|
For a gamestyle based heavily in balence, witches get the short end of the stick when it comes to replacing dead familiars in Society. Druids wait one session, wizards pay 100 gold per level. Witches pay 500 gold per level AND need to reteach (buy) any and all spells they gained with the old familiar.
I want to know about intentional replacement.
Improved Familiar can add a particularly interesting bit a flavor to a witch.
It can represent the growth of her familiar as she improves as a caster.
Her housecat can be more than a mere animal. At level 3 it turns out her familiar is celestial, at 7 it reveals itself to be a Silvanshee. Her snake turns entropic, then forms into a Voidworm. In a truely vile act, she sacrifices her loyal fox, appeasing the devils, who grant her an Imp as a companion.
It can represent the bond between the witch and her mysterious patron.
A witch of Elements could be gifted the service of a small elemental or a mephit. A Lyrakien compliments a witch of Deception quite nicely. Plague and Cacodaemons go hand in hand. (Yes, I know this is a ton of Beastiary 2. That's what's sitting in front of me at the moment.)
The Improved Familiar feat is OOZING with possibilities for flavor for a witch.
The question then is how badly is the witch being punished for doing something cool? Does the witch need to pay full out to replace a non-dead familiar, or can it be assumed that the new familiar learns from the last or even still is the last, abiet in a different body? It's really just not fair to make a third level witch pay 1500g (+ spells) just to make use of a feat, and while I'd waive it as a DM, I'd like to know how exactlly it would function in Society.
|
|
RAW you would not need to pay the 500 gp/level for changing familiar. The rules state "If a familiar is lost or dies, it can be replaced i day later...". Since the original familiar is neither dead nor lost, but is simply being dismissed, there should be no need for a new ritual. Additional spells tought to the original familiar are lost though and should be re aquired.
But that´s just what APG p. 69 states.