i was just curious when a snake made from find familiar uses bite on someone it says they take 1 piercing damage, and the target must make a DC 10 Constitution saving throw, taking 5 (2d4) poison damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one. so if im reading this correctly does that mean they take 5 damage + the 2 d4 or is that just a example of how much the 2 d4 could be its been bugging me for afew days in im just curious

The 5 is the average damage they would take. So if you were a DM you could roll 2d4 OR, to speed things up, just say they take 5 damage INSTEAD.

Normally for a player, you always roll for damage.

thanks for the help so much its been bugging the hell outta me 

Note that unless you're a Warlock with the Pact of the Chain feature, a familiar from the Find Familiar spell can't attack.

Quote from The_Ace_of_Rogues >>

Note that unless you're a Warlock with the Pact of the Chain feature, a familiar from the Find Familiar spell can't attack.

I think you've highlighted one of the flaws of playing D&D on D&D Beyond or on any other online platform into which the rules are plugged: Things can only ever be by the book.

When players can't negotiate things with their DMs that deviate even ever so slightly from what is written, a certain magic that's been with the game since the beginning is lost.

yea me and my dm got rid of that since it doesnt make much sense tho i am playing a annoying class so i wouldnt have blamed him for enforcing that rule

i love pact of chain to much

Quote from Kotath >>

What should be remembered is that it is not an actual snake. It is some sort of summoned spirit in the form of a snake. A regular familiar does not get all the abilities of the form. A pact of the chain familiar does. 

Like I said: by the book.

A game that for almost fifty years has had DMs allow all manner of things at their tables that deviated from what was written in the rulebooks should not be treated as if it were a sport. It's pretty much the first rule of D&D: the rules in the books ain't in charge; the DM is.

Hence why my post was about how digitizing the game means limiting the game.

I wasn't in any way questioning the differences between a regular familiar and pact-of-the-chain familiar as stated in the player's handbook.

Quote from Kotath >>

Well yes, DM's can change things. That does not mean they always should.

However, I was merely explaining how RAW does make sense. And, as a DM, if a player pressed it, I would ask them if they would rather they had summoned a normal snake with all the normal bite-y stats that they could not likely communicate with nor that has all the other benefits familiars have.

As for digital limiting things, not really. Any DM can manually roll anything they want. Or ask any player to manually roll any given thing, just as it is done playing with pencil, paper and physical dice. There is no 'digital limiting.'

Character creation here is not limited to what is allowed in the rules in the books?

Quote from Kotath >>

How is a familiar part of character creation? It does not even exist until the casting of the Find Familiar spell. And after casting, there is no more support for the familiar's existence than there is in conventional pen and paper style. Plus, again, a DM can allow any manual rolling they wish. 

I am not talking strictly about familiars.

I am talking broadly about how any online platform into which the rules as written are plugged cannot compete with the illimitable possibilities afforded players sitting around a table.

You're right. A DM can allow any manual roll.

But a player with a character with an overhauled class or a whole new one? With features not reflected here? With spells not reflected here? With effects for any of these not reflected here?

How many players create characters using only the rules as written as this is all that is made available to them here on Beyond?

How is that not potentially limiting the experience of the game when held up against players at tables where a player might negotiate some tweaks to a class or be given the freedom to come up with some feature or some spell?

I'm sure some are doing this and just have any additions or changes noted elsewhere. But you can't tell me most coming to the hobby since the advent of Beyond or observing the push for D&D to be seen as what can be seen on this website aren't limiting themselves to the rules as written. Just look at the ardor with which people await the next playtest or the next book. Many crave official releases as if without them they couldn't just make things up themselves.

EDIT: Your response about how Find Familiar works is a perfect example of what I mean when I say the rules as written should not be a cage in which the players are forced to play. What if a DM were to rule that all wizards begin play with familiars? Sought to hook the party's wizard into the adventure with something involving his or her familiar?

To make sure that the OP is not confused by the off-topic posts above, the proposition that you can’t have an attacking familiar be expressed on your character sheet is simply incorrect.

If, for whatever reason, OP wants the text of the spell to reflect the home rule to the spell (though ignoring the text is probably sufficient, and ignoring text folks don’t like has been part of D&D for generations), it simply is a matter of popping over to the homebrew section, creating a copy of Find Familiar, and deleting the line of rules text. Now your sheet’s spells accurately match homebrew.

Additionally, adding the snake stat block to the extras tab will include the whole stat block, including attacks.

Beyond has a great set of tools to homebrew basically anything you would like, so OP should really not feel like the system is somehow limiting them.