Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 JediMutant Feb 14, 2015 0:05:42	Abridged both for length... Read Pages 240 and 285 of the PHB for full length of the spells. I've posted this on Facebook, and on a few different forums; I've gotten about as many answers as places I have posted at.    Find Familiar 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...  Finally, when you cast a spell with a range of touch, your familiar can deliver the spell as if it had cast the spell. Your familiar must be within 100 feet of you, and it must use its reaction to cast it. If the spell requires an attack roll, you use your own attack modifier for the roll.     Vampiric Touch 3rd Level Necromancy Casting Time- 1 Action Range- Touch Components- V, S Duration- Concentration, up to 1 minute The touch of your shadow-wreathed hand can siphon life from others to heal your wounds. Make a melee spell attack against a creature within your reach. On a hit, the target takes 3d6 necrotic damage, and you regain hitpoints equal to half the amount of necrotic damage dealt. Until the spell ends, you can make the attack again on each of your turns as an action.   My question... If I use my action to cast Vampiric Touch through my familiar, can the familiar then use his subsequent turn(s), during the duration of the spell to reactively "Vampiric Touch" anything in his range, thus leaving me free to use my turns to fire off cantrips? (Assuming that the rules of concentration are followed.)
#2 Macv12 Feb 14, 2015 2:17:30	You can use an action to reactivate the effect. The familiar never cast Vampiric Touch, you did, as an action. So only you can use the action that Vampiric Touch allows on subsequent turns after casting.   I think it's up to your interpretation whether you can continue using VT through the familiar on later turns by having the familiar spend it's reaction. Strictly speaking, the familiar is only allowed to act as your proxy "when you cast a spell," and subsequent activations of the VT effect aren't cast spells. A DM could reasonably rule either way. I would allow it; familiars are fragile enough that you'd be unlikely to use it several turns in a row anyway, and you're still spending your action to do it.   EDIT: a bit more detail. The familiar can "deliver the spell as if it had cast the spell." The key being that "as if it had cast the spell" is only being applied to delivery. The familiar is not considered to have actually cast the spell. You just get to replace "within your reach" with "within [familiar's] reach."   Wherever the spell says "you," it's referring to the caster, and it's still the PC and not the familiar that cast the spell, so "you can make the attack again" only applies to the PC.
#3 mellored Feb 14, 2015 12:27:49	IMO if it says "you", then it means the familiar.
(Reply to #3) Undrhil	mellored wrote:
#5 cowleymen Feb 14, 2015 19:01:11	Undrhil wrote:
#6 mellored Feb 14, 2015 19:51:08	Yes, I would rule the familiar regains hit points.
#7 Kostoglot Feb 14, 2015 23:44:48	It's not the worst option for a Pact of the Chain Warlock, assuming particularly odd circumstances, I suppose, especially if you can remain hidden as your little invisible vampire harasses.  Note that as worded, a Death Domain Cleric's CD power should work with any melee spell attack your familiar can deliver for you.
#8 lawrencehoy Feb 15, 2015 6:21:41	I agree with mellored; the HP are gained by the source of the spell's effect. So, if the caster uses its familiar as the source, the familiar gains the HP. This would be a good way to keep a familiar in combat; but, is it worth not attacking directly?
#9 mellored Feb 15, 2015 8:29:03	hmm... does that mean the familiar is concentrating?
(Reply to #7) Macv12	Kostoglot wrote:
#11 lawrencehoy Feb 15, 2015 20:53:54	Macv12 wrote:
#12 ObeseBoyWonder Feb 16, 2015 17:05:31	JediMutant wrote:
#13 Undrhil Feb 17, 2015 14:16:04	It then becomes an upgrade to Witch Bolt. Nice
(Reply to #13) ObeseBoyWonder	Undrhil wrote:
#15 QwertyAzerty Feb 18, 2015 6:23:27	Undrhil wrote:
#16 mellored Feb 18, 2015 6:33:36	QwertyAzerty wrote: