Find familiar states a familiar must use its reaction to deliver a spell you cast, since its neither taking an attack action nor casting the spell does it lose its invisibility?
If an invisible sprite delivers shocking grasp for example
Find familiar states a familiar must use its reaction to deliver a spell you cast, since its neither taking an attack action nor casting the spell does it lose its invisibility?
If an invisible sprite delivers shocking grasp for example
to my recollection, Find Familiar states that we treat the Familiar as though it were casting the spell, thus they have the benefits of Unseen Attacker, but then the invisibility breaks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
Find familiar states a familiar must use its reaction to deliver a spell you cast, since its neither taking an attack action nor casting the spell does it lose its invisibility?
If an invisible sprite delivers shocking grasp for example
One must be careful with invisible Familiars and what they can and cannot do.
There is an entire war raging in another thread with those that want to abuse Find Familiar versus those on the RAW side.
But if your Fam is making an Attack Roll, yes, they become visible, no matter if it is a Reaction. Now, the same Fam transmitting Bestow Curse, which requires a Savings Throw from the target, that is another matter. In that case, the Fam stays Invisible, because in that case it is not "Attacking". Another case that gets people ticked off is that a Fam that has Dragon's Breath cast on it stays Invisible, even when it is strafing a target, (or targets) with a Breath Weapon.
There are 2 factors that break Invisibility, spelled out in the write up: If the target (recipient of Invisibility) attacks or casts a spell. Clearly, the Fam is not casting the spell. But when there is an attack roll made, that qualifies as an attack. Think of it this way. If an Invisible character makes an Opportunity Attack that requires an Attack Roll, even though it is a Reaction, it breaks Invisibility.
The wisest answer is for a DM to ban the spell altogether. Now, obviously, that has massive impact on Pact of the Chain Warlocks, and a real case can be made that only that subclass can ever use Find Fam at all.
"Finally, when you cast a spell with a range of touch, your familiar can deliver the spell as if it had cast the spell. Your familiar must be within 100 feet of you, and it must use its reaction to deliver the spell when you cast it. If the spell requires an attack roll, you use your attack modifier for the roll."
When you deliver a touch spell with the Familiar, it is treated as though it had cast it, so invisibility breaks. the Dragon's Breath argument still does check out because it is neither an attack nor a spell, but an action granted by the Spell so Invisibility is not broken.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
The problem with Dragon’s Breath and Invisibility is both require Concentration. Yes it is possible but only with a familiar that can turn invisible on its own, a potion, or two PCs working together.
The problem with Dragon’s Breath and Invisibility is both require Concentration. Yes it is possible but only with a familiar that can turn invisible on its own, a potion, or two PCs working together.
I just realized I tend to assume that anyone talking about an Invisible Familiar is talking about an Imp... you almost never see players use a concentration spell on a Familiar.
The problem with Dragon’s Breath and Invisibility is both require Concentration. Yes it is possible but only with a familiar that can turn invisible on its own, a potion, or two PCs working together.
I just realized I tend to assume that anyone talking about an Invisible Familiar is talking about an Imp... you almost never see players use a concentration spell on a Familiar.
I’m playing a wizard without a familiar right now and I’ve started casting Tiny Servant and casting Dragon’s Breath on it. It’s a very effective combination since I still have my other spells available.
When I played with a familiar I did use a couple of buff spells on it, but you’re correct I didn’t use them very often.
Find familiar states a familiar must use its reaction to deliver a spell you cast, since its neither taking an attack action nor casting the spell does it lose its invisibility?
If an invisible sprite delivers shocking grasp for example
One must be careful with invisible Familiars and what they can and cannot do.
There is an entire war raging in another thread with those that want to abuse Find Familiar versus those on the RAW side.
But if your Fam is making an Attack Roll, yes, they become visible, no matter if it is a Reaction. Now, the same Fam transmitting Bestow Curse, which requires a Savings Throw from the target, that is another matter. In that case, the Fam stays Invisible, because in that case it is not "Attacking". Another case that gets people ticked off is that a Fam that has Dragon's Breath cast on it stays Invisible, even when it is strafing a target, (or targets) with a Breath Weapon.
There are 2 factors that break Invisibility, spelled out in the write up: If the target (recipient of Invisibility) attacks or casts a spell. Clearly, the Fam is not casting the spell. But when there is an attack roll made, that qualifies as an attack. Think of it this way. If an Invisible character makes an Opportunity Attack that requires an Attack Roll, even though it is a Reaction, it breaks Invisibility.
The wisest answer is for a DM to ban the spell altogether. Now, obviously, that has massive impact on Pact of the Chain Warlocks, and a real case can be made that only that subclass can ever use Find Fam at all.
On the first bolded: The wording of find familiar says the familiar delivers "as if it had cast the spell". I believe it is valid that if the familiars is considered the caster, then it is casting said spell, and invisibility would drop. This actually makes the spell weaker (which judging from your feelings on the spell per second bolded and other posts, you would likely agree with), and I believe is the RAI and a valid reading of the RAW.
On the second bolded: I think you must mean "easiest" not "wisest". Im not sure if the banning of any game component is the "wisest" decision. It can certainly be a valid decision, but obviously if the game designers intended for the "wisest" decision being to omit something then they just would not have included it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Find familiar states a familiar must use its reaction to deliver a spell you cast, since its neither taking an attack action nor casting the spell does it lose its invisibility?
If an invisible sprite delivers shocking grasp for example
to my recollection, Find Familiar states that we treat the Familiar as though it were casting the spell, thus they have the benefits of Unseen Attacker, but then the invisibility breaks.
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
One must be careful with invisible Familiars and what they can and cannot do.
There is an entire war raging in another thread with those that want to abuse Find Familiar versus those on the RAW side.
But if your Fam is making an Attack Roll, yes, they become visible, no matter if it is a Reaction. Now, the same Fam transmitting Bestow Curse, which requires a Savings Throw from the target, that is another matter. In that case, the Fam stays Invisible, because in that case it is not "Attacking". Another case that gets people ticked off is that a Fam that has Dragon's Breath cast on it stays Invisible, even when it is strafing a target, (or targets) with a Breath Weapon.
There are 2 factors that break Invisibility, spelled out in the write up: If the target (recipient of Invisibility) attacks or casts a spell. Clearly, the Fam is not casting the spell. But when there is an attack roll made, that qualifies as an attack. Think of it this way. If an Invisible character makes an Opportunity Attack that requires an Attack Roll, even though it is a Reaction, it breaks Invisibility.
The wisest answer is for a DM to ban the spell altogether. Now, obviously, that has massive impact on Pact of the Chain Warlocks, and a real case can be made that only that subclass can ever use Find Fam at all.
"Finally, when you cast a spell with a range of touch, your familiar can deliver the spell as if it had cast the spell. Your familiar must be within 100 feet of you, and it must use its reaction to deliver the spell when you cast it. If the spell requires an attack roll, you use your attack modifier for the roll."
When you deliver a touch spell with the Familiar, it is treated as though it had cast it, so invisibility breaks. the Dragon's Breath argument still does check out because it is neither an attack nor a spell, but an action granted by the Spell so Invisibility is not broken.
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
The problem with Dragon’s Breath and Invisibility is both require Concentration. Yes it is possible but only with a familiar that can turn invisible on its own, a potion, or two PCs working together.
Professional computer geek
I just realized I tend to assume that anyone talking about an Invisible Familiar is talking about an Imp... you almost never see players use a concentration spell on a Familiar.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
I’m playing a wizard without a familiar right now and I’ve started casting Tiny Servant and casting Dragon’s Breath on it. It’s a very effective combination since I still have my other spells available.
When I played with a familiar I did use a couple of buff spells on it, but you’re correct I didn’t use them very often.
Professional computer geek
On the first bolded: The wording of find familiar says the familiar delivers "as if it had cast the spell". I believe it is valid that if the familiars is considered the caster, then it is casting said spell, and invisibility would drop. This actually makes the spell weaker (which judging from your feelings on the spell per second bolded and other posts, you would likely agree with), and I believe is the RAI and a valid reading of the RAW.
On the second bolded: I think you must mean "easiest" not "wisest". Im not sure if the banning of any game component is the "wisest" decision. It can certainly be a valid decision, but obviously if the game designers intended for the "wisest" decision being to omit something then they just would not have included it.