Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8581268" data-attributes="member: 6790260">I mean, if we presume good faith on the part of the DM, it is always "okay to target the familiar."That is, a DM acting in good faith, doing what really does make sense, and not actively manufacturing conditions that would permit such a thing, while still taking advantage of such conditions should they just end up being what happens? Totally fine. But it's pretty much by definition impossible to give any kind of precise description of "doing what really makes sense, not actively manufacturing conditions, while still taking advantage if they happen to occur." Were I to give clear, bright lines, I guarantee someone here would start dancing on them.It is always in principle permissible for the DM to target a familiar actively participating in combat--but individual circumstances will vary, such that it's essentially guaranteed (for any campaign of meaningful length) that you'll find circumstances where no combatants would prioritize the familiar even if they got a golden opportunity to kill it. I find it hilariously implausible that any DM is skilled enough to guarantee that every time a familiar happens to appear, it will be 100% logical and justified for every combatant to drop their current priorities and focus on making sure the familiar dies ASAP. As a result, a DM actually giving fair rulings, who does not have an inherent bias toward destroying all familiars immediately, takes seriously that they are a potential target that may be worth taking out. However, they might instead be too low-value, and thus their presence endured for a round or two or even a whole combat, if seriously pressing priorities win out. It is neither "do I have your permission to attack your familiar" nor "I will invent whatever narrative is necessary so that the familiar dies ASAP." It is, instead, the actually moderate position of, "I won't ignore your familiar if you risk it, but I won't do stupid things just to make sure it dies, either." If attacking the familiar actually seems like the most worthwhile thing to do, then it will get attacked. If it doesn't seem like the most worthwhile thing to do, though, the DM won't conspire to ensure that it will, definitely always, become the most worthwhile thing to do.A wild animal, for example, could easily try to eat a familiar or see it as a convenient meal that it can nab and run away with, e.g. how a wolf might view an owl familiar....or it could see the familiar as a nuisance to be ignored or swatted away, e.g. how a bear might view that same owl. An archer might try to hit the owl if it is sitting on someone's shoulder for example, but might also prioritize the obvious healer or fireball-thrower at the back of the party, thinking that disrupting their magic or even taking them out would be a better use of their attacks. The actual situations encountered by the party should be significantly variable over time. Familiars being always and consistently THE #1 target in every fight, where they're used, guaranteed, no matter what, is evidence of blatantly unfair refereeing. It's "rocks fall, everyone dies," but targeted only at familiars. That doesn't make it any less unfair, it just makes the unfairness localized.Why should they need to? So long as they stay within 100' you have continuous telepathic communication with them, and (by spending actions) can share the familiar's senses. That allows for the familiar to be (more than) 70' in the air and 70' away and still maintain contact.Plus, there are several familiars with 3 or higher intelligence, and most of them can fly. Pseudodragons are the major standout there (being NG, 10 Int, flying, and having the ability to share its Magic Resistance trait with a spellcaster it has chosen to bond with), but there are others. The flying monkey doesn't have the special bonus stuff and works with the regular spell (as opposed to things like imp, pseudodragon, quasit, gazer, etc. which don't do the spell thing in the first place) while still having flying and 5 Intelligence, but if you're willing to pass up flight, then the cat, fox, and octopus all provide 3 Int familiars.</blockquote>

Verification