I'm bringing this up because this is actually a very interesting point you've made. Not only would you have to do that, but if the interpretation of "cannot use it = doesn't have it," you'd also free up a feat slot for that creature to pick whatever feat he qualifies for, since, you know, you can't use what you don't have, right?
That specific example, yes, it might be reasonable to substitute a different feat. Maybe.
I mean, if you didn't, that means you're left with a creature who still has the feat, right? And the argument is "You can't use it because you don't have it."
That's one of the arguments I was making in parallel, yes.
If the argument is "You can't use it because the creature can't use it," that's been debunked, since the summoned creature's restrictions don't apply to you, as A. you're not a summoned monster, and B. you don't use the abilities as if you were the summoned monster, you use them as if they were yours, and NOT the summoned monster's, which is precisely what the item description says.
I hear you.
Let me explain why I'm making the arguments I am. My approach to open-to-interpretation questions is to look at the end result and work my way backwards. In the case of "you get to borrow abilities from a creature that cannot use them", that... doesn't make as much sense to me as "you get to borrow abilities from a creature that it can use". From that standpoint of asking what makes sense, I try to find an interpretation of the rules that matches. Call it reinforcement bias, but interpretations that don't match the desired outcome are discarded.
So while your interpretation is a valid one, it's one that produces what is - to me - a nonsensical outcome.
What if a summoned creature always showed up with five negative levels and you had an ability to use its attacks? The argument "I don't take a -5 penalty on my use if its attacks because it has the negative levels, not me" is parallel... but - to me - unsatisfying.
Shrug.
I believe summoned creatures also can't use spell like abilities that cost a great deal of money. Like wish.
Right. That's much more important than teleportation effects for game balance. Although restorations and raise dead are going to be more common than access to free Wishes, all of these are possible if you let the summon transfer powers that aren't normally available.
It seems I raised a good question to be discuss a while :-)
In fact, with or without Teleport (I'll check with my DM) or Wish (100% sure my DM won't let me cast these without spending material component), this item is amazing for RP.
With time or other items, I'll be able to cast these spell likes anyway.
BUT... what about a gold and lacquer worn faceless/shapeless mask (Vidocq like) that will display Rorscha-like creature faces ? Faces that will animate with random effects and/or screaming or biting like they do as creatures.
... and since this mask can cover my face, why not a more grave voice (Vader like, yes, but too easy, I can imagine something less classic :-))
Thx all anyway for your answers !