I like this invocation but I’m not clear when the attack would occur.
Immediately using the Warlock’s bonus action?
On the Familiar's turn using the familiar’s action?
Or, on the familiars turn, using the familiar’s reaction (per the Pact of Chain language for attacking)
Anyone have any thoughts?
Eldritch Invocation: Chain Master's FuryPrerequisite: 9th level, Pact of the Chain feature. As a bonus action, you can command your familiar to make one attack.
The text could use some clarification but my assumption was that this invocation amends the previous ability to use your action to attack with your familiar (using your familiar's reaction) and allows you to use your bonus action instead. Although it doesn't specifically say it, creatures don't attack for free so it makes sense that it still uses your familiar's reaction.
Combined with the other invocation that allows saving throws triggered by your familiar to use your spell DC, this is pretty nice. It definitely makes the quasit and sprite more attractive choices (mechanically speaking, they're already fine choices thematically).
The feature already tells you exactly what it does.
"As a bonus action, you can command your familiar to make one attack."
It doesn't say the attack happens later. It doesn't say your familiar needs to use its own action, bonus, reaction, or anything else. If those things were part of what it did, the feature would say so. Instead, all it says is "as a bonus action, command your familiar to make an attack." No other language, when in any case where the feature requires the use of another creature's turn or a specific action, the game explicitly says so the way it does with "your familiar can use its reaction to deliver your spell"
That means you use your bonus action to yell "SIC 'EM, FERDINAND" at your familiar, and your familiar immediately attacks. If it's unable to make an attack from where it is, the bonus is wasted. If it is able to attack from where it is? It just attacks. Then you go back to doing your turn, and the familiar gets its own regular turn.
There's no need to invent rules where none are to be had. The game tells you what you can do - it does not sort of tell you what you can do and then get mad when you don't extrapolate properly. if there's no conditionals attached to a feature you can do, then there's nothing you need to meet or do except use the feature.
The wording isn't dissimilar from the battle Smith's for commanding your steel defender (which acts on its turn). And the invocation doesn't say it makes any exceptions to rules.
So on your turn you command the familiar to attack and on the familiar's turn it does so.
Chain Master's Fury simply states "as a bonus action, you command your familiar to make one attack."
The Steel Defender class feature states that the defender cannot attack unless you use your bonus action to allow it to do so. The Pact of the Chain familiar, nor the normal Find Familiar spell, have no such rule. The Steel Defender's stat block also includes the words "ACTIONS (Requires Your Bonus Action)" directly in its stat block, while the familiar granted by Pact of the Chain does not. Familiars are not Steel Defenders and do not operate by Steel Defender rules.
The rule/feature does not say "You command your familiar to attack using its bonus reaction during its turn on your initiative exempting initiative ties during lair actions, unless it's a weasel." The feature says "as a bonus action, you command your familiar to make one attack." No extra requirements, no conditionals, no delays or mention whatsoever of the familiar's own turn. You command, critter attacks. End of feature.
The feature says "as a bonus action, you command your familiar to make one attack." No extra requirements, no conditionals, no delays or mention whatsoever of the familiar's own turn. You command, critter attacks. End of feature.
The feature does not say the familiar attacks on your turn, that means it has to follow the general rules of using its action on its own turn. You command the critter to attack. End of feature. It doesn't do more than it says, so the creature hasn't attacked, it has only been ordered to.
Chain master's fury does not create an exception that allows the familiar to attack on your turn the way the pact of chain does.
The PHB says about the pact of the chain familiar:
"Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to make one attack with its reaction."
The invocation doesn't say anything about using your familiar's reaction to attack so I can see interpreting it as not using it. However, if the invocation is written such that it only changes the part that is explicitly stated, the familiar's attack still uses its reaction but now uses your bonus action instead of one of your attacks. Both seem right to me and it's probably up to your DM to interpret until the invocations get properly published.
The PHB says about the pact of the chain familiar:
"Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to make one attack with its reaction."
The invocation doesn't say anything about using your familiar's reaction to attack so I can see interpreting it as not using it. However, if the invocation is written such that it only changes the part that is explicitly stated, the familiar's attack still uses its reaction but now uses your bonus action instead of one of your attacks. Both seem right to me and it's probably up to your DM to interpret until the invocations get properly published.
This is exactly how I think this works, you use a bonus action to command, then the familiars reaction is to attack. So the warlock isn't losing an attack of whatever type.
After reading the helpful comments, I think the answer is straight forward: (1) The Warlock uses a BA to issue a command and (2) the Chain Familiar attacks using their reaction. The only change is the warlock’s action economy. The warlock no longer needs to sacrifice an attack just a BA. The rest of the process remains unchanged.
At that point, I would ask why the Invocation is even there. Saying "I command my familiar to attack and it harms my enemy" is cool, great, and really helps Chain warlocks who are often left with nothing useful to do with their critter in combat (do not talk to me about the infinite stupidity that is the "command my familiar to use the Help action!"; that arises from a deep misunderstanding of 'the Help action' and is not permitted at my table unless the familiar is actually helping somehow).
Saying "I command my familiar to attack, which it does so at some nebulous point in the future if it feels like it, provided it survives" is...significantly less cool, and of no real help to a Chain warlock at all.
Not gonna lie, I was looking forward to having my Sprite take two attacks (give up my attack + my bonus action) giving multiple saving throw vs unconscious. I read the bonus action from the invocation as a new option not an alteration of the existing one. Especially since it burns a bonus action and an invocation.
At that point, I would ask why the Invocation is even there. Saying "I command my familiar to attack and it harms my enemy" is cool, great, and really helps Chain warlocks who are often left with nothing useful to do with their critter in combat (do not talk to me about the infinite stupidity that is the "command my familiar to use the Help action!"; that arises from a deep misunderstanding of 'the Help action' and is not permitted at my table unless the familiar is actually helping somehow).
Saying "I command my familiar to attack, which it does so at some nebulous point in the future if it feels like it, provided it survives" is...significantly less cool, and of no real help to a Chain warlock at all.
The familiar attacks immediately, on the warlock's initiative, using the familiar's reaction, not at a " nebulous point in the future".
RAW it does not cost the critters Reaction. Theoretically the Warlock can command the Familiar twice: You can give up one Attack to let it Attack once on your initiative using its Reaction. You can give up your Bonus Action to allow it to Attack once on its own initiative as an Action.
The trade economy there is giving up an entire Attack to let the Familiar make an out of sequence Attack on your initiative. You give up a simple Bonus Action to allow the Familiar to Attack on its turn, something it cannot do otherwise.
Heh. I mean, that's pretty much exactly what I said. The invocation tells you exactly what it does - "as a bonus action, command your familiar to attack". No other costs or requirements for making the attack are given, thus they do not exist. No mention of "the attack happens later" is given, this it happens when the action is taken, just like every other action that doesn't otherwise specify a given timing.
Why everyone is trying to shoehorn this into the other shit a Chainlock can do and distort it into uselessness baffles me. The thing is pretty clean and clear in what it says. Expend bonus action: critter attacks. it's a ninth-level Invocation, those are supposed to be pretty potent.
No distortions and no uselessness, the rules in general just don't let creatures do things for free. Acting out of turn either costs a legendary action (a familiar certainly doesn't get any of those) or a reaction. Familars are treated as independent creatures with their own movement, action, bonus action, and reaction, they're not special entities that you get to manipulate like a puppet. Besides, giving your familiar two attacks with your action and bonus action doesn't seem right to me - yes you're giving up your action for it but familiars don't have multi-attack, they shouldn't be attacking twice.
It's still a useful invocation for giving a chain warlock something to do with their bonus action. Free damage or control at the cost of a turn mechanic I never use? Sign me up! What is your familiar doing with it's reaction anyway? Is your imp making attacks of opportunity? Costing a reaction basically makes it free.
Would you ever, for any reason, consider this Invocation if, as you say, it requires you to burn your bonus action, your familiar's reaction, AND your familiar's next turn for some reason the way everyone else says it needs to do? "As a bonus action, you command your familiar to use its reaction to prepare an attack it takes with its action on its turn."
No. Fuggoff. That's horrible, and a complete and utter waste of a ninth-level Invocation. Especially since you also need Investment of the Chain Master for the familiar's attack to be worth using in the first place at that level, ne? Does burning two Invocation selections and three different types of action for a single chance at an admittedly useful poison debuff (for anyone but the imp) sound like a good deal to you?
RAW it does not cost the critters Reaction. Theoretically the Warlock can command the Familiar twice: You can give up one Attack to let it Attack once on your initiative using its Reaction. You can give up your Bonus Action to allow it to Attack once on its own initiative as an Action.
The trade economy there is giving up an entire Attack to let the Familiar make an out of sequence Attack on your initiative. You give up a simple Bonus Action to allow the Familiar to Attack on its turn, something it cannot do otherwise.
It’s a mix and match. You could choose to do neither, either, or both.
Would you ever, for any reason, consider this Invocation if, as you say, it requires you to burn your bonus action, your familiar's reaction, AND your familiar's next turn for some reason the way everyone else says it needs to do? "As a bonus action, you command your familiar to use its reaction to prepare an attack it takes with its action on its turn."
No. Fuggoff. That's horrible, and a complete and utter waste of a ninth-level Invocation. Especially since you also need Investment of the Chain Master for the familiar's attack to be worth using in the first place at that level, ne? Does burning two Invocation selections and three different types of action for a single chance at an admittedly useful poison debuff (for anyone but the imp) sound like a good deal to you?
If the "command" works like the beast master ranger's command (where your familiar attacks on its turn using it's action when you use your bonus action), that makes this a really crappy 9th level invocation. If you can't use your familiar's action to turn invisible and move out of danger, then actually using this feature would be a quick way to lose 10g worth of reagents. The whole advantage of using your familiar's reaction to do stuff on your turn is so it can hide again afterwards when it takes its turn.
It seems like there are 3 camps on this:
Yurei's that says you use your bonus action and your familiar attacks immediately with no other cost
Mine that says you use your bonus action, your familiar attacks immediately but it costs it's reaction
DxJxC's that says you use your bonus action and your familiar attacks on its turn using something (it's reaction?)
The only way I see this being at all useful and worthy of requiring 9 levels and a second invocation slot is if it works the way Yurei or I believe. Your familiar might be its own creature, but it's definitely under more tight control than a beast master's pet.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I like this invocation but I’m not clear when the attack would occur.
Anyone have any thoughts?
The text could use some clarification but my assumption was that this invocation amends the previous ability to use your action to attack with your familiar (using your familiar's reaction) and allows you to use your bonus action instead. Although it doesn't specifically say it, creatures don't attack for free so it makes sense that it still uses your familiar's reaction.
Combined with the other invocation that allows saving throws triggered by your familiar to use your spell DC, this is pretty nice. It definitely makes the quasit and sprite more attractive choices (mechanically speaking, they're already fine choices thematically).
The feature already tells you exactly what it does.
"As a bonus action, you can command your familiar to make one attack."
It doesn't say the attack happens later. It doesn't say your familiar needs to use its own action, bonus, reaction, or anything else. If those things were part of what it did, the feature would say so. Instead, all it says is "as a bonus action, command your familiar to make an attack." No other language, when in any case where the feature requires the use of another creature's turn or a specific action, the game explicitly says so the way it does with "your familiar can use its reaction to deliver your spell"
That means you use your bonus action to yell "SIC 'EM, FERDINAND" at your familiar, and your familiar immediately attacks. If it's unable to make an attack from where it is, the bonus is wasted. If it is able to attack from where it is? It just attacks. Then you go back to doing your turn, and the familiar gets its own regular turn.
There's no need to invent rules where none are to be had. The game tells you what you can do - it does not sort of tell you what you can do and then get mad when you don't extrapolate properly. if there's no conditionals attached to a feature you can do, then there's nothing you need to meet or do except use the feature.
Please do not contact or message me.
The wording isn't dissimilar from the battle Smith's for commanding your steel defender (which acts on its turn). And the invocation doesn't say it makes any exceptions to rules.
So on your turn you command the familiar to attack and on the familiar's turn it does so.
The wording on the two is not at all similar.
Chain Master's Fury simply states "as a bonus action, you command your familiar to make one attack."
The Steel Defender class feature states that the defender cannot attack unless you use your bonus action to allow it to do so. The Pact of the Chain familiar, nor the normal Find Familiar spell, have no such rule. The Steel Defender's stat block also includes the words "ACTIONS (Requires Your Bonus Action)" directly in its stat block, while the familiar granted by Pact of the Chain does not. Familiars are not Steel Defenders and do not operate by Steel Defender rules.
The rule/feature does not say "You command your familiar to attack using its bonus reaction during its turn on your initiative exempting initiative ties during lair actions, unless it's a weasel." The feature says "as a bonus action, you command your familiar to make one attack." No extra requirements, no conditionals, no delays or mention whatsoever of the familiar's own turn. You command, critter attacks. End of feature.
Please do not contact or message me.
The feature does not say the familiar attacks on your turn, that means it has to follow the general rules of using its action on its own turn. You command the critter to attack. End of feature. It doesn't do more than it says, so the creature hasn't attacked, it has only been ordered to.
Chain master's fury does not create an exception that allows the familiar to attack on your turn the way the pact of chain does.
The PHB says about the pact of the chain familiar:
"Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to make one attack with its reaction."
The invocation doesn't say anything about using your familiar's reaction to attack so I can see interpreting it as not using it. However, if the invocation is written such that it only changes the part that is explicitly stated, the familiar's attack still uses its reaction but now uses your bonus action instead of one of your attacks. Both seem right to me and it's probably up to your DM to interpret until the invocations get properly published.
This is exactly how I think this works, you use a bonus action to command, then the familiars reaction is to attack. So the warlock isn't losing an attack of whatever type.
After reading the helpful comments, I think the answer is straight forward: (1) The Warlock uses a BA to issue a command and (2) the Chain Familiar attacks using their reaction. The only change is the warlock’s action economy. The warlock no longer needs to sacrifice an attack just a BA. The rest of the process remains unchanged.
At that point, I would ask why the Invocation is even there. Saying "I command my familiar to attack and it harms my enemy" is cool, great, and really helps Chain warlocks who are often left with nothing useful to do with their critter in combat (do not talk to me about the infinite stupidity that is the "command my familiar to use the Help action!"; that arises from a deep misunderstanding of 'the Help action' and is not permitted at my table unless the familiar is actually helping somehow).
Saying "I command my familiar to attack, which it does so at some nebulous point in the future if it feels like it, provided it survives" is...significantly less cool, and of no real help to a Chain warlock at all.
Please do not contact or message me.
Not gonna lie, I was looking forward to having my Sprite take two attacks (give up my attack + my bonus action) giving multiple saving throw vs unconscious. I read the bonus action from the invocation as a new option not an alteration of the existing one. Especially since it burns a bonus action and an invocation.
The familiar attacks immediately, on the warlock's initiative, using the familiar's reaction, not at a " nebulous point in the future".
RAW it does not cost the critters Reaction. Theoretically the Warlock can command the Familiar twice: You can give up one Attack to let it Attack once on your initiative using its Reaction. You can give up your Bonus Action to allow it to Attack once on its own initiative as an Action.
The trade economy there is giving up an entire Attack to let the Familiar make an out of sequence Attack on your initiative. You give up a simple Bonus Action to allow the Familiar to Attack on its turn, something it cannot do otherwise.
It’s a mix and match.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
OK, I'm going to flip-flop my opinion and agree with you folks!
This Invocation only uses the Warlock's Bonus Action and not the Familiar's reaction. The folks at RPG Stack Exchange agree: https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/161132/when-does-a-chain-familiar-s-attack-occur-using-the-new-ua-eldritch-invocation
Heh. I mean, that's pretty much exactly what I said. The invocation tells you exactly what it does - "as a bonus action, command your familiar to attack". No other costs or requirements for making the attack are given, thus they do not exist. No mention of "the attack happens later" is given, this it happens when the action is taken, just like every other action that doesn't otherwise specify a given timing.
Why everyone is trying to shoehorn this into the other shit a Chainlock can do and distort it into uselessness baffles me. The thing is pretty clean and clear in what it says. Expend bonus action: critter attacks. it's a ninth-level Invocation, those are supposed to be pretty potent.
Please do not contact or message me.
No distortions and no uselessness, the rules in general just don't let creatures do things for free. Acting out of turn either costs a legendary action (a familiar certainly doesn't get any of those) or a reaction. Familars are treated as independent creatures with their own movement, action, bonus action, and reaction, they're not special entities that you get to manipulate like a puppet. Besides, giving your familiar two attacks with your action and bonus action doesn't seem right to me - yes you're giving up your action for it but familiars don't have multi-attack, they shouldn't be attacking twice.
It's still a useful invocation for giving a chain warlock something to do with their bonus action. Free damage or control at the cost of a turn mechanic I never use? Sign me up! What is your familiar doing with it's reaction anyway? Is your imp making attacks of opportunity? Costing a reaction basically makes it free.
Well, lemme ask you.
Would you ever, for any reason, consider this Invocation if, as you say, it requires you to burn your bonus action, your familiar's reaction, AND your familiar's next turn for some reason the way everyone else says it needs to do? "As a bonus action, you command your familiar to use its reaction to prepare an attack it takes with its action on its turn."
No. Fuggoff. That's horrible, and a complete and utter waste of a ninth-level Invocation. Especially since you also need Investment of the Chain Master for the familiar's attack to be worth using in the first place at that level, ne? Does burning two Invocation selections and three different types of action for a single chance at an admittedly useful poison debuff (for anyone but the imp) sound like a good deal to you?
Please do not contact or message me.
RAW it does not cost the critters Reaction. Theoretically the Warlock can command the Familiar twice: You can give up one Attack to let it Attack once on your initiative using its Reaction. You can give up your Bonus Action to allow it to Attack once on its own initiative as an Action.
The trade economy there is giving up an entire Attack to let the Familiar make an out of sequence Attack on your initiative. You give up a simple Bonus Action to allow the Familiar to Attack on its turn, something it cannot do otherwise.
It’s a mix and match. You could choose to do neither, either, or both.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I don't think anyone is saying this. I'm certainly not.
I read it as being able to use a BA for your familiar to attack on its turn. It doesn't say it uses its reaction.
So that means I am also arguing that the familiar can attack twice per round by also using you attack and its reaction.
Which for a ninth level evocation (being able to knock out 2 enemies per round) is pretty good imo.
If the "command" works like the beast master ranger's command (where your familiar attacks on its turn using it's action when you use your bonus action), that makes this a really crappy 9th level invocation. If you can't use your familiar's action to turn invisible and move out of danger, then actually using this feature would be a quick way to lose 10g worth of reagents. The whole advantage of using your familiar's reaction to do stuff on your turn is so it can hide again afterwards when it takes its turn.
It seems like there are 3 camps on this:
Yurei's that says you use your bonus action and your familiar attacks immediately with no other cost
Mine that says you use your bonus action, your familiar attacks immediately but it costs it's reaction
DxJxC's that says you use your bonus action and your familiar attacks on its turn using something (it's reaction?)
The only way I see this being at all useful and worthy of requiring 9 levels and a second invocation slot is if it works the way Yurei or I believe. Your familiar might be its own creature, but it's definitely under more tight control than a beast master's pet.