My players intend to use the conjured horse from the 1st level spell Mount for something other than simple travel.
- Summon and send it running in dungeon corridors or caverns to activate traps and lure monsters.
- Making it run wildly with a slap to explore dark places with a magical light on the saddle.
- observe reactions from a distance, while the horse fall victim to varous hazards...
I think you got the point.
Is it a correct use of the spell? Yes, it's a smart and lateral thing to do... but I'm just a bit suspicious about this use, because it's not like the spell was intended. Should I permit everything? Or maybe the horse would behave badly? I do not know... any advice?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's a perfectly fine use of the spell. Roleplayers have been doing it for years.
In our most recent game, our party was beset by an alchemical golem that had to climb a primitive elevator shaft to get to us. We weren't nearly powerful enough to fight it head to head, so what did we do?
We cast communal mount to summon horses, and then forced them into the pit. Every time a 1,000 pound horse hit it, it took a fair amount of damage and risked falling for even more damage (all of which ignored DR since they weren't attacks, but falling objects and falling damage).
By the time we had used most of our horses, it managed to make it to the top, though it was so beat up we were able to easily take it out with our bard's buffs (using our remaining few horses as shields all the while).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Summoned animals are real animals who are temporarily summoned from their natural environment to serve the summoner.
Players who summon animals and subject them to terrors and abuse them to get them to do what they want in my campaigns cannot be considered "good" characters.
Everyone plays differently, but doing this sort of thing could well come to the attention of a local druid.
And frankly I just find this sort of thing irritating. People who could look into the eye of a summoned animal and then subject them to this sort of abuse are quite rare in the real world. And rightly so.
"Hey, that room might be trapped!"
"No problem, summon a puppy and toss it in there."
"Righto!"
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Summoned animals are real animals who are temporarily summoned from their natural environment to serve the summoner.
Players who summon animals and subject them to terrors and abuse them to get them to do what they want in my campaigns cannot be considered "good" characters.
Everyone plays differently, but doing this sort of thing could well come to the attention of a local druid.
And frankly I just find this sort of thing irritating. People who could look into the eye of a summoned animal and then subject them to this sort of abuse are quite rare in the real world. And rightly so.
You know what's rarer in the real world? Summoned animals.
Also, you're wrong about them being real animals from elsewhere. What you just described is a calling effect.
Each conjuration spell belongs to one of five subschools. Conjurations transport creatures from another plane of existence to your plane (calling); create objects or effects on the spot (creation); heal (healing); bring manifestations of objects, creatures, or forms of energy to you (summoning); or transport creatures or objects over great distances (teleportation). Creatures you conjure usually—but not always—obey your commands.
A "manifestation" of something isn't a real something. The definition of manifestation says it is "the materialization of a disembodied spirit" (Dictionary.com), or in short, a magical effect.
Unless you are summoning a fiend or angel, there are no alignment repercussions whatsoever.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
RD, this is an old debate. There is an old saying that people who will abuse animals will abuse people.
You can say all you like that the animals being summoned are fake animals. They are as real as anything else in the game, they have beating hearts, functioning brains and feel pain and have the emotional range of the animals they represent.
What your characters are doing is not just a slight bit of abuse, it's violent abuse.
Defend it all you like. As a GM if you did this in my campaigns, you'd pay for it.
That's all.
As an animal lover I have to say that I find this whole line of conversation repugnant. It's one thing to summon an animal into danger to fight an enemy. But forcing horses to fall into a pit? Slapping it so it will run terrified into the dark ahead of the party?
Despicable behavior. That's all it is. Defend it all you like.
When players do this sort of thing enough, they eventually discover that their summon spells simply stop functioning. The gods who provide these powers don't appreciate it in my worlds. Summon horses to drop down a pit onto a demon? Next time you don't get horses.
ok, thanks to both of you.
you both have your good reasons... but I'm more in line with Adamantine.
It seems too much gratuitous to abuse animal for the sake of experimentation.
And the conjurer is chaotic good also. It doesn't feel right somehow.
I'm in agreement with Adamantine Dragon. This is deplorable behavior. I'm well aware of the caption in the Conjuration School regarding calling/summons. It doesn't sway me. One of that magic school's defining characteristics is that it is a matter/energy conservational approach where existing forms of energy/matter are redirected to a new purpose.
Creating something from nothing is Evocation's thing.
The "temporary magical construct" thing was added to the game to allow a sidestepping of the moral and ethical issues underpinning the sadistic application of this set of skills. That's a shame, since it allows a free pass to classes that frequently get free passes on the Alignment System as it is.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not defending anything AD, and I resent that you think that I would defend anything so horrible.
I'm merely pointing out your error in the rules. Summoned creatures are no more real creatures than a wall of force; they are magical effects. If you tear the heart out of one, you will find that there is no heart, for the magical effect has ceased to exist in its entirety. Smart spellcasters recognize that there never was a heart to begin with.
As for abuse of summoned creatures leading to abuse of people, that's what people have been saying about video-games, movies, and rock and roll for decades. Doesn't mean it's true.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I found a simple solution to these spells.
The caster always summons the same creatures.
Intelligent creatures that the caster must communicate with at times. This means that good casters don't just summon a hawk, they summon FeDjin a Celestial Hawk who sometimes brings friends to the Prime Material as he assists a certain Sorceror that he has great hopes for in the future.
It also means the player has an index card with static stats prepped before the spell is ever cast, which saves me paperwork and accounting.
Jack, that debate has been going on forever.
For those who don't see the distinction between summoning a tiger to fight for nature and summoning a horse to be sent terrified down a hallway to set off traps, I suppose your argument makes sense.
But for those of us who see a distinction, it doesn't.
Of course, no one has actually posted the text of the spell, which doesn't indicate the caster can do more than provide himself a mount. No talk of tricks, of following orders ("serves willingly and well" is not the same as "obeys every command.").
My answer: "No, it's a first level spell, and gives no indication that you can do more with it than provide yourself a mount. What you want is Summon Animal/Nature's Ally, etc. And you'd better have a way to talk with it."
No it just insulting that people think there is a cute little cuddly gray area between the two where you get to send an animals to fight to the deathand think its ok.
It's the same as the difference between a nation enlisting soldiers to fight in a war and a nation sending waves of children across the battlefield to set off mines Jack.
That's the difference.
Most people see that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You could think of it as preventing humanoid abuse. If no traps get the horse than want's the big deal? If some traps get the horse then you just saved some humanoid's from them. Really the ethical badness goes to the people that set the trap that were meant to cause harm ether way.
I deal with Mount by simply being strict on the text. The Mount only serves the caster as a mount. If it is ridden, it does what the caster wants. If it is not being ridden, it stays put to the best of its ability.
You summon a light horse or a pony (your choice) to serve you as a mount. The steed serves willingly and well. The mount comes with a bit and bridle and a riding saddle.
OK, let me be clear. I wasn't saying that RD was defending animal abuse in the real world. I was saying he was defending animal abuse in game.
As I said, in my games if players abuse summoning spells to use animals as cannon fodder or (worse) as bludgeoning weapons, their summoning spells stop working. It's really that simple.
For those who enjoy tossing puppies onto pit traps, well, play how you like.
Jack, I wouldn't say that there is necessarily a grey area.
Summoning a critter for combat has the same moral implications as summoning one for trap springing duty. There is a reason that most of these creatures are Outsiders, they respond to the summoning in the hopes that the summoner is seeking an objective that is something they would wish to see done. Or in the case of Lemures/Dretches etc. al. They are compelled to respond by an evil greater than any sociopathic PC. Heck, creatures in that situation may prefer a trap laden hallway to the horrors of the Abyss or the 9 Pits.
Animals via Nature's Ally, not so much. Yeah I hold Druids to a higher standard than Wizards.
RD, this is an old debate. There is an old saying that people who will abuse animals will abuse people.
There's an old saying that says old sayings can always say one thing, and the opossite one.
Tieing a horse to a chariot and make it pull, is not the same that tieing a human to a chariot and make it pull.
Killing your horse and eating it becouse you are starving, is not the same that killing your friend and eating him becouse you are starving.
Marking your cattle with a burning red hot iron is not the same as marking your wife with a burning red hot iron.
Having a kennel is not the same as having slaves.
No matter how you paint it, there IS a moral difference between treating animals and treating people.
If you would do the above with a Summoned halfling , it is not the same as if you do with a summoned horse. For the same reasons that eating a halfling is not the same that eating a horse.
More important: even if you rule that it is an evil act, that does not mean the spell should stop working. Fine, the Wizard can't be Chaotic Good and kill horses, in your world. He has to be Chaotic Neutral, or, even, Chaotic Evil. That does not mean the spell stop working. If evil acts make spells stop working, then Liches are going to be defenseless, you know.
Except that you were, in fact, defending it RD. Not to mention actually DOING IT in your games.
In real life, or in the game, I have never killed an animal unless it was self-defense or a terrible accident (I ran over a cat once).
Again, summoned creatures =/= real creatures.
And the link between animal abuse and abusing humans is not in dispute. In fact it is a major indicator for sociopathy and is used by the FBI and other law enforcement agencies as a profiling tool.
I never said it was. I've never advocated harming REAL animals in this thread or elsewhere (I don't even hunt). I'm talking about summoned beasts, which are simply manifested magical effects. Using the tool called magic is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT than putting non-summoned squirrel heads on pikes during one's childhood.
Now, if I was doing this with CALLED horses, rather than SUMMONED horses, you would totally have a point.
I see this all the time, and it's all I can do to keep my head from exploding. To me this sort of thing is vile evil behavior. To see how common it is actually concerns me in the real world.
It seems we are just talking past each other at this point.
Uhmm... I think I just will adhere strictly to the wording: The horse is conjured and stay put, till someone ride it. It's for raiding and it's a first level spell after all. Can't become the solution for any near trap...
Uhmm... I think I just will adhere strictly to the wording: The horse is conjured and stay put, till someone ride it. It's for raiding and it's a first level spell after all. Can't become the solution for any near trap...
That's my solution also.
Summoning: A summoning spell instantly brings a creature or object to a place you designate. When the spell ends or is dispelled, a summoned creature is instantly sent back to where it came from, but a summoned object is not sent back unless the spell description specifically indicates this. A summoned creature also goes away if it is killed or if its hit points drop to 0 or lower, but it is not really dead. It takes 24 hours for the creature to reform, during which time it can't be summoned again.
The magic isn't just creating something out of nothing. If the summoning spells bring a creature from some place, or that creature is sent back to where ever it came from, that creature has to already exist before the spell is cast. If the creature reforms somewhere after it dies, then it has to exist outside the duration of the spell.
The bolded parts above at least imply that you are summoning a real creature.
This spell summons an extraplanar creature (typically an outsider, elemental, or magical beast native to another plane). It appears where you designate and acts immediately, on your turn. It attacks your opponents to the best of its ability. If you can communicate with the creature, you can direct it not to attack, to attack particular enemies, or to perform other actions. The spell conjures one of the creatures from the 1st Level list on Table 10–1. You choose which kind of creature to summon, and you can choose a different one each time you cast the spell.
From Summon Monster 1. Nothing indicates you are summoning some magical manifestation. It specifically says "summons an extraplanar creature."
The creatures summoned with Summon Monster or Summon Natures Ally do exist somewhere in the multiverse.
(I've houseruled differently. Creatures summoned in our games are no more real then any other spell effects. Only Calling spells actually bring a real creature.)
Geez. Just take an undead or animated object and send that into any traps you'd like.
And if someone wants to scold you for using undead, ask him if you should rather send the druid's furry little friends instead.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First off, its fantasy, be cool. Now the idea that the creature in question resembles a real world creature is what seems to irk some folks. You send a goblin through there, and nobody blinks, never mind the human level intelligence. In fact, even in the real world we are silly about this. Kill a person in movie, and it will never get the reaction that a killing an animal will get. The deaths are fantasy, but people will get stand up pissed if they kill the animal. With all the things that you kill in the common Pathfinder game, it's the animal that makes you evil? That's silly.
First off, its fantasy, be cool. Now the idea that the creature in question resembles a real world creature is what seems to irk some folks. You send a goblin through there, and nobody blinks, never mind the human level intelligence. In fact, even in the real world we are silly about this. Kill a person in movie, and it will never get the reaction that a killing an animal will get. The deaths are fantasy, but people will get stand up pissed if they kill the animal. With all the things that you kill in the common Pathfinder game, it's the animal that makes you evil? That's silly.
Exactly. That's why when you see a gore movie and a knife enters skin and flesh, you feel bad. But when you see a SciFi movie, and a disintegrating ray blast someone, you couldn't care less. Becouse you KNOW that one is fiction.
Just to be sure that I am understanding the positions of the two major sides, the recap would be:
Side 1 says that Summoning creatures calls real creatures (no mention of from where) and that to use them as newfie mine detectors is evil. Some add that the summon spells would stop working if that happened (hopefully they advised the players before play).
Side 2 says that Summoning creatures calls forth a magic construct that looks, feels and acts like the real thing. To use the summoned creature(s) in outside-the-box fashion is perfectly acceptable. This argument seems to be more in line with RAW.
Is that about right?
There's also another side, that thinks summoning a horse, be it real or a magic construct, is not an evil act per se, even if you use it for things that would kill it, becouse animals arent people, and killing them to eat, or forcing them to pull a plow, is not in the same league as cannibalism or slavery.
Just to be sure that I am understanding the positions of the two major sides, the recap would be:
Side 1 says that Summoning creatures calls real creatures (no mention of from where) and that to use them as newfie mine detectors is evil. Some add that the summon spells would stop working if that happened (hopefully they advised the players before play).
Side 2 says that Summoning creatures calls forth a magic construct that looks, feels and acts like the real thing. To use the summoned creature(s) in outside-the-box fashion is perfectly acceptable. This argument seems to be more in line with RAW.
Is that about right?
I believe there is a third side. One that believes that you are summoning real creatures, but using the summoned creature(s) in outside-the-box fashion (including setting off traps) is perfectly acceptable, and not necessarily evil.
At least, I'm in that 3rd side.
I'm also of agreement that summoned creatures are not truely effected by the summoning. As per the description: "Summoning: A summoning spell instantly brings a creature or object to a place you designate. When the spell ends or is dispelled, a summoned creature is instantly sent back to where it came from, but a summoned object is not sent back unless the spell description specifically indicates this. A summoned creature also goes away if it is killed or if its hit points drop to 0 or lower, but it is not really dead. It takes 24 hours for the creature to reform, during which time it can't be summoned again."
Now, to me, if your summoned horse dies, you can't summon a horse with the same spell again for 24 hours. So if you cast mount, and the horse dies, you can't cast mount again for 24 hours. If you cast summon monster and summoned a horse, and it died, then you couldn't use either for 24 hours. This limits the abuses pretty well.
Lastly, if summoning animals to their deaths (traps or combat) is evil and causes your summoning spells to cease working, how does anyone who is evil in the world still have their abilities? Why wouldn't the "gods" or whoever grants abilities in the first place just take them away so that everyone can get back to frolicking around naked in world peace?
|
Mount allows you to summon a horse or pony for you to ride. When the spell ends the mount returns where it came from. If the mount is killed then it returns where it came from and reforms there... and consequently can't be summoned again until 24 hours have passed. All RAW.
I would take all of this to mean that there is ONE mount which you are summoning. If you do something to get it killed then casting the Mount spell again doesn't do anything until 24 hours have passed. Likewise, casting the spell twice in a row would just result in the duration being reset rather than two mounts showing up (you couldn't very well ride two at the same time).
Since the Mount comes from and returns to somewhere I'd say it exists independently of the spell and thus whether it is a 'real animal from elsewhere' or 'spiritual entity in animal form from elsewhere'... it is a being and torturing or otherwise mistreating it is evil. If it isn't 'really' an animal then maybe you could argue that a Druid isn't violating his 'revere nature' requirement, but I wouldn't buy it.
Nothing in the mount spell suggests that a specific horse is summoned. IF whatever horse you summon does die, there is nothing stopping you from casting the spell again and summoning a different horse.
Nothing in the mount spell suggests that a specific horse is summoned. IF whatever horse you summon does die, there is nothing stopping you from casting the spell again and summoning a different horse.
Mount is a conjuration (summoning) spell. Under the magic chapter, summoning spells are described as: "A summoned creature also goes away if it is killed or if its hit points drop to 0 or lower, but it is not really dead. It takes 24 hours for the creature to reform, during which time it can't be summoned again."
So no, you can't summon it again for 24 hours.