Category talk:Pseudo-Familiar

On the Talk:Silessa page, Cure asked: "Would she also be a Dread Familiar? Which is also to invite the question of whether all pseudo-familiars are dread familiars. I would say yes."

I did a bit of research:

• Black Box (1990): Only evil wizards get familiars
• Red Box (1994): Only evil wizards get familiars
• RLMCIII (1994): First mention of Pseudo-familiars... all good/neutral wizards get pseudo-familiars.
• Domains of Dread (1997): Only evil wizards get the familiars they want. Everyone else gets pseudo-familiars.
• RCS(2001): First mention of Dread Familiars. Everyone gets a Dread Familiar.
• RLPH(2003): same as RCS.

So, there's no mention of Dread Familiars in 2e, and no mention of Pseudo-familiars in 3e. Latest info from each edition says "everyone gets one". I'm inclined to believe they are the same thing by a different name, (like Dread Treant vs. Evil Treant, etc.), rather than that Pseudos are more powerful Dreads. They have been depowered in 3e compared to 2e, but familiars in general got a big power up in 3e, so it balances out somewhat. And lots of critters lost or gained abilities in the translation, so that's not too unusual. I'm inclined to just combine them into one entry with a note about their different name and different powers between editions. Thoughts? -- Gonzoron 23:10, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I am persuaded that you are right.Cure 23:29, 13 April 2010 (UTC)