Can a Pact of the Chain warlock forgo their Attack action to have all familiars from the Flock of Familars spell make an attack?What does upper-case-A-Attack action vs. lower-case-a-attack mean?How can I get the most synergy out of this Paladin/Warlock multi-class combination?Is a spell that rolls attack an “attack” for familiarsWhat are the consequences of denying Quickened Eldritch Blasts?Can a familiar use a Help action to grant advantage on an attack to a near by ally?Why can't the “Variant: Imp Familiar” be found with the Find Familiar spell?Can a Pact of the Chain Warlock have a celestial imp as a familiar?Can a Pact of the Tome warlock get a Pact of the Chain-type familiar?How can Pact of the Chain warlocks' familiars heal?Can a Pact of the Chain Warlock in Gaseous Form have their familiar attack?What are the limits of multiple warlock familiars?

What's the biggest organic molecule that could have a smell?

How to easily add discontinuity on x-axis?

Tall red piece with coffee cup, phone and gas picture?

How to determine the traffic avoidance manuver?

Is it possible to PIVOT on a LIKE statement

SCOTUS - Can Congress overrule Marbury v. Madison by statute?

C++ - using const reference to prolong a member of a temporary, ok or UB?

Exact Brexit date and consequences

Is there a standard terminology for female equivalents of terms such as 'Kingdom' and if so, what are the most common terms?

Job offer without any details but asking me to withdraw other applications - is it normal?

What does 鴨が葱を背負って来る mean?

How to split a string by the third .(dot) delimiter

How can a resurrection system prevent the cheapening of death?

Is the definition of integral extension, why we use monic polynomial?

Do all humans have an identical nucleotide sequence for certain proteins, e.g haemoglobin?

Why did it become so much more expensive to start a university?

Georgian capital letter “Ⴒ” (“tar”) in pdfLaTeX

How can I protect myself in case of a human attack like the murders of the hikers Jespersen and Ueland in Morocco?

Can a Pact of the Chain warlock forgo their Attack action to have all familiars from the Flock of Familars spell make an attack?

Will replacing a fake visa with a different fake visa cause me problems when applying for a legal study permit?

Why would "an mule" be used instead of "a mule"?

Dividing Divisive Divisors

Are there any space probes or landers which regained communication after being lost?

Is it appropriate for a professor to require students to sign a non-disclosure agreement before being taught?



Can a Pact of the Chain warlock forgo their Attack action to have all familiars from the Flock of Familars spell make an attack?


What does upper-case-A-Attack action vs. lower-case-a-attack mean?How can I get the most synergy out of this Paladin/Warlock multi-class combination?Is a spell that rolls attack an “attack” for familiarsWhat are the consequences of denying Quickened Eldritch Blasts?Can a familiar use a Help action to grant advantage on an attack to a near by ally?Why can't the “Variant: Imp Familiar” be found with the Find Familiar spell?Can a Pact of the Chain Warlock have a celestial imp as a familiar?Can a Pact of the Tome warlock get a Pact of the Chain-type familiar?How can Pact of the Chain warlocks' familiars heal?Can a Pact of the Chain Warlock in Gaseous Form have their familiar attack?What are the limits of multiple warlock familiars?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








5












$begingroup$


The Pact of the Chain warlock gets the following benefit:




Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to make one attack with its reaction.




If I have 3 familiars running havoc from the Flock of Familiars spell (Lost Laboratory of Kwalish, p. 57), do they all get to attack?



My megalomaniac sorcerer warlock, "Sorlack Lord of Imps", is planning to cast Flock of Familiars, then Haste himself and forgo the additional attack to let the imps enter melee - all while he stays in the back and unleashes hell with quickened eldritch blasts, laughing hysterically.



Would this combination work?










share|improve this question









New contributor



Sorlack is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. As the others have said, please indicate your RPG and edition by editing in the appropriate tag (e.g. [dnd-5e]). Once you do so, we can reopen your question and answer it (or point you to where it has already been answered). Hope you stick around! :)
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    8 hours ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    $endgroup$
    – Rubiksmoose
    4 hours ago

















5












$begingroup$


The Pact of the Chain warlock gets the following benefit:




Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to make one attack with its reaction.




If I have 3 familiars running havoc from the Flock of Familiars spell (Lost Laboratory of Kwalish, p. 57), do they all get to attack?



My megalomaniac sorcerer warlock, "Sorlack Lord of Imps", is planning to cast Flock of Familiars, then Haste himself and forgo the additional attack to let the imps enter melee - all while he stays in the back and unleashes hell with quickened eldritch blasts, laughing hysterically.



Would this combination work?










share|improve this question









New contributor



Sorlack is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. As the others have said, please indicate your RPG and edition by editing in the appropriate tag (e.g. [dnd-5e]). Once you do so, we can reopen your question and answer it (or point you to where it has already been answered). Hope you stick around! :)
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    8 hours ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    $endgroup$
    – Rubiksmoose
    4 hours ago













5












5








5





$begingroup$


The Pact of the Chain warlock gets the following benefit:




Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to make one attack with its reaction.




If I have 3 familiars running havoc from the Flock of Familiars spell (Lost Laboratory of Kwalish, p. 57), do they all get to attack?



My megalomaniac sorcerer warlock, "Sorlack Lord of Imps", is planning to cast Flock of Familiars, then Haste himself and forgo the additional attack to let the imps enter melee - all while he stays in the back and unleashes hell with quickened eldritch blasts, laughing hysterically.



Would this combination work?










share|improve this question









New contributor



Sorlack is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$




The Pact of the Chain warlock gets the following benefit:




Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to make one attack with its reaction.




If I have 3 familiars running havoc from the Flock of Familiars spell (Lost Laboratory of Kwalish, p. 57), do they all get to attack?



My megalomaniac sorcerer warlock, "Sorlack Lord of Imps", is planning to cast Flock of Familiars, then Haste himself and forgo the additional attack to let the imps enter melee - all while he stays in the back and unleashes hell with quickened eldritch blasts, laughing hysterically.



Would this combination work?







dnd-5e spells warlock attack familiars






share|improve this question









New contributor



Sorlack is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.










share|improve this question









New contributor



Sorlack is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 7 hours ago









V2Blast

34.2k5 gold badges123 silver badges214 bronze badges




34.2k5 gold badges123 silver badges214 bronze badges






New contributor



Sorlack is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








asked 8 hours ago









SorlackSorlack

261 bronze badge




261 bronze badge




New contributor



Sorlack is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




New contributor




Sorlack is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. As the others have said, please indicate your RPG and edition by editing in the appropriate tag (e.g. [dnd-5e]). Once you do so, we can reopen your question and answer it (or point you to where it has already been answered). Hope you stick around! :)
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    8 hours ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    $endgroup$
    – Rubiksmoose
    4 hours ago
















  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. As the others have said, please indicate your RPG and edition by editing in the appropriate tag (e.g. [dnd-5e]). Once you do so, we can reopen your question and answer it (or point you to where it has already been answered). Hope you stick around! :)
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    8 hours ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    $endgroup$
    – Rubiksmoose
    4 hours ago















$begingroup$
Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. As the others have said, please indicate your RPG and edition by editing in the appropriate tag (e.g. [dnd-5e]). Once you do so, we can reopen your question and answer it (or point you to where it has already been answered). Hope you stick around! :)
$endgroup$
– V2Blast
8 hours ago





$begingroup$
Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. As the others have said, please indicate your RPG and edition by editing in the appropriate tag (e.g. [dnd-5e]). Once you do so, we can reopen your question and answer it (or point you to where it has already been answered). Hope you stick around! :)
$endgroup$
– V2Blast
8 hours ago





1




1




$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
4 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















5














$begingroup$

It is likely that only one familiar would be able to attack



There are a few things that point to this being the case:




  1. The Pact of the Chain feature uses the singular



    The Pact of the Chain feature states:




    [...] Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to use its reaction to make one attack of its own.




    Though this feature existed before the flock of familiars spell, the feature didn't receive any errata with the release of Lost Laboratory of Kwalish. Applying the feature as is it consistently uses the singular throughout, which, strictly Rules As Written, means that only one familiar can gain this benefit at a time.




  2. Other parts of the flock of familiars spell only apply to one familiar at a time



    The flock of familiars spell states:




    [...] Each familiar uses the same rules and options for a familiar conjured by the find familiar spell...



    When you cast a spell with a range of touch, one of the familiars conjured by this spell can deliver the spell, as normal...




    This is more of a supporting idea; here we see another feature of Familiars applying only to one at a time so it would make sense for other features to work similarly.

    Note also that flock of familiars never states that the familiars function as some sort of collective unit instead each individual familiar follows the rules of the find familiar spell.




  3. Other familiar capabilities would be able to be done in unison



    If all the familiars could attack in unison, then you could also dismiss and recall the familiars all at once; both of these abilities use the singular in their descriptions:




    [...] As an action, you can temporarily dismiss your familiar...



    As an action while it is temporarily dismissed, you can cause it to reappear in any unoccupied space within 30 feet of you...




    So if Pact of the Chain's attack worked with all the familiars at once, so would this ability. Though it's not game-breaking by any means, suddenly summoning between three and ten familiars is certainly a significant buff to your party. This somewhat points towards Pact of the Chain's attack only working with one familiar at a time.



Arguments 2 and 3 are much weaker than argument 1, especially since the flock of familiars spell is somewhat inconsistent: It specifically says touch spells can only be done by one familiar at a time, yet it also says:




Familiars summoned by this spell can telepathically communicate with you and share their visual or auditory senses while they are within 1 mile of you...




And doesn't mention whether this sense-sharing can only apply to one familiar at a time, or even whether it is always on (the version in find familiar requires your action to activate and removes your own senses while sharing). And then flock of Familiars doesn't mention the ability to dismiss/recall familiars at all.



The spell isn't consistent in how it addresses the abilities of find familiar and how they change (or don't change) with the flock of familiars spell. As such arguments 2 and 3 are significantly weakened, though argument 1 still stands.




Overall, the use of the singular in the Pact of the Chain feature and the fact that some (though not all) features of the spell are called out as working with only one familiar at a time both support the idea that Pact of the Chain would only work with one familiar at a time.



Note also that Pact of the Chain is not itself part of the find familiar spell, and also Jeremy Crawford, though he was a designer of the book, was not the lead designer like he was for other books for fifth edition. It is quite possible the Pact of the Chain feature was forgotten about when writing the description for the flock of familiars spell.




A small note:



The Pact of the Chain features states:




[...] Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks...




You do not forgo your entire Attack action, just one attack that you can make with the Attack action (features such as extra-attack allow you to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this would only require you to forgo one of them). For further reading on the distinction between attacks and the Attack action you can read "What does upper-case-A-Attack action vs. lower-case-a-attack mean?"






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$














  • $begingroup$
    From what I can see, there is nothing preventing you from forgoing 2 of your attacks to allow 2 of your familiars to attack, provided you have the 2 attacks in the first place.
    $endgroup$
    – GreySage
    17 mins ago













Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "122"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);







Sorlack is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded
















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f155030%2fcan-a-pact-of-the-chain-warlock-forgo-their-attack-action-to-have-all-familiars%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









5














$begingroup$

It is likely that only one familiar would be able to attack



There are a few things that point to this being the case:




  1. The Pact of the Chain feature uses the singular



    The Pact of the Chain feature states:




    [...] Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to use its reaction to make one attack of its own.




    Though this feature existed before the flock of familiars spell, the feature didn't receive any errata with the release of Lost Laboratory of Kwalish. Applying the feature as is it consistently uses the singular throughout, which, strictly Rules As Written, means that only one familiar can gain this benefit at a time.




  2. Other parts of the flock of familiars spell only apply to one familiar at a time



    The flock of familiars spell states:




    [...] Each familiar uses the same rules and options for a familiar conjured by the find familiar spell...



    When you cast a spell with a range of touch, one of the familiars conjured by this spell can deliver the spell, as normal...




    This is more of a supporting idea; here we see another feature of Familiars applying only to one at a time so it would make sense for other features to work similarly.

    Note also that flock of familiars never states that the familiars function as some sort of collective unit instead each individual familiar follows the rules of the find familiar spell.




  3. Other familiar capabilities would be able to be done in unison



    If all the familiars could attack in unison, then you could also dismiss and recall the familiars all at once; both of these abilities use the singular in their descriptions:




    [...] As an action, you can temporarily dismiss your familiar...



    As an action while it is temporarily dismissed, you can cause it to reappear in any unoccupied space within 30 feet of you...




    So if Pact of the Chain's attack worked with all the familiars at once, so would this ability. Though it's not game-breaking by any means, suddenly summoning between three and ten familiars is certainly a significant buff to your party. This somewhat points towards Pact of the Chain's attack only working with one familiar at a time.



Arguments 2 and 3 are much weaker than argument 1, especially since the flock of familiars spell is somewhat inconsistent: It specifically says touch spells can only be done by one familiar at a time, yet it also says:




Familiars summoned by this spell can telepathically communicate with you and share their visual or auditory senses while they are within 1 mile of you...




And doesn't mention whether this sense-sharing can only apply to one familiar at a time, or even whether it is always on (the version in find familiar requires your action to activate and removes your own senses while sharing). And then flock of Familiars doesn't mention the ability to dismiss/recall familiars at all.



The spell isn't consistent in how it addresses the abilities of find familiar and how they change (or don't change) with the flock of familiars spell. As such arguments 2 and 3 are significantly weakened, though argument 1 still stands.




Overall, the use of the singular in the Pact of the Chain feature and the fact that some (though not all) features of the spell are called out as working with only one familiar at a time both support the idea that Pact of the Chain would only work with one familiar at a time.



Note also that Pact of the Chain is not itself part of the find familiar spell, and also Jeremy Crawford, though he was a designer of the book, was not the lead designer like he was for other books for fifth edition. It is quite possible the Pact of the Chain feature was forgotten about when writing the description for the flock of familiars spell.




A small note:



The Pact of the Chain features states:




[...] Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks...




You do not forgo your entire Attack action, just one attack that you can make with the Attack action (features such as extra-attack allow you to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this would only require you to forgo one of them). For further reading on the distinction between attacks and the Attack action you can read "What does upper-case-A-Attack action vs. lower-case-a-attack mean?"






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$














  • $begingroup$
    From what I can see, there is nothing preventing you from forgoing 2 of your attacks to allow 2 of your familiars to attack, provided you have the 2 attacks in the first place.
    $endgroup$
    – GreySage
    17 mins ago















5














$begingroup$

It is likely that only one familiar would be able to attack



There are a few things that point to this being the case:




  1. The Pact of the Chain feature uses the singular



    The Pact of the Chain feature states:




    [...] Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to use its reaction to make one attack of its own.




    Though this feature existed before the flock of familiars spell, the feature didn't receive any errata with the release of Lost Laboratory of Kwalish. Applying the feature as is it consistently uses the singular throughout, which, strictly Rules As Written, means that only one familiar can gain this benefit at a time.




  2. Other parts of the flock of familiars spell only apply to one familiar at a time



    The flock of familiars spell states:




    [...] Each familiar uses the same rules and options for a familiar conjured by the find familiar spell...



    When you cast a spell with a range of touch, one of the familiars conjured by this spell can deliver the spell, as normal...




    This is more of a supporting idea; here we see another feature of Familiars applying only to one at a time so it would make sense for other features to work similarly.

    Note also that flock of familiars never states that the familiars function as some sort of collective unit instead each individual familiar follows the rules of the find familiar spell.




  3. Other familiar capabilities would be able to be done in unison



    If all the familiars could attack in unison, then you could also dismiss and recall the familiars all at once; both of these abilities use the singular in their descriptions:




    [...] As an action, you can temporarily dismiss your familiar...



    As an action while it is temporarily dismissed, you can cause it to reappear in any unoccupied space within 30 feet of you...




    So if Pact of the Chain's attack worked with all the familiars at once, so would this ability. Though it's not game-breaking by any means, suddenly summoning between three and ten familiars is certainly a significant buff to your party. This somewhat points towards Pact of the Chain's attack only working with one familiar at a time.



Arguments 2 and 3 are much weaker than argument 1, especially since the flock of familiars spell is somewhat inconsistent: It specifically says touch spells can only be done by one familiar at a time, yet it also says:




Familiars summoned by this spell can telepathically communicate with you and share their visual or auditory senses while they are within 1 mile of you...




And doesn't mention whether this sense-sharing can only apply to one familiar at a time, or even whether it is always on (the version in find familiar requires your action to activate and removes your own senses while sharing). And then flock of Familiars doesn't mention the ability to dismiss/recall familiars at all.



The spell isn't consistent in how it addresses the abilities of find familiar and how they change (or don't change) with the flock of familiars spell. As such arguments 2 and 3 are significantly weakened, though argument 1 still stands.




Overall, the use of the singular in the Pact of the Chain feature and the fact that some (though not all) features of the spell are called out as working with only one familiar at a time both support the idea that Pact of the Chain would only work with one familiar at a time.



Note also that Pact of the Chain is not itself part of the find familiar spell, and also Jeremy Crawford, though he was a designer of the book, was not the lead designer like he was for other books for fifth edition. It is quite possible the Pact of the Chain feature was forgotten about when writing the description for the flock of familiars spell.




A small note:



The Pact of the Chain features states:




[...] Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks...




You do not forgo your entire Attack action, just one attack that you can make with the Attack action (features such as extra-attack allow you to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this would only require you to forgo one of them). For further reading on the distinction between attacks and the Attack action you can read "What does upper-case-A-Attack action vs. lower-case-a-attack mean?"






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$














  • $begingroup$
    From what I can see, there is nothing preventing you from forgoing 2 of your attacks to allow 2 of your familiars to attack, provided you have the 2 attacks in the first place.
    $endgroup$
    – GreySage
    17 mins ago













5














5










5







$begingroup$

It is likely that only one familiar would be able to attack



There are a few things that point to this being the case:




  1. The Pact of the Chain feature uses the singular



    The Pact of the Chain feature states:




    [...] Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to use its reaction to make one attack of its own.




    Though this feature existed before the flock of familiars spell, the feature didn't receive any errata with the release of Lost Laboratory of Kwalish. Applying the feature as is it consistently uses the singular throughout, which, strictly Rules As Written, means that only one familiar can gain this benefit at a time.




  2. Other parts of the flock of familiars spell only apply to one familiar at a time



    The flock of familiars spell states:




    [...] Each familiar uses the same rules and options for a familiar conjured by the find familiar spell...



    When you cast a spell with a range of touch, one of the familiars conjured by this spell can deliver the spell, as normal...




    This is more of a supporting idea; here we see another feature of Familiars applying only to one at a time so it would make sense for other features to work similarly.

    Note also that flock of familiars never states that the familiars function as some sort of collective unit instead each individual familiar follows the rules of the find familiar spell.




  3. Other familiar capabilities would be able to be done in unison



    If all the familiars could attack in unison, then you could also dismiss and recall the familiars all at once; both of these abilities use the singular in their descriptions:




    [...] As an action, you can temporarily dismiss your familiar...



    As an action while it is temporarily dismissed, you can cause it to reappear in any unoccupied space within 30 feet of you...




    So if Pact of the Chain's attack worked with all the familiars at once, so would this ability. Though it's not game-breaking by any means, suddenly summoning between three and ten familiars is certainly a significant buff to your party. This somewhat points towards Pact of the Chain's attack only working with one familiar at a time.



Arguments 2 and 3 are much weaker than argument 1, especially since the flock of familiars spell is somewhat inconsistent: It specifically says touch spells can only be done by one familiar at a time, yet it also says:




Familiars summoned by this spell can telepathically communicate with you and share their visual or auditory senses while they are within 1 mile of you...




And doesn't mention whether this sense-sharing can only apply to one familiar at a time, or even whether it is always on (the version in find familiar requires your action to activate and removes your own senses while sharing). And then flock of Familiars doesn't mention the ability to dismiss/recall familiars at all.



The spell isn't consistent in how it addresses the abilities of find familiar and how they change (or don't change) with the flock of familiars spell. As such arguments 2 and 3 are significantly weakened, though argument 1 still stands.




Overall, the use of the singular in the Pact of the Chain feature and the fact that some (though not all) features of the spell are called out as working with only one familiar at a time both support the idea that Pact of the Chain would only work with one familiar at a time.



Note also that Pact of the Chain is not itself part of the find familiar spell, and also Jeremy Crawford, though he was a designer of the book, was not the lead designer like he was for other books for fifth edition. It is quite possible the Pact of the Chain feature was forgotten about when writing the description for the flock of familiars spell.




A small note:



The Pact of the Chain features states:




[...] Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks...




You do not forgo your entire Attack action, just one attack that you can make with the Attack action (features such as extra-attack allow you to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this would only require you to forgo one of them). For further reading on the distinction between attacks and the Attack action you can read "What does upper-case-A-Attack action vs. lower-case-a-attack mean?"






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$



It is likely that only one familiar would be able to attack



There are a few things that point to this being the case:




  1. The Pact of the Chain feature uses the singular



    The Pact of the Chain feature states:




    [...] Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to use its reaction to make one attack of its own.




    Though this feature existed before the flock of familiars spell, the feature didn't receive any errata with the release of Lost Laboratory of Kwalish. Applying the feature as is it consistently uses the singular throughout, which, strictly Rules As Written, means that only one familiar can gain this benefit at a time.




  2. Other parts of the flock of familiars spell only apply to one familiar at a time



    The flock of familiars spell states:




    [...] Each familiar uses the same rules and options for a familiar conjured by the find familiar spell...



    When you cast a spell with a range of touch, one of the familiars conjured by this spell can deliver the spell, as normal...




    This is more of a supporting idea; here we see another feature of Familiars applying only to one at a time so it would make sense for other features to work similarly.

    Note also that flock of familiars never states that the familiars function as some sort of collective unit instead each individual familiar follows the rules of the find familiar spell.




  3. Other familiar capabilities would be able to be done in unison



    If all the familiars could attack in unison, then you could also dismiss and recall the familiars all at once; both of these abilities use the singular in their descriptions:




    [...] As an action, you can temporarily dismiss your familiar...



    As an action while it is temporarily dismissed, you can cause it to reappear in any unoccupied space within 30 feet of you...




    So if Pact of the Chain's attack worked with all the familiars at once, so would this ability. Though it's not game-breaking by any means, suddenly summoning between three and ten familiars is certainly a significant buff to your party. This somewhat points towards Pact of the Chain's attack only working with one familiar at a time.



Arguments 2 and 3 are much weaker than argument 1, especially since the flock of familiars spell is somewhat inconsistent: It specifically says touch spells can only be done by one familiar at a time, yet it also says:




Familiars summoned by this spell can telepathically communicate with you and share their visual or auditory senses while they are within 1 mile of you...




And doesn't mention whether this sense-sharing can only apply to one familiar at a time, or even whether it is always on (the version in find familiar requires your action to activate and removes your own senses while sharing). And then flock of Familiars doesn't mention the ability to dismiss/recall familiars at all.



The spell isn't consistent in how it addresses the abilities of find familiar and how they change (or don't change) with the flock of familiars spell. As such arguments 2 and 3 are significantly weakened, though argument 1 still stands.




Overall, the use of the singular in the Pact of the Chain feature and the fact that some (though not all) features of the spell are called out as working with only one familiar at a time both support the idea that Pact of the Chain would only work with one familiar at a time.



Note also that Pact of the Chain is not itself part of the find familiar spell, and also Jeremy Crawford, though he was a designer of the book, was not the lead designer like he was for other books for fifth edition. It is quite possible the Pact of the Chain feature was forgotten about when writing the description for the flock of familiars spell.




A small note:



The Pact of the Chain features states:




[...] Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks...




You do not forgo your entire Attack action, just one attack that you can make with the Attack action (features such as extra-attack allow you to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this would only require you to forgo one of them). For further reading on the distinction between attacks and the Attack action you can read "What does upper-case-A-Attack action vs. lower-case-a-attack mean?"







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 3 hours ago

























answered 4 hours ago









Medix2Medix2

10.7k2 gold badges37 silver badges106 bronze badges




10.7k2 gold badges37 silver badges106 bronze badges














  • $begingroup$
    From what I can see, there is nothing preventing you from forgoing 2 of your attacks to allow 2 of your familiars to attack, provided you have the 2 attacks in the first place.
    $endgroup$
    – GreySage
    17 mins ago
















  • $begingroup$
    From what I can see, there is nothing preventing you from forgoing 2 of your attacks to allow 2 of your familiars to attack, provided you have the 2 attacks in the first place.
    $endgroup$
    – GreySage
    17 mins ago















$begingroup$
From what I can see, there is nothing preventing you from forgoing 2 of your attacks to allow 2 of your familiars to attack, provided you have the 2 attacks in the first place.
$endgroup$
– GreySage
17 mins ago




$begingroup$
From what I can see, there is nothing preventing you from forgoing 2 of your attacks to allow 2 of your familiars to attack, provided you have the 2 attacks in the first place.
$endgroup$
– GreySage
17 mins ago











Sorlack is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded

















Sorlack is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












Sorlack is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











Sorlack is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f155030%2fcan-a-pact-of-the-chain-warlock-forgo-their-attack-action-to-have-all-familiars%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

François Viète Contents Biography Work and thought Bibliography See also Notes Further reading External links Navigation menup. 21Google Bookspp. 75–77Google BooksDe thou (from University of Saint Andrews)ArchivedGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle booksGoogle Bookscc-parthenay.frL'histoire universelle (fr)Universal History (en)ArchivedAdsabs.harvard.eduPagesperso-orange.frArchive.orgChikara Sasaki. Descartes' mathematical thought p.259Google BooksGoogle BooksGoogle Bookspp. 152 and onwardGoogle BooksGoogle BooksScribd.comGoogle Books1257-7979Google BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGallica.bnf.frGoogle BooksGoogle Books"François Viète"Francois Viète: Father of Modern Algebraic NotationThe Lawyer and the GamblerAbout TarporleySite de Jean-Paul GuichardL'algèbre nouvelle"About the Harmonicon"cb120511976(data)1188044800000 0001 0913 5903n82164680ola2013766880073431702w6vt1sb70287374827140948071409480