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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 6844625">Mmm...I'm not using "cheesy" to mean "misinterpretation of the rules".  I'm using it to mean exploitation of a loophole in the rules, in a way that just doesn't feel "realistic" (although I hate that word).  Example: last week I sat at a table with an elf rogue who was excited to try Polearm Master: "If I hold a staff in my offhand as a 1H weapon I get a free attack with my rapier whenever anybody comes within 10'!"  (Polearm Master doesn't actually STATE that the free attack is with the polearm itself...)  Cheesy.First, the familiar is still incredibly useful in lots of ways.  Delivering touch attacks.  Stealth scouting.  Or "I'd rather spend 10g than die" scouting.  Sitting on your shoulder (as you pointed out) using Perception.Second, it's a 1st level spell.  A ritual, no less.  Granting Advantage practically forever, without even using a bonus action or initial action, seems way too powerful compared to other 1st level spells.  Here I think we are using the term "choice trap" differently.  In my definition the other choices can still be good, but if one choice is markedly superior then there is decision pressure to take it.I made this post because my Warlock just 3rd and I'm getting a familiar.  It's in the new Ravenloft content so I actually want a Raven, not an Owl.  But...grumble grumble...free Advantage with Flyby (plus Advantage on Perception!) is soooooo good that the little minmaxer in me is having a hard time trading it for a familiar that can imitate voices.Can I still take Raven if it's so important to me?  Sure.  But I don't think it's good design if I have to give up so much just to get the roleplay/fluff that I prefer.  (Heck, look at all the insistence that Greatsword > Greataxe || Maul just because of a minor statistical difference.)That's what I mean by false choice.I'm not saying the DM can't justify it.  It's just that I see that as a rationalization for what's really going on: the DM is trying to thwart the player's overuse of (what I see as) a rules loophole.  It's a shift in mindset that I don't like.And it's particularly obvious/problematic with Owls because "swatting at the annoying critter" isn't an option: suddenly the DM starts always including an adversary with ranged attacks, or otherwise contriving fights to make sure there's a way to kill the Owl.  With Flyby it's not even a dice roll: the monsters simply don't get to attack it.  Without Flyby I'd have a lot less problem with the tactic because it'd be easy enough to kill the thing.</blockquote>

Verification