What are your thoughts on a blind druid having a wolf as a mount, with which they can communicate to gain information about locations of enemies n such?
Would that be possible without homebrew, maybe a bit reflavoring and RAW?
Something to discuss with the DM. (Most worries are solved with communication.)
My personal opinion is that it is viable with caveats surrounding the wolf's status to remove over-advantage, but that's just me and I'm not at your table.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
You might be better off with a familiar. The ability to communicate and see through their eyes already exists. With a mount, you'll also run into logistical issues like climbing ropes, tight dungeon spaces, and social settings where the mount won't be able to go.
What are your thoughts on a blind druid having a wolf as a mount, with which they can communicate to gain information about locations of enemies n such?
Would that be possible without homebrew, maybe a bit reflavoring and RAW?
You'd need to be a Small race and have a reliable way to communicate would require Awaken (which is a Druid spell that doesn't require you to see the target, so that's fine) at a minimum - every other way I can think of to achieve the communication is less practical, like spamming Speak with Animals. If you're willing to give up the mount idea, a Gnome can just communicate with Small or Tiny animals. I agree with Lathius - using a Familiar for this is way easier.
A familiar sounds like a better option if you can get one as a druid, not sure if you can without taking a feat. I don't think druids can talk to animals by default, they still need a spell like speak with animals. The DM may be cool with giving you a seeing eye wolf of sorts. But that's probably going to have to be homebrew so you'd need to talk with the DM.
I think it's going to have issues either way. A lot of spells require you to see the target, and seeing through a famliar's eyes in combat takes your main action every turn. It only lasts until the start of your next turn. Depending on how strict your DM is with things, playing a blind character is likely to be a HUGE disadvantage. So I'd definitely talk with them about the idea first to make sure that A. they are okay with it, and B. you are okay with whatever penalties and hardships would come with it. RAW, if I'm not mistaken, someone telling you the location of the enemy is not the same as being able to SEE them for spells that require you to see them or for avoiding disadvantage on attacks on foes you can't see etc.
In short, talk to your DM and see what you can work out with them. I don't think this is going to work RAW but if you have a DM willing to work with the idea, maybe you two can hash this out.
I wouldn't get too hung up on "no homebrew, RAW only". It might be easier to convince your DM that way, but for practical purposes you probably want them to buy into the idea rather than just rubber stamp it. Decide what you absolutely want in order to be satisfied with the concept and maybe try to get as close to that as possible while staying within the RAW, but if you can't quite get there work something out with your DM. I don't see a way to handle this so the mechanics of it all are covered by the RAW, at least not until tier 2 or higher, and you're almost certainly making things harder for your character. No reason not to waive the mechanical justifications from a fairness or balance point of view. Just having a bond with a mount that lets you see through its eyes without needing a spell or class ability in return for being blind is arguably perfectly fine. I'd be a little wary if there were no range limitation or the creature was a stealthy scout, but with a medium or large non-flying mount that's not a concern. Characters can buy mounts after all, they're even affordable pretty early on if you really want one, so the presence of one with the party can't be an issue either. Just work out what its capabilities in terms of combat and utility would be with your DM.
Beast Bond almost does what you want, but the communication from the animal to you is limited: "it can telepathically communicate simple emotions and concepts back to you". This doesn't seem like it would be enough to communicate the locations of enemies.
Speak with Animals could do the trick. I mean guiding you to target an enemy based on a verbal description seems pretty clumsy, but keeping in mind that attack rolls are at disadvantage when you're blind even if you know where the enemy is, I guess it's believable. In any case, most druid spells are based on saves, not attack rolls.
10 minutes is long enough that you could cast it before a fight if you know a fight is coming. But if you are surprised, you would have to waste a round casting the spell. Then again, if your DM lets your wolf attack on its own during that round, it could be fine.
Technically, RAW, you don't even need a beast companion. You know the position of unseen enemies unless they Hide, and when they attack or cast a spell they end their hide. Being blind just gives them the option to Hide from you regardless of cover, and gives you disadvantage on your Perception.
I think it's a neat idea, but really one you should hash out with your DM, as none of us can speak for their preferences or what they will and won't allow etc.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What are your thoughts on a blind druid having a wolf as a mount, with which they can communicate to gain information about locations of enemies n such?
Would that be possible without homebrew, maybe a bit reflavoring and RAW?
Something to discuss with the DM. (Most worries are solved with communication.)
My personal opinion is that it is viable with caveats surrounding the wolf's status to remove over-advantage, but that's just me and I'm not at your table.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
You might be better off with a familiar. The ability to communicate and see through their eyes already exists. With a mount, you'll also run into logistical issues like climbing ropes, tight dungeon spaces, and social settings where the mount won't be able to go.
You'd need to be a Small race and have a reliable way to communicate would require Awaken (which is a Druid spell that doesn't require you to see the target, so that's fine) at a minimum - every other way I can think of to achieve the communication is less practical, like spamming Speak with Animals. If you're willing to give up the mount idea, a Gnome can just communicate with Small or Tiny animals. I agree with Lathius - using a Familiar for this is way easier.
A familiar sounds like a better option if you can get one as a druid, not sure if you can without taking a feat. I don't think druids can talk to animals by default, they still need a spell like speak with animals. The DM may be cool with giving you a seeing eye wolf of sorts. But that's probably going to have to be homebrew so you'd need to talk with the DM.
I think it's going to have issues either way. A lot of spells require you to see the target, and seeing through a famliar's eyes in combat takes your main action every turn. It only lasts until the start of your next turn. Depending on how strict your DM is with things, playing a blind character is likely to be a HUGE disadvantage. So I'd definitely talk with them about the idea first to make sure that A. they are okay with it, and B. you are okay with whatever penalties and hardships would come with it. RAW, if I'm not mistaken, someone telling you the location of the enemy is not the same as being able to SEE them for spells that require you to see them or for avoiding disadvantage on attacks on foes you can't see etc.
In short, talk to your DM and see what you can work out with them. I don't think this is going to work RAW but if you have a DM willing to work with the idea, maybe you two can hash this out.
I wouldn't get too hung up on "no homebrew, RAW only". It might be easier to convince your DM that way, but for practical purposes you probably want them to buy into the idea rather than just rubber stamp it. Decide what you absolutely want in order to be satisfied with the concept and maybe try to get as close to that as possible while staying within the RAW, but if you can't quite get there work something out with your DM. I don't see a way to handle this so the mechanics of it all are covered by the RAW, at least not until tier 2 or higher, and you're almost certainly making things harder for your character. No reason not to waive the mechanical justifications from a fairness or balance point of view. Just having a bond with a mount that lets you see through its eyes without needing a spell or class ability in return for being blind is arguably perfectly fine. I'd be a little wary if there were no range limitation or the creature was a stealthy scout, but with a medium or large non-flying mount that's not a concern. Characters can buy mounts after all, they're even affordable pretty early on if you really want one, so the presence of one with the party can't be an issue either. Just work out what its capabilities in terms of combat and utility would be with your DM.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Beast Bond almost does what you want, but the communication from the animal to you is limited: "it can telepathically communicate simple emotions and concepts back to you". This doesn't seem like it would be enough to communicate the locations of enemies.
Speak with Animals could do the trick. I mean guiding you to target an enemy based on a verbal description seems pretty clumsy, but keeping in mind that attack rolls are at disadvantage when you're blind even if you know where the enemy is, I guess it's believable. In any case, most druid spells are based on saves, not attack rolls.
10 minutes is long enough that you could cast it before a fight if you know a fight is coming. But if you are surprised, you would have to waste a round casting the spell. Then again, if your DM lets your wolf attack on its own during that round, it could be fine.
Technically, RAW, you don't even need a beast companion. You know the position of unseen enemies unless they Hide, and when they attack or cast a spell they end their hide. Being blind just gives them the option to Hide from you regardless of cover, and gives you disadvantage on your Perception.
I like the idea a lot!
I think it's a neat idea, but really one you should hash out with your DM, as none of us can speak for their preferences or what they will and won't allow etc.