Owls As Familiars. Ok, But No.

[Speely]

So almost everyone who wants to make the most of Find Familiar as a non-Chain Pact Warlock chooses an Owl.

I think that's a design flaw. Maybe it's a flaw in regard to D&D's focus on combat, or maybe it's a flaw in regard to the specific balance of this VERY popular spell.

So. Mechanically, there is almost no reason to choose anything but an owl when casting Find Familiar. This is mostly because of what it offers in combat. Flyby is brokenly-good.

But owls don't trade utility for this universally-useful feature. They have advantage on most Perception checks. They fly. I mean, for one ritual casting, you are getting Advantage fairly regularly and a great scout.

No other familiar can do that without exposing themselves to reciprocity. So here is my house rule fix for goddamn owls:

Remove Flyby. It's garbage. No familiar should have it. This is a utility spell ffs.

Add: "Piercing Gaze." When seeing through your owl familiar's eyes, you can make Insight checks using your own Insight.

This, to me, is more thematically consistent and more mechanically coherent.

Thoughts?

[OldTrees1]

Wait, what about Bats?

Blindsight 60ft sounds more appealing to me than mere flyby attack.

[Speely]

Wait, what about Bats?

Blindsight 60ft sounds more appealing to me than mere flyby attack.

Well that's great! I don't see any problem with bats and their blindsight, which is why I didn't mention them in this thread about owls.

[OldTrees1]

If you are replacing Flyby Attack from Owls, I suggest replacing it with something the Owl could use regardless of whether it is a familiar. That will make the feature feel more natural and make it easier to explain the removal.

[Speely]

If you are replacing Flyby Attack from Owls, I suggest replacing it with something the Owl could use regardless of whether it is a familiar. That will make the feature feel more natural and make it easier to explain the removal.

Fair enough. Some kind of sneak attack bonus? (Owls are really good at waiting for the right moment.)

[OldTrees1]

Poisonous Snake gets a damage boost (and Blindsight 10ft) however that damage boost amounts to roughly +1d4. I don't think an Owl could get Sneak Attack. Maybe some utility. Ravens get Mimicry and +4 attack. Owls get only +3 attack.

[Dork_Forge]

Poisonous Snake gets a damage boost (and Blindsight 10ft) however that damage boost amounts to roughly +1d4. I don't think an Owl could get Sneak Attack. Maybe some utility. Ravens get Mimicry and +4 attack. Owls get only +3 attack.

Ravens only get Mimicry, whilst Owls get two abilities. If you remove Flyby then they still have Keen Senses, bringing them more inline with other similar creatures whilst still giving them their 'thing.'

[OldTrees1]

Yes, simply removing the Flyby might be more reasonable.

Wait a moment. What touch spells are you worried about? Is this really an issue? I ran into a list and most of the touch spells are friendly spells. Shocking Grasp (no flyby needed), Bestow Curse, and Planeshift were the exceptions.

[Dork_Forge]

Yes, simply removing the Flyby might be more reasonable.

Wait a moment. What touch spells are you worried about? Is this really an issue? I ran into a list and most of the touch spells are friendly spells. Shocking Grasp (no flyby needed), Bestow Curse, and Planeshift were the exceptions.

I think the point is risk free advantage from the help action via flyby, the way casting touch spells through familiars works isn't conducive to abusing flyby the same as the Help action.

[Gtdead]

Flyby (and help action) are overrated unless you are an AT. That's all there is to it. Any wizard who makes heavy use of the familiar, mostly for action economy purposes and goodberry/potion shenanigans, would never risk it just to provide advantage on a cantrip or deliver an ..offensive melee touch attack? Like shocking grasp?... The only valid use for a (low level) spellcaster would be boosting guiding bolt/inflict wounds (aka the big guns), and that's way too niche since these spells exist on different class spell lists.

Owls are good general purpose familiars due to their senses and increased speed. Bats are also nice but are more niche because they have worse skills, less speed, and they compensate by having blind sight which may or may not be useful. Perhaps there is also some powergamey trick to be done with bats (perhaps some sort of fogcloud play where you use the familiar's senses to leverage obscurement?).

[Speely]

No one likes my Wis-based solution for the ole owl.

[OldTrees1]

I think the point is risk free advantage from the help action via flyby, the way casting touch spells through familiars works isn't conducive to abusing flyby the same as the Help action.

But is it risk free? It costs the caster their reaction, their concentration, and leaves them vulnerable to disruption? The Owl must wait until the Owl's turn before they can use Flyby.

[Speely]

But is it risk free? It costs the caster their reaction, their concentration, and leaves them vulnerable to disruption? The Owl must wait until the Owl's turn before they can use Flyby.

Literally no concentration needed tho

[OldTrees1]

Literally no concentration needed tho

Readying a spell requires concentration in 5E last I checked and the Owl can't use Flyby during the mage's turn if they want to keep their reaction available for the touch spell.

Mage Readies a touch spell and ends their turn.
The Owl starts to Flyby.
The Mage casts the readied touch spell.
The Owl uses its reaction to use the touch spell.
The Owl continues flying.

[Hytheter]

I only use my owl to hold my phone so I can upload the footage to the internet, anyway. :smalltongue:

...Our setting might be weird.

[Speely]

Readying a spell requires concentration in 5E last I checked and the Owl can't use Flyby during the mage's turn if they want to keep their reaction available for the touch spell.

Mage Readies a touch spell and ends their turn.
The Owl starts to Flyby.
The Mage casts the readied touch spell.
The Owl uses its reaction to use the touch spell.
The Owl continues flying.

To be fair, I lost the point when spells became part of the discussion. I was under the assumption that we were primarily talking about Flyby.

[Segev]

At one point, I had a thread discussing adding perks to various lesser familiar options to try to make them all equally attractive. Things like giving the seahorse the ability to cast shape water, or even just to control water on its own in enough amounts to swim itself around in the air.

[LudicSavant]

Back in 3.5e, you'd get a different little bonus for each familiar, and several saw popular use. It is rather disappointing to see pretty much just owls these days.

[OldTrees1]

To be fair, I lost the point when spells became part of the discussion. I was under the assumption that we were primarily talking about Flyby.

Perhaps you could enlighten me, what in combat benefit were you intending to talk about?
Flyby allows the owl to run away. I don't see that as a problematic feature.


Edit:
Have you been ruling that the Owl could swoop in, do the Help action to distract an enemy, and then swoop away without ending the distraction?

[H_H_F_F]

Edit:
Have you been ruling that the Owl could swoop in, do the Help action to distract an enemy, and then swoop away without ending the distraction?
Huh. That *is* the way I interpreted the rules.

- Combatant 1 lunges forward, and uses their action to help, distracting a villain within 5 ft. They then use the rest of their movement to dash back away, perhaps taking an attack of opportunity. The villain has still been distracted, and is attacked with advantage by combatant 2.

I don't see anything suggesting the help action is rendered meaningless if the helping combatant is killed, forcibly moved, or otherwise impacted before the next attack happens.

The help action is a singular action, granting advantage on the next attack. It is not a continous effect, lasting as long as the helping combatant is in range, right? So, I see no reason to rule it differently than any other instantanious action in that regard, from a rules prespective.

[Unoriginal]

Back in 3.5e, you'd get a different little bonus for each familiar, and several saw popular use. It is rather disappointing to see pretty much just owls these days.

Pretty sure that in 3.5 there was only a few familiars that were judged "worthwhile", and the others weren't ever taken unless it was for a specific character concept.



I don't see anything suggesting the help action is rendered meaningless if the helping combatant is killed, forcibly moved, or otherwise impacted before the next attack happens.

"Alternatively, you can aid a friendly creature in attacking a creature within 5 feet of you. You feint, distract the target, or in some other way team up to make your ally's attack more effective. If your ally attacks the target before your next turn, the first attack roll is made with advantage."

It can be argued that if the target isn't within 5ft of you when your ally attack, the help doesn't apply.

[Gtdead]

https://www.sageadvice.eu/help-action-2/

This is Crawford's opinion and generally speaking I prefer it that way. Initiative order already messes up the advantage generation. If the squishy familiar has to stay at melee range, it's a death sentence and it completely invalidates a significant part of familiar's kit. After all there are other ways to avoid an AoO, like a debuff, or by choosing a target that has already used his reaction.

[LudicSavant]

Pretty sure that in 3.5 there was only a few familiars that were judged "worthwhile", and the others weren't ever taken unless it was for a specific character concept. Yes, there were a handful that were used and many that weren't, but it was still a better ratio than 5e lent us.

[Dork_Forge]

But is it risk free? It costs the caster their reaction, their concentration, and leaves them vulnerable to disruption? The Owl must wait until the Owl's turn before they can use Flyby.

When this comes up it's usually just the Help action which requires nothing form the caster at all, on the owl's turn they just fly in Help and fly out

[DigoDragon]

...Our setting might be weird.

You say weird, I say Awesome. :3



At one point, I had a thread discussing adding perks to various lesser familiar options to try to make them all equally attractive. Things like giving the seahorse the ability to cast shape water, or even just to control water on its own in enough amounts to swim itself around in the air.

This would be my line of thinking; if the other familiars aren't attractive to pick, then retool them to be more interesting rather than debuff the owl. Yes it does take more work to do, but as the saying starts, "Anything worth doing..."

I would totally get a seahorse familiar with shape water so it could move about on land. That seems like a really cool concept.

[da newt]

The familiar is a HELP spamming action economy multiplier, and the owl is better at it than the others due to their flight, dark vision, and flyby. Whether your PC or another party member is the one to reap the benefits of the HELP action is irrelevant.

Also the FF spell specifically prohibits the familiar from attacking.

Even if your familiar is targeted by team bad guy regularly, that's a benefit as it's an attack or two that isn't directed at the PCs.

Of note the flying snake also has flyby (if your DM allows them as familiars).

If you are anti-familiar flyby, then removing it is just fine. I'd think any familiar who's senses you are using would allow an insight check.

NB from Sage Advice: If you use the Help action to distract a foe, do you have
to stay within 5 feet of it for the action to work? No, you
can take the action and then move away. The action itself
is what grants advantage to your ally, not your staying next
to the foe.

[KorvinStarmast]

So almost everyone who wants to make the most of Find Familiar as a non-Chain Pact Warlock chooses an Owl. I vary my familiars between owl, falcon/eagle, and parrot. My warlock (tome) currently uses a parrot. Cheap way to send a message a short distance.

I think that's a design flaw. Maybe it's a flaw in regard to D&D's focus on combat, or maybe it's a flaw in regard to the specific balance of this VERY popular spell. Owl uses its own initiative; that can mess up the sequencing on the flyby advantage trick, unless the barbarian or rogue readies an action to attack when the owl flies in, distracts, and flies off. The rogue attack is triggered by the distraction. That's one of the few RAW ways that this works well.

So. Mechanically, there is almost no reason to choose anything but an owl when casting Find Familiar. This is mostly because of what it offers in combat. Flyby is brokenly-good. No, it is not broken. And I often use eagle/falcon so that I can see farther. Or, in social situations, a cat who wanders into a place and lets me listen in on a conversation.


But owls don't trade utility for this universally-useful feature. They have advantage on most Perception checks. They fly. I mean, for one ritual casting, you are getting Advantage fairly regularly and a great scout. My favorite use of the owl is as a lookout at night. Wake me up if you see/sense anything. I think Eagle is a better scout.


No other familiar can do that without exposing themselves to reciprocity. So here is my house rule fix for goddamn owls:

Remove Flyby. It's garbage. No familiar should have it. This is a utility spell ffs.
Not the better idea, from where I sit. Nerfing the owl is pointlessly harsh. Let the players have their fun. And kill the owl now and again. The enemy gets a vote.

Add: "Piercing Gaze." When seeing through your owl familiar's eyes, you can make Insight checks using your own Insight.

This, to me, is more thematically consistent and more mechanically coherent.
Your table, your house rule, and a neat thematic one. At my table I am leaving owls as is. They have 1 HP. They die very, very easily.

I think the point is risk free advantage from the help action via flyby, the way casting touch spells through familiars works isn't conducive to abusing flyby the same as the Help action. It isn't risk free for the owl. They are getting in range of being attacked.

Back in 3.5e, you'd get a different little bonus for each familiar, and several saw popular use. It is rather disappointing to see pretty much just owls these days. As I said, I use parrots, cats, eagles, and owls.

[diplomancer]

Don't forget that you can ask your owl to help the Rogue or the Paladin. And that, RAW, initiative order is irrelevant.

[Dork_Forge]

It isn't risk free for the owl. They are getting in range of being attacked.


It has a 60ft fly speed, it can easily get into and out of range with Flyby, the only way it's at risk is if the monster readies an attack or has a damage on hit/aura.

[Segev]

Don't forget that you can ask your owl to help the Rogue or the Paladin. And that, RAW, initiative order is irrelevant.

I'm not sure what you mean by that, but I agree with the rest of it, and yes, the RAW do support that you take the help action on your turn, and it doesn't matter what happens to you or the enemy you helped against between your turn and your ally's; your ally gets the benefit of that help action.

Frankly, I don't see the problem. It's one advantaged attack per turn. The number of ways to gain advantage on an attack are so myriad that having one more is nice, but hardly game-changing. An owl with its master's dragon's breath spell active on it is a bigger "problem," and even that is just a very squishy target that has become threatening enough to eat one attack.

[KorvinStarmast]

Don't forget that you can ask your owl to help the Rogue or the Paladin. And that, RAW, initiative order is irrelevant.
I have done that with great frequency in my brother's game (I usually help the rogue or the Barbarian) but I am not sure what you mean by RAW, initiative order is irrelevant. Can you elaborate on that?

It has a 60ft fly speed, it can easily get into and out of range with Flyby, the only way it's at risk is if the monster readies an attack or has a damage on hit/aura. Or the owl ends up in an AoE. I've had more than a few owls die. But you are right, the range of movement usually helps the owl stay out of trouble.

... RAW do support that you take the help action on your turn, and it doesn't matter what happens to you or the enemy you helped against between your turn and your ally's; your ally gets the benefit of that help action. That is how we have played it.

Frankly, I don't see the problem. It's one advantaged attack per turn. The number of ways to gain advantage on an attack are so myriad that having one more is nice, but hardly game-changing. An owl with its master's dragon's breath spell active on it is a bigger "problem," and even that is just a very squishy target that has become threatening enough to eat one attack. Not a problem, as I see it, but good use of the tools at hand by the players. And by the NPC spell casters. :smallwink:

[H_H_F_F]

Pretty sure that in 3.5 there was only a few familiars that were judged "worthwhile", and the others weren't ever taken unless it was for a specific character concept.



"Alternatively, you can aid a friendly creature in attacking a creature within 5 feet of you. You feint, distract the target, or in some other way team up to make your ally's attack more effective. If your ally attacks the target before your next turn, the first attack roll is made with advantage."

It can be argued that if the target isn't within 5ft of you when your ally attack, the help doesn't apply.

You also have to be within 5 ft to attack someone with a sword. Doesn't mean you have to stay near them.

My point was that the way the help action works is not phrased different enough to other actions to assume a unique unwritten stipulation to the effect. Appearently, Sage Advice clarifies the intent here in favour of the owl.

[Keravath]

There is always inequality in familiars (or any other aspect of the game).

I have seen owl (for flyby), bat (for blindsight) and something that can breathe underwater used fairly frequently depending on circumstances.

Of the warlock chain pact familiars, the Imp is clearly the best for example. Since most of these can turn invisible, and the help action doesn't break invisibility, they all effectively have the equivalent to flyby as well.

In my experience, flyby is not a big deal. If a DM has it somehow breaking their immersion then feel free to change it.

However, the reason for "flyby" is that owls are almost completely silent in flight. If you don't see it coming then it is effectively hidden - so it flies close, distracts or attacks, then moves away since without warning, the target doesn't have the time to react. That is the reasoning behind "flyby" and it is based on a physical trait specific to owls.

Finally, the most common use of an owl familiar I have seen is to enable sneak attack for a rogue using the help action. Since the rogue can often hide behind some terrain feature as a bonus action or use steady aim - or any number of other options to get advantage - this only provides one more tool to try to land sneak attack. For everyone else, it represents advantage on one attack roll/round for one character.

[ProsecutorGodot]

All it takes is for one enemy to get fed up with the owl and ready an attack rather than trying to catch it with an opportunity attack.

I consider that a pretty fun interaction, it's not insurmountable for the NPC and it gives the PC opportunities to eat away enemy actions.

[Dork_Forge]

All it takes is for one enemy to get fed up with the owl and ready an attack rather than trying to catch it with an opportunity attack.

I consider that a pretty fun interaction, it's not insurmountable for the NPC and it gives the PC opportunities to eat away enemy actions.

The problem at hand though is that this kind of thing devalues other familiar choices because the Owl gets so much, rather than how problematic Flyby itself is.

[KorvinStarmast]

The problem at hand though is that this kind of thing devalues other familiar choices because the Owl gets so much, rather than how problematic Flyby itself is. My warlock's parrot is giving you the side eye here. :smallwink: (which reminds me, I need to check in on the worms...)

[ProsecutorGodot]

The problem at hand though is that this kind of thing devalues other familiar choices because the Owl gets so much, rather than how problematic Flyby itself is.

Only if your entire goal for the familiar is to use it for the help action, I'm more in the camp that KorvinStormast seems to be in where Owl is fine having this admittedly stronger niche because there are other conditionally useful familiars.

If the goal is to equalize familiars I'd rather give other familiar options bonuses than take away the reason people pick an owl, otherwise Find Familiar goes even further into "pick best land based, flying and swimming option or Imp for Warlock"

Chain Pacts options are "more powerful" by an such an extent that I personally would be comfortable giving each standard familiar that lacks one an additional ability on par with the owls without worrying of devaluing the option to be a chain pact for a strong familiar.

[Dork_Forge]

Only if your entire goal for the familiar is to use it for the help action, I'm more in the camp that KorvinStormast seems to be in where Owl is fine having this admittedly stronger niche because there are other conditionally useful familiars.

If the goal is to equalize familiars I'd rather give other familiar options bonuses than take away the reason people pick an owl, otherwise Find Familiar goes even further into "pick best land based, flying and swimming option or Imp for Warlock"

Chain Pacts options are "more powerful" by an such an extent that I personally would be comfortable giving each standard familiar that lacks one an additional ability on par with the owls without worrying of devaluing the option to be a chain pact for a strong familiar.

No they're better in multiple ways not just having Flyby, in comparison to a Bat for example they have double the fly speed and Keen Sight (in addition to Keen Hearing), with 120ft of darkvision.

Even if you strip out Flyby the Owl is still strong familiar choice, extremely useful in recon.

[Imbalance]

Some DM's aren't using giant spiders and tunnels choked with webs enough, and it shows.

[Willie the Duck]

I think where I stand is:--

One one hand, there are clear reasons to pick other familiars, the flyby-help combination is useful but not OP (and advantage on one attack in exchange for a fragile resource is only even 'quite good' if you have someone in-party who can well-capitalize on that single attack, like a rogue or paladin), and owls that are overused are a self(well, enemy arrow)-correcting problem.

On the other hand, no other (non-chainlock) familiar has any ability quite so, well, transparently set up for a fancy combo. Familiars can't attack, but owls get flyby, huh? Can't imagine someone should investigate some ways in which to make extra use out of that. If other familiars got something similar, it wouldn't stand out (I'd imagine there'd be ones more and less powerful), but on it's own it's noticeable.

It kind of reminds me of Warlock Darkness/Devil's Sight, or one-handed quarterstaff, PAM, and shield (with or without dueling fighting style or Shillelagh) -- they don't necessarily overpower anything, and certainly aren't 'simply always best' options. Yet you still kinda wonder if one of the devs wanted that for a pet character, or it was a leftover from an early design draft when there were more gimmicks like this amongst the other choices, or what.

[KorvinStarmast]

It kind of reminds me of Warlock Darkness/Devil's Sight, or one-handed quarterstaff, PAM, and shield (with or without dueling fighting style or Shillelagh) -- they don't necessarily overpower anything, and certainly aren't 'simply always best' options. Yet you still kinda wonder if one of the devs wanted that for a pet character, or it was a leftover from an early design draft when there were more gimmicks like this amongst the other choices, or what. FWIW, the dragonnel in Fizban's also gets flyby. I guess I need to do a word search and find out who, besides Giant Owls, gets flyby in this edition. Will do that later, I only recall seeing it on a few monsters.

[Dork_Forge]

FWIW, the dragonnel in Fizban's also gets flyby. I guess I need to do a word search and find out who, besides Giant Owls, gets flyby in this edition. Will do that later, I only recall seeing it on a few monsters.

That seems to be designed to be a mount though and as a CR 2 makes it an interesting creature to throw at a party. Outside of level 1, a horde of Owls isn't going to do much besides be a familiar/wildshape option.

[OldTrees1]

Huh. That *is* the way I interpreted the rules.

Then Flyby would be stronger at your table and perhaps (perhaps not) worth removing from Owl.


Personally, I prefer Bats.

[GooeyChewie]

Some DM's aren't using giant spiders and tunnels choked with webs enough, and it shows.

Pardon me while I make some notes for the next campaign I DM. :smallsmile:

[Joe the Rat]

I'm definitely in the boost options, not dumb down owls (and flying snakes) camp. But I would also be inclined to add more exploration value to the other familiars (possibly beyond the fact that if they are seen, it might not matter if that creature is common to the area).


Some DM's aren't using giant spiders and tunnels choked with webs enough, and it shows.

I find Spirit Guardians works quite nicely when familiars are involved. Or hostages. Nothing quite like having your Helpful Buddy and all the noncombatants explode into pink mist under the assailment of spectral reapers to shake up the game.

[diplomancer]

I have done that with great frequency in my brother's game (I usually help the rogue or the Barbarian) but I am not sure what you mean by RAW, initiative order is irrelevant. Can you elaborate on that?


Sorry I was way too succint. What I meant is that you can choose whom your familiar helps, it doesn't have to be the next attack against a particular creature (I've seen DMs thinking it's the next attack, which does make some sense from a simulation POV, but it's not RAW)

[Dork_Forge]

Sorry I was way too succint. What I meant is that you can choose whom your familiar helps, it doesn't have to be the next attack against a particular creature (I've seen DMs thinking it's the next attack, which does make some sense from a simulation POV, but it's not RAW)

It's not clear RAW that you can choose who to Help though, the language just uses singular terms and refers to your ally, it doesn't say a creature of your choice gains advantage, it only specifies that they have to be an ally and the creature has to be within 5ft.

[strangebloke]

IMO owls should just have sunlight sensitivity and no bonus to sight. They're good at seeing things in the dark but presumably that's what the 120 foot darkvision and +3 perception is for? IRL owls kind of suck at seeing things in the day.

Beyond that a lot of familiars should have buffs. Why don't cats have darkvision again?

[OldTrees1]

Why don't cats have darkvision again?

A wizard did it. They lost too many apprentices to cats so they decided to retaliate by removing cat's darkvision.

[Luccan]

Beyond that a lot of familiars should have buffs. Why don't cats have darkvision again?

My assumption has been because they fused Dark and Low-light Vision this edition. It's kinda weird owls HAVE it since afaik owls can't see any better than humans in a closed room with literally no light at all.

[strangebloke]

My assumption has been because they fused Dark and Low-light Vision this edition. It's kinda weird owls HAVE it since afaik owls can't see any better than humans in a closed room with literally no light at all.

rats have it too though, as do a bunch of beasts that are no better than cats in the dark.

[Luccan]

rats have it too though, as do a bunch of beasts that are no better than cats in the dark.

Hm, I never looked that far into it. Definitely weird then.

[elyktsorb]

I feel like Owls are so much better simply because of their overall utility, that and DM's don't seem to callout the fact that it would be hecking sus that an owl is spying on people in broad daylight, in a world where familiars exist, you figure people would find an owl out during the day one of those dead on indicators.

I actually used a Crab a lot the last time I had a familiar, want to have a little sentry, or spy on a specific area you know someone's going to come into? Just make a small hole, or find one, and fill it with water, then put the Crab in the water, 30ft blindsight and water breathing means that no one will likely notice it while it looks about.

[SharkForce]

https://www.sageadvice.eu/help-action-2/

This is Crawford's opinion and generally speaking I prefer it that way. Initiative order already messes up the advantage generation. If the squishy familiar has to stay at melee range, it's a death sentence and it completely invalidates a significant part of familiar's kit. After all there are other ways to avoid an AoO, like a debuff, or by choosing a target that has already used his reaction.

find familiar provides an absolutely absurd amount of utility for a level 1 spell slot with no concentration, indefinite duration, and which can even be used in ritual form to save spell slots.

if I were to propose a new level 1 spell that gives you at-will scouting that most enemies won't respond to, keeps the entire party safe while the scouting is going on, doesn't interfere with the caster's senses unless they choose for it to happen, can provide enhanced senses, is reusable until something goes out of their way to destroy it, doesn't even have to cost a spell slot, and also has a variety of other niche uses, with the only downside being a 10 gp cost, I would expect most people to say "that's way too powerful", unless of course they realize that I'm pointing out how extremely strong familiars are in this edition of D&D and spot that this is exactly what find familiar does.

this spell is plenty overloaded. there is no need to worry that taking something out of the "kit" of find familiar is going to leave it underpowered.

personally, my ruling has been that since familiars (apart from chain pact warlock familiars) can't attack, therefore they can't help on an attack (which is arguably supported by the rules on helping), and I still think the spell is *more* than worth having (and to be clear, I am aware that there is a sage ruling that familiars can help on the attack action, I just don't care).

to put it another way, look up the spell "arcane eye". it's a level 4 spell, lasts 1 hour, and requires concentration. this is the first spell where I would say that it is *arguably* superior to having *certain* familiars *while the duration is running*, and there are STILL things I like more about find familiar.

does this spell need to *also* have powerful combat uses like providing advantage to a rogue's attack which is a significant boost to their damage? in my opinion it does not.

[KorvinStarmast]

find familiar provides an absolutely absurd amount of utility for a level 1 spell slot with no concentration, indefinite duration, and which can even be used in ritual form to save spell slots.
It does no damage by itself. I don't get this wave of negativity.

does this spell need to *also* have powerful combat uses like providing advantage to a rogue's attack which is a significant boost to their damage? in my opinion it does not. And if party doesn't have a rogue?
There are 12 classes in the book and usually only 3-6 players.
Run the numbers. :smallwink:

[Segev]

find familiar provides an absolutely absurd amount of utility for a level 1 spell slot with no concentration, indefinite duration, and which can even be used in ritual form to save spell slots.

if I were to propose a new level 1 spell that gives you at-will scouting that most enemies won't respond to, keeps the entire party safe while the scouting is going on, doesn't interfere with the caster's senses unless they choose for it to happen, can provide enhanced senses, is reusable until something goes out of their way to destroy it, doesn't even have to cost a spell slot, and also has a variety of other niche uses, with the only downside being a 10 gp cost, I would expect most people to say "that's way too powerful", unless of course they realize that I'm pointing out how extremely strong familiars are in this edition of D&D and spot that this is exactly what find familiar does.

this spell is plenty overloaded. there is no need to worry that taking something out of the "kit" of find familiar is going to leave it underpowered.

personally, my ruling has been that since familiars (apart from chain pact warlock familiars) can't attack, therefore they can't help on an attack (which is arguably supported by the rules on helping), and I still think the spell is *more* than worth having (and to be clear, I am aware that there is a sage ruling that familiars can help on the attack action, I just don't care).

to put it another way, look up the spell "arcane eye". it's a level 4 spell, lasts 1 hour, and requires concentration. this is the first spell where I would say that it is *arguably* superior to having *certain* familiars *while the duration is running*, and there are STILL things I like more about find familiar.

does this spell need to *also* have powerful combat uses like providing advantage to a rogue's attack which is a significant boost to their damage? in my opinion it does not.

The idea that "most enemies will ignore" a familiar is always a weird one to me. I could see the argument for the spider, if it's a tiny house spider and not something closer to mouse-sized, or for the rat if you're in a place that's got the vermin everywhere, but a bat? An owl? Flying about in a scouting pattern, staring at you while you talk about your evil plans, etc.? Yes, you CAN find situations where it's not a big deal and unlikely to get noticed, but a lot of those situations also have predators that will go after such creatures. Familiars are fragile. Some are okay at stealth, but most aren't. If a wizard's familiar is this god-like scout that is going unnoticed and that's causing you trouble, just have your NPCs notice them, or even have predators prey on them.

Yes, they're good. No, they're not unstoppable, undetectable spy drones.

[MoiMagnus]

And if party doesn't have a rogue?
There are 12 classes in the book and usually only 3-6 players.
Run the numbers. :smallwink:

A lot of tables tend to have very biased repartition of classes per campaign. If someone's table almost systematically includes a rogue (in the same way that mine almost systematically include a paladin, always by a different player), I'd say it's fair to take that into account when making rulings. Especially if the omnipresence of rogue is due to some of the other rulings (or simply overhaul GMing style) making them stronger than what they would be on an average table.

[SharkForce]

It does no damage by itself. I don't get this wave of negativity.
And if party doesn't have a rogue?
There are 12 classes in the book and usually only 3-6 players.
Run the numbers. :smallwink:


it doesn't *need* to do damage. it is the best scouting spell in the game for the first several levels. it is *probably* superior to having an actual scout in many cases (and yes, not all familiars are equally inconspicuous... but seeing as how you get to choose which one you get, you just choose one that *is*)

also, while rogues are probably the most notable damage increase from getting advantage on an attack that doesn't mean they're the only ones. paladin smites, polymorphed allies, wildshaped druids, summoned creatures... not every party will have those things, it is true. but that isn't a good reason to take what is already a very powerful level 1 utility spell and also give it a potential large damage increase, whether the party currently has the tools to make use of that large damage increase or not.

this would be like if I said "hey, web doesn't do any damage, we should make it also able to block teleportation. it wouldn't be a major buff, because lots of enemies don't teleport anyways". web's value doesn't lie in damage, and it is already one of the best spells. it is not in need of added effects regardless of whether those effects are always useful or not. likewise, find familiar is already very powerful as a level 1 spell whether you get any extra damage out of it or not.

to me, that raises the question: why would I give it the ability to deal damage at all? if we were talking about improving a terrible spell like witch bolt, fine, by all means think about what you can add to it to make the spell decent. in this case, we're not even really looking at a spell that is middle of the pack, we're looking at a spell that doesn't have any serious competition until we get to a spell that is 3 levels higher, and even then it's not a clear victory for the higher level spell.

[Keravath]

does this spell need to *also* have powerful combat uses like providing advantage to a rogue's attack which is a significant boost to their damage? in my opinion it does not.

I'd just like to point out that a rogue which doesn't get sneak attack will fall well behind in damage compared to every other martial character (and most casters using cantrips). Even the anemic firebolt averages 11 damage at 5th level while the rogue with a long bow and 18 dex is only 8.5.

The expectation is that most turns the rogue WILL find a way to have sneak attack available every turn whether by one of the methods of generating advantage, a rogue special ability or an ally adjacent to their target.

Familiar is just one of the possible methods. Without sneak attack, a rogue is no better than a character with a single attack and no other way of doing damage.

[Segev]

A lot of tables tend to have very biased repartition of classes per campaign. If someone's table almost systematically includes a rogue (in the same way that mine almost systematically include a paladin, always by a different player), I'd say it's fair to take that into account when making rulings. Especially if the omnipresence of rogue is due to some of the other rulings (or simply overhaul GMing style) making them stronger than what they would be on an average table.

The 4-player party I'm in on Saturdays has a fighter(arcane archer), bard(valor), rogue, monk(shadow), ranger, and artificer(battlesmith).

Three of the PCs are single-classed.

[strangebloke]

The idea that "most enemies will ignore" a familiar is always a weird one to me. I could see the argument for the spider, if it's a tiny house spider and not something closer to mouse-sized, or for the rat if you're in a place that's got the vermin everywhere, but a bat? An owl? Flying about in a scouting pattern, staring at you while you talk about your evil plans, etc.? Yes, you CAN find situations where it's not a big deal and unlikely to get noticed, but a lot of those situations also have predators that will go after such creatures. Familiars are fragile. Some are okay at stealth, but most aren't. If a wizard's familiar is this god-like scout that is going unnoticed and that's causing you trouble, just have your NPCs notice them, or even have predators prey on them.

Yes, they're good. No, they're not unstoppable, undetectable spy drones.

All correct.

For the undetectable spy drone you need pact of the chain.:smalltongue:

Though even then people should be able to at least notice them.

[Segev]

All correct.

For the undetectable spy drone you need pact of the chain.:smalltongue:

Though even then people should be able to at least notice them.

Yeah, and if you're spending your warlock pact boon on it, go for it.

[Gtdead]

find familiar provides an absolutely absurd amount of utility for a level 1 spell slot with no concentration, indefinite duration, and which can even be used in ritual form to save spell slots.

if I were to propose a new level 1 spell that gives you at-will scouting that most enemies won't respond to, keeps the entire party safe while the scouting is going on, doesn't interfere with the caster's senses unless they choose for it to happen, can provide enhanced senses, is reusable until something goes out of their way to destroy it, doesn't even have to cost a spell slot, and also has a variety of other niche uses, with the only downside being a 10 gp cost, I would expect most people to say "that's way too powerful", unless of course they realize that I'm pointing out how extremely strong familiars are in this edition of D&D and spot that this is exactly what find familiar does.

this spell is plenty overloaded. there is no need to worry that taking something out of the "kit" of find familiar is going to leave it underpowered.

personally, my ruling has been that since familiars (apart from chain pact warlock familiars) can't attack, therefore they can't help on an attack (which is arguably supported by the rules on helping), and I still think the spell is *more* than worth having (and to be clear, I am aware that there is a sage ruling that familiars can help on the attack action, I just don't care).

to put it another way, look up the spell "arcane eye". it's a level 4 spell, lasts 1 hour, and requires concentration. this is the first spell where I would say that it is *arguably* superior to having *certain* familiars *while the duration is running*, and there are STILL things I like more about find familiar.

does this spell need to *also* have powerful combat uses like providing advantage to a rogue's attack which is a significant boost to their damage? in my opinion it does not.

I think you let your feelings about this spell get the best of you. Help action is familiar's weakest feature, and the weakest of the two ways to be used in combat (the other is administering potions). Why nerf this feature instead of limiting it's utility? Then you can justify allowing it to thrive in combat without being "way too powerful".

Find familiar is a once per day deal. It's really hard to recast it if you lose it because it takes 1+ hour to do so and you lose your short rest recovery. If you had an item that made you omniscient, but would break to provide advantage to your next attack roll, would you ever do that? Something is as strong as it's strongest feature. Using it any other way when risk is involved is trouble, and actually, if you believed that this spell is so overpowered, the best way to deal with it is to kill it in combat because it's becoming dangerous enough to be a good target, by enabling the rogue, or by administering potions, or by giving away enemy positions for better engagements, or whatever. Let the players expend resources to keep it alive. It's their decision to let a 11 AC/1 HP creature roam freely around the battleground.

[SharkForce]

I'd just like to point out that a rogue which doesn't get sneak attack will fall well behind in damage compared to every other martial character (and most casters using cantrips). Even the anemic firebolt averages 11 damage at 5th level while the rogue with a long bow and 18 dex is only 8.5.

The expectation is that most turns the rogue WILL find a way to have sneak attack available every turn whether by one of the methods of generating advantage, a rogue special ability or an ally adjacent to their target.

Familiar is just one of the possible methods. Without sneak attack, a rogue is no better than a character with a single attack and no other way of doing damage.

there are plenty of ways for rogues to get sneak attack without find familiar. they don't need advantage, they just need an ally next to their target.



I think you let your feelings about this spell get the best of you. Help action is familiar's weakest feature, and the weakest of the two ways to be used in combat (the other is administering potions). Why nerf this feature instead of limiting it's utility? Then you can justify allowing it to thrive in combat without being "way too powerful".

Find familiar is a once per day deal. If you had an item that made you omniscient, but would break to provide advantage to your next attack roll, would you ever do that? Something is as strong as it's strongest feature. Using it any other way when risk is involved is trouble, and actually, if you believed that this spell is so overpowered, the best way to deal with it is to kill it in combat because it's becoming dangerous enough to be a good target, by enabling the rogue, or by administering potions, or by giving away enemy positions for better engagements, or whatever. Let the players expend resources to keep it alive. It's their decision to let a 11 AC/1 HP creature roam freely around the battleground.

once per day? it's a ritual spell. you can cast it several times per day if you want, and while there is a gp cost it isn't *that* high.

furthermore, I'm not seeing the problem with taking away from the thing the spell is *not* designed to do rather than the thing the spell *is* designed to do. I mean, I *could* make the spell suck at scouting (say, by making the familiar glow with magic or something) and leave in the combat utility, but frankly I think that would be much more unsatisfying. I'd much rather have the spell be useful for scouting and extra senses (with a bit of risk attached if they use it for scouting in situations where it might be too obvious) than have it bad at scouting just so that I can salvage the combat uses.

(on a side note, I also don't allow most familiars to administer potions in any reasonable amount of time... this isn't universal, but most familiars are somewhat lacking in useful appendages suitable to opening a vial and carefully pouring it down a creature's throat. something like a raven probably could manage it given a bit of time to find a place to wedge the potion vial in place, open it with their beak eventually, and then awkwardly hop/flutter over to their target and pour it down someone's throat, but likely not in a 6 second time frame. I do allow it in combat for creatures like rats or weasels, on the other hand, which could in theory sit up on their hind legs, hold a vial with their front paws, and pull out a stopper with their mouth provided they have appropriate instructions. so as far as giving people healing potions, I'd allow it for a familiar to eventually help their unconscious master or something where 30 seconds of awkward struggling could do the job, but in the middle of combat the best you might hope for is that they could carry it to a person, and that person will need to use the potion themselves).

[Gtdead]

once per day? it's a ritual spell. you can cast it several times per day if you want, and while there is a gp cost it isn't *that* high.

I was slow to edit my post to make it clearer. It's once per day deal because it takes 1 hour+ to cast, so you lose your short rest recovery. Not because of the gp cost, although that's significant early in the game. The implication is that if you can have enough downtime to consistently cast 1+ hour spells, then I think we should talk about short rest classes instead and forget about Find Familiar and low level wizards.



furthermore, I'm not seeing the problem with taking away from the thing the spell is *not* designed to do rather than the thing the spell *is* designed to do. I mean, I *could* make the spell suck at scouting (say, by making the familiar glow with magic or something) and leave in the combat utility, but frankly I think that would be much more unsatisfying. I'd much rather have the spell be useful for scouting and extra senses (with a bit of risk attached if they use it for scouting in situations where it might be too obvious) than have it bad at scouting just so that I can salvage the combat uses.

Why would you assume that it's not designed to help you in combat? The only thing it can't do is attack. The spell is all about creating some kind of creature that assists you. Help action is as close to assisting you as anything, and the only thing that could validate your argument about the design purpose incombat is that there aren't more familiars with the flyby ability, which I'd say is fairly weak. I can't think of any other argument.



(on a side note, I also don't allow most familiars to administer potions in any reasonable amount of time... this isn't universal, but most familiars are somewhat lacking in useful appendages suitable to opening a vial and carefully pouring it down a creature's throat. something like a raven probably could manage it given a bit of time to find a place to wedge the potion vial in place, open it with their beak eventually, and then awkwardly hop/flutter over to their target and pour it down someone's throat, but likely not in a 6 second time frame. I do allow it in combat for creatures like rats or weasels, on the other hand, which could in theory sit up on their hind legs, hold a vial with their front paws, and pull out a stopper with their mouth provided they have appropriate instructions. so as far as giving people healing potions, I'd allow it for a familiar to eventually help their unconscious master or something where 30 seconds of awkward struggling could do the job, but in the middle of combat the best you might hope for is that they could carry it to a person, and that person will need to use the potion themselves).

It's your right as a DM to nerf spells and abilities for what you consider a better experience and I wouldn't have any problem playing with this ruling. After all, the whole point of that practice (administering potions) is to act as a healer for your party. It would just make me design my character to be a bit more selfish. However I personally disagree with any rationalization that uses real life as an argument.

[Gurgeh]

Find familiar is a once per day deal. It's really hard to recast it if you lose it because it takes 1+ hour to do so and you lose your short rest recovery.
A Wizard can only use Arcane Recovery once per day, so it's entirely feasible that they could be looking at getting little - or nothing, even - from a short rest.

Warlocks do suffer from this collision, but the Pact of the Chain gives them enough of a power boost that they're far less likely to need to replace their familiar in the first place - so it's only really horrible for non-Chain warlocks or other short rest classes who've picked it up via Magic Initiate.

The only time it's going to be a total non-starter to cast is if your team doesn't take short rests at all.

[Gtdead]

A Wizard can only use Arcane Recovery once per day, so it's entirely feasible that they could be looking at getting little - or nothing, even - from a short rest.

Warlocks do suffer from this collision, but the Pact of the Chain gives them enough of a power boost that they're far less likely to need to replace their familiar in the first place - so it's only really horrible for non-Chain warlocks or other short rest classes who've picked it up via Magic Initiate.

How many short rests are you supposed to do daily? Arcane Recovery is the absolute priority unless you argue that the wizard won't use spell slots till the first short rest, which isn't realistic. And what about hit dice recovery? Would you give that up in order to attack with advantage once per round and possibly lose it again? It's a vicious cycle. If you are likely to lose your familiar in combat, keep it in your backpocket unless you know it's the last fight of the day.

The only scenario where I'd rate resummoning the familiar higher than using my hit dice would be if I was topped up, or if I know for a fact that the success of the quest depends on scouting. Former is fairly common, although not as common as most people seem to think, the second is way too contrived.

So ok, there is the possibility to have it twice per day, on your second short rest, if and when that happens.

[Gurgeh]

Like every other short rest resource, it's heavily table-dependent, and also hinges on how much your party has by way of HD-independent recovery (Inspiring Leader, Healer, cleric who actively wants to be the party's healbot, etc.) - but absent compelling evidence of play trends, the DMG guideline of two short rests a day seems to be a reasonable assumption.

There's also the flipside where there might be so much pressure on your hit points that you're already burning all of your HD on your first short rest, though if that's the case then your whole team's probably in a fair bit of trouble.

[Christian]

No they're better in multiple ways not just having Flyby, in comparison to a Bat for example they have double the fly speed and Keen Sight (in addition to Keen Hearing), with 120ft of darkvision.

Even if you strip out Flyby the Owl is still strong familiar choice, extremely useful in recon.

And the best Dexterity(Stealth) check bonus of any flying familiar. There's really no contest--I'd take owls as my default familiar for recon purposes regardless of the Flyby ability.

That said, that ability is way more useful for recon than for combat. Some enemies might be suspicious enough to whack a random animal going by, just in case. An owl is mainly vulnerable to those enemies if it ends its turn nearby; it can't get whacked in passing.

[Gtdead]

Like every other short rest resource, it's heavily table-dependent, and also hinges on how much your party has by way of HD-independent recovery (Inspiring Leader, Healer, cleric who actively wants to be the party's healbot, etc.) - but absent compelling evidence of play trends, the DMG guideline of two short rests a day seems to be a reasonable assumption.

There's also the flipside where there might be so much pressure on your hit points that you're already burning all of your HD on your first short rest, though if that's the case then your whole team's probably in a fair bit of trouble.

There are myriad scenarios. What I'm more interested in is planning for the day. Even if the XP budget stays the same, the difficulty of encounters increases near the end of the day due to the expenditure of resources. The more scarce spellslots become, the more important hitpoints become. Also Wizard is one of the classes that doesn't benefit very much from yoyo healing because (usually) he needs to concentrate, unlike let's say a ranged rogue/fighter/ranger that gets back up and is ready to go again. The default assumption for me is that the Wizard will want to prioritize Hit Dice recovery, but it doesn't have to be so 100% of the time.

Capitalizing on circumstantial factors like having a very efficient healer as a team mate, or having days with one but very difficult encounter etc, is always a good thing and the mark of a skilled player, and that's probably when using your familiar recklessly is worth it. But claiming that because it's a ritual, it's easy to have high uptime or some such is completely unrealistic and feels like the player/DM in question either doesn't have enough experience, doesn't attack it at all even when it's warranted, or designs the adventuring day in a way that allows the circumstance to become the norm.

[ad_hoc]

Creatures that cannot attack should not be able to use the Help action in combat.

That's the simple solution that solves all the familiar nonsense (but still allows Chain Pact familiars to Help).

Having a toad on my shoulder should not make the iron golem vulnerable to me.

It's silly in the narrative and doesn't make sense in the balance of the spell.

Find Familiar is still the best 1st level spell even without Help in combat.

[Dork_Forge]

Also Wizard is one of the classes that doesn't benefit very much from yoyo healing because (usually) he needs to concentrate, unlike let's say a ranged rogue/fighter/ranger that gets back up and is ready to go again. The default assumption for me is that the Wizard will want to prioritize Hit Dice recovery, but it doesn't have to be so 100% of the time.


They're also more likely to die, Wizards and most Sorcerers stay in the insta-death risk zone longer than other classes.

[Spore]

They're also more likely to die, Wizards and most Sorcerers stay in the insta-death risk zone longer than other classes.

I personally call Wizard 3-5 the "no-fun" zone. You have more than enough encounter ending spells for easy challenges: Sleep vs. hordes of tiny critters, magic missile to kill a pesky dodging enemy, charm person for social stuff but if the enemy knows what they are dealing with you need to pour what feels like 80% of spell slots into defenses like Shield, Absorb Elements, Mage Armor and Mirror Image.

That makes you a glorified cantrip turret. Familiars add to that combat experience by being at least a slight tactical option, and truth be told, after that familiars are not that great. At best they "waste" an enemy attack to create space. I play a Lv 6 cleric with ritual caster, and my familiar has died twice with me unable to purchase the ritual components for now. The DM just need to target the damn thing, and suddenly it is not so great anymore.

[KorvinStarmast]

it doesn't *need* to do damage. it is the best scouting spell in the game for the first several levels. Your complaining about a first level spell is over the top to the point of hyperbole. I've been in a lot of games with that spell, no, it is not OP. It is a utility spell and it is useful.

So people use it. TFD is also useful. So people use it, and it really shines in a game where the DM / Table pays attention to encumbrance.

I do not understand this obsession with the need to declare something OP.

We play this game to have fun. If, for you, someone using the find familiar spell hurts your fun then I'm going to suggest that the problem does not lie anywhere in the game.

Compare what you dislike about find familiar with a spell that was just badly designed: True Strike. The use case is so narrow that a lot of players I've seen who took it ask to change it out after a few levels because it's mechanically poor.

[Garfunion]

With the new “companion” template for the beastmaster Ranger and summoning spells. Perhaps it would be best to re-visit the find familiar spell and create templates for it. The spell would allow you to summon a scout, combat, or utility familiar. The chain pact could switch between these choices freely and quickly.

[Kane0]

Speak for yourself, i can't convince the current wizard on our party to use anything other than a weasel.

[Ugmaro]

Your complaining about a first level spell is over the top to the point of hyperbole. I've been in a lot of games with that spell, no, it is not OP. It is a utility spell and it is useful.

So people use it. TFD is also useful. So people use it, and it really shines in a game where the DM / Table pays attention to encumbrance.

I do not understand this obsession with the need to declare something OP.

We play this game to have fun. If, for you, someone using the find familiar spell hurts your fun then I'm going to suggest that the problem does not lie anywhere in the game.

Compare what you dislike about find familiar with a spell that was just badly designed: True Strike. The use case is so narrow that a lot of players I've seen who took it ask to change it out after a few levels because it's mechanically poor.

I didn't want to get involved in this discussion but after reading this specific comment I kinda have to:
I strongly disagree with such sentiments. I for one consider quite a few spells to be too strong and quite a few spells to be terrible due to which I'd sooner agree that find familiar should have no combat utility than say there are no problems in the game. I say let people speak their mind in regards to such things, even if it's something that annoys you - much better than blaming them for thinking about something they're passionate about.

[Gtdead]

I didn't want to get involved in this discussion but after reading this specific comment I kinda have to:
I strongly disagree with such sentiments. I for one consider quite a few spells to be too strong and quite a few spells to be terrible due to which I'd sooner agree that find familiar should have no combat utility than say there are no problems in the game. I say let people speak their mind in regards to such things, even if it's something that annoys you - much better than blaming them for thinking about something they're passionate about.

I think calling it "blaming" is a stretch. Discussions are about trying to reach a consensus. Ideas need to be challenged and scrutinized and passionate opinions invite passionate responses. And personally, I 100% agree that people are quick to call something overpowered. It's nothing new and it's been that way since the first online gaming communities were created, but when it's unwarranted or too passionate, it makes for awful discussions.

[Ugmaro]

I think calling it "blaming" is a stretch. Discussions are about trying to reach a consensus. Ideas need to be challenged and scrutinized and passionate opinions invite passionate responses. And personally, I 100% agree that people are quick to call something overpowered. It's nothing new and it's been that way since the first online gaming communities were created, but when it's unwarranted or too passionate, it makes for awful discussions.

It's not the "calling something overpowered is too common" part of his arguement that I mind, it's the "the problem is not in the game" part that bothers me, since it's insinuating "the problem is in you", which is almost always going to result in vitriol in the discussions. Sorry for not being clearer on that part though, good of you to call me out on it!

[Tanarii]

Just house rule that because familiars can't attack, they can't take the Help action. Problem solved.

[Gtdead]

It's not the "calling something overpowered is too common" part of his arguement that I mind, it's the "the problem is not in the game" part that bothers me, since it's insinuating "the problem is in you", which is almost always going to result in vitriol in the discussions. Sorry for not being clearer on that part though, good of you to call me out on it!

I understand. I do believe that there is a certain validity to "problem being with the player/DM" however because small alterations to rules and basic assumptions for the game (for example alterations in pacing, number of encounters per day/short rest opportunities, type of enemies etc) can make a dramatic difference in the effectiveness of certain abilities. Generally speaking, when the experiences of two individuals vary dramatically for something very particular, and always assuming that their arguments are in good faith, the safest possible assumption is that the culprit is the human, not the game design. Which doesn't necessarily mean that one is right and the other is wrong, the ruleset is ours to do whatever we like with it and there will be significant variations between tables even without homebrewing. There isn't any authority, except for AL games and published modules to an extend.

[Segev]

Speak for yourself, i can't convince the current wizard on our party to use anything other than a weasel.

I'm curious as to his reason. Has he told you?

[Ugmaro]

Speak for yourself, i can't convince the current wizard on our party to use anything other than a weasel.

Admirable, a man with priciples and well set priorities :P

[Wintermoot]

I'm curious as to his reason. Has he told you?

Because he has to Weeze the juice.


*let's see if we can guess how old everyone is by whether or not they understand that reference*

[KorvinStarmast]

I strongly disagree with such sentiments. I don't find hyperbole to be useful. The assertion that Find Familiar is OP is hyperbole. As to this:

I say let people speak their mind Where is this nonsense coming from? Nothing I said prevents anyone from sharing an opinion. Heck, it's what we do a lot on this forum: share opinions.
Not every opinion is formed on a rational or well reasoned basis. (My own loathing for Kender could arguably be placed in that category). Someone sharing an ill formed opinion may certainly receive the feedback that their opinion is in that class.

it's the "the problem is not in the game" part that bothers me I'll let Donald Sutherland / Oddball respond to that (https://youtu.be/Xyh-JpWdGmQ?t=33).

[Ugmaro]

I don't find hyperbole to be useful. The assertion that Find Familiar is OP is hyperbole.
I'll let Donald Sutherland / Oddball respond to that (https://youtu.be/Xyh-JpWdGmQ?t=33).

So the first quote is from the first post, which I could fully understand you misinterpreting, if you had not also read the second post in which I've clarified what I'm objecting to.
You'll excuse me if I don't accept "be positive" as a response to me pointing out something is vitriol inducing, which you completely fail to quote. You must understand this is making it very difficult to understand your comments as written in good faith, don't you?

[KorvinStarmast]

So the first quote is from the first post, which I could fully understand you misinterpreting, if you had not also read the second post in which I've clarified what I'm objecting to.
I didn't care for the passive aggressive tone in your post previous to this, so I guess we just aren't doing this very well together. :smallfrown:
As to opinions, they are as common as navels.
My experience at the various tables where I have played shows the base assertion is false.
Mine isn't the only response that expresses disagreement in the overreach/hyperbole in the OP.

[Ugmaro]

Sorry, I tend to get riled up when personal attacks become the name of the game and that's the only thing I was objecting to the entire time, though I 100% cede that my first post in the thread has been unfortunately formulated.

[KorvinStarmast]

Sorry, I tend to get riled up when personal attacks become the name of the game and that's the only thing I was objecting to the entire time, though I 100% cede that my first post in the thread has been unfortunately formulated. We are messing this up and I'm sorry I got all grumpy with you.

[Darth Credence]

Because he has to Weeze the juice.


*let's see if we can guess how old everyone is by whether or not they understand that reference*

Hey, buuuddy.

No wheezing the juice!

[Thunderous Mojo]

Creatures that cannot attack should not be able to use the Help action in combat..

Just house rule that because familiars can't attack, they can't take the Help action. Problem solved.

While there is elegance to this design, this ruling also results in limiting the narrative options for the Help action.

Hedwig can Help Harry by flying in the face of his enemies.
By RAW, the Help action isn't an attack, one can take the Help action whilst also being the target of the Invisibility spell, for example.

Which I think is further evidence, that the Help action isn't narratively tied to being able to attack something.

I do think it is entirely reasonable for a DM to ask a player to describe how their Familiar is Helping, and rule based off that description if the Help action is viable.

An Invisible Imp could knot the boot laces of an enemy Champion, or loosen their scabbards...the Help action is probably applicable.

What can an Imp do to distract an Iron Golem?
Even if the Imp Familiar can attack the Golem through Pact of the Chain or other reason..it can't hurt an Iron Golem.

Narratively, the Imp may not be able to Help.

As to the original post, Owls are not unobtrusive creatures.
My experience is it only takes 3-5 Owl Familiars being shot down before a player starts selecting Spiders, and other options that are not overly intrusive.🃏

Also, the DM can roleplay the Familiar:

"No way Dalamar! I, the great spirit, Chesterfield, refuse to fly into the lair of the Horned Harpies wearing the form of an Owl. I would be ripped to shreds by the harpies!"

[Doug Lampert]

How many short rests are you supposed to do daily? Arcane Recovery is the absolute priority unless you argue that the wizard won't use spell slots till the first short rest, which isn't realistic. And what about hit dice recovery? Would you give that up in order to attack with advantage once per round and possibly lose it again? It's a vicious cycle. If you are likely to lose your familiar in combat, keep it in your backpocket unless you know it's the last fight of the day.

2-3 short rests per day is the supposed goal.

You start with a familiar, it gets gaked, you can bring it back one or two times and still have arcane recovery. Saving it for the last fight of the day is not required to have it for the last fight of the day unless you expect to get 0-1 short rests per day, in which case the classes with meaningful short rest resources are being shortchanged pretty badly.

[KorvinStarmast]

As to the original post, Owls are not unobtrusive creatures.
Somebody further up suggested that owls ought to have sunlight sensitivity. (It's darkvision is double strength). As I mull this over, I am inclined to agree. My most common use of owl as a familiar since level 3, as a vHuman warlock, is as a lookout at night or in dark places, and I generally kept him out of combat most of the time though we have sometimes taken advantage of the flyby in outdoor fights. Right now my familiar is a parrot.

My experience is it only takes 3-5 Owl Familiars being shot down before a player starts selecting Spiders, and other options that are not overly intrusive. My brother's elf wizard discovered that in early 2015.

[SharkForce]

A Wizard can only use Arcane Recovery once per day, so it's entirely feasible that they could be looking at getting little - or nothing, even - from a short rest.

Warlocks do suffer from this collision, but the Pact of the Chain gives them enough of a power boost that they're far less likely to need to replace their familiar in the first place - so it's only really horrible for non-Chain warlocks or other short rest classes who've picked it up via Magic Initiate.

The only time it's going to be a total non-starter to cast is if your team doesn't take short rests at all.

conveniently, my reasoning for familiars being unable to attack and therefore unable to *help* on an attack does not apply to chain pact familiars, as they can attack in the first place.

for that matter, they'd be perfectly capable of using potions of healing on unconscious people too, as they have an appropriate shape.

as such, I am not taking anything away from chain pact familiars that the official rules have given them.


Your complaining about a first level spell is over the top to the point of hyperbole. I've been in a lot of games with that spell, no, it is not OP. It is a utility spell and it is useful.

So people use it. TFD is also useful. So people use it, and it really shines in a game where the DM / Table pays attention to encumbrance.

I do not understand this obsession with the need to declare something OP.

We play this game to have fun. If, for you, someone using the find familiar spell hurts your fun then I'm going to suggest that the problem does not lie anywhere in the game.

Compare what you dislike about find familiar with a spell that was just badly designed: True Strike. The use case is so narrow that a lot of players I've seen who took it ask to change it out after a few levels because it's mechanically poor.

find familiar is useful whether or not you can use it to help on attacks. it is, as I pointed out, already the strongest scouting utility spell in the game with no competition for several spell levels afterwards (and even then there are arguments for find familiar over that other spell). it has plenty of value purely in providing additional senses and far safer scouting potential (10 gp and 70 minutes isn't free, but it is much cheaper than having to go find the rogue that died 100 feet away from the party and get a raise dead cast if the rogue gets caught). it even provides some minor additional utility in the form of allowing touch spells to be used from a distance (though this is best used for touch-ranged buff spells generally speaking). it does not need to also have combat uses like increasing an ally's damage or absorbing an enemy attack in addition to the other stuff it brings to the table.

true strike in contrast is a spell that is nearly impossible to use in an effective manner. the two are simply not equivalent. you can feel free to add a bunch of stuff to true strike and I won't be bothered in the slightest. if I think it's cool and interesting, I'll gladly use those changes in my games. heck, if I think it's boring but makes true strike at least not horrible, I'd seriously consider adding it to my games. it is hard to say that it is definitively the worst spell of its level, but it is a competitor for that position at the very least.

there is a world of difference between taking something away from find familiar which is one of the best spells of its level (and is competitive with significantly higher level spells that have similar functions) and the true strike cantrip which is one of the worst spells for its level.

[KorvinStarmast]

It does not need to also have combat uses like increasing an ally's damage or absorbing an enemy attack in addition to the other stuff it brings to the table. Your opinion is not a fact, but at your table if you take the glass half empty approach that you have professed here, and you feel it important to remove that aspect (see Tanarii's suggestion a few posts back) just make sure that your players are aware of that ahead of time.

And make sure that your sailor background character can have a parrot as a familiar. :smallwink:

[Willowhelm]

I’m curious about this scouting ability. You can use their senses within 100ft as an action. You’re relying on their stealth too. If you’ve got this rogue in your party then are you really going to trust your owls +3 stealth over your rogue’s expertise?

And even in range you’re communicating telepathically. You’re not remote controlling it! Keep that in mind. And you’re deaf and blind while you do.

Outside of that range you’re relying on them reporting back to you. An owl has an int of 2. What exactly is it reporting back to you that is so useful? Send it off to scout the whole dungeon (assuming no closed doors) and you get back a report that there are no mice… great.

(Of course if your DM allows for a Tressym then they might be more intelligent than some of the PCs)

I know there are various guides on how to get the most out of your familiar but, as with other low level spell guides, they rely on generous DMs allowing the abilities. If your DM lets it deliver potions to unconscious players well… they’ve allowed talons to get a unconscious body into position, open bottles, pour, and make the unconscious body swallow not choke/drown… which is nice. If their dungeons don’t have doors, and they let the familiar scout it all and not be seen, not be killed, and then actually give you a reliable report back… that’s generous. You can summon it on the other side of a door! So cool! Let’s summon it blind into a room and alert everything inside. Oops. (Or end up in a gelatinous cube and die instantly - true story).

Letting one familiar form give advantage on one attack for one character once per round… not exactly game breaking power levels.

I am a generous DM. I’d balance things by letting other familiars get flyby. I don’t care. If the player is “abusing” the ability then it’s trivial to add a minion to the fight that takes it out.

None of this is intended to downplay the spell. I love it. My current wizard has a familiar, tiny servants, and a manifest mind. I dread to think how overpowered that must seem to some.

Edits: fixing grammar and spelling errors

[SharkForce]

well, first off, 100 feet away can mean a lot more than 100 feet of travel time if you're not in a plain tunnel. the room right next to you might be somewhere you only reach after 500 feet of walking, but could be contained within a 200 foot radius sphere easily. especially if you include up and down as possible directions.

secondly... just how far ahead do you think it's a good idea to send your rogue solo? 100 feet is already 2 full rounds of dashing before you get to them, and in my experience the average rogue isn't going to do very well solo if they're caught.

thirdly, we're looking at far lower risk than sending the rogue. it is much easier to get your familiar back (10 gold, no spell slot, and 70 minutes) than it is to get your rogue back.

fourthly, 100 feet ahead is giving your party potentially 220 feet advance notice of when something is coming, if you have a 120 foot range on that familiar's senses.

fifthly, depending on form your familiar may be able to simply bypass doors (small rodents can probably squeeze under many doors, a spider may even be able to squeeze through cracks on the side or even through a key hole).

sixthly, you don't need to guide it constantly, so you don't need to be blind and deaf yourself constantly.

seventhly, when you don't use it to scout ahead, you're getting a free extra perception check for the party, possibly with the benefit of special senses that can even include blindsight.

eighthly, what kind of crazy person sends a lone party member to go through a door alone with the rest of the party potentially several hundred feet away anyways? even if you can't send the familiar to do that job, you definitely SHOULDN'T send the rogue to do that job alone in most cases. opening a door is something you can't plausibly hide from people on the other side, after all.

ninthly, the familiar's form can also provide some added protection from enemies. a spider can scout a lot of places unnoticed. a rat won't attract a lot of attention in many cases, and it is possible a bat or a bird won't either.

maybe you think putting all of that into a level 1 spell that can be cast as a ritual, has an indefinite duration, and does not require concentration or even any sort of action to direct is not enough (plus has additional niche uses). personally, I'm not sure how much you want a spell to do before you say "actually, that's probably good enough without adding on to it", but to me that already sounds like one hell of a spell.

[Willowhelm]

well, first off, 100 feet away can mean a lot more than 100 feet of travel time if you're not in a plain tunnel. the room right next to you might be somewhere you only reach after 500 feet of walking, but could be contained within a 200 foot radius sphere easily. especially if you include up and down as possible directions.

secondly... just how far ahead do you think it's a good idea to send your rogue solo? 100 feet is already 2 full rounds of dashing before you get to them, and in my experience the average rogue isn't going to do very well solo if they're caught.

thirdly, we're looking at far lower risk than sending the rogue. it is much easier to get your familiar back (10 gold, no spell slot, and 70 minutes) than it is to get your rogue back.

fourthly, 100 feet ahead is giving your party potentially 220 feet advance notice of when something is coming, if you have a 120 foot range on that familiar's senses.

fifthly, depending on form your familiar may be able to simply bypass doors (small rodents can probably squeeze under many doors, a spider may even be able to squeeze through cracks on the side or even through a key hole).

sixthly, you don't need to guide it constantly, so you don't need to be blind and deaf yourself constantly.

seventhly, when you don't use it to scout ahead, you're getting a free extra perception check for the party, possibly with the benefit of special senses that can even include blindsight.

eighthly, what kind of crazy person sends a lone party member to go through a door alone with the rest of the party potentially several hundred feet away anyways? even if you can't send the familiar to do that job, you definitely SHOULDN'T send the rogue to do that job alone in most cases. opening a door is something you can't plausibly hide from people on the other side, after all.

ninthly, the familiar's form can also provide some added protection from enemies. a spider can scout a lot of places unnoticed. a rat won't attract a lot of attention in many cases, and it is possible a bat or a bird won't either.

maybe you think putting all of that into a level 1 spell that can be cast as a ritual, has an indefinite duration, and does not require concentration or even any sort of action to direct is not enough (plus has additional niche uses). personally, I'm not sure how much you want a spell to do before you say "actually, that's probably good enough without adding on to it", but to me that already sounds like one hell of a spell.

What I’m saying is that given all that (assuming your DM provides an opportunity for you to use it in all those ways)… who gives a fig if you can also use the help action with flyby?

And as I was saying before. All those uses are from a generous DM. Providing an environment where those distances matter. Allowing your 2 int familiar to not do something stupid when you’re not actively commanding it action to action. Not having it die to random beasts. Not having whatever enemies it finds see it and kill it and now be on high alert. You can stay within range of your familiar but your party is still stealthy enough not to alert anyone etc etc. None of this just happens - it’s a living word that reacts.

I think you missed my point about the doors. Getting close enough to summon it on the other side means you’re already there and you can just open it. It’s a niche ability. (Although if you want to Misty step in afterward to bypass a locked door… great. Now what about the rest of the party?)

I think opening a door is more stealthy than an owl popping into existence in the middle of a room personally. If you’ve switched to another familiar to get through cracks (that are explicitly not there in some official adventures) then you’re not really talking about how OP an owl is (the topic of the thread). Similarly your other comment about other forms doesn’t really apply to this whole “owl is the obvious/only/op choice” thing.

It is a fantastic spell. I love it. I have it on all my caster PCs. But it’s “power” comes from the opportunity the DM provides and how the word reacts to it. It doesn’t just present the player with some outlandish ability that breaks the game.

A high dex PC with expertise in stealth is going to be better at stealthy scouting and make better decisions. Would their death be a bigger deal? Yes! But why on earth are they going to get themselves killed? And why would you want to play in such a paranoid manner in a game where it is so hard to actually die. Have the dumb rogue get out of range. Have him open a door by himself. Live a little. Die a little. They made a rogue and you’re not going to let them scout?! Apparently the fight will be easy anyway because you can spam the help action to win or just heal everyone with potions on a whim… because your DM let you.

[dafrca]

So almost everyone who wants to make the most of Find Familiar as a non-Chain Pact Warlock chooses an Owl.

Not in my experience, but then I expect different players and GMs can have different norms in their game.

:smallbiggrin:

[diplomancer]

Some DMs are *very* stingy with information from scouting familiars. Even if it's an intelligence 14 sprite. It's so frustrating I'm even quitting a group over it once the current adventure path is over in a few sessions (and other reasons, but that's kinda the main one). Rant over.

[Chronos]

It's not even completely clear from the rules that familiars can help with attacks. There's a rule that you can only help with tasks you could attempt yourself, and familiars can't attack. It's just a question of whether that rule applies.

And I see a lot more bat familiars than owl familiars, since blindsight is much more useful than advantage on a few attack rolls.

[Tanarii]

What I’m saying is that given all that (assuming your DM provides an opportunity for you to use it in all those ways)… who gives a fig if you can also use the help action with flyby?

And as I was saying before. All those uses are from a generous DM.
Personally I'd rather be a generous DM that allows Find Familiar to be an effective scouting / recon tool and a restrictive DM that prevents it from being just another combat tool.

AFAIC that's the intent, other than touch spells. And Familiar's using Help is just a system artifact that wasn't considered before hand.

[KorvinStarmast]

It's not even completely clear from the rules that familiars can help with attacks.
It's quite clear. The trick is to read all of the rules sections that apply, which is more than one. This is from the spell.

Your familiar acts independently of you, but it always obeys your commands.
In combat, it rolls its own initiative and acts on its own turn. A familiar can’t attack, but it can take other actions as normal.

Now, let's see what actions you can take in combat. Go to the PHB section with the heading "actions in combat and read all of them. Here they are, summarized. Remember, from up there, in combat, a familiar cannot attack but it can take other actions as normal.
Actions in Combat

When you take your action on your turn, you can take one of the actions presented here, an action you gained from your class or a special feature, or an action that you improvise. Many monsters have action options of their own in their stat blocks.
Attack
Cast a Spell
Dash
Disengage
Dodge
Help
You can lend your aid to another creature in the completion of a task. When you take the Help action, the creature you aid gains advantage on the next ability check it makes to perform the task you are helping with, provided that it makes the check before the start of your next turn.
Alternatively, you can aid a friendly creature in attacking a creature within 5 feet of you. You feint, distract the target, or in some other way team up to make your ally's attack more effective. If your ally attacks the target before your next turn, the first attack roll is made with advantage.

Hide
Ready
Search
Use an Object
(Improvising an action covers everything else you dream up that isn't otherwise covered in the rules. Push a cart down the slope at the enemy? Grab a burning bale of hay and toss it at an enemy? Swing from the chandelier? And so on) It is not complicated. You appear to be mixing ch 7 an ch 9 help cases here.

And I see a lot more bat familiars than owl familiars, since blindsight is much more useful than advantage on a few attack rolls. I agree with you on the bat/blindsight combo feature. Seen quite a few casters employ that.

Not in my experience, but then I expect different players and GMs can have different norms in their game. Mine is similar, in terms of experience.

Aside from that, my favorite familiar is still my sprite that my archfey warlock chain pact had. Best scout familiar I've used so far.

[Tvtyrant]

I have never seen a familiar live through a combat, and usually not even through a scouting scene. So their marginal superiority at combat before they instantly die to an AoE doesn't bother me I guess?

[Gtdead]

RAW the familiar can use magic items, wands, hold concentration on spells etc. Help action is the least of what it can do. Sure we can argue that it doesn't have hands, opposable thumbs, intelligence or whatever, but technically all these are allowed and arcane abeyance doesn't require flyby ^^.

[ad_hoc]

Actions in Combat It is not complicated. You appear to be mixing ch 7 an ch 9 help cases here.


Chapter 7 references Chapter 9. They're literally mixed together.

Just so we're clear here you're making the argument that out of combat a character cannot help with opening a lock without having thieves' tools proficiency but if they were to help while in combat they could.

That's nonsensical.

The rules don't make sense if interpreted this way.

"Hey Bob and Jim! Start fencing so I can help Sam pick this lock!"

It is completely reasonable to rule that a Familiar who is unable to attack cannot use the Help action to assist another character in an attack.

[Amnestic]

There's a rule that you can only help with tasks you could attempt yourself,

That's only for ability checks (since it's in the Ability Checks section and references ability checks both before and after the paragraph you're talking about).

Can we attempt a group check on attack rolls, by the same metric?

[ad_hoc]

That's only for ability checks (since it's in the Ability Checks section and references ability checks both before and after the paragraph you're talking about).

Can we attempt a group check on attack rolls, by the same metric?

The Help action in combat also applies to ability checks.

Using the interpretation that the Working Together rule in ch. 7 is independent of the Help action in ch. 9 (though one references the other) means that a character cannot help out of combat in something they cannot themselves do, but if they are in combat then they are able to do so.

[Keravath]

Personally I'd rather be a generous DM that allows Find Familiar to be an effective scouting / recon tool and a restrictive DM that prevents it from being just another combat tool.

AFAIC that's the intent, other than touch spells. And Familiar's using Help is just a system artifact that wasn't considered before hand.

I wouldn't conclude that was the case. Preventing a familiar from taking the Attack action is a method to prevent classes with such a creature from gaining an attack. However, since they wrote the spell to explicitly exclude an attack in the case of Find Familiar and explicitly allow it in the case of Chain Pact familiars - it seems clear that the did consider the list of actions available to familiars during he design and it is not just a "system artifact".

This is potentially further confirmed by the Sage Advice Compendium which includes rules clarifications.

"Can the familiar you conjure with the find familiar spell use the Help action to grant you advantage on your attack roll?
A familiar can’t attack, but it can take non-attack actions, including Help. As the text of the Help action indi-
cates (PH, 192), the action doesn’t require you to be able to attack; you simply need to be able to provide some sort of distraction."

So, it is fine if a DM wants to homebrew changes to the Find Familar spell if they find it fits better for their game but it is pretty clear that RAW, a familiar is allowed to take the help action and from the clarification in the sage advice compendium, this was clearly intended to be the case.

[ad_hoc]

I wouldn't conclude that was the case. Preventing a familiar from taking the Attack action is a method to prevent classes with such a creature from gaining an attack. However, since they wrote the spell to explicitly exclude an attack in the case of Find Familiar and explicitly allow it in the case of Chain Pact familiars - it seems clear that the did consider the list of actions available to familiars during he design and it is not just a "system artifact".

This is potentially further confirmed by the Sage Advice Compendium which includes rules clarifications.

"Can the familiar you conjure with the find familiar spell use the Help action to grant you advantage on your attack roll?
A familiar can’t attack, but it can take non-attack actions, including Help. As the text of the Help action indi-
cates (PH, 192), the action doesn’t require you to be able to attack; you simply need to be able to provide some sort of distraction."

So, it is fine if a DM wants to homebrew changes to the Find Familar spell if they find it fits better for their game but it is pretty clear that RAW, a familiar is allowed to take the help action and from the clarification in the sage advice compendium, this was clearly intended to be the case.

It isn't necessarily true that it was intended to be the case.

There are lots of rules in the game that ended up technically working out a certain way even if that wasn't what was originally intended.

For example Agonizing Blast may not have originally been intended to work on each blast. It could be that at one point Eldritch Blast was only 1 attack and when it was changed to multiple attacks Agonizing Blast wasn't updated.

The Help mechanic looks like it was cut up in final editing without enough consideration to what it actually means in play as taking it literally is nonsensical.

I take the Sage Advice Compendium with a grain of salt too. At one point Elves needed 8 hours to long rest and now they need 4. That's a terrible change.

[LibraryOgre]

The fun part of this argument for me is that, for another game entirely (Hackmaster), I just wrote an article on why having a tree, a rock, or a mushroom, might not suck as much as you think as a familiar.

"Are owls too good?"
"Due to my rolls, my familiar is classified as a 'soup stone'."

[SharkForce]

I think you missed my point about the doors. Getting close enough to summon it on the other side means you’re already there and you can just open it. It’s a niche ability. (Although if you want to Misty step in afterward to bypass a locked door… great. Now what about the rest of the party?)

I think opening a door is more stealthy than an owl popping into existence in the middle of a room personally. If you’ve switched to another familiar to get through cracks (that are explicitly not there in some official adventures) then you’re not really talking about how OP an owl is (the topic of the thread). Similarly your other comment about other forms doesn’t really apply to this whole “owl is the obvious/only/op choice” thing.

fair enough, that is such a terrible idea that I did indeed miss that point.

find familiar takes an hour to cast with a spell slot or 70 minutes as a ritual.

furthermore, you can only summon a familiar on the other side if you can see the other side, at least by default rules as far as I know. you might even need an opening (depending on whether the DM thinks it is the same as teleportation magic, which by default requires LOS but not necessarily LOE)

you'd need a situation where spending an hour to scout past the door sounds appealing.

so, outside of an extreme niche situation where you're facing a transparent door that can be easily opened from the inside, can't be easily broken, and is also totally unguarded, I agree that nobody is going to summon a familiar through a door... but to my mind, that was never something I would have ever in a million years expected to be able to use and I have no idea why you would even bring that up. it's like saying that having the fighter throw away their sword and try tickling their opponents to death with a feather is a bad idea. it is a bad idea, but it isn't something I think people were expecting to use anyways so why even bring it up?

edit: @ad_hoc if it was *obvious* by RAW that familiars can use help on an attack action even though they can't attack, in spite of text suggesting otherwise in the RAW, it wouldn't *need* a clarification. it is only "obvious" if you read the sage advice clarification. stuff that needs clarification is by definition *not* obvious.

[Gtdead]

It isn't necessarily true that it was intended to be the case.

There are lots of rules in the game that ended up technically working out a certain way even if that wasn't what was originally intended.

For example Agonizing Blast may not have originally been intended to work on each blast. It could be that at one point Eldritch Blast was only 1 attack and when it was changed to multiple attacks Agonizing Blast wasn't updated.

The Help mechanic looks like it was cut up in final editing without enough consideration to what it actually means in play as taking it literally is nonsensical.

I take the Sage Advice Compendium with a grain of salt too. At one point Elves needed 8 hours to long rest and now they need 4. That's a terrible change.

There are a lot of rules that seem like the weren't exactly thought out, or slipped through the cracks, and the errata fixes are kind of wonky, like for example being able to twin EB tier 1 while you can't do it in T2, or the same for Scorching Ray, when both spells are capable of being fully single target. It's an odd change that I can't understand how it came to be.

On the other hand, changes like +mod damage (like from Dragon Sorcerer 6) applying only once per spell, are easier to understand, so one would reasonably think that the interaction between magic missiles and empowered evocation would be an oversight. It seems very reasonable. Up until the point it doesn't because then we have things like Hexblade's Curse and Spirit Shroud that pretty much do exactly that, boosting spells with multiple attacks, the very thing that they errata'd.

There are too many conflicting things happening, so at this point determining that something is or isn't intended is a tall order.

From my point of view, there is a certain specificity in Find Familiar's text that makes me think that it was intended. This isn't some obscure subclass feature that interacts with the spell in a funny way. Actions in combat are as fundamental as it gets. Messing that up is way harder than messing up the potential value of twinned Eldritch Blasts or Scorching Ray's mod stacking.

Is help action less significant than casting a spell? The tiny spider can actually cast one. What exactly is so special about help action that it even warrants a discussion when there are situations where the familiar can act as a secondary spellcaster?

[Willowhelm]

fair enough, that is such a terrible idea that I did indeed miss that point.

find familiar takes an hour to cast with a spell slot or 70 minutes as a ritual.

furthermore, you can only summon a familiar on the other side if you can see the other side, at least by default rules as far as I know. you might even need an opening (depending on whether the DM thinks it is the same as teleportation magic, which by default requires LOS but not necessarily LOE)

you'd need a situation where spending an hour to scout past the door sounds appealing.

so, outside of an extreme niche situation where you're facing a transparent door that can be easily opened from the inside, can't be easily broken, and is also totally unguarded, I agree that nobody is going to summon a familiar through a door... but to my mind, that was never something I would have ever in a million years expected to be able to use and I have no idea why you would even bring that up. it's like saying that having the fighter throw away their sword and try tickling their opponents to death with a feather is a bad idea. it is a bad idea, but it isn't something I think people were expecting to use anyways so why even bring it up?

edit: @ad_hoc if it was *obvious* by RAW that familiars can use help on an attack action even though they can't attack, in spite of text suggesting otherwise in the RAW, it wouldn't *need* a clarification. it is only "obvious" if you read the sage advice clarification. stuff that needs clarification is by definition *not* obvious.

I don’t think you need to be able to see to summon. It just has a range and a restriction that the space be unoccupied.

As for why I bring it up - it’s one of the useful things a familiar can do that other scouting options can’t. Just pros and cons vs other options. I used the misty step trick to rob a safe in one campaign too.

[ad_hoc]

From my point of view, there is a certain specificity in Find Familiar's text that makes me think that it was intended. This isn't some obscure subclass feature that interacts with the spell in a funny way. Actions in combat are as fundamental as it gets. Messing that up is way harder than messing up the potential value of twinned Eldritch Blasts or Scorching Ray's mod stacking.

Is help action less significant than casting a spell? The tiny spider can actually cast one. What exactly is so special about help action that it even warrants a discussion when there are situations where the familiar can act as a secondary spellcaster?

It is intended that the familiar can use the Help action. What isn't clear is whether the intention was for them to be able to use it to Help an attack if they cannot attack (and some familiars can attack).

As you said, they can also use the Cast a Spell action. Doesn't mean they can actually cast a spell though.

There are actions they are allowed to use per the spell Find Familiar that other rules in the game may put limits on.

[Thunderous Mojo]

It is intended that the familiar can use the Help action. What isn't clear is whether the intention was for them to be able to use it to Help an attack if they cannot attack (and some familiars can attack)

PHB pg 192
Alternatively, you can aid a friendly creature in attacking a creature within 5 feet ofyou. You feint, distract the target, or in some other way team up to make your ally's attack more effective. If your ally attacks the target before your next turn, the first attack roll is made with advantage.

The rule seems clear. Questioning the 'True Intent' behind fairly straightforward rules, is creating fictions.

Based off the responses in the thread, many people wouldn't have a problem with a houserule removing the Help Action from Familiars.

Indicating that your personal ruling, reflects the true intent of the rules, with no evidence to support such an assertion, seems a reach to me.

[ad_hoc]

PHB pg 192
Alternatively, you can aid a friendly creature in attacking a creature within 5 feet ofyou. You feint, distract the target, or in some other way team up to make your ally's attack more effective. If your ally attacks the target before your next turn, the first attack roll is made with advantage.

The rule seems clear. Questioning the 'True Intent' behind fairly straightforward rules, is creating fictions.

Based off the responses in the thread, many people wouldn't have a problem with a houserule removing the Help Action from Familiars.

Indicating that your personal ruling, reflects the true intent of the rules, with no evidence to support such an assertion, seems a reach to me.

I didn't start talking about 'true intent' I was replying to another poster who was talking about it. They said the intent was clear and I disagreed.

The rule is also clear that in combat you can help another character pick a lock without proficiency in thieves' tools while out of combat you cannot.

The rules don't always make sense and sometimes the DM needs make a ruling. I choose to apply the text in Ch. 7 and Ch. 9 together into 1 cohesive rule. I get others do not. I think it's valid for me to do so.

My advice to the OP is to not allow familiars who cannot attack from using the Help action to aid an attack rather than removing Flyby.

[Thunderous Mojo]

The rules don't always make sense and sometimes the DM needs make a ruling. I choose to apply the text in Ch. 7 and Ch. 9 together into 1 cohesive rule. I get others do not. I think it's valid for me to do so.

Entirely appropriate ruling. Even Elegant.

I'm not adverse to idle speculation.
I'm certainly willing to entertain the notion that Familiars were never intended to be able to use the Help Action in combat.

Unfortunately we won't know for sure, unless the Designers release a Blooper Reel.

[Darth Credence]

I didn't start talking about 'true intent' I was replying to another poster who was talking about it. They said the intent was clear and I disagreed.

The rule is also clear that in combat you can help another character pick a lock without proficiency in thieves' tools while out of combat you cannot.

The rules don't always make sense and sometimes the DM needs make a ruling. I choose to apply the text in Ch. 7 and Ch. 9 together into 1 cohesive rule. I get others do not. I think it's valid for me to do so.

My advice to the OP is to not allow familiars who cannot attack from using the Help action to aid an attack rather than removing Flyby.

It is absolutely not clear that is the case - it is pretty clear to me that it is not. In chapter 7, under working together, it is clear that to help you must be able to do the task on your own. It also specifies that to work together in combat, you have to use the help action. Therefore, it is pretty clear that the restrictions on working together apply to the help action in combat talked about in chapter 9, and the same restrictions apply. It takes some rather motivated reasoning to decide that the later chapter decides to ignore the restrictions from an earlier chapter on the same thing. There is no reason to repeat that restriction at this point, since it was already made clear in an earlier chapter.

[Keravath]

It isn't necessarily true that it was intended to be the case.

There are lots of rules in the game that ended up technically working out a certain way even if that wasn't what was originally intended.

For example Agonizing Blast may not have originally been intended to work on each blast. It could be that at one point Eldritch Blast was only 1 attack and when it was changed to multiple attacks Agonizing Blast wasn't updated.

The Help mechanic looks like it was cut up in final editing without enough consideration to what it actually means in play as taking it literally is nonsensical.

I take the Sage Advice Compendium with a grain of salt too. At one point Elves needed 8 hours to long rest and now they need 4. That's a terrible change.

Just FYI but from what I can find in terms of playtest material prior to publication of the PHB, the ability of a warlock to combine Agonizing blast with each beam of eldritch blast was tested and included as part of the principal design allowing the warlock to do at will damage comparable to other classes.

https://www.enworld.org/threads/so-warlocks.358126/

In the above Reddit thread one person comments on the warlock at will damage using Agonizing blast before the PHB was published (or at least before they saw a copy). There are likely other references scattered around the internet. Much of 5e was fairly extensively playtested in the 2012-2014 time frame.

Basically, making a statement that an aspect of the game which doesn't work as you might expect must have been an accidental side effect isn't a reasonable position especially when there is evidence that these features were play tested that way and were intended.

[Gtdead]

It is intended that the familiar can use the Help action. What isn't clear is whether the intention was for them to be able to use it to Help an attack if they cannot attack (and some familiars can attack).

As you said, they can also use the Cast a Spell action. Doesn't mean they can actually cast a spell though.

There are actions they are allowed to use per the spell Find Familiar that other rules in the game may put limits on.



The "no attack action" clause is specific to the spell like it is with Unseen Servant, which is the only other instance of this predicament as far as I am aware. So the Familiar can do exactly what the spell specifies, just like Unseen Servant does. Owl can attack, familiar owl can't attack. Trying to determine if that's an oversight or not is really grasping at straws here. And since there is a precedent with Unseen Servant and how they handled something that they don't want to take traditional combat actions, I consider this a non issue.

As for spellcasting, while they don't have the spellcasting trait, they are perfectly capable of casting. The can become a conduit for touch spells and can activate items. Otherwise we should argue that the Fighter can't possibly use magic unless he is an EK, which isn't the case.

PS. Help action in combat can't bypass the Working Together limitation. Help action is how this rule is applied in combat and the text is pretty clear on that IMO.

[ad_hoc]

Just FYI but from what I can find in terms of playtest material prior to publication of the PHB, the ability of a warlock to combine Agonizing blast with each beam of eldritch blast was tested and included as part of the principal design allowing the warlock to do at will damage comparable to other classes.

https://www.enworld.org/threads/so-warlocks.358126/

In the above Reddit thread one person comments on the warlock at will damage using Agonizing blast before the PHB was published (or at least before they saw a copy). There are likely other references scattered around the internet. Much of 5e was fairly extensively playtested in the 2012-2014 time frame.

Basically, making a statement that an aspect of the game which doesn't work as you might expect must have been an accidental side effect isn't a reasonable position especially when there is evidence that these features were play tested that way and were intended.

Grappler feat.

I didn't say must, I said may. It is unclear. The intention of a rule is not always what the rule ended up being. The rule on Help needing to be something you can do is different in Ch. 7 than in Ch. 9. Clearly there is some sort of problem there.

[ad_hoc]

The "no attack action" clause is specific to the spell like it is with Unseen Servant, which is the only other instance of this predicament as far as I am aware. So the Familiar can do exactly what the spell specifies, just like Unseen Servant does. Owl can attack, familiar owl can't attack. Trying to determine if that's an oversight or not is really grasping at straws here. And since there is a precedent with Unseen Servant and how they handled something that they don't want to take traditional combat actions, I consider this a non issue.

As for spellcasting, while they don't have the spellcasting trait, they are perfectly capable of casting. The can become a conduit for touch spells and can activate items. Otherwise we should argue that the Fighter can't possibly use magic unless he is an EK, which isn't the case.

PS. Help action in combat can't bypass the Working Together limitation. Help action is how this rule is applied in combat and the text is pretty clear on that IMO.

The familiar can take the Use an Object action but that doesn't mean they can just open a door if they don't have the strength to do so. Arguing that they can because the spell says they can take the action is the height of rules lawyering. They can take actions but are still limited by the rules of those actions. For example, familiars can't help with picking a lock unless they have thieves' tools proficiency. It doesn't matter that the spell says they can take the Help action, they are still limited by the terms of the actions.

Help in combat is not 'Working Together'. As many people have pointed out, they're different rules and Help doesn't have the limitation that 'Working Together' has. This means that in combat a character can Help lock picking when they otherwise are not able to out of combat. Personally I don't like this interpretation and instead apply the limitation of needing to do the task in order to Help with it and so do not allow creatures to Help an attack if they cannot make an attack themselves.

[diplomancer]

I'm a "yes" on the Help action, and a "no" on the Healing Potion for a downed companion, unless Pact of the Chain Familiar.

Reverse that for Unseen Servant.

[Gtdead]

The familiar can take the Use an Object action but that doesn't mean they can just open a door if they don't have the strength to do so. Arguing that they can because the spell says they can take the action is the height of rules lawyering. They can take actions but are still limited by the rules of those actions. For example, familiars can't help with picking a lock unless they have thieves' tools proficiency. It doesn't matter that the spell says they can take the Help action, they are still limited by the terms of the actions.

Help in combat is not 'Working Together'. As many people have pointed out, they're different rules and Help doesn't have the limitation that 'Working Together' has. This means that in combat a character can Help lock picking when they otherwise are not able to out of combat. Personally I don't like this interpretation and instead apply the limitation of needing to do the task in order to Help with it and so do not allow creatures to Help an attack if they cannot make an attack themselves.

I think there are too many misunderstandings here that are beside the point so I'll try to make it as simple as possible. First things first, saying that help action is a different rule when the Working Together rule directly references Help Action as how it would apply in combat is wrong. The important part of this reference is that you can't just do it for free. You need to spend your main action on this. Otherwise, there would be no reason for the "Working Together" rule to not apply in combat as is, just like all the other rules about sight, movement, etc apply. You don't need an action to see, you need an action to help. Without this clause, "Working Together" is broken in combat because then everyone would have advantage in every turn by using smart positioning. Perma advantage on grappling woud be nothing to scoff at.


Sometimes two or more characters team up to attempt a task. The character who's leading the effort--or the one with the highest ability modifier--can make an ability check with advantage, reflecting the help provided by the other characters. In combat, this requires the Help action.

Second, I don't argue that just because the familiar is able to perform certain actions, it can ignore the specifics. I argue for exactly the opposite. However there is nothing stopping it from doing some of the more powergamey stuff. Not it's low strength, not it's intelligence, etc.

And lastly, the only argument for the familiar not being able to use Help for attacks is from Working Together: "A character can only provide help if the task is one that he or she could attempt alone."
However working together specifies that it only applies on skill checks. "The character who's leading the effort--or the one with the highest ability modifier--can make an ability check with advantage".

Help has two parts. The one that is referenced in working together, and a completely different part that applies to helping an enemy attack.

[KorvinStarmast]

Chapter 7 references Chapter 9. They're literally mixed together.

Just so we're clear here you're making the argument that out of combat a character cannot help with opening a lock without having thieves' tools proficiency but if they were to help while in combat they could. No, I am not. The language in Ch 9 on help has to do with causing distractions to offer advantage. End of.
Your choosing to use thieves tools help in combat from a familiar is an absurdity, or an edge case, that this discussion doesn't need.
At table experience follows:
The majority of in game uses of thieves tools are done out of combat, though I can see a chase scene evolve into "can you pick that lock quickly so that we can escape" as being at least related to combat - but your pulling on an edge case does nothing for the clarity I am referring to in terms of how Help in Combat Works to offer an ally Advantage.

Now I suggest that you refer again to the PHB Piece I cited (see below), which starts "In combat" which is the context of the familiar's ability in question. Throwing Ch 7 issues into this discussion is a matter of deliberately confusing a very simple Chapter 9, combat, based situation raised in the OP.

As I said, it is not complicated.

In combat, it rolls its own initiative and acts on its own turn. A familiar can’t attack, but it can take other actions as normal.
And then we refer to actions in combat, all of the ones other than attack, and Help via distraction is on the list.
Not complicated.

[ad_hoc]

No, I am not. The language in Ch 9 on help has to do with causing distractions to offer advantage. End of.
Your choosing to use thieves tools help in combat from a familiar is an absurdity, or an edge case, that this discussion doesn't need.
At table experience follows:
The majority of in game uses of thieves tools are done out of combat, though I can see a chase scene evolve into "can you pick that lock quickly so that we can escape" as being at least related to combat - but your pulling on an edge case does nothing for the clarity I am referring to in terms of how Help in Combat Works to offer an ally Advantage.

Now I suggest that you refer again to the PHB Piece I cited (see below), which starts "In combat" which is the context of the familiar's ability in question. Throwing Ch 7 issues into this discussion is a matter of deliberately confusing a very simple Chapter 9, combat, based situation raised in the OP.

As I said, it is not complicated.

And then we refer to actions in combat, all of the ones other than attack, and Help via distraction is on the list.
Not complicated.

I am glad we agree that it isn't complicated.

[ad_hoc]

And lastly, the only argument for the familiar not being able to use Help for attacks is from Working Together: "A character can only provide help if the task is one that he or she could attempt alone."
However working together specifies that it only applies on skill checks. "The character who's leading the effort--or the one with the highest ability modifier--can make an ability check with advantage".

Help has two parts. The one that is referenced in working together, and a completely different part that applies to helping an enemy attack.

That isn't true. You're separating them into 2 parts.

There is nothing in the ch.9 rule that says only 1 part refers back to the ch.7 rule.

Either they both do or neither one does.

The Ch.7 rule does not say "this only applies to ability checks" either.

[Gtdead]

That isn't true. You're separating them into 2 parts.

There is nothing in the ch.9 rule that says only 1 part refers back to the ch.7 rule.

Either they both do or neither one does.

The Ch.7 rule does not say "this only applies to ability checks" either.

The two help functions are very different. The first function requires a friendly target and the second function requires at least one hostile target (it's debatable if it requires a friendly target too, it seems open ended to me which isn't a big problem). If we had to create an algorithm for this function, there would never be any confusion. Working Together doesn't have anything to do with hostile targets so naturally there is no reason to apply to the second function. Only grapple is an oddball because with a very technical reading, you can't grant advantage to it because it's an attack without an attack roll, but the first function kind of covers this situation with a more relaxed reading.

Why would ch.9 need to have any reference to ch.7 when ch.7 already has the necessary info? Ch.9 is about actions in combat so it makes perfect sense to explain the specifics of how to apply it there, among the other combat actions, so the reader won't have to go back and forth. Also the reader is already supposed to know what skill checks are, thus he already has knowledge of the Working Together concept and knows the reference. So since the reference already exists, ch.9 has the burden of proof and would need to specify that help action does something different in relation to ch.7, but it doesn't.

Also ch.7 doesn't have to specify that it applies only to ability checks anymore than it already does. I provided the necessary quote. It doesn't make any reference, direct or otherwise, to any other mechanics and rules. If we disregard the Working Together text then why not disregard the Help action text to and allow it to apply to saves too (since it doesn't say that "this only applies to attack rolls")? The book provides enough info to make sense out of it. Trying to read too much into the specific language and applying the general vs specific concept breaks it and there is a saying about that. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". And personally I don't think that there is anything wrong with the text.

[JackPhoenix]

fair enough, that is such a terrible idea that I did indeed miss that point.

find familiar takes an hour to cast with a spell slot or 70 minutes as a ritual.

furthermore, you can only summon a familiar on the other side if you can see the other side, at least by default rules as far as I know. you might even need an opening (depending on whether the DM thinks it is the same as teleportation magic, which by default requires LOS but not necessarily LOE)

You can also temporarily dismiss the familiar into a pocket dimension, and then have it reappear within 30' of you, both as an action. Neither is casting a spell, so the "clear path to the target" rule of spellcasting doesn't apply, and only requires the space for the familiar to be unoccupied, not necessarily seen.


edit: @ad_hoc if it was *obvious* by RAW that familiars can use help on an attack action even though they can't attack, in spite of text suggesting otherwise in the RAW, it wouldn't *need* a clarification. it is only "obvious" if you read the sage advice clarification. stuff that needs clarification is by definition *not* obvious.

Not everything is obvious to everyone. Lot of the questions in SAC are clearly the case of someone not reading the rules.

[Thunderous Mojo]

The familiar can take the Use an Object action but that doesn't mean they can just open a door if they don't have the strength to do so.

Very true.


Arguing that they can because the spell says they can take the action is the height of rules lawyering.

Perhaps, I missed it, but this seems a non-sequitur, as I don't believe anyone was advocating for the position you have denounced.


This means that in combat a character can Help lock picking when they otherwise are not able to out of combat. Personally I don't like this interpretation and instead apply the limitation of needing to do the task in order to Help with it and so do not allow creatures to Help an attack if they cannot make an attack themselves.

It is an odd result.
In real life, I've never found myself trying to crack a trapped vault door built by giants, whilst in the middle of a firefight. Someone to mop sweat off my brow, or bring me tools; an assistant, to help, might be useful.

How does the Hulk help the Black Widow pick a lock?
The Hulk starts weakening the door.🃏

(A Telepathic Assistant, available at times of extreme stress, could feel like a godsend. 🃏)

Narratively, the odd result, still functions, and support a trope:
Heroes working together can more easily achieve results.

Looking at a bit of rules with 'hard eyes', often leads to not being able to Describe the action, which may lead a person into feeling that a rule is "off".

Ruling that one can't Help Ability Checks In Combat that they couldn't normally Help with, is a very reasonable, ruling, to my mind, however.

[Damon_Tor]

Owl familiars can reasonably be expected to give advantage in combat once. The second round it tries to do it, it gets shot down by a readied ranged attack. Because why would the enemy tolerate that sort of nonsense? Better hope the wizard brought enough to keep re-summoning the little bugger. (And no, you can't just use gold, the cost is incense, which means you need to make it back to civilization, and to a town big/important enough to have a decent magic shop to boot).

[Willowhelm]

(And no, you can't just use gold, the cost is incense, which means you need to make it back to civilization, and to a town big/important enough to have a decent magic shop to boot).

Well it’s a combination of herbs, charcoal and incense. Incense might be super expensive and the rest cheap. Out of interest - Why do you think they need to come from a magic shop? Maybe you just need a shedload of charcoal…

This is the same for any material with a cost - are tiny diamonds super expensive or do you need fist sized rocks in your backpack? Who says what volume of what material costs how much? Why… your DM does. So whether or not you can resummon one and how easily between visits to civilisation is, once again, down to the DM.

I’m not trying to argue against your general point though. It is not always trivial to just mark off 10gp and have a familiar back.

[Ugmaro]

Well it’s a combination of herbs, charcoal and incense. Incense might be super expensive and the rest cheap. Out of interest - Why do you think they need to come from a magic shop? Maybe you just need a shedload of charcoal…

This is the same for any material with a cost - are tiny diamonds super expensive or do you need fist sized rocks in your backpack? Who says what volume of what material costs how much? Why… your DM does. So whether or not you can resummon one and how easily between visits to civilisation is, once again, down to the DM.

I’m not trying to argue against your general point though. It is not always trivial to just mark off 10gp and have a familiar back.

As a DM I'd decide you need approximately 3 lb of charcoal (the weight of the creature you're summoning), which is probably 1 or 2 copper pieces - I don't mind if you spend time with a herbalism kit to collect the herbs you need for the ritual but even with that you can take off only half the price. The other 5 gold has to come from incense, which you can only get from a temple or a magic shop, since nobody else is carrying such a massive amount of incense... maybe if you raid an entire village for their smoke sticks :P

[Segev]

I do like the reminder that the material components are not just gold, and that it is fair to force tracking of them when not in a town where you can just assume you can buy them.

[neonchameleon]

I'm another "any non-chain familiar that uses the help action in combat has a short life expectancy" DM. Keep your familiar out of the combat and it'll probably survive. An owl has AC11 and 1hp.

(The Pact of the Chain familiars all have invisibility and are significantly stronger. Imps dominate unless you improve them with an invocation, when sprite archers work well).

[KorvinStarmast]

Well it’s a combination of herbs, charcoal and incense. Incense might be super expensive and the rest cheap. Out of interest - Why do you think they need to come from a magic shop? Maybe you just need a shedload of charcoal…
{snip}
It is not always trivial to just mark off 10gp and have a familiar back. My DM agrees with your last bit. One of the few things my warlock carries in her backpack(she travels light) is a brazier and three servings of the Material Component, since I've seen enough Familiars die in combat that I like to be prepared. :smallsmile:

[MoiMagnus]

It is an odd result.
In real life, I've never found myself trying to crack a trapped vault door built by giants, whilst in the middle of a firefight. Someone to mop sweat off my brow, or bring me tools; an assistant, to help, might be useful.

How does the Hulk help the Black Widow pick a lock?
The Hulk starts weakening the door.🃏

(A Telepathic Assistant, available at times of extreme stress, could feel like a godsend. 🃏)

Narratively, the odd result, still functions, and support a trope:
Heroes working together can more easily achieve results.

Looking at a bit of rules with 'hard eyes', often leads to not being able to Describe the action, which may lead a person into feeling that a rule is "off".

Ruling that one can't Help Ability Checks In Combat that they couldn't normally Help with, is a very reasonable, ruling, to my mind, however.

But would this be the Help action?
Shouldn't this be instead be Hulk saying "I weaken the door with my strength", the GM asking for a strength check (or giving automatic success), and in case of success Black Widow getting an advantage to her check (since the GM is supposed to give circumstantial advantages/disadvantages when reasonable).

The purpose of the Help action is to shortcut this procedure in the instances where it is so clear that the ally can help that they don't even need to justify how they help, and can just say "I help".

With this understanding of the rules, the familiar might still be able to grant advantage to an attack even without the Help action, however, contrary to the Help action, the advantage is not guaranteed (so the GM can say "The dragon doesn't even care about harmless animals like this one, and treat it as if was a bug going around the battlefield while there are much more dangerous threats in front of him. By default, he ignores it, so no advantage. If you really want to use the Owl, it would needs to succeed a deception or intimidation check against the Dragon's passive Insight to grab his attention and grant you an advantage.").