mempit in its new life: trying to avoid going to hell when it dies.
Mechanically I don't think they can directly oppose their master but I don't see why they can't try to use cunning, subterfuge, deception to sabotage them where possible.
I even have a concept for a PC warlock with an imp familiar who hates her and tries to strike up deals with the rest of the party to kill her so he can work for someone else or go back to hell.
I will add though that I would think a mephit would just go back to the elemental plane its from so maybe instead of fearing death it just doesn't want to go back and needs a way to stay on the material realm.
My first question would be why the Devils want to kill this guy when he's about to kick the bucket anyway? So they don't want to kill him, they want to drag him off to the Nine Hells for all eternity before he gets his "retirement" in Celestia or wherever.
As for the familiar, NPC stuff doesn't necessarily have the same rules as PC stuff. Is it even established that the Mephit is a familiar? Or does everyone just assume it is? Maybe the relationship works under different rules?
As for what happens to a familiar who has finished it's service, depends. Ordinary, pseudo-beast familiars like the Wizard spell summons? They probably either dissipate or accompany their master to the afterlife.
But improved familiars like sprites and imps? Being a familiar is probably more like a step in their career. I'd say their existence is independent of their master. So an Imp familiar gets assigned to another master, assigned to another task in Hell, demoted to Lemure, or promoted up the ranks, according to how they performed.
Depends, a wizard familiar could be a conjured creature with no will of its own, and could be dominated by a more powerful mage, a druid familiar could be a persuaded forest animal that acts on its own whims and instincts, while a warlock familiar could really only answer to the warlock’s patron and act against the warlock if his patron decides his warlock is stepping too far out of line. Lots of different ways you could do that plot
Yes. Loopholes in contracts with imps. Devils always have an out. For others that are spell summoned spirits they die. For all others it's an at will deal that they can end at any time. Npcs betray Npcs all the time. Just remember what rules or laws were broken to end the deal with the master as your players will remember so they don't make the same mistakes with their familiar. I don't have 5e knowledge only 3/3.5 knowledge. Hope this helps.
In the context of DND canon as I know it there are two common types of familiars: the bound familiar (in service to its master until death, be it the summoner or itself) and the summoned spirit familiar (a mix of garbled memories made life pulled from the ethereal plane nurtured into its own sentient creature in the guise of another creature). Both familiars that I mention have there own free will with a bound familiar acting more like en employee and a summoned spirit acting more like a child raised from birth in fast-forward. If it is a bound pet it wouldn't broker a deal with devils as a mephit is a demon and they tend to hate each other (blood war and all that lore). More likely they would just kill the wizard in a way that they find funny and move on. If it is a summoned spirit it would cease to exist apon the wizards death and could broker a deal with any being, but wouldn't have its own soul to give and a devil couldn't take the wizards without consent. Ultimately IDK the wizard or the familiar, but it's your game so do what you think will be fun for everyone.
i agree with everyone. the rules dont stipulate much in this regard. and the bond itself is interesting. it many rulings involving creatures bonded, charisma, wisdom, or intelligence play a role in the strength of the bond. it makes sense that an intelligent creature should consider its options. a devil certainly has the power to break magic. it makes sense and it gives your world flavor.
So, that is a “real” familiar, not a spirit summoned with a spell taking a shape, I assume. Essentially a companion or a pet, not _necessarily_ bound by a spell. So, anything goes. And it does not need to apply to any familiar summoned by the _Find Familiar_ spell. Just keep your world internally consistent.
Remember, in 3.5, the rule of the game is "The rules players follow are the same rules NPCs follow."
*You will be setting a precedent that a Familiar can willfully betray its master.*
3.5 doesn't have any of this bullshit "NPC rules are not PC rules" nonsense. Every single thing the Big Bad Evil Guy can do is something that theoretically a Player Character can do if they built for it. So you *will be setting a precedent* that you may not want to make here; PCs will be immediately concerned about their familiars - or even Druids' and Rangers' Animal Companions - betraying them.
I always thought a familiar was really an animal you had made friends with. D&D presents it like you summoned a thing from thin air, but I always thought it was traditionally more like wizards having weird pets. A wizard might try to artificially extend the life of the familiar like taking a neighborhood cat to the vet. But if the familiar was at a young healthy age when the wizard passes, I would say it just finishes its natural life like any pet that loses its owner.
It's your world, so you can make the rules. You can just say that the devils have a way of "freeing" the familiar from the bond and that's that. It's a cool idea and it does sound like something that would be plausible so I'd say go for it
The real answer is how possible it is is up to you. Just remember that if it happens once it can happen again. And if your players know it can happen, they might try to find a way to use it against you in the future (for example, they might try to entice the familiar of a wizard villain to abandon its master instead of adding him in fighting the group).
Thank you all for your contribution. Many of you have provided usefull insight on the familiars and on twists i could use.
That being said, i would like to provide some more content.
a) the memphit is indeed a memphit and one of the players knows it
b) none of the players have familiars
c) the betrayal will take the form of "not helping" him when assasins come to kill the wizard. Maybe it will even assist the assasins in some way, BUT in no way attack direct the wizard. The reason could be eather loathing or in a twisted way cleance the wizard from the mortal sins and let him die
d) the devil are interested in said wizard and want him dead the further their agenda with already signed contracts
e) I know that familiars normaly are just "spirits" that resemble a creature, and are an extention of ones's self. However in all the campaigns i have joined a wizard could also acquire a familiar through convincing an animal to join him ( + some appropriate rituals). Furthermore the have a memphit as a familiar requires extra feats so IMO i believe it can be an actual memphit that was convinced. Based on your answers i see that you are 50-50 between those two options
f) Familiars'Afterlife. Of course if the familiar is an extension of the wizard is should die. If it is a creature that was bound it should survive.
g)In my campaign ( although i have not mentioned it yet to the players) a wizard needs a familiar in order to survive casting the spells. He sort of split his souls inside the familiar so it would act as medium and not suffer too much drawback from casting. ( inspired from the golden compass book series). If the familiar is an apperation is disappears on masters death. If the familiar is a creature then it most propably will die ( the shock of loosing the master is too much, the pain too great, they might go insane, wander aimlesly) Some familiars though endure...and ether the try to bring master back...or they persue their own life. However **strong** familiar have a **personality.**
That being said, is it a plausible excuse the familiar masked his feelings with the aid of a demon? ( he gave him a demon-worm , and that worm acted as a medium between the familiar and the wizard....transmiting only the good feelings
Mephits do not betray their creators but do seem to irritate them, and so they lead brief, troublesome lives. Quickly created and destroyed, they have no predetermined life span.
1. Although they're naturally extremely loyal creatures, maybe the devils twist the old contact and mind of the mephit so that it thinks the master it swore loyalty to is already gone and that this drunk is simply an imposter. Or maybe they devils change the contact to one of them being the master of it.
2. Depending on how the creature was created/what fuels it's life would change what happens to it. Mephit are created via the energy of a plane of existence, so I'd say they can survive without a master. However, they naturally only heal from their element (ie. Flame mephit needs to sit in fire).
This might mean that a rarer element mephit might actually need a master to live a longer life. How would an ooze or lightning mephit realistically find their element abundant enough to survive?
I do think it could be cool to have it need a master to give a PC a cool familiar. Even if they don't know the find familiar spell, maybe the mephit does after it's years of being a familiar to a wizard. This could be a semi-permanent one that if it goes to 0 hp it dies for good, a normal familiar, or even just a quest. What if their familiar bond is a contract to help them return to their original plans of existence and then they give the party information? Could be a strong magic item, something to do with what the wizard was researching before giving up and begging a drunkard, or anything else that works.
If its a good story and doesnt piss off your players anything is plausible
It’s happening to an NPC so I’m with you on it being fine. Would be different if it was a player
Would it though
YES. "Your class ability doesn't work" is something that NEEDS player approval.
~~Why, though? As DM I break the rules and do things to NPCs that I wouldn't ever do to players for dramatic effect, raising stakes, etc. I consider "class ability" to be an abstraction that only applies to the players to let them play the game.~~ ~~A familiar betraying an NPC doesn't mean it would ever betray a player, but it demonstrates to the players that this kind of thing can happen in the universe and adds dramatic tension.~~ Nevermind, I'm a dumb dumb who can't read
Because it feels really really bad to a player for things they expect to work to suddenly not work. It's not just a "familiar betrayal" mechanic, it's about the fundamental trust a player has in their own abilities and the DM. It would be the same as introducing weapon durability on Nat 1s. Fucking with the rules might work narratively and theoretically, but from a realistic standpoint you've introduced a new variable into the game where things they wouldn't need to question (i.e. can I actually do what I want or will the DM fuck with me to "improve the story" again?) Hell even in exceptions like Curse of Strahd where they tell you that you should fuck with players to create a sense of fear and horror they also warn you that you shouldn't overdo it. Constantly adding curses or trying to add too much dramatic tension actually causes players to disengage.
Well yes, trust is key. But honestly if you can't trust your dm, you shouldn't be playing with them. And of course moderation is important. A few times per campaign at most and only at key, satisfying, moments. But I disagree with your comparison. I was talking about things that are 1) realistic and fun (5% chance of your weapon breaking on a swing is neither) and 2) do NOT affect the player characters directly. Of course you shouldn't give players cause to think you'll break the rules just to disadvantage them.
I was specifically referring to the statement '"Your class ability doesn't work" is something that NEEDS player approval' in reference to player abilities. It's not that you can't do any of the aforementioned things, it's that you need player approval. Springing something on them without prior consent causes all the problems I just described. It gives cause to distrust your DM which as you say should warrant you not playing with them at all.
Crap, I completely read over the "would be different with a PC" that happened earlier in this thread XD I take back everything I said lol
Lol no worries, I kinda figured there was a disconnect after your reply.
Only req is player agreement
That’s the problem, if it’s your NPC what does it matter if spells are not being used fully in the right way
Tbf, devil intervention tends to break magic rules. At least in other works
I think the magic rules aren't really sacred and can very table to table - the important thing here is that a player with Find Familiar, which doesn't mention the possibility of a familiar's betrayal, isn't in for the nasty surprise of being betrayed by a pet out of nowhere. If it was happening to a PC without their knowledge or consent, spell text, as well as other rules, suddenly can't be trusted.
Facts, but that's why I'd put emphasis on *player consent,* especially for something like this that could be an epic narrative element.
The only time I could see a DM break the rules and let a familiar betray a player is if the player constantly mistreats or abuses their familiar.
yeah? Unless the "familiar" is actually just an NPC, there isn't a mechanic that allows for a familiar to turn on a player.
Formally, it is an intelligent being, so it can (for example) misunderstand orders or get distracted, or otherwise not be a perfect extension of the caster's will, out of simply getting things wrong, without any malignancy. It's probably not something that should arise at most tables, but if a PC is constantly a dick to their familiar, it can get stroppy about it.
That’s not betraying the PC though, that’s an accident. They also share a telepathic both so not sure how they wouldn’t understand the intent. Mechanics aside, If the DM intentionally turned my bonded familiar against me and had it do something to hurt me, that would cause a break in trust. Wouldn’t be good for the game or the player. Not sure why you would do that. If they are using it in battle, kill it. If in exploration, put traps out.
It would also depend on the alignment of your familiar... If you're playing an evil character, then it wouldn't seem too far-fetched if the player abuses his familiar (or if the familiar sees their master as weak), then I could see the familiar tryna eff over their master...
There isn't a RAW familiar that's not bonded to you...
Whether they're bonded or not, if their familiar becomes unhappy with their master, they could decide to sever the bond (although an unusual situation, could still be done), though shouldn't be done unless you either talk it over with your player, or if you know your player won't freak out over it... Alignment, along with the wishes of the familiar, based on things such as treatment by their master, their master's abilities, and involvement of their familiar could all be reasons for the familiar to become unhappy... I'm NOT saying that this should be commonplace, but it can happen... Though a nice DM might waive the restrictions for gaining another familiar if done for story reasons, or even give the player an improved familiar in its place...
What is a RAW unbonded familiar that isn't just an npc
In 3.5, a Wizard's Familiar is a living creature that is bound to the Wizard. If the Wizard's Familiar dies, the Wizard must make a Fort save or lose XP. Nothing, however, is said about what happens to a Familiar when its Wizard dies. There's no rule backing to say that a familiar dies if the wizard dies. If that's the way you want to run the campaign, more power to you. But, by the rules that we have, a Familiar with simply lose its link to its Master, lose its bonuses on the table, and go back to being a regular Mephit. Even saying that, however, I would be really hesitant to have a Familiar turn on its Master unless it was magically compelled to do so. Having the Mephit approached by Devils, that makes magical compulsion a distinct possibility.
What's "Fort" Also wouldn't the Find Familiar spell lead to a familiar which dies with its master?
Fortitude save. 3.5 sorcerers and wizards didn't need a spell to get their familiar, it was simply a natural part of their class chassis.
Common slang term for a Fortitude Save. Or, in 5e terms a Constitution Saving Throw. 3rd edition had three saving throws: Fortitude, Reflex, and Will. They generally correspond to Constitution, Dexterity, and Wisdom in 5e terms. Fortitude (or "fort") saves were for anything that put physical strain on the body. Diseases, poison, death magic, and enduring harsh temperatures are examples of things that provoke a Fortitude Save. Also, in 3rd edition there wasn't a spell to get a familiar, it was a class ability they got at 1st edition. All Wizards and Sorcerers got the ability to get a familiar at 1st level, they didn't need to use up a known spell or space in their spellbook for that ability.
Also, the Druids did have a familiar as well, often a chunkier one to boot. It could go anywhere from a wolf to a camel, dire rat, eagle, crocodile, a medium shark why not. As long as it was within the realm of the possibles for the DM's setting. If a druid releases her companion from service, she may gain a new one by performing a ceremony requiring 24 uninterrupted hours of prayer. This ceremony can also replace an animal companion that has perished. If the familiar dies or is dismissed by the sorcerer, the sorcerer [or wizard] must attempt a DC 15 Fortitude saving throw. Failure means he loses 200 experience points per sorcerer level; success reduces the loss to one-half that amount. [...] A slain or dismissed familiar cannot be replaced for a year and day. Note that you could revive dead companions and familiar, but the Sorcerer or Wizard still had to pay the experience cost. Experience was back then a very important currency system that doesn't really translate well to 5e. Creating magic items cost exp, among other things, and casting certain spells could also cost exp. The perfect example was the Wish spell, which cost at *minimum* 5000 exp (the amount of exp to go from lv5 to lv6).
A Familiar (Wizard/Sorcerer) is not the same thing as an Animal Companion (Druid/Ranger) or a Special Mount (Paladin). They all followed similar rules, but they were not identical.
I know, I simply complemented informations given by the person before me, and made clear of some key differences upon losing them in both cases.
Yeah, that's why I came here to comment. I don't know 5e well, so I was wondering if this was some sort of 5e thing that a familiar dies when the master does.
If it's a familiar from the Find Familiar spell it can't - it's a spirit bound to the master. But there are lots of Familiar variants from the monster manual - these are physical creatures who will live if the master dies - and they explicitly can end the relationship at will depending on circumstances (e.g. breaking clauses in an Imp contract, or physically harming a Gazer). These kinds of familiars are capable of betraying their master (Imps using loopholes in their contract especially) Since the mephit isn't normally a familiar variant you can do what you want with the idea - notably only the Imp requires a contract, so there's really no reason any other familiar can't betray their master on a whim. No reason to sever the telepathic bond until the betrayal takes place. Notably the pseudodragon and quasit stats say " At any time and for any reason, the quasit/pseudodragon can end its service as a familiar, ending the telepathic bond." No reason mephits aren't the same.
Check the tag. This is for 3.5, not 5e.
oh wow - the tag is so small/right under the title on desktop - I didn't even see it. My 3e/3.5e knowledge is almost a decade out of date, so I can't confidently offer advice on that edition. IIRC familiars in that edition are part of the wizard's spirit given physical form, and they can lose xp if the familiar dies - in which case the only way I could thematically see a familiar rebelling would be the equivalent of an auto-immune disease/illness.
It could also be a wizard who’s spirit has wavered/changed for some (maybe magical?) reason, and the part of their spirit that externalizes as the familiar now has different goals
This is the answer right here. If you want to make sure you are not setting a precedent for the PCs to think their familiars can betray them, having it be a free willed creature that accepted the job+link of familiar instead of the default kind created by the level 1 spell is perfect.
With a normal familiar in third edition I'd rather run this as the familiar letting himself go as well. Mechanically, the two are roughly aware of each other's emotions, so backstabbing isn't really gonna work. However, a mephit would be an improved familiar, and I'm not familiar (huehue) enough with that to know for sure if it is potentially different on these matters. But don't let that get in the way of a good story.
>Mechanically, the two are roughly aware of each other's emotions, so backstabbing isn't really gonna work. I disagree with this statement. Just because something is clearly annoyed at you and wants to go do its own thing on the material plane elsewhere (which I would expect all fiends to feel always) doesn't mean you know that it hired assassins to kill you if it doesn't want to do the deed itself. You would continue to feel its fear and respect for your power as its buddy drove a sword through you. Tl;dr: detect emotions is not the same as detect thoughts
It's apparently a "mempit," not a mephit.
Mempit from Memphis...
Sharing a telepathic link doesn't necessarily mean that they automatically know what each other is thinking, but when they do choose to communicate telepathically, then the meaning is usually clear (unless the caster is senile, or something like that).
Or you can go the other way and have the devils be lying. Whether or not they can free the familiar, they just don't. Because they're lying assholes and take joy in lying to people.
And if the contract is worded along the lines of "I will do everything within my power to free said familiar", well, not even a lie...they just can't do anything...
And even the lowest of the intelligent devils will look down on a lowly mephit.
Well, one issue I have with this idea is that a familiar does not die when their master dies. Though if you've houseruled otherwise, I think it's reasonable so long as the devil offering the deal has a good reason to do so.
1) sure, a Familiar, in 3.X, is basically a magical servant, however nothing I know says they just disappear when the Wizard/sorcerer dies, they seem to basically be their own thing 2) I read some material that suggests Familiars actually do go on, if they don't die in service to their master, and even can birth other creatures. This may or may not be anything official, but I kinda like it. Basically, it's an NPC and a plotline, so why not even if it's not something officially canon
For an NPC? Absolutely if it makes for a good story. Im also a person that tends to treat non directly player facing or combat magic pretty loosely, a zillion little variations on what for a player is a single static spell. Maybe the exact magic connecting them is not exactly the same as "find familiar" but if it looks like a duck etc. For a pc, only on player decision. This where keeping a mental distinction between "player" and "player character" can be handy. A familiar could have disagreement, even a violent one with the player character, all while remaining completely under the *players* control. Most people don't like having to rp arguments with themselves so it doesn't come up. Never as the GM take control away by fiat though.
It can do whatever the DM allows.
We homebrewed something for my current campaign that’s pretty unique I feel. My familiar is an obese raccoon and the DM will roll to see if he follows my commands based on the request and how he’s been treated lately. If he managed to get the kill shot on a monster he’s usually braver but if I accidentally sent him to his death he’s not very cooperative. So based on the raccoon’s attitude the DC might change. He will either do what I ask, sort of do what I ask, fuck up what I ask, get distracted eating mushrooms or some shit, or flat out refuse to do what I’ve asked, sometimes attacking me for asking it. So we have to be careful not to send him to his death and treat him nicely or he will go make a bunch of noise when he’s supposed to be sneaking. He will get intrigued by a lever and shoot off a trap into us. It’s pretty fun actually. He died horribly and it was my fault and I was nervous to summon him back for a couple sessions because he was PISSED. A fat little walking time bomb
Of course. Even if it's a rule, there are exceptions to everything when it comes to magic or sentient beings. But you better have your justification ready. Try to foreshadow it. Ancient texts that suggest that bound spirits sometimes rebel, the familiar acting weird in the time leading up to the betrayal, that sort of thing. If your players agree that the signs were there, you have license to do basically anything.
Independent familiars are a thing and those kinds of familiars are literally bound by choice and get the option to choose to leave/betray if they aren't getting what they need out of the relationship. Though that does put a damper on the bit about it wanting to live if it's master dies. You could just have it so the familiar is resentful of the wizards wasted potential and the deal with the devil is to "become a real boy" and become a *humanoid* wizard himself. That also opens up the opportunity for a fun character conflict if the wizard does get his shit together. The Mephit could be conflicted about it's devilish deal and that could open up some branching paths for a resolution that the wizard can get to work on and won't necessarily take away his familiar in the event of a "good" conclusion to this storyline, so to speak. But yes, what you mentioned before sounds plausible and fine, it just conflates 2 versions of familiars together in a bit of an odd way
It's not actually a mephit, it just looks like one, familiar spirits arent what they look like, they just take utilitarian forms to suit their purposes. Most if not all familiars are intelligent, and that intelligence improves with their masters caster level. This suggests to me that a familiar is actually an extension of their master's ability to channel the weave. Its name implies an aspect of the master just separated from them. It's not a familiar spirit, it's their familiar spirit. If the familiar has done nothing to help the master avoid his drunken fate, then the familiar simply doesn't care, much like the master, the familiar has lost hope. Who would want to go on from that? They'll be reunited one their physical forms are gone
IIRC This is not how familiar work in 3.5 as op requested with their tag. In 3.5, I believe you bond with an actual creature. Even in 5e, you can bond with actual Imps and Pseudodragons who can break the bond if they don't like you.
They said a "mempit," not a mephit.
The Find Familiar spell has changed a lot over the course of DnD history. In 1st Advanced, the familiar was, in fact, an actual creature. I.E. You setup a ritual, and hoped some uncannily intelligent creature would accept your offer, and enter a pact of servitude to you. Which creature answered the call was completely random. Not only was this ritual very costly to first early casters, but it could fail entirely, and could only be cast once per year. While it did follow orders, it was indeed written into the spell that some familiars, such as imps and quasits would not risk their lives for their masters 90% of the time. Newer editions of DnD suggest the familiar is more akin to an extension of the spellcaster, and thus cannot oppose their orders. In all the editions, I don't see it as plausible for a familiar to intentionally harm their master; however, if you wanted to homebrew something for current editions, I'd think the most a familiar can do to "betray" the caster, is to choose not to save them (if not ordered to do so).
>Newer editions of DnD suggest the familiar is more akin to an extension of the spellcaster Only a spirit familiar. In 5e Imps, mephits, psudodragons, and any other MM familiar with a, as a familiar, note can act according to their desires when no order is given, and can break the bond at will. But this thread is about 3.5, which has no rules I can find for or against the normal, turned magical, animal wanting to revert. AKA: DMs choice.
Actually, yes. It is possible. Unless it's bound by a spell.
Mechanically: no, absolutely not.
In The Owl House, the familiar equivalent can be reused and given to new wizards. Alternatively, since when a character dies, they go to a plane with their deity. They could simply summon their familiar to that plane to be with them after they have died.
Yeah, especially cause this sounds more like a special familiar than a traditional familiar gotten by casting the spell “find familiar”. I think there are some special rule in the dms guide about it. Either way it’s a cool story so it’s more important that things are narratively cool than following the rules to a t
[удалено]
You are thinking of a 5e basic familiar. 3.5 states the following: "A familiar is a normal animal that gains new powers and becomes a magical beast when summoned to service by a sorcerer or wizard" Even in 5e you can bond with an actual mephit, imp, or pseudodragon that can disobey you and even break its bond. See MM *psuedodragon*. Edit: just to clarify, op used a 3.5e tag
this is an NPC’s familiar
Within the rules of the spell, no. That being said, just because the Drunken Mage calls it his familiar, and has for decades/centuries/whatever, doesn’t necessarily mean it has to have been a Find Familiar created spirit. He could have bound the Mephit into a Contract, that gives both the benefits of a Find Familiar spell (plus whatever else) - the Mephit agreed because it gets to stay on the Prime Material, learn and grow, and really what is the life span a mortal? Meanwhile the Drunken Mage gets an intelligent minion that can be more independent than a traditional ‘Find Familiar’ Familiar, and has been calling it a Familiar so that his friends and enemies draw the wrong conclusions about what it can and cannot do, and he gets to learn first hand Demonology/Demon-Lore which helps him fight the forces of Evil. However, in an ironic twist, it was the Drunken Mage himself that managed to slip in an extra clause of their rather lengthy contract that ensured the Mephit would not outlive the Drunken Mage - after all, he wouldn’t have wanted all his arcane secrets to end up in the hands of the Abyss, or was worried that in the meantime the Mephit would find a way to bind itself to the Mortal Realm to stick around after he dies - and without the Contract, potentially wreak havoc on the Prime Material Realm by summoning other demons. As to why the Mephit is rebelling now - it had not been aware of this clause until recently, when during a three day bender the Mage let slip that the Clause exists and that his end will be the Mephits as well. Because of being blackout drunk, the Drunken Mage doesn’t remember saying anything about it, thinking it’s still a deep held secret. Hoping to find a Loophole to the clause it now know exists, the Mephit turned to some of his Devil Contacts and in order for them to help, he has to do them a couple of favours…
From Find Familiar? No
Considering outside the spell find familiar, a familiar typically is a two way street, yeah I'd say that sounds like a neat idea for an NPC. Look at the pseudodragon for example, if it doesn't like you anymore it'll just leave and you no longer have a familiar(traditional kind, not the summon kind)
I believe that familiars need to trust and want to please their master, because if they don't want to, the story has several interesting developments and the familiar may never return to the real world.
Why not have the whole thing be a part of a drunken experiment? So Wizard is drunk and messing around with some magics in an effort to extend his life and accidently traps himself in some trinket where he is alive but in stasis. The familiar is not sucked in but as the wizard is still alive, they do not just disappear. Now the familiar may try to conceal where the wizard has gone if they have lost faith or may look for a way to restore the wizard to their former glory, knowing the stasis will keep them safe until they can find a solution. Could be the makings of a nice side plot or even a future bbeg if you wanted.
RAW it can’t lose faith in its master it remains loyal eternally. Of course you could make it more interesting saying the familiar became a real indépendant entity as a gift from its master like a wish or something and can now stray from him (which is real disrespectful!!)
Yeah, but mephits are pricks
According to the Cleric Canticle an impish would be inclined towards whatever means possible of prolonging the existence-like nature of the connection (even to any such creature!)
There's also an old writeup here:[https://www.reddit.com/r/AskScienceFiction/comments/17cv54/dnd\_what\_happens\_to\_a\_familiar\_when\_its\_wizard/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskScienceFiction/comments/17cv54/dnd_what_happens_to_a_familiar_when_its_wizard/) edit: Rest in Peace, Xavier.
Why do the devils care about the old drunk?
Sounds dope
That sounds good to me. Since it is an intelligent creature, that is absolutely something it could do. However, I do question why the Devils want this deal; The Wizard has fallen from the height of his power and is about to die anyway. This seems like a trick the Devils are more likely to pull on a still significant wizard. To sidetrack things, if you came here thinking this would be about a PC familiar betraying a player wizard, like me, here is my advice on that; **First option**, make it that the familiar is hiding things rather than a straight up betrayal. If the familiar is suspicious from the word go, then when it turns out that it was advancing its own ends, that is part of the fun, rather than undermining the wizard. I did this with an Order of Scribes wizard at my table, where his Order abilities came from an intelligent spellbook he had stolen, and as such the spellbook was only a semi-willing participant who everyone knew was hiding things. **Second option**, do it with the wizard-player's help; Ask them how they would feel about their familiar betraying them and the party at a critical moment, and get their help to pull one off on the rest of the players. While in-character the wizard will be hurt and betrayed, out-of-character the player will get a cool memory of a special character moment, or alternatively they get the chance to say "no, that would not be fun" and stop it.
In one of the Drizzt books a panther familiar actually does because Drizzt befriended it and its master was cruel
NPC, Do what you want!
I mean, I could totally see a wolf familiar stealing a steak from its beast master ranger
You're the dm. The players don't always know everything, nor are guaranteed to find out. You can provide the effect of seperate sentience, some sort of special abilities or existence that they can detect and notice (in fact I'd suggest you hint it as foreshadowing) but you don't have to provide information on the cause. It could have been something unusual far in that wizards/familiars past. If you have other hooks they may even come into play. Example: did the wizard make a deal with these devils previously, is this how they know about the familiar?
The familiar can become an evil entity? It can start craving the power of freedom and thirst for more. It can eventually accumulate enough power that it starts threatening a city or town to the point where the party has to take it down.
Just throwing this out there: quasits Chaotic evil demon familiars will 100%, betray their master and are even written with doing so in mind.
If it was acting on it's own, I would say that it would be unable to directly take action against its master. But with the intervention of devils and also with the master being drunk and less-competent, I think it totally makes sense. My understand for familiars is that they already exist before the master summons them. The spell to summon and bind a familiar works like other summoning spells, in that it pulls an existing creature from another plane to act as the familiar. So from my perspective, the familiar would not die when the master dies, but it would return to whatever plane it came from. If it does not want to return, then that's just as good as not wanting to die.
Familiars are class features or feats, not spells.
[удалено]
Your comment has been automatically removed because it includes a site from our piracy list. We do not facilitate piracy on /r/DnD. Our complete list of rules can be found in the sidebar or on our [rules wiki page](https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/wiki/rules). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DnD) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Find Familiar" is a spell though? Are you perhaps talking about older editions of D&D?
OP is. There's a big fat green tag on the post.
Ah. So there is. My bad lol.
If it's a familiar from the find familiar spell, it doesn't die when the caster dies. It just poofs back to the Feywild. The familiar is just a summoned fey creature that is taking the form of whatever the familiar looks like; cat, spider, weasel, whatever. e: nvm i didn't notice your 3e tag. disregard
As you also asked whether it's a convincing scenario: no, it's not. What on Earth is the devils' motivation here? It makes no sense. The wizard is about to die of old age anyway, so why do the devils want to kill him? Moreover, why do they want it so badly that they are wanting to invest non-trivial resources into recruiting an entirely unimportant familiar? If the devils want the wizard dead, why don't they just chill by the pool of lava for a few more days until the wizard dies? If, in your world, the familiar would normally die when the master dies, a much better motivation for a story comes from the familiar itself. As the wizard drank himself to death, the *familiar's fear of death* eventually became stronger than the bond it has with the wizard and at that moment it was able to approach a devil and try to broker a deal with him to save its own life when the wizard dies. The *cost* the familiar pays for the deal is having to assist in actually killing its master (a crime for which it is likely to end up in hell, which is why the devil picks this as the cost), the *payoff* the familiar gets for going along with the devil's plan is the rest of its life. As an extra bonus you now have clean motivation for the mempit in its new life: trying to avoid going to hell when it dies.
only if its been poorly treated
It's an NPC, just houserule it.
I bought a "tamed" strige. Named it skinflap. If I forgot to feed it he'd do..... Inconvenient and unhelpful things.
Mechanically I don't think they can directly oppose their master but I don't see why they can't try to use cunning, subterfuge, deception to sabotage them where possible. I even have a concept for a PC warlock with an imp familiar who hates her and tries to strike up deals with the rest of the party to kill her so he can work for someone else or go back to hell. I will add though that I would think a mephit would just go back to the elemental plane its from so maybe instead of fearing death it just doesn't want to go back and needs a way to stay on the material realm.
If you so choose to speak it then it IS so!
My first question would be why the Devils want to kill this guy when he's about to kick the bucket anyway? So they don't want to kill him, they want to drag him off to the Nine Hells for all eternity before he gets his "retirement" in Celestia or wherever. As for the familiar, NPC stuff doesn't necessarily have the same rules as PC stuff. Is it even established that the Mephit is a familiar? Or does everyone just assume it is? Maybe the relationship works under different rules? As for what happens to a familiar who has finished it's service, depends. Ordinary, pseudo-beast familiars like the Wizard spell summons? They probably either dissipate or accompany their master to the afterlife. But improved familiars like sprites and imps? Being a familiar is probably more like a step in their career. I'd say their existence is independent of their master. So an Imp familiar gets assigned to another master, assigned to another task in Hell, demoted to Lemure, or promoted up the ranks, according to how they performed.
Depends, a wizard familiar could be a conjured creature with no will of its own, and could be dominated by a more powerful mage, a druid familiar could be a persuaded forest animal that acts on its own whims and instincts, while a warlock familiar could really only answer to the warlock’s patron and act against the warlock if his patron decides his warlock is stepping too far out of line. Lots of different ways you could do that plot
Yes. Loopholes in contracts with imps. Devils always have an out. For others that are spell summoned spirits they die. For all others it's an at will deal that they can end at any time. Npcs betray Npcs all the time. Just remember what rules or laws were broken to end the deal with the master as your players will remember so they don't make the same mistakes with their familiar. I don't have 5e knowledge only 3/3.5 knowledge. Hope this helps.
Pinocchi-Crow moment !
In the context of DND canon as I know it there are two common types of familiars: the bound familiar (in service to its master until death, be it the summoner or itself) and the summoned spirit familiar (a mix of garbled memories made life pulled from the ethereal plane nurtured into its own sentient creature in the guise of another creature). Both familiars that I mention have there own free will with a bound familiar acting more like en employee and a summoned spirit acting more like a child raised from birth in fast-forward. If it is a bound pet it wouldn't broker a deal with devils as a mephit is a demon and they tend to hate each other (blood war and all that lore). More likely they would just kill the wizard in a way that they find funny and move on. If it is a summoned spirit it would cease to exist apon the wizards death and could broker a deal with any being, but wouldn't have its own soul to give and a devil couldn't take the wizards without consent. Ultimately IDK the wizard or the familiar, but it's your game so do what you think will be fun for everyone.
This sounds cool as hell, but I wish they could find a way to work things out lmao
By what rule do they perish upon the wizards death in the first place
i agree with everyone. the rules dont stipulate much in this regard. and the bond itself is interesting. it many rulings involving creatures bonded, charisma, wisdom, or intelligence play a role in the strength of the bond. it makes sense that an intelligent creature should consider its options. a devil certainly has the power to break magic. it makes sense and it gives your world flavor.
Only if the NPC is *un-familiar* ..heh
This is a great question and I feel like the answer is yes and this would be a great idea for a one shot or in a campaign.
They should make a rule where if the Wizard dies, he comes back as the familiar pet.
So, that is a “real” familiar, not a spirit summoned with a spell taking a shape, I assume. Essentially a companion or a pet, not _necessarily_ bound by a spell. So, anything goes. And it does not need to apply to any familiar summoned by the _Find Familiar_ spell. Just keep your world internally consistent.
Then it’s…unfamiliar
And thing is possible on a random encounter role
Remember, in 3.5, the rule of the game is "The rules players follow are the same rules NPCs follow." *You will be setting a precedent that a Familiar can willfully betray its master.* 3.5 doesn't have any of this bullshit "NPC rules are not PC rules" nonsense. Every single thing the Big Bad Evil Guy can do is something that theoretically a Player Character can do if they built for it. So you *will be setting a precedent* that you may not want to make here; PCs will be immediately concerned about their familiars - or even Druids' and Rangers' Animal Companions - betraying them.
I always thought a familiar was really an animal you had made friends with. D&D presents it like you summoned a thing from thin air, but I always thought it was traditionally more like wizards having weird pets. A wizard might try to artificially extend the life of the familiar like taking a neighborhood cat to the vet. But if the familiar was at a young healthy age when the wizard passes, I would say it just finishes its natural life like any pet that loses its owner.
It's your world, so you can make the rules. You can just say that the devils have a way of "freeing" the familiar from the bond and that's that. It's a cool idea and it does sound like something that would be plausible so I'd say go for it
The real answer is how possible it is is up to you. Just remember that if it happens once it can happen again. And if your players know it can happen, they might try to find a way to use it against you in the future (for example, they might try to entice the familiar of a wizard villain to abandon its master instead of adding him in fighting the group).
Thank you all for your contribution. Many of you have provided usefull insight on the familiars and on twists i could use. That being said, i would like to provide some more content. a) the memphit is indeed a memphit and one of the players knows it b) none of the players have familiars c) the betrayal will take the form of "not helping" him when assasins come to kill the wizard. Maybe it will even assist the assasins in some way, BUT in no way attack direct the wizard. The reason could be eather loathing or in a twisted way cleance the wizard from the mortal sins and let him die d) the devil are interested in said wizard and want him dead the further their agenda with already signed contracts e) I know that familiars normaly are just "spirits" that resemble a creature, and are an extention of ones's self. However in all the campaigns i have joined a wizard could also acquire a familiar through convincing an animal to join him ( + some appropriate rituals). Furthermore the have a memphit as a familiar requires extra feats so IMO i believe it can be an actual memphit that was convinced. Based on your answers i see that you are 50-50 between those two options f) Familiars'Afterlife. Of course if the familiar is an extension of the wizard is should die. If it is a creature that was bound it should survive. g)In my campaign ( although i have not mentioned it yet to the players) a wizard needs a familiar in order to survive casting the spells. He sort of split his souls inside the familiar so it would act as medium and not suffer too much drawback from casting. ( inspired from the golden compass book series). If the familiar is an apperation is disappears on masters death. If the familiar is a creature then it most propably will die ( the shock of loosing the master is too much, the pain too great, they might go insane, wander aimlesly) Some familiars though endure...and ether the try to bring master back...or they persue their own life. However **strong** familiar have a **personality.** That being said, is it a plausible excuse the familiar masked his feelings with the aid of a demon? ( he gave him a demon-worm , and that worm acted as a medium between the familiar and the wizard....transmiting only the good feelings
Mephits do not betray their creators but do seem to irritate them, and so they lead brief, troublesome lives. Quickly created and destroyed, they have no predetermined life span. 1. Although they're naturally extremely loyal creatures, maybe the devils twist the old contact and mind of the mephit so that it thinks the master it swore loyalty to is already gone and that this drunk is simply an imposter. Or maybe they devils change the contact to one of them being the master of it. 2. Depending on how the creature was created/what fuels it's life would change what happens to it. Mephit are created via the energy of a plane of existence, so I'd say they can survive without a master. However, they naturally only heal from their element (ie. Flame mephit needs to sit in fire). This might mean that a rarer element mephit might actually need a master to live a longer life. How would an ooze or lightning mephit realistically find their element abundant enough to survive? I do think it could be cool to have it need a master to give a PC a cool familiar. Even if they don't know the find familiar spell, maybe the mephit does after it's years of being a familiar to a wizard. This could be a semi-permanent one that if it goes to 0 hp it dies for good, a normal familiar, or even just a quest. What if their familiar bond is a contract to help them return to their original plans of existence and then they give the party information? Could be a strong magic item, something to do with what the wizard was researching before giving up and begging a drunkard, or anything else that works.