Planar Binding, even the much maligned planar binding of efreet, is a canonical effect that should remain a part of the game. In order to have fantasy roleplaying, it is almost an assumption that wizards will bind powerful elementals and demons to do the mage's bidding.
However, the big problem is that the Planar Binding spells and effects use as an attempt to balance them the hit die of the target creature. Unfortunately, as proven by the Polymorph subschool patch, Hit Die are a notoriously poor balancing metric, as different outsiders of a given Hit Die can have a wide difference in spell like abilities.
On the one hand, applying a similar patch to Planar Binding as was used with Polymorph could result in a clean balancing of the spell, it robs the spell of a lot of its flavor, as essentially you couldn't bind, say, a Bestiary standard Efreet, but rather a Fire type outsider with x, y, and z special abilities.
So, how do you then go about establishing a method for functionality of this spell that doesn't result in infinite money loops with at will or per day spell like abilities?
I'd deal with this the same way I'd deal with fixing undead creation:
Make Planar Binding a spell with nearly empty rules text. Then, for each Outsider that might be bound, add a few lines to their bestiary entry about the costs and requirements to bind them.
I'd deal with this the same way I'd deal with fixing undead creation:
Make Planar Binding a spell with nearly empty rules text. Then, for each Outsider that might be bound, add a few lines to their bestiary entry about the costs and requirements to bind them.
The problem is that every creature of the Outsider type is a valid target for planar binding, which makes it less than ideal, whereas not every undead type is creatable with the create undead spells.
Perhaps if each type of Outsider had fixed guidelines for binding, so yugoloths follow w rules, devils follow x rules, archons follow y rules, and djinn follow z rules, etc. I could see that working as a potential solution, as it is not overly common for new outsider types to be created out of whole cloth.
The problem is that every creature of the Outsider type is a valid target for planar binding, which makes it less than ideal, whereas not every undead type is creatable with the create undead spells.
Hrmm. I'd just suggest that not all outsiders need binding rules, then. This spell (And Planar Ally) does suffer from the Polymorph problem. Adding new outsiders to Binding/Ally spells should be the same as adding them to Summon spells. It should be opt-in, not opt-out.
The problem is that every creature of the Outsider type is a valid target for planar binding, which makes it less than ideal, whereas not every undead type is creatable with the create undead spells.Hrmm. I'd just suggest that not all outsiders need binding rules, then. This spell (And Planar Ally) does suffer from the Polymorph problem. Adding new outsiders to Binding/Ally spells should be the same as adding them to Summon spells. It should be opt-in, not opt-out.
I agree in principle. I do feel that angels, archons, genie, elementals, yugoloths, demons, and devils at a minimum should have binding/ally rules specific to their subtypes. Defining the rules for binding/allying with a devil to be different from the rules for binding/allying with genie is all kinds of good content.
Open type outsiders, like formians/sl**d, inevitables, rakshasas, night hags, etc. can and should be opt-in only.
I do feel that angels, archons, genie, elementals, yugoloths, demons, and devils at a minimum should have binding/ally rules specific to their subtypes. Defining the rules for binding/allying with a devil to be different from the rules for binding/allying with genie is all kinds of good content.
And this can be done: Just put the binding rules for Devils/Mephits/Genies in the header of their combined Bestiary entry, rather than by each species.
I'd deal with this the same way I'd deal with fixing undead creation:
Make Planar Binding a spell with nearly empty rules text. Then, for each Outsider that might be bound, add a few lines to their bestiary entry about the costs and requirements to bind them.
I agree about the "nearly empty rules text", but I'd leave everything else to the DM's discretion. I dislike rules that say "If the PCs do X, then your NPC must respond by doing Y" (viz. Diplomacy, Planar Binding, etc.).
I agree about the "nearly empty rules text", but I'd leave everything else to the DM's discretion. I dislike rules that say "If the PCs do X, then your NPC must respond by doing Y" (viz. Diplomacy, Planar Binding, etc.).
What I am more suggesting is that, as a part of the rules text, governing, for example, Devils, you have something like the following:
Calling:
All devils subjected to a calling effect require the terms of the request to be phrased as a formal contract. The caster performing the calling effect must succeed on a hidden, opposed Knowledge: The Planes check, or the Devil will deny and/or subvert the caster's request. The caster can attempt to create a binding contract before casting the spell, but cannot take 20 on this check. All devils called with a calling effect will take actions they consider appropriate unless excluded from the terms of the binding contract.
I agree about the "nearly empty rules text", but I'd leave everything else to the DM's discretion. I dislike rules that say "If the PCs do X, then your NPC must respond by doing Y" (viz. Diplomacy, Planar Binding, etc.).What I am more suggesting is that, as a part of the rules text, governing, for example, Devils, you have something like the following:
Calling:
All devils subjected to a calling effect require the terms of the request to be phrased as a formal contract. The caster performing the calling effect must succeed on a hidden, opposed Knowledge: The Planes check, or the Devil will deny and/or subvert the caster's request. The caster can attempt to create a binding contract before casting the spell, but cannot take 20 on this check. All devils called with a calling effect will take actions they consider appropriate unless excluded from the terms of the binding contract.
That's interesting stuff, but what I meant was that having a fixed price list or Charisma check DC for a given task to compel a particular course of action is something I don't like. When I'm the DM, I'm going to have my NPCs behave according to their own personalities and motivations (which includes devils following the letter of a contract instead of the spirit, e.g.); I won't have their behaviour dictated by a die roll when it doesn't make sense.
Calling:
All devils subjected to a calling effect require the terms of the request to be phrased as a formal contract. The caster performing the calling effect must succeed on a hidden, opposed Knowledge: The Planes check, or the Devil will deny and/or subvert the caster's request. The caster can attempt to create a binding contract before casting the spell, but cannot take 20 on this check. All devils called with a calling effect will take actions they consider appropriate unless excluded from the terms of the binding contract.
I really like the idea of putting rules into the monster types section regarding how calling and summoning affects monsters of that type, along with particular flavor text etc. Further, I really like Treelynx's text above about contracts for devils. Good flavor man!
That's interesting stuff, but what I meant was that having a fixed price list or Charisma check DC for a given task to compel a particular course of action is something I don't like. When I'm the DM, I'm going to have my NPCs behave according to their own personalities and motivations; I won't have their behaviour dictated by a die roll when it doesn't make sense.
While I agree with your sentiment, and would probably do the same, the argument goes that if you are willing to let your NPC's and monsters bleed and die as a result of die rolls, why is how they react to a die roll different? Again, I understand your point, and agree with it, but an argument can be made either way. I do think though that simple die rolls dictating NPC behavior are an issue so broken crazy high Diplomacy scores always frost my buns lol
Do you think there needs to be some divine caster levels associated with this spell. I'm imagining high level clerics calling and "asking" angels, etc. to go on a crusade with them. Of course there is the other side of the coin with demonic cult leaders summoning agents of their overlords to do their bidding.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I agree about the "nearly empty rules text", but I'd leave everything else to the DM's discretion. I dislike rules that say "If the PCs do X, then your NPC must respond by doing Y" (viz. Diplomacy, Planar Binding, etc.).What I am more suggesting is that, as a part of the rules text, governing, for example, Devils, you have something like the following:
Calling:
All devils subjected to a calling effect require the terms of the request to be phrased as a formal contract. The caster performing the calling effect must succeed on a hidden, opposed Knowledge: The Planes check, or the Devil will deny and/or subvert the caster's request. The caster can attempt to create a binding contract before casting the spell, but cannot take 20 on this check. All devils called with a calling effect will take actions they consider appropriate unless excluded from the terms of the binding contract.
I also like this a lot. It would be great to have different types of outsiders have different requirements for binding/ally and gate effects. Angels could require a donation to the poor/orphans/or the forces of good, demons could require sacrifices/killing things, daemons would want souls, etc. Combined with different skill checks for different types, this would make a demon summoner play differently from an elemental binder, etc.
That's interesting stuff, but what I meant was that having a fixed price list or Charisma check DC for a given task to compel a particular course of action is something I don't like. When I'm the DM, I'm going to have my NPCs behave according to their own personalities and motivations; I won't have their behaviour dictated by a die roll when it doesn't make sense.
Agreed, which is why I think it is important to establish, in calling effects, two difficulties.
First, the getting the outsider there and interested. That absolutely should be part of the mechanics of the spell.
The second difficulty, of getting the outsider to agree to what you are requesting it to do, is the difficult and problematic one, and should be resolved by the specific rules for each individual type of outsider. For special classes, like the malconvoker, allowing a special rule that allows them to substitute the normal rules for a subset of outsiders is fine. But it is critical that part of the rules text for the outsiders include as a baseline how they respond to being called, whether through planar binding, planar ally, or gate.
Devils should be willing to wheel and deal, Demons may require intimidation, Elementals may require environments suitable to their type, but regardless, the specifics of what the outsider will do when successfully called is secondary to the effect that called them there.
Do you think there needs to be some divine caster levels associated with this spell. I'm imagining high level clerics calling and "asking" angels, etc. to go on a crusade with them. Of course there is the other side of the coin with demonic cult leaders summoning agents of their overlords to do their bidding.
That's what Planar Ally is for, not Planar Binding.
Planar Binding is about forcing some demon into a pentagram and not letting it out until it does something for you (e.g. extorting favours rather than asking for favours).
That's what Planar Ally is for, not Planar Binding.Planar Binding is about forcing some demon into a pentagram and not letting it out until it does something for you (e.g. extorting favours rather than asking for favours).
This actually brings up a problem with this solution.
If we are stuck with mechanics light planar binding and planar ally spells, and offload the "getting the outsider to do what you want" bit to the monster entry, it changes the difference between these two calling spells.
In the case of planar binding, the trap mechanic pretty clearly establishes the ability of the spell to be used against hostile outsiders, whereas planar ally requires the outsider to match alignment, and, although the spell does not specify, I would assume of friendly attitude. Regardless, I think it is reasonable for callable outsiders to have fixed rules for how to get them to do what you want, allowing payment to provide a fixed bonus, but providing a method for limited control also. Gate is still a rough spot of the calling rules, since it acts like an odd hybrid of summon monster, planar ally, and planar binding. I think if the summon monster effect required concentration it would be okay, especially if gate is increased to a 1 round casting time. That way, the merged calling rules between ally/binding can be used with gate, as well.
That's what Planar Ally is for, not Planar Binding.
Planar Binding is about forcing some demon into a pentagram and not letting it out until it does something for you (e.g. extorting favours rather than asking for favours).
Ahhh. Thanks, hadn't even read it. Looked up Binding when I read this thread. Sparked my interest because of a conversation at a game recently where we were trying to figure out how all of these enormous temples "built on the backs of demon labor" could have been done at the work rate of 1 round per level. ;)
Planar Binding spells should allow the caster to either use Diplomacy or Intimidate to get an extraplanar creature to perform one service, just like Planar Ally. Details regarding the caster level and procedures required to bind a creature should be included in the monster's bestiary. The caster should either have firsthand knowledge of the type of monster to be summoned or be able to recall that information with a successful Knowledge check (the type and DC of which should be included in the monster's bestiary).
The problem is that every creature of the Outsider type is a valid target for planar binding, which makes it less than ideal, whereas not every undead type is creatable with the create undead spells.Hrmm. I'd just suggest that not all outsiders need binding rules, then. This spell (And Planar Ally) does suffer from the Polymorph problem. Adding new outsiders to Binding/Ally spells should be the same as adding them to Summon spells. It should be opt-in, not opt-out.I agree in principle. I do feel that angels, archons, genie, elementals, yugoloths, demons, and devils at a minimum should have binding/ally rules specific to their subtypes. Defining the rules for binding/allying with a devil to be different from the rules for binding/allying with genie is all kinds of good content.
Open type outsiders, like formians/sl**d, inevitables, rakshasas, night hags, etc. can and should be opt-in only.
I think this is a terrific idea. Any chance the proposed rules text entries will make it into the Pathfinder Bestiary? If not, I'd still like to see them in the core PF Beta. It doesn't sound like a lot of text for each type, so it could all fit together (alphabetically by type) in one place: either under one calling spell that the others reference, or else in Ch.14 Nonplayer Characters under a new section entitled "Monsters" (again, referenced by all the calling spells).
Planar Binding spells should allow the caster to either use Diplomacy or Intimidate to get an extraplanar creature to perform one service, just like Planar Ally. Details regarding the caster level and procedures required to bind a creature should be included in the monster's bestiary. The caster should either have firsthand knowledge of the type of monster to be summoned or be able to recall that information with a successful Knowledge check (the type and DC of which should be included in the monster's bestiary).
That should about do it, although for flavor, I'm not sure that Intimidate is the best choice. Bluff is certainly within flavor, as well, and since Outsiders are Outsiders, Knowledge or Linguistics checks used like Intimidate or Diplomacy can work as well.
Planar Ally: Call an outsider of compatable alignment, of a friendly attitude. Can be asked to perform one service, with rules as established by the Outsider's type.
Planar Binding: Call and trap an outsider in a Magic Circle against <foo>. Attitude is Unfriendly, even if the outsider would normally be aligned similarly to the caster. Outsider can attempt to break the trap with a Charisma check daily, or via any other means not prohibited by the trap. Can be asked to perform one service, with rules as established by the outsider's type.
Gate: Call an outsider. Attitude is whatever the GM wants it to be. Can be asked to act as a summoned monster, but requires caster concentration. This is a reasonable cost, because an outsider of up to 34-40 HD is unruly, and losing concentration should have severe consequences before the end of the spell's duration. Like, Sphere of Annihilation consequences. Plus, this takes the caster off of the field while the outsider is romping around, barring concentration hacks. Otherwise, can be asked to perform one service, with rules as established by the outsider's type.
Gate: Call an outsider. Attitude is whatever the GM wants it to be. Can be asked to act as a summoned monster, but requires caster concentration. This is a reasonable cost, because an outsider of up to 34-40 HD is unruly, and losing concentration should have severe consequences before the end of the spell's duration. Like, Sphere of Annihilation consequences. Plus, this takes the caster off of the field while the outsider is romping around, barring concentration hacks. Otherwise, can be asked to perform one service, with rules as established by the outsider's type.
This is important, when you're summoning a monster that's potentially more powerful than the mage himself. I like the fix, BTW.
Thanks.
Planar Binding and Planar Ally, and Gate, when used in the fashion of PA or PB, are what I will call Encounter spells. In some circumstances, unlike with summons, it can be okay to allow a successful calling effect to allow PCs to access something that is not level appropriate, if they are willing to take a commensurate risk, as long as there is a meaningful opportunity for failure. After all, it is an encounter which is being generated to be favorable for the caster, and not the called outsider.
In the case of Gate's pseudo-summon effect, it is still a Calling effect, which means any given outsider has the risk of being permenantly destroyed while the caster is having them do something for a handful of rounds. If the outsider breaks free of control, they are likely going to attempt to use the caster as their chew toy in fairly short order, or at least hold them accountable for it, and request recompense.
|
When I'm the DM, I'm going to have my NPCs behave according to their own personalities and motivations; I won't have their behaviour dictated by a die roll when it doesn't make sense.
While I agree with your sentiment, and would probably do the same, the argument goes that if you are willing to let your NPC's and monsters bleed and die as a result of die rolls, why is how they react to a die roll different?
The problem with social rules is that, unlike attack rolls or saving throws, PCs are immune, under the RAW, since they can just ignore a Diplomacy/Bluff/Intimidate etc roll they don't like. Even if the RAW didn't state that, players being players, they will simply choose to ignore it, or meta-game the fact that they know they have been tricked, by insisting on questioning each and every comment by the NPC, requiring endless rolls until they fail one, and the DM has no way of enforcing it, barring flat-out taking control of the PC.
The rules should flow both ways; either PCs should stand and fall based on an NPC's social skill check, or throw out the concept for PCs and NPCs alike.
That's a big reason you so rarely see a bard as a campaign BBEG. Half his arsenal of tricks is rendered obsolete, the moment you add that 'N' to his PC status.