All joking about evil activities aside...
So I just found out that summoned monsters are actual real creatures and that you are kidnapping them and forcing them to fight, get injured and pseudo die only to resynthesize a day later and have it happen again. Why was this not labeled evil. My character is a master summon and so has all of his abilities tied to summoning :l to think of all the suffering Ive caused by my ignorance :(
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Summons are "real", but they do not die or suffer actual harm. It's called creatures you need to worry about.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not evil because you're not actually killing them.
No, really, that was the WotC rationale. And, supposedly, the rationale in 2E.
That is false. I'm on my phone so I can't link, but look at conjuration summoning. It is an actual creature. It spells out how the spell works right there. they do not die, but how do you figure thatthey do not suffer harm?
Edit: from the descriptions it seems like the major difference between called and summoned is that one dies and the other doesn't. To make it worse, they can't even resist or avoid it in any way... It's forced permanent slavery.
"hey papa wolf can you *poof* where'd dad go?"
"those @%$# adventurers are getting him mangled again. I'll get dinner and you think up a story to distract him from the pain when he gets back."
|
I agree with you about the problematic nature of the Rules as Written. The way I run it instead is that the spell creates a copy of a type of creature, rather than actually taking some real creature away from what it was doing -- otherwise the Lantern Archons would all unionize and appeal to the gods to be taken off the list!
If you are summoning good creatures to do good things, one can only assume they would consent.
If you need to rationalize it, imagine that you don't summon a SPECIFIC creature, just a type. So, like, all the celestial dire tigers are hanging out on the plains of Elysium huntin, chillin, and this portal opens up, the other side of which is a fight happenin on the prime material.
One lucky lion says "alright, I shall heed the call", jumps through, and mauls the crap out of some guy's face.
I always imagine that you kidnap your summoner creatures in there sleep and that it is like a Dream to them what they do in your service.
But in my last big campaign i used a astral construct rule that i made long time ago.
Talk to your GM about making a deal with creatures so you only summon stuff that likes you.
As a cleric who likes to summon things with sacred summons, I usually preface the spell with "Sarenrae, please send help!" or some such. I've heard there were also some popular houserules along the lines of 'if you summon an intelligent creature, it's always the same one and it remembers you.' In short, build your own relationship with your summons. If your party wants you to summon them to throw them into a pit of lava for funsies, say no. But when you have to summon them, understand why you have to summon them and try to get that across to them somehow...build it into the verbal component of the spell. Just a thought anyway. We could just be evil, too.
Wait, do the rules mention much on whether it is the same one every time? If not, then the spell might just call any random member of whatever type of creature you are summoning, and you might never get the same one twice. Hardly slavery. The less intelligent creatures just might get an experience equal to a bad dream and go back to their own business.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, you are on Golarion, anyway.
JJ,
I believe there are several (inconclusive) threads on this topic on the messageboards. So I was wondering if you could clarify something on the subject of summoning and how it works in Golarion:
1)If summoning an eidolon only summons an "aspect" of a creature, does this mean that the actual creature remains behind on its home plane?
2) Do items carried/worn by the creature representing the eidolon come over with it when it's summoned?
3) What about items that the eidolon is carrying when it's dismissed (or dies) and is sent back to its home plane?
4) If the answer to 3 is that they are left behind, does this mean the eidolon has to be re(equipped) every time it's summoned?
5) Do the answers to 1 through 4 above apply to summoned monsters as well?
6) And finally, are the answers to all the above questions Golarion-specific, or would they apply to the Pathfinder mechanic in general?
Thanks in advance!
Here's my take—how I justify and interpret the summoner.
1) The rules are unclear as to what happens to the source of a summoned creature, but basically, think of a summoned creature as a "reflection" of a creature on another plane... yet it's a real and physical creature, not just an image. It's likely that whatever the original creature on the other plane was never even realizes that it's "reflection" has been summoned to do the bidding of someone somewhere else. As for eidolons... my preference is to believe that they're not "reflections" of single creatures, but composites cobbled together from many different creatures. The summoner essentially custom-builds his eidolon from partial reflections from numerous different source creatures and then binds that specific combination together with metaphysical "glue" harvested form his own life energies (hence the shared magic rune between summoner and eidolon).
2) In the case of an eidolon, it initially comes over naked. Any gear or items given to it stay with it, vanishing into some inaccessible void when the eidolon is gone and coming back the next time it's summoned. Items can't be utilized while in this "void" but neither can they be destroyed.
3) Those items go with the eidolon, and come back the next time it's summoned. Creatures being grappled or otherwise detained by the eidolon do not vanish; they're released when the eidolon goes away.
4) Nope.
5) Summoned creatures are very different. The actual summoned creature itself has no existence before or after the summon monster/summon nature's ally spell is cast, and thus any items it's equipped with have nowhere to come from and nowhere to go. If a summoned monster is a creature that, in its actual stat block, has gear, that gear is with the monster when it arrives, but vanishes as soon as the monster or spell effect is slain/ends. And any additional gear given to a summoned monster drops to the ground as soon as the spell ends or the summoned monster is defeated.
6) I would say those interpretations should apply to the Pathfinder rules in general, because if they don't work that way, you open up a world of confusing possibilities that the rules don't currently offer solutions to. The interpretations above are the simplest and easiest to handle. If you want to interpret them in other ways, it increases the complexity beyond what the rules can currently adjudicate or cover. AKA: If you or your GM doesn't want to use these rules, he/she is going to have to do a little or a lot of work to explain things otherwise.
Ok, I'm home now so I can make links and such.
From Conjuration : Summoning
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.
So from this how can you get it is not a real creature?
"A summoning spell instantly brings a creature or object to a place you designate." Right there BRINGS a creature... to a place you designate."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 fact that it has to reform means it is damaged. I have no idea where these other wild theories or ideas (house rules?) come from including the one from James Jacobs, but Conjuration summoning quite literally spells out what it does. You grab a creature and use it, if it dies it takes a full day to reconstitute itself I'm assuming through the magic of the summoning.
I remember reading fluff about summoned creatures (particularly outsiders) being the manifestation of the plane of existence whence they come from. As such, they didn't really exist on the material plane other than in a "concept-made-flesh" type of existence.
I wonder where I read that; most likely a D&D 3E splat book, or perhaps even a 2nd edition AD&D planescape book...
The fact that it has to reform means it is damaged. I have no idea where these other wild theories or ideas (house rules?) come from including the one from James Jacobs, but Conjuration summoning quite literally spells out what it does. You grab a creature and use it, if it dies it takes a full day to reconstitute itself I'm assuming through the magic of the summoning.
You can't really argue with James Jacobs about thematic elements. He doesn't give rules clarification, but for things like this it is basically Word of God.
This is how the PF universe works. Deal with it or don't. Arguing with a developer is silly.
I was posting from whence my interpretation came and pointing out that I don't see how he came to his. Also, I'm not saying anything about thematic elements (which I'm taking to mean literary devices used to provide depth and meaning for reference) but about the Rules As Written i.e. core functionality of the spell. Reading the description of the spell and of conjuration summoning (the url is http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic#TOC-Conjuration I couldn't get it to work) it seems like an actual creature is used.
If it IS an actual creature being used then it is a completely different spell than a spell which is using a likeness.
Example:
I would have no problem summoning a 1d4+2 horses between myself and a monsters if it makes an easy get away IF they are not real horses.
I would use invisibility to get away (at the cost of one of my few spells per day vs my near limitless summoning SLA) if the alternative is to feed 1d4+2 horses to the monsters to get away.
Also, if it is a reflection then why do you have to wait for it to reform itself for a day if it is "killed"? Is the reflection then... broken or something? The original creature looks into a pond and sees a half eaten version looking back at it?
Again, I'm not trying to argue with a developer or anyone here, I'm just trying to see how you have come to your conclusion. I don't take anyone's word as absolute if i can't rationalize it myself. I guess that's the curse of being a thinker, I need to be able to follow the logic train.
My logic train goes like this; A creature appears, The description says "brings a creature" - so it is an actual creature, If it dies it has to reform - so they are damaged/harmed, during the reforming you can't resummon it - so it's the same creature, WHAT it's forced servitude!
Your logic train seems to be; A creature appears, The description says "brings a creature" - so it's actually bringing an image/reflection of a creature?, If it dies it has to reform - so they are unharmed?, during the reforming you can't resummon it - so it's ...??? , therefore it's not a real creature.
I'm sure I'm missing something (alot) about your side, so help me to see it.
RAI > RAW
We players just go by RAW because we can't guess the RAI accurately. When a paizo dev tells you what's what, that is what you go with. Because even if the RAW contradicts them, more likely than not that RAW will be errata'd at a later date.
The fact that it has to reform means it is damaged. I have no idea where these other wild theories or ideas (house rules?) come from including the one from James Jacobs, but Conjuration summoning quite literally spells out what it does. You grab a creature and use it, if it dies it takes a full day to reconstitute itself I'm assuming through the magic of the summoning.You can't really argue with James Jacobs about thematic elements. He doesn't give rules clarification, but for things like this it is basically Word of God.
This is how the PF universe works. Deal with it or don't. Arguing with a developer is silly.
Except that JJ is not calling him self the Voice of God but suggesting solutions to unclear points.
So there may be no point in arguing with him but that is because he us not putting up an argument but offering his suggestions to fix somthing that is a bit hard to swallow in the books as it is atm.
RAI > RAW
We players just go by RAW because we can't guess the RAI accurately. When a paizo dev tells you what's what, that is what you go with. Because even if the RAW contradicts them, more likely than not that RAW will be errata'd at a later date.
*blink* *rubs eyes* *blink* Yep, that's what it says alright...
That must be why PFS games strictly follow the RAI.
Except that JJ is not calling him self the Voice of God but suggesting solutions to unclear points.The fact that it has to reform means it is damaged. I have no idea where these other wild theories or ideas (house rules?) come from including the one from James Jacobs, but Conjuration summoning quite literally spells out what it does. You grab a creature and use it, if it dies it takes a full day to reconstitute itself I'm assuming through the magic of the summoning.You can't really argue with James Jacobs about thematic elements. He doesn't give rules clarification, but for things like this it is basically Word of God.
This is how the PF universe works. Deal with it or don't. Arguing with a developer is silly.
A valid point.
If this was a more rules oriented question, I would be inclined to agree. It's not though.
But more importantly, evil spells have evil indicators. So RAW summoning monster isn't evil. Heck is it evil to travel with a meat shield? That's what they signed up for.
That's exactly the problem, they didn't sign up. You cast a spell and kidnap the creature and the next thing it knows it is standing across from a monster and compelled to fight. THEN they get mangled or die and they not only had no choice in the matter, but have to reform only to do it again tomorrow.
That's like stealing a neighbor's dog, throwing it into a dog fight, putting it back in the yard all bruised and mangled, and then once its taken care of and recuperated doing it again. Not to mention the intelligent ones thrown into this situation...
This is an argument that can't be won.
Funny anecdote: In the Council of Thieves AP we were exploring the sewers under the city. The party wizard summoned a celestial snake to explore ahead of us. The rest of the party felt sorry for that poor snake being yoinked away from Mt Celestia into a stinking sewer and chastised the wizard for it. We never forgot that poor snake, and we're pretty sure the snake never forgot being summoned into a sewer.
I guess the next question is, would the summoner character know?
I made a master summoner under the assumption that they were not real and I got them killed ruthlessly. Now that I know should I play my character different? I don't want to lose ... well practically my full arsenal due to misunderstanding of the rules, but at the same time I can't see him willingly causing harm to a creature regardless of reason. I mean... It'd be one thing if he killed it and ate it and used it's skin for a coat but this is like some kind of cosmic torture. I seriously can not see why they haven't revolted.
From another point of view; if i go by the assumption that he DID know all along then that makes him a fundamentally different person than I had intended and I guess I could play it that way to, just a cold hearted bastard, but how could such a character be good?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The party wizard summoned a celestial snake to explore ahead of us. The rest of the party felt sorry for that poor snake being yoinked away from Mt Celestia into a stinking sewer and chastised the wizard for it. We never forgot that poor snake, and we're pretty sure the snake never forgot being summoned into a sewer.
As he slithered ahead, he must have been thinking "Why have you forsnaken me?"
Perhaps looking at the wording of another spell that is also conjuration (summoning) will allow your master summoner to sleep more easily at night. The Mount spell reads:
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.
I would read Mount as just a specialized version of the Summon Monster spell and assume that any creature summoned using conjuration (summoning) magic comes willingly.
Perhaps looking at the wording of another spell that is also conjuration (summoning) will allow your master summoner to sleep more easily at night. The Mount spell reads:So we're adding brainwashing to what we're doing then?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.I would read Mount as just a specialized version of the Summon Monster spell and assume that any creature summoned using conjuration (summoning) magic comes willingly.
Nah. Not enough electroshock and waterboarding. Not brainwashing. Looks more like creating a temporary magical clone that likes you.
|
Nah. Not enough electroshock and waterboarding. Not brainwashing. Looks more like creating a temporary magical clone that likes you.Perhaps looking at the wording of another spell that is also conjuration (summoning) will allow your master summoner to sleep more easily at night. The Mount spell reads:So we're adding brainwashing to what we're doing then?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.I would read Mount as just a specialized version of the Summon Monster spell and assume that any creature summoned using conjuration (summoning) magic comes willingly.
Either that, or the spell puts out a call, and the first creature that willingly responds is summoned.
I think in the end it comes down to how a DN rubs things you've seen my thoughts elsewhere. I also have a sudden urge to research a summon adventurer spell.
"Okay everyone we hit him hard and don't let him ... "
"Tom, tom you in there man?"
"Sorry some jackass just summoned me into a stinking sewer to scout for his party. Where was I in the motivational speech?"
We played a Planescape game once where our players opened a bar in Sigil. Then one day they were 'summoned' to the material plane as planar beings...
We added it to our bar's slogans.
'come for adventure!!! You won't (probably*) die!!!!
*management not responsible for death....
You don't know the mechanism of summoning. You're just assuming it's unwilling because they just appear. It could be astral projection, it could be the nearest creature willing to come to your aid for a minute. No need to assume it is evil or unwilling. In fact, you should assume the opposite due to the lack of an evil descriptor.I guess the next question is, would the summoner character know?
I made a master summoner under the assumption that they were not real and I got them killed ruthlessly. Now that I know should I play my character different? I don't want to lose ... well practically my full arsenal due to misunderstanding of the rules, but at the same time I can't see him willingly causing harm to a creature regardless of reason. I mean... It'd be one thing if he killed it and ate it and used it's skin for a coat but this is like some kind of cosmic torture. I seriously can not see why they haven't revolted.
From another point of view; if i go by the assumption that he DID know all along then that makes him a fundamentally different person than I had intended and I guess I could play it that way to, just a cold hearted bastard, but how could such a character be good?
You're really hung up on the astral projection angle, aren't you? Summon Monster spells are nothing like Astral Projection. At all. Ever. They just plain aren't. If the two spells were the same, then a low level summoned creature would be killed for real if the summoned body were killed. Astral Projection carries a two negative level penalty for having your second physical body killed.