Can 'humanoid' target spells, be cast on an Eidolon?
Under the Summoner section, it states: "A summoner may cast spells on his eidolon even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the eidolon’s type (outsider)."
But in this case the Eidolon is a quadruped beast. It definitely does NOT have the humanoid qualifications. One of my players is saying that since it says: "... normally do not affect creatures of the eidolon’s type (outsider)" then that means that any humanoid spell can be cast on it.
I tend to think that for a 'humanoid' target spell, the target still has to meet the humanoid qualifications. What do you all think please? Or is this clarified anywhere in the RAW?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You mean it's written out for you but you just want to ignore what it says?
It looks like that rule as written allows you to ignore all type/subtype spell restrictions. The restriction of "Person" spells only affecting humanoids is just the most common of the restrictions that you can ignore.
This ability has nothing to do with the physical shape of the eidolon.
Yes. That is what share spells does for casters that have "pets".
It has nothing do with the shape, but the racial type.
Humanoid is a race type that include humans, elves, dwarves, giants, and a few other creatures.
In Pathfinder Humanoid is a specific game term describing a game mechanic. While it is also a word in the English language when used in the context of the game its meaning is a little different.
Consider that a character uses a uses a polymorph spell still keeps his Humanoid type. So I shape change into an octopus but I am still considered a humanoid(human).
Ok, but the very first line of the description of that class feature states: "The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “you” on his eidolon (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on himself." So doesn't that limit it to only spells with the "you" target in the first place? And if so, I am not aware right off, of any "you" target spells that say humanoid only anyways!
They're separate sentences. They alter the summoner's ability to cast spells on their eidolon are in two different but complementary ways.
Ok, but the very first line of the description of that class feature states: "The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “you” on his eidolon (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on himself." So doesn't that limit it to only spells with the "you" target in the first place?
No, they are two independent clauses that grant two independent abilities.
Ok, but the very first line of the description of that class feature states: "The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “you” on his eidolon (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on himself." So doesn't that limit it to only spells with the "you" target in the first place? And if so, I am not aware right off, of any "you" target spells that say humanoid only anyways!
Charm person, dominate person, reduce person, and enlarge person only affect humanoids.
You need Charm monster, and Dominate monster for other creatures.
edit: There won't be any humanoid spells that say you for reasons mentioned. I misread you comment at first.
Ok, but the very first line of the description of that class feature states: "The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “you” on his eidolon (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on himself." So doesn't that limit it to only spells with the "you" target in the first place? And if so, I am not aware right off, of any "you" target spells that say humanoid only anyways!Charm person, dominate person, reduce person, and enlarge person only affect humanoids.
But those spells don't target "you." (See dimension door for an example spell that does.) A summoner could use this spell to teleport his eidolon without teleporting himself.
Ok, but the very first line of the description of that class feature states: "The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “you” on his eidolon (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on himself." So doesn't that limit it to only spells with the "you" target in the first place? And if so, I am not aware right off, of any "you" target spells that say humanoid only anyways!Charm person, dominate person, reduce person, and enlarge person only affect humanoids.But those spells don't target "you." (See dimension door for an example spell that does.)
I edited the comment. I read "I am not aware right off, of any target spells that say humanoid only anyways!". The word "you" got skipped while I was reading.
You mean it's written out for you but you just want to ignore what it says?
* faceplam *
In regards to these two quotes - If you do some searching there is a very large disagreement on this! I found about as many discussion threads that say it does work, as I did ones that say it doesn't work. And there is no reason to be rude to someone who is asking for information. One is already being strong enough of personal character to admit to not knowing the answer and then your rude to them? To me that just shows which of them has a stronger personal character, and it is NOT the one being rude.
Are there any spells (specifically on the Summoner spell list) that have a target of "You" AND specify a creature type (thus, a spell that both sentences would apply to)? I'm fairly certain there are not, therefore the two sentences can't be intended to apply to the same spell, and must be independent.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Can 'humanoid' target spells, be cast on an Eidolon?
Under the Summoner section, it states: "A summoner may cast spells on his eidolon even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the eidolon’s type (outsider)."
But in this case the Eidolon is a quadruped beast. It definitely does NOT have the humanoid qualifications. One of my players is saying that since it says: "... normally do not affect creatures of the eidolon’s type (outsider)" then that means that any humanoid spell can be cast on it.
I tend to think that for a 'humanoid' target spell, the target still has to meet the humanoid qualifications. What do you all think please? Or is this clarified anywhere in the RAW?
Only spells cast by the Summoner on their OWN eidolon. It's specifically there to allow the use of the Enlarge Person spell on the Eidolon.
|
But those spells don't target "you." (See dimension door for an example spell that does.) A summoner could use this spell to teleport his eidolon without teleporting himself.Ok, but the very first line of the description of that class feature states: "The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “you” on his eidolon (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on himself." So doesn't that limit it to only spells with the "you" target in the first place? And if so, I am not aware right off, of any "you" target spells that say humanoid only anyways!Charm person, dominate person, reduce person, and enlarge person only affect humanoids.
It gets better. Because the eidolon is the target of the spell, its size doesn't matter, but its reach does, for the purpose of which allies it can take along. Because it is not the caster of the spell, it can take a full round of actions.
I've seen this in action in the Emerald Spire. Thank you,
Are there any spells (specifically on the Summoner spell list) that have a target of "You" AND specify a creature type (thus, a spell that both sentences would apply to)? I'm fairly certain there are not, therefore the two sentences can't be intended to apply to the same spell, and must be independent.
Spells that target "you" don't need to specify a creature type:
Examples: Shield, Ventriloquism, Long Arm. (on the list)
Spell that targets humanoids only on the list: Enlarge Person.
Are there any spells (specifically on the Summoner spell list) that have a target of "You" AND specify a creature type (thus, a spell that both sentences would apply to)? I'm fairly certain there are not, therefore the two sentences can't be intended to apply to the same spell, and must be independent.
For this person in the quote above is the player I'm dealing with in my Campaign which caused me to start this thread. I had to make multiple posts in my campaign about this subject and telling him I had already spent 6 hours researching the subject and then finally posting my decision, after I posted my decision, then he gets on here trying to argue his point further?
Right now I am a hairbreadth away from banning him from my Campaign. I'm just not making the decision right now because I don't want to make the decision based only off my anger.
This question dates back to familiars and animal companions; and the consensus is almost universal that share spells is there to allow the master to cast spells like enlarge person on their creature.
Are there any spells (specifically on the Summoner spell list) that have a target of "You" AND specify a creature type (thus, a spell that both sentences would apply to)? I'm fairly certain there are not, therefore the two sentences can't be intended to apply to the same spell, and must be independent.
There are no spells that call out "you" and a specific creature type.
You are correct. They are two different clauses.
One allows you to cast spells with a target of "you" on your eidolon.
The other allows you to cast spells that call out a specific creature type on your eidolon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The other allows you to cast spells that call out a specific creature type on your eidolon.
And I believe that Enlarge/Reduce Person are the only spells in that criteria.
Are there any spells (specifically on the Summoner spell list) that have a target of "You" AND specify a creature type (thus, a spell that both sentences would apply to)? I'm fairly certain there are not, therefore the two sentences can't be intended to apply to the same spell, and must be independent.For this person in the quote above is the player I'm dealing with in my Campaign which caused me to start this thread. I had to make multiple posts in my campaign about this subject and telling him I had already spent 6 hours researching the subject and then finally posting my decision, after I posted my decision, then he gets on here trying to argue his point further?
Right now I am a hairbreadth away from banning him from my Campaign. I'm just not making the decision right now because I don't want to make the decision based only off my anger.
But he is correct if he is saying what most of use are saying.
The only way the opposing rule would be correct is if there are spells that does what he ask, which is to call out "you" and a creature type.
Now if you say I am going to houserule it so that only one clause applies that is different. In that case he should just accept the houserule or leave the table.
And I believe that Enlarge/Reduce Person are the only spells in that criteria.
The other allows you to cast spells that call out a specific creature type on your eidolon.
I think so too unless someone takes a feat/archetype/etc that gives them other spells.
The only way the opposing rule would be correct is if there are spells that does what he ask, which is to call out "you" and a creature type.
There are no personal only spells (i.e. target "you" that do this. Every spell that calls out a creature type is one that's generally target "creature touched" or "creature".
There are no personal only spells (i.e. target "you" that do this. Every spell that calls out a creature type is one that's generally target "creature touched" or "creature".The only way the opposing rule would be correct is if there are spells that does what he ask, which is to call out "you" and a creature type.
That is was my point. :)
I wasn't trying to say it was actually possible for that to be true.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are there any spells (specifically on the Summoner spell list) that have a target of "You" AND specify a creature type (thus, a spell that both sentences would apply to)? I'm fairly certain there are not, therefore the two sentences can't be intended to apply to the same spell, and must be independent.For this person in the quote above is the player I'm dealing with in my Campaign which caused me to start this thread. I had to make multiple posts in my campaign about this subject and telling him I had already spent 6 hours researching the subject and then finally posting my decision, after I posted my decision, then he gets on here trying to argue his point further?
Right now I am a hairbreadth away from banning him from my Campaign. I'm just not making the decision right now because I don't want to make the decision based only off my anger.
Hmm...
*quick search*
Here is your campaign thread...
Don't see anything there that would warrant banning a player. Especially since your player's post on this thread wasn't out of line in any way. You, on the other hand, seem to be taking this far too personally. Please try to calm down.
BTW, it took me 15 minutes to find this. Search is your friend.
I've talked to Jason and updated the FAQ about share spells. To sum up: yes, a regular summoner is able to cast humanoid-only spells on his eidolon (duh); yes, a synthesist can too because it doesn't alter share spells.
There is a bit of weirdness about the synthesist and enlarge person that Jason wants to think about for a bit because of the "eidolon must be at least the same size as the synthesist" rule. Basically, if you're Medium and the eidolon is Medium, should it be assumed that the spell affects you "both," or is it a weird case where the summoner "outgrows" the Medium eidolon. Likewise, if you're Medium and the eidolon is Large, you already have the Large benefits, so turning into a Large summoner inside a Large eidolon-shell shouldn't have any effect. Anyway, he's going to let that "roll around in the old rock tumbler," as he puts it.
There is weirdness when you use it on a Synthesist that might be answered later on in the thread, but it doesn't matter, because normal Eidolons can take Enlarge person just fine.
Don't see anything there that would warrant banning a player. Especially since your player's post on this thread wasn't out of line in any way. You, on the other hand, seem to be taking this far too personally. Please try to calm down.
In fairness to my GM, I'm not the most tactful player, and any time there's an argument in our game, it's safe to assume that it's at least partially my fault.
|
There is no doubt on this op. You are wrong. Lets parse the entire ability out to demonstrate why.
Share Spells (Ex): The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “you” on his eidolon (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on himself.
This means the summoner can cast spells with the target of you on his eidolon. Doesnt impact other things.
A summoner may cast spells on his eidolon even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the eidolon's type (outsider).
This answers your question. Humanoid is a creature type. Eidolons are able to be targetted by and affected by spells that target humanoids.
Spells cast in this way must come from the summoner spell list. This ability does not allow the eidolon to share abilities that are not spells, even if they function like spells.
This give restrictions on how it can be used.
Where are you getting a different reading? Please just state how you are getting a different reading from the text.
He is reading the first two clauses as interconnected and applying to the same spells.
He's wrong, yes, no doubt about it, but it's not an Underpants on Head bonkers reading.
I misread this for years without realizing it, seems like a relatively common error, but an easy one to correctly explain.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The given reasoning is that the first sentence talks about spells with a target of you, and so this must apply to the entire ability. This is wrong, but let's break down why a bit more.
Summary: The text says you can, and there is no reason for the class feature to exist if you can't.
If it said:
The summoner may cast a spell with a target of “you” on his eidolon (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on himself. He may cast these spells on his eidolon even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the eidolon's type (outsider)
then Stormrider's reading would be correct, because "these spells" links the sentences; the next sentence must be talking about the spells from the previous sentence with a target of "you".
This isn't the case. The second sentence refers to "spells" in general and adds restrictions after, making sure to link the restriction to the previous two abilities granted by saying that spells cast "in this way" (i.e. using the two abilities previously discussed in the class feature) must be from the summoner spell list and must be actual spells.
(You could theoretically claim that the restriction only refers to the previous sentence, so a summoner could cast spells with a target of "you" on their eidolon regardless of whether they were on the summoner spell list so long as they could be cast on creatures of the eidolon's type, but that would be a very odd reading and the ability would have been written terribly if that were intended.)
It if had not included this link it would be saying that spells in general must be cast from the summoner spell list, obviously contradicting all the classes that use different spell lists.
The use of a demonstrative to tie the restriction to what came before, and what not including one would make it say, shows why them not using one to link the first two sentences is important.
That said, Pathfinder is not always written with the care that goes into reading it, and I have a particular annoyance with people who seize on what people reviewing actual laws would dismiss as inartful drafting to do something nonsensical, so let's also look at the effects of these rulings.
In the dominant reading, this class feature allows what are normally personal buff spells to be cast on the eidolon, which can often benefit from the more than the summoner would. This is a useful class feature that is thematically appropriate for the summoner, who entire concept is having a scary monster that does their fighting for them.
In Stormrider's reading, this class feature is a piece of worthless garbage that should be cut from the class entirely. I'm not going to say that there are NO spells with a range of "you" that are restricted to being cast on humanoids because there are a whole lot of spells out there, but if they exist at all they are vanishingly few in number. People asked earlier in the thread about any spells that met this criteria, and no one had an example. It's simply not how they write spells. And the fact that the ability still present on the Unchained Summoner, and is used for familiars, should be evidence that it actually does something.
The closest thing I have is the spell Blend, which was designed for use by elves, which are a humanoid subtype and thus implicitly that spell could only be used by humanoids while having a target of "you". But in addition to being a pretty long walk, and that spell being learnable by other races with the GM's permission, and that an elf could still cast the spell if they were transformed into a nonhumanoid because the restriction only refers to learning it, not casting it, Blend isn't on the summoner spell list anyway.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, okay, okay! It seems my reading/interpretation was incorrect. I'm going to revert my ruling and allow the humanoid spells on his eidolon. I'm man enough to admit when I'm wrong and to try to correct it to the best of my abilities.