Should you take a players commands to a summond creature Litteraly?


Advice

Grand Lodge

Hey,
So based on a couple situations recently we have had people summoning creatures such as Elementals (Elemental Gem).

They then give them an ambiguous command such as "Attack the guy by the stairs". Without having line of site on any of the creatures near the stairs and there are multiple possible targets and the player is after a specific one...

Was wanting to get a feel for how litteraly commands should be taken for respect of what the player wants to achieve and what the elemental knows and asumes.

Would you rule that the elemental just knows which creature the caster is referring to?

Would you say a random die roll?

Or some other option, I also realize that the intelligence of the summond creature may also be a factor in this.

So i guess it depends on how litteraly you take a players command to a summond creature...

Liberty's Edge

Generally, if the player's command is at all ambiguous (assuming the creature understands the character's language), then it would attack the closest target that meets the parameters of the command.

Using your example, it would attack the creature closest to it that is also by the stairs (even if it is an ally).

It is possible, that the character could command it to "attack the guy in the red cape that is by the stairs." That would more closely define things.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Andrew Christian wrote:
Using your example, it would attack the creature closest to it that is also by the stairs (even if it is an ally).

I'd be very hesitant to have a summoned creature attack an ally, seeing as the spell says it attacks your enemies. If the magic of a summon spell can let a creature attack your enemies even when you can't communicate with it at all, then adding the ability to communicate shouldn't result in less reliability except in fairly unusual circumstances.

Or at least, that's my take at first glance. Haven't done tons of summoning research.

Liberty's Edge

Jiggy wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Using your example, it would attack the creature closest to it that is also by the stairs (even if it is an ally).

I'd be very hesitant to have a summoned creature attack an ally, seeing as the spell says it attacks your enemies. If the magic of a summon spell can let a creature attack your enemies even when you can't communicate with it at all, then adding the ability to communicate shouldn't result in less reliability except in fairly unusual circumstances.

Or at least, that's my take at first glance. Haven't done tons of summoning research.

^This. Those of us next to the stairs appreciate it, especially when the Hellknight is off splitting the party :P

The Exchange

Jiggy wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Using your example, it would attack the creature closest to it that is also by the stairs (even if it is an ally).

I'd be very hesitant to have a summoned creature attack an ally, seeing as the spell says it attacks your enemies. If the magic of a summon spell can let a creature attack your enemies even when you can't communicate with it at all, then adding the ability to communicate shouldn't result in less reliability except in fairly unusual circumstances.

Or at least, that's my take at first glance. Haven't done tons of summoning research.

This, plus using a player's class feature or a spell cast, possibly as a full-round, to screw over the player is bad form. Especially when as stated it attacks your enemies.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Using your example, it would attack the creature closest to it that is also by the stairs (even if it is an ally).

I'd be very hesitant to have a summoned creature attack an ally, seeing as the spell says it attacks your enemies. If the magic of a summon spell can let a creature attack your enemies even when you can't communicate with it at all, then adding the ability to communicate shouldn't result in less reliability except in fairly unusual circumstances.

Or at least, that's my take at first glance. Haven't done tons of summoning research.

If you choose to use the command portion of the spell, because you can communicate with the creature summoned, then the creature does not follow its default. It follows your command as you state it.

Liberty's Edge

Fake Healer wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Using your example, it would attack the creature closest to it that is also by the stairs (even if it is an ally).

I'd be very hesitant to have a summoned creature attack an ally, seeing as the spell says it attacks your enemies. If the magic of a summon spell can let a creature attack your enemies even when you can't communicate with it at all, then adding the ability to communicate shouldn't result in less reliability except in fairly unusual circumstances.

Or at least, that's my take at first glance. Haven't done tons of summoning research.

This, plus using a player's class feature or a spell cast, possibly as a full-round, to screw over the player is bad form. Especially when as stated it attacks your enemies.

It isn't being used to screw over anyone. If they can't be more specific than, "attack the guy by the stairs" when there are 3 or 4 guys by the stairs... then the ambiguity is their own fault. Not mine as the GM.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

After reading the summon spell

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 as you command.

Also after rechecking the field guide the ONLY time PVP is allowed is due to mind controlling affects.

So while in a homebrew campaign i would definatly include allies as potential targets if the command were ambiguos (The spell does also state you can give it other commands which would in theory overide its base behaviour of attack enemies).

Summoning a creatre is not a mind controlling affect so i would rule that it could not attack a PC intentionaly or Unintentialy (unless it was controlled by a spell after the summoning).

I think that the concept of the "CLOSEST" enemy makes a lot of sense and if i have a similar situation in future I think i will rule that in a similar scenario it would attack the closest ENEMY that meets the critera (Weather that was the PC's intention or not).

Kind of a mix of the literal command, the creatures instinct, and anti PVP.

Thanks for the input!

Grand Lodge

I agree with Andrew.

Liberty's Edge

Kelgar Spellbeard wrote:

After reading the summon spell

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 as you command.

Also after rechecking the field guide the ONLY time PVP is allowed is due to mind controlling affects.

So while in a homebrew campaign i would definatly include allies as potential targets if the command were ambiguos (The spell does also state you can give it other commands which would in theory overide its base behaviour of attack enemies).

Summoning a creatre is not a mind controlling affect so i would rule that it could not attack a PC intentionaly or Unintentialy (unless it was controlled by a spell after the summoning).

I think that the concept of the "CLOSEST" enemy makes a lot of sense and if i have a similar situation in future I think i will rule that in a similar scenario it would attack the closest ENEMY that meets the critera (Weather that was the PC's intention or not).

Kind of a mix of the literal command, the creatures instinct, and anti PVP.

Thanks for the input!

Your welcome! This is certainly a valid interpretation, and I would have no problem with this ruling should I be playing at your table.

Grand Lodge

So, first of all, if it is a creature they can communicate with, then it is an intelligent creature.

With that in mind, I would first give it a wisdom check / sense motive check. If it figures it out, it knows who it is supposed to attack.

Now, if it is a demon or devil, it may still attack the wrong person. Either it won't bother to make the sense motive check, and will attack the most obviously good* person there under the excuse "just following orders master." Or it might just cast fireball at everyone on the stair "Wasn't sure which one you meant master, so I got them all!"

(*i.e. the guy wearing the Lawful good holy symbol, assuming it doesn't have time to get off a detect good)

An elemental, or other unaligned intelligent type will make the sense motive check, and if it fails will ask for clarification. Depending on how your table runs summons initiatives and free speech actions, this may delay it's ability to hit.

An angel would probably move up to the stairs, and then ask which one, unless one of the opponents was a demon or devil, in which case if it failed it's sense motive check, it might assume that obviously you called it there to attack the agent of hell.

Grand Lodge

Kelgar, don't forget that they have to give the command in a language the elemental understands. I don't think elementals as a rule speak common, do they?

Grand Lodge

FLite wrote:
Kelgar, don't forget that they have to give the command in a language the elemental understands. I don't think elementals as a rule speak common, do they?

In the specific situation it was an earth elemental and the character spoke Terran....

So yes he could definatly communicate with it.

The problem is the player doesn't have a whole lot of experience yet, and while i don't want to "Punish" him for that he needs to have consiquences of his actions to learn from.

And as mentioned he was giving commands to attack a target he couldn't even see... adding the the elementals potential confusion.

Grand Lodge

FLite wrote:

So, first of all, if it is a creature they can communicate with, then it is an intelligent creature.

With that in mind, I would first give it a wisdom check / sense motive check. If it figures it out, it knows who it is supposed to attack.

Now, if it is a demon or devil, it may still attack the wrong person. Either it won't bother to make the sense motive check, and will attack the most obviously good* person there under the excuse "just following orders master." Or it might just cast fireball at everyone on the stair "Wasn't sure which one you meant master, so I got them all!"

(*i.e. the guy wearing the Lawful good holy symbol, assuming it doesn't have time to get off a detect good)

An elemental, or other unaligned intelligent type will make the sense motive check, and if it fails will ask for clarification. Depending on how your table runs summons initiatives and free speech actions, this may delay it's ability to hit.

An angel would probably move up to the stairs, and then ask which one, unless one of the opponents was a demon or devil, in which case if it failed it's sense motive check, it might assume that obviously you called it there to attack the agent of hell.

The problem is Flite that while its a monster and i interprete commands given to it. It is still a tool under the control (for the most part) of the player.

As such any hostile action the creature takes against a PC could be interpreted as PVP. As stated the guide to organize play states.

"In short, you can never voluntarily use your character to kill another character—ever. Note that this does not apply to situations where your character is mind-controlled by an NPC and is
forced by that NPC to attack a fellow Pathfinder."

No mind controll involved.... no attacking the PC's.

At least thats how i would interprate that....

Grand Lodge

Yeah, then I would definitely give the earth elemental a sense motive check (untrained it looks like) to guess who is on which side and pick the closest enemy by the stair if it succeeded.

Otherwise I would have the elemental say "Which one" (and hit a nearby enemy instead while it waits for the response if your table rules say the caster has to wait till his turn comes around again to answer.)

Sczarni

If the summoned creature is elemental and player speak it's language, then I see no problem with player actively commanding it to do whatever he wants.

Liberty's Edge

Malag wrote:
If the summoned creature is elemental and player speak it's language, then I see no problem with player actively commanding it to do whatever he wants.

Agreed, just communicate clearly what you want it to do, or it may not do what you expect it to do.

Grand Lodge

Kelgar Spellbeard wrote:


The problem is Flite that while its a monster and i interprete commands given to it. It is still a tool under the control (for the most part) of the player.

As such any hostile action the creature takes against a PC could be interpreted as PVP. As stated the guide to organize play states.

"In short, you can never voluntarily use your character to kill another character—ever. Note that this does not apply to situations where your character is mind-controlled by an NPC and is
forced by that NPC to attack a fellow Pathfinder."

No mind controll involved.... no attacking the PC's.

At least thats how i would interprate that....

Yeah, I wasn't in PFS mode entirely when I wrote that.

I would give more leeway for PFS, and I would definitely never have a non-evil summon attack a fellow player (though it might go on doing it's default actions until it got clearer instructions)

I still maintain that summoning Devils / Demons and giving them ambiguous instructions is a lot like summoning uncontrolled swarms. The GM gets the option to say which way they go and who they attack, and it's not PVP, just stupidity.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kelgar Spellbeard wrote:

Hey,

So based on a couple situations recently we have had people summoning creatures such as Elementals (Elemental Gem).

They then give them an ambiguous command such as "Attack the guy by the stairs". Without having line of site on any of the creatures near the stairs and there are multiple possible targets and the player is after a specific one...

Was wanting to get a feel for how litteraly commands should be taken for respect of what the player wants to achieve and what the elemental knows and asumes.

Would you rule that the elemental just knows which creature the caster is referring to?

Would you say a random die roll?

Or some other option, I also realize that the intelligence of the summond creature may also be a factor in this.

So i guess it depends on how litteraly you take a players command to a summond creature...

The more serious question is how is the player communicating with his summons? The summon spell does not give you a built in communication channel. Unless the summoner and the summonee have a common language, all that will happen is that the summoned creature will attack the nearest enemy of the caster who summoned it.

Grand Lodge

Answered above Lazar, the summoner spoke Terran

Grand Lodge

FLite wrote:

Yeah, then I would definitely give the earth elemental a sense motive check (untrained it looks like) to guess who is on which side and pick the closest enemy by the stair if it succeeded.

Otherwise I would have the elemental say "Which one" (and hit a nearby enemy instead while it waits for the response if your table rules say the caster has to wait till his turn comes around again to answer.)

A good idea, however as also mentioned it aparently by default technicaly knows who are your enemies...

" The summoned ally appears where you designate and acts immediately, on your turn. It attacks your opponents to the best of its ability. "

It knows this without even being able to communicate... I guess you could argue the sense motive would be to determin if it realized which creature the caster was talking about... but i think attacking the closest would be the most logical thing to do as well as prevent the combat from slowing down....

Grand Lodge

Since you specified it was a new player, let me approach this from a different direction.

What would you have done if he had cast a fireball, and mistakenly chosen an origin point that included several players?

Most GM's I have seen would look at him and remind him that he needs to not do that because it could be pvp, and would he like to move his origin a bit to not hit them or pick a different spell. (Really nice gm's might suugest a different origin that would hit all the bad guys and miss the pcs.)

Similarly, you could look at him and say "that command could be interpreted in a way that could cause unintentional PVP. Do you want to make it more specific." If he genuinely doesn't have the knowledge he needs to frame a better command, maybe you should suggest "You need to give a command that won't result in PVP, why don't you tell the elemental to delay until you can move to see what is going on."

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
The more serious question is how is the player communicating with his summons? The summon spell does not give you a built in communication channel. Unless the summoner and the summonee have a common language, all that will happen is that the summoned creature will attack the nearest enemy of the caster who summoned it.

I usually allow for a small amount of pantomime. The 'Point and Grunt' method (the same one I use to order croissants in Paris). :-)

Grand Lodge

FLite wrote:

Since you specified it was a new player, let me approach this from a different direction.

What would you have done if he had cast a fireball, and mistakenly chosen an origin point that included several players?

Most GM's I have seen would look at him and remind him that he needs to not do that because it could be pvp, and would he like to move his origin a bit to not hit them or pick a different spell. (Really nice gm's might suugest a different origin that would hit all the bad guys and miss the pcs.)

Similarly, you could look at him and say "that command could be interpreted in a way that could cause unintentional PVP. Do you want to make it more specific." If he genuinely doesn't have the knowledge he needs to frame a better command, maybe you should suggest "You need to give a command that won't result in PVP, why don't you tell the elemental to delay until you can move to see what is going on."

Well he is new ISH - he is still playing on a higher tiered table for a 5-9 scenario. so he has played at least 15 + Scenarios (If i remember he is lvl 6 so yeah 15)

So he has lost that new player edge of "I don't know what im doing help me" to "You need to start thinking about what your doing a little more" Zone.

Grand Lodge

Kelgar Spellbeard wrote:
FLite wrote:

Yeah, then I would definitely give the earth elemental a sense motive check (untrained it looks like) to guess who is on which side and pick the closest enemy by the stair if it succeeded.

Otherwise I would have the elemental say "Which one" (and hit a nearby enemy instead while it waits for the response if your table rules say the caster has to wait till his turn comes around again to answer.)

A good idea, however as also mentioned it aparently by default technicaly knows who are your enemies...

" The summoned ally appears where you designate and acts immediately, on your turn. It attacks your opponents to the best of its ability. "

It knows this without even being able to communicate... I guess you could argue the sense motive would be to determin if it realized which creature the caster was talking about... but i think attacking the closest would be the most logical thing to do as well as prevent the combat from slowing down....

I always read that "It attacks your opponents to the best of its ability. " to say that it attacks your opponents to the best of it's abilities includes that it uses it's abilities as best it can both to identify your opponents, and also to attack them. Not that it has some mystic knowledge of which is your opponents. Most fights I've seen in PFS, it has been pretty clear who is on which side, though certainly not always. I suppose in a really confused situation, I would require even a dumb animal to make a sense motive check (probably at a DC 5 or something) to figure it out unless there is a lot of fog of war.

speaking as the guy who rolls an extra ride check or two each round, if you know they are coming and you know what they are, they can be done very fast and rolled with the rest of the dice.

But that would be something like if you were in the middle of a bar brawl, and most of the people involved were just hitting whoever was next to them. (At which point, I would assume absent a command, it would stay by you and ready to hit anyone who tried to hit you, instead of, for example, crossing the room to attack the person attacking the party fighter while you huddle under a table.)


If they can communicate with each other surely the simplest way of dealing with it where there is ambiguity is to have the elemental turn to its summoner and say "which one?" to make things clearer.

Liberty's Edge

andreww wrote:
If they can communicate with each other surely the simplest way of dealing with it where there is ambiguity is to have the elemental turn to its summoner and say "which one?" to make things clearer.

That is also a valid response.

Grand Lodge

Took the separate question of "does the summon automagically know who your opponents are" to a separate thread.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2q5de?How-much-knowledge-to-summoned-creatures- have

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The elemental is doing its best to fulfill the caster's demands. It's a "people pleaser" sort of monster.

So, if the caster calls out "Boulder magma graphite pebble sedementary-boulder, pebble-rock feldspar!" ("Attack the enemy-people standing where the ground rises!") I would have it take a move action to query "Tectosilicates, extrusive schist! Cinnabar, igneous shale mesomorphic. Mesomorphic, iron pyrite!" ("You all look alike, you fool!")

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32

As one of the players at this table and the player who raised the concern to begin with, I feel that it's necessary to add a bit more to the problem.

First, we were fighting non-humanoids. Had the elemental been summoned to fight humanoids, confusion would be more appropriate, but given the fact that the enemies didn't look like the allies, I think that it's more reasonable for it to attack the non-humanoids exclusively.

Second, from a player's perspective, I would have been extremely frustrated if the summoned creature would have killed an ally. It was positioned in such a way that it could have hit several injured casters, and it's more than reasonable to expect that a hit from the large earth elemental would have killed said character.

Finally, the text of Elemental Gem says "The elemental is under the control of the creature that broke the gem." I am not aware of any location in the rules text which requires that specifically worded commands be given to a summoned creature. If there is such a passage, then I will withdraw this point. However, my reading is that if the elemental is summoned under the control of a player, that player can just act for the elemental without having to worry about misleading commands.

Grand Lodge

It's in the general text for "summon monster." I suspect if you go look that somewhere in elemental gem it says "as per summon monster." (I would have to go look)

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32

Elemental Gem doesn't reference Summon Monster. I had missed that line in Summon Monster, though.

Grand Lodge

When the gem is crushed, smashed, or broken (a standard action), a Large elemental appears as if summoned by a summon nature’s ally spell. The elemental is under the control of the creature that broke the gem.

SNA also has that same description

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Netopalis wrote:

As one of the players at this table and the player who raised the concern to begin with, I feel that it's necessary to add a bit more to the problem.

First, we were fighting non-humanoids. Had the elemental been summoned to fight humanoids, confusion would be more appropriate, but given the fact that the enemies didn't look like the allies, I think that it's more reasonable for it to attack the non-humanoids exclusively.

Second, from a player's perspective, I would have been extremely frustrated if the summoned creature would have killed an ally. It was positioned in such a way that it could have hit several injured casters, and it's more than reasonable to expect that a hit from the large earth elemental would have killed said character.

Finally, the text of Elemental Gem says "The elemental is under the control of the creature that broke the gem." I am not aware of any location in the rules text which requires that specifically worded commands be given to a summoned creature. If there is such a passage, then I will withdraw this point. However, my reading is that if the elemental is summoned under the control of a player, that player can just act for the elemental without having to worry about misleading commands.

If the GM, under these circumstances, let a character use an elemental gem to summon an earth elemental and the character spoke Terran, and the GM STILL decided to have the Elemental attack a friendly character....then the GM is a jerk. There is no rule that support that reaction, a magic item was essentially wasted, having a certain language was useless, and using a players action up for the round was turned against the party.

That would be extremely bad form and I suggest the GM quit GMing. It's fun to challenge the player...blatantly screwing them over with no justification is rude.

Grand Lodge

Flite and Netopalis.

the Gem is as per Natures Ally, which by default attacks your enemies to the best of its abilities, however it states that if you can communicate with it you can issue other commands that over ride that base behaviour.

"If you can communicate with the creature, you can direct it not to attack, to attack particular enemies, or to perform other actions as you command."

Which was what the player was atempting to do.

As a homebrew game a confusing command could have worse results. But as discussed earlier in the thread anti pvp prevents these issues and limites the monster from attacking PC's.

However a poorly worded command could present a wasted turn while the creature gets conformation or it may simply attack the closes enemy that matches the description (Which is what happened in the end at the table in question).

There seems to be many different opinions on this topic so i think it is good that it is up for discussion!

But as stated personaly, in future in a similar situation at my tables after more research with time to look over things with a comb these creatures will attack the closest creature that is an enemy and matches the command while the creature may at the same time say "This one?"

Sczarni

So you warn a player that "that" kind of order could mean two different things and you ask him to restate it. I don't see much problem with this, especially with a gem. Player wasted a resource worth 2000+ gold pieces already.

At worst, I would let elemental do nothing but stand confused.

The Exchange

This isn't a Wish spell that is twisted per the words used. This is two creatures conversing in a language that they share to convey the desire for the summon to attack THAT particular enemy. Talking is a free action, the player may not state with perfect clarity but his PC would have been more exact because the PC is in the situation while the player is imagining it. Just because the summon can communicate with the summoner doesn't mean it suddenly can't tell friend from foe either. A summoned creature attacks your foes to the best of it's abilities. You can command it to do otherwise but the default is that it will attack a foe. You direct it to attack the dude by the stairs, and it will look to attack the foe by the stairs, not your ally, because you never gave a command to attack an ally by the stairs. It isn't going to suddenly confuse friend and enemy.
Like I said if the GM rules otherwise he is being a jerk by negating an item, spell, action, etc with no justification besides "your wording isn't perfect so I'll d!ck you over now".

Scarab Sages

I would say in PFS, a PC's summoned creature could never attack another PC unless, the other player approved it due his/her character being dominated, special circumstances, ect.

If a PC summons a creature and he gives it commands, it will act logically with the assumption that the summoned creature knows who the "opponents" are.


andreww wrote:
If they can communicate with each other surely the simplest way of dealing with it where there is ambiguity is to have the elemental turn to its summoner and say "which one?" to make things clearer.

This +1.

Communication is a two-way thing. If the elemental isn't sure what the summoner means, it should just ask. If for some reason it can be issued commands but not respond, well, the spell implies that it at least knows which creatures are the summoner's enemies, so it should attack the enemy that it thinks fits the description best.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

kelgar, i don't mean this to sound judgmental or attacking (and i totally understand the desire/need to push young players to improve) but it sounds like you're being a little bit unreasonable on this one. the spell clearly states that (even with 0 ability to communicate with the creature) it will magically know whom to attack and do so... your player knew enough to invest in the language and then use it to offer some direction to the creature- punishing him for that is not going to push him to improve, its going to demonstrate that there's no sense wasting languages to communicate with summoned creatures which are more effective if you don't say anything...

i agree with those who have said that (in non-PFS play) it is reasonable for a verbal command to override the default magic of the spell (to drive the creature to attack your enemies), however that should be a clear and intentional override- here the player (it seems from what you wrote) merely narrowed that default by indicating the general area in which he would like the attacks (against his enemies) to occur. i could understand if it was some kind of devil that it might purposefully try to distort the command to do something not normally within the spell (cause that's what those things do), but even with that you need to be careful because then you're clearly making it more dangerous and potentially less effective to summon those than other options of the same level (though i happen to think its probably also more accurate that way, lol)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thread Title wrote:
Should you take a players commands to a summond creature Litteraly?

To be honest, I think doing it in a fashion that harms the player falls into jerk territory and there isn't a good reason to do it unless you want to be one.


MrSin wrote:
Thread Title wrote:
Should you take a players commands to a summond creature Litteraly?
To be honest, I think doing it in a fashion that harms the player falls into jerk territory and there isn't a good reason to do it unless you want to be one.

Seconded.


Can't this whole thing just be amended to a nice friendly statement from the GM saying, "Hey, you should be a little more clear with your commands." Then the player improves his statement and says, "Please attack the enemy closest to the stairs." assuming he doesn't want a more specific enemy (which since he can't see any is about all he can do).


Besides the literal and RAW ruling, here is something else to consider.

The character who summoned the creature is not the same as the player giving the commands. Generally speaking, the character probably has studied summons, knows their capabilities, and know how best to command them. In the case of a wizard, you have a very intelligent person who has studied magic for years. In light of that, I would be inclined to assume that the character is much better at handling summoned creatures than the players.

Dark Archive

If the creature has more than animal intelligence, it should be able to discern which is the enemy target. If it is mindless then we have another issue.

If you can't communicate with it, all it can do is attack the nearest hostile target anyway - this is specified in the spell.

Also, I agree that being overly literal with things like this is just jerkitude and doesn't enhance the game in any meaningful way. All you will do is force your players to write a 3-page contract accompanying every action. Combat is slow enough.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Should you take a players commands to a summond creature Litteraly? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.