You have been taken by the Mists

Author Topic: How about @familiar for animals companions?  (Read 4202 times)

KoopaFanatic

  • Iä! Iä! Puckwolf fhtagn!
  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
How about @familiar for animals companions?
« on: May 15, 2009, 11:55:38 AM »
The new @familiar command looks interesting, and it makes me wonder if it could be extended to druid/ranger animal companions?  Sure, companions can't talk per se, but it'd be nice to be able to emote their actions on occasion.  Maybe a separate command that only repeats strings that start (and end?) with [ or *?

Any thoughts?

LoLJohnFerro

  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 1248
  • Currently playing: Dragoon Sae'rid
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #1 on: May 15, 2009, 11:57:42 AM »
Sounds like a good idea but im just a crazy paliden well used to be oaly so ehh. *With a pet dragon of course*

Chrisman888

  • The Man Of The Hour
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 1486
  • Current Character: Horatiu Milosovici
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2009, 12:45:57 PM »
IT'S PALADIN! PALADIN! PALADIN! PALADIN! PALADIN! PALADIN!

~ Chris  :twisted:

Wids

  • We don't need no stinkin' avatars!
  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 942
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #3 on: May 15, 2009, 03:29:49 PM »
The new @familiar command looks interesting, and it makes me wonder if it could be extended to druid/ranger animal companions?  Sure, companions can't talk per se, but it'd be nice to be able to emote their actions on occasion.  Maybe a separate command that only repeats strings that start (and end?) with [ or *?

Any thoughts?
What about my Druid/Wizard who has both a familiar and an animal companion, and is often seen travelling with both?  :?

KoopaFanatic

  • Iä! Iä! Puckwolf fhtagn!
  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2009, 03:43:22 PM »
What about my Druid/Wizard who has both a familiar and an animal companion, and is often seen travelling with both?  :?

That would be the strongest argument for separate commands, I guess. :lol:

Truth

  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 748
    • Myspace!
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #5 on: May 15, 2009, 04:31:24 PM »
what does this all do again? just outta curiousity?
THE NATION THAT MAKES A GREAT DISTINCTION BETWEEN ITS SCHOLARS AND ITS WARRIORS WILL HAVE ITS THINKING DONE BY COWARDS AND ITS FIGHTING DONE BY FOOLS. -THUCYDIDES

failed.bard

  • Guest
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #6 on: May 15, 2009, 11:41:53 PM »
@companion and @summons would both be nice additions, if all three (including the already present @familiar) could be implimented without conflicting.

LoLJohnFerro

  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 1248
  • Currently playing: Dragoon Sae'rid
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #7 on: May 18, 2009, 12:09:56 AM »
I SPELL PALIDEN HOW EVER I LIKE! RAWR!

Falcifer

  • Undead Slayer
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #8 on: June 01, 2009, 06:02:33 PM »
Actually, according to PnP, once your little Druid bumps into level 9 and recieves the Awaken spell, your animal companion can talk one of your languages. So, this would be handy.

But then, according to the Awaken spell, an Awakened animal cannot serve as an Animal Companion (Though could technically choose to follow the Druid or Ranger out of it's newfound free will and sentience).


And you still spelled Paladin wrong. Bad spelling is bad for brains.

LoLJohnFerro

  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 1248
  • Currently playing: Dragoon Sae'rid
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #9 on: June 03, 2009, 10:27:30 PM »
*Pulls out a halbard*
I will bleeden spell it how ever i like!
*Brandaishes it towards every one who says otherwise*

Wids

  • We don't need no stinkin' avatars!
  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 942
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #10 on: June 03, 2009, 10:56:18 PM »
*Pulls out a halbard*
I will bleeden spell it how ever i like!
*Brandaishes it towards every one who says otherwise*
You spelled "halberd" wrong, too.   :lol:

Zarathustra217

  • Lead director, main scripter, nutty geek, Community Council
  • Administrator
  • Dark Power
  • *
  • Posts: 12699
  • a.k.a. Sren
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #11 on: June 04, 2009, 05:51:53 AM »
Generally, I'm all for trusting the players ability to roleplay, and I figure abuse should be considered OOC behaviour, so let's try this.

LoLJohnFerro

  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 1248
  • Currently playing: Dragoon Sae'rid
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #12 on: June 10, 2009, 09:17:54 PM »
*Pulls out a halbard*
I will bleeden spell it how ever i like!
*Brandaishes it towards every one who says otherwise*
You spelled "halberd" wrong, too.   :lol:

 :D Wids undermining me every step of the way....

Wids

  • We don't need no stinkin' avatars!
  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 942
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #13 on: June 11, 2009, 09:47:48 AM »
*Pulls out a halbard*
I will bleeden spell it how ever i like!
*Brandaishes it towards every one who says otherwise*
You spelled "halberd" wrong, too.   :lol:

 :D Wids undermining me every step of the way....
Undermining?  Nah, just being educational.  Smartz iz gud.  :teach:

I just thought of something, though: Has anyone ever tried a Druid/Ranger combo or a Sorcerer/Wizard combo?  Would such a combo allow you to summon two animal companions or two familiars?  If so, then how would these commands work with them?  :?

Axel

  • Eternal Saviour/Community Council
  • Administrator
  • Dark Power
  • *
  • Posts: 1530
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #14 on: June 11, 2009, 10:03:04 AM »
I just thought of something, though: Has anyone ever tried a Druid/Ranger combo or a Sorcerer/Wizard combo?  Would such a combo allow you to summon two animal companions or two familiars?  If so, then how would these commands work with them?  :?

According to the SRD sorcerer and wizard levels stack for determining familiar abilities, i.e., a multiclass sorcerer/wizard can have one familiar, not two. The same is true for multiclass druid/rangers.

Wids

  • We don't need no stinkin' avatars!
  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 942
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #15 on: June 11, 2009, 10:16:47 AM »
I just thought of something, though: Has anyone ever tried a Druid/Ranger combo or a Sorcerer/Wizard combo?  Would such a combo allow you to summon two animal companions or two familiars?  If so, then how would these commands work with them?  :?

According to the SRD sorcerer and wizard levels stack for determining familiar abilities, i.e., a multiclass sorcerer/wizard can have one familiar, not two. The same is true for multiclass druid/rangers.
Does that hold true for the NWN engine, though?  We all know how Bioware deviated from the books here and there when putting NWN together....  :think:

failed.bard

  • Guest
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #16 on: June 11, 2009, 10:23:23 AM »
Druid/rangers only get one at a time, same with Wizard/sorcerors.  A Ranger/sorceror like Grimshackle can summon a familiar and a companion at the same time.

Cor Reale

  • Undead Slayer
  • ***
  • Posts: 194
  • - the bullets produced no effect whatsoever
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #17 on: June 11, 2009, 11:43:18 AM »
abuse of @animal is.... how exactly is a talking animal abuse? If a cat can speak cat druidic, or, and this has always bothered me, is druidic the language of all animals, cat, dog, bear, cow, mule, ox, horse, bull, etc.. if @animal [bear druidic, or bd] ouch! that fire hurt me, can we crawl out of here? Druids can know druidic, and rangers can too if I'm campaigning them, rangers can learn. It is not a give with rangers, and mine may be a bit daft to know the language, but as far as a learner of druidic bear, he can scrounge a few words out of emotions, and feelings. Druidic I've found is an empathetic langauge, as much as sign language is a somatic one. Spelling out words can be a fast scrawl of motions, but letters are understood all by themselves. In sign, a stream of motion is recognized as a word because of a commonly conceived spelling of the unspoken. In my own words, two dots of the hand for e. e. in feed is glanced over, yet the f and the d are caught on with an exactitude or the reader may mistake feed for feet, or beep. The word peat is too different. keep is not so different. It's like cloud watching and giving the sky all the attention instead of the clouds.
_____________________

Shi'njra Hlarret
Eyms Mo'vs
Medi 'ne

Axel

  • Eternal Saviour/Community Council
  • Administrator
  • Dark Power
  • *
  • Posts: 1530
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #18 on: June 11, 2009, 01:01:02 PM »
abuse of @animal is.... how exactly is a talking animal abuse? If a cat can speak cat druidic, or, and this has always bothered me, is druidic the language of all animals, cat, dog, bear, cow, mule, ox, horse, bull, etc.. if @animal [bear druidic, or bd] ouch! that fire hurt me, can we crawl out of here? Druids can know druidic, and rangers can too if I'm campaigning them, rangers can learn. It is not a give with rangers, and mine may be a bit daft to know the language, but as far as a learner of druidic bear, he can scrounge a few words out of emotions, and feelings. Druidic I've found is an empathetic langauge, as much as sign language is a somatic one. Spelling out words can be a fast scrawl of motions, but letters are understood all by themselves. In sign, a stream of motion is recognized as a word because of a commonly conceived spelling of the unspoken. In my own words, two dots of the hand for e. e. in feed is glanced over, yet the f and the d are caught on with an exactitude or the reader may mistake feed for feet, or beep. The word peat is too different. keep is not so different. It's like cloud watching and giving the sky all the attention instead of the clouds.
Druidic is the secret language of druids, not the language of animals. Animals can't speak in this fantasy world.

DarkWyvern

  • Guest
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #19 on: June 11, 2009, 01:21:23 PM »
For More Detail. Here's a Canon Explanation of the Druid Language:

Quote
The Secret Language
   
   All druids can speak a secret language in addition to other tongues they know. Using the optional proficiency system, the secret language does not require a proficiency slot.

The secret language of the druids has its roots in British tradition. A language called Thari, derived from Celtic roots, apparently was spoken as a secret tongue throughout the British Isles by a small number of traveling folk such as tinkers and bards. It later was adopted by some Gypsy clans in addition to Romany, their own Indic language. Thari may predate the Dark Ages, and some claim fluency in it even today. Certain researchers seeking the roots of Thari as a language distinct from Gaelic have linked its origins to both ancient Celtic craft guilds and to the historical druids. If the DM wants to name the druids' secret language, Thari possesses some historical relevance.
   
   Not only can druids use the secret language to provide passwords, they can speak this private tongue when they wish to baffle nondruidic eavesdroppers. It is a precise tool for discussing Nature; a druid can say "dense, old-growth pine forest" in one word rather than a whole phrase.
   The secret language has a specialized and detailed vocabulary limited to dealing with Nature and natural events; beyond this sphere, it is very basic. A druid could use the secret language to talk about the health of a person, animal, or plant; discuss the weather; or give detailed directions through the wilderness. The language also can describe druidic spells, ceremonies, powers, and any natural and supernatural creatures known to the druids. However, it contains no words for sophisticated human emotions, for most tools or artifacts (beyond those used for hunting, farming, or fishing), or for weapons and armor (other than items druids use). The language also contains few words that refer to concepts peculiar to sentient beings, like property, justice, theft, or war. Tense distinctions blur in this secret tongue; usually the concepts druids express bear a certain immediacy or timelessness.
   Finally, the secret language of the druids remains a purely spoken tongue. A few simple runes or marks (symbolizing danger, safe water, safe trail, and so on) exist for marking paths and leaving messages, but the language cannot communicate actual sentences and complex ideas in writing.
   Here's an example of how the secret language works in practice. Suppose two druids are discussing a magical item and want to converse entirely in the secret language, using no words borrowed from other tongues. One druid wishes to say:

   This magical long sword was a gift to Melinda, wife to King Rupert, from Rupert's    court wizard Drufus. The mage gave it the power to throw lightning bolts. But then King Rupert grew jealous of Melinda. He had her executed and took the blade for himself. After Rupert died, the sword was left buried in the dungeons under his castle.

In the secret language, the story might come out something like this:

   This magic scimitar was for the Tall Golden Female, mate of the Man-Leader, from the Wielder of Magic from the Vale of the White Eagles. He put the call lightning power in it. But the Man-Leader wanted it. He killed the Tall Golden Female and    took it for himself. He died. The scimitar stayed in the cave under his big stone man-den.

   See the difference? There's no word for long sword, so our druid has substituted "scimitar." (All druidic weapons have names.) The idea of a gift is described in more basic terms. In addition, the concept of naming has no place in this Nature-oriented language; people and creatures are known by description, status, or place of origin.
   Wizard becomes the more generic "wielder of magic." Lightning, a natural phenomenon, has an equivalent in the secret language. But the secret language cannot convey a human emotion such as Rupert's jealousy, so the druid has had to substitute less precise phrasing. Similarly, the private tongue does not cover execution or murder, so the druid used the more generic "killed." Finally, no druidic term corresponds to dungeon or castle, so the druid has had to use other words-"cave under his big stone man-den"--to convey that image. Of course, a druid not worried about being overheard might mix the secret language and normal speech in a single sentence.
   The secret language helps bind the worldwide druidic order together. Druids from different circles (See Chapter 3: The Druidic Order) or branches all speak the same secret language. However, they may have developed their own regional accents or dialects. These could enable a listener to identify the region the druid comes from, or provide a clue to the speaker's branch.

   In a Spelljammer or Planescape campaign and through the use of certain spells and magical items, druids from different worlds can meet. The DM should decide whether their secret languages resemble each other enough to allow communication.

   Finally, the druid's secret language, while private, is not supernatural--theoretically, others can learn it. However, because the tongue provides druids with code phrases or passwords, they simply will not teach it to nondruids. The great druid of the region will punish any who break with this tradition.

Wids

  • We don't need no stinkin' avatars!
  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 942
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #20 on: June 11, 2009, 01:55:13 PM »
Druid/rangers only get one at a time, same with Wizard/sorcerors. 
That, I wasn't sure about.  :?

A Ranger/sorceror like Grimshackle can summon a familiar and a companion at the same time.
That, I did know.  Preachin' to the choir here, padr.  :P

Cor Reale

  • Undead Slayer
  • ***
  • Posts: 194
  • - the bullets produced no effect whatsoever
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #21 on: June 11, 2009, 02:52:20 PM »
abuse of @animal is.... how exactly is a talking animal abuse? If a cat can speak cat druidic, or, and this has always bothered me, is druidic the language of all animals, cat, dog, bear, cow, mule, ox, horse, bull, etc.. if @animal [bear druidic, or bd] ouch! that fire hurt me, can we crawl out of here? Druids can know druidic, and rangers can too if I'm campaigning them, rangers can learn. It is not a give with rangers, and mine may be a bit daft to know the language, but as far as a learner of druidic bear, he can scrounge a few words out of emotions, and feelings. Druidic I've found is an empathetic langauge, as much as sign language is a somatic one. Spelling out words can be a fast scrawl of motions, but letters are understood all by themselves. In sign, a stream of motion is recognized as a word because of a commonly conceived spelling of the unspoken. In my own words, two dots of the hand for e. e. in feed is glanced over, yet the f and the d are caught on with an exactitude or the reader may mistake feed for feet, or beep. The word peat is too different. keep is not so different. It's like cloud watching and giving the sky all the attention instead of the clouds.
Druidic is the secret language of druids, not the language of animals. Animals can't speak in this fantasy world.

You say animals can't talk. Well, I see none of you are witches!
_____________________

Shi'njra Hlarret
Eyms Mo'vs
Medi 'ne

LoLJohnFerro

  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 1248
  • Currently playing: Dragoon Sae'rid
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #22 on: June 12, 2009, 10:09:49 PM »
Animals can talk if a werewolf and a were raven and anyother were creature can talk then with enough magic and a awken scroll you can make any animal talk . :|

ethinos

  • Keepin' it hardcore since 2nd edition AD&D
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 3707
  • When in doubt, fireball.
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #23 on: June 12, 2009, 10:18:19 PM »
Animals can talk if a werewolf and a were raven and anyother were creature can talk then with enough magic and a awken scroll you can make any animal talk . :|

That isn't a good comparison at all. Actually, it's a really bad one. A werecritter has human intelligence. An animal does not. Intelligence is important when considering the ability for speech.
Torgan Ironshield: Battlerager and smith
Wirth Darmington II: Roguish noble
Kurgh: A simple herdsman

DarkWyvern

  • Guest
Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
« Reply #24 on: June 12, 2009, 10:23:09 PM »
Animals can not talk. They have animal communications between their own kind. The only possible "Familiars" that could speak are the Raven, and that's more "Mimicry" of what they hear, the Imps, Mephits and maybe the pseudo dragon if it's int is above 10.

Ethinos hits on the nose. Intelligence plays the role.

Animal Companions can't talk anything but animal speech.

Certain Familiars can speak.


And, even animal Empathy isn't "Talking" to animals. It's soothing or charming them


Quote
A successful check allows a character to charm or dominate certain creatures.

    * Ability: Charisma

    * Classes: Druid, Ranger, Shifter

    * Cross-Class: No

    * Requires Training: Yes

    * Check: Animals and dire animals have a difficulty class of 15 + the creature's hit dice. For beasts and magical beasts, the DC is 19 + the creature's hit dice. If the check succeeds, the creature is dominated.

    * Special: If the character fails their check by five or more, the creature will go hostile.

    * Use: Select this skill (from the quickbar) and then select the target creature. Dominated creatures will be commanded as if they were henchmen. The creature will remain dominated for one turn per level of the character using the skill.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2009, 10:25:55 PM by DM DarkWyvern »