He sundered my familiar!

[shilsen]

Check out the latest WotC article on familiars.

Just one question - what's the hardness of a weasel?

 

[Pinotage]

Man, that's just horrible on so many levels.

Pinotage

 

[Testament]

Actually, I don't see what's wrong with it. It helps stop OOTS-type Familiars.

 

[Alpha Polaris]

Just one question - what's the hardness of a weasel?

No hardness, just hit points, I don't see a problem there. Why do you find this so utterly bad ?

 

[krishnack]

may be I'm totaly wrong but a familiar is a living beeing and like any other you have to strike him normally with a weapon like you do it when attacking a human fighter, an elf wizard, a dwarven cleric and so on.... you can sunder an object, so why do they count a familiar as an object???

 

[Bront]

You guys read it wrong

Striking the familiar in the carrier is using the sundering rules for the strike, and any damage done could be done to the familiar or the carrier (Might pass over from one to the other). And I think that's fine.

However, the familiar's HP remain the same, and function normaly, it's just a way to strike at him when he's in a worn carrier (Cat in the backpack, etc).

 

[shilsen]

No hardness, just hit points, I don't see a problem there. Why do you find this so utterly bad ?

Well, that comment was just me joking. I don't find the article's suggestion "utterly bad" as much as ill-advised. As krishnack notes above, a familiar is a creature so using the rules for hitting an object against it seems inappropriate. Not to mention that a lot of the time, the rules for hitting an object makes it much easier to hit the familar than if you just used its AC.

 

[shilsen]

You guys read it wrong

Striking the familiar in the carrier is using the sundering rules for the strike, and any damage done could be done to the familiar or the carrier (Might pass over from one to the other). And I think that's fine.

However, the familiar's HP remain the same, and function normaly, it's just a way to strike at him when he's in a worn carrier (Cat in the backpack, etc).

It doesn't just apply when the familiar is in a container. It also applies when it is simply under your cloak or in a pocket. As the article says:

You can try to conceal your familiar inside a cloak or big pocket. Remember, however, that even a Tiny creature can create a considerable bulge. (Imagine what you'd look like when trying to carry a cat under your shirt.) When you're carrying your familiar in this fashion, your foes can still attack it. Use the rules for sundering a carried item. The attack provokes an attack of opportunity from you if you threaten the attacker. Use the familiar's Armor Class and your Dexterity modifier. Because the familiar is concealed in your clothing, the attack against it has a 50% miss chance.

Personally I'd say that in such a case, the easiest thing to do would be to use the familiar's AC but treat the attacker as an invisible attacker (+2 to hit and the familiar gets no Dex bonus to AC). The attack would draw an AoO from the person the familiar is on and the familiar would benefit from concealment.

 

[kjenks]

Skip mentioned the possibiligy of using a Ride check to get cover from his master, but he neglected to mention the usual -5 penalty for riding bareback or the -5 from an unsuitable mount.

He (by proxy) asked for input on what questions he should cover, then he (mostly) ignored the advice:
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=468387

All in all, it was a less than satisfactory series.

 

[lukelightning]

My familiar is going to take the mounted combat feat and max out ride. Then when I'm in combat, he's going to ride me, and when someone attacks me he'll use the mounted combat feat to counter their attack roll!

Seriously, though, I don't think a familiar on a person counts as riding. "Riding" is not just hanging on to a creature, it is directing its actions (or attempting to direct its actions). Unless your familiar is steering you I don't think it's riding you.