D&D 5E (2024) Wizard vs Sorcerer (a Campaign Experience)

[Zardnaar]

I really think the pseudo dragon ability can be classified as an attack.

An unarmed strike that initiates a grapple also has no attack roll.

It is not about not telling players, it is about having a serious talk and tell them that you think that ability fell victim to the 2024 conversion sloppiness.

My players dont really go for pact of chain. Never seen one in 12 years.

They ain't see interaction between it and summon undead. They dont really know about the weapon cantrips, spirit shroud or shadow blade.

Well 1 sorta does but its also not her thing. She did use spirit shroud.

 

[ECMO3]

I really think the pseudo dragon ability can be classified as an attack.

An unarmed strike that initiates a grapple also has no attack roll.

The 2024 Monster Manual clearly identifies a specific "Attack Notation" and a "Saving Throw Effect Notation" which designate different types of actions defined in the beginning of the MM. The attack notation includes the option for other effects.

They really cleaned up the difference for saves vs attacks in the 2024 MM, if you have an attack that does something or causes an effect it just does it on a hit with no save and if something gets a save it just gets a save with no attack roll.

The entry for the Pseudodragon Sting follows the syntax for the "Saving Throw Effect Notation" and it was changed from the 2014 MM. This compares with the Pseudodragon Bite and other things like the Quasit poisoning Rend and the Sprite Enchanting Bow which all use the "Attack Notation" and the latter two do not include a save for being poisoned or charmed, it just happens.

The MM further specifies a "monster’s attack identifies whether the attack is a melee or a ranged attack" and the Pseudodragon Sting entry provides neither of these, while those other examples all do. Unarmed Strike in the PHB is also defined specifically as a "melee attack".

It is not about not telling players, it is about having a serious talk and tell them that you think that ability fell victim to the 2024 conversion sloppiness.

I don't think it did fall victim to sloppiness. 2014 Sting was an attack and was explicitly changed in 2024 to NOT be an attack. It is hard for me to believe they would go through the effort to change it if it was not purposeful. Instead they would have just removed the save and left it as an attack with no saving throw like they did for the Quasit.

Making the Sting an attack would be OP despite the action cost. Attacks are generally much easier to land then saves, especially since they are not affected by legendary resistance. If the Sting was an attack your Psuedodragon familiar would put an Ancient Red Dragon to sleep on a hit with no save and no option for legendary resistance.

If it is an oversight, I find it more likely that it is an oversight in the Warlock Invocation section or Find Familiar spell description which do not provide more limiting verbiage on actions. The spell clearly says "it can't attack but it can take other actions as normal" and considering familiars regularly used their other things like Scare and Invisibility, I just don't think it is likely that it is unintended.

 

[ECMO3]

My players dont really go for pact of chain. Never seen one in 12 years.

I have seen a lot of them ..... but I think all of them were played by me

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The 2024 Monster Manual clearly identifies a specific "Attack Notation" and a "Saving Throw Effect Notation" which designate different types of actions defined in the beginning of the MM. The attack notation includes the option for other effects.

They really cleaned up the difference for saves vs attacks in the 2024 MM, if you have an attack that does something or causes an effect it just does it on a hit with no save and if something gets a save it just gets a save with no attack roll.

The entry for the Pseudodragon Sting follows the syntax for the "Saving Throw Effect Notation" and it was changed from the 2014 MM. This compares with the Pseudodragon Bite and other things like the Quasit poisoning Rend and the Sprite Enchanting Bow which all use the "Attack Notation" and the latter two do not include a save for being poisoned or charmed, it just happens.

The MM further specifies a "monster’s attack identifies whether the attack is a melee or a ranged attack" and the Pseudodragon Sting entry provides neither of these, while those other examples all do. Unarmed Strike in the PHB is also defined specifically as a "melee attack".




I don't think it did fall victim to sloppiness. 2014 Sting was an attack and was explicitly changed in 2024 to NOT be an attack. It is hard for me to believe they would go through the effort to change it if it was not purposeful. Instead they would have just removed the save and left it as an attack with no saving throw like they did for the Quasit.

Making the Sting an attack would be OP despite the action cost. Attacks are generally much easier to land then saves, especially since they are not affected by legendary resistance. If the Sting was an attack your Psuedodragon familiar would put an Ancient Red Dragon to sleep on a hit with no save and no option for legendary resistance.

If it is an oversight, I find it more likely that it is an oversight in the Warlock Invocation section or Find Familiar spell description which do not provide more limiting verbiage on actions. The spell clearly says "it can't attack but it can take other actions as normal" and considering familiars regularly used their other things like Scare and Invisibility, I just don't think it is likely that it is unintended.

I see it differently.

For me it looks like an oversight.

 

[TheSword]

How is scouting working out with closed doors, chance of being spotted, local predators. Or do you keep it simple and give it free reign?

It might be relevant for my next campaign. In a world where familiars are a known thing I would think folks would take this into account with their security?