Recent Posts
Checking the templates in the back of the Bestiary in preparation for using them in a game, I noticed that the Celestial and Fiendish creature templates no longer raise the animals (or vermins) intelligence to 3, afford it the ability to understand instructions in Celestial (or Infernal, etc.) and no longer change it's alignment to Good or Evil.
As a result, a Summoned Celestial (or Fiendish) creature can no longer be directed to do anything other than attack the casters foes (which it does automatically), and Celestial and Fiendish-templated creatures cannot Smite each other, since they are all Neutral (or otherwise retain their base alignment).
Is this a deliberate change in Pathfinder, or an oversight?
It does make a pretty darn huge difference in the use of Conjuration (Summoning) spells.
As Celestial (or Fiendish) animals no longer become Magical Beasts, it does mean that a Speak with Animals spell could be used to communicate with a conjured animal, [/i]assuming that spell were available to Conjurers[/i], and, even in that case, removes as well the ability of the Conjuror to give instructions to a Fiendish Giant Wasp, which he could do in 3.X, and, according to the text of Summon Monster, he's still supposed to be able to do, somehow.
As Celestial (or Fiendish) animals no longer become Magical Beasts, it does mean that a Speak with Animals spell could be used to communicate with a conjured animal, assuming that spell were available to Conjurers, and, even in that case, removes as well the ability of the Conjuror to give instructions to a Fiendish Giant Wasp, which he could do in 3.X, and, according to the text of Summon Monster, he's still supposed to be able to do, somehow.
Where does it say that you should be able to communicate with a fiendish giant wasp? I'm not doubting it does, I just can't find it in the PRD.
It's deliberate. The celestial and fiendish templates were redesigned to make them simpler to apply, since applying them to summoned monsters during game play is the primary use for them. It also helps to limit the abuse one can heap on the lower level ones—if you want to do some REALLY tactical stuff with summoned monsters, that's an advantage of summoning things like devils and demons and azatas and archons.
That doesn't mean that the PC should have NO control over his summoned monsters, of course. He should be able to direct who the summoned monster attacks, and what attack options the summoned monster uses, and where it attacks from. The GM, of course, has final say in how tactical he wants to let a summon monster spell get, of course.
Both the Tiefling and Aasimar are listed as "Medium outsider (native)". So to me, fiendish and celestial templates should be as well. Since that is what a Tiefling and Aasimar are really.However, it does mean to me that a fiendish or celestial animal should also now be "native outsiders".No. Outsider means more than just "from another plane". That's what the extraplanar subtype is for.
No. Tieflings and Aasimars are directly descended from Outsiders.
Celestial and Fiendish creatures are merely residents of a plane with the Good Dominant or Evil Dominant traits.
It's deliberate. The celestial and fiendish templates were redesigned to make them simpler to apply, since applying them to summoned monsters during game play is the primary use for them. It also helps to limit the abuse one can heap on the lower level ones—if you want to do some REALLY tactical stuff with summoned monsters, that's an advantage of summoning things like devils and demons and azatas and archons.
That doesn't mean that the PC should have NO control over his summoned monsters, of course. He should be able to direct who the summoned monster attacks, and what attack options the summoned monster uses, and where it attacks from. The GM, of course, has final say in how tactical he wants to let a summon monster spell get, of course.
How exactly does the caster direct this though? The spell description specifically says
"If you can communicate with the creature, you can direct it not to attack, to attack particular enemies, or to perform other actions."
So if you cant communicate with it you can still direct it's attacks?
I guess a dedicated summoner would then be possibly inclined to take max ranks in handle animal and attempt to 'push'. But otherwise how would it be done?
I guess a dedicated summoner would then be possibly inclined to take max ranks in handle animal and attempt to 'push'. But otherwise how would it be done?
In the past I've ruled that a summoned animal or monster can obey any of the tricks listed under "Combat Training" (i.e. attack, come, defend, down, guard and heel) without needing a Handle Animal check. Works for me.
DitheringFool
(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Roleplaying Game, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, GameMastery Cards Subscriber)
So if you cant communicate with it you can still direct it's attacks?
Be a gnome and use your speak with animals ability (limits your summoned choices somewhat and there is the whole once a day thing) OR drop the creature right on your enemy's head - might provoke it enough to focus on the target.
...of course, I'm a cruel and heartless DM.
Nothing I have read in crunch or fluff lead me to think of Fiendish/Celestial Templates as only being residents of Evil/Good dominant planes. Not in 3.0, 3.5 or PFRPG.
Really? Because that's what all the 3.x fluff and crunch states. 3.5 specifically states that when a celestial or fiend breeds with another creature, that creature is a half-foo, while celestial/fiendish creatures are something entirely different. Crunchwise, they've never been outsiders, while all of the outsider-descendant templates do change the base creature's type to outsider.
It's deliberate. The celestial and fiendish templates were redesigned to make them simpler to apply, since applying them to summoned monsters during game play is the primary use for them. It also helps to limit the abuse one can heap on the lower level ones—if you want to do some REALLY tactical stuff with summoned monsters, that's an advantage of summoning things like devils and demons and azatas and archons.
That seems like a fairly large change to not get mentioned in the spell itself, and only become known through the purchase of another book several months later.
Should the Summon Monster spell text itself be updated to make note of this new restriction, for those still using backwards-compatible monster books?
That doesn't mean that the PC should have NO control over his summoned monsters, of course. He should be able to direct who the summoned monster attacks, and what attack options the summoned monster uses, and where it attacks from. The GM, of course, has final say in how tactical he wants to let a summon monster spell get, of course.
That sounds like a nice compromise, although the rules do not permit that sort of thing.
Will that be eratta-ed in (and become an option for Organized Play), or is it just a suggested house rule?
Not trying to be a jerk or anything, it's just a pretty darn major change to the functionality of the spell, which seems a bit excessive to cut out the following sentence in the name of 'simplicity;'
'Celestial creatures have a minimum Intelligence of 3 and can understand celestial.'
I do find it highly peculiar that a celestial or fiendish creature retains the ability to Smite evil or good, despite not actually being good or evil any longer!
'Yes, the energies within me empower me to make specially targetted attacks against people that I really don't mind that much... It's like Race Hatred, but, in my case, more like Alignment Apathy.'
Maybe we should wait for Jason to have the time to address this issue, honestly. When I GM things, I'm probably going to handle things the same way I did in 3.5; if you summon a fiendish viper or fiendish spider or fiendish ape, you can direct its attacks however you want. It's less work for me as the GM to let the conjurer run his summoned monster, and it doesn't really cause anyone to have less fun to do it this way.
It's important not to slave yourself to the rules, I guess, but to run the game the way it feels right. As a result, this makes me probably not the best guy to be talking to about hard-core exacting rules interpretations.
Maybe we should wait for Jason to have the time to address this issue, honestly. When I GM things, I'm probably going to handle things the same way I did in 3.5; if you summon a fiendish viper or fiendish spider or fiendish ape, you can direct its attacks however you want. It's less work for me as the GM to let the conjurer run his summoned monster, and it doesn't really cause anyone to have less fun to do it this way.
That seems sensible, and the DM for the game in question had the same opinion, expressing a desire to not have to run summoned creatures in addition to the NPCs / monsters.
I didn't mean to shout down your suggested 'fix,' I was just curious as to whether this would apply for Organized Play or whatever.
I feel kinda bad when you give a reply to a topic like this and it seems like nobody respects your advice...
I feel kinda bad when you give a reply to a topic like this and it seems like nobody respects your advice...
Well, it is just advice after all and not an official ruling.
There are people who all the time don't respect my advice. They usually learn by themselves down the road, though. James may feel the same way! ;)
Maybe we should wait for Jason to have the time to address this issue, honestly. When I GM things, I'm probably going to handle things the same way I did in 3.5; if you summon a fiendish viper or fiendish spider or fiendish ape, you can direct its attacks however you want. It's less work for me as the GM to let the conjurer run his summoned monster, and it doesn't really cause anyone to have less fun to do it this way.
It's important not to slave yourself to the rules, I guess, but to run the game the way it feels right. As a result, this makes me probably not the best guy to be talking to about hard-core exacting rules interpretations.
This is pretty much how we play it at my table too. Unless the caster is asking the summoned creature to do something completely off base we generally let the conjurer control the summoned critter.
I think your advice is good advice I was just curious how it would react to the line that i quoted from the summon spell. I was interested in your reasoning, and "Its easier and more fun for all involved" is prefectly good reasoning to me. I just wanted to see if there was something you had thought of that I hadnt regarding it.