So, if I had an Imp familiar through Pact of The Chain, they could attune to a magic tattoo. But would it fall to the ground if I dismiss it?
As per the spell:
"Whenever the familiar drops to 0 hit points or disappears into the pocket dimension, it leaves behind in its space anything it was wearing or carrying."
But do magic tattoos count as being either worn or carried?
So, if I had an Imp familiar through Pact of The Chain, they could attune to a magic tattoo. But would it fall to the ground if I dismiss it?
As per the spell:
"Whenever the familiar drops to 0 hit points or disappears into the pocket dimension, it leaves behind in its space anything it was wearing or carrying."
But do magic tattoos count as being either worn or carried?
Up to your DM, we have no strict RAW handling tattoos. Note that being magical or not is irrelevant.
If your attunement to the tattoo ends, the tattoo vanishes, and the needle reappears in your space.
This implies that the tattoo is more worn than embedded in the skin, so I would rule that the tattoo is worn.
It doesn't - it implies that the ink embedded in your skin is still capable of transmutation magic so it can turn into a needle and capable of conjuration magic so it can teleport - but your ruling is also 100% consistent, by which I mean it won't cause rules paradoxes, because we don't have tattoo rules to contradict. However, note you will have potentially significant rules interactions with rules that interact with worn objects, such as heat metal (if the DM rules the ink is metallic). There's absolutely nothing wrong with this ruling from a perspective of other rules. One interaction you'll want to think about before it comes up is Antimagic Field - do you want the AMF to make the tattoo "fall off" or stay "on" the skin?
Personally, I would rule at my table that magical tattoos temporarily become body parts for rules purposes, but this is homebrew, not RAW. This has other rules interactions which are also not paradoxes and also potentially unintended - it's just a question of which consequences I prefer, as the DM.
I think quindraco at least has a point in that whatever you rule, you're in homebrew territory.
With that being said, I think the sentence in the find familiar description is pretty clearly there to prevent the familiar from leaving with valuables, and I think I'd call a magic item tattoo a valuable, even if it is on the familiar's skin. So, I'd rule that the tattoo stays (and reverts to a needle) when the familiar stays. On the other hand, I'd just suppress its function within an antimagic field because the text in the spell indicates that is what is expected of other magic items. Sometimes, I find it is worth thinking about the game design reason a rule seems to exist for and apply logic to that ruling when a new situation comes up.
So, if I had an Imp familiar through Pact of The Chain, they could attune to a magic tattoo. But would it fall to the ground if I dismiss it?
As per the spell:
"Whenever the familiar drops to 0 hit points or disappears into the pocket dimension, it leaves behind in its space anything it was wearing or carrying."
But do magic tattoos count as being either worn or carried?
I'd treat a magic tattoo as being worn or carried for the purposed of a familiar dropping.
I would treat a tattoo as being worn. A good DM should take a lot of care before letting players give magic items to familiars.
Honestly, I have found that in general it is a BAD idea to let Familiars attune to anything (unless you rule that anything they attune to also counts as being attuned to you). Way too many abuses. Lots of magic items that help allies.
Consider the following magic items, all from the DMG:
Amulet of the Planes
Arrow Catching Shield
Candle of Invocation
Crystal Ball, any version
Cube of Force
And that is just the A's and C's. Some of these require a warlock's Pact of the Chain familiar to be really abused, an intelligent familiar helps a lot. Attunement is supposed to be a real limit, do not negate it.
Note, Hirelings, followers, and even animal companions are a different matter. If the creature can decide to leave you and gets to keep the items they are attuned to that is a different story. But familiars cannot leave you and they cannot really be killed. They are more like an extension of you than a different person.
* If the familiar is dismissed, it retains the tattoo in its pocket dimension while it waits to be resummoned.
* If the familiar is dropped to 0 hit points and vanishes, its attunement to the tattoo immediately breaks and the needle appears in the space where the familiar was.
The situation that I'm not sure how to deal with is if the familiar has been dismissed to its pocket dimension, and you re-cast Find Familiar to summon it in a new form. If was generous I'd allow it to arrive in its new form already attuned to the tattoo. But I'm inclined to be a little more restrictive and say the familiar appears in its new form without the tattoo, and the needle appears on the ground next to it.
Honestly, I have found that in general it is a BAD idea to let Familiars attune to anything (unless you rule that anything they attune to also counts as being attuned to you). Way too many abuses. Lots of magic items that help allies.
This. I have never liked the idea of familiars (or other bound constructs) attune to or using magic items beyond a common healing potion. And I agree with Mog_Dracov its a very different case than a hireling. A Tressym with a Ring of Spell Storing around its paw, isn't doing something cool; its getting around a limitation. The shenanigans that a battle master artificer that has spent a feat to learn Find Familiar and has a Steel Defender and a homunculus, each with 3 attunement slots, plus 3-6 of the artificer is an extreme version of how this could go bad.
Even if you had to have the item bound, and let the familiar manipulate it feels wrong too; an owl that borrowed your Wand of Fireballs makes a mess of the balance of the action economy. Never mind the familiar having low health; one fireball going off first may be worth the risk.
But back to the OP: ifit was being allowed, by RAW the needle is dropped where the familiar last was. Personally I would let that particular item stay on the familiar until you had time to resummon it based on the nature of embedding it within your skin, and removing it from play as an incentive to keep your familiar safe.
Of course sniping an imp above a haystack and letting the needle drop there would be amusing.
* If the familiar is dismissed, it retains the tattoo in its pocket dimension while it waits to be resummoned.
* If the familiar is dropped to 0 hit points and vanishes, its attunement to the tattoo immediately breaks and the needle appears in the space where the familiar was.
The situation that I'm not sure how to deal with is if the familiar has been dismissed to its pocket dimension, and you re-cast Find Familiar to summon it in a new form. If was generous I'd allow it to arrive in its new form already attuned to the tattoo. But I'm inclined to be a little more restrictive and say the familiar appears in its new form without the tattoo, and the needle appears on the ground next to it.
Anything that can be harmlessly removed and reattached is "wearable". (Example: a Halloween mask, or magic tattoo)
Anything that can be applied, but is destroyed upon removal, is also commonly said to be "worn", but should technically be considered already consumed. It is now an "effect". (Example: Face Paint, or mundane tattoo)
I'd rule that if the familiar is dismissed while attuned to a magical tattoo, the needle falls to the ground, but as long as no one else attuned to it, the familiar can re-apply the magic tattoo without the normally requisite short rest because it is still attuned.
The bottom line is that familiars shouldn't be able to be used as extra-dimensional vaults.
So, if I had an Imp familiar through Pact of The Chain, they could attune to a magic tattoo. But would it fall to the ground if I dismiss it?
As per the spell:
"Whenever the familiar drops to 0 hit points or disappears into the pocket dimension, it leaves behind in its space anything it was wearing or carrying."
But do magic tattoos count as being either worn or carried?
Up to your DM, we have no strict RAW handling tattoos. Note that being magical or not is irrelevant.
Per the tattoo description:
If your attunement to the tattoo ends, the tattoo vanishes, and the needle reappears in your space.
This implies that the tattoo is more worn than embedded in the skin, so I would rule that the tattoo is worn.
It doesn't - it implies that the ink embedded in your skin is still capable of transmutation magic so it can turn into a needle and capable of conjuration magic so it can teleport - but your ruling is also 100% consistent, by which I mean it won't cause rules paradoxes, because we don't have tattoo rules to contradict. However, note you will have potentially significant rules interactions with rules that interact with worn objects, such as heat metal (if the DM rules the ink is metallic). There's absolutely nothing wrong with this ruling from a perspective of other rules. One interaction you'll want to think about before it comes up is Antimagic Field - do you want the AMF to make the tattoo "fall off" or stay "on" the skin?
Personally, I would rule at my table that magical tattoos temporarily become body parts for rules purposes, but this is homebrew, not RAW. This has other rules interactions which are also not paradoxes and also potentially unintended - it's just a question of which consequences I prefer, as the DM.
I think quindraco at least has a point in that whatever you rule, you're in homebrew territory.
With that being said, I think the sentence in the find familiar description is pretty clearly there to prevent the familiar from leaving with valuables, and I think I'd call a magic item tattoo a valuable, even if it is on the familiar's skin. So, I'd rule that the tattoo stays (and reverts to a needle) when the familiar stays. On the other hand, I'd just suppress its function within an antimagic field because the text in the spell indicates that is what is expected of other magic items. Sometimes, I find it is worth thinking about the game design reason a rule seems to exist for and apply logic to that ruling when a new situation comes up.
I'd treat a magic tattoo as being worn or carried for the purposed of a familiar dropping.
I would treat a tattoo as being worn. A good DM should take a lot of care before letting players give magic items to familiars.
Honestly, I have found that in general it is a BAD idea to let Familiars attune to anything (unless you rule that anything they attune to also counts as being attuned to you). Way too many abuses. Lots of magic items that help allies.
Consider the following magic items, all from the DMG:
And that is just the A's and C's. Some of these require a warlock's Pact of the Chain familiar to be really abused, an intelligent familiar helps a lot. Attunement is supposed to be a real limit, do not negate it.
Note, Hirelings, followers, and even animal companions are a different matter. If the creature can decide to leave you and gets to keep the items they are attuned to that is a different story. But familiars cannot leave you and they cannot really be killed. They are more like an extension of you than a different person.
The way that seems most logical to me is:
* If the familiar is dismissed, it retains the tattoo in its pocket dimension while it waits to be resummoned.
* If the familiar is dropped to 0 hit points and vanishes, its attunement to the tattoo immediately breaks and the needle appears in the space where the familiar was.
The situation that I'm not sure how to deal with is if the familiar has been dismissed to its pocket dimension, and you re-cast Find Familiar to summon it in a new form. If was generous I'd allow it to arrive in its new form already attuned to the tattoo. But I'm inclined to be a little more restrictive and say the familiar appears in its new form without the tattoo, and the needle appears on the ground next to it.
This. I have never liked the idea of familiars (or other bound constructs) attune to or using magic items beyond a common healing potion. And I agree with Mog_Dracov its a very different case than a hireling. A Tressym with a Ring of Spell Storing around its paw, isn't doing something cool; its getting around a limitation. The shenanigans that a battle master artificer that has spent a feat to learn Find Familiar and has a Steel Defender and a homunculus, each with 3 attunement slots, plus 3-6 of the artificer is an extreme version of how this could go bad.
Even if you had to have the item bound, and let the familiar manipulate it feels wrong too; an owl that borrowed your Wand of Fireballs makes a mess of the balance of the action economy. Never mind the familiar having low health; one fireball going off first may be worth the risk.
But back to the OP: if it was being allowed, by RAW the needle is dropped where the familiar last was. Personally I would let that particular item stay on the familiar until you had time to resummon it based on the nature of embedding it within your skin, and removing it from play as an incentive to keep your familiar safe.
Of course sniping an imp above a haystack and letting the needle drop there would be amusing.
That's probably how I would run it too.
Agreeing with treating magical tattoos as "worn".
Anything that can be harmlessly removed and reattached is "wearable". (Example: a Halloween mask, or magic tattoo)
Anything that can be applied, but is destroyed upon removal, is also commonly said to be "worn", but should technically be considered already consumed. It is now an "effect". (Example: Face Paint, or mundane tattoo)
I'd rule that if the familiar is dismissed while attuned to a magical tattoo, the needle falls to the ground, but as long as no one else attuned to it, the familiar can re-apply the magic tattoo without the normally requisite short rest because it is still attuned.
The bottom line is that familiars shouldn't be able to be used as extra-dimensional vaults.
Thanks for the input!
And for those of you worrying about balance, don't worry; I'm theory crafting for a high-level PvP oneshot. More of a hypothetical really.