D&D (2024) Find Familiar, the Alert feat, and the loss of the fly-by Owl.

[Charlaquin]

I think the difference between our expectations may be more subtle than you seem to imply, but maybe not. Do you essentially have the familiar create full and accurate maps of an area (including most hidden things) for your players to plan over? Because that's the implied expectation that I'm unhappy with. Again, it's not that a familiar assists with scouting. I'm okay with that. It's a matter of to what extent.

I resolve the familiar exploring the same way I would a (flying, if the familiar can fly) PC exploring. The player describes where the familiar goes and what they do, and I describe what it can perceive while doing so. If the players want to make a map from that they can, but it’s not automatic, and the familiar has to search for hidden features the same way a PC would. If your players are expecting to be able to skip those processes and just have you tell them every detail of the map automatically, I can certainly see that being annoying. But I would think a simple “that’s not how the spell works, the familiar has to actually explore and experience the environment through its direct senses” would resolve the issue.

 

[Mistwell]

Yeah, but then it doesn’t really benefit from flyby.

Yes. I'm personally OK with that. If a foe wants to waste an attack on a familiar, that's usually a win in my book.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yes. I'm personally OK with that. If a foe wants to waste an attack on a familiar, that's usually a win in my book.

I agree, but the premise of the thread was that the flyby + sneak attack trick is getting nerfed in 2024, which I think is an accurate assessment. I’m fine with that though, especially since Vex is going to make it very easy for rogues to get advantage anyway.

 

[Mistwell]

I agree, but the premise of the thread was that the flyby + sneak attack trick is getting nerfed in 2024, which I think is an accurate assessment. I’m fine with that though, especially since Vex is going to make it very easy for rogues to get advantage anyway.

I guess you mean attacking with two short swords, with the first hit assumed to not do sneak attack damage?

 

[Charlaquin]

I guess you mean attacking with two short swords, with the first hit assumed to not do sneak attack damage?

If you don’t mind using your bonus action for your off-hand attack, sure. Or you could use one short sword and one scimitar, and keep your bonus action available for Steady Aim or Hide or whatever. From level 5 on you can also trip with your cunning strike to prone your target and get advantage on your off-hand attack. Either way, looking at the 2024 rogue, it’s going to be really, really easy to get advantage on most of your attacks.

 

[Mistwell]

If you don’t mind using your bonus action for your off-hand attack, sure. Or you could use one short sword and one scimitar, and keep your bonus action available for Steady Aim or Hide or whatever. From level 5 on you can also trip with your cunning strike to prone your target and get advantage on your off-hand attack. Either way, looking at the 2024 rogue, it’s going to be really, really easy to get advantage on most of your attacks.

If you're using your bonus action for hide or steady aim or trip...you have no need for flex.

As for advantage, in practice there will be times where advantage will be routinely canceled by disadvantage. Which is the ongoing debate I was having earlier about finding ways to make the rogue useful still even when there is something which prevents sneak attack.

 

[Scott Christian]

I've always hated he way the find familiar spell gets abused for situations exactly as described in the OP, so I can't say that I am sad about the changes. I also hate that familiars are more ubiquitous in the 2024 rules. Familiars are a pain in the butt, unbalanced, and allow players to hog the mic.

I had a DM once that did something interesting with the familiar.

The PC always summoned the familiar and used it for battle. It often "died," and was sent back to the spirit realm in which it was summoned. After six or seven levels of this, we had a side quest, and learned that the spirit felt the pain of each death. Each death was tenfold the pain of the previous. Each familiar he had summoned really wanted him dead. Looked at him as some evil slave master.

After that, he summoned them, but they never fought again. They were used for more situational circumstances.

Anyway, I thought it was a cute idea from the DM to bridge the gap between exploitation of a rule and the narrative of the story.

 

[Vikingkingq]

The problem is that he overrides every other player's attempts to do ANYTHING with letting his familiar do it all instead. Like in his head, his familiar can explore every area instantly for miles around (and report accurately on it) while everyone else stands around.

I have NO problem with the familiar being part of the team that explores an area. No problem with it having unique access to higher views, smaller or otherwise hard-to-get-to spaces.

I have a problem with it flying around a mountaintop and accurately reporting on every possible entrance to a dungeon that is located in the area (as the player intended last session) while the party stands there waiting for it.

Again, no problem with it adding its value to exploration. This player's expectation just needs to be brought down to something more reasonable.

Yeah, we ran into this in a previous campaign and the DM just started having wandering monsters attack the familiar on-sight. Eventually, the repeated 1 hr delays to resummon the familiar kept things in check, such that we didn't solely rely on the familiar to scout, but still used it to let us know about the first instance of danger.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I resolve the familiar exploring the same way I would a (flying, if the familiar can fly) PC exploring. The player describes where the familiar goes and what they do, and I describe what it can perceive while doing so. If the players want to make a map from that they can, but it’s not automatic, and the familiar has to search for hidden features the same way a PC would. If your players are expecting to be able to skip those processes and just have you tell them every detail of the map automatically, I can certainly see that being annoying. But I would think a simple “that’s not how the spell works, the familiar has to actually explore and experience the environment through its direct senses” would resolve the issue.

Yes, the latter part of your paragraph here is what I was speaking to, and I certainly used your solution. It's just a constant struggle to keep the player's expectation toned down to a reasonable reality without overly disappointing them. (I generally don't like to say "no" to a player - so I'm constantly having to tone down his expectation.) I also don't want to have the other players sitting around twiddling their thumbs while we play out every single thing that his familiar does, but that's another issue.

But I have no problem with a familiar being an excellent scouting tool - just not an "I win" button.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yes, the latter part of your paragraph here is what I was speaking to, and I certainly used your solution. It's just a constant struggle to keep the player's expectation toned down to a reasonable reality without overly disappointing them. (I generally don't like to say "no" to a player - so I'm constantly having to tone down his expectation.) I also don't want to have the other players sitting around twiddling their thumbs while we play out every single thing that his familiar does, but that's another issue.

But I have no problem with a familiar being an excellent scouting tool - just not an "I win" button.

Ok, that makes sense to me. Personally, I have no qualms about giving players a hard no, but I can understand the struggle of trying to temper expectations for sure. Especially with players who may have had other DMs that were more permissive with such things.