I've been part of more then one campaign that went downhill due to over summoning by the caster, and I'm playing a conjurer with augment summons right now, and it is hard to resist flooding every battlefield with summoned creatures.
While ideally it is a matter of player etiquette not to take an undue amount of time and space with summons, when it comes time for your character to shine, game time has a way of passing differently for different players. Also what works great in a three person party (especially without a fighter type) may wreck the game for a larger group.
Perhaps limiting the number of summoning spells that can be active to two? Or even one?
I really think this needs to be part of the rules because a mid-to-high level caster can put enough complex creatures into play that the game just slows to a crawl.
Also, can Summon Swarm ramp up to one swarm per 5 caster levels or something...
|
I've got some summoners in my game; how many things were you summoning, and what level were you?
I haven't seen a problem so that's why I was wondering; my group's about 7th level and 3.5. Not that I'm calling you a liar or nothing, just curious is all.
Is this a 'Beta problem that didn't exist in 3.5?
I think this gets worse at higher levels, when summon spells can easily summon multiple creatures that last more and more rounds. It becomes a potential game breaker around 13th level, when it summons huge creatures and those with intelligence, speech, and a variety of spell like abilities. Druids can expend all their spells as summons, so they tend to summon the most, but anyone with augment summons can cause things to get out of hand.
Throw in mass buff spells and animal growth, and things get really crazy.
My experiences were mostly in 3.5, but I have found that Channel Energy causes my summons to last much longer then they would have in 3.5.
I have some first-hand experience in this situation, playing a PC in a group of 5 players some time ago. We were around 9th-11th level (can't remember exactly) and had a druid in the party. We were attacking an orc camp with baddies such as giants, ogres, NPCs and the druid summoned 9 hippogriffs from 3 castings to aid the battle. Between himself, his dog companion, and the 9 hippogriffs, his turn was unbearable, and the other players got a little annoyed. Even the controlling player realized afterward he may have been taking too much from the other players.
Is there any way of limiting the number of monsters a spell caster can control at once? Perhaps make it = to your INT or WIS modifier at least? Has this been a concern?
I have some first-hand experience in this situation, playing a PC in a group of 5 players some time ago. We were around 9th-11th level (can't remember exactly) and had a druid in the party. We were attacking an orc camp with baddies such as giants, ogres, NPCs and the druid summoned 9 hippogriffs from 3 castings to aid the battle. Between himself, his dog companion, and the 9 hippogriffs, his turn was unbearable, and the other players got a little annoyed. Even the controlling player realized afterward he may have been taking too much from the other players.
Is there any way of limiting the number of monsters a spell caster can control at once? Perhaps make it = to your INT or WIS modifier at least? Has this been a concern?
A simple change i am considering is to change the duration of summon spells to concentration + 1 round.
I was thinking to limiting it to a single summoning spell at a time. Perhaps a feat would allow you to have more then one summoning spell active. I like the idea of the DM not allowing this feat in larger groups, or having it be the type of thing that could be swapped out like the Leadership feat.
If you limit it to duration=concentration +1 round you could have, at most, 2 spells active at once. Also, by changing duration you dont have to worry About wierd new rules or feats.
A simple change i am considering is to change the duration of summon spells to concentration + 1 round.
This would be a huge nerf to summoners, way out of proportion with the problem and likely eliminating summoning from the game.
Simply having a limit of 1 summon spell active per player would work fine without actually nerfing these spells which are pretty decent other than the fact that multiple castings make for chaos.
|
I'd actually suggest doing this the otherway around, carrot rather then stick. Have a Feat or Spell or Something that strongly augments a single creature that you have summoned, when you concentrate on that, Essentially transferring the Player's Focus from their Character to their Character's Summoned Creature. Such as the ability to deliver spells from that point.
Then they don't care that they only have one, and that they aren't doing anything with themselves, essentially reducing it to one Player, one Character.
|
This is interesting.
We had one druid in our game for a while and he liked summoning stuff. It drove me nuts cause his summoned monsters were always a total waste of time.
The first problem was he had to choose his summoned creature. Which was never in the Monster Manual, cause there is always a freaking template added. So first he had to stat out the monster. I would go turn on the TV, get some chips and just crash a while (and he NEVER saved the stats from one game to another-idiot- but that is another problem all together).
The next problem was they were always useless in combat because the CR is SOOOOOOOO much lower than the party level and the level of bad guys we were fighting.
For example at level 11, the druid could cast Summon Nature's Ally VI. He could, for example summon a Dire Bear (CR 7), a Girallon (CR 6), or a Megaraptor (CR 6)- and manage to not use a template.
Ummm yeah, these are 4-5 levels lower than the PCs and at least as much lower than the bad guys.
So he gets this really cool awesome dinosaur to run up to the 12 headed CryoHydra (CR 11) and it misses. So CryoHydra doesn't even bother to swipe at big bad megaraptor. At most the megaraptor will last a round, and the hydra will have attacks to spare.
The most his summoned critters ever managed to do slow down the bad guy and irritate the rest of us. Worse was when he would summon several even weaker critters to waste our time with. These couldn't even slow down the bad guys (Three Gryphons (CR 4) would be a snack for a CR 11, 12 headed cryohydra).
Eventually he stopped summoning all together when he realized how useless they were.
I am curious though, why would an adventuring party of levels 9-11 be messing with Orcs (CR 1/2-ish)? Should have been a cake walk no matter what...
See, when it came to time for spells I was going to suggest strengthening the summoning spells. Why waste time with such weak critters? If I am 11th level I want something that can fight a CR 11 monster!
|
|
Anyone who runs a summoner has to know his critters. I have had 5-10 critters around a few times, and my turns were regularly just as fast as anyone else with multiple attacks or multiple die rolls needed for attack spells. Someone who does not know their critters will take an excessive amount of time, but so will someone who does not know his fighter melee modifiers, cannot pick a spell, or needs to check twenty paths to figure out where to tumble to for a flank.
Eventually he stopped summoning all together when he realized how useless they were.
This has not been my experience with summoned creatures.
I am curious though, why would an adventuring party of levels 9-11 be messing with Orcs (CR 1/2-ish)? Should have been a cake walk no matter what...
I put summoning squarely in the middle of usefulness. While it generally doesn't turn the tide of battle it often helps as either battlefield control (blocking a section of the battlefield for a few rounds until dispatched) or for dealing with lower level threats.
The other nice thing about summons is the utility functions they bring to the party. Lots of spell like abilities and things like burrowing, flight, etc.
As a DM, I love summoned monsters and animals. I never know what my players as going to summon, it adds an extra level of suspense to things, from my side of the screen. And my players love them too - a lot of the creatures can do things the players can't. My wife summons monsters with powers that her sorcerers don't have the equivalent spell for, e.g. teleport, etc.
I'd have to disagree that the spells are over powered or problematic. We even play with the houserule that you can summon anything from the MM, as long as the CR is equal or lower than the average CR of the creatures on the summon monster lists. It hasn't broke anything yet.
In our experience, this:
The first problem was he had to choose his summoned creature. Which was never in the Monster Manual, cause there is always a freaking template added. So first he had to stat out the monster. I would go turn on the TV, get some chips and just crash a while (and he NEVER saved the stats from one game to another-idiot- but that is another problem all together).
is the real issue. My players all keep a binder of the creatures they want to summon, all stat'd out and ready to go. In addition, they bookmark the pages in the MM that they need *before* the game starts. When it's their turn, they have everything ready to go, usually so far as to have the dice in piles, from left to right, ready to be rolled.
The problems we've had with this spell are the same as with all other spells, or rather with the caster of those spells. If you don't know what you're doing then the game is going to grind to a halt. Of course, having to look up both a monster (as mentioned above, sometimes a template too) and a spell makes this spell seem worse than any others. But really, it's the same problem of a lack of player etiquette. You need to know what your options are so you don't bring the momentum crashing down. Obviously, this doesn't apply to newbies who are still learning the game.
WotC made a similar mistake by limiting the power Astral Construct in the XPH errata. 1 summoned creature per character will not fix the 'problem' if that player still has to look up the monster, find the template, re-check the spell description....
Another option we use, on occasion, is just to let the summons come under the control of the DM. For example, if the summons are being used to hold off enemy reinforcements, let the players issue orders and then hand control over to the DM. The DM can then either make all the rolls while the players are taking their turns and discussing their moves, or just eyeball it and say "Those summons are going to last only 2 turns against that dragon, done." This has the advantage of letting the player focus their attention on their character.
Using a combination of the above points, we've successfully run combats since 3.0 came out, including one with a Mystic-Theurge summon-spamming build and large combats with up to 20 or so summons on multiple sides. A favorite still talked about today was a three way outsider battle featuring a lot of sorcerers....
It can be done! A sidebar offering some suggestions to speed things up and detailing player etiquette would be a better 'fix' than scaling the spells down.
Peace,
tfad
Good thoughts tfad.
I agree 100% on stat cards/ binder for summoned critters. In particular if it's not a standard critter out of the MM (either due to template or due to feats).
This is another thing I really hope doesn't get "fixed," since I think a lot of the problem is that players running summoners don't have their monsters ready to go, or they aren't doing the work themselves on their own creatures.
I know as a GM, I figure out what creatures a caster is going to summon before I run the session that night and have them all ready to go just like another monster in the game.
This would be a huge nerf to summoners, way out of proportion with the problem and likely eliminating summoning from the game.
Simply having a limit of 1 summon spell active per player would work fine without actually nerfing these spells which are pretty decent other than the fact that multiple castings make for chaos.
Because of limiting it to concentration +1 round? By doing that you make it so that at the low end low level casters get more than 1-2 rounds out of a monster and at the high end the caster is not running multiple summons. The downside is its concentration. I dunno, it seems kinda cool to me.
The trouble with making it concentration is that means the caster isn't doing other things. YEs, it means that they aren't summoning more, but I'd rather keep my 20th level caster in the fight than just concentrate on keeping a CR 9 monster out of Summon Monster IX on the table.
|
|
True that a player who knows his critters and has them statted up will make it go faster.
But I still fail to see any real usefulness of the summoned critters themselves. At most the critters deny a space from the enemy. Even the threat of an AoO is not worth worrying about. IF the extremely lower level summoned creature even manages to get a hit on the enemy it will do minimal damage.
Burrowing and flight can be useful in some situations, sure. But most of the critters on the summoning lists are pretty lame for powers. For example Summon Nature's Ally VI, has two critters that have useful powers, the Large Elemental and the Pixie (with Dispel Magic it can be the most useful of the list). Everything else is just set up to be slaughtered against enemies much higher than themselves.
To maintain control of the battlefield, summoned critters must be able to back up the threat of an AoO. If the summoned critter is virtually unable to damage the enemy in any meaningful way it fails to control any spaces around it.
True that a player who knows his critters and has them statted up will make it go faster.
But I still fail to see any real usefulness of the summoned critters themselves. At most the critters deny a space from the enemy. Even the threat of an AoO is not worth worrying about. IF the extremely lower level summoned creature even manages to get a hit on the enemy it will do minimal damage.
For a druid, the 3.0/3.5 version of Animal Growth combined with Augmented Summoning was a killer. +12 to Str isn't peanuts, especially for a grappling creature. So you can have a 5th level druid summoning up to 5 Huge dire wolves with 37 Str (+ Trip) or up to 3 Gargantuan giant crocodiles with 39 Str (+ Improved Grab). Thankfully, Animal Growth has been nerfed in Pathfinder (one animal only per casting).
You're right that melee creatures get less and less impressive once you hit higher levels, though.
|
1. Put simplified creature statblocks near GM.
Download 3.0 and 3.5 statblock from:
http://www.greyhawkonline.com/smetzger/summon/index.html
Awesome resource, thanks for pointing it out!
And yeah, here's my 'house rule' for summoning;
"If you don't have it statted up on a card, you can't summon it."
We use Game Mechanics cards (I use them for each encounter, seeded into the adventure on the appropriate pages, just so that I can mark them up and toss them aside when they die), filled out with the template information, etc.
Summon Monster truly is a PITA, because of having to check the Magical Creature type, in addition to the Fiendish/Celestial creature changes. You end up flipping between three different pages in the MM, one for the animal, one for the Celestial/Fiendish template and one to see what the change to Magical Beast does to the critter's BAB, HD, saves, etc.
Factoring in Augment Summons, Augment Elemental (from Magic of Eberron, a decent choice for a Druid) and various other Feats that allow for summoning critters with other templates (Greenbond) or from other lists (Vermin Heart), and it gets annoying fast, even before spells like Summon Ice Beast (from Frostburn) or Summon Dustform Creature (from Sandstorm) enter the picture...
If it ain't written down before the game, you ain't summoning it.
But I still fail to see any real usefulness of the summoned critters themselves.
A lot of it is situational. In one of our games, the PCs needed (or, more accurately, decided they needed) to collapse a flimsily constructed guard tower. I believe the conversation started something like this:
"Right, what's the heaviest animal I can summon?"
Like the best spells, it's about interesting ways to use them. In a straight up fight, no they're not as powerful as other options. But summoned Formians can cast cure spells in groups. Where else can a low level resource strapped sorcerer get a cure spell?
Summon spells work as a fully loaded tool belt, not an enchanted battle axe. That said, at low levels you do not want to *&!$ with a celestial bison.
Peace,
tfad
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
a) Speaking as a Shaper, you can never have too many astral constructs.
b) Speaking as a player of a shaper, having the stats laid out before hand is a must. Also being able to declare all your actions when your initiative is up is a must. This is one place where battlemats and minis are highly desirable.
c) Speaking as a DM who has too many players who don't do b) I think limiting it to a number of levels of spell equal to character level is a good cap. 1st level, summon monster 1, second level two summon monster 1, 3rd level 3 summon monster 1 or 1 summon monster II and a summon monster 1, etc.
|
|
The issue lies not in the number of monsters that can be summoned, but the ability of the controlling character to deal with them efficiently. Good player organisation is required to run a summoner. You need the aforementioned pre-gen stat blocks and the self control to limit your choiced to a handful of sommoned creatures at a time.
If a player does not show the ability to handle these minimum requirements for playing a summoner, they they should be strongly encouraged to find another niche to fill.
I prefer to leave this sort of discretion up to the player and DM, rather than trying to put it in the rules. You can't legislate common sense or good judgement, but you can discourage those unsuited to a role from taking it on.
I too would be sad to see Summoning limited in this way. It can be a hassle for the unprepared, but no more hassle than a druid wildshaping, a wizard shapechanging (far later of course), or any other complex spellcasting.
It's powerful in its own way, and limited in others, and that is *Magic*.
I would suggest a notation in "Running the Game" about summoned creatures, with suggestions as made above, along with a caveat that if one player is summoning large numbers of creatures, passing them out to other players is a good way to "share the fun".
Putting the onus on the player to fully stat out every possible monster/animal/whatever that they might ever possibly summon, in all variations (fiendish/celestial/buffed/non-buffed etc) is a metric crap load of work and is completely unreasonable for newer or more recreational players. Sure its no problem for us super nerds who live and breath DnD but for the wives, children, and friends, who only play occasionally or when we can talk them into it, asking them to now spend hours before the session gathering all of the material on the monsters is absurd. They will *never* do it. Now certainly you could do it for them, but who really wants to do all of that??
It would be really handy if within the spell text itself (or in a nice index table somewhere) there were stat blocks for all possible summon candidates (yes I know about the online options for this-I mean something official in the book). Then, if I know that a friend, wife, or kid, is going to be playing the summoner I could copy and paste that small box onto a separate sheet for them and they could just point and say, "Pikachu I summon you!" and bam a unicorn appears, all statted out and the newbie (or less interested significant other) isn't left going "why in the f am I doing this when I could be washing dishes instead?"
But I still fail to see any real usefulness of the summoned critters themselves. At most the critters deny a space from the enemy. Even the threat of an AoO is not worth worrying about. IF the extremely lower level summoned creature even manages to get a hit on the enemy it will do minimal damage.
This is both true and untrue.
I am in 2 campaigns, one as DM, and one as a player. In the campaign I DM, we have a wizard PC who summons but his creatures are often a laughable nuisance in combat. His most common tactic with summoned creatures is for feeling out for traps and such.
In the campaign in which I'm a player, the druid's summoned monsters are quite often a significant threat. The DM who runs that campaign often tells us how he is designing encounters just to take into account the summoned creatures because he never is sure when they are going to pop up or what they will be (becuase of splat books).
I've brought this up before, but it's a matter of 2 groups using the same rules but having 2 completely different styles of play.
My issue with summoning is only if there are too many on the board to the point it is taking too much time in turn resolution... not with the power level of the spells. Is it an issue important enough that the spell needs to be looked at? Well, according to the one group, I'd say yes, but according to the other, I'd say no.
|
|
Putting the onus on the player to fully stat out every possible monster/animal/whatever that they might ever possibly summon, in all variations (fiendish/celestial/buffed/non-buffed etc) is a metric crap load of work and is completely unreasonable for newer or more recreational players.
Sounds like homework, and I wouldn't do that either. Hence the 'if you don't have it written up, you can't use it' rule.
They don't have any reason at all to write up *every option.* And they certainly won't be summoning every single creature that might appear on the list, just the ones that they've decided were worth the time.
If the player doesn't think his five or ten minutes to write up the beastie before the game is worth it, then I certainly don't think that those same five or ten minutes of *my* time, his time, *and every other players time* is any less valuable...
You can look at it mathematically (waste five minutes of your time, not 30 man-minutes of all of our time) or as a matter of consideration and respect for your fellow players, not to interrupt their combat round with your unpreparedness. Either way, it's better to 'put the onus' on the player to have his own character's action ready when his turn comes around. Combat is one small and fairly boring part of D&D, for all the rules that surround it, and I don't have time to squeeze three combats into a night *and* a couple of hours of plot stuff and role-playing, if one character is going to take five or ten minutes on each of their combat rounds, because they cared so little for their fellow players time that they couldn't be bothered to *download a prepared summon monster sheet off of the internet.*
[There are several sites that have these. The WotC site among them, IIRC, as well as the one that I hadn't seen before that ruemere linked to upthread.]
Here's my take on the effectiveness of summoned monsters:
They don't scale properly. While this isn't exactly true, a decent rule of thumb is that Summon spells get creatures of a CR equal to their spell level.
At 1st level, the Summon is a relevant threat: It's CR 1 at level 1. However, it only sticks around for 1 turn, making it more of a flank generator with a single attack strapped on. (Not bad for a first level spell, though.)
At 2nd level, the summon is still sorta relevant: It's still CR 1, but you get it for two turns, and a CR monster is still relevant against 2nd level ecounters.
At 3rd level, summon is actually pretty good. You get access to Summon Monster II, so you get a CR 2 summon, and it sticks around for 3 rounds. Most fights only last 4-5 rounds, and you had to spend a round summoning it, so it starts to stick around for the whole fight.
After 5th level, the duration increase stops really being relevant. The maximum duration is two whole minutes at 20th level, and it's hard to get two fights in two minutes.
By the time you reach 17th level, you're still only getting stuff of CR 9-11 out of Summon Monster IX. I'd rather use Gate.
Notice the pattern here? The duration scales neatly, but that stops helping much around 5th level. The power of the monsters, on the other hand, only goes up at HALF the rate of character advancement, leading to an ever widening gap between summoned monster and the summoner.
Obviously, there should be a gap, because a summoned monster should not be a replacement for a party member. But the gap shouldn't grow as badly as it does. It doesn't help that frequently summoned critters are templated, and templated monsters frequently have a glass jaw (or are glass cannons). (This is why Druids have an easier time being effective than Conjurers: Summoned Nature's Allies are rarely templated).
I suggest that the summon lists be reworked by shifting monsters downward, and populating the 8th and 9th level lists with some tougher beasts. This shouldn't be a threat to backward compatibility because anything a caster could summon before they can still summon (since you can choose monsters from a lower level list.)
A simple change i am considering is to change the duration of summon spells to concentration + 1 round.This would be a huge nerf to summoners, way out of proportion with the problem and likely eliminating summoning from the game.
Simply having a limit of 1 summon spell active per player would work fine without actually nerfing these spells which are pretty decent other than the fact that multiple castings make for chaos.
I would agree about the nerf. I have two characters that use summoning spells in my Age of Worms campaign. Both players keep a binder with the stats of their creatures in them for quick reference. This keeps the game from slowing down too much.
The most summoned creatures I have seen on the board so far was about 9 lantern archons (being used as crowd control and to prevent mind control with their magic circle against evil).
They don't have any reason at all to write up *every option.* And they certainly won't be summoning every single creature that might appear on the list, just the ones that they've decided were worth the time.
I've been playing for oh what? almost 30 years? and even *I* never know ahead of time 1) what we will be facing in the adventure I am playing in or 2) what weird critter will come in handy at just the right moment. Asking, as I said, someone else like a significant other, child, or part-time guest player to invest the required time before the session to stat out the monsters is not going to happen.
If the player doesn't think his five or ten minutes to write up the beastie before the game is worth it, then I certainly don't think that those same five or ten minutes of *my* time, his time, *and every other players time* is any less valuable...
Have you ever played with, as I said, a wife, kid, or casual gamer? If you want to be that big of an @$% to them then that's on you, but I try to be more accommodating. Either way though, if you expect them to do it, and you would like to encourage them to play, you are not going to be very successful if you put this amount of labor on them. They are nowhere near as into this as you or I. And like I said, maybe thats fine for you, but not for me. Besides, even for myself, I would appreciate not having to do all that manual labor every time I cast a summon spell.
You can look at it mathematically (waste five minutes of your time, not 30 man-minutes of all of our time) or as a matter of consideration and respect for your fellow players, not to interrupt their combat round with your unpreparedness.
Dude I think we are arguing two different things. I get all of that, thats blatantly obvious. Its not a matter of respect its a matter of the game designers could make actual table-time easier by cutting out some of the manual labor involved.
[There are several sites that have these. The WotC site among them, IIRC, as well as the one that I hadn't seen before that ruemere linked to upthread.]
As I said, I am aware of those sites, but I'm not talking about just me here. Theres a ton of people who play DnD who never go online. Are you saying basically to heck with them? Why NOT just include stat blocks in the book?
Sheesh.
Why NOT just include stat blocks in the book?
They do provide stat blocks in a book (the Monster Manual). The exception is with fiendish/celestial creatures, which I agree is a bit of a pain to add.
I also agree that playing a summoner probably isn't that great for casual/beginning players.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
jresyt's tactful nature aside...
Why not include stats? Um, see book, huge, pressed for space as is.
And playing any caster requires work. Heck, any good character requires work. One of the complaints about power attack is that it takes so long to crunch optimal numbers. I've seen players with spreadsheets on hand just to speed it up. Heaven forbid he not need homework.
Enlarging the fighter? Well, it takes time to recalculate damage.
your other 'casual players' are going to get bored and hop on the Wii while your caster goes "Hmm, fiendish or Celestial? Bird or Bee? Oh wait, didn't you say we could use the vivacious template?"
The idea is to make it fun for -everyone-. As a player, I have an obligation to make it fun for everyone. If I'm playing a master summoner, then part of that obligation is to be prepared.
If I'm playing poker and I constantly have to flip open a book to check if a straight beats a flush (which I always get confused) then I'm slowing the game down and disrupting everyone's fun. If I'm a casual player in an event at a con, not only is my needing to look up celestial gummi bears slowing down people, but it's also hampering their chances of competing effectively in a scenario.
|
|
They don't have any reason at all to write up *every option.* And they certainly won't be summoning every single creature that might appear on the list, just the ones that they've decided were worth the time.I've been playing for oh what? almost 30 years? and even *I* never know ahead of time 1) what we will be facing in the adventure I am playing in or 2) what weird critter will come in handy at just the right moment. Asking, as I said, someone else like a significant other, child, or part-time guest player to invest the required time before the session to stat out the monsters is not going to happen.
I repeat, they don't have to stat out every monster in the book. They just need to make sure they've got the ones they want to use. If they are incapable of choosing one or two creatures and saying, 'I'll use this one!' before the game, then yeah, they might want to print out stats for four or five of them. Golly. The horror of having to stab the 'print' button a few extra times, how could I be so heartless?
I've been playing for decades as well, and I don't know every single creature that would be optimal for every single situation, nor do I care enough to print out the stats for a Celestial Giant Bee, so, even if it's *perfect* for a particular encounter, I'll be using something I *do* have statted up. I don't like making other players (or the GM) wait while I dither, and most of my players are also fast-paced and already have their action decided and dice in hand when their initiative comes around. None of us want to sit around while someone reads through every spell on their list in the PHB, trying to figure out which one would be best. They're only six-second rounds. Cast something and move on.
And yeah, I've gamed with plenty of casual players, and I'm not sadistic enough to give them the most complicated possible class to play, and tell them to use every single option in a dozen different monster books, and then forbid them the use of online resources or make them do the conversions/templating in their head in Aramaic or something. If the inexperienced player wants to run a summoner, which is definitely not one of the easiest options, I'll suggest to them to pick one or two critters from the list and even show them where to download the pre-converted critters (or even print them out for them, which I've done before, since I tend to have copies of that stuff for my own summoner characters).
I don't consider it a terribly 'mean' thing to expect any player to have at least a modicum of consideration for the rest of the players.
The 'rule' remains. If they don't have it ready, they don't use it. If, after the game, they realize that having a Thoqqua would have totally rocked and they want to add it to their 'playlist,' they can print it out (or ask me to do so) before the next session, but stopping the game and making everyone else sit around holding their cheese isn't a great choice.
And, like every 'rule,' there will always be exceptions. If everybody wants to order Chinese takeout anyway, we can pause the action while they get their orders decided upon, and the player or myself can jot down the stats for a Fiendish Dire Weasel without being inconsiderate to the rest of the players.
jreyst's tactful nature aside...
Ok, I apologize if I was rude, but its irritating when people suggest that casual players are just lazy and if they do not want to do the work they shouldn't play. The game should make it easy for casual players to play, so that they actually enjoy playing and do not see it as a chore.
Why not include stats? Um, see book, huge, pressed for space as is.
Yeah, I get that. That part is unfortunate. But, and this is probably my ignorance showing through here, but why exactly is everything going into one book? Is it a cost issue for printing? I'd much rather have three medium sized books (and ultimately would pay more) than have one reallllllllllly thick book.
And playing any caster requires work. Heck, any good character requires work. One of the complaints about power attack is that it takes so long to crunch optimal numbers. I've seen players with spreadsheets on hand just to speed it up. Heaven forbid he not need homework.
Sure, but the casual player could just go "ummm ok I subtract 3 from my attack to add 6 damage" when using PA whereas don't even ask me to get into what is involved with casting a summon spell.
Enlarging the fighter? Well, it takes time to recalculate damage.
Yep. That's a chore too.
your other 'casual players' are going to get bored and hop on the Wii while your caster goes "Hmm, fiendish or Celestial? Bird or Bee? Oh wait, didn't you say we could use the vivacious template?"
Yep.
The idea is to make it fun for -everyone-. As a player, I have an obligation to make it fun for everyone. If I'm playing a master summoner, then part of that obligation is to be prepared.
I don't think any one player or character combination should be required to invest a massively greater proportion of prep time than other classes. Do I do it? Sure, when I am playing spellcasters I do invest that time, so that I am prepared and can pull off the best combinations or spell choices at the right times, but others want to walk up, sit down, and play. Ultimately I think we should try to make that as feasible as possible (within reason).
If I'm a casual player in an event at a con, not only is my needing to look up celestial gummi bears slowing down people, but it's also hampering their chances of competing effectively in a scenario.
At cons the GM usually has everything pre-statted out, including PC's and all of their options, or at least the games I have been in at cons, or at least, the BETTER games I have been in. Other games where the GM is completely unprepared are no fun for anyone.
|
|
its irritating when people suggest that casual players are just lazy and if they do not want to do the work they shouldn't play.
Has anyone in this thread other than you said this? It sounds to me like something you have carried over from another thread and generously gifted upon us innocent bystanders...
|
|
I think that the critter list should be fixed for starters. Like said above, at higher levels the critters' utility begins to suffer. Their HDs need to scale in some decent proportion to PC level.
I would suggest that the standard critters listed all be in the MM exactly as listed on the charts. BUT also allow custom summons lists to be made with GM approval. First this allows the summoner to be built on a theme. Also it allows for prestatting out if the player wants to make a new summons list. And finally, if you use the premade list you know that critter exists exactly as listed so it is easy for anyone to use.
The spells should limit summoning to only what is on the lists, so there is no flipping through books to see what might work in every specific situation. Feats could allow for additional lists or critters to be added to existing lists.
A good limit on summoning would be along the lines of controlling undead. Caster level x 4 in summoned HD. This allows for a few to be summoned but unless very low level critters are summoned you won't get too many at once. Especially if HD of summoned critters are scaled up at higher levels.
its irritating when people suggest that casual players are just lazy and if they do not want to do the work they shouldn't play.Has anyone in this thread other than you said this? It sounds to me like something you have carried over from another thread and generously gifted upon us innocent bystanders...
2-3 separate comments above, including (especially?) yours set very clearly implied that its lazy and unprepared players who are to blame. All i am saying is that level of prep should not be required and if steps can be taken to make the game more fun and inviting to newbies then the hobby, and by extension the industry, will grow, driving more dollars into paizos hands. With that said i would think simplifying the games rough spots is what pf is about, and in my opinion summoning is a very rough spot.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
What you choose to infer, and what Set or I chose to imply, are two seperate things.
Do you go and play golf without practicing? Or figure "Bill organized the game, he'll bring clubs."
Do you go to a Wii party planning to use someone else's machine?
Do you go to a book club w/o reading the book, or at least the Clift notes?
Do you show up with your swordsage without your Tome of Battle?
Do you hop in your formula 1 race car without knowing how to drive?
Do you do brain surgery w/o going to medical school?
In all those examples, the hypothetical you is in an activity that requires some preperation. Not being prepared a) makes you look silly and/or b) ruins everyone's fun. in the last two examples replace 'ruins everyone's fun' with 'makes you a danger to those 'round you.'
the question of the thread is "How many summons are too much?" We've seen guidelines from Hit Dice, to spell levels to 'one'.
Do you have a solution? Besides "it's not fun to make someone work becasue they've chosen something difficult and game slowing."
I suppose we should be thankful your reply isn't "I've decided to make a focus required, an ivory ball with a ruby band, and a gem. The caster has to yell the monster's name, followed by 'I choose you'." It would be consistent with your other spell thread suggestions.
|
|
Summoners, like most dedicated casters, are more of an "advanced" character type and not appropriate character choices for newbies. Casual players who occasionally summon a monster into combat can be given a little slack for not having a prepped monster reference sheet. A dedicated summoner character OTOH needs to be prepared before the game and ready to go every round, otherwise they drag the game down.
Summoning/calling spells ought to be complicated since you're essentially introducing another character into the party for a limited time.
If you wanted to break summonings down to a simple mechanic the way Beast Shape (and its relatives), that'd be fine too. You get a basic stat block for the creature in the rules and you pick a few options from a list (type, movement modes, Ex and Su powers etc...) and the appearance of creature is merely in-game fluff.
The other option is to have your reference sheets ready. Actually, I think that Paizo could make a mint by selling monster decks that have a drawing of the creature on one side and the stats on the other, including a note of which spells can summon them.
Krome: Yes, please, let's get back on track.
It seems like a reasonable limit to keep summoning in check might be to limit each caster to one summon spell being active at a time. Base it on the compulsion magics involved, or the continuous magic required to keep the summoning active (as opposed to Calling effects), or some other such flavorful justification.
If the caster wants multiple summoned pets, they can use the '1d3 lower level' options.
I'm going to go open a new thread regarding the effectiveness of summoned monsters, as this thread isn't really the place for my comments above.
If you wanted to break summonings down to a simple mechanic the way Beast Shape (and its relatives), that'd be fine too. You get a basic stat block for the creature in the rules and you pick a few options from a list (type, movement modes, Ex and Su powers etc...) and the appearance of creature is merely in-game fluff.
That's how the psionic summoning equivalents work. Astral Constructs work that way.
The other option is to have your reference sheets ready. Actually, I think that Paizo could make a mint by selling monster decks that have a drawing of the creature on one side and the stats on the other, including a note of which spells can summon them.
That's not a bad idea.
Maybe a limit such as "one summon effect (sometimes summon spells summon multiple creatures in themselves of course, so not sure how to word that)plus one additional summoned creature/(spell?) per point of Charisma modifier may be active at any time"? If you want to add in something to account for party size (as the OP suggests) you could then subtract one from that number for every party member above 4, citing the distraction of multiple combatants or some other justification.
I know that as a ref, I tend to reward players for summoning the same creature (which often, if not always, entails having stats worked out ahead of time and recorded for next session) and the game itself discourages summoning monsters with whom you are not familiar. Furthermore when a player isn't using a summon to full potential or summons the wrong creature for a fight, I find it much easier to "ignore" their summoned creature.
For me, the summon family of spells is a threat from the player because of its ability to block and lessen options, not because it puts another viable combatant on the board. More often than not, the combat ability of the summoned creature is less relevant than its mere presence on the board, blocking effortless movement, performing the occasional combat maneuver or just plain soaking hits from the BBEG that would have put the party at risk.
The summoned creature is invaluable in a small party if only for that reason. In a large party, however, it can help add to what is already generally a circus atmosphere.
I find "gimmicky" summons to be the least palatable (the lantern archon with its ranged touch attacks, arrowhawks, etc.) and wish players would use a little more self-control with these. While its cool to spam the battlefield with 12 lantern archons, it also quickly depletes spells and then the caster is sitting there wondering why the rest of the party is irked that he wants to rest when they didn't really get to do anything in the combat.
Similar things are the multiple huge elephants with their trample... One is great and the rest of the party is jazzed to have such an effective resource in play. 3 or 4 is overkill and leads to people feeling antsy, impatient and left out (and overlong turns for the summoner).
Aside from that I have no problem if a caster is summoning creatures ad nauseam. As long as they have stats prepared and a vague idea of what the creature does, I have no problem with a few extra chunks of fodder running around the dragon's den.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
If you wanted to break summonings down to a simple mechanic the way Beast Shape (and its relatives), that'd be fine too. You get a basic stat block for the creature in the rules and you pick a few options from a list (type, movement modes, Ex and Su powers etc...) and the appearance of creature is merely in-game fluff.That's how the psionic summoning equivalents work. Astral Constructs work that way.
The other option is to have your reference sheets ready. Actually, I think that Paizo could make a mint by selling monster decks that have a drawing of the creature on one side and the stats on the other, including a note of which spells can summon them.That's not a bad idea.
That's a wonderful idea. and if they don't, once the Pathfinder SRD is finalized, I bet someone will.
As to the Astral Construct mechanic, that is a good solution, though even the ACs allow some customizability, so it still takes preperation, just not as much.
|
|
Summoners, like most dedicated casters, are more of an "advanced" character type and not appropriate character choices for newbies. Casual players who occasionally summon a monster into combat can be given a little slack for not having a prepped monster reference sheet. A dedicated summoner character OTOH needs to be prepared before the game and ready to go every round, otherwise they drag the game down.
Summoning/calling spells ought to be complicated since you're essentially introducing another character into the party for a limited time.
If you wanted to break summonings down to a simple mechanic the way Beast Shape (and its relatives), that'd be fine too. You get a basic stat block for the creature in the rules and you pick a few options from a list (type, movement modes, Ex and Su powers etc...) and the appearance of creature is merely in-game fluff.
The other option is to have your reference sheets ready. Actually, I think that Paizo could make a mint by selling monster decks that have a drawing of the creature on one side and the stats on the other, including a note of which spells can summon them.
Awww don't suggest that! I akready can't afford way too much stuff I want!
Awespme idea though