Handy Haversack wrote:
I think I definitely wouldn't let it work against a witch's familiar. But a magician's . . . hmm. I like the idea of making my players sad--but I also like the idea of a familiar vomiting maggots! It's so hard to choose.
I agree extermination should be effective against a magician's familiar, but not a witch's. The former is more like the AD&D familiar, whilst the latter is something... different.
I would not allow it there, either, personally, but do what thou wilt, shall be the whole of the law. My contention is this: Even the magician's familiar is noted as a "singular" creature, and that word choice is by intent.
Singular: remarkable, extraordinary, exceptional, outstanding, signal, notable, noteworthy; rare, unique, unparalleled, unprecedented, amazing, astonishing, phenomenal, astounding.
When I consider the supernatural bond with its master, and that it is rare and exceptional, I feel it should be exempt; though I must admit, I do enjoy BA23's resolution above.
Personally I accept Jeff's ruling as "official"...
So, Jeff, when can we begin cataloguing your every message board post and endlessly debating your apparently contradictory statements?
Maybe I can answer questions with questions! Everbody loves that:
Q: "What happens if a thief picks a lock while wearing chain mail?"
A: "What do you think should happen?"