Author Topic: Why X Familiar is Broken Thread (Read 1058 times)

Rayenoir · « **on:** February 14, 2007, 04:13:09 pm »

In concordance with Dorganath's statement, here is a separate thread to discuss why a given familiar or another is overpowered.

I feel that the pixie familiar is overpowered. I find the "RP" excuse to be a questionable reasoning for making use of a familiar that offers all the benefits of playing two characters (a spellcaster and a rogue) without any of the drawbacks (splitting up gear, xp, treasure), particularly when I personally have seen it used purely as a universal key to any door or chest not marked plot. I feel that it is an insult to those of us who would choose a familiar without such capabilities for the sake of RP to allow it to remain available to those who would abuse that potential.

By all means, please explain to me why you agree or disagree with my opinions.

LynnJuniper · « **Reply #1 on:** February 14, 2007, 04:17:29 pm »

Overall I agree and concur to this, as I’ve seen it done before. I do find it sad that the pixie is not used as an rp device and is used instead as a key and trap disarmer. However, there have been times I have seen the pixie used as an RP device. The times that come to mind are Solarina’s pixie, and when Rhynn used the pixie as a means of communication when her mouth was shut.

I am not trying to eliminate the existence of a pixie as a familiar. It should, however be chosen because the player wants a pixie, not because the player wants a pocket rogue. Therefore I find it a suitable choice to, instead of removing it all together, to fix it so it is not as unbalancing as it currently is.

Filatus · « **Reply #2 on:** February 14, 2007, 04:20:17 pm »

I agree that there is a lot of room for improvement. The familiars as they are now, don't add a thing to the game, which I consider a bit of a loss. I'd even go so far as to say that for me, the pixie leaves a bit of a bad aftertaste every time I see one summoned and the way it's being rp'd.

I am not saying it should be like Forgotten Realms, on the contrary. Layonara should be as original as possible in my opinion. But this also shouldn't mean we should just settle for what we have now.

For that reason I think this discussion could be a healthy one. We've seen it pop up before, but it was always cut short. To be fair, there are wilder ideas out there getting room for discussion. And I feel this one especially deserves some attention.

At this time I want to stop here and just state, that I would like to see room for some discussion on this.

LynnJuniper · « **Reply #3 on:** February 14, 2007, 04:23:03 pm »

To add to my previous post, and as I have said before, I would like it if familiars were more mundane beings: Cats, Ravens, Bats, Rabbits, Weasels etc. Like in NWN2 , where they actually benefit the player in other subtle ways while there, and then take away from them when they are killed. It would give more incentive for rp to me. Because familiars as they are now, sadly are used either as pocket rogues for the ones that can do so, or not at all.

Pen N Popper · « **Reply #4 on:** February 14, 2007, 04:29:34 pm »

Having a rogue PC, it is incredibly discouraging to attempt a lock, RP that it is difficult, then see the "pocket rogue" whipped out and the obstacle bypassed.
On the other hand, rogues are not terribly common and they are often times hard to find. I don't really think a group should be slowed down if they have a pixie and don't have a rogue. That's just the way it is. There are some places that need the skill and I'd rather see them kept rather than worked around.
My vote: I have no idea.

Doc-Holiday · « **Reply #5 on:** February 14, 2007, 04:34:31 pm »

Weston Pendrot has a "pocket Rogue"

Rosepetel

...

Of course.. good luck getting her out of his pocket... she generally prefers just to sit on his shoulder and watch everyone...

But then again.. she's only opened one lock out of the dozens that needed to be opened... and only because someones life was in danger

Filatus · « **Reply #6 on:** February 14, 2007, 04:42:27 pm »

In an attempt to stop the thread from going off topic before it even started, let me add the following. I don't think we should narrow this down to just the pixie. Would altogether getting rid of it solve anything, I don't think so.

We should take a look at every familiar from eyballs to panther and what they add to a wizard.

Because at this time, I have a hard time formulating any idea on why they would have familiars in the first place.

LynnJuniper · « **Reply #7 on:** February 14, 2007, 04:49:58 pm »

That's a really good question: Why do wizards have familliars? Forgive me, but I am PnP/D&D Illiterate here so beyond "Something to stand and take hits so a wizard doesn't die while soloing" I don't get the point. I understand the bond between wizard (or sorc) and familiar, but Is it manditory?

osxmallard · « **Reply #8 on:** February 14, 2007, 04:50:37 pm »

The only wizards you ever see using a familiar besides the pixie is when they are new and playing with their pseudodragon in Hlint.

Familiars are pretty worthless overall IMO.

Doc-Holiday · « **Reply #9 on:** February 14, 2007, 04:53:17 pm »

You never got hit with the fear spamming bat

Dorganath · « **Reply #10 on:** February 14, 2007, 04:54:29 pm »

I'm not really going to comment one way or the other as to whether X is broken or Y is better or whatever. I will point out just a couple of things, in case the conversation remains civil and leads to something productive down the line...
Everyone should know that in order to change one familiar, we need to change 40 of them. Since they "level up" with the character, whatever changes we make have to be made for all 40 levels, which are 40 discrete creatures per familiar. By the same token, each familiar we add needs 40, balanced versions of itself. This should not be construed as something we won't do, but given the work involved it should be noted just what kind of work goes into making or updating a familiar.
Also, we'd be much more likely to update the familiars themselves than the familiar system to be more like NWN2. The reason is that NWN2's familiar system was designed and created differently, and one should not simply assume that we can translate one to the other, in whole or in part, in a way that works well and that makes sense. Granting bonuses from the familiar, for example, may be rather problematic and best left undone.

Lilswanwillow · « **Reply #11 on:** February 14, 2007, 04:56:31 pm »

oh THANKS

blah. I never even knew bout the pocket pixie

I fully intend to RP my lil dragon (ok-so I already forgot which one I have chosen-I haven't gotten to play her alot) when the time comes, but it gets tricky with the rules in Hlint. Scaring children is not looked upon, ya know?

so the only place I can use my familiar is out of town, and thats not something I've actually done yet

Dorganath · « **Reply #12 on:** February 14, 2007, 05:00:59 pm »

Now, what I will contribute to this conversation is that familiars add things to wizards that are not easily translated into an online game. NWN uses them in a way that they really were not meant to be used, in my opinion.
I would submit that familiars are not really supposed to be "useful" as has been suggested except in ways to further the RP of the wizard or sorcerer.
On that note, a choice of familiar should be more one of RP and not of the special abilities of each creature.

Lalaith Va'lash · « **Reply #13 on:** February 14, 2007, 05:20:40 pm »

Quote

Pen N Popper - 2/14/2007 7:29 PM Having a rogue PC, it is incredibly discouraging to attempt a lock, RP that it is difficult, then see the "pocket rogue" whipped out and the obstacle bypassed.

Agree on this. I thought it was pretty sad when I heard a pixie allowed a party in the Mithril chambers once

Quote

On the other hand, rogues are not terribly common and they are often times hard to find. I don't really think a group should be slowed down if they have a pixie and don't have a rogue. That's just the way it is. There are some places that need the skill and I'd rather see them kept rather than worked around.

Disagree on this however.
A party needs a cleric so not to be slowed down, at least at higher levels that is a must for any place of any kind of challenge. And yet, there are no "pocket clerics" to cast death wards... (at least to my knowlegde). I could apply this same principle to the class of rogue, why should it matter then if a party needs a rogue to not get slowed down.
------
I've recently been playing the Layonara Single Player module for testing. I've never really played a caster, so it was interesting. I was playing a sorcerer and she had a Pixie familiar named Pecka. What can I say? Pecka was indespenseable in the single player for disarming traps and unlocking doors. I think the familars were created fine for the single NWN designed them for...
I'm not so sure about for PW. But I'm at a loss for a reasonable suggestion at this point

LynnJuniper · « **Reply #14 on:** February 14, 2007, 05:21:29 pm »

Can choosing not to have a familiar (Despite technically having one) (Read as: Never using it and rping as if you do not have one) Be a feasible option for a wizard or are they mandatory in an rp sense?

Lalaith Va'lash · « **Reply #15 on:** February 14, 2007, 05:22:24 pm »

Quote

Dorganath - 2/14/2007 8:00 PM I would submit that familiars are not really supposed to be "useful" as has been suggested except in ways to further the RP of the wizard or sorcerer.

If that were the case, we could just take away their skills. Then they'd only solely be used in RP or not at all

*smiles*

Filatus · « **Reply #16 on:** February 14, 2007, 05:32:35 pm »

I would actually be interested in taking away skills, but at the same time we look at at what they could offer for RP. For example on a quest. Not every ability needs to be a bioware feat or skill in my opinion.

Next to this, I looked around a bit on the Vault, most of the haks for familiars on the Vault are from 2004 or later, so not sure whether any of these actually still are supported.

Found something called the "Easy Familiars and Animal Companions Starter Kit", though at this time it's too late for me to see if that actually still works. And.. I'm guessing this is the type of things the team has already looked at a long time ago (especially since I saw a three years old comment from L on one of the haks *grins*).

EDIT: And yes, the familiars were designed for the SP-campaigns. Though instead of the pixie, Find Traps did the trick as well with traps.

AeonBlues · « **Reply #17 on:** February 14, 2007, 05:52:24 pm »

Quote

osxmallard - 2/14/2007 4:50 PM

The only wizards you ever see using a familiar besides the pixie is when they are new and playing with their pseudodragon in Hlint.

Familiars are pretty worthless overall IMO.

This says a lot about the game balance issue. When every wizard and sorcerer has a pixie, then the pixie is clearly over powered, and has lost its flavor as an RP device.

My least obvious idea that I see, is putting familiars on a deity system similar to summons. Non worshiping casters could get one based on alignment, or just make alignment the issue in the first place. That would cover 9 familiars.....

AeonBlues

Drizzlin · « **Reply #18 on:** February 14, 2007, 05:58:10 pm »

Quote

LynnJuniper - 2/14/2007 4:49 PM

That's a really good question: Why do wizards have familliars? Forgive me, but I am PnP/D&D Illiterate here so beyond "Something to stand and take hits so a wizard doesn't die while soloing" I don't get the point. I understand the bond between wizard (or sorc) and familiar, but Is it manditory?

In PnP and D&D, familars can be very useful. For one, wizards use them as agents and spys for their given talents. That is why in table top a wizard gains bonuses for the said creature. An example is if you pick a bat, you get +3 listen, hawk +3 spot, ect... A wizard can scry on their familiar at a certian level (13), which again would allow them to use their familar as a scout, or spy. Another very useful tool is the ability to deliever touch spells through your familar. There are also a lot of cool things between a familiar and wizard, like the fact that any beneficial spell cast on the wizard is also shared with the familiar, as long as it is withing 5 feet at the time of casting. If you want to read about a familiar saving the life of a Drow, pick up The War of the Spider queen. In that series, Gromph has a rat familiar that he communicates with to gain help.

Another thing about familiars in pnp, is that they require a long time to make one become your familiar, and if one dies a wizard can not have another one for a year and a day. There are some other rules and negatives to loosing your familiar that I do not know off the top of my head. I also remember that you can not just "get rid" of your familiar, if you release it, it still takes the one year and a day to gain another.

Over all, in pnp, familiars are great RP and can be extremely useful. In nwn, they were made more as a second pet in the single player version. There is still room for RP with one, but it is limited to the player in the game.

Stephen_Zuckerman · « **Reply #19 on:** February 14, 2007, 05:58:50 pm »

That sounds good, Aeon... It would also keep alignments well within the two steps required by the original familiar bit.