D&D 5E Sprite familiar firing sleep-needles every round?

[doctorhook]

A couple weeks ago, I started a thread asking folks' opinion on the best way to use pets/familiars/summoned monsters in 5E. I was looking for a way that balances combat-impact and the action economy with verisimilitude. The conclusion I drew from that discussion was that the best way would be to have pets controlled by the DM as allied NPCs/monsters, and that the owner/controller/summoner of a given pet should be able to issue instructions as a bonus action; the creature would act according to its nature, its ability, and its willingness to follow those instructions, and otherwise the owner does its own thing on its turn.

One of the characters in my game is a FeyChain warlock with a sprite familiar. I really like the approach I settled on above, but I'm curious what anyone else thinks of this: my player will have an NPC sprite ally in virtually every combat, and it will be using its action to fire a sleep-needles from its tiny bow every round. I'm okay with this because I know the sprite is pretty fragile, but I want a second opinion: how broken is this going to be?

Thanks for your input, gang.

 

[iserith]

A couple weeks ago, I started a thread asking folks' opinion on the best way to use pets/familiars/summoned monsters in 5E. I was looking for a way that balances combat-impact and the action economy with verisimilitude. The conclusion I drew from that discussion was that the best way would be to have pets controlled by the DM as allied NPCs/monsters, and that the owner/controller/summoner of a given pet should be able to issue instructions as a bonus action; the creature would act according to its nature, its ability, and its willingness to follow those instructions, and otherwise the owner does its own thing on its turn.

One of the characters in my game is a FeyChain warlock with a sprite familiar. I really like the approach I settled on above, but I'm curious what anyone else thinks of this: my player will have an NPC sprite ally in virtually every combat, and it will be using its action to fire a sleep-needles from its tiny bow every round. I'm okay with this because I know the sprite is pretty fragile, but I want a second opinion: how broken is this going to be?

Thanks for your input, gang.

The sprite's fragility is one limiting factor - swat that thing like a bug given the opportunity. The Constitution saving throw is also only a DC 10 which means at least a 55% chance of success for many monsters. It also requires the sprite to hit, so that's two chances for the monster to avoid any serious effect. It's probably fine.

If it does become an issue that impacts game play in a negative way, then it's worth talking to the player about the goals of play - everyone having a good time and creating an exciting, memorable story as a result of play - and explaining how you see the use of the sprite as failing to help achieve those goals. Seek compromise accordingly.

 

[bganon]

The sleep effect requires a result of 5 or less on the save - it's essentially DC 6. Even with zero Con bonus that's only a 1/4 chance on each hit with the bow. I'd also rule that it's a poison effect, which means a huge swath of monsters are immune. Personally I wouldn't worry about it happening very often.

Normally it'd take the Warlock's action to deliver the attack, and it sounds like you're changing that to a bonus action, but given the fragility, 40' range, and that it takes an hour and 10 gp to get it back I wouldn't be worried about it unbalancing combats.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I haven't read the other thread, so maybe this is something you've houseruled, but... I thought familiars couldn't attack at all?

 

[Sunseeker]

I haven't read the other thread, so maybe this is something you've houseruled, but... I thought familiars couldn't attack at all?

If familiars have an attack they can attack with it, though I believe in that case it works like the Ranger pet and uses part of the master's turn. (not 100% sure, I would certainly houserule it to do so)

I don't have a problem with this. The DC is low and a lot of the monsters who would actually fail to it will often be in great numbers (kobolds, goblins, etc..) any fairly beefy monster is going to be either A: immune to sleep or B: have high enough con as to save on very low numbers. Any intelligent monster would eventually get tired of the gnat buzzing around them and turn your minion into paste.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Ah, okay, it's a warlock-specific thing. (Just looked.) I'd forgotten the warlocks had an exception to the "can't attack" rule as specified in find familiar. Oops.

 

[bganon]

Weirdly, only elves seem to have sleep immunity in 5e (and only to magical sleep). Even golems aren't actually immune to sleep, though they have magic resistance and immunity to a whole host of other stuff. Including poison, and like I said I'd rule that a creature immune to poison is also immune to the sleep effects of a poison that puts creatures to sleep.

 

[doctorhook]

The sleep effect requires a result of 5 or less on the save - it's essentially DC 6. Even with zero Con bonus that's only a 1/4 chance on each hit with the bow. I'd also rule that it's a poison effect, which means a huge swath of monsters are immune. Personally I wouldn't worry about it happening very often.

Normally it'd take the Warlock's action to deliver the attack, and it sounds like you're changing that to a bonus action, but given the fragility, 40' range, and that it takes an hour and 10 gp to get it back I wouldn't be worried about it unbalancing combats.

Good argument. You've convinced me that I have absolutely nothing to worry about from this ruling.

 

[Psikerlord#]

Yeah the chain pact warlock pet is it's thing. It's strong but not OP.

 

[miniaturehoarder]

I'd rule the sprite has limited number of sleep arrows, with downtime needed to replenish them. I'd be inclined to be generous but there would definitely be limits.