Would this work?
At this point, does the familiar now have the permanent ability to see invisible creatures/objects?
If so, does the familiar retain the ability after the death or the wizard and/or leaving the service of said wizard? (This could be an issue with some improved familiars.)
Yes, it would work. Once they have the permanent effect, they would always have it until dispelled, even if their master were killed or they were released from service.
I haven't read much up on Familiar rules, but familiar stay around after their master's have been killed?
I can see a lot of fun coming out of a permanently powered up familiar running around with no master. (I'm guessing this would work on other beings with Share Spells? Eidolons, Animal Companions, etc?
If the master and/or familiar ever move more than 5 feet apart, the spell would end as the sharing would be broken.
How do you figure?
Share Spells: "The wizard may cast a spell with a target of “You” on his familiar (as a touch spell) instead of on himself. A wizard may cast spells on his familiar even if the spells do not normally affect creatures of the familiar's type (magical beast)."
However there are certain spells that can target the familiar, then be permanized on others. Those WOULD be retained if it wasn't part of sharing but simply imbued into the animal.
A permanently enlarged anthropomorfic cat with a 11 Int, 33 HP and 12 HD, +3 magical bite attack and +1 at least to all saves and spell resistance? That sounds like a great start to an awesome NPC...
Puss N Boots here could also speak to other cats, has tons of skills left over and a +6/+1 bab to start. Would he get to keep ALL Of this if his master died? If so, I'm TOTALLY developing this thing for my Fairy Tale style campaign.
Throw it a couple traits, one of which gives it a cantrip, then add a couple levels of rogue and this sounds like a REALLY fun NPC to just generally harass the PCs with!
Should a master die, the rules are silent as to whether or not the familiar retains these bonuses. On the whole, I would say that the familiar slowly reverts back to a normal animal of its type.
I would say even if it slowly reverts back to a normal animal of its type, that animal would still retain any Permanency effects previously cast on it. In the example above with See Invisible, the former familiar would eventually become a normal animal with Permanent See Invisible.
My reasoning; at the time the See Invisible was cast, the familiar was a legal target for the See Invisible. The same Wizard now casts Permanency on the familiar, again treating the familiar as himself. As both were legal castings at the time, the familiar has Permanent See Invisible.
Later, the master dies or releases the familiar. Based on JB's ruling above, the familiar becomnes a normal animal. However, nothing would casue this former familiar to now lose that Permanent effect; he was a legal target for the effect when cast.
Now, at this point, being a normal animal, he now could have Anthropomorfic Animal casts on him. When a familiar, he was not a legal target of the spell. Familiars are magical beasts for spell purposes except for personal spells cast by their master through the shared spell ability (in which case he effectively has no type).
I would say even if it slowly reverts back to a normal animal of its type, that animal would still retain any Permanency effects previously cast on it. In the example above with See Invisible, the former familiar would eventually become a normal animal with Permanent See Invisible.
My reasoning; at the time the See Invisible was cast, the familiar was a legal target for the See Invisible. The same Wizard now casts Permanency on the familiar, again treating the familiar as himself. As both were legal castings at the time, the familiar has Permanent See Invisible.
Later, the master dies or releases the familiar. Based on JB's ruling above, the familiar becomnes a normal animal. However, nothing would casue this former familiar to now lose that Permanent effect; he was a legal target for the effect when cast.
Now, at this point, being a normal animal, he now could have Anthropomorfic Animal casts on him. When a familiar, he was not a legal target of the spell. Familiars are magical beasts for spell purposes except for personal spells cast by their master through the shared spell ability (in which case he effectively has no type).
I would agree with this. The spell is permanent, and as such, could only be removed as stated by permanency
Okay, but is it abusive?
The case in point.
I have a 10th level wizard with a Psuedodragon familiar. I have the relevant spells (not a big problem for a wizard).
Remember that Psuedodragons have the ability to communicate telepathically.
If it can be made permanent on the caster it could be made permanent on the familiar. Familiars are treated as the caster for purposes of spells.
Okay, but is it abusive?
** spoiler omitted **
Telepathy does not let them see through each others eyes. At best the familiar could tell the caster where an invisible foe is.
Telepathy does not let them see through each others eyes. At best the familiar could tell the caster where an invisible foe is.Okay, but is it abusive?
** spoiler omitted **
I see. So the telepathy could allow the Psuedodragon to tell any caster in the party where to direct the Dispel Magic/Invisibility Purge, etc? (Which is what I would actually be looking for.)
I see. So the telepathy could allow the Psuedodragon to tell any caster in the party where to direct the Dispel Magic/Invisibility Purge, etc? (Which is what I would actually be looking for.)Telepathy does not let them see through each others eyes. At best the familiar could tell the caster where an invisible foe is.Okay, but is it abusive?
** spoiler omitted **
Yes. Though a raven with see invisibility could just tell the party with similar results. Whispering if the secrecy was an issue.
With just an additional feat, you can cast a spell that can affect both you and your familiar, then cast permanency....
Now does that permanency effect both you and the familiar, or just you?
The feat in question is... Improved Share Spells
With just an additional feat, you can cast a spell that can affect both you and your familiar, then cast permanency....
Now does that permanency effect both you and the familiar, or just you?
The feat in question is... Improved Share Spells
Except this part
I'm thinking of the old version of that mechanic. Never mind.If the master and/or familiar ever move more than 5 feet apart, the spell would end as the sharing would be broken.How do you figure?
Share Spells: "The wizard may cast a spell with a target of “You” on his familiar (as a touch spell) instead of on himself. A wizard may cast spells on his familiar even if the spells do not normally affect creatures of the familiar's type (magical beast)."
I was unaware that the definition had changed. That's good news. Too bad the "Improved Share Spells" feat still has the old description....
Bah! Ninja'd.
With just an additional feat, you can cast a spell that can affect both you and your familiar, then cast permanency....
Now does that permanency effect both you and the familiar, or just you?
The feat in question is... Improved Share Spells
Except this part
Unless.... I make sure my familiar always remains next to me... ALWAYS!!!!
"No Mr. Hedgehog, you cannot go outside to make water... make it here on my shoulder! I KNOW that is where you sleep! However, you wont be as special to me as you are now if you leave my presence. I spent a lot of time and resources for you to have See invisibility.... so water here!"
You can share spells with those you have a magical connection with.I'm thinking of the old version of that mechanic. Never mind.If the master and/or familiar ever move more than 5 feet apart, the spell would end as the sharing would be broken.How do you figure?
Share Spells: "The wizard may cast a spell with a target of “You” on his familiar (as a touch spell) instead of on himself. A wizard may cast spells on his familiar even if the spells do not normally affect creatures of the familiar's type (magical beast)."
I was unaware that the definition had changed. That's good news. Too bad the "Improved Share Spells" feat still has the old description....
Bah! Ninja'd.
Prerequisites: Spellcraft 10 ranks, ability to acquire an animal companion, eidolon, familiar, or special mount.
Benefit: Any non-instantaneous spell (but not any spell-like ability) you cast on yourself can also affect a creature bonded to you (such as an animal companion, eidolon, familiar, or special mount). The creature must be within 5 feet of you at the time of casting to receive the benefit. The spell’s duration is halved between you and your bonded creature (for example, a spell with a duration of 1 hour has a duration of 30 minutes for both you and your bonded creature).
If the spell or effect has a duration other than instantaneous, it stops affecting the creature if it moves farther than 5 feet away from you. It does not affect the creature again if it returns before the duration expires. You may share spells in this fashion even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of that type. This feat only applies to animal companions, eidolons, familiars, or special mounts gained through a class feature.
After reading that Feat, that would be a hard call specifically based upon the line:
"If the spell or effect has a duration other than instantaneous, it stops affecting the creature if it moves farther than 5 feet away from you. It does not affect the creature again if it returns before the duration expires."
So the only call I could make is this, but would actually ask a dev for more clarification.
The duration of the spell is halved between the familiar and the caster. Half of a permanent duration is...permanent. However, we still have the above line of the feat to contend with.
My ruling would be as long as the familiar is within 5 feet of the wizard, the effect is permanent. Once either moves 5 feet away from the other, the effect ends.
Like I said though, I would ask a dev for assistance on that matter.
If the ability has changed so that I no longer have to have my companion or familiar within 5 feet of me to cast the buffs/shared spells, I would rule that the Improved Share Spells feat would change the same way.
I was always confused by the wording of this feat, and have NEVER taken it for my caster classes, because it seems to be MORE restrictive than the base ability.
That 5ft limit is specific to that feat only.
Improved Shared Spells does not replace the normal Shared Spells class ability, either. It just gives the caster another optional way of using the Shared Spells ability.
Regardless, once the spell is on a target, Permanency cast using the Shared Spells ability will trump the 5ft limit 'Improved' feat anyways. That feat will no longer be in effect once Permanency is cast because per it's spell description, the spell effect just simply becomes permanent. Not permanent within 5ft...permanent.
If there's a disagreement among the ranks, then don't use the Improved Shared Spells feat in this situation since the normal ability is sufficient.
Ummm...this thread is is about 1 and half years old.