D&D General Familiars and Spiritual weapon, Turrets and Tentacles, some have HP some do not, why?

[Ancalagon]

So a magic-user can create all sorts of "things" to help them in battle, we all know this. Familiars, eldritch cannons, spiritual weapons, etc etc etc.

But what I've realized is that it's not clear to me why some things are targetable (eldritch cannon), and some aren't (tentacle of the deep). More importantly, is this distinction clear to the foes?

So "soaking a hit" is not a bad use for a summoned entity that fights besides you. So if the giant is tired of your familiar giving advantage to you and smashes it with a club - well at least YOU weren't smashed with a club, so that's a good benefit to you. But the giant also gains a small benefit (killing the familiar). But a giant would never swat at a spiritual weapon bashing the giant, because the spiritual weapon is not killable. Not only would the spiritual "soak a hit", the giant would gain nothing.

But how does the giant know this? Surely a wizard well versed in arcane matters would know this, or even an experienced adventurer. But a dumb hill giant?

I hope you enjoy this little Christmas gift of a puzzle

I will note that I put this in D&D general but I'm taking the 5e perspective

 

[Omand]

A very good question to which I have no good answer.

Well, short answer is because it was like that before (so history), but it is certainly inconsistent.

Cheers

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

When pushing the Tab key, the spiritual weapon isn't highlighted for the dumb hill giant to select as a target for his attack. The OP is totally right, many of the visual manifestations of spells effect would serve as decoy in a fight.

 

[Stormonu]

I've seen at some tables things are handled differently. I've had PCs attempt to grab (and wield) other caster's spiritual weapons, ask if they could keep "evil" Spirit Guardians at bay with Protection from Evil and other things.

Just because the rules are quiet on some things, doesn't mean someone hasn't tried - and then succeeded.

 

[billd91]

I think it might be reasonable to go by the effect and whether or not it really seems to be connected to a creature - at least for some of the specific examples here. A familiar looks like a li'l critter so it's easy to make the connection that it can be targeted and killed. A spiritual weapon, on the other hand, isn't wielded by anyone - it just floats out there striking at you. While this does have a few things in common with an animated object, you could describe it as somewhat spectral and not very real-looking. Same with the warlock's tentacle of the deep. By contrast, an eldritch cannon is a very real device made with real tools - and thus it has a stronger impression of "realness" that makes it a legit target.

At least that's a quick ad hoc suggestion.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I’m all for all of the weird implications of all those things having actual form and thus being subject to interaction.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

So a magic-user can create all sorts of "things" to help them in battle, we all know this. Familiars, eldritch cannons, spiritual weapons, etc etc etc.

But what I've realized is that it's not clear to me why some things are targetable (eldritch cannon), and some aren't (tentacle of the deep). More importantly, is this distinction clear to the foes?

So "soaking a hit" is not a bad use for a summoned entity that fights besides you. So if the giant is tired of your familiar giving advantage to you and smashes it with a club - well at least YOU weren't smashed with a club, so that's a good benefit to you.

Metagaming. Some groups don't mind, others do. This would be a "non-thing" in my game; the Giant, unless it is particularly smart or aware of what a familiar was, and could recognize one, would never choose to attack it "because it's giving you advantage". It'd attack it because it chose to for some other reason. But that's a "beside the point". To me, that's like saying "It attacks Fighter A, not Fighter, B, because Fighter A only has 12 hp compared to Fighter B, who has 43".

But the giant also gains a small benefit (killing the familiar). But a giant would never swat at a spiritual weapon bashing the giant, because the spiritual weapon is not killable. Not only would the spiritual "soak a hit", the giant would gain nothing.

Again, Metagaming. But hey, whatever works in your group I guess.

But how does the giant know this? Surely a wizard well versed in arcane matters would know this, or even an experienced adventurer. But a dumb hill giant?

Well, in the game you just described, the same way it can distinguish "That is a bat, that is a bat familiar" or "That is a Spiritual Weapon spell, that is a magic-spirit fighting for this puny human".

And yeay... you pretty much answered your own question: If the creature knows what it is, it knows what it is (or at least THINKS it knows what it is).

I hope you enjoy this little Christmas gift of a puzzle

I will note that I put this in D&D general but I'm taking the 5e perspective

As for the deeper question... why did the game choose to give SOME spells and things "HP's and an AC", but doesn't give them to other, similar things? That's a question for the ages! My simple answer: "Game balance and that's just how the writer wrote it down when creating it". Nothing more, no deeper "secret of game design", nothing past "hhehe... that'd be cool.. to have a magic weapon of your god sort of poof into existence to fight by your side...like your god/dess was right there next to you...yeah...very cleric'ey!"

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Lyxen]

So "soaking a hit" is not a bad use for a summoned entity that fights besides you. So if the giant is tired of your familiar giving advantage to you and smashes it with a club - well at least YOU weren't smashed with a club, so that's a good benefit to you. But the giant also gains a small benefit (killing the familiar). But a giant would never swat at a spiritual weapon bashing the giant, because the spiritual weapon is not killable. Not only would the spiritual "soak a hit", the giant would gain nothing.
But how does the giant know this? Surely a wizard well versed in arcane matters would know this, or even an experienced adventurer. But a dumb hill giant?

The familiar is a creature, it's obviously smashable, and to give advantage, it has to be a real annoyance to the giant, so swatting it makes sense. The Spiritual weapon is not targetable, I would assume that the giant sorts of swishes around with his club and realises that without wasting an attack. There are almost always ways to rationalise all these things.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

If you look at the art for the Fathomless warlock in Tasha's the tentacle is transparent and does not look "real". It also connects to the warlock. No one is going to confuse that for a target.

 

[Ancalagon]

So there is a partial answer here - the things that can't be attacked tend to be ... spiritual. Spectral. (I'll concede the line is muddy, what if you summon a spectre?) . And it would make sense that a turret summoned by an artificer is very physical (thus targetable, and recognizable as such).

But these are often "flavor" elements. So if you reflavor a class to fit a concept... like right now we have a new campaign coming up, and 2 characters are "mecanical" - one is a hogoblin artificer battlesmith. And I'm an autognome warlock , a fanthomless. From the depth... of space. I'm an explorer from beyond the stars. So my EB is a "death ray" and my familiar is a "flying probe". (and I'm a warlock because one of the other PCs is an artificer - so there is a "flavor" overlap but very little mechanical/role overlap).

And my spectral tentacle is a lighting spewing combat probe which... can't be attacked for, uh, reasons. :/