Alright, so a discussion I had in the Rules folder came to this interesting revelation. Since you have to 'summon' a paladin's mount after it dies. Wouldn't that make it a summoned creature? Seeing as 'summon' is a very specific game term that relates to Conjuration (summoning) spells.
If this is the case, would that mean that you can dispel a paladin's mount? I mean Divine Bond IS a spell-like ability.
Though it also says that you can 'call' the Paladin's mount to your side, in reference to using a Conjuration (calling) ability. That could also be explained as calling an already summoned creature from one location to another.
Anyway, it sounds like, RAW, you can dispel a paladin's mount. Thoughts?
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Paladin mounts are called not summoned. Thus they can actually die (they aren't just sent back to their plane) and would be immune to dispel magic. You could banish them.
Maezer wrote: Paladin mounts are called not summoned. Thus they can actually die (they aren't just sent back to their plane) and would be immune to dispel magic. You could banish them. To be fair, it does say "summon".
In a game that has two very clear and different ways to bring a creature to your side, calling and summoning, it's not wise to throw those terms around loosely.
It can easily be read that since you have to 'summon' the mount. It's a summoned creature.
If you're right, which you probably are (RAI), than it should say "after 30 days, you can call another mount, ect.
I don't think you can dispel the mount. I'm fairly sure it is a Conjuration (Teleportation) effect for a few reasons:
First Conjuration (Calling) specifies that it comes from another plane. When you get the mount it has the Animal type, and when you get higher level it becomes a Magical Beast. It never gains the Outsider or Outsider(Native) types.
Second, it never says anywhere that you can "unsummon" the mount. You can leave the mount in the stables, then summon it into a dungeon, but once it is there you can't send it back to the stables. Unlike 3.x there is nothing about having it conveniently disappear.
I think it's one of those annoying situations where a common rules term gets used in a sentence with just its standard English language meaning ie: Huge Rats (size small). So I think you can counterspell the initial call/summon/whatever, but banishment, dismissal, and dispel shouldn't have any effect.
While I don't honestly believe that it was RAI. If you use game terms as descriptive words, than you're going to simply confuse the players. They won't know when 'summon' means beckon, or when it means that you cast a Conjuration (summon) spell.
Names (like the "Huge Rat") are one thing. Same with flavor/fluff text. But describing an actual in game action with a game term being used as a descriptive verb for something else will only serve to confuse people. I think.
Anyway, this is more tongue and cheek than anything. If you could actually dispel a paladin's mount, I think that every paladin would just give up.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Its a matter that the core role book has large quantities of text copied (word for word) from the WotC's d20srd. 3.x also had the terminology that you called the mount as a standard action, but you summoned it 30 days after it dies. But its such a minor detail even WotC didn't FAQ/errata it despite their giagantic FAQs.
If you really want to argue semantics. The paladin has no ability to summon his mount, he can only call it. So not being able to summon the mount for 30 days is irrelevant.
As to dismissing the mount. All 'calling' effects give the called creature a one time ability to return to their plane of origin this is how after being called a paladins mount can return to its original plane. Being called also gives it immunity to dispel magic. As it is not native to the material plane however it is still vulnerable to banishment or dismissal.
Like I said there, Captain, "I don't honestly believe it's RAI."
But if it comes to it, yes. I want to argue semantics. Because that's all there is to argue.
And I don't see how telling me that most of the text is copied makes my point any less valid.
Because, the way I see it, I do have a VERY valid point. Copied or not, the wording should me MUCH more careful. Hell, a simple CTRL+F "call" / "summon" would allow the editor to fix this specific confusion pretty quick.
Maezer wrote: As it is not native to the material plane however it is still vulnerable to banishment or dismissal. This is incorrect.
InsaneFox wrote: If you use game terms as descriptive words, than you're going to simply confuse the players. I don't believe that's necessarily true. Case in point: Level. The term "Level" has several meanings. The rules don't always specify whether it's speaking of Character level, encounter level, dungeon level, spell level, or some other meaning of the word, nevertheless there is little confusion.
As far as "Call" and "Summon" is concerned, those aren't exactly game terms. Conjuration (Calling) and Conjuration (Summoning) are the proper terms and the rules seldom, if ever, shorten it to simply call or summon unless it's already been specified that the terms are in reference to Conjuration (Calling) or Conjuration (Summoning). i.e. If an effect has already been explicitly identified as Conjuration (Calling) or Conjuration (Summoning), the rules may use call or summon, for short, in the effect description. Otherwise, call and summon use their normal, English definition.
At least, I can't think of any instance where the rules use call or summon in reference to a Conjuration (Calling) or Conjuration (Summoning) spell or effect with no other context to clarify their meaning.
Quote: As it is not native to the material plane however it is still vulnerable to banishment or dismissal. From RAW:
Quote: This mount functions as a druid's animal companion, using the paladin's level as her effective druid level. Bonded mounts have an Intelligence of at least 6.
Once per day, as a full-round action, a paladin may magically call her mount to her side. This ability is the equivalent of a spell of a level equal to one-third the paladin's level. The mount immediately appears adjacent to the paladin. A paladin can use this ability once per day at 5th level, and one additional time per day for every 4 levels thereafter, for a total of four times per day at 17th level.
At 11th level, the mount gains the celestial creature advanced simple template and becomes a magical beast for the purposes of determining which spells affect it.
It's type is still animal, and stays animal, and is native to the prime material plane. It is only considered a magical beast for the purposes of magical effects. Meaning, as it is not an outsider nor an extraplanar creature it cannot be banished or dismissed (except of course, in the instance the paladin and its mount are not on the prime material plane, in which it can be as is the paladin).
You're confusing Pathfinder rules with 3.x D&D rules, which were a lot harsher to the paladin. While the mount under 3.x rules was still an animal (magical beast for the purpose of effects) yet not an outsider, RAW specified the mount was not native to the prime material plane making it susceptible to banishment and dismissal effects (and dimensional anchor, ironically enough).
Now, continuing on: given calling the mount is a spell-like conjuration (calling) ability, it's obviously subject to antimagic fields, provokes AoO's, and the like. But, it's duration is instantaneous under Pathfinder rules (RAI based upon no duration explicitly listed, and as the mount is native there is no purpose for it to be permanent), meaning it cannot be dispelled. Under 3.x, the duration was 2 hours per paladin level, meaning it could technically be dispelled; of course the net effect there is the creature is no longer bound for the duration and can return at will, if I remember my 3.x rules correctly.
I'm not going to delve through the book to find every instance of the word summon, that'd be a pain. But I'll quote one that's fresh on my mind from an earlier discussion.
Time Stop, page 360, the phrase "most spellcasters use the additional time to improve their defenses, summon allies, or flee from combat."
In this instance you have to question whether it means you can only use Conjuration (summoning) or if it meant just summon by any means in general... allowing Conjuration (calling) and Conjuration (teleportation) spells, which by the definition of time stop, would be spells that affect a creature in normal time, and thus not be useable while under the effects of time stop. Since summoning spells bring a manifestation of a creature, the caster isn't actually affecting a real living creature while he's under the effect of time stop.
In many spell descriptions that affect subschools of magic, they merely state the subschool (summoning, calling, divination, ect.) and not the "Conjuration (----)" part.
Found this, not sure which of the 4 threads to put it in.
Suggestion wrote: A Will saving throw (DC 10 + 1/2 bard’s level + bard’s Cha modifier) negates the effect. This ability affects only a single creature (but see mass suggestion, below). Suggestion is an enchantment (compulsion), mind-affecting, language-dependent ability and relies on audible components. Take from that what you will.
Boargames rules have a easy way to differentiate when a word is used as a specific game term or a term in colloquial English.
When a term is used as a in game term it is eiter Capitalized of bolded.
Maybe Paizo should start doing the same.
The change from 3.5 to Pathfinder turned the mount from something summoned from the celestial planes to essentially a Paladin's version of the Druidic Animal companion. Since it is not an extraplanar creature, it is not subject to banishment or any of the usual hedges against such.
Nor can it be handily dismissed and called back. It's just there.
InsaneFox wrote: I'm not going to delve through the book to find every instance of the word summon, that'd be a pain. But I'll quote one that's fresh on my mind from an earlier discussion.
Time Stop, page 360, the phrase "most spellcasters use the additional time to improve their defenses, summon allies, or flee from combat."
In this instance you have to question whether it means you can only use Conjuration (summoning) or if it meant just summon by any means in general... allowing Conjuration (calling) and Conjuration (teleportation) spells, which by the definition of time stop, would be spells that affect a creature in normal time, and thus not be useable while under the effects of time stop. Since summoning spells bring a manifestation of a creature, the caster isn't actually affecting a real living creature while he's under the effect of time stop.
In many spell descriptions that affect subschools of magic, they merely state the subschool (summoning, calling, divination, ect.) and not the "Conjuration (----)" part.
A non-comprehensive list of the myriad of actions a caster could take isn't really a very good example of ambiguous terms. Time Stop itself isn't any type of Conjuration, nor does it put any restrictions on Conjurations one could cast other than the general restriction that you can't do anything that targets other creatures.
Conjuration (Summoning) spells actually brings whatever it is you summon to the designated area. That is, if you summon a spoon, somewhere, someone's spoon just up and vanished.
The trick is, Summon Monster doesn't target the summoned creatures, so it's doable. Similarly, Gate an Planar Ally don't have targets either, so you can cast them to summon (or, if you prefer, call) allies while under the effects of Time Stop.
Quantum Steve wrote: The trick is, Summon Monster doesn't target the summoned creatures, so it's doable. Similarly, Gate an Planar Ally don't have targets either, so you can cast them to summon (or, if you prefer, call) allies while under the effects of Time Stop. This is highly debated.
ShadowcatX wrote: Quantum Steve wrote: The trick is, Summon Monster doesn't target the summoned creatures, so it's doable. Similarly, Gate an Planar Ally don't have targets either, so you can cast them to summon (or, if you prefer, call) allies while under the effects of Time Stop. This is highly debated. Granted, one side relies on saying that all instances of a word in the game that has a specific meaning is referring to that specific meaning, as well as that the fluff is mechanically binding.
Well in the case of time stop, think about it realistically. You're the only creature under the effect of time stop. Gate would fail simply because the spell would literally begin and end instantaneously. (Gate would have to instananeously transport a creature into the material plane, for it to even have a chance of working.)
Unfortunately, gate doesn't instantaneously teleport creatures, as it actually creates a literal gate in the vicinity of the target, which then pulls it in.
Though I guess you could use gate to LOOK at a time frozen image of what you want to call to your aid.
Cheapy wrote: ShadowcatX wrote: Quantum Steve wrote: The trick is, Summon Monster doesn't target the summoned creatures, so it's doable. Similarly, Gate an Planar Ally don't have targets either, so you can cast them to summon (or, if you prefer, call) allies while under the effects of Time Stop. This is highly debated. Granted, one side relies on saying that all instances of a word in the game that has a specific meaning is referring to that specific meaning, as well as that the fluff is mechanically binding. I don't think it makes sense to be able to cast Summon Monster in a Time Stop, but I also can't think of any interpretations of "summon allies" that would make sense. So, it would seem either Summon Monster was intended to work, or the fluff is just plain incorrect (which is not unprecedented).
@InsaneFox
Gate wrote: Duration instantaneous or concentration (up to 1 round/level); see text The calling function of Gate is instantaneous. If you use it to create a gate, then it's rounds/level
Under the 'calling creatures' section of the Gate spell description. It says, "this use of the spell creates a gate that remains open just long enough to transport the called creatures".
It implies that there is a short amount of time it takes for the gate to open and pull a creature into it. Since you, and your spells are in their own flow of time, they cannot interact with beings that exist within the normal flow of time. So your time stop spell literally could not move the creature it's trying to pull. And the gate spell would simply end before you return to normal time.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
