7
\$\begingroup\$

Under the new rules, it is specified that, if you already have a familiar, when you cast a new find familiar spell, you just "cause it to adopt a new eligible form" (if I am not wrong, during the beta testing of "one dnd", it was said that any time you cast the spell you can choose to call the same familiar and it retains its memories, but it seems that now there is no such paragraph in the new player handbook - sigh).

It was also discussed in this post that familiar may (with some limitation) wear magic tattoos. Can I make my familiar, adorned with a magic tattoo, assume a new form, but retaining the tattoo? Or is it correct to assume that, being just a spirit that takes a new physical form, the tattoo is lost, because the ink "drops on the ground" like other magic items it was wearing? What if instead the familiar is hit and drops to 0 hit points, and then I re-call it casting a new find familiar spell?

\$\endgroup\$

2 Answers 2

8
\$\begingroup\$

The tatoo likely sticks, but check with your DM

Find familiar (p. 272, PHB) does not say familiars drop all magic items1; it says they drop all worn or carried items:

Whenever the familiar drops to 0 Hit Points or disappears into the pocket dimension, it leaves behind in its space anything it was wearing or carrying.

The tattoo, however, is not worn or carried; it instead becomes part of the creature's skin:

Once inscribed on a creature's body, damage or injury doesn't impair the tattoo's function, even if the tattoo is defaced. When applying a magic tattoo, a creature can customize the tattoo's appearance. A magic tattoo can look like a brand, scarification, a birthmark, patterns of scale, or any other cosmetic alteration.

It is a cosmetic alteration of the skin that is part of the creature. Worn or carried objects in contrast are not part of the creature, they are separate objects. So the clause above does not say the familiar will drop the tattoo when it vanishes.

Here is what the rules say about the familiar appearing, disappearing (from the spell description, p. 272, PHB)

You gain the service of a familiar, a spirit that takes an animal form you choose. Disappearance of the Familiar. When the familiar drops to 0 Hit Points, it disappears. It reappears after you cast this spell again. As a Magic action, you can temporarily dismiss the familiar to a pocket dimension. Alternatively, you can dismiss it forever. As a Magic action while it is temporarily dismissed, you can cause it to reappear in an unoccupied Space within 30 feet of you.

That is all the rules we have for it. Now, spirits do not normally have a physical body, but once you have your familiar appear by taking an animal form, it does have a physical body, and the description does not say it loses this body, merely that it "disappears" (who knows where to) and you can cause it to "reappear", or that it is dismissed to a pocket dimension and can be magicked back. So technically, in never loses its form or body in those cases, and the tatoo should stay on.

Here is what it says about changing form:

One Familiar Only. You can’t have more than one familiar at a time. If you cast this spell while you have a familiar, you instead cause it to adopt a new eligible form.

When you chose a different form, it adopts this new form, but the rules do not say if that happens by becoming disembodied and creating a new form, or if it is just transforming into a new form. So this is left to the DM. I think it is more fun for the players, and more consistent with the other ways it can vanish and re-appear, if the tatoo stays on.


1Magic Tatoos in tattoo form are magic items. They are listed under "Magic Item Descriptions" on p. 119ff of Tasha's Guide to Everything, and their description clearly says they are Wondrous items, for example, for Absorbing Tattoo (p. 119)

ABSORBING TATTOO

Wondrous item (tattoo), very rare (requires attunement)

For this, it does not matter if the tattoo is in needle form, or if it is in tattoo form. It is a magic item throughout:

When the attunement is complete, the needle turns into the ink that becomes the tattoo, which appears on the skin. If your attunement to the tattoo ends, the tattoo vanishes, and the needle reappears in your space.

The needle does not enchant the creature with a spell effect, it becomes the tattoo. So the tattoo is the magic item. Further evidence can be seen in the fact that if you end attunement, the tatttoo turns back into the needle.

\$\endgroup\$
-2
\$\begingroup\$

Pre-5e Summoning: Real Creatures

In D&D editions prior to 5e, summoning spells brought actual creatures from elsewhere to the caster's location. Here’s how this manifested:

  1. True Beings, Not Constructs: Summoning spells, such as Summon Monster and Summon Nature’s Ally, called specific creatures. The creatures weren't just representations—they were real beings from other planes or realms within the game world.
  2. Alignment and Personal Agenda: Since the summoned beings had actual alignments and personalities, summoners had to take into account the creature's disposition and potential behavior. For example, summoning a demon or devil could be risky due to its chaotic or malevolent nature, and the creature could try to turn on the caster if control faltered.
  3. Limited Summoning Lists: These spells typically included specific lists of creatures by level, restricting what could be summoned to balance the game and keep the choices clear. Each level of summoning spell (from low-level animals to high-level fiends and elementals) determined what could be called.

Summon Monster, Summon Nature's Ally

5e Summoning: Spirit-Based Creatures

In D&D 5th Edition, summoning spells generally call forth "spirits" that embody certain characteristics rather than actual creatures. Here’s how this differs from earlier editions:

  1. Spirit Forms Rather Than Actual Creatures: In spells like Summon Beast, Summon Fiend, or Summon Elemental, the creatures are described as "spirits" taking on the form of beasts, fiends, or elementals, rather than the actual creatures themselves. These spirits are considered ephemeral constructs of the spell rather than creatures that exist independently outside of the summoning.

  2. No Alignment or Independent Motive: Since these entities are spirits tied to the caster’s magic, they don't have their own alignments or agendas. This eliminates the need for the caster to worry about rebellion or unintended consequences based on creature personality, making them simpler to handle in gameplay.

  3. Simplified Summoning Mechanic: Each summoning spell in 5e is more streamlined, with fewer creature options and less complex requirements than the detailed creature lists in earlier editions. The spells often scale by spell level, increasing in power and durability, rather than having a broader variety of summonable creatures at each level.

Summon Beast, Summon Fiend, Summon Elemental, et. al.

In essence, the shift to spirit-based summons in 5e offers a mechanically different approach, emphasizing simplicity and loyalty, as opposed to the complex relationships and potential conflicts of summoning actual creatures in pre-5e games.

Ultimately, it's up to the DM

The DM is free to consider these "spirits" as ephemeral, or some sort of recurring being. If they are truly recurring, then the DM gets to decide if any enhancements or modifications are persistent for future summons.

Find Familiar at least hints that this is the same "spirit"

One Familiar Only. You can’t have more than one familiar at a time. If you cast this spell while you have a familiar, you instead cause it to adopt a new eligible form

Causing "it" to adopt a new form at least implies we're talking about the same spirit in successive castings, but it isn't definitive.

\$\endgroup\$
8
  • \$\begingroup\$ I thought this was a great into for you saying that they shouldn't carry over, but then your actual answer was basically 'dunno' and kinda disappointed me. You actually convinced me that they shouldn't carry over. \$\endgroup\$
    – SeriousBri
    Commented Oct 25 at 20:51
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @SeriousBri I cannot extract something that doesn't exist :-) However, there is one bit of text that at least leans one direction... \$\endgroup\$
    – Wyrmwood
    Commented Oct 25 at 21:22
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ The question is tagged [dnd-5e-2024], but you’ve quoted from the 2014 edition of find familiar, and haven’t linked to or cited any other information in your answer. It’s unclear if this answer is even talking about the right edition, and is otherwise just totally unsupported. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Oct 26 at 0:10
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Wyrmwood No, the texts are not identical, which I did verify. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Oct 28 at 15:43
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @ThomasMarkov I didn't even have to change the comment :-) There is no meaningful difference. Sure, not identical, but both use the same language that raises the question of intent. Is it intended to always be the same spirit, or only when you cast while another casting is active? Are we trying to improve the answer or just exercising criticism without concern for results? \$\endgroup\$
    – Wyrmwood
    Commented Oct 28 at 16:07

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .