Question. If my warlock has a sprite familiar and I have it deliver a touch spell, will its invisibility lapse? Not an attack spell but one like Invisibility, or Spider Climb, or Fly on a party member? It hasn't come up yet, but it might. Just pondering.
Question. If my warlock has a sprite familiar and I have it deliver a touch spell, will its invisibility lapse? Not an attack spell but one like Invisibility, or Spider Climb, or Fly on a party member? It hasn't come up yet, but it might. Just pondering.
Evan
No. When you cast a spell through your familiar, your familiar doesn't cast a spell or attack, so its invisibility won't drop.
Ok, I appreciate the response! Now, how about 'delivering' an attack spell (ex: inflict wounds). I know that they use my spell attack to make the roll, this one SEEMs obvious, but will the invisibility fail?
No. When you cast a spell through your familiar, your familiar doesn't cast a spell or attack, so its invisibility won't drop.
And conversely, in the case of a familiar delivering inflict wounds from a visible caster, the invisible familiar would not convey advantage on the roll for being unseen, I assume?
Find familiar specifically says that a familiar cannot attack, and if it delivers a spell it uses your attack modifier. Seems indisputable that it does not break invisibility.
But that does not mean the victim is blind, deaf, and dumb.
An invisible familiar must still touch the target. I would grant a free Perception check to realize that something invisible just touched them, and if they made it and also saw you casting at the same time, a free arcana check to realize that most likely an invisible familiar just completed the touch part of the spell against you.
Even if they failed the Arcana check, If they made their Perception check, they could take an AoO attack against the familiar if it left the area, albeit with disadvantage for the invisibility.
Find familiar specifically says that a familiar cannot attack, and if it delivers a spell it uses your attack modifier. Seems indisputable that it does not break invisibility.
I think the problem arises because of the wording of Find Familiar. A familiar cannot 'Attack' (note the capital 'A') but that doesn't mean that, in delivering a spell that would be considered an 'attack', it would not be 'attacking' in the sense of the word as used in the spell description of Invisibility. Moreover, Find Familiar states that "your familiar can deliver the spell as if it had cast the spell." If the caster casts a spell which would break Invisibility if they delivered it themself, that wording implies to me that the familiar would break invisibility, because that's what would happen "if it had cast the spell."
So, talk to your DM. At my table, if an invisible familiar delivers a spell that would break invisibility had it been cast by an invisible caster and delivered normally, then the familiar becomes visible just as the caster would have been. On the flip side, if the caster were invisible, I would rule that the delivery of the spell through the familiar does not break invisibility of the caster, as the caster did not 'deliver' the 'attack'.
Hello,
Question. If my warlock has a sprite familiar and I have it deliver a touch spell, will its invisibility lapse? Not an attack spell but one like Invisibility, or Spider Climb, or Fly on a party member? It hasn't come up yet, but it might. Just pondering.
Evan
No. When you cast a spell through your familiar, your familiar doesn't cast a spell or attack, so its invisibility won't drop.
Find familiar isn't worded as the familiar casting, just "delivering".
Ok, I appreciate the response! Now, how about 'delivering' an attack spell (ex: inflict wounds). I know that they use my spell attack to make the roll, this one SEEMs obvious, but will the invisibility fail?
Evan
And conversely, in the case of a familiar delivering inflict wounds from a visible caster, the invisible familiar would not convey advantage on the roll for being unseen, I assume?
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Find familiar specifically says that a familiar cannot attack, and if it delivers a spell it uses your attack modifier. Seems indisputable that it does not break invisibility.
But that does not mean the victim is blind, deaf, and dumb.
An invisible familiar must still touch the target. I would grant a free Perception check to realize that something invisible just touched them, and if they made it and also saw you casting at the same time, a free arcana check to realize that most likely an invisible familiar just completed the touch part of the spell against you.
Even if they failed the Arcana check, If they made their Perception check, they could take an AoO attack against the familiar if it left the area, albeit with disadvantage for the invisibility.
I think there is quite a bit dispute about this, at least in those cases where the familiar is delivering something that qualifies as an attack. Mike Mearls in Sage Advice (not the SAC) says that an invisible familiar delivering Bestow Curse would become visible. https://www.sageadvice.eu/invisible-imp-bestow-curse-does-it-lose-invisibility/
I think the problem arises because of the wording of Find Familiar. A familiar cannot 'Attack' (note the capital 'A') but that doesn't mean that, in delivering a spell that would be considered an 'attack', it would not be 'attacking' in the sense of the word as used in the spell description of Invisibility. Moreover, Find Familiar states that "your familiar can deliver the spell as if it had cast the spell." If the caster casts a spell which would break Invisibility if they delivered it themself, that wording implies to me that the familiar would break invisibility, because that's what would happen "if it had cast the spell."
So, talk to your DM. At my table, if an invisible familiar delivers a spell that would break invisibility had it been cast by an invisible caster and delivered normally, then the familiar becomes visible just as the caster would have been. On the flip side, if the caster were invisible, I would rule that the delivery of the spell through the familiar does not break invisibility of the caster, as the caster did not 'deliver' the 'attack'.