Familiars as artillery "spotters"

[Hairfoot]

Does anyone know of any articles or rules addressing the use of familiars as spotters for indirect attack spells?

Say you want to fire a magic missile at someone around a corner, or throw a fireball over a wall into a group of orcs. How would you use a familiar to relay the position of a target?

 

[Thanee]

In many cases this simply won't work, because you need to see the target yourself.

The familiar could give you a rough position of any opponents around a corner and you could aim an area effect in a way to catch them in the radius, however, as long as the center of the explosion is in line of sight and effect.

Bye
Thanee

 

[shilsen]

As Thanee pointed out, there are some problems with familiars spotting for you. Another big problem is that of communication. The empathic link is useless for information, since all it does is provide general emotional content. A familiar whose master is at least 5th lvl can speak to the master, but that means the master must be close enough to hear, and even if they can't make out what it is saying, enemies are likely to realize what is going on and nail the familiar, if possible.

 

[Hairfoot]

The D&D spell rules don't take indirect fire into account, which is fair enough. The idea is that a caster would use spells which affect immediate targets. However, any wizard with a decent grasp of adventuring or combat would create some which could be lobbed without exposing the caster to danger.

From a character point of view, it makes perfect sense to perch your avian familiar on a wall and use it to spot your enemies. The familiar rules state that an empathic link confers enough knowledge of a location for a teleport spell, so identifying a target for magic missile isn't hugely different.

It might require a custom feat, but I think it's reasonable. As it is, familiars are cute but fairly useless. Using them for indirect fire would add a nice dimension to spell combat.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

It's probably much easier to just cast a spell that allows you to see through your familiar's eyes, then use it as a spotter. I know I've seen spells out there that do this (although I can't recall the names of them offhand).

 

[dcollins]

The notion of indirect fire is contradicted by the fundamental "line of effect" requirement for all magic spells. From the SRD "Magic Overview":

Line of Effect: A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what a spell can affect. A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier. It’s like line of sight for ranged weapons, except that it’s not blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight.

You must have a clear line of effect to any target that you cast a spell on or to any space in which you wish to create an effect. You must have a clear line of effect to the point of origin of any spell you cast.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Ahh, good point.

Maybe they should have made some artillery-type spells for Heroes of Battle that would enable the use of spotters...

 

[argo]

The D&D spell rules don't take indirect fire into account, which is fair enough. The idea is that a caster would use spells which affect immediate targets. However, any wizard with a decent grasp of adventuring or combat would create some which could be lobbed without exposing the caster to danger.

I think your taking too much for granted here, any wizard with a decent grasp of combat may desire such a spell, but that doesn't mean he could make one.

Figgure it this way; Line of Effect is a bassic property of magic in the implied natural law of DnD. This is not trivial. It is not a matter of no wizard having thought of such a spell before, its a matter of no wizard having the ability to invent such a spell that actually works before now. You are trying to invent a spell that breaks one of the established rules of magic. Its not enough to have the idea to do it, you have to actually be able to do it.

Mechanically what this means is that were you to invent such a spell it would have to have a commesurate cost assoicated. I.E. the non-line of effect version would need to be several levels higher than the line of effect version. At a rough guess I'd say at least four levels higher.

That being said. Were we to postulate the existance of "indirect" spells then yes, I think that a familiar's empathic link would be sufficient to act as "spotter".

 

[Rostek]

But couldn't one conjure a boulder or some lava or something above an enemy- still in the caster's line of sight, but it would fall upon the targets? Especially with Enlarge Spell, you could drop something nasty- but you'd need some help to target the parallel square above the target, hence a spotter.
Some lava or acid dropping on you from 50 ft or so would be pretty nasty.
I not sure something like this is addressed in the rules, so that first sentance actually is a question- could you?

I think your taking too much for granted here, any wizard with a decent grasp of combat may desire such a spell, but that doesn't mean he could make one.

Figgure it this way; Line of Effect is a bassic property of magic in the implied natural law of DnD. This is not trivial. It is not a matter of no wizard having thought of such a spell before, its a matter of no wizard having the ability to invent such a spell that actually works before now. You are trying to invent a spell that breaks one of the established rules of magic. Its not enough to have the idea to do it, you have to actually be able to do it.

Mechanically what this means is that were you to invent such a spell it would have to have a commesurate cost assoicated. I.E. the non-line of effect version would need to be several levels higher than the line of effect version. At a rough guess I'd say at least four levels higher.

That being said. Were we to postulate the existance of "indirect" spells then yes, I think that a familiar's empathic link would be sufficient to act as "spotter".

 

[Jack Simth]

There is a spell that will, to some extent, permit you to get around Line of Effect requirements: Project Image. You cast the image at range - say, at that hall intersection - and then channel magic through the image - say, that Grasping Hand or Prismatic Spray - safe from line of effect of the critters you are actually casting at.

Mind you, it's an 8th level spell, lasts only 1 round/level, and you must maintain constant line of effect to the image... but is there anything, really, stopping you from chaining them - e.g., casting Project Image to see around a corner, then having that Image casting Project Image to see around another corner, and then having that Image cast the actual spell? Other than using multiple 8th level spells and several rounds to pull it off, of course....

Any of the Summon Monster or similar series can usually get around corners - you need line of effect to the point where the monster is summoned, but I know of nothing in the RAW which says the critter goes poof if you cease to have line of effect. Even if there is, some of the higher-end summons have ranged abilities, which might be used to good effect.

At 15th, a Psion's Psicrystal picks up Channel Power, which has a similar, but permanent, effect, originating from the Psicrystal.