If a witch familiar dies, the witch can replace it (at a cost), but will only get one with 2 spells per witch level, plus the patron spells (though there are some GMs that include the bonus sells geined at first level for +INT, plus those the witch chose from favored class... but that's another story).
Question is, do these spells stored in the new familiar have to be a subset of the spells the old familiar knew, or is there anything (rules-wise) stoppin Wally, the wunchkin witch from scribing all spells she knows onto scrolls, ritually slaughter her Familiar (or simply setting it free, if so inclined), get a new familiar with all shiny new spells, and then load her old backup into it?
rules wise no problem.
- If a familiar is lost or dies, it can be replaced 1 day
later through a special ritual that costs 500 gp per witch
level. The ritual takes 8 hours to complete. A new familiar
begins knowing all of the 0-level spells plus two spells of
every level the witch is able to cast. These are in addition
to any bonus spells known by the familiar based on the
witch’s level and her patron (see patron spells).
This will cause you to lose money on spells below 5th level, and will be most cost efficient at lvl 17 witch.
- The cost of the scrolls you have to feed the familiar will not be free takes at least a day to scribe each and takes 1 hour per spell level to feed the familiar.
I dont think there is a point a witch would get a real advantage out off this, but it might be good to have backup scrolls regardless just incase, or when you upgrade your familiar to improved familiar if you have a difficult GM.
Yes, two things:
1) It is so out of character, no matter your alignment the DM should ban the player from ever playing again.
2) See 1)
Oh, I am perfectly aware of that That's why I used the word 'rules-wise'.
Yes, there seems to be nothing in the rules preventing that.
You still have to scribe the scrolls yourself. That means you need:
a) 1 feat
b) 50% the money of just buying the scroll
c) Spells with material components add that to the price of the scroll
So... as soon as you have 4 spells to scribe for a level, it would cost you the same to just buy the 2 free spells as scrolls.
If you have more than 4 already, it's quite possible that it eats up the gain of higher level spells as well.
If one of those spells actually has a material component it's quite possible you reach that threshhold with just 1 or 2 spells.
Replacing the familiar costs alot too, so that once again cuts into your "profit margin".
In the end, yes it's probably possible, but not sure it's actually worth it.
Granted, you can scribe your existing spells once, then kill the familiar get 2 more per level, scribe them, and repeat it a few times. But even then the cost of replacing the familiar alone costs more than half of what you safe on the scrolls.
If a witch familiar dies, the witch can replace it (at a cost), but will only get one with 2 spells per witch level, plus the patron spells (though there are some GMs that include the bonus sells geined at first level for +INT, plus those the witch chose from favored class... but that's another story).
Question is, do these spells stored in the new familiar have to be a subset of the spells the old familiar knew, or is there anything (rules-wise) stoppin Wally, the wunchkin witch from scribing all spells she knows onto scrolls, ritually slaughter her Familiar (or simply setting it free, if so inclined), get a new familiar with all shiny new spells, and then load her old backup into it?
Nothing against it rule-wise, although killing your familiar is not a cool thing role-play-wise (and may not sit too well with your patron). The feat and the monetary cost can be prohibitive, though.
It would make sense to scribe all of the spells before getting an Improved Familiar, however. Depending on your GM, that may or may not be necessary (the GM may let the "old" familiar teach the "new" one before leaving).
|
With the transition to an Improved Familiar I tend to prefer the 'familiar evolves' type of fluff myself, rather than being forced to replace what should be by that time a beloved NPC - but that's hardly a RAW position, just one you may see with quite a few gaming groups.
The 'familiar cycling for extra spells' bit would seem to only be of value if you happen to be in a campaign where the DM is playing hardball in limiting your ability to just go out and buy scrolls to feed your familiar in the first place... and in such a case I'd doubt the same DM would allow such a 'loophole' to slip past... So yes, it's possible - just really specific in application.
With the transition to an Improved Familiar I tend to prefer the 'familiar evolves' type of fluff myself, rather than being forced to replace what should be by that time a beloved NPC - but that's hardly a RAW position, just one you may see with quite a few gaming groups.
It depends on what the new familiar is, really. "Evolving" by adding a planar template or becoming a dire version would be understandable. Turning into a completely different creature (stirge, pseudodragon, etc.), a construct (homunculus), or an outsider (elemental, mephit, imp, quasit, etc.) is a bit hard to explain.
Not really. Change "Improved Familiar" into the "Polymorph Familiar" feat.
I don't think this witch will come out ahead monetarily.
Between the 500 gold/witch level up front cost and the cost per scroll to backup the previous familiar's spells, this is a very expensive method of gaining spells.
About the only scenario in which this makes even a little sense is if your old familiar was loaded exclusively with spells that overlapped spellbooks of existing wizards you knew well enough and you wanted desperately to gain witch-exclusive spells.
Also to be factored into the monetary cost of 'uploading' your old spells into the new familiar, there is a small chance that any given spell won't take and you'll need to get another scroll...