Sorry that doesn't make any sense. He said he'd specifically allowed called shots to worn/held/carried objects and then grant advantage on those attacks. That is entirely his own invention, that is not standard rules. And if you extrapolate from there, you could do the same to anything anyone is holding/wearing/carrying. It'd be chaos.
HearthSmith did not mention called shots. He said he'd allow targeting the spider even if that spider was in a pocket or something, since the enemy saw it go there. He said the soft material would not be enough to stop the spider being damaged. He even gave an example that this was about targeting the spider with an example of the spider being under a cup instead and letting the enemy smash the cup with a hammer.
Let's put it another way. Let's say you have a blanket with you. Does covering yourself with the blanket stop people shoving a sword through it and into you? No. It doesn't. So it doesn't work for the spider either. The fact it's part of your clothing instead of a blanket or cup, makes no difference.
Targeting the spider (normal rules of targeting creatures) is NOT the same as targeting your eyes or hand (homebrew rules, called shots).
Also, apparently, TIL you cannot run behind a wall with your movement and gain cover unless you take the Hide action?? I think you're confused.
Not the same thing. Just going round a wall for cover would be the equivalent of the spider crawling to your back. If the enemy steps around you, they'll still see the spider and can attack normally. Just as an enemy going round the wall after you would let them attack you normally.
The spider wriggling under your clothes/armour or into your pocket would be like you wriggling into a barrel or under a bed. That requires the hide action.
-
You've also missed the point - it's not about allowing specific shots or not or going into semantics about cover. It's about not letting you use a 1st level spell effect for "infinite unpreventable advantage on all attacks with no drawbacks or limitations" - something normally reserved for high level features and spells. Basically, you're trying to cheat.
This conversation is tiresome because of how offbase it is. I said Container, not pocket or clothing. A Tiny creature doesn't need to "squeeze" into something much larger than itself. You're practically arguing that a human must squeeze to enter a 5ft space. It is silly. This entire conversation is silly. You can't just punch through a metal container. And a spider doesn't need to take an action to move. Ugh. I don't even know why I'm responding to this. You're not discussing the rules here you just don't like someone having a tactic you didn't think of or something.
Anyway, about your last line of hyperbole. The spider isn't invulnerable, nor is the advantage on every attack, and nor is there no drawback. You're wrong on all points. I'm not sure you even know this game if you're this wrong about everything you're saying here. He can get hit by aoe, and held actions, or by anything that actually could destroy or ignore his cover. The advantage is only on one attack, and only if the opponent is adjacent to him (and initiative even allows for it to all work out without some interruption). And the drawback is it risks my little scout's life, obviously. He's too cute to be squashed. That, and uh, well, his whole action/move.
Bullet points on everything wrong you said:
We're talking about a durable Container, not a pocket.
Implying that a creature can attack an object held/carried/worn by another.
Implying that hitting the cover of a creature automatically hits that creature.
Saying the help action provides advantage on all attacks
Saying that it requires the hide action to enter an area that you easily fit if it provides cover. (Like the equivalent of a small room for a medium sized creature)
Probably some other stuff I'm bored of this already
Anyway, I'm not sure what got under your skin. You seem to want to make this personal, but what's clear is you don't understand this game's rules very well. You're welcome to homebrew whatever you want at your table though man, rule it however you'd like.
And I'll leave you with this little fun fact: you aren't "letting me" do anything. I don't need some rando-on-the-internet's permission to play D&D and follow the RAW. Trying to control me or my actions is the weirdest response you could possibly have about any of this.
A pocket is a container by definition but if you mean an object carried - even better. Because the RAW DO allow you to target an object. There are no rules specifying you cannot target an object worn/carried by another creature - the rules DO say you can target an object instead of a creature. So, great, no problem then, the enemy can just attack the container and either remove it from you or damage it - and whatever is inside. If it is an open container, they can still target the creature inside as that would not be total cover, if the container is closable, the spider cannot do that so you'd need to use your own action to open/close it.
And yes, the spider would need to move to or from said container, otherwise the Help action cannot be used. You do need to describe HOW the spider can take the Help action - it just doing nothing on you or sitting in its container is not sufficient. The text of the Help action alludes to this: "You feint, distract the target, or in some other way team up to make your ally's attack more effective. If your ally attacks the target before your next turn, the first attack roll is made with advantage." A spider just being a spider is insufficient, just scurring around doing nothing isn't going to work. The spider jumping onto the enemy, even if briefly would be enough (and an hilarious mental image), but yes it must use movement to achieve this - especially if its in a container to begin with.
Sure I went too much with the "advantage on every attack" as if you have multiattack it would only apply to one, but otherwise my point remains.
"He can get hit by aoe"
Actually, if you've state the idea was for the spider to get total cover. Which means immunity to AoE - since it will not pass through total cover.
"held actions"
Agreed.
"by anything that actually could destroy or ignore his cover"
Also agreed and is my and HearthSmith's point. We stated specifically targeted the creature in that cover to destroy/damage the cover and still get the spider - and you responded saying this was homebrow shot-calling. So make up your mind, mate.
"and only if the opponent is adjacent to him (and initiative even allows for it to all work out without some interruption)."
Yes, but you're obviously going to be in melee (help action cannot be applied at range, you've just the spider didnt need to move, it has limited movement anyway) and initative isn't that important unless the enemy moves away from the spider - and you - before the spider's turn, which would grant you an AoO. Since the advantage granted is specifically for your next attack taken before the spider's next turn, initiative is barely an issue.
"We're talking about a durable Container, not a pocket."
You made no mention of durable or type of container. So, clothing and pockets were assumed especially since you were saying targeting the container would be a "called shot" and it's not a pocket or part of your clothes, it wouldn't be, because a separate contain is a discrete object which can be targeted as per RAW.
"Implying that a creature can attack an object held/carried/worn by another."
RAW allows targeting an object even if its held or worn. If an enemy wanted to attack your backpack, they can, if they wanted to attack your container, they can.
"Implying that hitting the cover of a creature automatically hits that creature."
Never said such a thing. I said make an attack against the spider, I didn't say it was guaranteed hit. Feel free to provide a quote where I said making an attack is a guaranteed hit on the spider?
"Saying the help action provides advantage on all attacks"
Yes, I forgot about Extra Attack features. Then again, if you've got a familiar you're most likely a wizard and this is the Wizard forum, and only 1 subclass grants extra attack, to my memory. So, chances are, for most wizards, it would be all your attacks where the spider can apply the help action.
"Anyway, I'm not sure what got under your skin. You seem to want to make this personal, but what's clear is you don't understand this game's rules very well. "
How am I making this personal? Am I saying you're using my personal spider?! This is a discussion forum. You presented an idea, and I am discussing it. Do I really need to explain how discussion works? I hope I don't.
"You're welcome to homebrew whatever you want at your table though man, rule it however you'd like."
I know. But I'll stick to RAW which fully supports my point.
"And I'll leave you with this little fun fact: you aren't "letting me" do anything. I don't need some rando-on-the-internet's permission to play D&D and follow the RAW. Trying to control me or my actions is the weirdest response you could possibly have about any of this."
Obviously you don't need permission. The point was "if this was at my table and I was the DM" - I shouldn't need to specify that. It's interesting that you infer things I don't imply and then fail to infer things I do imply. o.O
A pocket is a container by definition but if you mean an object carried - even better. Because the RAW DO allow you to target an object. There are no rules specifying you cannot target an object worn/carried by another creature - the rules DO say you can target an object instead of a creature. So, great, no problem then, the enemy can just attack the container and either remove it from you or damage it - and whatever is inside. If it is an open container, they can still target the creature inside as that would not be total cover, if the container is closable, the spider cannot do that so you'd need to use your own action to open/close it.
As I said, if you allow normal attacks to target held/carried/worn object you are opening a huge can of worms. The rules skirt around this possibility because it creates some serious quandaries, like now you've opened the floodgates to all kinds of abuse. Attacking someone's armor, shield, or weapon... or arcane focus, holy symbol, whatever. All kinds of things go sideways in D&D if you introduce these homebrew rules of called shots on people's possessions. Objects often have very hittable AC and very few HP. It totally changes the game, and not in a healthy way. There is not an established ruleset for how to even handle any of this, you'd have to invent it. By definition homebrew.
And yes, the spider would need to move to or from said container, otherwise the Help action cannot be used. You do need to describe HOW the spider can take the Help action - it just doing nothing on you or sitting in its container is not sufficient. The text of the Help action alludes to this: "You feint, distract the target, or in some other way team up to make your ally's attack more effective. If your ally attacks the target before your next turn, the first attack roll is made with advantage." A spider just being a spider is insufficient, just scurring around doing nothing isn't going to work. The spider jumping onto the enemy, even if briefly would be enough (and an hilarious mental image), but yes it must use movement to achieve this - especially if its in a container to begin with.
Seems irrelevant. A spider familiar is perfectly capable of performing the Help action. Their only action restriction is that they cannot Attack.
Sure I went too much with the "advantage on every attack" as if you have multiattack it would only apply to one, but otherwise my point remains.
"He can get hit by aoe"
Actually, if you've state the idea was for the spider to get total cover. Which means immunity to AoE - since it will not pass through total cover.
Please reread cover rules... eh, I'll just quote it for you: "A target with total cover can't be targeted directly by an attack or a spell, although some spells can reach such a target by including it in an area of effect."
Ruling that a mundane regular ol' melee attack can target a creature in total cover is in direct conflict with the rules as written. Can you do it? Yes. Is it RAW? Quite the opposite. Can you snag someone who has total concealment with an AOE though? Absolutely. Maybe not all AOEs, sure, but some would work.
"by anything that actually could destroy or ignore his cover"
Also agreed and is my and HearthSmith's point. We stated specifically targeted the creature in that cover to destroy/damage the cover and still get the spider - and you responded saying this was homebrow shot-calling. So make up your mind, mate.
Some spells and effects specifically state they can target held/carried/worn objects or can simply ignore objects, barriers, or cover/concealment. A punch is not among these things. This is one of those specific trumps general sort of situations. Unless something says it can, it cannot.
"and only if the opponent is adjacent to him (and initiative even allows for it to all work out without some interruption)."
Yes, but you're obviously going to be in melee (help action cannot be applied at range, you've just the spider didnt need to move, it has limited movement anyway) and initative isn't that important unless the enemy moves away from the spider - and you - before the spider's turn, which would grant you an AoO. Since the advantage granted is specifically for your next attack taken before the spider's next turn, initiative is barely an issue.
You say that but battle is chaotic. It works more than it doesn't, but it isn't guaranteed. Unless you get real close inits with the familiar going right before you, then it works like a charm. But that's pretty rng.
"We're talking about a durable Container, not a pocket."
You made no mention of durable or type of container. So, clothing and pockets were assumed especially since you were saying targeting the container would be a "called shot" and it's not a pocket or part of your clothes, it wouldn't be, because a separate contain is a discrete object which can be targeted as per RAW.
That's only true if it is unattended. Carried/held/worn objects are something else entirely. Opening them up to called shots is a can of worms. (And is homebrew)
"Implying that a creature can attack an object held/carried/worn by another."
RAW allows targeting an object even if its held or worn. If an enemy wanted to attack your backpack, they can, if they wanted to attack your container, they can.
Nope. Quote some rules text to prove otherwise if you think so. Of course, a DM is free to adhoc anything they want at any time, but you're not going to find jack for how any called shots against held/carried/worn objects would work.
"Implying that hitting the cover of a creature automatically hits that creature."
Never said such a thing. I said make an attack against the spider, I didn't say it was guaranteed hit. Feel free to provide a quote where I said making an attack is a guaranteed hit on the spider?
You suggested attacking a pouch containing it would hit it. Though, by RAW, that's not the case. You cannot target a creature with total concealment by raw, so to do what you're talking about you would need to target the container, but that too has no rules governing it, and so you would be forced to homebrew this interaction entirely.
"Saying the help action provides advantage on all attacks"
Yes, I forgot about Extra Attack features. Then again, if you've got a familiar you're most likely a wizard and this is the Wizard forum, and only 1 subclass grants extra attack, to my memory. So, chances are, for most wizards, it would be all your attacks where the spider can apply the help action.
lol.. yeah, it could be all attacks, but only if melee, and adjacent, and you never aoo, and only hit once a round. Weird wizard you're playing.
"You're welcome to homebrew whatever you want at your table though man, rule it however you'd like."
I know. But I'll stick to RAW which fully supports my point.
But does it though? You can link some rules text at any point. Objective evidence goes far to support your claim here.
"And I'll leave you with this little fun fact: you aren't "letting me" do anything. I don't need some rando-on-the-internet's permission to play D&D and follow the RAW. Trying to control me or my actions is the weirdest response you could possibly have about any of this."
Obviously you don't need permission. The point was "if this was at my table and I was the DM" - I shouldn't need to specify that. It's interesting that you infer things I don't imply and then fail to infer things I do imply. o.O
In summary, it seems to me that you're coming from a misguided place of thinking called shots to held/carried/worn objects is somehow RAW. It is not. And you're also dramatically overestimating the power of this maneuver, so much indeed that you feel it "cheats the system". I assure you, you are wrong on both fronts. It is great when it works, and could be clutch, but is far cry from "always works with no cost".
I mean, just ask yourself, how often are you trying to be in melee range on your wizard? Attacking, of all things, an adjacent hostile target?
DMs can homebrew whatever rules they want, and I'd never tell you what you should do, nor try to stop you from doing something in your game. You do you. That's part of what is great about D&D, every group can make it their own. But... I am going to make my warning big, bold, and in neon, that homebrewing hits to objects under the direct control of other creatures is a scary place to take your game, it will snowball on you. If you just handwave the fact that the object is basically in motion because of the creature controlling it, and just keep standard non-moving inanimate ACs, man, things are just going to devolve quick. And if you don't keep standard immobile object ACs? Then you're making it up entirely as you go.
This conversation has really reminded me how fortunate I am to not have adversarial DMs. You really can't take your good DMs for granted people!
"1. Choose a target. Pick a target within your attack's range: a creature, an object, or a location."
Right there. An object.
No restriction about whether it is being carried or not. No restrictions at all. If it is an object, it can be attacked. I have searched through both PHB and DMG. No Restrictions about this anywhere.
If it is an object, you can attack it.
Now, I've quoted text from the rulebook that says you can attack "objects". Please quote where in the text it specifies "objects worn or carried" are exempt from this rule.
"1. Choose a target. Pick a target within your attack's range: a creature, an object, or a location."
Right there. An object.
No restriction about whether it is being carried or not. No restrictions at all. If it is an object, it can be attacked. I have searched through both PHB and DMG. No Restrictions about this anywhere.
If it is an object, you can attack it.
Now, I've quoted text from the rulebook that says you can attack "objects". Please quote where in the text it specifies "objects worn or carried" are exempt from this rule.
Okay, you attack the object. What's the AC, and how many HP? Enter homebrew.
Not really sure what you're not getting here. You literally have to make stuff up to be able to do it. That is by definition homebrew. The rules don't explain how it would work, ergo you must make it up yourself.
"1. Choose a target. Pick a target within your attack's range: a creature, an object, or a location."
Right there. An object.
No restriction about whether it is being carried or not. No restrictions at all. If it is an object, it can be attacked. I have searched through both PHB and DMG. No Restrictions about this anywhere.
If it is an object, you can attack it.
Now, I've quoted text from the rulebook that says you can attack "objects". Please quote where in the text it specifies "objects worn or carried" are exempt from this rule.
Okay, you attack the object. What's the AC, and how many HP? Enter homebrew.
Not really sure what you're not getting here. You literally have to make stuff up to be able to do it. That is by definition homebrew. The rules don't explain how it would work, ergo you must make it up yourself.
There's a ssection in the DMG for this. I cannot be bothered to quote right now because I shouldn't have to, and I'm about to have dinner, but for a small metal container, IIRC, it would be AC 19 and 14 hit points (average). The DMG has tables - AC is determined by material and hit points by size. They have tables in the book.
My Kenku wizard familiar is raccoon with weasel stats as its the closest the DM could find that would suit. His name is Peanut and when I took over his senses on an errand to drop off a document sneakily, the party started playing the Mission Impossible theme (recorder version) when things started getting dicey.
Right now my Bladesinger has an almiraj familiar, a childhood pet given new life and damn near the only thing my wizard cares about sincerely. The DM is allowing me to change her form to a more exotic familiar, but the requirements are particularly strict and take a long, long time in game to be rendered permanent. It’s a solid 80% of my character’s downtime just researching, developing, and constituting the spell to do this—never mind the conversations that have to be had between familiar and wizard, because my character refuses to forcibly change her familiar’s form for the sake of utility.
I can’t go into much more detail because the rest of our campaign also trolls the forums here, and it’s intended to be a surprise. Only one of the other players knows about it, because he’s roommates with the DM and was there when we discussed this in September.
My GM let me pull off a modified owl and turn it into a hummingbird. The character is a conquest paladin with a hummingbird as their family crest. I was taking magic initiate because I wanted prestidigitation and then I noticed I could also get a familiar, BONUS. So now I have a maul wielding bringer of fear and tiny little iridescent bird fluttering around his head.
Familiar: Harbinger Hummingbird (Celestial) Tiny Beast (CR 0) AC: 13 HP 1 (1d4-3) Speed: 5 ft. fly 50 ft. (Hover) STR 1 (-6), DEX 16 (+3), CON 5 (-3), INT 6 (-2), WIS 12 (+1), CHA 6 (-2) Skills: Perception +3 Passive Perception 13
Alert: +5 bonus to initiative, can’t be surprised while conscious, and other creatures don’t gain advantage on attack rolls against them as a result of being hidden.
Flyby: The hummingbird doesn't provoke Opportunity Attacks when it flies out of an enemy's reach.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
IMHO, Earthdawn is still the best fantasy realm, Shadowrun is the best Sci-Fi realm, and Dark Sun is the best D&D realm.
i have a wizard with hawk familar i mostly use him to scout but in a fight i cast dragons breath on him. so my familiar is flying around doing 3d6 of whatever element helps most at the time while im casting crowd control spells to help the front line. and cause my familiar fly i can always position it in a way that i dont set my team onfire
Has your GM targeted it when it was doing the attacks. I love this idea ever since I read it on a site, but I have been nervous about having to keep a bunch of 10g material components on hand to re-summon my familiar when the GM gets tired of the free area effect. Basically the familiar is being used like spiritual weapon that has an area effect and higher damage output. The thing is ridiculous if you break it down against spiritual weapon:
No Spell slot used, No bonus action used, 3d6 vs d8+x, greater mobility, half damage vs no damage on a miss, variable damage type vs. force, and the best is AoE vs single target. The only downside is that Dragon's Breath has concentration and you can critical on spiritual weapon.
Also, if you were crazy enough to cast these at their highest levels, SW would top out at 4d8+x and DB would top out at 10d6
I love this combo though, and have used it in conjunction with spiritual weapon for a nasty effect. I grabbed magic initiate as a Paladin of Conquest, just to get a familiar. Our party wizard picked up Dragon's Breath so we get to have fun times with an extra mini-fighter and mini-caster against hordes.
I just noticed the Octopus grapples, so what if I theow the OctoFamiliar at the bad guys face, and the grapples it. Talk the DM into a little Ink-to-mouth or Ink-to-Eyes actions maybe.
Oh, and not Find Familiar Familiars per se, my 7th Paladin bought a scroll and now can't decide between a saber-tooth tiger or a Riding Rhino. Yes, a Riding Rhino. And check the Saddle of the Cavalier.
My 2nd Level mage has decided thought that Fai Chen's Mini Displacer Beast is going to Find he is a Fine Familiar.
Ignoring any mechanical reason, my favorite ever since AD&D has been the toad. Back before you could pop your familiar into an interdimensional space, and when a killed familiar = severe repercussions (I forget the details, I think you lost a level or something in AD&D), a toad was probably the best one because it was the only option that would happily sit in a jar etc. for safety while you adventure.
This conversation is tiresome because of how offbase it is. I said Container, not pocket or clothing. A Tiny creature doesn't need to "squeeze" into something much larger than itself. You're practically arguing that a human must squeeze to enter a 5ft space. It is silly. This entire conversation is silly. You can't just punch through a metal container. And a spider doesn't need to take an action to move. Ugh. I don't even know why I'm responding to this. You're not discussing the rules here you just don't like someone having a tactic you didn't think of or something.
Anyway, about your last line of hyperbole. The spider isn't invulnerable, nor is the advantage on every attack, and nor is there no drawback. You're wrong on all points. I'm not sure you even know this game if you're this wrong about everything you're saying here. He can get hit by aoe, and held actions, or by anything that actually could destroy or ignore his cover. The advantage is only on one attack, and only if the opponent is adjacent to him (and initiative even allows for it to all work out without some interruption). And the drawback is it risks my little scout's life, obviously. He's too cute to be squashed. That, and uh, well, his whole action/move.
Bullet points on everything wrong you said:
Anyway, I'm not sure what got under your skin. You seem to want to make this personal, but what's clear is you don't understand this game's rules very well. You're welcome to homebrew whatever you want at your table though man, rule it however you'd like.
And I'll leave you with this little fun fact: you aren't "letting me" do anything. I don't need some rando-on-the-internet's permission to play D&D and follow the RAW. Trying to control me or my actions is the weirdest response you could possibly have about any of this.
I got quotes!
A pocket is a container by definition but if you mean an object carried - even better. Because the RAW DO allow you to target an object. There are no rules specifying you cannot target an object worn/carried by another creature - the rules DO say you can target an object instead of a creature. So, great, no problem then, the enemy can just attack the container and either remove it from you or damage it - and whatever is inside. If it is an open container, they can still target the creature inside as that would not be total cover, if the container is closable, the spider cannot do that so you'd need to use your own action to open/close it.
And yes, the spider would need to move to or from said container, otherwise the Help action cannot be used. You do need to describe HOW the spider can take the Help action - it just doing nothing on you or sitting in its container is not sufficient. The text of the Help action alludes to this: "You feint, distract the target, or in some other way team up to make your ally's attack more effective. If your ally attacks the target before your next turn, the first attack roll is made with advantage." A spider just being a spider is insufficient, just scurring around doing nothing isn't going to work. The spider jumping onto the enemy, even if briefly would be enough (and an hilarious mental image), but yes it must use movement to achieve this - especially if its in a container to begin with.
Sure I went too much with the "advantage on every attack" as if you have multiattack it would only apply to one, but otherwise my point remains.
"He can get hit by aoe"
Actually, if you've state the idea was for the spider to get total cover. Which means immunity to AoE - since it will not pass through total cover.
"held actions"
Agreed.
"by anything that actually could destroy or ignore his cover"
Also agreed and is my and HearthSmith's point. We stated specifically targeted the creature in that cover to destroy/damage the cover and still get the spider - and you responded saying this was homebrow shot-calling. So make up your mind, mate.
"and only if the opponent is adjacent to him (and initiative even allows for it to all work out without some interruption)."
Yes, but you're obviously going to be in melee (help action cannot be applied at range, you've just the spider didnt need to move, it has limited movement anyway) and initative isn't that important unless the enemy moves away from the spider - and you - before the spider's turn, which would grant you an AoO. Since the advantage granted is specifically for your next attack taken before the spider's next turn, initiative is barely an issue.
"We're talking about a durable Container, not a pocket."
You made no mention of durable or type of container. So, clothing and pockets were assumed especially since you were saying targeting the container would be a "called shot" and it's not a pocket or part of your clothes, it wouldn't be, because a separate contain is a discrete object which can be targeted as per RAW.
"Implying that a creature can attack an object held/carried/worn by another."
RAW allows targeting an object even if its held or worn. If an enemy wanted to attack your backpack, they can, if they wanted to attack your container, they can.
"Implying that hitting the cover of a creature automatically hits that creature."
Never said such a thing. I said make an attack against the spider, I didn't say it was guaranteed hit. Feel free to provide a quote where I said making an attack is a guaranteed hit on the spider?
"Saying the help action provides advantage on all attacks"
Yes, I forgot about Extra Attack features. Then again, if you've got a familiar you're most likely a wizard and this is the Wizard forum, and only 1 subclass grants extra attack, to my memory. So, chances are, for most wizards, it would be all your attacks where the spider can apply the help action.
"Anyway, I'm not sure what got under your skin. You seem to want to make this personal, but what's clear is you don't understand this game's rules very well. "
How am I making this personal? Am I saying you're using my personal spider?! This is a discussion forum. You presented an idea, and I am discussing it. Do I really need to explain how discussion works? I hope I don't.
"You're welcome to homebrew whatever you want at your table though man, rule it however you'd like."
I know. But I'll stick to RAW which fully supports my point.
"And I'll leave you with this little fun fact: you aren't "letting me" do anything. I don't need some rando-on-the-internet's permission to play D&D and follow the RAW. Trying to control me or my actions is the weirdest response you could possibly have about any of this."
Obviously you don't need permission. The point was "if this was at my table and I was the DM" - I shouldn't need to specify that. It's interesting that you infer things I don't imply and then fail to infer things I do imply. o.O
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
As I said, if you allow normal attacks to target held/carried/worn object you are opening a huge can of worms. The rules skirt around this possibility because it creates some serious quandaries, like now you've opened the floodgates to all kinds of abuse. Attacking someone's armor, shield, or weapon... or arcane focus, holy symbol, whatever. All kinds of things go sideways in D&D if you introduce these homebrew rules of called shots on people's possessions. Objects often have very hittable AC and very few HP. It totally changes the game, and not in a healthy way. There is not an established ruleset for how to even handle any of this, you'd have to invent it. By definition homebrew.
Seems irrelevant. A spider familiar is perfectly capable of performing the Help action. Their only action restriction is that they cannot Attack.
Please reread cover rules... eh, I'll just quote it for you: "A target with total cover can't be targeted directly by an attack or a spell, although some spells can reach such a target by including it in an area of effect."
Ruling that a mundane regular ol' melee attack can target a creature in total cover is in direct conflict with the rules as written. Can you do it? Yes. Is it RAW? Quite the opposite. Can you snag someone who has total concealment with an AOE though? Absolutely. Maybe not all AOEs, sure, but some would work.
Some spells and effects specifically state they can target held/carried/worn objects or can simply ignore objects, barriers, or cover/concealment. A punch is not among these things. This is one of those specific trumps general sort of situations. Unless something says it can, it cannot.
You say that but battle is chaotic. It works more than it doesn't, but it isn't guaranteed. Unless you get real close inits with the familiar going right before you, then it works like a charm. But that's pretty rng.
That's only true if it is unattended. Carried/held/worn objects are something else entirely. Opening them up to called shots is a can of worms. (And is homebrew)
Nope. Quote some rules text to prove otherwise if you think so. Of course, a DM is free to adhoc anything they want at any time, but you're not going to find jack for how any called shots against held/carried/worn objects would work.
You suggested attacking a pouch containing it would hit it. Though, by RAW, that's not the case. You cannot target a creature with total concealment by raw, so to do what you're talking about you would need to target the container, but that too has no rules governing it, and so you would be forced to homebrew this interaction entirely.
lol.. yeah, it could be all attacks, but only if melee, and adjacent, and you never aoo, and only hit once a round. Weird wizard you're playing.
But does it though? You can link some rules text at any point. Objective evidence goes far to support your claim here.
In summary, it seems to me that you're coming from a misguided place of thinking called shots to held/carried/worn objects is somehow RAW. It is not. And you're also dramatically overestimating the power of this maneuver, so much indeed that you feel it "cheats the system". I assure you, you are wrong on both fronts. It is great when it works, and could be clutch, but is far cry from "always works with no cost".
I mean, just ask yourself, how often are you trying to be in melee range on your wizard? Attacking, of all things, an adjacent hostile target?
DMs can homebrew whatever rules they want, and I'd never tell you what you should do, nor try to stop you from doing something in your game. You do you. That's part of what is great about D&D, every group can make it their own. But... I am going to make my warning big, bold, and in neon, that homebrewing hits to objects under the direct control of other creatures is a scary place to take your game, it will snowball on you. If you just handwave the fact that the object is basically in motion because of the creature controlling it, and just keep standard non-moving inanimate ACs, man, things are just going to devolve quick. And if you don't keep standard immobile object ACs? Then you're making it up entirely as you go.
This conversation has really reminded me how fortunate I am to not have adversarial DMs. You really can't take your good DMs for granted people!
I got quotes!
PHB - Chapter 9 - Making an Attack
"1. Choose a target. Pick a target within your attack's range: a creature, an object, or a location."
Right there. An object.
No restriction about whether it is being carried or not. No restrictions at all. If it is an object, it can be attacked. I have searched through both PHB and DMG. No Restrictions about this anywhere.
If it is an object, you can attack it.
Now, I've quoted text from the rulebook that says you can attack "objects". Please quote where in the text it specifies "objects worn or carried" are exempt from this rule.
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
Okay, you attack the object. What's the AC, and how many HP? Enter homebrew.
Not really sure what you're not getting here. You literally have to make stuff up to be able to do it. That is by definition homebrew. The rules don't explain how it would work, ergo you must make it up yourself.
I got quotes!
There's a ssection in the DMG for this. I cannot be bothered to quote right now because I shouldn't have to, and I'm about to have dinner, but for a small metal container, IIRC, it would be AC 19 and 14 hit points (average). The DMG has tables - AC is determined by material and hit points by size. They have tables in the book.
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
I will have my familiar change shape. right now she's a cat.
"If you ever ask a wizard to list the books they've read recently, prepare to be there for a solid week. " - Original.
Grammar Cult
Bow down to Cats! (Cult of Cats)
My Kenku wizard familiar is raccoon with weasel stats as its the closest the DM could find that would suit. His name is Peanut and when I took over his senses on an errand to drop off a document sneakily, the party started playing the Mission Impossible theme (recorder version) when things started getting dicey.
Right now my Bladesinger has an almiraj familiar, a childhood pet given new life and damn near the only thing my wizard cares about sincerely. The DM is allowing me to change her form to a more exotic familiar, but the requirements are particularly strict and take a long, long time in game to be rendered permanent. It’s a solid 80% of my character’s downtime just researching, developing, and constituting the spell to do this—never mind the conversations that have to be had between familiar and wizard, because my character refuses to forcibly change her familiar’s form for the sake of utility.
I can’t go into much more detail because the rest of our campaign also trolls the forums here, and it’s intended to be a surprise. Only one of the other players knows about it, because he’s roommates with the DM and was there when we discussed this in September.
My GM let me pull off a modified owl and turn it into a hummingbird. The character is a conquest paladin with a hummingbird as their family crest. I was taking magic initiate because I wanted prestidigitation and then I noticed I could also get a familiar, BONUS. So now I have a maul wielding bringer of fear and tiny little iridescent bird fluttering around his head.
Familiar: Harbinger
Hummingbird (Celestial)
Tiny Beast (CR 0)
AC: 13
HP 1 (1d4-3)
Speed: 5 ft. fly 50 ft. (Hover)
STR 1 (-6), DEX 16 (+3), CON 5 (-3), INT 6 (-2), WIS 12 (+1), CHA 6 (-2)
Skills: Perception +3
Passive Perception 13
Alert: +5 bonus to initiative, can’t be surprised while conscious, and other creatures don’t gain advantage on attack rolls against them as a result of being hidden.
Flyby: The hummingbird doesn't provoke Opportunity Attacks when it flies out of an enemy's reach.
IMHO, Earthdawn is still the best fantasy realm, Shadowrun is the best Sci-Fi realm, and Dark Sun is the best D&D realm.
We really otter be able to have an otter.
Choose another animal that has the a similar stat block and call it an otter. Easy.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
Otter
Tiny beast, Unaligned
* Armor Class 13
* Hit Points 1 (1d4-1)
* Speed 30 ft. Swim 30ft.
* STR 3 (-4), DEX 16 (+3), CON 8 (-1), INT 2 (-4), WIS 12 (+1), CHA 3 (-4)
* Skills Perception +3
* Senses passive Perception 13
* Challenge 0 (10 XP)
* Keen Hearing and Smell. The otter has advantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on hearing or smell.
* Actions: Bite. Melee Weapon Attack: +5 to hit, reach 5 ft., one creature. Hit: (1d1) piercing damage.
IMHO, Earthdawn is still the best fantasy realm, Shadowrun is the best Sci-Fi realm, and Dark Sun is the best D&D realm.
i have a wizard with hawk familar i mostly use him to scout but in a fight i cast dragons breath on him. so my familiar is flying around doing 3d6 of whatever element helps most at the time while im casting crowd control spells to help the front line. and cause my familiar fly i can always position it in a way that i dont set my team onfire
Has your GM targeted it when it was doing the attacks. I love this idea ever since I read it on a site, but I have been nervous about having to keep a bunch of 10g material components on hand to re-summon my familiar when the GM gets tired of the free area effect. Basically the familiar is being used like spiritual weapon that has an area effect and higher damage output. The thing is ridiculous if you break it down against spiritual weapon:
No Spell slot used, No bonus action used, 3d6 vs d8+x, greater mobility, half damage vs no damage on a miss, variable damage type vs. force, and the best is AoE vs single target. The only downside is that Dragon's Breath has concentration and you can critical on spiritual weapon.
Also, if you were crazy enough to cast these at their highest levels, SW would top out at 4d8+x and DB would top out at 10d6
I love this combo though, and have used it in conjunction with spiritual weapon for a nasty effect. I grabbed magic initiate as a Paladin of Conquest, just to get a familiar. Our party wizard picked up Dragon's Breath so we get to have fun times with an extra mini-fighter and mini-caster against hordes.
IMHO, Earthdawn is still the best fantasy realm, Shadowrun is the best Sci-Fi realm, and Dark Sun is the best D&D realm.
Nice.
I just noticed the Octopus grapples, so what if I theow the OctoFamiliar at the bad guys face, and the grapples it. Talk the DM into a little Ink-to-mouth or Ink-to-Eyes actions maybe.
Oh, and not Find Familiar Familiars per se, my 7th Paladin bought a scroll and now can't decide between a saber-tooth tiger or a Riding Rhino. Yes, a Riding Rhino. And check the Saddle of the Cavalier.
My 2nd Level mage has decided thought that Fai Chen's Mini Displacer Beast is going to Find he is a Fine Familiar.
Urshuraak
Catter.
Urshuraak
Ignoring any mechanical reason, my favorite ever since AD&D has been the toad. Back before you could pop your familiar into an interdimensional space, and when a killed familiar = severe repercussions (I forget the details, I think you lost a level or something in AD&D), a toad was probably the best one because it was the only option that would happily sit in a jar etc. for safety while you adventure.
imagine if someone created a bat with the thunderclap cantrip and basically makes it look like the bat screamed ; p