Author Topic: A Familiar Question  (Read 2968 times)

Offline wyvern

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1418
    • View Profile
A Familiar Question
« on: July 28, 2010, 07:27:23 PM »
Namely: What are familiars?

I find brief mention of them on OW175 - including that the White Council disapproves of them - but not much more.  And, alas, I don't have the full collection of novels around to go browsing for further details.

What do you all think?

Tbora

  • Guest
Re: A Familiar Question
« Reply #1 on: July 28, 2010, 07:30:07 PM »
I think Familiars are a cool concept and I would definitely like to have some for a couple of characters.Sadly not much info is given about them in the books.The closest we have seen is Little Brother - the baby raccoon which Listens to the Winds keeps with him.

Offline CMEast

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 468
    • View Profile
Re: A Familiar Question
« Reply #2 on: July 28, 2010, 07:55:10 PM »
I would probably play it as a pet that you could invest focus item slots or enchanted item slots in if you wanted. I'd also allow it to have an effect in a conflict/investigation etc by treating it as a walking stunt.
For instance:

---Ferret---
Focus Ferret - one focus item slot.
+1 control to divination
[-1] Quick Eyed Ferret: When examining a location for clues with your ferret, it quickly sniffs out useful details. Your first Investigation roll to determine deeper details about a scene is two time increments (page 315) faster than usual and you gain +1 to the investigation roll.

(it's more powerful than Quick Eye and Scene of the Crime because you're limited to when you have your familiar with you. If this isn't often an issue (your familiar never leaves your side) then I wouldn't allow the extra bonus if I were GM).

Of course, other people might do it differently/better than this but it's my own suggestion on the subject.

Offline bcillustration

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 14
    • View Profile
Re: A Familiar Question
« Reply #3 on: July 28, 2010, 08:15:04 PM »
Abby's Dog Toto might be a familiar...

I believe generally a familiar is quite more than a pet, it's more like a living Philactory. A magic user imbues said animal companion with some portion of their power, both as storage, safety net, & power boost. Familiars often have heightened intelligence, and occasionally outright powers of their own. ( The old witch in the woods whose cat can grow to enormous size, protects the house when she is away, etc.)  I've never played D&D, but I do know they have a fairly in depth set of rules for familiars. Also, doesn't have to be a naturally occurring animal, and often a "familiar" was proof enough to burn a practitioner in not so ancient times.

Offline Doc Nova

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 101
  • Who needs a cab?
    • View Profile
Re: A Familiar Question
« Reply #4 on: July 28, 2010, 08:15:37 PM »
Assuming zero knowledge of the term, familiars are animal companions for spell casters, often with greater intelligence, cunning, and comprehension.  While the concept existed long before D&D, that game really brought the concept (as far as most gamers are concerned) into the light.

Depending on the ideas behind them, familiars can be little more than a smart animal or can be a magically potent ally, spy, and source of arcane information.

Insofar as the Dresdenverse, it is generally thought that familiars are non-existent.  Little Brother had not exhibited anything beyond being a cool raccoon, and there is no major evidence that Mister is anything beyond a big, attitude-fueled cat.

That said, I think familiars definitely have their place amongst the magical community, whether it's a witch's black cat or Injun Joe's raccoon.

For my upcoming campaign, Librarian's of sufficient rank can gain access to an Athenaean owl, a Little Owl imbued with a fragment of Athena's insight and wisdom.  Mechanically, I built them as an Item of Power, since that allowed the greatest amount of conceptual freedom along with a point mechanic that worked (things like It Is What It Is really resonated with the concept of a familiar, in my mind).  Granted, it stretched the Item of Power's concept, but I'm not at all adverse to doing that for my own game (in fact, I've created several Items of Power that are "mass produced", at least as far as Items of Power are typically conceived of).

For those wanting a refresh-free method, CMEast's idea works, although that does little for a familiar's own motility or independent action, let alone the ability to target and affect them as their own entity.

Doc

Offline Bruce Coulson

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 621
    • View Profile
Re: A Familiar Question
« Reply #5 on: July 28, 2010, 08:26:11 PM »
The only comments we get is that the White Council 'disapproves' of familiars; not that they're illegal or a violation in any way.  That implies they do exist...

There are several ways to represent Familiars in the game.  One might be a Power requiring Refresh (which is why most Wizards don't have them).  Another is the classic bargain/negotiation we see re Bob and Harry; where the caster summons a spirit and then reaches an agreement with it.  (Possibly this is why the White Council frowns on the practice; it's shading into grey territory, and it's very easy to get fooled and make a pact with a minor demon...)  Another way is as a Stunt for Lore, allowing for a 'living library' and assistant.  (This actually would allow mortals/non-casters to have Familiars, which is also a part of literature.)
You're the spirit of a nation, all right.  But it's NOT America.

Offline GruffAndTumble

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 204
    • View Profile
Re: A Familiar Question
« Reply #6 on: July 28, 2010, 08:59:12 PM »
Actually, the "familiars are animals" concept is largely due to D&D's influence. As Michael mentions in Grave Peril, the full term is "familiar spirit." According to many classical beliefs, Bob is much more of a archetypal familiar than Little Brother.

As far as the RPG goes, I'd probably call "Bound Familiar" a -1 refresh power, with additional cost for an especially knowledgeable or potent spirit. If it took the form of an animal, I'd probably limit it to something small and innocuous unless additional Refresh was paid to make it a powerhouse as normal. And finally, I'd require the player to develop an Aspect describing his relationship with the familiar, like an Item of Power's requirement.

Offline Bruce Coulson

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 621
    • View Profile
Re: A Familiar Question
« Reply #7 on: July 28, 2010, 09:15:12 PM »
Well...familiars embodied in animals is part of Gothic/Medieval occult tradition.  The Malleus Malleficarum gives some ideas on how to spot witches based on their 'animal companions'.  Familiars were indeed possessed by a spirit (or demon), but otherwise were normal animals.  (The spirit was responsible for claiming the damned soul of the witch and conveying it to Hell, by medieval thought.)
You're the spirit of a nation, all right.  But it's NOT America.

Offline Doc Nova

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 101
  • Who needs a cab?
    • View Profile
Re: A Familiar Question
« Reply #8 on: July 28, 2010, 09:17:37 PM »
Actually, the "familiars are animals" concept is largely due to D&D's influence. As Michael mentions in Grave Peril, the full term is "familiar spirit." According to many classical beliefs, Bob is much more of a archetypal familiar than Little Brother.

I was not aware of this, I had thought the influence came prior to the game, but that may also be my geekery overriding education...

However your refresh comments and aspect tie-in is precisely why I went with Item of Power as the baseline.  

Offline Bruce Coulson

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 621
    • View Profile
Re: A Familiar Question
« Reply #9 on: July 28, 2010, 09:30:26 PM »
A lot of this depends on how useful your familiar is supposed to be in-game.  If it's just a cool companion that makes snarky comments and demands attention, then I wouldn't charge anything for it.

If it provides benefits, some Refresh cost would probably be appropriate.  Generally speaking, familiars functioned much as does Bob; sources of Lore, general information, and spies.  Treating them as an Item of Power means the familiar 'bond' is unbreakable; the actual animal host could be easily smushed.  (At least imho.)
You're the spirit of a nation, all right.  But it's NOT America.

Offline CMEast

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 468
    • View Profile
Re: A Familiar Question
« Reply #10 on: July 28, 2010, 09:49:25 PM »
Then you could put modular abilities on the IoP-spirit familiar so that it could possess different animals, each providing different abilities. Could be fun :)

Offline Bruce Coulson

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 621
    • View Profile
Re: A Familiar Question
« Reply #11 on: July 28, 2010, 10:41:49 PM »
A sketchy proposal...

Familiar (-1 or -2)

A familiar is a spirit (generally an Intellect spirit) bound in service to a practitioner in order to aid and assist them in magical workings.  Such spirits are selected for their extensive knowledge of Lore (and other intellectual skills); by contrast, familiars are sadly lacking in any useful knowledge concerning human affairs and society.

Mechanics: A familiar can assist in any task involving intellectual knowledge, assuming the character has access to the familiar.  This works exactly as the assisting skills rule (don't have the book atm; feel free to clarify/correct).  They can add a flat +1 to any Thaumaturgical/Ritual spell that their master is capable of casting.

A familiar must have a host body or secure place in order to remain in the Mundane world.  At a -1 Refresh, this is a single place; generally a small, inconspicuous animal or construct.  (Since the spirit actually possesses/displaces the spirit of the animal, they aren't able to occupy a large, self-willed being even of animal intelligence.)  At -2 Refresh, the spirit may transfer itself to another host for a time.  This is often done to spy on locations discreetly.  Familiars, as spirits, cannot cross Thresholds, even in a host body, and generally require close contact with their master to survive magical grounding (such as crossing large rivers).  Although possible for a familiar to gain spirit powers, this requires an investment of time and energy from their master (translation: the master pays any Refresh costs).  Note that the practicioner is sacrificing a small animal to the spirit; the Council believes that a mage willing to do this would be willing to do much worse if sufficiently tempted.

Sponsored (+1)  Sometimes a powerful entity will 'gift' a faithful or dedicated follower with a familiar, reducing the costs of such benefits in return for future services.  Since the sponsors are often from the Lowerarchy, the nature of those services can be left to the imagination. It's this tendency that has given the White Council a jaundiced opinion of familiars...
You're the spirit of a nation, all right.  But it's NOT America.

Offline Jaroslav

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 664
    • View Profile
Re: A Familiar Question
« Reply #12 on: July 28, 2010, 11:51:52 PM »
If it provides benefits, some Refresh cost would probably be appropriate.  Generally speaking, familiars functioned much as does Bob; sources of Lore, general information, and spies.  Treating them as an Item of Power means the familiar 'bond' is unbreakable; the actual animal host could be easily smushed.  (At least imho.)

I remember Fred (one of the developers) saying over on rpgnet that familiars should be free, unless the character has complete control over their familiar. In that case it probably should cost the character something. The logic is that since willful familiars, like Bob, add something more to the story than just another source of power for the character the player should be rewarded for making the game more interesting.

« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 11:54:43 PM by Jaroslav »
Irony is lost on the tired; if your not laughing, go take a nap.

Offline GruffAndTumble

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 204
    • View Profile
Re: A Familiar Question
« Reply #13 on: July 29, 2010, 02:25:37 AM »
Well...familiars embodied in animals is part of Gothic/Medieval occult tradition.  The Malleus Malleficarum gives some ideas on how to spot witches based on their 'animal companions'.  Familiars were indeed possessed by a spirit (or demon), but otherwise were normal animals.  (The spirit was responsible for claiming the damned soul of the witch and conveying it to Hell, by medieval thought.)

I may have been unclear--I'm not contesting that familiars were often in the form of animals, or took possession of animals, or what have you. I'm just pointing out that what makes a familiar is first and foremost its spiritual nature.

Offline Bruce Coulson

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 621
    • View Profile
Re: A Familiar Question
« Reply #14 on: July 29, 2010, 02:28:02 PM »
D&D was the pioneer of our hobby...and as a result, there are a lot of things about it that work only in the context of that game.  Their research was pretty basic, at best.  As I remember, familiars in the game were more of a handicap than an asset, and familiars were magically-endowed animals rather than actual characters.

There's some precedent for that kind of familiar.  Homonculi were magically-animated assistants without any spiritual component, and nothing would prohibit a thaumaturgical ritual to enhance/boost a normal animal to make it better, strong, faster, more intelligent, able to wear capes and fly...:)

But you're right; for the Dresdenverse, having familiars be embodied spirits is more in keeping with the genre and spirit of the game.
You're the spirit of a nation, all right.  But it's NOT America.