Is using a familiar in combat to grant advantage a common tactic?

[iserith]

No. And this is ok. Because there is no statblock for Xilonen the polyp. A good use of reskinning.

A bad use would be:
A gigantic gelatineous cube like you encountered several times before. Suddenly arms are coming out entangling you and pull you in.
Not too bad. Could be some kind of mimic. No it is a roper. Surprise. Actually that use would not be too bad because it would actually be a mimic functioning similar to a roper and looking like the gelatineous cube.
To make the thing perfect you add the sticky trait which all mimics have...

Ok I think a roper is a good monster that might be used for many things if you slightly alter its traits so that it fits. My problem is when you actually have stats for a monster and then decide to just ignore then using a different statblock. And it is more than dodgy if somehow any familiar ends up having the owl traits. If the intend had been a pet that flies in and out gibibg advantage all the time the spell would have just told you so. No matter what outlook, the familiar has following abilities...

Actually a hawk with flyby attack that is no familar but a ranger's pet would be more comvincing because a real animal can be trained. A familiar not.

I think what you're describing is actually a symptom of a failure on the DM's part to telegraph the threats the monster poses (so it becomes a "gotcha") combined with the players engaging in what the DMG calls "metagame thinking." It's not reskinning per se that is the issue. There's an underlying problem of presentation by the DM and bad assumptions made by the players that combine to create an undesirable outcome. If the DM telegraphs the monster properly such that the players have reason to suspect that this isn't the thing they think it is, while at the same time the players never take anything at face value and take steps to verify their assumptions before acting, then there is no issue here.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think what you're describing is actually a symptom of a failure on the DM's part to telegraph the threats the monster poses (so it becomes a "gotcha") combined with the players engaging in what the DMG calls "metagame thinking." It's not reskinning per se that is the issue. There's an underlying problem of presentation by the DM and bad assumptions made by the players that combine to create an undesirable outcome. If the DM telegraphs the monster properly such that the players have reason to suspect that this isn't the thing they think it is, while at the same time the players never take anything at face value and take steps to verify their assumptions before acting, then there is no issue here.

Yes. 100% agreement here.

 

[5ekyu]

It is wanting to eat your cake and have it.

How would you as a wizard player feel about this:

The wizard always is 60ft away. Orcs have the aggressive trait to dash as a bonus action. So you always use prcs and reskin them as goblins, hobgoblins, elves and so on, so you can always reach the wizard in the backrow...

That is what you do. You want to exploit a trait of an animal and because you want to be no boring owl user, you just say your owl is actually a different animal.

That is more or less the same.

I think it was one thing 4e did wrong. Because the outlook of something didn't tell you anything about the abilities and combat something has a player could never know how hard it is to hit an enemy, how many hp something has or what it can do. The only thing which was given for granted was that it should be a fair challenge.
In 5e it is actually the other way around:

If something looks like an orc, you better expect it to dash as a bonus action. If something looks like an owl you better expect flyby attack. If it looks like a falcon you don't.

Edit: or maybe make everything a reskinned dragonborn. So whenever a familiar uses flyby you ready a reskinned dragon breath to kill the familiar and damage everything in its vicinity. What is the drago n breath? A barrage of daggers maybe.
Its just no fair game anymore because it seems arbitrary. If you don't want an owl you won't get abilities of an owl.

Uhhh what?

Ok to be clear, if the GM reskinned and "always" the creatures were reskinned to have aggressive, then that is a feature of the game world and that is fine.

We would find it out and plan accordingly. It would be "as known" as "orcs have aggressive figure because its "always" so it's no big deal.

Similarly, in a world where pretty much the flying familiars are reskinned owls then guess what, that is known too and reacted to.

This is pretty basic rpg 101, not the stuff of exploit.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Uhhh what?

Ok to be clear, if the GM reskinned and "always" the creatures were reskinned to have aggressive, then that is a feature of the game world and that is fine.

We would find it out and plan accordingly. It would be "as known" as "orcs have aggressive figure because its "always" so it's no big deal.

Similarly, in a world where pretty much the flying familiars are reskinned owls then guess what, that is known too and reacted to.

This is pretty basic rpg 101, not the stuff of exploit.

Yes. And that is not as it is in the rules. Familiar has stats as the base animal. Not an own statblock with flyby and just the appearance of an animal.
But hey... magic... you know.

Maybe in your world every wizard should have a ritual: protection from owls. No owl can come within 5 ft of a warded creature. But then the owl is actually a hawk... so maybe your ritual should be "protection from flybying creatures...". Yes people would adapt but that puts you on an arms race between players and DM which in my book is not a good thing...

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

The best familiar is a spider. Use slight of hand to put a ‘bug’ on people and spy on them. Then get it to deliver shocking grasp. Owls suck.

 

[Autumn Bask]

Maybe in your world every wizard should have a ritual: protection from owls. No owl can come within 5 ft of a warded creature. But then the owl is actually a hawk... so maybe your ritual should be "protection from flybying creatures...". Yes people would adapt but that puts you on an arms race between players and DM which in my book is not a good thing...

An arms race over a familiar's species designation? I'm sorry, but that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Just kill the damn Owl. Flyby + Help action leaves it a maximum distance away of 60ft, which is well within range of most attack Cantrips and all non-Hand Crossbow, non-Thrown ranged weapons. If the DM pulled a similar stunt with an enemy Wizard, any of the parties I'm in at the moment would kill that familiar within the first round of combat, and the DM should feel free to have the enemies do the same. The thing is, if you did that; if you sent a reskinned Owl against your players, do you think they would complain about how unfair that is? Do you think it would bother them in the slightest, or do you think they could deal with it pretty frickin easily?

 

[Mistwell]

At this point I'd say no. If you want the benefits of an owl, buy an owl.

You don't like re-skinning things in your game, or you don't like this in particular re-skinned?

 

[5ekyu]

Yes. And that is not as it is in the rules. Familiar has stats as the base animal. Not an own statblock with flyby and just the appearance of an animal.
But hey... magic... you know.

Maybe in your world every wizard should have a ritual: protection from owls. No owl can come within 5 ft of a warded creature. But then the owl is actually a hawk... so maybe your ritual should be "protection from flybying creatures...". Yes people would adapt but that puts you on an arms race between players and DM which in my book is not a good thing...

I really dont get the point you are saying he. It seems mostly that you dont like the owl flyby want to stick it too them and the examples keep getting worse and worse.

Just watched video today where JEC discussed reskinning in this rpg and highly recommended use of it - a lot. The idea that reskinning is against the rules is, well, to be polite - not one supported in the rules. The notion that reskinning is wrong for 5e is also not supported by rules or any statements about RAI etc.

There is no arms race, no boogeyman here, just gms and players having fun.

"Feel free to tweak an existing creature..." is right there in the MM. You know, the book with all those stat blocks. It's right there.

So, you know, silly we must be, we GMs, to not see how its not "right" or "good" to allow the massive stat block change to change the appearance of an owl. Apparently, if my owl is actually a dove I am starting an arms race?

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

Maybe in your world every wizard should have a ritual: protection from owls. No owl can come within 5 ft of a warded creature. But then the owl is actually a hawk... so maybe your ritual should be "protection from flybying creatures..."

There's already a spell that does that: Antilife shell. Works on owls and on hawks.

 

[Bigsta]

I don't tend to get really grognardy, but I preferred how you got different special abilities from different familiars in the old editions. It gave each familiar more of a different feel.

I've seen some players show legitimate attachment and concern for their familiars, and others just name them Bill I through VI..., treating them like an expendable resource. It's really with the latter that I tend to get grumpy.

My players just summoned Gryff XX the other day. They are being more careful with him since its the 20th anniversary edition.