Improved Familiar Questions


Pathfinder Society

Scarab Sages 5/5

I have been informed that at higher levels the improved familiar feat can be taken and you can have your new and improved familiar wield magical items; such as a wand. What I would like to know is:

1. Per the FAQ, imps and quasits can wield a wand. So does that mean as long as the familiar is intelligent and can speak a language can others wield magical items as well. If that is not the case what are the requirements?

2. Does the familiar have to make a UMD check each time it goes to activate the item?


2) Unless the familiar happens to be a spellcaster in his own right (with the wand spell on its class spell list), then yes.
Note that your familiar will have your ranks in UMD... but uses its own Cha score, will not share your Feats... and, most likely, will not have UMD as Class Skill.

Grand Lodge 4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber
Kristen Gipson wrote:

I have been informed that at higher levels the improved familiar feat can be taken and you can have your new and improved familiar wield magical items; such as a wand. What I would like to know is:

1. Per the FAQ, imps and quasits can wield a wand. So does that mean as long as the familiar is intelligent and can speak a language can others wield magical items as well. If that is not the case what are the requirements?

I think we can expand that list to include the Brownie and Lyrakien Azata.

I will update the FAQ when I get back from Kuba Con and Origins unless I can get IT to do it for me via email.

Scarab Sages 5/5

Thank you. Both answers have been very helpful.


What about the mephits?

they seem like wand users as well.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber

No mephitis , no elementals.


Ok,

I'm just curious why on the mephits?

They have hands, they have int of 6, a 14 cha and can speak common as well as another language

seems like they have just as good a reason to use wants as any of the ones you have called out thus far.


how did this question about PFS that was posted in the PFS area get moved to rules?

god this happens a lot.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber

I don't know but I have moved it back to PFS General Message boards.

Also, Brownie and Lyrakien Azata have been added to the FAQ.

*

Why not Cassisians? They can be small angelic humanoids at will.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber

Because they find it strange and rarely stay in the form of small angelic humanoids for more than a few minutes? Who am I to force them into a form that will make them uneasy? ;-)

Liberty's Edge

So why can't an elemental with a humanoid form, that can talk, and use my UMD not wield a wand via UMD?

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

Winterwalker wrote:
So why can't an elemental with a humanoid form, that can talk, and use my UMD not wield a wand via UMD?

Now that is a rules question.

Liberty's Edge

Walter Sheppard wrote:
Winterwalker wrote:
So why can't an elemental with a humanoid form, that can talk, and use my UMD not wield a wand via UMD?
Now that is a rules question.

Right, and if Michael Brock flatly says "No." I'd like to hear why.

Going through my mental checklist I come up with:

Can it hold the wand and physically use it? yes. Elementals can take a humanoid form.

Can it complete a vocal trigger to activate it? yes, they have a language.

Does the wands spell appear on it's cast list? No, but it can bypass this with a DC 20 UMD check.

Does the elemental have UMD? Yes, if the caster does it will have it.

It has the skill required to emulate spellcasting, it can trigger verbal spell trigger items or command words, it can physically manipulate the wand etc. So at this point I see only positives for why it is allowable.

Plus, I see nothing saying they can't. But if i am wrong, I'd like an example why so I can cite this in my games.


Honestly I too would like to know the why behind it.

if it is simply that Mephits and elementals are available at level 5 and that is a balance issue with wands then thats cool.

but to say yes to one type and no to another when it seems that either should work just sounds arbitrary.

I don't think anyone is disputing how it works, the FAQ rules.

but I (and others) would love to know why.

Liberty's Edge 2/5

Poor Mike getting pestered to death during Gen Con. so i get it, the slots have nothing to do with whether or not a given AC or Familiar can use a wand. Let me ask a different question. What was the deciding factor. At a glance i am thinking its the base int. All the critters mentioned were 12+ at base.

2/5

I'm going to Necro like whoa for a second because there were some valid questions that I've never seen addressed.

I also find it relatively arbitrary that the ability is locked behind not just a feat choice but also working with potentially evil creatures which would be out of character for some familiar users (this mostly comes up in Core play, since there are options outside of Imp or Quasit for Standard). I think it's appropriate that the ability to activate wands be locked behind a feat selection. I do not think it's appropriate to also have an alignment/role-playing restriction as well.

I think the restrictions should be an improved familiar with a language and an appendage capable of holding a wand. I could also understand wanting to make it only those familiars available at level 7 or above, but I don't see a huge problem with Elementals using wands more so than Mephits.

Anyways, just my thoughts and since it's not in the heart of GenCon maybe it could get a bit of a rethink.

Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Improved Familiar Questions All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.