D&D (2024) Pets: Find Familiar and Find Steed.

Kobold Stew

Last Guy in the Airlock
Supporter
There are a number of changes to the rules for pets and other animal friends, and it may make sense to keep conversation focused in a single thread.

Here are some things I observe:

FIND FAMILIAR

1. Familiars now use a template. That's probably good, and will create a wider range of creatures in play, even if they are not mechanically different. No more owls with Flyby. Familiar templates offer no skill proficiencies.

2. Familiars now use your place in initiative and go after you, instead of having a separate place in the sequence. I see how that simplifies play, but it reduces the usefulness of familiars in combat significantly. Rogues are less likely to want to pick up FF, since they can't position their creature in advance of a potential sneak attack. This is different from the Beast Master Primal Companion in Tasha's, iirc, which may be good allowing it to have something familiars do not. Tactically, using a familiar in combat will be more challenging now than it was before.

3. Disappearance of the Familiar. No more picket dimension for safe keeping. If you dismiss your familiar, it leaves all its stuff (so no hiding-rings tricks, etc.) and you don't get it back without recasting. This is another big change for how familiars will play, and it is only partially mitigated by...

4. Extradimensional Escape. In most cases, rather than die, it "escapes" to an extradimensional space. It still leaves behind anything it was carrying, but you don't need to recast, it automatically returns after an hour or until you spend an action.

5. Damage done depends on creature type (Celestial/Fey/Fiend). No alignment restrictions on the choice, which is good.

--> All of these (1-5) will have a big impact on how the familiar plays in combat, while giving greater flexibility to the in-game appearance of the creature.

6. Telepathic communicatin up to 120' (from 100'), with the parameters of Telepathy spelled out in the glossary.

7. I wonder if the equipment list will finally include the cost of a bronze brazier.

FIND STEED

8. On the Divine list and not the Arcane; no material components, but same casting time. Why is this not a ritual?

9. Steed is now large -- no more Halfling paladins finding a Mastiff to ride. Not sure that was something that needed "fixing".

10. I LOVE that they've worked Greater Find Steed into this spell with the upcast option: Same spell, cast at a 4th level spell, gives you 60' flight. That's really clean.

11. Different abilities of the steed are based on Creature type, not alignment. Again, this is fun: I would want to play a LG paladin riding a Fiend Steed that he has tamed and broken, still getting the Frightening effect, all as part of an effort to civilize or whatever.

12. Life Bond does not benefit from Laying on of Hands. That's a shame in some ways, but may make sense. We'll see in play.

13. Placed on the divine spell list, the spell is now available to Clerics at level 3, and Paladins only at level 5 (when you get it for free as a class feature). I can see Paladins being a little jealous of a War Cleric (at levels 3-4 and 7-12), but that's an inevitable consequence of the spell lists, and was bound to happen. Is there an easy fix to this?

14. Telepathy still extends a mile.

--> Unlike the changes to FF, the changes to FS will not impact combat as significantly, but will change the flavour of having these steeds in play a great deal.

What do others think?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Kobold Stew

Last Guy in the Airlock
Supporter
One more thing:

Wild Companion. Druids can have a (fey-only) familiar at level 2, for one charge of Channel Nature. That's good, incorporating a change we've already seen. This familiar needs to be "re-cast" after every long rest, however. It's fun to have pets, but there is still a real reason for a Druid character to take a Feat that gives a 1st-level arcane spell so you can have a Familiar without this cost.
 

Whizbang Dustyboots

Gnometown Hero
As a long-time familiar user (for my gnome illusionist), I think this change makes sense for how I play my familiar and how the players I DM for use theirs. We weren't using them as combat auxiliaries, but as scouts and helpers, and it seems that WotC thinks they should be used in 1D&D. (Oh, and my character's familiar is a thrush, which can just happen now instead of having to explain what it is mechanically.)

That said, I can imagine the frustration of people who had built a specific character concept around a familiar as a combat companion.
 

Kobold Stew

Last Guy in the Airlock
Supporter
As a long-time familiar user (for my gnome illusionist), I think this change makes sense for how I play my familiar and how the players I DM for use theirs. We weren't using them as combat auxiliaries, but as scouts and helpers, and it seems that WotC thinks they should be used in 1D&D.
Fair enough. t the same time, the loss of skills and the pocket dimension will change the out of combat play as well.

(Oh, and my character's familiar is a thrush, which can just happen now instead of having to explain what it is mechanically.)
Fun!
 

3. Disappearance of the Familiar. No more picket dimension for safe keeping. If you dismiss your familiar, it leaves all its stuff (so no hiding-rings tricks, etc.) and you don't get it back without recasting. This is another big change for how familiars will play, and it is only partially mitigated by...
I have to say this is a bizarre design choice and reeks further of the "I don't actually play D&D, daaaaaaarling, that's for proles, I just write rules for it!". Like, I see the mitigation, but there's a certain kind of player - particularly children and actually-nice people, who just don't want to risk their familiars, and this design inexplicably punishes them by not letting them "stow" their familiar for combat.
 

As a long-time familiar user (for my gnome illusionist), I think this change makes sense for how I play my familiar and how the players I DM for use theirs. We weren't using them as combat auxiliaries, but as scouts and helpers, and it seems that WotC thinks they should be used in 1D&D. (Oh, and my character's familiar is a thrush, which can just happen now instead of having to explain what it is mechanically.)
I feel like it's people like you being targeted, because this design prevents you stowing/hiding familiars in combat.

The template thing is obviously an improvement.
 


Whizbang Dustyboots

Gnometown Hero
I have to say this is a bizarre design choice and reeks further of the "I don't actually play D&D, daaaaaaarling, that's for proles, I just write rules for it!". Like, I see the mitigation, but there's a certain kind of player - particularly children and actually-nice people, who just don't want to risk their familiars, and this design inexplicably punishes them by not letting them "stow" their familiar for combat.
Yeah, half of my familiar-using players would never think of letting their familiar into combat. I expect we'll see either a familiar pocket cantrip or revisions to find familiar in future packets.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
2. Familiars now use your place in initiative and go after you, instead of having a separate place in the sequence. I see how that simplifies play, but it reduces the usefulness of familiars in combat significantly. Rogues are less likely to want to pick up FF, since they can't position their creature in advance of a potential sneak attack. This is different from the Beast Master Primal Companion in Tasha's, iirc, which may be good allowing it to have something familiars do not. Tactically, using a familiar in combat will be more challenging now than it was before.
Eh, no real impact on a rogue. With the assurance the familiar goes directly after your turn there is no issue with moving and doing your bonus action and then readying an action to attack once your familiar is adjacent to the foe. Then the familiar immediately is adjacent to the foe and giving the help action and your attack goes off. Seems even more guaranteed now.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
I have to say this is a bizarre design choice and reeks further of the "I don't actually play D&D, daaaaaaarling, that's for proles, I just write rules for it!". Like, I see the mitigation, but there's a certain kind of player - particularly children and actually-nice people, who just don't want to risk their familiars, and this design inexplicably punishes them by not letting them "stow" their familiar for combat.
Do you have to go immediately to that level of attack on WOTC over this mild concept? I mean, if you keep doing this at this intensity level, it all becomes noise and nothing seems important to you because you treat everything as the most serious level of defcon. I mean, just tell them your thoughts in the feedback - no reason to claim they don't play the game and are elitist!
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top