Familiars and Darkvision-The Sage hath spoken-Answers Within

[Squire James]

From what I've read of the Core Books, the familiar is clearly a magical beast and NOT an animal (PHB p. 50, 2nd column, third sentence of familiar description). Similarly, the Monster Manual notes that magical beasts, unless otherwise noted, have darkvision with a range of 60 feet (p. 5, Magical Beast description). This evidence appears to indicate that familiars have darkvision (and owls have low-light vision too).

Of course, if you went strictly by the rules, the Cleave feat description doesn't state you had to score the inital kill with a melee weapon. So a guy with a bow can shoot it at someone, down an opponent, and immediately gain a melee attack (with the bow, the feat requires that...) against another creature in the immediate vicinity. It doesn't mention the concepts like "reach" and "threaten", so technically it can happen.

In other words, some strange things can happen if the DM isn't allowed to use common sense. Anyone who expects to play 100% "by the book" should expect a lot of tiny rules not to make sense. It's kinda funny looking at posts like, "I hate D&D because a guy with +24 Craft (weaponsmith) roll has to be powerful enough to wax a 5th level fighter!" IMO, people who think like that have forgotten that D&D is a game (though more likely they hate it for some less objective reason that they don't feel like trying to explain, which I can understand).

 

[GrimJesta]

In other words, some strange things can happen if the DM isn't allowed to use common sense. Anyone who expects to play 100% "by the book" should expect a lot of tiny rules not to make sense

Thats an excellent point. Thats why a referee (DM/GM) is a mandatory part of the game. Someone has to do all the interpreting and what-not.

-=grim=-

 

[evileeyore]

I whole heartedly agree.

The rub comes, when as in my group, we have multiple people who DM.

When I initially mentioned these rules to a few of them, I got two different answers (as is want to happen).

Now our group tries to follow what is written without really any house rules (we try the variant classes occasionaly, etc).

The two answers I got were:

"Its common sense man, of course familiars don't have darkvision or lowlight vision, in fact animals don't have lowlight unless the base animal in real life would have it." (paraphrased down from larger discussion)

and:

"Well I'd have to read those rules agian and some other stuff, and I'll make a decision. However pretty much all animals have atleast lowlight." (paraphrased down from larger discussion)


So since answer 2 comes from the DM currently running, and most likely to be running when I start playing a Src/Wiz for the first time, I am trying to get all the angles (Yeah I am a bit of a rules Lawyer).

See I believe that familiars have a special place in the story, and as I want to have as many familiars as I can, they'll have a big place in my part of the story.

In past games familiars had less screen time or personality than the Fighters favorite weapon. Heck I knew the name our Dwarven Fighter gave his Dwarven Throwing Axe, I can almost remember the name of the Gnome Druids awakened riding dog, buuuut I can't even remember whether the Wizard had an owl or a hawk, or wether it had a name or not. (Owl I think, only because we were adveturing in the UnderDark).

I plan on getting a lot of screen time off my familiars. I want their names to be remembered as easily as the fighters favorite weapon.

 

[Squire James]

Ah, the Multiple DM Syndrome! Hopefully they're at least running different campaigns!

"Sorry, boss! I can't see a thing!"

"You saw in the dark fine yesterday!"

"Yeah, but the moons are aligned differently... almost as if someone else has seized control of the universe!"

"Jeez, that's lame!"

"Who's this 'Jeez' you're referring to? It sounds like one of those dreaded 'out of character' comments to me! You know what happens to people who say those sorts of things don't you?"

"Noooo...."

"That's the third master implosion this week alone... I must be doing something right!"

 

[evileeyore]

HA!

Yeah they run completely seperate campaigns. In fact at the moment they run under seperate systems. The "Common Sense" DM's Planescape campaing imploded under the weight of Chaotic PCs, and he decided he wanted to run something completely different (and I had griped for 3 years I wanted a non-D&D game to play in..)

We actaully have 5 DM's out of the group of 7 of us (with three of us running on seperate nghts-I run GURPS CyberMancer on intermitent Fridays, the "Common Sense" DM is currently running GURPS Traveller on Saturdays, and "I'll read it & rule later" is running a Roman styled D&D campaign on Sundays, the other two aren't running anything at the moment).

Actually we run fairly smoothly for having as many forceful DM personalities in the group.

 

[evileeyore]

The Answer

Note Skip's responses are in green and are taken in their entirety from his response to my email.


From: EvilE
Posted At: Thursday, May 2, 2002 11:26 AM
Conversation: Faimiliars and Darkvision
Subject: Faimiliars and Darkvision

I'll begin with supporting evidence then state my
question.

From the PHB on Monks (chapter 3: page 40: paragraph
21 or so): "Perfect Self: At 20th level, a monk has
tuned her body with skill and quasi-magical abilities
to the point that she becomes a magical creature. She
is forevermore treated as an outsider (extraplanar
creature) rather than as a humanoid."
on Paladin's Mounts (chapter 3: page 43: paragraph 7
or so): "A paladin's mount is a magical beast, not an
animal."

on Familiars (chapter 3: page 50: paragraph 8 or so):
"A familiar is a magical, unusually tough, and
intelligent small animal (see facing page). It is a
magical beast, not an animal."

From the MM on Magical Beasts (introduction: page 5:
paragraph 24 or so): "Magical Beast: Magical beasts
are similar to beasts but have supernatural or
extraordinary abilities. Unless noted otherwise,
magical beasts have darkvision with a range of 60 feet
and lowlight vision. Example: displacer beast."

on Outsiders (introduction: page 5: paragraph 3 or
so): "Outsider: An outsider is a nonelemental creature
that comes from another dimension. reality, or plane.
Unless noted otherwise, outsiders have darkvision with
a range of 60 feet."

Now for my question:

When a creatures type permanently changes, do they get
the inherent abilities of that creature type, unless
otherwise noted?

No. They get *no* new abilities at all, magic just affects them differently.

Thus when a Monk becomes 20 level and becomes an
Outsider, does he gain darkvision with a range of 60
feet?

No.

Do Arcane Familiars and Paladin's Mounts have
darkvision with a range of 60 feet and lowlight
vision?

No, but since they're animals, they already lave low light vision.

I ask because the exclusionary clause is nowhere to be
seen, and most D&D enthusiasts seem to disagree with
my assumption that they get those abilities, but can't
explain why other than "Its the way it works".

When a creature's type changes, it just gets a new "label."

Have I missed an Errata or FAQ (or even a Sage Advice
concerning this)?

Yup.

Skip Williams
RPG R&D


Thank you...