| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At best, this spell will lead to hours of rules discussion, as GMs try to salvage the game.
Being able to extend any of your summons to hours/level for the cost of a 2nd level spell and maybe a feat is crazy. Also, the creatures summoned with this spell aren't banned from using Teleportation effects, planar travel or spells with expensive material components, nor do their spells end at the end of the summoning.
Please. This spell is worse than Divine Protection. It's far, far worse than the Master Summoner ever was. Just ban it.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting. I'm going to assume you can't use this on swarms (because of the single-target negating property of swarms), so what spells could you use this on for duration?
Mount -> Summon Monster I
Communal Mount -> Summon Monster II, multiple creatures that can be replaced. Juiciest SM2 monster is probably the small earth elemental, it hits hard and earth glide is a useful ability in dungeons.
Summon Totem Creature (level 3, Shoanti); 1 hour and you can turn 1d3+1 hawks into Lantern Archons.
Summon Accuser -> Summon Monster IV. You can now trade for a Hound Archon or Lantern Archon. The Hound Archon's continuous Circle vs. Evil and Aura of Menace, as well as at-will Aid, will make this a good pick. And it's very durable, too.
Eagle Aerie -> Summon Monster VI. 1 hour/level, 3-6 eagles depending on caster level. Eagles don't like to fight and the duration shortens if they fight; might not be the case for replacement monsters.
---
The limitation on summoned monsters teleporting is from the Summon Monster spell. They still can't summon other creatures, that's a limitation from the Conjuration (Summoning) subschool. The limitation on expensive components is from the spell, but the subschool does note that any spells they cast end after the monster goes away.
---
It should also be noted that you don't have to replace a monster with a scary monster. If you get through a summoned monster's saves, you can just turn it into a SM-I pony.
---
This spell does need a long hard look at it.
Read one of the many other threads in rules/advice forums. The problem interaction with mount is Heighten Spell.
And you know what, Heighten Spell should just be put in a shallow grave. I have never ever seen it used for anything but the most...inventive...kinds of shenanigans.
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We could always just say that for PFS purposes it can only be used to replace creatures summoned by summon monster / summon natures ally.
It is kind of a fun flexibility spell, and I would be sad to see it go.
(It is not even clear to me that by the rules the heighten mount / ASM thing actually works, as the 200 post thread illustrates.)
Heightened continual flame is not a shenanigan, and that's the most common use for heighten spell I'm aware of.Read one of the many other threads in rules/advice forums. The problem interaction with mount is Heighten Spell.And you know what, Heighten Spell should just be put in a shallow grave. I have never ever seen it used for anything but the most...inventive...kinds of shenanigans.
Ah, yes, true, there is that one legitimate use.
|
|
My opinion is that the combination does not work. Heightened spell does not actually change the level of the spell just it's effective lvl in regards to numbers and effects.
So a heightened mount spell is still a lvl 1 spell.
Sure, you could alter summoned monster for hours of summons but it still leaves you with a SM1 monster list.
|
|
Yep. That's pretty close to how it works in my home game.We could always just say that for PFS purposes it can only be used to replace creatures summoned by summon monster / summon natures ally.
It is kind of a fun flexibility spell, and I would be sad to see it go.
That is an interesting idea. I would prefer this over a flat out ban or ruling regarding heightened spell which could have down stream effects on other heightened spells (light, continual flame, etc). It would prevent spell duration shenanigans while allowing for druids to use SM and wizards to use SNA. That is probably what the original RAI of the spell was for.
Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Jacksonville
|
Ah, yes, true, there is that one legitimate use.Heightened continual flame is not a shenanigan, and that's the most common use for heighten spell I'm aware of.Read one of the many other threads in rules/advice forums. The problem interaction with mount is Heighten Spell.And you know what, Heighten Spell should just be put in a shallow grave. I have never ever seen it used for anything but the most...inventive...kinds of shenanigans.
As is putting save or suck spells like Lipstich to a DC that makes it usable against casters at higher levels
|
|
Seems to me that three paths are available here:
1: Outright ban in PFS
2: Limit to spells with Summon Monster/Nature's Ally spells
3: Limit duration of effect to be consistent w/ Summon Monster/NA.
4: Ignore Heighten for determining substitution.
Just trying to summarize the thoughts I've seen in various places.
This still leaves a possible loophole re: SM II used to summon multiple SM I critters and replacing them one-by-one with SM II critters.
|
Ah, right, extended heightened murderous command is hilarious, too.As is putting save or suck spells like Lipstich to a DC that makes it usable against casters at higher levelsAh, yes, true, there is that one legitimate use.Heightened continual flame is not a shenanigan, and that's the most common use for heighten spell I'm aware of.Read one of the many other threads in rules/advice forums. The problem interaction with mount is Heighten Spell.And you know what, Heighten Spell should just be put in a shallow grave. I have never ever seen it used for anything but the most...inventive...kinds of shenanigans.
extended heightened unnatural lust...
|
|
This still leaves a possible loophole re: SM II used to summon multiple SM I critters and replacing them one-by-one with SM II critters.
Maybe the better example is casting SMV to get 1d3 SMIV monsters and then casting 1d3 alter summoned monster (ASM) to convert them to 1d3 SMV monsters. So you basically converted 1d3 SMV castings into 1 SMV plus 1d3 ASM. Not a bad trade if you have extra lvl 2 slots to waste but horrible from an action economy standpoint. The only benefit I see is if you absolutely need multiple monsters and you can't cast the spell lvl above that lvl to get them in one casting.
I think that the negatives to action economy outweigh the slight savings in spell lvl cast.
At best, this spell will lead to hours of rules discussion, as GMs try to salvage the game.
Being able to extend any of your summons to hours/level for the cost of a 2nd level spell and maybe a feat is crazy. Also, the creatures summoned with this spell aren't banned from using Teleportation effects, planar travel or spells with expensive material components, nor do their spells end at the end of the summoning.
Please. This spell is worse than Divine Protection. It's far, far worse than the Master Summoner ever was. Just ban it.
Have you seen the new/errated/nerfed to oblivion Divine Protection? I know that's not the kind of 'worse' you were probably talking about, but still...
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
Even if Heightened Spell doesn't work, there's still the other spells I listed earlier.
The idea behind ASM is cute, but the execution leaves it open to massive abuse.
|
You cannot use alter summoned monster on more than one creature. It doesn't matter the number summoned.
Additionally Heighten Spell feat does absolutely nothing to a summon monster other other summoning spell. As such, a heightened summon monster I spell still uses the summon monster I list. So a heightened mount spell would not change which summon monster level used with alter summoned monster spell.
|
You cannot use alter summoned monster on more than one creature. It doesn't matter the number summoned.
Additionally Heighten Spell feat does absolutely nothing to a summon monster other other summoning spell. As such, a heightened summon monster I spell still uses the summon monster I list. So a heightened mount spell would not change which summon monster level used with alter summoned monster spell.
That is just not true, about a Heightened summoning spell. (Excepting some hidden ruling in the forums somewhere)
A heightened Mount does only give you a horse/pony and a heightened summon monster I still only gives you that list to choose from. But...Benefit: A heightened spell has a higher spell level than normal (up to a maximum of 9th level). Unlike other metamagic feats, Heighten Spell actually increases the effective level of the spell that it modifies. All effects dependent on spell level (such as saving throw DCs and ability to penetrate a lesser globe of invulnerability) are calculated according to the heightened level.
Level Increase: The heightened spell is as difficult to prepare and cast as a spell of its effective level.
First line of the benefit says it has a higher spell level than normal. It goes on to say that means the normal things that a higher spell level means for a spell apply to a spell affected by Heighten Spell.
The new creature must be an option from a spell of the same level or lower as the spell that summoned the target.
As a Mount spell heightened to level 5 is now a 5th level spell... you may now switch it out for any creature that is valid for any summoning spell up to that level.
|
|
I will have to agree that this option is not a good fit when combined with other options just so. It effectively more than duplicates a capstone, in that you could have multiple casts of summon monster last perpetually(With refresh casts). Put it on a wand and you don't even need to use up 2nd level spells.
Not to mention bypassing the no teleportation clause that Summon Monster has.
|
|
Have people actually seen this abused in play?
If I were GMing and I had a player attempt to use a Heightened Mount followed by Alter Summoned Monster, I would say no. Even though nominally I'd be in violation of the PFS rules for doing this (strict RAW, etc.), it's so clear that the spell is not supposed to be able to do the Mount cheese that disallowing it is just an anticipation of an inevitable ruling. However, I'd certainly allow the spell for turning one Summon Monster III monster into another.
|
|
Have people actually seen this abused in play?
If I were GMing and I had a player attempt to use a Heightened Mount followed by Alter Summoned Monster, I would say no. Even though nominally I'd be in violation of the PFS rules for doing this (strict RAW, etc.), it's so clear that the spell is not supposed to be able to do the Mount cheese that disallowing it is just an anticipation of an inevitable ruling. However, I'd certainly allow the spell for turning one Summon Monster III monster into another.
That is clearly in violation of the PFS Guidelines.
"As a Pathfinder Society GM, you have the right and
responsibility to make whatever judgements, within the
rules, that you feel are necessary at your table to ensure
everyone has a fair and fun experience. This does not
mean you can contradict rules or restrictions outlined in
this document, a published Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
source, errata document, or official FAQ on paizo.com.
What it does mean is that only you can judge what is right
for your table during cases not covered in these sources."
You don't have to like an option, but table GMs are not in charge of what options are allowed at a table. Otherwise you are running house rules.
Your options for removal of an option are the same as your options for the addition of an option, petitioning on the boards.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
There was a suggestion in the rules forum thread where this was discussed (at incredibly excessive length) that while Alter Summoned Monster replaces the horse you get when you cast mount, it does not replace the conditions of the spell that summoned it. So if you cast alter summoned monster on a heightened mount, and get a lantern archon, you now have a lantern archon that will serve you as a mount. You also have a bit and bridle that are sized for a horse. It will "willingly" carry you wherever you ask it to go. It may even defend you if you are attacked. But it won't go charging off into combat for you (unless you are on it's back), or go scouting ahead for you. And you have a +10 DC to your ride checks (bareback, not an appropriate mount.)
That would certainly be within the realm of GM discretion.
(Of course, because it is a lantern archon, with str 1, being willing to carry you doesn't actually mean it *can* carry you...)
|
|
There was a suggestion in the rules forum thread where this was discussed (at incredibly excessive length) that while Alter Summoned Monster replaces the horse you get when you cast mount, it does not replace the conditions of the spell that summoned it. So if you cast alter summoned monster on a heightened mount, and get a lantern archon, you now have a lantern archon that will serve you as a mount. You also have a bit and bridle that are sized for a horse. It will "willingly" carry you wherever you ask it to go. It may even defend you if you are attacked. But it won't go charging off into combat for you (unless you are on it's back), or go scouting ahead for you. And you have a +10 DC to your ride checks (bareback, not an appropriate mount.)
That would certainly be within the realm of GM discretion.
(Of course, because it is a lantern archon, with str 1, being willing to carry you doesn't actually mean it *can* carry you...)
Unfortunately, that is really not supported by the text.
"The new creature has the same conditions and amount of damage as the target creature, and remains affected by all curses, diseases, poisons, and penalties that affected the target, but no other spells or effects carry over."
This line prevents someone 'healing' a summon by using Alter Summoned Monster. It does not further limit the creature, as 'conditions' are things like sickened or fatigued. It wipes out all buffs as well.
No where does it say a 'mount' can not fight, even if you are not on its back. Take a Paladin's Bond, for instance. And, while the original summon came with a bit and bridle, the newly summoned creature would not as it was not brought by Mount. It could be a benefit in some cases if the new summon came with a bit and bridle. It would be funny to roleplay a hound archon with the Urge to be a mount. "Get up on my shoulders!"
Though, lacking the text stating that it will attack your enemies automatically, you must be able to communicate with it to get it to do anything for you. (Riding, in this case, would be considered a form of communication)
That being said, the creature is still under the affects of the original summoning spell and is limited by it. Alter Summon Monster summons a new creature under the original spell, altering what it summoned but not its duration. In such case, a Summon Monster summon, then Altered, still may not teleport, as it is still bound to the original Summon Monster casting.
This gets complicated with Summon Swarm, though I think it would cause the summon to attack the nearest creature, even if Altered.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
I didn't say it won't fight. But the spell calls it to serve you as a mount (i.e. something to carry you from place to place) not as a a mount class feature.
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.
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 compulsion to fight on your behalf and the willingness to respond to orders to perform other actions are granted by the summon monster spell. The mount spell only compels it to carry you willingly and well from place to place.
I agree with the other people who have said you cannot use this on a swarm, because it targets a creature, and swarms are immune to effects that target a single creature.
|
|
I didn't say it won't fight. But the spell calls it to serve you as a mount (i.e. something to carry you from place to place) not as a a mount class feature.
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.
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 compulsion to fight on your behalf and the willingness to respond to orders to perform other actions are granted by the summon monster spell. The mount spell only compels it to carry you willingly and well from place to place.
I agree with the other people who have said you cannot use this on a swarm, because it targets a creature, and swarms are immune to effects that target a single creature.
Most certainly you could not target the swarm with Alter Summoned Monster, I was just giving a spell example with an odd set of circumstances.
But I am merely saying, in regards to Mount, that the horse/pony would not be limited to simple conveyance. If so, they would have stated that the beast can not attack or perform any other actions, such as any other mount can. Though, for RAI it may have been meant for that to be true.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
I wasn't thinking it can't attack. As I said, it would probably defend it's rider if attacked. I just said it is not going to go off into combat on it's own or go scouting ahead or go running around giving you flank. It is going to stick by your side and serve as your mount to the best of it's abilities.
I would say that is within the realm of legitimate GM interpretation.
|
|
I wasn't thinking it can't attack. As I said, it would probably defend it's rider if attacked. I just said it is not going to go off into combat on it's own or go scouting ahead or go running around giving you flank. It is going to stick by your side and serve as your mount to the best of it's abilities.
I would say that is within the realm of legitimate GM interpretation.
Being that it serves willingly, it should do as it is commanded. You should be able to handle animal a summoned horse to move where you wish it to. Thus, you should be able to command a creature, under the same restrictions, to do anything it is capable of doing if you can communicate with it.
You must remember that a summoned creature is not programmed hard-light hologram with a limited instruction set. It is a living breathing creature, even if it is not possible to permanently kill it on the plane in which it is summoned. Without any control given by the spell summoning it, it would be able to act as it pleases during its limited duration of stay just as a Called being. Though being called comes with other pros/cons.
But yes, you are correct that it is well within GM jurisdiction to claim the words 'serve as mount' mean that the beast can ONLY be a set of magic legs. Though, I honestly wouldn't play with any GM who claimed that means the horse could not be commanded to leave your side.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
I would let you command it to follow you, or to stay, or to come, but I would have it refuse to go running into combat without you, or go scouting ahead.
As you say, it *is* a free willed creature. Many of those creatures would be insulted and outraged to be summoned as a mount, and since they are not compelled to do more, may not be willing to do more.
That said, the mount summoned by even the base mount spell is *not* a animal companion. And doesn't specify any tricks. As such handling it with handle animal is at best a move action, if not a full round action. I think most GMs would it allow it to be riding trained, but I don't see anything in the spell to indicate that it is combat trained. This is less an issue if you are replacing it with a sentient summoned creature.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Interesting thought experiment:
Cast Mount:
Cast Wartrain Mount: (Mount is now wartrained, knows the attack trick, and is presumably willing to fight for you)
Cast Alter Summoned Monster:
Now you at least have a creature that will attack on it's own.
I would have to think about that one.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
As is disallowing Heightened Spell to do anything.
I believe that if you disallow Heighten spell to raise the level of a summon spell, then for consistency you have to disallow Heighten Spell form raising the level of a continual light spell. I don't understand how you can make the argument that it raises the spell level of one, but not the other.
|
|
I would let you command it to follow you, or to stay, or to come, but I would have it refuse to go running into combat without you, or go scouting ahead.
As you say, it *is* a free willed creature. Many of those creatures would be insulted and outraged to be summoned as a mount, and since they are not compelled to do more, may not be willing to do more.
That said, the mount summoned by even the base mount spell is *not* a animal companion. And doesn't specify any tricks. As such handling it with handle animal is at best a move action, if not a full round action. I think most GMs would it allow it to be riding trained, but I don't see anything in the spell to indicate that it is combat trained. This is less an issue if you are replacing it with a sentient summoned creature.
No, it is not an animal companion and thus you gain no action discount on ordering it. Just as if you purchased an untrained horse in town. It also is not stated to have any tricks, thus it has none and would require for you to 'push' it to perform. It would not be riding trained nor combat trained, but the Handle Animal skill does not care what tricks are known for the 'push' option.
That is a good use for the Knight-Inheritor's Ring, being that it allows you to cast Wartrain Mount.I do not argue that you can freely command a non-sentient creature to do as you wish, only that after going through the hoops to command it, it would then perform as a creature of its type.
But if you want to talk about cans of worms, Summon Monster gives the creature a task. It attacks your enemies. But it is a creature with a mind and if it does not have an order, such as no enemies are around to attack,... what prevents it from doing as it wishes? This applies to any summoning spell that does not give a constant 'task' for the summoned being.
This example brought to you by the millions of little assumptions that allow this game to function.
|
|
Interesting thought experiment:
Cast Mount:
Cast Wartrain Mount: (Mount is now wartrained, knows the attack trick, and is presumably willing to fight for you)
Cast Alter Summoned Monster:Now you at least have a creature that will attack on it's own.
I would have to think about that one.
Alter Summoned Monster clears away all spells affecting the creature, leaving the damage, conditions and penalties such as curses and poisons.
Also Wartrain Mount would be meaningless for any being that is not an animal and does not utilize the Handle Animal system.
|
|
As is disallowing Heightened Spell to do anything.I believe that if you disallow Heighten spell to raise the level of a summon spell, then for consistency you have to disallow Heighten Spell form raising the level of a continual light spell. I don't understand how you can make the argument that it raises the spell level of one, but not the other.
And in both cases, that would be in direct opposition to how Heighten Spell functions. To do otherwise would require rewriting Heighten Spell so that it only increases DCs, or some such thing, instead of raising the spell level.
|
|
As is disallowing Heightened Spell to do anything.I believe that if you disallow Heighten spell to raise the level of a summon spell, then for consistency you have to disallow Heighten Spell form raising the level of a continual light spell. I don't understand how you can make the argument that it raises the spell level of one, but not the other.
I'm saying that Heighten Spell doesn't turn a summon on spell into a higher level summon spell. In other words, while summon monster I might be higher level for some purposes (most are simply not applicable to a summon spell) but you are still summoning a level 1 monster.
That doesn't change just because you use alter summoned monster . The level of summon is 1. Heightened won't change that.