Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8577011" data-attributes="member: 7032025">Indeed, it was a dark forest, at night, and I was LOOKING for threats, with a creature supremely suited for that. Do you call that taking risks ?It's exactly like the stormwind fallacy, a DM, like a player, can always find a reason to kill a familiar if he is looking for it, usually by inventing something justification that was not there 10 seconds ago. This is exactly the problem of the "kill familiar on sight" DM, he will let you play a familiar, but will invent any sort of excuse to do it as soon as they can (and being a DM, they can very easily do that).I much prefer a DM telling me "I don't allow familiars" than a DM doing the above, much less frustration involved.Once more, you don't have to watch for threats to have PP apply. And by default, in D&D, everyone is watching for threats, all the time. The PH tells you it straight up. Please don't bring up that one sentence that means something else entirely than what you think it means, this was not travelling and the owl was certainly not bent over a table making a map.Moreover, since the owl was LOOKING FOR THREATS, I dare say that it was.The owl was flying as discreetly as it could, at night, with a darkvision, stealth and senses far superior to kobolds. But then it just died.And if I see them readying an attack instead of attacking, I will probably do something else that turn. But with a familiar with flight and flyby, is it really taking a risk ? That's where the problem is, it shouldn't be.And putting everything in the open reduces the game to a boardgame where everything is on the table and you just need to compute probabilities. There is no reason nor requirement for a DM to telegraph threats or make them explicit. The discovery and investigation, and surprise, is part of the game too, actually a more interesting part for some of us than crunching numbers in combat.And of course, it's more important to target the owl because of the standing "kill familiar on sight" order than the fighter in your face, the rogue in the shadows and the wizard peppering you with magic missiles...Look I have nothing against adversaries targeting familiars if the player abuses them by always claiming advantage and invulnerability, but this is not what we are speaking of, a "kill familiar on sight" is just a reason to aggravate players who just want a scout under reasonable conditions, and who expect a well chosen familiar to be sufficiently discrete or blending in to not be hunted and killed on sight. There are rats in the sewers. There are ravens flying over the streets during the day, there are owls flying at night in the wood. Are these all killed on sight just because they might be familiars ? Or are just familiar targeted because they are an annoying player feature ?</blockquote>

Verification