Where did all this harry potter malarky come from. Wizards focusing their magic through a chosen item/familiar is as old as the very first myths and fairy tales. I'm struggling to think of one where that isn't true.
(I know they are out there, but they are vastly outnumbered and none spring to mind at the moment)
Those who don't select a bonded item must have selected a familiar.
It is not optional (unless your GM says otherwise).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Select Familiar, do not summon Familiar (or kill Familiar), no Arcane Bond. Problem resolved.
If you want to trade out the Arcane Bond there are a number of archetypes that trade it out.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Adrian, you keep referring to Dragonlance, a setting where wizards could have a familiar for as long as it's existed. Find familiar was a first level magic-user spell in 1e, when Dragonlance was written. Sure, not every Wizard of High Sorcery would choose to have one, but it's not like wizards with familiars are somehow against the lore of the setting. And you can make a pretty decent case that the iconic Dragonlance wizard, Raistlin, had a bonded object in the form of the Staff of Magius. A staff, that he carries around all the time, given to him as he tested to go from apprentice to full wizard? Sounds like an arcane bond to me.
But even if you find that unconvincing, if you were doing a Pathfinder version of Krynn, just make it a setting rule that wizards don't need to have an arcane bond. Boom, problem solved. I mean, you'd need to make several other setting rules to really preserve the Dragonlance flavor anyway; kender existing, no arcane healing, clerics must worship gods, lunar effects on arcane magic, etc.
This option was not available when this thread was started, but if you are really paranoid about losing your familiar or bonded object, one obvious solution is to take the Figment familiar archetype.
Tattooed Sorcerer or Tattooed Mystic, as well. Just keep you familiar in tattoo form.
Or be an Arcane Bomber, Exploiter Wizard, Primalist, Scrollmaster, Shadowcaster, or Spell Sage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Types of wizards that don't have an arcane bond by rules as written:
Astromancer
Blood mage
exploiter wizard
arcane bomber
geomancer
instructor
iounmancer
primalist
scrollmaster
shadowcaster
siege mage
spell sage
vril adept
I'd say there are plenty to pick from that let you skip the bonded item or familiar.
So the answer is no, the arcane bond is mandatory, not optional.
However, you can simply take the familiar and kill it off at no penalty.
Indeed, came here to say that arcane bond is not optional. But you can take a familiar and there is no penalty for leaving it someplace, killing it, or anything else. There is only a penalty for having a bonded item. So there is no risk to having a familiar, except losing the bonus they give you.
So..yeah. If you don't want to have an arcane bond just choose familiar and then say you left it, or killed it, or lost it. Or actually keep it around as a pet because it doesn't harm you if they stop being their for some reason. They are not a liability like the bonded item.
Yes, Pathfinder has arcane healing. Bards and Witches both have cure spells and are arcane spellcasters.
Yes, Pathfinder has arcane healing. Bards and Witches both have cure spells and are arcane spellcasters.Oh I see.
Witches? That's not in my core rulebook. Which sourcebook introduces witches?
Advanced Player's Guide.
If you open up the PRD link on this page and type in witch in the search bar, it'll come up for you.
|
How I would rule it is as follows:
Player MUST chose if the arcane bond is an item or familiar. This choice needs to be made at character creation. Don't want to actually start with your arcane bond? Go ahead. But you will suffer the penalties of not having it available. If you chose arcane bond item, but don't actually have the item yet... You're making concentration checks every time you cast a spell until you do actually form the bond with something. And when you eventually pick one up, you have to pay for the item or preforming the familiar ritual.
Advanced class guide. You can find that one too by typing it into the PRD search.
More powerful? Certainly up for debate. You replace your arcane bond with a 1/day superspell, and you give up arcane school to have a greater variety of spells available to you. Personally, I like it less than a regular wizard. But to each their own.
From Googling, the Spell Sage seems a lot more powerful than the Wizard presented in the Core rulebook, is this not so?
Not really. I think you underestimate the power/usefulness of the arcane bond.
The item allows you to
#1 cast 1 spell per day you can cast, even if the spell is not prepared. This is any spell when and where you need it.
#2 you can enchant the item without having an item creation feat. That's a 1/2 price amulet, ring, staff, wand, or weapon or your choice.
The familiar gets you:
#1 alertness [who doesn't need more perception?]
#2 Special Ability [again, who doesn't need a bonus to saves, initiative or perception?]
#3 Empathic Link [a tiny animal can make an awesome scout. Rats/centipedes +18/+19 stealth, one has darkvision, the other has scent ans lowlight. A hawk can scout high enough to stay out of missile range and ravens can speak to people.]
#4 Deliver touch spells [this can have a huge effect if used well. This allows you to cast touch buffs on your allies that are out of your range. Pretty nice.]
#5 they are SMART!!! [never forget the utility of having someone watch over you at night, literally watch your back or aid your skill checks. There is never a reason you shouldn't roll twice or have them aid other on all your skill checks.]
#6 you can take improved familiars which are pretty awesome!
#7 to add to their coolness, familiars can take archetypes! [worried about your familiar dying? make it a Figment familiar. if it ever dies, it reappears the next morning. Want a scout, make them an Infiltrator. The Valet familiar helps with aid other, crafting, teamwork feats and is better at giving buffs to friendlies.]
For those that like Dragonlance, I found some interesting Wizard class archetypes and class variations:
- http://www.dlnexus.com/fan/rules/23000.aspx
- http://www.dlnexus.com/fan/rules/22372.aspx
- http://guilesworld.com/role-playing-games-stuff/dragonlance/wizard-of-high- sorcery/... not official, but worth the read I think.
Thanks, but no thanks. I refuse to play in a world where kenders exist. :P
Also, if you look under the post area and click on the button next to "How to format your text", you're see how to format the text to have the links actually be links.
Thanks, but no thanks. I refuse to play in a world where kenders exist. :PFor those that like Dragonlance, I found some interesting Wizard class archetypes and class variations:
- http://www.dlnexus.com/fan/rules/23000.aspx
- http://www.dlnexus.com/fan/rules/22372.aspx
- http://guilesworld.com/role-playing-games-stuff/dragonlance/wizard-of-high- sorcery/... not official, but worth the read I think.
But they're so tasty.
I'm with graystone. Kender are single-handedly the reason I will not play a Dragonlance game. I despise them more than Adrian does arcane bond.
/aside
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But they're so tasty.Thanks, but no thanks. I refuse to play in a world where kenders exist. :PFor those that like Dragonlance, I found some interesting Wizard class archetypes and class variations:
- http://www.dlnexus.com/fan/rules/23000.aspx
- http://www.dlnexus.com/fan/rules/22372.aspx
- http://guilesworld.com/role-playing-games-stuff/dragonlance/wizard-of-high- sorcery/... not official, but worth the read I think.
Not on the way back up. You can never keep those little suckers down as no one EVERY knows what they have in their pockets, even them. Stuff goes bad after a while... :P
Thanks, but no thanks. I refuse to play in a world where kenders exist.I tend to only play characters who I'd like to be like, so I don't think I'd play a Kender. But as a character in a fictional world I like them.
Quite honestly, I don't understand why there hasn't been a kender genocide. They are quite literally a race of psychopathic kleptomaniacs. If a DM or player correctly plays one, most people should feel the urge to take them out back and shoot them after 5 minutes. Any sane community with kender near would/should quietly murder them in there sleep and never speak of it again. What place allows ADHD pickpockets incapable of fear and common sense anywhere near them? If that person was your neighbor in real life, I can guarantee you wouldn't have to ask why anyone hates them. :P
I'm with graystone. Kender are single-handedly the reason I will not play a Dragonlance game. I despise them more than Adrian does arcane bond.
/aside
I'm pretty sure I hate them more too. If any kenders show up in any game I'm in, I'm killing them. A game they exist in isn't worth playing in, so even if I die trying it was worth it.
Alright everybody, stay on topic of the thread.
In a game about co-operation a race of kleptomaniac psychopaths is a terrible idea.
I'm pretty sure I hate them more too. If any kenders show up in any game I'm in, I'm killing them. A game they exist in isn't worth playing inSo what I'm hearing is that you don't like them because they are inconvenient for your character?
No, they make the game not enjoyable. Why be in a game I KNOW I'm not going to enjoy? And to be clear, even if for some crazy reason my character didn't want to kill them I would. Me. I loathe them with every fiber of my being and they fill me with a murderous rage. They are without a doubt the worst idea for a race in a cooperative game. They have no redeeming qualities and there is no reason to allow them to keep on wasting the worlds oxygen. They are a race that are clinically insane in MULTIPLE ways and each way is disruptive on a constant basis.
SO to sum it up, "don't like them because" of everything that the race embodies. Everything they do or say. In fact just them standing there would be enough reason to murder them.
Is your dislike of arcane bond because it's "inconvenient"? [I made sure to keep it on topic for CampinCarl9127 :) ]
Is your dislike of arcane bond because it's "inconvenient"? [I made sure to keep it on topic for CampinCarl9127 :) ]
Oh graystone, you and I have quite a love/hate relationship ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Assuming you aren't good aligned or restricted by a druid's code or similar compunctions, of courseSo the answer is no, the arcane bond is mandatory, not optional.
However, you can simply take the familiar and kill it off at no penalty.
What does alignment have to do with this? I usually play evil anyway... Even if you have a d**k GM who forces you to take a familiar, you can just command it to go away and never come back.
Yes, you start with one.
No, you are not obligated to keep it.
Kill it, dismiss it, it doesn't matter one bit. There are ZERO repercussions for 'losing' your familiar.
After all these years I finally did some kender research. Now I understand why they have their reputation. I had a fellow player run a character with a kender-like attitude. When he left the table nobody missed him.
Types of Wizards? Which sourcebook is this from?
exploiter wizard - Advanced Class Guide
arcane bomber - Ultimate Combatinstructor - cohorts and companions
primalist - Inner Sea Magic
scrollmaster - Ultimate Magic
shadowcaster - Inner Sea Magic (Inner Sea World Guide/Race Guide)
siege mage - Ultimate Combat
spell sage - Advanced Class Guide
The others are from Deep Magic - apologies I had meant to keep this list paizo only and didn't realise I was pulling from that source.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After all these years I finally did some kender research. Now I understand why they have their reputation. I had a fellow player run a character with a kender-like attitude. When he left the table nobody missed him.
I played with a guy who wanted to always be Kender, regardless of setting...
I wound up banning the dude from my game entirely, it got so annoying.
Is your dislike of arcane bond because it's "inconvenient"? [I made sure to keep it on topic for CampinCarl9127 :) ]Not at all. I just don't like the flavour.
When I think about a wizard, and what that concept means to me, it doesn't include an Arcane Bond.
It would be like the rules dictating what colour hair you must have based upon your class. You might say, "when I imagine my character I imagine them with black hair, not X coloured hair". For me, that has the same feel as to why I don't like Arcane Bond. When I imagine my Wizard, as a concept in my head, he doesn't have an Arcane Bond. I just want my character to as closely as possible represent what I envision.
Then assume my reason for hating kender is that I find their flavor to be that of fresh dung floating in otherwise clean water. Just fish that turd out and we'll talk.
"It would be like the rules dictating what colour hair you must have based upon your class." There IS an archetype called "White-Haired Witch". ;)
I find it hard to imagine a wizard concept that that can't accommodate one of the bonds. For instance, is your character never going to wear an amulet or ring? Never use a staff or wand? Never carry weapon? That's pretty much a naked caster... The amulet/ring are pretty much put on and forget items. No need to worry about them being stolen, as someone would just take your spellbook if they are screwing with you. Note that not having spells makes a concentration check pretty pointless.
Having said that, I'm not going to say you should change your mind. Some things rub you the wrong way and you shouldn't be forced to have things in the game you don't want. I'd ask you do the same for me and kender's. The race "just doesn't fit into my ideal concept of medieval fantasy" and I find they are fundamentally incompatible with the concept of cooperative gameplay the game is based on.
