Can a 9th level Summoner use Evolution Surge to give an Eidelon an evolution that states that a Summoner must be 11th level before taking? My initial gut reaction is that no, you can't.
I'm thinking no. Your relative level doesn't change only the number of evolution points.
my 2C
Can a 9th level Summoner use Evolution Surge to give an Eidelon an evolution that states that a Summoner must be 11th level before taking? My initial gut reaction is that no, you can't.
Ah, I had to get intimately familiar with this spell for my Superstar entry last year--
The eidolon must meet any prerequisites of the selected evolution.
So you're right.
|
Can a 9th level Summoner use Evolution Surge to give an Eidolon an evolution that states that a Summoner must be 11th level before taking? My initial gut reaction is that no, you can't.The Surge only gives you points. You still have to qualify for whatever you spend those points on.
See, I totally agree with you, however the spell description says that the Eidelon must qualify for the evolution, it doesn't say anything about the Summoner. I just want to have a good argument when I tell them they can't do it.
See, I totally agree with you, however the spell description says that the Eidelon must qualify for the evolution, it doesn't say anything about the Summoner. I just want to have a good argument when I tell them they can't do it.Can a 9th level Summoner use Evolution Surge to give an Eidolon an evolution that states that a Summoner must be 11th level before taking? My initial gut reaction is that no, you can't.The Surge only gives you points. You still have to qualify for whatever you spend those points on.
Take a look at the Rake evolution to see why I disagree with Nigrescence. The last three sentences explain conditions in which the eidolon can qualify:
"This evolution is only available to eidolons of the quadruped base form. This evolution counts as one natural attack toward the eidolon’s maximum. The summoner must be at least 4th level before selecting this evolution."
So there are three conditions that the eidolon must meet here.
1) Of the quadruped base form
2) Has an additional natural attack available
3) Has a summoner of at least 4th level
The wording on the eidolon prereqs isn't always precise, so I suppose you could claim that none of these is a prereq and that a level 1 Summoner can give it to her Biped eidolon, but I just don't think that tracks.
See, I totally agree with you, however the spell description says that the Eidelon must qualify for the evolution, it doesn't say anything about the Summoner. I just want to have a good argument when I tell them they can't do it.Can a 9th level Summoner use Evolution Surge to give an Eidolon an evolution that states that a Summoner must be 11th level before taking? My initial gut reaction is that no, you can't.The Surge only gives you points. You still have to qualify for whatever you spend those points on.Take a look at the Rake evolution to see why I disagree with Nigrescence. The last three sentences explain conditions in which the eidolon can qualify:
"This evolution is only available to eidolons of the quadruped base form. This evolution counts as one natural attack toward the eidolon’s maximum. The summoner must be at least 4th level before selecting this evolution."
So there are three conditions that the eidolon must meet here.
1) Of the quadruped base form
2) Has an additional natural attack available
3) Has a summoner of at least 4th levelThe wording on the eidolon prereqs isn't always precise, so I suppose you could claim that none of these is a prereq and that a level 1 Summoner can give it to her Biped eidolon, but I just don't think that tracks.
Except #1 and #2 are features of the Eidolon, and #3 is a feature of the summoner. So the question, which I don't think can be resolved with developer input / errata, is "Is the summoner's level a prerequisite that the eidolon must meet?"
Given that it's the Summoner who chooses the evolutions, it's a given that he has to meet the pre-reqs.
Except #1 and #2 are features of the Eidolon, and #3 is a feature of the summoner. So the question, which I don't think can be resolved with developer input / errata, is "Is the summoner's level a prerequisite that the eidolon must meet?"
Except it's not. The Summoner is not a quadruped. The Summoner does not have a limit on natural attacks. Those are both features of the summoner's eidolon, and the spell specifically states that "The eidolon must meet any prerequisites of the selected evolution."
It's clearly the eidolon that has to meet the prereqs, it's just a question of whether the summoner's level is one that the eidolon can meet.
|
It's clearly the eidolon that has to meet the prereqs, it's just a question of whether the summoner's level is one that the eidolon can meet.
The eidolon is an extension of the summoner. There is no eidolon without a summoner, ergo, having a summoner of the appropriate level is a requirement of the eidolon.
It's clearly the eidolon that has to meet the prereqs, it's just a question of whether the summoner's level is one that the eidolon can meet.The eidolon is an extension of the summoner. There is no eidolon without a summoner, ergo, having a summoner of the appropriate level is a requirement of the eidolon.
Actually, it would be "The eidolon is an extension of the summoner. There is no eidolon without a summoner, ergo, having a summoner is a requirement of the eidolon."
The Eidolon does not have a statistic "Summoner's level". It has lots of stats based on that value, but it doesn't have that value. The requirement could be worded "The eidolon must belong to a 4th level summoner before selecting this evolution." That would clearly make it a requirement for the eidolon to fulfill. But it doesn't mention the eidolon at all in that sentence.
|
|
The eidolon is an extension of the summoner. There is no eidolon without a summoner, ergo, having a summoner of the appropriate level is a requirement of the eidolon.
Actually, it would be "The eidolon is an extension of the summoner. There is no eidolon without a summoner, ergo, having a summoner is a requirement of the eidolon."
The Eidolon does not have a statistic "Summoner's level". It has lots of stats based on that value, but it doesn't have that value. The requirement could be worded "The eidolon must belong to a 4th level summoner before selecting this evolution." That would clearly make it a requirement for the eidolon to fulfill. But it doesn't mention the eidolon at all in that sentence.
Of course the eidolon has a "summoner's level" statistic. The summoner's level defines the power of the eidolon. The eidolon doesn't have hit dice without a summoner's level, for example.
Can a 9th level Summoner use Evolution Surge to give an Eidolon an evolution that states that a Summoner must be 11th level before taking? My initial gut reaction is that no, you can't.The Surge only gives you points. You still have to qualify for whatever you spend those points on.No, it does not give you points. It gives your Eidolon one evolution of up to a certain number of points (Lesser two, Normal four). Or, in the case of Greater Evolution Surge, two evolutions of up to a total of six evolution points.
Also, while the Eidolon's hit dice are tied to the Summoner's level, the Summoner's level is not an intrinsic part of the Eidolon itself, nor is it a part of the Eidolon. The Eidolon is a part of the Summoner. For example, the Eidolon has six hit dice at the seventh and eighth levels of the Summoner. But an eighth level Summoner can select the Large evolution for his Eidolon, while a seventh level Summoner cannot, even though the Eidolon is still six hit dice at both levels.
Yet again, the spell only requires the Eidolon to meet the prerequisites. It says nothing about the Summoner meeting any prerequisites. And, as I have stated before, the evolutions clearly outline Eidolon prerequisites and Summoner prerequisites separately.
Additionally, I pointed out how the requirements for the Summoner seem to be listed for when you level up and can select evolutions. The spell can do something against what your level can match (granting evolutions that exceed your max evolution points for that level). You also do not select the evolution as you do normally when leveling up. The spell grants the evolution.
As I said, the requirement that an Eidolon must meet the prerequisites seems to be primarily based on preventing "impossible" things like having claws without limbs to wield them, having a tail slap without a tail, or having a wing buffet when you do not have wings.
+1
Just what I was trying to say. Only clearer.
I don't think it is allowed.
Example: a 4th level summoner using lesser evolution surge, attempting to give his Eidolon "Energy Attacks [fire]"
Energy Attacks specifically states "The summoner must be at least 5th level before selecting this evolution." The summoner therefore is unable to select the evolution, whether by spending evolution points or by using a spell, as the evolution specifically says that summoners under 5th level cannot select it. The fact that the spell doesn't make note of this limitation does not negate the fact that the evolution itself does.
It's not enough that the spell doesn't mention this limitation. The fact is, the spell doesn't OVERRIDE this limitation, so it's still in effect. The spell didn't have to note that the eidolon had to qualify for the evolution [the evolution already states those requirements] - it's just text that was added so that no one would get the wrong idea that the spell overrides the rules in the evolution text. Looks like people have managed to get that impression anyway, though.
Where does evolution surge say that it allows you to break any of the summoner/eidolon rules other than the one it specifically mentions (extra evolution points)?
I'm only sorry that I didn't start this one. It seems like something I'd ask.
Where does evolution surge say that it allows you to break any of the summoner/eidolon rules other than the one it specifically mentions (extra evolution points)?
It's a statement by omission. If I said "I always eat peas and corn together," then said "today I ate peas," the implication would be that today I didn't actually eat corn with my peas. However, it would also be quite reasonable for me to have thought that since I had said I always ate them together, saying I ate one meant I ate both.
In this case, the spell reiterates that the eidolon must meet the prerequisites, and that it doesn't allow the eidolon to exceed it's maximum number of attacks, but does not reiterate that the summoner must meet any prerequisites. If it didn't specify anything, you could assume (rightly) that all the usual restrictions apply. If it said "This does not allow the eidolon to take an evolution it normally would be unable to," that would specifically state that all the usual restrictions apply. But because it restates two out of the three restrictions, there's no reason to assume that the third one still applies.
It's easy enough to errata - just add "and the summoner" in, so that it reads "The eidolon and the summoner must meet any prerequisites..."
|
|
It's always better not to add errata if you don't have to. Not everyone gets to see it.
With the developer's question (Thanks, Sean) it's clear that the summoner, as the caster of the spell, must still meet the summoner requirements to choose the spell.
Now, if you want an interesting case, if a first-level summoner successfully casts a tenth-caster-level Evolution Surge from a scroll, then I'd say that the summoner could choose evolutions requiring higher levels (up to level 10) than first. But it's still based on the level of the caster, which is the level of the summoner.
And I'd rather not have every single spell and ability reiterate every single thing the ability does or doesn't modify. One, because I like to assume that a reasonable person understands the repercussions of what is said, and two, because that would make every rule really, really long.
The GM is not a robot.
|
and the players are not mind readers.
however, time and time again we are expected to read between the lines.
if an ability was not to reiterate every single word, then why not say: 'all standard restrictions apply'
there are several spells and items, that go outside of the normal for what a reasonable person understands in this game.
'Ring Of Revelation, lesser' is an example.
if, at level 1, i was to receive this ring, would that mean i am able to take a revelation that would typically require me to be up to 6th level?
to be reasonable, we would assume that this item works as writen.
or are we to be reasonable and read between the lines to understand we should be 6th level?
bring UMD into the equation, and we dont even have to be an oracle to gain the bonuses of that revelation, we only have to do a skill check every hour, and anyone can gain the feats.
in home games, each rule was intrepreted by the DM to dictate what was reasonable, and they had the final say of the mater. but, in today's game era, we are now playing with a group of DMs. with forums, and posts, and society funcitons.
which makes it even more cumbersome as a player, as now we have to be able to read between the lines of written rules both in book and forums.
and from one table to another. from one store location to another.
its like hearing everyone quote the below statement:
"So just because the grid has a square for "15 feet away" and a square for "5 feet away," but no square for "10 feet away," using that corner path doesn't mean you're magically teleporting from 15 feet to 5 feet; you are passing through a 10-foot-radius band around the creature, and therefore you provoke an AOO."
is this for all types of movement?
are we supposed to understand this rule only applies when moving more than 10', but doesnt apply when taking a 5' step?
one reasonable perspective is that a 5' never provokes, yet, from the other reasonable perspective, you are stepping in from my 15' range to my 5' range. which should provoke an aoo.
we talk about players being reasonable, but how does that assumption fit when there are several descriptions for rule sets that are anything but that
|
Spells tell you what you can do. If a spell says you can do something, you still have to follow all the rules for that something unless the spell specifically removes the restrictions.
There are rules clarifications that are needed in some situations, but in others the rule is simple, did the spell allow you to do so or are you saying you can because the spell didn't say you couldn't. In this case \
You can grant the eidolon any evolution whose total cost does not exceed 2 evolution points. You may only grant one evolution with this spell, even if that evolution can be taken multiple times. You can grant an evolution that allows you to spend additional evolution points to upgrade that evolution. This spell cannot be used to grant an upgrade to an evolution that the eidolon already possesses. The eidolon must meet any prerequisites of the selected evolution. This spell does not allow an eidolon to exceed its maximum number of natural attacks.
No where in that does is allow you to violate the normal rules for choosing evolutions except that you can pick one up to 2 points beyond your normal allotment. It doesn't say you can pick evolution not available to your Eidolon, nor does it say you can ignore level restrictions. The one line explicitly states that the eidolon must meet the prequisites, which in actually unnecessary for the above reason and was probably included just to answer the questions your asking.
If you want to change the spell in a house rule to allow additional power to the spell feel free, but nothing in the spell suggests you can do it by RAW. Omission is not permission.
Both readings are correct, actually. You can perfectly reverse engineer the eidolon stats to figure out what level the summoner is if you look at things in addition to BAB. Even still, as evolutions list requirements for both eidolon and summoner and with the spell only needing the eidolon to qualify for the evolution then this is reasonable enough to see the spell in two different lights.
I share Dysfunction's general sentiment. Some things we're supposed to "just know" when we ask rules questions even though those things are no where in RAW while other omissions are treated as if they should be urgently corrected. The "reasonable person" argument is largely subjective based on the vocal consensus of a few and more often than not is used to beat down a critical reading by making someone feel unreasonable which results in abstention rather than clarification or critical review of the underlying issue. It's little different than telling someone to ignore the crazies.
As I've said in several other posts: the developers are the ones who have the rules debates so what is obvious for them is not obvious for us. The ONLY tool we have is the black and white text presented to us in the books. So, if the text says one thing but another is expected then it should be clarified. Thus, if the summoner's level really should factor in to that spell then the words as they are should never have been printed. The statement should be clarified to make the summoner level an inherent prerequisite as well.
To act as if this few-word addition would dictate the vast modification of the rules is conflation to an extreme to again try to make someone's request seem unreasonable when really all you want is to not worry about it as the issue is settled in your mind which means others are somehow unreasonable to ask the same question.
If the spell allowed you to ignore the level of the summoner required for some evolutions then the spell would have said so. It didn't say so. You have to bent and twist and snip at it to try to get it to say that.
It tells you what you get. You get an evolution worth X points. (depending on which version you use). That is all you get.
To ignore a preq for said evolution it would have to say so. It doesn't say so.
-S
As was said, sure it does, by omission. The synthesist and the eidolon are two different beings that can have wildly different statistics, feats and skills from the other. If both need to be in alignment with a spell then both should be stated. Why explain even if the eidolon must qualify for the spell in that case? Should that not simply be assumed given the way evolutions work? Sean may have simply been posting his own thoughts on the matter but it's very weird to list out some requirements, to not list others and then imply people are unreasonable when they question if some other factor is actually a requirement.
It can be read a perfectly reasonable thing as the evolution surge spells are tiered and there are several examples in the system whereby one class may gain a feature early albeit temporarily or in a weakened version then you can eventually gain the full benefit as you go on. It's easy to see that pattern and look at those spells and see the same thing. You can eventually take the full evolution as you gain levels and evolution points but for now it simply offers a taste of things to come.
This is true if we're using precedents in other parts of the system and similar trade-off logic used by the developers on the boards time and time again. It's not like it can be made permanent without GM permission.
There's no way to abuse it as it already has rules that prevent you from building evolutions to later stages, the limits on spells per day, it's time limitation and so forth. You're level 10 by time you get the greater surge spell. What's the big deal if you can put a toe into the pants of a level 13 evolution for a few minutes a day? You still have to wait until you're level 13 before you can actually put on those pants.
|
That's a pretty obscure example given that Summoners by thier nature aren't scroll writers anyway.But they can be, and now lots of summoner players are asking their GMs for high-level scrolls of Evolution Surge. Obscure doesn't actually exist with a magic mart.
A more reasonable example would be a summoner using feats and items to boost their caster level.
That thread is here. This thread underlines a rules-question about a spell, not a class or archetype.