Nerfing the Help action

[Tanarii]

Specifically, should I nerf the Help action in combat? (As a house-rule.)

(Going to use the term Helper for the creature taking the Help action, and Helpee for the creature receiving the benefit. For clarity and conciseness.)

First off, it's clearly pointless when the Helper could do more by themselves than they contribute via adding advantage to the Helpee. This is most evident in a straight DPR vs DPR situation. That means that Helpers should (in a DPR situation) only Help if their DPR is less than 1/4 the Helpee.

The other time it's worth it is when there's an effect / rider that the Helpee's attack will bring into play, or when there's something degrading the Helper's combat capability.

So, we've got several 'working as intended' situations for a PC using the Help action in combat. Basically, the Helper doesn't have a reasonable attack option for some reason or the Helpee has a special attack they're using.


Then there's henchmen, mooks, and companions, and why I'm thinking about house-ruling Help in combat. I like that henchmen and mooks and gang up to get some effectiveness. It feels thematic to have them assisting the PC (and BBEG for mooks). But I'd love to focus them on using Help actions mainly when the attack is special, not all the time.

What is bothering me in particular if the damn Familiars, and other similar creatures (sometimes including conjuring low CR creatures). Creatures with NO effective combat contribution are suddenly a +25% DPR increase. If they're on the party side on an ongoing basis, it's an massive buff.

So I'm thinking of several possible house rules, and want to get some feedback on them:

1) Familiars can't Help. Warlock Chain Master can use his action to have his Familar Help (ie same cost as having it attack). Other similar creatures may be ruled the same on a case-by-case basis.

2) Require an attack roll to help. Given Bounded Accuracy, mooks and even familiars can still hit hard targets. The advantage of it is that it focuses help even more on the 'Helpee has a special effect / rider on the upcoming attack' aspect. The disadvantage of this method is that it pushes the situations in which Help is helpful down even further in terms of DPR. Which, given that familiars are basically worthless DPR themselves, probably won't do anything to stop them from being a Helper.

3) tell players to stop spamming help. This approach works well at small tables with players who are close personal friends. Unfortunately neither of those are true. Introducing a house rule at all is going to be tricky. For players using Familiars, I can offer them an option to trade out the spell, but it's still going to be an clear nerf. Henchmen have value for other reasons, so it may fly to just request people tone it down.

4) Familiars may use the Help action, but it costs the owners Action. Effective allowing Help actions at range through Familiars.

5) some other options? Ideas are welcome.

Edit: added option 4.

[Corran]

2) Require an attack roll to help. Given Bounded Accuracy, mooks and even familiars can still hit hard targets. The advantage of it is that it focuses help even more on the 'Helpee has a special effect / rider on the upcoming attack' aspect. The disadvantage of this method is that it pushes the situations in which Help is helpful down even further in terms of DPR. Which, given that familiars are basically worthless DPR themselves, probably won't do anything to stop them from being a Helper.
Instinctively, I would say that this is a very good houserule. I would be curious to see how it changes things in actual play, but I definitely get the logic behind this suggestion, and I think it is a balanced way to deal with the spamming. Having the familiar spam the help action is not bad imo, constant advantage (guaranteed by the 100% success chance of the help action) is a bit of a problem though. Requiring to hit AC is a nice balancing factor, that still allows the familiar to be useful, but not too useful.

[RickAllison]

Instinctively, I would say that this is a very good houserule. I would be curious to see how it changes things in actual play, but I definitely get the logic behind this suggestion, and I think it is a balanced way to deal with the spamming. Having the familiar spam the help action is not bad imo, constant advantage (guaranteed by the 100% success chance of the help action) is a bit of a problem though. Requiring to hit AC is a nice balancing factor, that still allows the familiar to be useful, but not too useful.

It should be kept in mind that you only get advantage on the next attack roll for the creature. So it is perma-advantage for the Rogue, but most martials are only getting the bonus for one attacK. I suppose you could have several henchmen who Ready actions to help after Xth attack, but one familiar is providing one attack for the entire party with advantage.

[Giant2005]

Personally, I think number 1 is probably what was intended in the first place. It seems logical that something would need to be capable of fighting for it to help someone fight. It is just that they overlooked the need of a rule for such a thing.

[Corran]

It should be kept in mind that you only get advantage on the next attack roll for the creature. So it is perma-advantage for the Rogue, but most martials are only getting the bonus for one attacK. I suppose you could have several henchmen who Ready actions to help after Xth attack, but one familiar is providing one attack for the entire party with advantage.
Oh yes, this is a good point. I admit I had the AT rogue - familiar thing in mind, which is perhaps one of the strongest applications of the familiar taking the help action. So, putting everything else on the scale, but keeping in mind how powerful it can be in some cases, maybe an AC 10 instead of the target's AC might be a more balanced way to go about it? (Ofc I assume that there is a need to houserule this, as I haven't seen it yet in actual play, and also I am assuming that the RAI was for familiars to take the help action, of which I am not sure)

Wasn't there a rule in one of the playtest versions that in order for the help action to be successful you had to suceed against a DC (or AC in this case) of 10? Or am I confused with how it worked in previous editions?

[Malifice]

Specifically, should I nerf the Help action in combat? (As a house-rule.)

(Going to use the term Helper for the creature taking the Help action, and Helpee for the creature receiving the benefit. For clarity and conciseness.)

First off, it's clearly pointless when the Helper could do more by themselves than they contribute via adding advantage to the Helpee. This is most evident in a straight DPR vs DPR situation. That means that Helpers should (in a DPR situation) only Help if their DPR is less than 1/4 the Helpee.

The other time it's worth it is when there's an effect / rider that the Helpee's attack will bring into play, or when there's something degrading the Helper's combat capability.

So, we've got several 'working as intended' situations for a PC using the Help action in combat. Basically, the Helper doesn't have a reasonable attack option for some reason or the Helpee has a special attack they're using.


Then there's henchmen, mooks, and companions, and why I'm thinking about house-ruling Help in combat. I like that henchmen and mooks and gang up to get some effectiveness. It feels thematic to have them assisting the PC (and BBEG for mooks). But I'd love to focus them on using Help actions mainly when the attack is special, not all the time.

What is bothering me in particular if the damn Familiars, and other similar creatures (sometimes including conjuring low CR creatures). Creatures with NO effective combat contribution are suddenly a +25% DPR increase. If they're on the party side on an ongoing basis, it's an massive buff.

So I'm thinking of several possible house rules, and want to get some feedback on them:

1) Familiars can't Help. Warlock Chain Master can use his action to have his Familar Help (ie same cost as having it attack). Other similar creatures may be ruled the same on a case-by-case basis.

2) Require an attack roll to help. Given Bounded Accuracy, mooks and even familiars can still hit hard targets. The advantage of it is that it focuses help even more on the 'Helpee has a special effect / rider on the upcoming attack' aspect. The disadvantage of this method is that it pushes the situations in which Help is helpful down even further in terms of DPR. Which, given that familiars are basically worthless DPR themselves, probably won't do anything to stop them from being a Helper.

3) tell players to stop spamming help. This approach works well at small tables with players who are close personal friends. Unfortunately neither of those are true. Introducing a house rule at all is going to be tricky. For players using Familiars, I can offer them an option to trade out the spell, but it's still going to be an clear nerf. Henchmen have value for other reasons, so it may fly to just request people tone it down.

4) some other options? Ideas are welcome.

I dont let famliars help with many tasks.

Player: My Owl familiar flies into his face to distract him!
DM: Cool; the monster swats it away (rolls attack of opportunity). Your familiar is dead; you have advantage on your next attack.

[hymer]

I dont let famliars help with many tasks.

Me neither. I just don't punctuate it by coming up with little mechanical punishments when players overreach. I give them squeezed lemons, instead.

[Battlebooze]

I dont let famliars help with many tasks.

Player: My Owl familiar flies into his face to distract him!
DM: Cool; the monster swats it away (rolls attack of opportunity). Your familiar is dead; you have advantage on your next attack.


Player: My Owl Familiar has flyby, he doesn't trigger that attack.

DM: Shut up. You don't get to have fun.

[BurgerBeast]

Player: My Owl Familiar has flyby, he doesn't trigger that attack.

DM: Shut up. You don't get to have fun.

This. Or:

Player: My owl familiar never left the monster's threat range. It's just in the monster's threat range and circling. How did the monster get an AoO?

[ad_hoc]

I don't let familiars take the help action either.

I think that is the easy fix and also has been said clearly an oversight.

Beastmasters require their action to have their beast use Help, but familiars can just do it? Obviously not right.

Familiars can also do other things by the rules such as Use an Object. I put limits on that as well.

[Sabeta]

If I recall correctly, SA stated that Companions could take the Help action, and that it was balanced by most companions having incredibly low AC and/or Health.

So yeah, your owl flies in to Help. On the bears turn it eats the owl, then takes a swat at the GWM Fighter who now stands a realistic chance of missing his next swing without a Helper. I don't really find Help terribly overpowered unless your creature can't spare the time mauling a butterfly for some reason.

Edit:
Source for Help Action Familiar's: http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/12/21/can-a-familiar-use-the-help-action/

[Tanarii]

Enemies taking actions to "swat" a Familiar is an action not taken dealing with a Party member. Thats not an insignificant loss of action economy in many situations.

Interesting that so many people don't allow Familiars to Help. I expected quite a lot of being told that I was the devil for even considering it.

The main question now becomes is how to implement it without an outcry from Familiar using players lol

[Sabeta]

A random goblin can take out a pixie or an owl. Any boss worth his salt either has multiple actions per turn or mooks to protect him.

I don't think the problem with Help is so much the Action itself, but that Familiars are just so strong on their own. They make perfect, invisible scouts (all enemies have -5 to see them, while gaining advantage on stealth checks...), can deliver Touch Spells for you, AND they can take the help action. It has less to do with Help being powerful, and everything to do with Familiars breaking action economy. If I were to change anything about it (I personally wouldn't, but if), then I would agree that the Caster must use up their Action to allow their Familiar to Help.

[MrStabby]

Help is powerful, but it may depend on your encounters. If you have enemy casters for example make sure that the familiar is subject to any AoE spells.

As it is, the rules in both the PHB and the errata prohibit helping something that the helper couldn't do themselves and familiars are prohibited from attacking. If you play by the rules in the rulebooks then this is not an issue at all.

This gets more complex if you move to a more descriptive approach. You want a familiar to help? How are they doing it? An Owl flaps at something? Ok, what if it is blind? What if it is not easily distracted - you can make a concentration save to not be distracted from your spell by being hit with an axe but can't try and focus on hitting your enemy with a stick? How should more automatic opponents like zombies and constructs react? Zombies don't have the mental faculties to not run into lava but are so sensitive to net getting dust in their eyes that they shy away from a flapping bird...

Personally I think the best way is to just be aware of what type of game you are playing - if it is more of a tactical emphasis with use of abilities as optimal in a combat situation and if the abilities are abstracted then stick with it as a pure rules based interaction (whichever way you want to rule it). If you are focused on a more role-playing game with descriptions of actions, then probably better ensure the described actions match the expected effects on a case by case basis.

[Coffee_Dragon]

In my group we quickly realized owl familiar + rogue meant near-guaranteed sneak attack every turn. I think we didn't really go overboard with it, but the DM still encouraged us to stop e.g. by bending the rules to let enemies kill off the owl even though it technically should have been able to keep out of sight between turns. But I guess it's an ace up our sleeve if we absolutely need it.

[RickAllison]

In my group we quickly realized owl familiar + rogue meant near-guaranteed sneak attack every turn. I think we didn't really go overboard with it, but the DM still encouraged us to stop e.g. by bending the rules to let enemies kill off the owl even though it technically should have been able to keep out of sight between turns. But I guess it's an ace up our sleeve if we absolutely need it.

Your DM does know that rogues were balanced with the idea that they are getting Smeak Attack every turn, right? Letting a rogue have it every turn is how the game is balanced, and removing the possibility (familiars are a reliable way to do it, at the risk of being easily destroyed) actually is what unbalances them.

[Coffee_Dragon]

Your DM does know that rogues were balanced with the idea that they are getting Smeak Attack every turn, right? Letting a rogue have it every turn is how the game is balanced, and removing the possibility (familiars are a reliable way to do it, at the risk of being easily destroyed) actually is what unbalances them.

I don't think any of us knows it. As the rogue I've been getting SA off pretty consistently using two weapons, support from the fighter in our party of three, and situationally sniping from hiding, but it's nowhere near guaranteed. It's especially shaky when I roam freely to hit a particular target and can't get "flanking" from the fighter, basically leaving me just inspiration which regrettably is rarely enough to one-shot even an enemy spellcaster.

When we were just starting out with 5E there was actually some concern at early levels that I was consistently outperforming the fighter with respect to raw damage, which is just Not How It's Supposed To Be in D&D, and I had to reassure them by arguing that 1) the situation was likely to change as the fighter picked up tricks like Action Surge and Extra Attack, and b) I was entirely relying on the fighter to get my SA damage anyway.

I'm all for getting me more sneak attacks, but in this particular case I could understand the DM thought things were getting a little gamey. Also I'm our alternating DM, so what goes around comes around...

[RickAllison]

I don't think any of us knows it. As the rogue I've been getting SA off pretty consistently using two weapons, support from the fighter in our party of three, and situationally sniping from hiding, but it's nowhere near guaranteed. It's especially shaky when I roam freely to hit a particular target and can't get "flanking" from the fighter, basically leaving me just inspiration which regrettably is rarely enough to one-shot even an enemy spellcaster.

When we were just starting out with 5E there was actually some concern at early levels that I was consistently outperforming the fighter with respect to raw damage, which is just Not How It's Supposed To Be in D&D, and I had to reassure them by arguing that 1) the situation was likely to change as the fighter picked up tricks like Action Surge and Extra Attack, and b) I was entirely relying on the fighter to get my SA damage anyway.

I'm all for getting me more sneak attacks, but in this particular case I could understand the DM thought things were getting a little gamey. Also I'm our alternating DM, so what goes around comes around...

It's not "guaranteed" when you are getting an attack with advantage either. It becomes little different than TWF, Hiding with a bonus action, or otherwise working to get to roll two dice. TWF is reliable, but takes up a bonus action; Hiding requires a hiding spot and you need to roll not-badly; familiars are reliable up until anyone attacks them, as they will probably die. It is no more "guaranteed" or cheesy than using TWF to get a second attack.

[energyscholar]

There's no need at all to 'nerf' the help action. For example, while that helpful familiar won't take an opportunity attack, it's regular use reminds you it's there when the Fireball strikes. Just be reasonable about it, and let the helpful sorts have their fun.

[MeeposFire]

Help is powerful, but it may depend on your encounters. If you have enemy casters for example make sure that the familiar is subject to any AoE spells.

As it is, the rules in both the PHB and the errata prohibit helping something that the helper couldn't do themselves and familiars are prohibited from attacking. If you play by the rules in the rulebooks then this is not an issue at all.

This gets more complex if you move to a more descriptive approach. You want a familiar to help? How are they doing it? An Owl flaps at something? Ok, what if it is blind? What if it is not easily distracted - you can make a concentration save to not be distracted from your spell by being hit with an axe but can't try and focus on hitting your enemy with a stick? How should more automatic opponents like zombies and constructs react? Zombies don't have the mental faculties to not run into lava but are so sensitive to net getting dust in their eyes that they shy away from a flapping bird...

Personally I think the best way is to just be aware of what type of game you are playing - if it is more of a tactical emphasis with use of abilities as optimal in a combat situation and if the abilities are abstracted then stick with it as a pure rules based interaction (whichever way you want to rule it). If you are focused on a more role-playing game with descriptions of actions, then probably better ensure the described actions match the expected effects on a case by case basis.

Actually I think the rule actually says the helper cannot help in a skill that it cannot do. Attacking is not in the rules as a skill.

[Hrugner]

Is this a theoretical problem, or a real problem happening at a table? It's one more source of advantage with little investment in a game full of things that fit that description, what is it that makes this method feel worse?

If you need to adjust it, I'd consider something minimal like using up a players reaction to accept the help.

[NNescio]

There's no need at all to 'nerf' the help action. For example, while that helpful familiar won't take an opportunity attack, it's regular use reminds you it's there when the Fireball strikes. Just be reasonable about it, and let the helpful sorts have their fun.

That's why Chainlock Imps are awesome.

[Giant2005]

That's why Chainlock Imps are awesome.

Or just regular Owls. They have nothing to fear from AOEs either (aside from meteors, but everything fears meteors).

[jas61292]

Or just regular Owls. They have nothing to fear from AOEs either (aside from meteors, but everything fears meteors).

As nice as owls seem, their garbage AC and HP makes them far less impressive than people make them out to be. A commoner can pick up a plain old, non-weaponized rock from the ground, throw it at an owl from long rang, and still kill it 25% of the time. Any enemy with an even mildly respectable ranged attack will almost always kill it in one attack.

And as far as AoEs, the ability to fly away sounds nice, but then you remember that you actually have to be close enough to fly in AND fly out, meaning you are at most 30 feet from the enemy. That is enough to keep you out of range of smaller spells aimed for the teammate who is engaging that foe, but when an enemy drops a 40 foot diameter fireball, the owl is getting fried.

[Giant2005]

As nice as owls seem, their garbage AC and HP makes them far less impressive than people make them out to be. A commoner can pick up a plain old, non-weaponized rock from the ground, throw it at an owl from long rang, and still kill it 25% of the time. Any enemy with an even mildly respectable ranged attack will almost always kill it in one attack.
That doesn't matter so much - if the familiar absorbs an attack that would have otherwise hit someone else, then it has probably been more useful than if it had lasted the entire fight while giving advantage to a single attack each round.


And as far as AoEs, the ability to fly away sounds nice, but then you remember that you actually have to be close enough to fly in AND fly out, meaning you are at most 30 feet from the enemy. That is enough to keep you out of range of smaller spells aimed for the teammate who is engaging that foe, but when an enemy drops a 40 foot diameter fireball, the owl is getting fried.
Unless the second target is directly below the owl (a space which should be occupied by the owl's target anyway), then it is impossible to hit both an owl that is 35' in the air as well as hit medium-sized ground targets with the same fireball. Either way, I'd much rather have a fireball be aimed so it hits the owl and one ally, than one that is aimed to hit multiple allies.

[MrStabby]

Unless the second target is directly below the owl (a space which should be occupied by the owl's target anyway), then it is impossible to hit both an owl that is 35' in the air as well as hit medium-sized ground targets with the same fireball. Either way, I'd much rather have a fireball be aimed so it hits the owl and one ally, than one that is aimed to hit multiple allies.

As long as there are no encounters indoors, this should help.

[Tanarii]

Is this a theoretical problem, or a real problem happening at a table? It's one more source of advantage with little investment in a game full of things that fit that description, what is it that makes this method feel worse?Its commonly used, and feels very cheesy, since it provides a constant source of advantage. Barbarians get that, but at a somewhat balanced cost of all enemies getting advantage back. And even then, it's almost always going to be used.

An effectively free always on advantage is, IMO, overpowered. Especially one that takes enemy action economy to counter. It's all very well to say 'AoE' but those aren't extremely common in lower levels of play.


If you need to adjust it, I'd consider something minimal like using up a players reaction to accept the help.actually, that give me an idea for another option. Adding it to the OP.

4) Familiars may use the Help action, but it costs the owners Action. Effective allowing Help actions at range through Familiars.

[RickAllison]

Its commonly used, and feels very cheesy, since it provides a constant source of advantage. Barbarians get that, but at a somewhat balanced cost of all enemies getting advantage back. And even then, it's almost always going to be used.

An effectively free always on advantage is, IMO, overpowered. Especially one that takes enemy action economy to counter. It's all very well to say 'AoE' but those aren't extremely common in lower levels of play.

actually, that give me an idea for another option. Adding it to the OP.

4) Familiars may use the Help action, but it costs the owners Action. Effective allowing Help actions at range through Familiars.

It is not "always on advantage", it is advantage for one attack for one PC per round. That fits for a rogue or a caster using GFB/BB as they put all their eggs into one attack, but it does nothing to help any other attackers. Consistent advantage on one attack per round for the party is very different than "always on advantage".

[Tanarii]

It is not "always on advantage", it is advantage for one attack for one PC per round. That fits for a rogue or a caster using GFB/BB as they put all their eggs into one attack, but it does nothing to help any other attackers. Consistent advantage on one attack per round for the party is very different than "always on advantage".
Okay fair correction. It's free once per round advantage per character with a familiar, NPC ally, or henchman, that doesn't have something better to do with its action.

But that's more than enough to be an irritation to a DM when parties involve several of those. Especially multiple familiars.

[JellyPooga]

Okay fair correction. It's free once per round advantage per character with a familiar, NPC ally, or henchman, that doesn't have something better to do with its action.

But that's more than enough to be an irritation to a DM when parties involve several of those. Especially multiple familiars.

Henchmen, familiars, etc. can't (or shouldn't) do much to Help when they're otherwise engaged themselves. Any creature that isn't specifically a PC is, strictly speaking, an NPC (even if they're a Class Feature) and NPC's don't throw their lives away for PC's without a very compelling reason. "I'm more than some numbers on a sheet!" is the rallying cry of every Hireling and Henchman (and a fair few Familiars and Animal Companions) that ever got sacrificed on the altar of PC indifference. Don't let your PC's get away with such nonchalance about the mooks playing for their team.

Also, never forget; Rule 0.1) Anything the Players do, the GM can always do better. If the PC's are bringing an army, then the appropriate challenge for them is another army. There's a reason a single Hero can't defeat an army; numerical superiority actually counts for something in 5ed. This is a feature, not a bug. Don't try and fix it, 'cos it's not broken.

You need to challenge them in ways that actually challenge them; throwing the same 4 orcs at a party of 8, even if only half of them are actually PC's, is not a challenge. Adjust your encounters to accommodate the party...the whole party, not just the PC's.

[Yuki Akuma]

Henchmen, familiars, etc. can't (or shouldn't) do much to Help when they're otherwise engaged themselves. Any creature that isn't specifically a PC is, strictly speaking, an NPC (even if they're a Class Feature) and NPC's don't throw their lives away for PC's without a very compelling reason. "I'm more than some numbers on a sheet!" is the rallying cry of every Hireling and Henchman (and a fair few Familiars and Animal Companions) that ever got sacrificed on the altar of PC indifference. Don't let your PC's get away with such nonchalance about the mooks playing for their team.

Yeah, but familiars have to follow every order given by their master, and actually can't die anyway. They're not actually animals, they're spirits.

[JellyPooga]

Yeah, but familiars have to follow every order given by their master, and actually can't die anyway. They're not actually animals, they're spirits.

Whilst they can't die, they can still feel pain. Even spirits in animal form don't like pain and I imagine anything sufficient to "kill" one would be pretty painful, even if they are just getting sent back to their home plane! The moral implications of willingly sacrificing a companion multiple times (technically) should also be considered; such a familiar that is repeatedly summoned and sacrificed should probably begin to display disloyalty to such a bad master, requiring constant supervision in order to be a useful tool once again. This is especially true of the more intelligent Chain Pact familiars, which may even go so far as to subvert or willfully misinterpret poorly worded orders (particularly if they're Evil, like the Imp).

This brings me to another thing that's also worth noting; the non-Chain Pact Familiars still only have animal intelligence. Unlike Find Steed, which does grant increased Int, Find Familiar only grants a different creature Type. This should limit the function of such a Familiar quite severely; perhaps not in combat so much (though stories about people using familiars to feed potions to people and the like should probably have been given a bit more consideration to the capabilities of a Familiar), but certainly when it comes to distraction and understanding. Given the order "follow that man", a Familiar is under no obligation to follow them indefinitely and if the target went through a dangerous place or one rich with the familiars favourite food, for example, I'd expect the familiar to at least have the option of abandoning their order in favour of their own self-preservation or self-satisfaction. At least until ordered specifically otherwise.

All this aside, my point still stands that whilst the Help action is a great use for an otherwise non-combatant NPC, it's not the Help action, nor the rules for Familiars that are broken...it's the encounter design being employed by the GM that isn't taking into account the fact that more guys on one side requires more guys on the other to remain challenging.

[Coffee_Dragon]

more guys on one side requires more guys on the other

It's just a single casting of a first level spell, manifesting a minute fraction of a wizard's power. Not even a class feature! If that counts as a "guy" upping encounter levels by themselves, then wizards are borkan and need to be banned.

[Battlebooze]

Okay, I swear I'm so tired of the familiars "can't attack" issue. Familiars can (both RAW and RAI) deliver touch spells and so are quite capable of being a real threat to someone.

Anyone savvy to what a familiar is, would know this. Anyone who isn't, who thinks the familiar is just an animal, would think it can attack normally.

I do agree Familiar's shouldn't be able to take the help action on anything they couldn't realistically contribute to, like picking a lock or negotiating a trade treaty with the king. Familar's can contribute directly to fights, by being a vector for touch attacks and other things like dropped oil.

They are pretty squishy though. If an NPC doesn't have any easier targets, whacking that annoying owl sure sounds like a good thing to do.

[JellyPooga]

It's just a single casting of a first level spell, manifesting a minute fraction of a wizard's power. Not even a class feature! If that counts as a "guy" upping encounter levels by themselves, then wizards are borkan and need to be banned.

By that count, we should look toward "fixing" the monetary system too.

For a mere gold piece, singular, you can hire an untrained mook for a whole working week (he gets the weekend off if he manages not to die)! Totally broken.

Why, with just your starting gold, you could hire 10 untrained guys for three days, at the low low price of 6gp, get the lot of them killed over the course of those three days, reclaim your money off their cold dead corpses, reap the reward of whatever quest you hired them to Help with, go back to town and repeat the whole affair! What's more, anyone can do this, regardless of Class, Race or Background!

Definitely needs fixing, right? :smallamused:

Regardless of the source of any additional characters, whether it's from a Class Feature, hirelings, a spell or just buddies along for the ride, the encounter difficulty needs to be adjusted accordingly. If, as GM, you know that one of your Players is fond of spamming Conjure X spells for extra bodies, you can't just keep throwing the same old low-numbers encounters at the party or they won't be challenged for the same reason that you don't fight 4 Goblins as an encounter when you're level 12. It's just not as fun as taking on something level appropriate.

For example; Let's say we have a party of four Player Characters, each with a familiar (why not?), one spamming Conjure Animals and a dozen trained soldier Hirelings.

The same Encounter of e.g. six Gnolls is not going to challenge this party as much as it will another party of equal level without the familiars, spellcasters or hirelings, is it?

It's not a case of fixing the spell or the Help action, it's just good GMing practice; you adjust the campaign to the Players, not the rules.

[Coffee_Dragon]

It's not a case of fixing the spell or the Help action, it's just good GMing practice; you adjust the campaign to the Players, not the rules.

Probably all true (and I wasn't super serious, although for real wizards are pretty nuts), but it smacks a little of the level scaling problem in CRPGs: if every increase in capability you can attain or additional resource you can leverage results in an equal and opposite force, why are you even doing it? And don't say it's fun or some such nonsense

[Xetheral]

Okay fair correction. It's free once per round advantage per character with a familiar, NPC ally, or henchman, that doesn't have something better to do with its action.

But that's more than enough to be an irritation to a DM when parties involve several of those. Especially multiple familiars.

Out of curiosity, why is it more irritating than any other source of advantage?

[JellyPooga]

Probably all true (and I wasn't super serious, although for real wizards are pretty nuts), but it smacks a little of the level scaling problem in CRPGs: if every increase in capability you can attain or additional resource you can leverage results in an equal and opposite force, why are you even doing it? And don't say it's fun or some such nonsense

As you say, any increase in power; gaining XP/Levels, magic items, followers, land and titles...all of it amounts to the same thing; namely more power in one form or another. The fun of the game is being challenged; cake-walk campaigns are boring. If you have a group of high-op players, then your run-of-the-mill published adventure tends not to be much cop; you have to up the stakes. Same goes for whatever power a group attains; you have to constantly up the stakes otherwise the game gets stale. If your players start toying with extra bodies in the party, then the game has to change and it's no different to the party leveling up, finding a rare magic item or being given or acquiring any other significant resource.

On the flipside of this, whatever increase in power a party gets, it's almost always something that opens doors rather than closes them. It can still be fun running rough-shod over an encounter that's "too easy"; as GM, you're not beholden to always throw level or party appropriate encounters at your players, after all.

As much as you say "don't say it's fun", it's really the only response I can give!

[Hrugner]

And as far as AoEs, the ability to fly away sounds nice, but then you remember that you actually have to be close enough to fly in AND fly out, meaning you are at most 30 feet from the enemy. That is enough to keep you out of range of smaller spells aimed for the teammate who is engaging that foe, but when an enemy drops a 40 foot diameter fireball, the owl is getting fried.

And of course, if the familiar is flying back out to its max range every time, all it takes is 5 feet of movement to avoid the help action.

[Tanarii]

Also, never forget; Rule 0.1) Anything the Players do, the GM can always do better. If the PC's are bringing an army, then the appropriate challenge for them is another army. There's a reason a single Hero can't defeat an army; numerical superiority actually counts for something in 5ed. This is a feature, not a bug. Don't try and fix it, 'cos it's not broken.

You need to challenge them in ways that actually challenge them; throwing the same 4 orcs at a party of 8, even if only half of them are actually PC's, is not a challenge. Adjust your encounters to accommodate the party...the whole party, not just the PC's.Combat as war-campaign. Hasty retreats in the face of overwhelming force, and even TPKs, can and do happen. Of course, if the players are doing their job right they set things up so they face 4 orcs with their party of 8 ... force the turkey shoots to happen in their favor instead of against them.

Encounters aren't designed specifically with a given party in mind. Especially given multiple sessions with different parties in a week, with an open-door bring whatever character isn't occupied elsewhere in the campaign policy. That's basically an impossible requirement, as well as breaking the campaign-as-war philosophy.

Edit: this also means Familiars are already incredibly useful in out of combat and pre-combat scouting.

[JellyPooga]

Combat as war-campaign. Hasty retreats in the face of overwhelming force, and even TPKs, can and do happen. Of course, if the players are doing their job right they set things up so they face 4 orcs with their party of 8 ... force the turkey shoots to happen in their favor instead of against them.

Encounters aren't designed specifically with a given party in mind. Especially given multiple sessions with different parties in a week, with an open-door bring whatever character isn't occupied elsewhere in the campaign policy. That's basically an impossible requirement, as well as breaking the campaign-as-war philosophy.

Edit: this also means Familiars are already incredibly useful in out of combat and pre-combat scouting.

My point still stands, whether you're running CaW or CaS. As you say, if the players are doing their job properly, then the odds should be in their favour relative to the difficulty of the encounter in the first place. Letting them stack up every advantage they can get only trivialises an encounter if, let's face it, the encounter was going to be fairly easy in the first place. If the choice is between X and Y, where X is easier than Y, then the answer is to introduce Z as a harder option than Y and eliminate X as an option at all.

Up your game. Increase the stakes. Make. It. Harder.

If you're running CaW, then raising the ceiling on the difficulty shouldn't make much of a difference to those players who aren't already bringing an army; it's all part of the challenge of CaW to overcome odds stacked against you. For the guys who are bringing an army, increased difficulty means that their superior numbers are no longer trivialising the game. Win-win, from where I'm sitting.

[Strill]

Letting a familiar take the help action is fine. You just have to remember that the familiar only has 1 HP.

[Tanarii]

Up your game. Increase the stakes. Make. It. Harder.
The game is already hard enough, and far more lethal than any 5e game I've played in. PCs and Henchment regularly die, including TPKs. In fact, trying to find out what happened to PCs/groups that disappeared and/or recover bodies of higher level PCs in time to have Raise Dead cast is a fairly common goal for a session.

To me, the familiar part isn't an issue about how easy or difficult the game is. It's an issue about internal mechanical balance, and making granting of advantage far too regular an occurrence for extremely minimal resource expended from the beginning of the game. It waters down the value of advantage significantly, as well as reducing tactical play. To the point where it's started to irritate me.

[Dizlag]

To me, the familiar part isn't an issue about how easy or difficult the game is. It's an issue about internal mechanical balance, and making granting of advantage far too regular an occurrence for extremely minimal resource expended from the beginning of the game. It waters down the value of advantage significantly, as well as reducing tactical play. To the point where it's started to irritate me.

If the granting of advantage is watering down the play experience, then spice it up with some good ole disadvantage. Put the PCs in situations where they are at a disadvantage, so when they get their "advantage" then it is a straight up roll effectively nullifying their advantage. I wouldn't do this all the time, but enough to help the irritability.

Also ask yourself, are your players having fun? If they are, then adapt as a DM and enjoy the fun with them. If they feel the same way as you, then talk it out.

Another thing to consider, is instead of the Help action being used on an attack to grant advantage, then make it just a +1 or +2 to their attack roll. Advantage effectively gives approximately a +5 on your roll, (as I'm sure there are multiple threads on this forum to attest to) so this would be a nerf. And maybe its only familiars that only give a +1 or +2 on the attack roll. And remember, as someone pointed out ... the Help action is only for one PC and one attack.

Enjoy!

Dizlag

[Tanarii]

Also ask yourself, are your players having fun? If they are, then adapt as a DM and enjoy the fun with them. If they feel the same way as you, then talk it out.Some of them are, because they're the ones with Familiars. Some of them that don't have Familiars have expressed that they think it's total cheesecake. Most of them haven't expressed an opinion.

Talking it out isn't feasible given the number of players involved.

[ad_hoc]

If the granting of advantage is watering down the play experience, then spice it up with some good ole disadvantage. Put the PCs in situations where they are at a disadvantage, so when they get their "advantage" then it is a straight up roll effectively nullifying their advantage. I wouldn't do this all the time, but enough to help the irritability.


That doesn't do anything to solve the problem. It's not about difficult encounters, it is about interesting choices. This is also why the optional flanking rule which grants advantage is terrible. Then everyone has advantage all the time.

The solution is so simple, just don't allow familiars to grant advantage. Find familiar is still a powerful spell.

I fail to see the problem with that solution.

[IShouldntBehere]

Simple Fix: You can only help with what you could do yourself.

If you're a familiar and you can't attack, you can't help attacks. If you're gnome that rolled a "3" for strength and your 6'5" shaq-esque human buddy is trying to lift a heavy object over a tall barrier you can't help with that.

Basically the question is: Would your solo effort produce any kind of meaningful advance towards the goal at hand? If not, your help probably isn't useful enough to warrant a mechanical bonus. You're basically loaning your "d20" part of your action to an allies efforts, whatever those may be. Which is still often a smart move for many things because if you've got a +4 and your buddy has a +9, (1d20+9,1d20+9) take highest is still better than rolling on your own which is functionally (1d20+4,1d20+9) take highest, since your "d20" would normally get your modifier.

This makes it less useful in combat mind you, since in the combat scenario both attackers could produce one or more attacks from their action. However I'm not super convinced that's a bad thing, since using help to upgrade otherwise combat-useless entities into combat-extremely-useful ones can be seen as problem as OP points out.

If you've got tiny helpless kitten paws that the game says makes you a poor-to-worthless combatant it's not unreasonable to prefer that remains true if you're the primary actor or the backup.

[Battlebooze]

Sigh.

If you rule that familiars can't help in combat, I think it would be fair to give Familiars advantage on touch based spells they deliver for their casters, since everyone knows that Familiars can't hurt them.

Famous last words, "The Wizards little birdy can't do anything to me, I can ignore it completely!"

[Tanarii]

If you rule that familiars can't help in combat, I think it would be fair to give Familiars advantage on touch based spells they deliver for their casters, since everyone knows that Familiars can't hurt them.
I generally judge "fair" based on what I want to accomplish mechanically, not on the rules being some kind of simulation.

[IShouldntBehere]

Sigh.

If you rule that familiars can't help in combat, I think it would be fair to give Familiars advantage on touch based spells they deliver for their casters, since everyone knows that Familiars can't hurt them.

Famous last words, "The Wizards little birdy can't do anything to me, I can ignore it completely!"

A familiars attacks not giving advantage does not mean they're ignored completely just that their efforts make no difference large enough constitute Advantage. I imagine it contributes somewhat to creating an opening sometimes but whatever minuscule contribution that is gets rounded down to zero. It certainly isn't on a par with having the enemy cornered, being unseen, being on higher ground, them being on the ground or the other big effects that broadly encompass combat advantage.

Sure one can order a familiar can to harry an opponent and they'll make some attempt to avoid geting pecked in the face by an owl, or to kick away an unruly chipmunk but such things are too small a factor consider when we're not tracking every +/- 1 in the universe.

Similarly your STR 3 gnome could put his hands on the heavy stone and push with all his might for the duration it is in his reach. It still would not give his 6'5" buddy advantage to throw it over a 10' tall barrier. It's not like your the force of your stubby, thin arms did nothing to the stone just the amount contributed is too small to represent as the advantage mechanic. It's not a meaningful contribution.

[RickAllison]

I generally judge "fair" based on what I want to accomplish mechanically, not on the rules being some kind of simulation.

But then why aren't you taking into account that anyone in melee can Shove for advantage on all the rest of their attacks and their melee allies? And they don't have to worry about one tap of a rock taking out their source of advantage. Further with a second maneuver, a Grapple, they can make it last for multiple turns.

All of the methods of getting advantage have a cost. Shoving costs an attack, spells cost a slot, Hide and Help costs actions, while familiars cost both time and money (in the time it takes to recover a killed familiar using a ritual, everyone else is getting a short rest).

That's actually a great example of why the dang things are balanced. Their resource cost is an entire short rest and all the benefits they provides. Ranged Rogues, Rangers, and sorcerers don't really care that much, but everyone else is getting back health and resources for that time.

[JellyPooga]

The game is already hard enough, and far more lethal than any 5e game I've played in.

Lethal is not always Challenging and vice-versa. If the game is lethal because of high-CR creatures, that's very different to it being hard because of greater numbers or favourable terrain. Action Economy counts for a lot. If the guys with Familiars or Henchmen always have the opportunity to use the Help Action and that's playing hell with your conception of the way the game should flow, then introduce elements that prevent the players from abusing such tactics.

- Rein back the base CR and increase the number of foes. Even a handful of mooks is enough to tie up non-essential personnel for a few turns while the PC's deal with something bigger and badder.
- Place foes behind walls, on pedestals, on bridges or the like. If the Henchmen or Familiars can't reach a foe, they can't Help and will have to resort to something else; shoot an arrow, swing from a chandelier, build a human pyramid...who knows?
- Make the terrain dangerous; AoE spells are good for doing this on the fly (how many Familiars or Henchmen would survive a Wall of Fire or successfully make it through a Stinking Cloud, for example?), but pools of lava, jagged rocks, corrosive slime and the like can all help prevent players ganging up on your big-nasties.

If all else fails, use reputation and roleplaying to change things up; if the local mercenary guild hears about the number of their men dying in futile causes, they're going to start raising their prices and eventually stop doing business with the PC's. It won't stop the Familiar problem, but when your hired goons look at the 30' monstrosity in front of them and say "Sorry Boss, here's what I owe you out of the money you've paid up front; I'm gone. I've got a family to take care of", there's not a lot the PC's can do beside shrug and get on with it. Unless they want to fight their own minions too.

As I said before, hired goons aren't just numbers on a page; roleplay them. If they're so ineffectual that the Help action is the only useful thing they can do what the devil are they doing hanging around in that melee? I know I, personally, wouldn't stick around in a firefight if I had no weapon that could do anything against my foe, no matter how much the dude with the rocket launcher pays me and shouts at me to go distract that guy over there with the flamethrower. Heck, even if my Boss was charging Mr.Flamey alongside me, I'd still be having second thoughts...something along the lines of "My Boss has an asbestos suit and an assault rifle. I've got what amounts to a pair of pyjamas and a pointy stick. We're both charging some dude in heavy plate armour with a flamethrower. Err...I'll leave this one for you, Boss". I might be willing do everything I can to help, but that's not going to include getting myself killed for 2sp a day.

[RickAllison]

Snip

Isn't that what the Geas spell is for? They get the choice between a certain death by the spell and the possible death by the enemy!!

[Battlebooze]

I generally judge "fair" based on what I want to accomplish mechanically, not on the rules being some kind of simulation.

We're not talking about how many swallows it takes to carry a coconut. Either Familiars are capable of being a threat in combat or they aren't. This seems to be the basis for the conclusion that they can't help. They are a threat, I was just pointing out the end effect of treating them as helpless.

It's your house rule I guess, knock yourself out.

[Battlebooze]

There is something very similar to the Familiar who can't attack but can take the Help action.

Versatile Trickster. 13th level Arcane Trickster ability. You can distract targets with your mage hand. As a bonus action on your turn, you can select a creature within 5 feet of the your Mage Hand. Doing so gives you advantage on attack rolls against that creature until the end of the turn.

Very similar. Obviously distraction can do a hell of a lot.

[JellyPooga]

Isn't that what the Geas spell is for? They get the choice between a certain death by the spell and the possible death by the enemy!!

Let's not walk into the moral minefield of magical compulsions, shall we? :smallamused::smallwink:

[Coffee_Dragon]

Sure one can order a familiar can to harry an opponent and they'll make some attempt to avoid geting pecked in the face by an owl, or to kick away an unruly chipmunk but such things are too small a factor consider when we're not tracking every +/- 1 in the universe.

http://i.imgur.com/tyHqXir.jpg

[RickAllison]

Let's not walk into the moral minefield of magical compulsions, shall we? :smallamused::smallwink:

What, there is something morally grey about putting a curse on someone where disobeying my order causes them to die from their brain psychically turned inside out? Fine. Instead just kidnap their loved ones and stick them in a sealed bunker with one entrance with Glyphs of Warding that cause a terrible explosion to kill anyone who enters as well as the loved ones. Nothing wrong with that, it is just establishing collateral.

... What?

[IShouldntBehere]

http://i.imgur.com/tyHqXir.jpg

Honestly. If the player had dozens of squirrels as a familiar and they weren't actually familiars because they weren't a wizard but instead some kind of custom "Squirrel Master" where every level was a squirrel feature I'd probably allow said swarm of dozens of squirrels to provide advantage.

Kind of seems like the kind of thing the DM would create on a Lark without the intention for anyone to take seriously, but then the class would get really popular and everyone would just shrug and take it seriously anyway.

[Tanarii]

But then why aren't you taking into account that anyone in melee can Shove for advantage on all the rest of their attacks and their melee allies?Because that takes a contest. In other words, it doesn't automatically replace no effective action with an effective one.


All of the methods of getting advantage have a cost. Shoving costs an attack, spells cost a slot, Hide and Help costs actions, while familiars cost both time and money (in the time it takes to recover a killed familiar using a ritual, everyone else is getting a short rest).The non-combat resource economy to provide a Familiar providing advantage until an enemy blows an action taking it out is, IMO, pretty negligible. It's 10 gp and zero other resources (because the time is spent before the adventure), unless you're talking about replacing one that has been taken out. Then it's 10gp + time (still no spell slot because it's a ritual). Time definitely is a resource of course, and an important one. But the cost of that resource, when it actually applies, is (again IMO) already more than sufficiently covered by all the other benefits of a Familiar.

[Hrugner]

Rituals aren't available to a few casters who would want a familiar, most notably the AC rogue that gets the most benefit from this help action concern. They could take the ritual feat, but that's even more costly and they'd be better off with athletics specialization and shield spec at that point.

Isn't it only cleric bard druid and wizard who get rituals for free? I doubt they're the beg beneficiaries with this help action stuff. I think you can safely treat casting the spell as a cost.

[Tanarii]

Rituals aren't available to a few casters who would want a familiar, most notably the AC rogue that gets the most benefit from this help action concern. They could take the ritual feat, but that's even more costly and they'd be better off with athletics specialization and shield spec at that point.Rogues in large parties have plenty of targets they don't need advantage to get SA as a general rule.


Isn't it only cleric bard druid and wizard who get rituals for free? I doubt they're the beg beneficiaries with this help action stuff. I think you can safely treat casting the spell as a cost.Familiars aren't limited to using Help to benefit their master.

It's Ritual for Wizards, Chain 'locks, Tome 'locks and Bards that burn a Magical Secrets on it. And it costs a spell slot for EKs/ATs. Other classes don't get it. That's still enough Familiars in play in any given session for it to be an irritation.

[ad_hoc]

All of the methods of getting advantage have a cost. Shoving costs an attack, spells cost a slot, Hide and Help costs actions, while familiars cost both time and money (in the time it takes to recover a killed familiar using a ritual, everyone else is getting a short rest).

They're a non-concentration buff that doesn't even cost a spell slot unless they use up attacks from the enemy.

10GP does not count as an appreciable cost either.

Imagine instead that it is a 1st level spell which lasted until dispelled, did not have concentration, and allowed the caster to grant advantage to one ally's attack per round. It also has the caveat that an enemy can forego an attack to attempt to dispel it. Also, the spell is a ritual so it doesn't use up spell slots.

Would that not be hands down the best 1st level spell in the game?

The actual Find Familiar spell not only does that but also has all of the regular benefits.

Find Familiar is primarily an exploration spell, and a damn good one at that. It doesn't also need to be the best 1st level combat spell.

[Saggo]

It's Ritual for Wizards, Chain 'locks, Tome 'locks and Bards that burn a Magical Secrets on it. And it costs a spell slot for EKs/ATs. Other classes don't get it. That's still enough Familiars in play in any given session for it to be an irritation.

Curious, how often do players lose their familiars in your games? I can't imagine they would be using them every turn if there was any reasonable amount of danger.

[RickAllison]

They're a non-concentration buff that doesn't even cost a spell slot unless they use up attacks from the enemy.

10GP does not count as an appreciable cost either.

Imagine instead that it is a 1st level spell which lasted until dispelled, did not have concentration, and allowed the caster to grant advantage to one ally's attack per round. It also has the caveat that an enemy can forego an attack to attempt to dispel it. Also, the spell is a ritual so it doesn't use up spell slots.

Would that not be hands down the best 1st level spell in the game?

The actual Find Familiar spell not only does that but also has all of the regular benefits.

Find Familiar is primarily an exploration spell, and a damn good one at that. It doesn't also need to be the best 1st level combat spell.

And don't forget that it also eats up an hour when you have to replenish it. That seems like a decent enough spell. Low cost, but it is extremely easily neutralized, even by a scrub enemy. Sure, if you have a campaign where the party can take a short rest after every encounter then it will be very potent, but then anyone who loves those (warlocks and monks, hooray!) will be dominating as they get to be very free with their slots/ki. In many campaigns, however, sitting down for an hour so the wizard can get his little owl back happens far less often, and ordinary short rests are usually when that caster will be wanting to heal up, recharge resources, or otherwise have other concerns than a once/round advantage.

And depending on the campaign, 10 gp can be a very appreciable cost. At low levels, 10 gp could be a quarter of the haul of the day, but a typical day could see a familiar helping on the front lines dying multiple times. At higher levels, it certainly is nothing, but the occasional Help from a familiar really should not be a threat at those levels, else you might want to re-think your encounters...

[Tanarii]

Curious, how often do players lose their familiars in your games? I can't imagine they would be using them every turn if there was any reasonable amount of danger.
Almost certainly not enough, given I consider granting advantage important enough to house-rule it. Probably because I'm considering the cost of an enemy using it's action too high. In other words, win/win for the Familiar owner.

I think at this point, since Familiars have so freely gotten run of the battlefield (so to speak), I'm going to increase enemy targeting of them, when the loss of action economy isn't too severe and it makes sense. I'll give players a heads up first though. If I still feel the cost is too low in return for the benefits gained, I'll come back to looking at house-rules.

Of course, I'm guessing just announcing that I'll be increasing enemies going after familiars will have a chilling effect for at least a little while. Even if I stress I'll try not to swing too heavily into always targeting them territory. :smallamused:

[ad_hoc]

And don't forget that it also eats up an hour when you have to replenish it. That seems like a decent enough spell. Low cost, but it is extremely easily neutralized, even by a scrub enemy. Sure, if you have a campaign where the party can take a short rest after every encounter then it will be very potent, but then anyone who loves those (warlocks and monks, hooray!) will be dominating as they get to be very free with their slots/ki. In many campaigns, however, sitting down for an hour so the wizard can get his little owl back happens far less often, and ordinary short rests are usually when that caster will be wanting to heal up, recharge resources, or otherwise have other concerns than a once/round advantage.

And depending on the campaign, 10 gp can be a very appreciable cost. At low levels, 10 gp could be a quarter of the haul of the day, but a typical day could see a familiar helping on the front lines dying multiple times. At higher levels, it certainly is nothing, but the occasional Help from a familiar really should not be a threat at those levels, else you might want to re-think your encounters...

You only need to cast it once per long rest for it to still be the best 1st level spell by a wide margin. That you can sometimes cast it more than once per day is just added benefit.

There is a reason why there aren't other ritual combat buffs like this.




Of course, I'm guessing just announcing that I'll be increasing enemies going after familiars will have a chilling effect for at least a little while. Even if I stress I'll try not to swing too heavily into always targeting them territory. :smallamused:

I would be delighted by this.

[Saggo]

Almost certainly not enough, given I consider granting advantage important enough to house-rule it. Probably because I'm considering the cost of an enemy using it's action too high. In other words, win/win for the Familiar owner.

I think at this point, since Familiars have so freely gotten run of the battlefield (so to speak), I'm going to increase enemy targeting of them, when the loss of action economy isn't too severe and it makes sense. I'll give players a heads up first though. If I still feel the cost is too low in return for the benefits gained, I'll come back to looking at house-rules.

Of course, I'm guessing just announcing that I'll be increasing enemies going after familiars will have a chilling effect for at least a little while. Even if I stress I'll try not to swing too heavily into always targeting them territory. :smallamused:

So I'm running an EK archer with an Owl familiar for this very purpose. Very quickly learned that determining when and where to use a familiar, even the Owl, should be an integral part of the tactic. Ignoring the gold and casting cost (varies greatly based on rewards, class, and feats, but can be quite costly for some), it's very easy to notice when you lose a familiar early in an encounter, early in an adventuring day, and simply don't have it available the remaining rounds/encounters.

If it happens enough, prudent players should start to be selective using familiars in combat. Those that treat them as disposable buffs, let them keep spending the gold and remind them that they need a brass brazier when they try to make a new one.

If there's technique required to use the familiar, then it seems fairly balanced to me.

[RickAllison]

Almost certainly not enough, given I consider granting advantage important enough to house-rule it. Probably because I'm considering the cost of an enemy using it's action too high. In other words, win/win for the Familiar owner.

I think at this point, since Familiars have so freely gotten run of the battlefield (so to speak), I'm going to increase enemy targeting of them, when the loss of action economy isn't too severe and it makes sense. I'll give players a heads up first though. If I still feel the cost is too low in return for the benefits gained, I'll come back to looking at house-rules.

Of course, I'm guessing just announcing that I'll be increasing enemies going after familiars will have a chilling effect for at least a little while. Even if I stress I'll try not to swing too heavily into always targeting them territory. :smallamused:

Oh yeah, familiars are much less likely to be put into combat in the first place if the players actually think they will get killed. Familiars are too useful for exploration and safely using touch spells to risk doing something as mundane as giving advantage once per round. Especially for those doing it by Magic Initiate, it just isn't worth it to have your familiar risking death every single round of combat.

Oh, and never forget that as far as other entities are concerned, the exploring familiars are just another beast. That means they could well be lunch...