A perusal of my role-playing history will reveal my penchant for playing the non-humanoid: a shapeshifting cat, a griffon, a [url]dragon[/url], and a [url]http://paizo.com/people/Terexaltherin[/url] pseudodragon are the examples here on the Paizo boards, and of course I've GM'd for a party of ravens and am currently GMing for a hydra. The truth is, I'm something of a xenophile when it comes to my role-playing tastes--the more removed from my everyday experience a character is, in general, the more excited I am to play them.
One itch that I've never scratched, however, regards familiars. I love giving my familiars their own personalities and motivations whenever I play a character with one, but it's not enough. I want to be able to focus exclusively on a familiar's unique perspective on the world.
I want to play a familiar.
I think the boards here are perfect for this, because, unlike at a table where, should the familiar's master decide to shove him in an extradimensional space for a while, I'd have to sit around and do nothing, here on the boards I can just keep reading the thread while I'm waiting to be back on the Prime Material (and maybe write a post or two grumbling about being left out of everything).
However, I recognize that such an unusual situation requires a significant degree of trust between all players involved (including the GM). So this is kind of a shot in the dark here, asking if anyone would be interested in having me play as a familiar. Nonetheless, on the off chance someone is willing to take the chance, I'd love to try.
(And let me note here that other bonded creatures, like Eidolons, would be interesting to play, too, so this isn't limited to familiars.)
I would totally love to have someone play a familiar or eidelon. Sometimes I choose the singular options just because it seems like such an extra chore to have to think of the character and motivations of another creature.
... It would also be interesting to play an intelligent object. :)
It would be cool to have a game where everyone played in teams. Maybe a world where even "animal companion" type animals were awakened. However, getting a little ahead of the idea on that one.
The only current opportunity I would have is a game that just got posted (Artificial Alliances). The "Mechanic" build in the to-be-released Starfinder lets you choose a drone or an exocortex... I chose exocortex, but it is literally the first post of the entire game and easily changed. Not sure if you want to try Starfinder and play a drone though, but if you do, the thread is open to everyone, and you can find out from the GM what might have happened to my drone when I was captured. I'd be happy to have you as part of that game... would be totally fun to learn the new game with someone else.
(I suppose an exocortex (AI type thing?) is also playable, come to think of it, but it might be boring to play an AI. Not sure if anyone else can even hear it, so a drone would probably be more fun for you.)
I've been trying to get into a game as a familiar for a while, myself. There's something very interesting about that sort of character dynamic that I'd love the opportunity to explore, but it's very difficult to find a game that would permit such a thing.
Hmm. I guess I can see why people would be against it... it opens already-slow gameplay up to dragging even further if you have to wait for yet another person to play.
It could be awesome with the right mix of consistent posters though, and an agreement that the player would bot the companion and not force the GM to do it if the companion didn't keep up.
What other challenges to the idea could we anticipate and overcome?
I think someone that wanted to play a Spirit Binder wizard would be the best choice. especially if you wanted to play a "pure" familiar rather than asking the DM to make the Familiar a little more powerful.
(as tumor familiar might be fun also, lol)
Hmm. I guess I can see why people would be against it... it opens already-slow gameplay up to dragging even further if you have to wait for yet another person to play.
Eh, I don't think that's much of a concern, at least from my point of view. If you're planning to have 4-5 players, I don't see why it would matter if one of them was a "familiar".
I can see the concern about how that kind of a connection between players could lead to delays, but I don't know if that's any different with them being siblings or lovers or master/apprentice, etc, and as you said, the right mix of players can easily make that work.
That's why I said there's a certain amount of trust that would be needed. That's the real trick here on the boards, from my viewpoint. Well, that and consistent posting.
Funny that you've been looking to do this, too. Maybe we could get a GM and two players and both play familiars? XD
I'm not really sure about playing a drone. Really, when you're doing something outside of the expected for a system, you really want to know the system well, first. So thanks for the offer, but I think I'll want to wait until I've played something 'normal' in Starfinder before trying something unorthodox.
Makes sense. I can always stick with Exocortex. :)
As an aside... I'm kind of wondering just how the exocortex will work. I have a character I've played a bit off and on who has a 'dual consciousness' thanks to being the product of some Mad Science, and I'm kind of hoping I'll be able to flavor the exocortex similarly.
Yeah, it will be interesting to find out. ... That's some good flavor. :)
You're already running one awesome campaign for me, I definitely wouldn't expect another. :D Hmmm... sounds like maybe we should shop around for a GM!
To clarify, as I understand it, we have rknop and Zanbabe who would be okay playing as the characters 'owning' the familiars, while YoricksRequiem and I would be playing the familiars. It'd give us a four-'person' party, though only two characters in terms of effectiveness more-or-less, which is usually good for party size. So we just need a GM and a campaign to play in. XD
Yep, I'm in if you find someone willing to do it.
What kind of adventure would you guys be wanting to play? Are you hoping for an appropriate module, or something homebrew?
Also, reading your idea, I would suggest adding in one druid or ranger for a bit of martial ability; someone else could be the animal companion. That would keep in theme and keep a small enough party size with enough actions a round.
Hmmm... interesting question. Honestly I didn't expect this to get anywhere, so I hadn't thought much of what we'd actually play myself. :D Any of the others have some thoughts? It seems like homebrew might be easier since we'll be such an unusual party.
I think, from a party balance perspective, we could probably get away with a magus and a witch. I'd rather avoid adding another pair--six players can work, but the chances of something killing the PbP seems to increase as the square of the number of players. Additionally an animal companion would be hard to play right just because it's hard to get in the head of something Int 2. A summoner & eidolon could give us a primary melee combatant without running into that issue. But if someone would be willing to take up the challenge we could give it a try as far as I'm concerned.
I am not picky about the type of adventure. Modules or an AP or something Homebrew are all totally okay with me. Even if it's one I've played before, I'm just really into the idea and think it's a new enough approach. That said, if it is an AP / module, I prefer ones that offer a variety of interaction types and not just straight dungeon crawlers.
As far as what to play, my first go-to was something akin to a pseudodragon or raven, but I think playing an animal companion (like a wolf or something) could be quite interesting as well. I do think that the intelligence-capped communication skills may lead to some frustration and disconnect from the other characters, though.
With regards to party roles, I think it probably depends on what the actual character creation is like: whether as companions we are literally playing companions and the other players must choose classes that are granted familiars / animal companions, and we advance as they do, or if it's more the case of our race being an animal and still being able to take some appropriate subset of classes.
I'm not picky about either direction, but it does probably affect what I'd be looking to create.
I guess homebrew would be my thought, in some kind of world with awakened animals so it makes sense... but there are a lot of stories that could explain it, and if we have a GM willing to run an adventure with such unusual challenges, then I would say that the GM of necessaity also gets to choose the adventure and the rules about the world.
I sort of agree that we would need at least another pair to handle a regular level adventure. Having a person playing a companion doesn't really make it into a player power-level character. Although, of course you are right about it raising the possibility of people flaking out.
GM Redelia, did you have something in mind? (I've heard people raving about your games, and would love to be a part of one, but definitely not trying to twist your arm.)
To me, at least, the vast power difference between a full PC and the familiar is part of what makes the situation interesting to role-play... but being a tiny sorcerer could be interesting, too. :D
I'd agree that we could go with most any kind of adventure, but if we do go for a module instead of homebrew we probably will need to do something to boost the companion creatures' power to near-PC levels to keep from dying horribly.
I think there was an old adventure, or an adventure that was a fanbrew where the PCs were familiars whose masters were captured and they had to figure out a rescue. Something where the PCs have to figure out how to solve with their skills and limitations(no hands unless you are a monkey) would work I think.
... if we do go for a module instead of homebrew we probably will need to do something to boost the companion creatures' power to near-PC levels to keep from dying horribly.
Yes, *or* get more players. I think that regular players could help us too, if we don't find enough people who want to play companions / familiars / drones. :)
I get the fear of the game falling apart, but it's just the same risk in any game, plus the player-bots-the-companion (or the reverse perhaps>) agreement so that it isn't harder on the GM.
OK, I think I have a good story idea for you guys. I want to make sure you're all OK with the fact that I haven't done a homebrew like this before, other than with my kids. I have a basic 'problem to solve' and some ideas as to place names and NPCs. I would stick with Golarion deities for simplicity.
I also want to make sure everyone is OK with my one big houserule: All PCs are required to be of good alignment. That can be naive, innocent good, or used-to-be-evil seeking redemption good, but that requirement is just part of how I conceive of stories that are fun to tell in a game like this.
We would be starting just high enough level for the improved familiar feat so that the familiars can be able to do more things, like perhaps use wands depending on choices made.
I would be perfectly fine with that! :) Thank you so much for offering!
As for the starting level... Would you be okay with a familiar who was a 'normal' animal (before becoming a familiar) but had the stats of an improved familiar? As in, say, a raven who had the stats of a faerie dragon? I actually played a witch with a familiar like that in the past (basically he discovered a way to power-up his raven familiar to improved familiar levels), and it would be cool to reprise him in this. :)
I'm completely okay with that house rule. I never play evil anyway. ... And thanks! Should be fun and interesting to see how it works.
Or you could do a Gesalt campaign. with familiar and animal companion. still have one PC. with being able to talk to both.
I would definitely be into that, Redelia! And the houserule fits what I wanted to go with anyway.
Or, there is the Familiar Bond feat. Could house rule it for anyone if you wanted to, so everyone could play whatever they wanted but still have them. Other feats and kinds of characters have them too. Eldritch Heritage. ... or I played a Sea Singer Bard with a parrot familiar once, and I know there are individual archetypes that grant them to other classes too, but don't know them all. I think last time I was building a Cleric there was a domain that gave you a snake companion of some sort.
Let's see... lots of feats to take for good familiars.
Improved familiar, evolved familiar, are there others to improve a familiar? (Although evolved stacks, so you could take that one forever.)
Then there are feats for familiars like Polyglot Familiar, and familiar archetypes.
Witch and Wizard and sorcerer with arcane bloodline get familiars at level 1
Summoners get eidolons level 1
Cleric can get a divine animal companion at level 1 or a familiar (vermin domain for instance)
Sea Singer bard gets a familiar at level 2, but looks like most everything else I am seeing is level one (obviously not a comprehensive search, just a quick one).
EDIT: Cleric Scalykind domain, subdomain Saurian get dinosaur companion at level 4.
You can take improved familiar at first level... but all the things on the list of improved familiars are 3rd, 5th, and 7th it looks like. So maybe a 3rd level start, or jump right into the big guns? :D
Sorry so long, just taking a look at what you would have to take for a really good familiar.
There are a *lot* of options for having familiars now, yes. :D
We'll have to discuss just how much the 'masters' will have to spend on upgrading the familiars. I was thinking of suggesting that the familiars get their own feats every two levels and can spend them on some of the familiar upgrade feats, so we're not requiring the 'masters' to keep spending their own feats on the familiars.
I think whether or not we play gestalt is up to Redalia, but I think the idea works better without it.
|
I think there was an old adventure, or an adventure that was a fanbrew where the PCs were familiars whose masters were captured and they had to figure out a rescue. Something where the PCs have to figure out how to solve with their skills and limitations(no hands unless you are a monkey) would work I think.
This sounds like Another Fine Mess, an adventure written for Fudge by Ann Dupuis a couple of decades ago.
At one point, I know she was thinking about writing an "Animal Companions" Fudge supplement/game, where the players would be animal companions by default. I don't know how far it got, though, beyond Another Fine Mess.
|
|
With two players and two familiars, I don't think we need Gestalt.
I do like the idea of giving the familiars' players more ability to grow and customize their characters, however. By default, familiars have a pretty narrow path once their race (and, possibly, archetype) is chosen.
Re: normal familiar with the stats of an improved familiar -- I've done the "metamorphosis" thing before. In one game, I had a cat who turned out to be a Silvanshee once it got high enough level to realize its true identity. In a Reign of Winter game I'm running, the raven familiar of a witch turned into a NoSoi psychopomp at higher level. One of my PFS characters had a cat familiar, and then later had a Cat Sith familiar with the same name and appearance.... I suppose by PFS RAW it's not the "same" creature, but I think of it as being the same creture, evolved, or revealed.
I also believe I did the "powered up" option in another game I was GMing. There, a compsognathus was powered up to Improved levels when the player took the Improved Familiar feat.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No on the gestalt. My thought is that the masters will be built in the standard way. Then we will start out as a group with familiars built by the rules, but we will add some stuff to them to make them a bit more powerful and versatile. The masters will have standard WBL to gear themselves up, and then we will give the familiars a bit of gear.
I'm wanting this to be a rather slow moving game because I'll have to think a lot. I would say the expected posting rate is about 3 times a week for players. More is great, but I can't commit to keeping this going at a faster rate.
I'm OK with improving a regular familiar rather than choosing an 'improved familiar' by the book. I would suggest taking a familiar that can speak, though.
I don't think two masters and two familiars is quite large enough. Would you guys rather:
A. try to recruit another pair
B. try to recruit one or two other PCs
C. use NPCs
Sounds good to me! I'll probably be up for posting more often, but I can (and will, because I enjoy it) fill in times where there aren't GM posts with banter, raven musings, and other such things. ;)
As for your question... I think I'd rather recruit one other, unpaired PC. Sometimes having a bit of 'normalacy' is good for counterbalancing some craziness.
On the other talon, if anyone knows someone else who wants to play a familiar, I'd be fine with another pair for the sake of giving more people a chance to do something they'd otherwise never be able to do.
I'm thinking I'll play an alternate version of one of my previous characters' familiars, Brennus the raven. His story is that he was previously someone else's familiar, but then something happened to his master. He's fuzzy on the details because losing his master made him revert to being a normal raven again--a fate he's now terrified of. He has a bit of a selfish, power-hungry streak, mostly due to his fear of losing his intellect and powers again (he's searching for a way to remain a super-raven even if his master dies), but he has a good heart, and if presented with the choice between saving someone's life and gaining arcane power, he'd choose saving a life every time. He'd just have to agonize over the decision for a while. Alignment-wise he'll be Chaotic Good, he'll just complain about the missed opportunities being good costs. :D
EDIT: I'd also suggest the familiars have their own skill ranks instead of sharing their master's skill ranks, to give us a bit more customizability/versatility.
Sounds good for standard build. And I am okay with either A or B overall. C is okay if *you* prefer it, but it seems much harder on the GM.
Guys, come on over here to start building characters.
Link fixed. :)
Also, huzzah! Thank you so much!
if you need someone to fill out the group, I will be willing to play-never thought of playing a familiar but it sounds fun. I would play any role needed to fill out the party
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Same here, I would be up for playing either half of a bonded pair. Other characters that I play are witches and shamans, so I have some experience with familiar-owning characters.
@Redalia if we do want another pair, it sounds like we have some interest, and I'm playing with Kittenmancer in another game and think we'd work quite well together.