Control Summoned Creature and dismissing

[Silthe]

I asked this elsewhere, but thought it might get more discussion in it's own thread.

The spell Control Summoned Creature gives the caster control over someone else's summoned creature. Basically, the creature now acts as if it were summoned by the person who cast this spell.

However, the question came up fairly quickly as to who has control of the summon spell in order to dismiss the creature.

In the game I was playing, I cast this spell on an elemnetal. I then got a couple rounds of use out of the elemental before the original summoner spent the time to dismiss the elemental. I couldn't figure out if that were by the rules or not, so didn't argue the point. The GM agreed to revise the interpretation going forward if we could find clearer rules on it.

Well, so far we can't. Control Summoned Creature says this:

You seize control of a summoned creature by disrupting the bond between it and the caster who summoned it. If the creature fails its save, you may command it as if you had summoned it. The original caster can attempt to regain control of the creature as a standard action by making an opposed Spellcraft check against you. When your spell ends, control reverts to the original summoner. If the summoning spell ends before this spell ends, the remaining duration of this spell is lost.

The question arises by whether the creature is the spell and control gives you full dismissal authority over it, or whether the creature is different than the spell that summoned it and therefore the original caster can still dismiss it. Either way, it greatly affects the power level of the spell. Either it's weaker than expected in that rather than contest control, the original summoner can just dismiss the creature as a standard action and be done with it, or the spell is much more powerful in that on the last round of the Control spell, the Control's caster can dismiss the creature and not worry about left over duration.

Any thoughts or official rulings on this?

[Ravingdork]

I would think that once you lose control of the spell effect, that includes the ability to dismiss it.

I believe that to be the intent, otherwise control summoned creature is useless.

[DeltaOneG]

I can see it going either way.

I would argue that the spell control and the effect are separated and that neither party can dismiss the summoning spell.

Even if the original caster can dismiss the summoned creature I don't think that makes control summoned creature useless as it removes an enemy and costs the original caster a standard action to dismiss the effect. Mind you, it might not be worth your action.

[David knott 242]

We seem to be all over the place on this one. I would go with a generous interpretation of the spell, given how seldom it can actually be used. The caster of this spell would be treated as the summoner in all ways until the spell duration expires or the spell is otherwise negated in some fashion.

[Howie23]

I'm not following the other thread.

There is a rules mechanic for dismissing a caster's own spell. There is a rules mechanic for dispelling any caster's spell. Control summoned creature, as quoted, gives control over the summoned creature, which is the effect of the spell, but is not the spell itself. The original caster can still dispel the spell.

Does this make it less powerful than the other interpretation? Yes. Does it make it useless? No. It is (usually) a 4th level spell that can take control of a creature summoned with a spell up to 9th level. If you gain control, you've used a standard action to offset the full round action used by the original caster. In the worst case scenario, the original caster is going to accept the loss of summoned creature or spend additional actions to offset the effect of the control spell. All good for action economy.

[Silthe]

My DM ruled on the spot that the evil Druid could dispel the elemental I had hijacked. Basically I got a round and a half of use out of it before the Druid spent a standard action to dismiss it.

It was useful, since the alternative was to fight the elemental and druid together, and it make the druid think twice about summoning anything else. It just feels like a waste of a spell since the description implies so much more fun to be had. Tactically speaking though, it helped the party out a lot.

I'd still like to see some sort of concrete rule though since both interpretations seem legitimate to me.

[IejirIsk]

I'd say the original caster... with maybe an opposed spellcraft check to stop it... but, the original caster "owns" the spell. otherwise, you could do it to an eidolon, which seems a tad overpowered to me... 1min vs 2 std actions...

[LazarX]

IejirIsk wrote:

I'd say the original caster... with maybe an opposed spellcraft check to stop it... but, the original caster "owns" the spell. otherwise, you could do it to an eidolon, which seems a tad overpowered to me... 1min vs 2 std actions...

Not if the eidolon was present from the standard ritual.

[Diego Rossi]

LazarX wrote:

IejirIsk wrote:

I'd say the original caster... with maybe an opposed spellcraft check to stop it... but, the original caster "owns" the spell. otherwise, you could do it to an eidolon, which seems a tad overpowered to me... 1min vs 2 std actions...

Not if the eidolon was present from the standard ritual.

PRD wrote:

In addition, due to its tie to its summoner, an eidolon can touch and attack creatures warded by protection from evil and similar effects that prevent contact with summoned creatures.

...

Devotion (Ex): An eidolon gains a +4 morale bonus on Will saves against enchantment spells and effects.

I don't see anything about "it can't be controlled/dominate, ecc".

- * -

Note that the caster can dismiss the spell, not the creature, so if he has summoned multiple creatures with one casting he will have to dismiss all of them, not only one. And he need to be withing the range of the spell to dismiss it, for standard summoning spells that is close range.

[Ximen Bao]

Diego Rossi wrote:

LazarX wrote:

IejirIsk wrote:

I'd say the original caster... with maybe an opposed spellcraft check to stop it... but, the original caster "owns" the spell. otherwise, you could do it to an eidolon, which seems a tad overpowered to me... 1min vs 2 std actions...

Not if the eidolon was present from the standard ritual.

PRD wrote:

In addition, due to its tie to its summoner, an eidolon can touch and attack creatures warded by protection from evil and similar effects that prevent contact with summoned creatures.

...

Devotion (Ex): An eidolon gains a +4 morale bonus on Will saves against enchantment spells and effects.

I don't see anything about "it can't be controlled/dominate, ecc".

Evil GM sense tingling: I bet this spell would play merry hell with a synthesist...

[IejirIsk]

Yep... synthesist has so many weakness its not even funny...especially if he takes the summon eidolon spell :P then it loses the protection from evil buff, etc

[JustynThyme]

Although dismissing the creature isn't a command you give the creature, it's simply ending the spell prematurely (because of the (D) at the end of the duration), the spell description clearly states that you are disrupting the bond between the creature and the summoning caster, and that you can control the summoned creature as if you were the caster who summoned it. In other words, the description as written says you are to be treated as the summoning caster, giving the duration of the summoning as the only exception. Since the summoning caster has the ability to dismiss the creature, no one else, that would be you since the spell grants you that position.