Table Talk - Development

I do suppose it is my own views on religon that cause me to have that instinctive reaction. linking your soul with that of a beast seems creepy to me somehow, and I think there is something in Duteronomy that mentions this is a bad thing (along with forune telling and summoning spirits). No matter. If the rules for holy magic do not preclude having a familiar, then I will not interfere. Only a killer DM or a tyrant SG would impose non-existant rules upon unwilling players.

A divine animal would be cool I guess.

Holy magic does not precude it. It is more that familiars are considered property and the monastic vows (hermetic) might prohibit it.

Yeah, binding myself to a creature of magic is an interesting moral dilemna esp since if it is intelligence enough as familiar, I would want to make it over divine rather than magic. A divine animal could be fascinating but how would familiar rules work with a divine beast and divine magic?

Don't worry, I won't be that harsh on you. They are property from an objective view, but to each other, their could be just a bond of friendship and no thought at all concerning who owns whom.

I'd say they also potentially lose their immortality (dying when their magus does) as a trade-off for this ability to learn from him.

That's why I'd say use the RoP: Magic rules! :wink:

You could also give him an InHe power allowing him to "know" a given locale :wink:

Of course :smiley: As marko said later: Training or Teaching by the magus, or books written by that specific magus, or exposure from assisting the magus.
This makes the magus/familiar relationship more similar to a magus/apprentice relationship, and strengthen the bonds between them.

I also have this idea for a magical human/forgotten god.
Background, name, looks... I just need to do stats :laughing: :blush:

Totally agreed.
They go along the magi, and progress with him. You wanna teach your familiar all year long? Do it!!! :wink: And if you're holed up in your lab with him assisting, then he'll have slave labor instead :smiling_imp:

I read it as applying to your "average" magical cat, not to familiars magical cats

You've got a point.
Let's assume the covenant is wealthy enough in flowers and all to have him do this on his "free time". Even if it means buying flowers :laughing:
A normal magical animal, though, wouldn't have such perks.

:smiley: :smiley: :smiley:
My take exactly :smiley:

Although this familiar might cound as a human, as he might have special needs, such as fine fresh flowers and all.

A close tie to an animal??? That is desecrating god's creation!

IIRC, I dunno if divine familiars are allowed, even for divine magi. This need checking, it's been a long time

Like I said on novus mane:

This may take some time, especially as I will submit the results to you before publishing, but I'll try to do it :wink:

I saw that idea on the Familiars/Magic thread, but I don't think it works as a general rule, because very few animals would be willing to make that deal.

That's kind of a lame workaround.

I'm not sure why. Explain.


You can be holy and have a close relation to animals in 1220. I could see a chapter about Ameline's plgrimage to Assisi where she has to talk about the theological ramifications with Francis.

That sounds like an absolute wonderful idea.

That's thinking like a human, and a modern one at that: In greek legend, Achilles had to choose between Glory and Life. He choose Glory. A long life is not necessarily a better life.

(Note also that magical creatures might not fear death as much as we do, especially as, as immortal creatures, they probably have a less acute perception of their own finitude)

What if being bonded with a magus made a familiar taste his soul, this divine spark in every human?
Bonding with a magus might make a familiar feel more alive than ever, and a few years of "real" life might seem better than centuries of sleepwalking.

As marko said:

The whole "humans are above animals, have souls and free will, while animals don't".

While being a gentle lord and friend to nature and animals is a way to be closer to god's creation, bonding your spirit to an animal's might be seen as a form of spiritual bestiality, debasing your god-given gifts and clouding the aforementioned gree will and judgment.
Even today, no one will see anything wrong with someone who has a lot of animals and care for them. Few would see it fine if he wanted to consort them and marry them.

This is not to say ameline can't have a familiar. I, as a player, don't think it is forbidden for holy magi, and see nothing in the rules against that. It's just that, from a christian and roleplay view, this doesn't seem apt

I found one familiar that might suit Ameline a lot. A Caladrius. It is very much like her in nature.

It might be interesting thoguh to find a divine might one and invent the divine cords of some sort. Something unique to a divine mage like faerie cords are to faerie magic.

Most magical animals do not have Intelligence, they have Cunning instead. RoP-Magic mentions that a Player Character magical aninam should be intelligent, but most others are not. I think that gaining Intelligence and the ability to learn is a fair trade off, and since a magu's mortality is not always an absolute circumstance, many creatures would be quite satisfied with the arrangement.


What if you lived in a haze, constantly on drugs, almost unable to think clearly, and there was this option to be able to think without difficulty, see the world clearly in your mind's eye...

To take an analogy with Alzeihmer, I think there are at least some people with the disease who'd gladly choose clarity of mind over immortality. These are the ones who become familiars.

I'm sure some potential familiars would think that way. I'm equally sure that some would not. That reduces the number of potential familiars in the pool.


If that's the case, the magus is making a decision for the unknowing animal--yes, there are benefits, but there's also a drawback that an unintelligent animal probably can't possibly understand. Many magi would be unwilling to make such a choice. Viola absolutely would not do such a thing, and if we go with that rule, I'm changing her background so that she has no familiar.


Magical creatures need to live in a magic aura. The chance to have the magical aura, ample food supply and true friendship and love might have many animals more than willing to join with a magus as familair.

Considering that there must be a bond between the two before the bond is created, it is not a unilateral conversation. Any animal unwilling to be familiar could not be made one.

See p53 of RoP: Magic. By being a familiar, they become immune to the acclaimation that can destroy them. As such they avoid death of a sort with the price being a death much further down the road.

But they could also avoid acclimation simply by staying in a strong enough aura. And no, it's not unilateral, but an animals with only Cunning wouldn't understand the consequences. Seriously, you guys can rule that way if you want, but it would be totally out of character for Viola to take a familiar under those circumstances.


So restrict yourself to a familiar that only has int. Many magical animals can have int instead of cunning (owls for example).

This way you can make yourself understood.

Well, the familiar Viola chose didn't have Int--and that sort of animal is rare, anyway.

In any case, Viola wouldn't do such a thing even with an animal who could make the choice for itself--she's not going to ask another creature to die for her.

And aside from my personal concern with Viola, that's one big reason I don't like the idea: it makes taking a familiar an entirely different commitment than it was before.


Guess we can leave the faerie aura now and the caves too, Viola wouldn't want anyone to die for her so no reason to risk grogs or magi against dark faerie.

For true friendship, a bond of love that is incredible, it might be worth it.

There's a difference between doing a dangerous favor and accepting a certain death.