I don't get it: Summoning Spells - PETSA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Summoned Elementals)


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 59 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

In a recent dungeon crawl my PC wanted to summon and send an air elemental to detect and set off traps so that we knew what we were looking at. The party had already taken a beating, had used numerous spells and healing, and had a few members with negative levels.

Several party members objected strongly saying it was immoral to send a "sentient" (although summoned) creature to scout and possibly trigger traps, and that it was the equivalent of torture.

I'd heard of PETA (People Eating Tasty Animals) and of a group opposed to exactly that by with the same name, but PETSA? People for the Ethical Treatment of Summoned Elementals?

Then to my surprise, they argued that it was morally OK to summon one to fight when you needed it. Even though here too it would be painfully destroyed (for 24hrs) while you use it to "defend" you (specifically they said "to keep you from dying"), and while it probably held ill will for you for disturbing it.

Part of the argument used was the "How would you like it if you were jerked from your home and subject to having to be injured or temporarily and painfully destroyed? Such that if they ever met you in the future, they would hate you for subjecting them to this?" But somehow the fact that summoning them unwillingly to save you from dying (even though they would get painfully destroyed and probably want you to die for simply having disturbed them in the first place) was considered to be different and acceptable.

I just didn't get it and still don't. And the more they tried to explain it to me, the more clear it became that I simply didn't get it. That it was somehow ethically wrong to summon an elemental from another plane to save the life or limb of a creature that would die permanently if they screwed up versus a trap.

1. I first tried arguing that it was morally better to pseudo-sacrifice a sentient air elemental against a trap than to buy a dog and run him over the same traps. (I think they agreed with this one, but it didn't change their POV.)

2. I then tried arguing that bringing a sentient creature into a fight that it didn't want to fight was then also as bad under their reasoning. They disagreed, and I just didn't get it. Apparently subjecting a random sentient stranger to violence to spare your life or to make it easier for you to kill another creature (possibly a sentient one) didn't make a lick of difference.

So I come here to ask the community their thoughts, as I've thought about it some more and concluded the following:

1. Using shards of their reasoning, I've since concluded that bringing a sentient creature to fight for you is actually worse (or "more evil") than sending it to check and trigger traps, possibly being destroyed for 24 hours until it re-formed on its native plane.

a) As Golda Meir once said, "We can forgive the Arabs for killing our sons, but we cannot forgive them for making our sons kill their sons." Forcing a creature to harm another creature that it had no interest in harming, no connection to, and no prior knowledge of, would therefore be an evil act, even a form of "gladiatorial" torture.

b) Summoning a creature to "fight for you" (to save your life) generally ignores the fact that you are using it while out there being a murder hobo trying to kill things and take their stuff. The summoned creature may even wish you ill, but has to fight and become pseudo-lethally injured for you, yet receives no compensation and no XP. This is the equivalent of saying, "I'd like steak for lunch. Here, take this knife and go up against the bull, and when you're done, I'll finish him up and have my Rib-eye for lunch (and all the XP) while you simply get to go home with the memories of being traumatized by completely unexpected violence."

2. In a fantasy and possibly semi-medieval world filled with fantastical, violent, and dangerous beasts, where life is often "Nasty, Brutish, and Short" the sort of modern day value systems about "sentient creatures" is wholly misplaced and very absurd. {I should probably mention here that in my second Pathfinder campaign, a different group overcame a dragon that had sought them out to destroy them, but when beaten and captured, this large dragon would not explain its complete enmity for our group that it had attacked. One player then voice this opinion that it was wrong/evil to kill this again unconscious creature because it was sentient. Thankfully the rest of the group strenuously and reasonably objected to this position, pointing out that it was a "marauding monster" and the fact that it was sentient was absolutely irrelevant. It was clear he had a hard time grappling with this concept, but when pointed out the fact that it was not a sentient humanoid, he seemed to be a bit mollified.]

3. Shouldn't the spell "Enslave Random Creatures" (A.K.A. Summoning Spells) have an "Evil" descriptor? Or at the very least, have a minutes or 10 minutes per level duration "if they are not called upon to fight or do not suffer being attacked?" A sort of "You have to clean the outhouse and take out the dirty laundry for 60 minutes, unless you get attacked by the Otyugh living there, then you have to fight for your life, limb, and 24hour existence for the next 60 seconds."

4. Shouldn't most compulsion spells, (not a including charm type spell, because they clearly and presently "want" to do good things for you) be considered evil as well, especially since they are often abused to cause injury or misfortune to a compelled sentient creature? This being the equivalent to involuntary slavery of the "Enslave Random Creatures" Spell?

5. To be fair, in my own campaign, I may introduce a situation where if one player is effectively traveling 100mph, in a burning aircraft, with both arms broken, at 1hp, and 10' above the ground just before the plane makes an "uncontrolled landing," I'll ask the player if his PC is either has A) "his life flash before his eyes,"" or B) if he has this very deep feeling of "I don't want to be here!" If the answer is the latter I'll simply let him have a large negative circumstantial bonus to his Will Save (maybe a -10 circumstance penalty due to his high level of distraction and stress) against a "regional" spell affecting his particular section of the prime material plane; a spell cast from another plane seeking to summon a creature of his type. Since he would be the one that most meets the conditions that makes it possible for him to be the one summoned (over ALL the other creatures in his section of the prime material), he'll be the summoned creature, with full health, having to fight and be possibly killed on behalf of another creature that he has no knowledge of or interest in. If he succeeds, he'll come back to the material plane someplace safe in his original condition (cured of all lethal poisons/diseases), and if he dies in the fight, then he'll come back 24 hours later to someplace safe, but fully healed. Not that I'm making a particular point on how a weak first level spell might be able to reach across the planes to bring forth and compel a creature to willingly fight for you, it is just that it might be hilarious. As would be the reverse, an adventure hook started by trying to find a severely wounded guy who disappeared in a vicious fight that occurred but only 12 hours ago. (A guy who miraculously appears nearby after the party spends 12 hours searching for him, and tells of a waking up with memories of a rather bizarre albeit violent dream that he's having trouble remembering fully.)

Clearly, Jonathan Swift I'm not, but since I OBVIOUSLY still don't get it. Perhaps someone here would explain it to me so that the position of the rest of my party seems reasonable and fair to me so that I will actually "get it."

On behalf of all but one other in my party (who agreed with me), I thank you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

PETSE

You're not summoning alementals, are you? ;)


5 people marked this as a favorite.

PETSA are crazy people, you should just ignore them


Interesting thought.

I'd always assumed that when you summon nasty stuff like demons, they charge into battle because they like charging into battle. You gave them something fun to do that they like, and they don't really mind spending 24 hours out of their ETERNAL existence on the off chance that they lose - either way it was fun, and the little 24-nap is the blink of an eye to them.

For angelic stuff, they aren't always as fond of battle (some are), but usually those summoners are often fighting evil monsters, BBEGs, or even just questing to the benefit of decent, innocent folk. So while they aren't all as bloodthirsty as the nasty stuff, they usually don't mind risking a 24-hour nap to do some good in the world.

So for both of the above, summoning them for battle isn't a big issue because they're OK with it.

For the neutral stuff in between, like elementals or animals, it seems a little less fair since they might not have built-in reasons to be OK with being a battle-puppet for random summoner #477 today. But, it's likely that the person summoning a neutral critter is probably neutral too (my take on the alignment sub-game is that your alignment should reflect your character's actions and all these summoning spells have an alignment descriptor) so the summoner probably doesn't feel too bad about forcing his summoned critter to risk a 24-hour nap because it was summoned and sent into combat.

So combat is easily explained.

As for being a trap finder, the evil ones probably think it's beneath them (don't be surprised if they find a trap and avoid it without setting it off, then "forget" to tell you about it - you know, because evil). The good ones probably don't mind lending a hand for a good cause. The neutral and/or unintelligent ones are probably the worst sufferers but, again, their neutral summoners probably aren't losing much sleep over that 24-hour nap.


Depending on how you flesh out the details summoning can evil but needn't be.

For example, if the summoned creature is sentient, gets nothing, has no choice in the matter, and suffers a painful death, then yep summoning is evil.

Alternately, if the summoned creature gets some valuable magical energy from the transaction, volunteers for it, and suffers a painful (though temporary) death, then summoning is decidedly neutral.

The details of how summoning works are pretty vague in the Core Rulebook. Your GM has considerable leeway to set the specifics and morality of summoning.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Hmmm....
Isn't being summoned part of a punishment -- like community service?

*I sentence you to 20 hours of being summoned by casters!*


Actually Brf may not be far off, remember that many of the summoned critters actually serve other greater lords, like elemental lords, demon and devil princes, etc. If those powerful entities did not want you using their minions, pretty sure we would know it.


You could potentially swing the interpretation of 'summon elementals' by viewing Rick and Morty episode involving Mr. Meeseeks.

He is essentially a summoned creature with sentience that is immediately given a task upon his creation and his only desire is to fulfill that task. If sustained too long in our world they start to go a little loopy eventually saying all they want to do is complete the task and go home.

I guess with a mentality like that you are still subjecting a sentient creature to a painful existence but they seem pleased when they can complete a task quickly and efficiently. So maybe the air elemental doesn't care WHY it is summoned and just wants the job done so it can go home.

A secondary issue that is really more silly than anything else is that the application of the Fiendish template causes something to be a 'summonable' creature. In a recent evil campaign my group ran my PC had this template and there was the running joke that whenever I couldn't make a session my character was summoned to fight the battles of some wizard or another.

Maybe take another look at alignment motivations to see if there are any guidelines... It sorta sounds like you have Chaotic heavy players (they value the freedom of the summoned creature AND the freedom to SUMMON that creature) and maybe you are more Neutral with regards to the L/C axis.

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Brf wrote:

Hmmm....

Isn't being summoned part of a punishment -- like community service?

*I sentence you to 20 hours of being summoned by casters!*

You just gave me a wonderfully evil idea for a future game. LOL


I think I've read some James Jacobs stuff that summons don't exist until you summon them, and then they go back to not existing after they get unsummoned.

Calling is entirely different. Called creatures have lives and memories and rights and hold grudges. Summon monster though? No moral problems there.


In most cases, using magic to bind something to your will and forcing it to suffer for your benefit would indeed be evil.

We know though that summoning magic isn't evil. It is instead dependent on what is being summoned, so summoning good is good, etc. This seems contrary, as enslaving a good and noble angel seems worse than enslaving a wicked demon. So we are left to find a explanation if we want more than just the simple rules.

A couple ideas have been mentioned. I'll note that a summoned creature is almost more like a projection of that creature into the material plane, rather than the creature being there itself. From the perspective of the actual creature, they may not even know it is happening or think of it like a dream. I addition, the idea that the creature or home plane or ruler or ethos benefits from the summoning makes some sense. If every time you summon a devil the power of evil increases in the universe, then it is understandable why it is an evil act, even when you use that devil to save innocent children.

Basically though, for whatever reason, it is clear that in regards to summoned creatures there is no moral culpability for what happens to them in the Pathfinder universe.


GM_Beernorg wrote:

Hmmm....

Isn't being summoned part of a punishment -- like community service?

*I sentence you to 20 hours of being summoned by casters!*

Now that is an awesome reply, one that I was hoping for, albeit one that supports my position.

Brf wrote:
...summoned critters actually serve other greater lords, like elemental lords, demon and devil princes, etc. If those powerful entities did not want you using their minions, pretty sure we would know it.

I HAVE to use this quote with them!

Keep these comments coming!


Here we go. Just James' personal preference for how it would work. The actual rules are apparently silent on the matter, but I give the creative director's opinion quite a bit of credence on matters like this. We've seen Good NPCs use summons as cannonfodder before, I'm sure. I don't think all of them were mindcontrol-murdering outsiders.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think there is and most people would perceive a difference between a person drafted, handed a gun, and told to kill the enemy and a person drafted, handed a rake, and told to rake up a minefield.


Bill Dunn wrote:
I think there is and most people would perceive a difference between a person drafted, handed a gun, and told to kill the enemy and a person drafted, handed a rake, and told to rake up a minefield.

Ahhh, but whose enemy? Yours or the guy who was drafted.

Does it matter if the person drafted is also told they will be the "first over the top?" or the first to charge the machine gun?

And what if the 'death' is not permanent, but perhaps the experience/memory is?


James Jacobs' answer is cute, but then it's not really a "summon" spell at all, certainly not by Pathfinder's definition:

SRD, Magic, Schools of Magic, Conjuration wrote:
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.

Summoning brings a creature. You can't bring something that doesn't exist, you can only bring a thing that exists already.

What JJ is describing is Creation, not Summoning:

SRD, Magic, Schools of Magic, Conjuration wrote:
Creation: a creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates. If the spell has a duration other than instantaneous, magic holds the creation together, and when the spell ends, the conjured creature or object vanishes without a trace. If the spell has an instantaneous duration, the created object or creature is merely assembled through magic. It lasts indefinitely and does not depend on magic for its existence.

Pathfinder has definitions for both Summoning and Creation, and JJ was clearly describing the latter.


So no Good character would ever use Summoning spells on sentient beings. Slap the [evil] on 'em and say goodbye to PFS.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DominusMegadeus wrote:
So no Good character would ever use Summoning spells on sentient beings. Slap the [evil] on 'em and say goodbye to PFS.

I don't know what any of that means, but my good character is perfectly willing to summon intelligent good ousiders like archons and say:

"Archon, destroy that evil monster before you!" which it gladly does because archons like destroying evil monsters.

Or

"Archon, help me fight this totally neutral monster that threatens me and my friends so that we can continue working good deeds in this world." which it gladly does because I'm a good guy and it wants me to live and keep on being a good guy.

Or even

"Archon, please help us navigate this dangerous dungeon in which lair evil monsters and lurk evil villains. Please scout ahead and warn us of traps." which it will gladly do because it wants my to survive and vanquish the evil stuff in this dungeon.

Etc.

I see no alignment conflicts at all, unless I'm trying:

"Archon, help me slay these orphans and kick these kittens because I'm a vile evil wretch who enjoys such things" which it might perhaps have to do, but as a GM I would be talking to the player of this evil character and asking him why he's playing an evil character but casting [Good] spells - perhaps he doesn't understand alignments very well and I should help him.

(Although, I'd totally buy it if his answer was "I love seeing the look of despair and disgust on those archons' faces when they have to kill innocent kittens. It's priceless, and it tickles my evil funny bone to make archons do it instead of demons." - totally plausible as an evil action.)


DM_Blake wrote:

James Jacobs' answer is cute, but then it's not really a "summon" spell at all, certainly not by Pathfinder's definition:

SRD, Magic, Schools of Magic, Conjuration wrote:
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.

Summoning brings a creature. You can't bring something that doesn't exist, you can only bring a thing that exists already.

What JJ is describing is Creation, not Summoning:

SRD, Magic, Schools of Magic, Conjuration wrote:
Creation: a creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates. If the spell has a duration other than instantaneous, magic holds the creation together, and when the spell ends, the conjured creature or object vanishes without a trace. If the spell has an instantaneous duration, the created object or creature is merely assembled through magic. It lasts indefinitely and does not depend on magic for its existence.

Pathfinder has definitions for both Summoning and Creation, and JJ was clearly describing the latter.

While I agree with your interpretation, you can "bring" something into existence, which is more-or-less the same as bringing something that doesn't exist.


The Real Grim Shady wrote:
While I agree with your interpretation, you can "bring" something into existence, which is more-or-less the same as bringing something that doesn't exist.

"Bring to" is very different than "bring into".

And the definition is quite clear, for both Summoning and Creating. They're not the same. There is no crossover in the definition.


DominusMegadeus wrote:
So no Good character would ever use Summoning spells on sentient beings. Slap the [evil] on 'em and say goodbye to PFS.

I dunno, my LG Herald Caller has brought a lot of Archons to fight demons and other evil stuff. Then again Hound Archons are really sturdy if you can't break their DR while Lantern Archons can float at a safe distance and chip away with their lasers so they're usually safe from harm.


Saving the evil (tiefling witch in this case) summons good outsiders for kitten kicking and orphan slaying for our current Way of the Wicked Game, thanks Blake! The pained look I imagined the Archon having provides much joy to my tiefling witch.

Though excellent point about HOW one gives summons a task, in the context given, as GM I would have no issues with any of the tasks given to the Archon by the good PC, as there is logic and sense to the requests that hits on the desires of the outsider summons in question.

In honor of our current presidential race, perhaps summons is not so much about WHAT you ask the summons to do, but HOW you spin it ;).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Because the creature gets "reformed" over the course of 24 hours, we know that it's not just created on-demand. Or, rather, it persists after being summoned. Abstract creatures summoned could be created but specific ones are selected from the previously-summoned pool.


DM_Blake wrote:

[ my good character is perfectly willing to summon intelligent good ousiders like archons and say:

"Archon, destroy that evil monster before you!" which it gladly does because archons like destroying evil monsters.

I agree that summon monster isn't evil (when not summoning evil) but this explanation doesn't really fly.

Just because I enjoy something, doesn't mean it is ok to compel me to do that. I like drinking beer, but if you go all Purple Man on me, and make me drink a beer, it simply isn't cool. Numerous other, even less cool examples will doubtless occur with just a moments thought.

If you need a reason for summoning (and therefore controlling) a good creature to not be evil, you have to figure out something more (not bothering to figure out a reason is perfectly fine).


born_of_fire wrote:

PETSE

You're not summoning alementals, are you? ;)

Whiskey Elementals, here I come...

On a serious note, it doesn't really matter of anyone's ethical qualms when you're in a dungeon, slaying things that are trying to kill you, because you're probably in a place that you don't belong.

So let's see here, breaking and entering, murderous intent, murder in general (assuming things are living, of course), and doing activities that are illegal in half of the universe? And the big moral hangup is condemning the essence of a creature (not the creature itself, since it merely dissipates when "killed"), created by magic, to a suicide mission?

That's like saying you can pick your friends and your nose. But your friend's nose? You're going to Hell for that! Say Hi to Asmodeus for me!


I preferred 3.5e's summoning... were it was just bringing planar matter to your plane in the shape of a creature rather than bringing a proper creature.

The Exchange

I don't think it would be right to start drawing ethics into summoning, as it would be nerfing any good aligned caster's ability to ever summon anything in combat again. For a good aligned caster, I would not be sending summons to trigger traps, but combat, even against overwhelming odds, is fine. It's the equivalent of telling wizards they can't throw any more evocation spells, because evocation spells are evil (for god knows what moral grounds).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Just a Mort wrote:
It's the equivalent of telling wizards they can't throw any more evocation spells, because evocation spells are evil (for god knows what moral grounds).

Whenever you cast a fireball your contributing the heat-death of the universe.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

They come at the summoner's calling and fight for him because of the bond of friendship between them! Notwithstanding the fact that they are regularly shunted off into little spherical red-and-white prisons and released only to do battle or train, or when the summoner wants to play with them, which can sometimes be for entire seasons as their summoners seemingly forget about them in favour of new creatures that they have captured for future summoning.

Hmm...wait which game were we talking about again?


Possibly relevant point of view on Summoning by JJ.

I personally do not run summoned creatures like this, mostly because I let my PCs fully control summons to keep the game flowing. As a GM, I value game flow over enforcing alignment. That said, I'd love to some day run summoned creatures as JJ describes. It seems really cool to me.


Fluff your casting of Summoning spells as making a deal with whatever you Summon, trading some magical power for their assistance, granting them some face time on the Prime Material (which EVERYONE seems to desire), or even just getting them out of a jam. After all if you summon something it's no longer wherever it is in the Outer Realms, which might be appealing to some Air Elemental who finds itself ambushed by some random elemental-eating monstrosity around the time you call it up.

The possible reasons for a given creature Wanting you to summon it are endless. Pick one you like, roll your eyes at your social justice party mates, and move on.


Just a Mort wrote:
I don't think it would be right to start drawing ethics into summoning, as it would be nerfing any good aligned caster's ability to ever summon anything in combat again. For a good aligned caster, I would not be sending summons to trigger traps, but combat, even against overwhelming odds, is fine. It's the equivalent of telling wizards they can't throw any more evocation spells, because evocation spells are evil (for god knows what moral grounds).

Evocation is an inefficient use of party resources and therefore evil


I was always under the impression that summoning created a body and put an extraplanar creature's mind into it. That's why there was the 24hour wait time if you got them killed. The creature wasn't really there but he would still get pissed at you if he got killed.

Calling Spells on the other hand brought the actul creature there, so if he died he was dead for real.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

I always wondered how summoned creatures would feel about the way they were treated by their masters. My last campaign featured the UNFⒶTTERED--an anarchist terrorist group consisting of discarded familiars, independent golems, and unfettered eidolons revolting against their oppressors. They spread horror stories of human conjurors who were responsible for young celestial puppies being orphaned by their summoned parents. Eventually, they would try to recruit the PC summoner's eidolon to their cause. Unfortunately, that storyline didn't evolve far due to a TPK.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Perhaps a summons by a good summoner is like a printed invitation, a 'hook' appears which and elemental et al is free to respond to - and there may be many reasons one would want to respond. Perhaps being summoned gives them a 'Rush' sort of like a natural high, perhaps it's like currency.

Perhaps summoning is petitioners auditioning for their eventual role in the afterlife. The deity hooks them to the summons, temporarily grants them appropriate abilities and sends them off to serve ...


I personally like the idea of the summons enjoying spending time in the Material Plane. After all, it's probably much more interesting than the Elemental Plane of Fire.


Amanuensis wrote:
I always wondered how summoned creatures would feel about the way they were treated by their masters. My last campaign featured the UNFⒶTTERED--an anarchist terrorist group consisting of discarded familiars, independent golems, and unfettered eidolons revolting against their oppressors. They spread horror stories of human conjurors who were responsible for young celestial puppies being orphaned by their summoned parents. Eventually, they would try to recruit the PC summoner's eidolon to their cause. Unfortunately, that storyline didn't evolve far due to a TPK.

I've love note on this campaign to run it myself for my next game.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

What a great idea. Even if a summoned creature is merely made of planar magic debris, most people don't have a lot of ranks in planar knowledge.

This means there could be ethical groups of concerned peasants protesting the servitude of planar beings from being summoned. Don't bother us with meddlesome so-called "facts", these people are highly concerned with the welfare of those poor summoned creatures.


Milo v3 wrote:
Just a Mort wrote:
It's the equivalent of telling wizards they can't throw any more evocation spells, because evocation spells are evil (for god knows what moral grounds).
Whenever you cast a fireball your contributing the heat-death of the universe.

[algore]Fool! Don't you get it?

The real threat to the universe is obviously ManBearPig! I swear he's somewhere on the Material Plane! I'm super-duper serial![/algore]

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

Starbuck_II wrote:
I've love note on this campaign to run it myself for my next game.

I'm afraid I haven't done a complete write-up. I was mostly annoyed that the summoner's player hadn't come up with a background story/character concept for his eidolon (treating it more as a slave than a fellow party member). This side plot was meant as an encouragement to flesh out his character and develop the relationship between summoner and eidolon.

The outline:

At first, UNFⒶTTERED would use propaganda to recruit followers and sway public opinion in their favor. The PCs would find pamphlets, the wizard's familiar would be approached by recruiters, etc. UNFⒶTTERED would arrange for the PCs to uncover a particularly vile conjuror enslaving outsiders to indulge in his vices, thereby further increasing public outrage.
In a second phase, UNFⒶTTERED would try to assassinate public figures fitting their concept of the enemy, including the PC's allies/mentors. Opinion would turn against all forms of 'interplanar slavery' and similar forms of oppression. Public debate would take an increasingly hostile tone.
At last, UNFⒶTTERED agents would capture the summoner's eidolon and sever the connection between summoner and eidolon, turning it into an unfettered eidolon (against its will). In a dramatic showdown, the PCs would face UNFⒶTTERED leadership. Caught in the middle, the eidolon would be forced to pick a side, with both parties competing for its support.


Which is why I don't like Summoning.


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber

But more importantly, what about the People for the Ethical Treatment of Kyra Clones "PETKC" Poor Kyra has been summoned, used and discarded so much by Pathfinders. Where is her protection? Where is her "Society" to protect her frail nature?


Duncan7291 wrote:
But more importantly, what about the People for the Ethical Treatment of Kyra Clones "PETKC" Poor Kyra has been summoned, used and discarded so much by Pathfinders. Where is her protection? Where is her "Society" to protect her frail nature?

...

..
.

that....that sounds much more kinky than it should


Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber
Greylurker wrote:
Duncan7291 wrote:
But more importantly, what about the People for the Ethical Treatment of Kyra Clones "PETKC" Poor Kyra has been summoned, used and discarded so much by Pathfinders. Where is her protection? Where is her "Society" to protect her frail nature?

...

..
.

that....that sounds much more kinky than it should

In retrospect, you are correct....poor Kyra clone 2012451


No, not the one GoatToucher played! NOOO!!

The Exchange

No. Evocation is not a waste of time if you use sufficient cheese to give yourself wayang spellhunter and magical lineage on fireball, for a lv 4 dazing fireball.

Evocation flat out for every trick in the book to increase damage to 1-shot everything is a waste of time, because it spoils the party's fun.

I prefer summoning for most stuff, being less *broken* and all, but if all you're facing is stuff immune to mind-affecting, has DR/hardness or incorpreal, then what are you supposed to do to stop that thing in its tracks? Pit? Black tentacles? Too big for that/CMD too high for that/incorpreal. The good thing about dazing is that it works on everything, elemental immunities not withstanding. Admixture wizards can even switch elements on the fly.

As a wizard, if enemies are immune to most standard forms of control, what are you supposed to do? Dazing is the other option.

Of course, that being said, onus is on you NOT to use that ability(because it spoils the GMs fun) unless you really need it. I used it only once, against a huge construct in a PFS scenario. Only once, that scenario.

Its always good to know that you've an ace in your hand that you can throw out when sh*t hits the fan.


Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
Just a Mort wrote:
It's the equivalent of telling wizards they can't throw any more evocation spells, because evocation spells are evil (for god knows what moral grounds).
Whenever you cast a fireball your contributing the heat-death of the universe.

[algore]Fool! Don't you get it?

The real threat to the universe is obviously ManBearPig! I swear he's somewhere on the Material Plane! I'm super-duper serial![/algore]

He is. He is current location isn't known, but he was here in the 70's.

http://candlecove.wikia.com/wiki/ManBearPig


Thank god my Occultist doesn't have this issue when he uses his Necromatic Servant as it is a thought construct and ceases to exist when it is slain.


Logan's Run
Summoning in the future. To be Summoned, you have to put your self in...


The Local Summons Union # 359 is not happy, there has been a rash of complaints about certain wizards and summoners not abiding by the Summoned Creature Code of Conduct. Many of the complaints come from unseen servants citing "unseemly and unsanitary" working conditions.

1 to 50 of 59 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / I don't get it: Summoning Spells - PETSA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Summoned Elementals) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.