I have a druid with the summon fey spell that I cast. My druid is outside of a room where an encounter has started with the rest of the party, but I have yet to enter the room or have line of sight to the creatures attacking the party because I am still in the hallway. If I were to cast summon fey into the room, can I command my minion to make a strike against a specific target even though my druid does not have line of sight to that creature, but my minion now does? Does line of sight have any effect at all on minions attacking your targets? Would simply telling the minion to 'attack my enemies' work as a generic command or would the minion know who my enemies are?
OK so I get that this part " It generally attacks your enemies to the best of its abilities." It's going to attack your enemies. Even if you can't SEE your enemies, it'll still make attacks against them? If the PC and minion speak the same language, I can understand the summoner saying 'attack my enemies' and it's good. But what if they don't speak the same language? What about animals, can the summoner command them to attack something they can't actually see? Let's say the summoner (not necessarily the summoner class, just a spellcaster casting a summon spell) has been blinded or is now in an area of darkness? Can they still command a summoned minion to attack something they can't see?
I guess I'm asking because I have a player who looooooooves playing a summoner type PC (so much so that she only played the summoner class in pf1 and refused to play pf2 until she found out the summoner was being added later on) and we just want to get these rules down pat and we kinda had an argument last session over this very situation.
Since summoned creatures also have the minion trait, it gets a bit more specific on top of the summoned trait.
Source Core Rulebook pg. 634 1.1
Minions are creatures that directly serve another creature. A creature with this trait can use only 2 actions per turn and can’t use reactions. Your minion acts on your turn in combat, once per turn, when you spend an action to issue it commands. For an animal companion, you Command an Animal; for a minion that’s a spell or magic item effect, like a summoned minion, you Sustain a Spell or Sustain an Activation; if not otherwise specified, you issue a verbal command, a single action with the auditory and concentrate traits. If given no commands, minions use no actions except to defend themselves or to escape obvious harm. If left unattended for long enough, typically 1 minute, mindless minions usually don’t act, animals follow their instincts, and sapient minions act how they please.
For Summon Fey, Sustain a Spell is the appropriate command and it only has the concentrate trait and requires the user to not be fatigued. This is distinct from Command an Animal which additionally has the auditory trait. It sounds like you can communicate with it directly through the spell itself even without verbally speaking a command.
As to what it can communicate back to you (what it can sense that you can't, etc.), it doesn't really say. For this, I would go with the summoned trait rules pointed out by cavernshark, which simultaneously apply.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since summoned creatures also have the minion trait, it gets a bit more specific on top of the summoned trait.
Source Core Rulebook pg. 634 1.1
Minions are creatures that directly serve another creature. A creature with this trait can use only 2 actions per turn and can’t use reactions. Your minion acts on your turn in combat, once per turn, when you spend an action to issue it commands. For an animal companion, you Command an Animal; for a minion that’s a spell or magic item effect, like a summoned minion, you Sustain a Spell or Sustain an Activation; if not otherwise specified, you issue a verbal command, a single action with the auditory and concentrate traits. If given no commands, minions use no actions except to defend themselves or to escape obvious harm. If left unattended for long enough, typically 1 minute, mindless minions usually don’t act, animals follow their instincts, and sapient minions act how they please.For Summon Fey, Sustain a Spell is the appropriate command and it only has the concentrate trait and requires the user to not be fatigued. This is distinct from Command an Animal which additionally has the auditory trait. It sounds like you can communicate with it directly through the spell itself even without verbally speaking a command.
As to what it can communicate back to you (what it can sense that you can't, etc.), it doesn't really say. For this, I would go with the summoned trait rules pointed out by cavernshark, which simultaneously apply.
Its a minion, but pursuant to the Summoned Trait, you do not need to command it to attack your enemies:
"It generally attacks your enemies to the best of its abilities. If you can communicate with it, you can attempt to command it, but the GM determines the degree to which it follows your commands. Immediately when you finish Casting the Spell, the summoned creature uses its 2 actions for that turn."
It seems clear that a Summoned Creature by default attacks your enemies. IF you can communicate with it (which in most cases, you cannot), you can command it - the minion trait allows you to command it as part of your sustain spell action (but you still have to be able to communicate with the summoned creature to command it). If you had to command it to attack your enemies, in many cases, the summoning spell would be useless as the caster probably has no way to communicate with the summoned creature.
It's worth noting, I don't think you cast the summon "into the room" because it is out of your line of sight.
But you could cast it such that the creature comes into being just at the door and then enters the room to attack as part of its action. Doing so to the best of its abilities unless you can communicate with it to command it to do something more specific.
|
|
If it can hear you, you can command it. However it may be harder to instruct it specifically. You cannot point at a target and must describe it, such as "attack the red one". Now some animals are color blind or see colors differently.
I don't see anything in the rules that say you have some sort of psychic connection to your summoned creature such that you can speak to it. The rule says "If you can communicate with it, you can attempt to command it..."
Note that it doesn't say you can command it if it hears you... they use the word "communicate", which implies that you need a shared language (or something -- telepathy should work).
Also, I find it interesting that you can "attempt" to command the summoned creature, and if successful, the GM still gets to decide what the summoned creature does. I'm guessing that probably means the summoned creature is not your meat puppet... Caster: "GO FORTH AND TRIGGER THOSE TRAPS FOR ME..." Summoned Creature: "Uh, no?"
|
|
Canonically they would trigger the traps as they are compeletely loyal. Otherwise the spell is useless for combat for saving you.
I think the rule is there if the creature cannot understand the task like "dog, pick the lock". You would order the dog to open it and it would try to chew the box open instead, or push it so it falls and smashes open. Sometimes it might not hear properly because the sound is muffled, and them GM decides it hears "dog lick the lock".
I don't think they are completely loyal in the sense you say. The rule requires you (if you can communicate with the summoned creature) to "attempt" to command the summoned creature. This part of the rule has NOTHING to do with the creature's ability to understand your command... it has to do with whether you can get it to do what you want. ONLY THEN after you get it to do what you want, THEN the GM still gets to decide what the summoned creature does, such as your dog licking the lock example.
In summary,
1. There is nothing in the rules that say the caster has any inherent way to communicate with a summoned creature,
2. If you can communicate with the summoned creature you can command/compel it to undertake an action, and
3. If you succeed in commanding the summoned creature, then the GM decides if the creature understood what you wanted it to do or does something hilariously funny (or tragic).
|
In summary,1. There is nothing in the rules that say the caster has any inherent way to communicate with a summoned creature,
2. If you can communicate with the summoned creature you can command/compel it to undertake an action, and
3. If you succeed in commanding the summoned creature, then the GM decides if the creature understood what you wanted it to do or does something hilariously funny (or tragic).
These are indeed all that is needed. My experience (I run an AP with a summoner) is the issue of meta-knowledge.
The largest issue (discussion) I had was after I relented on 1) and 2) and then the player was extremely unhappy with 3) as what I did was follow his command and followed it's instructions.
Situation: A summoned spider attacks the enemy. So far simple.
The enemy goes invisible - spider keeps attacking the spot where he/she last was. Still straightforward.
Enemy 'moves' - I tell the player - spider doesn't know where enemy is.
Player says - spider has tremor sense - spider knows. It will attack the invisible enemy.
I ask - so you tell the spider to attack the invisible creature.
Player - yes - that is what I do.
I roll a dice - 50:50 if spider will follow instructions. Spider follows instructions.
Spider moves 10 feet and attacks the invisible rogue. Player outraged - that is not what I was telling the spider.
I ask again - you instructed the spider to attack the invisible creature. Yes - but the invisible enemy !!
What player didn't know - the invisible enemy used levitation (was build in the tactics) and therefore couldn't be sensed by tremor sense.
Player insists on attacking - overules me who says the spider seems to stop attacking and is confused. I more or less asked two or three times what instructions I should follow - attack invisible (enemy).
Attack - simple
Invisible - simple
Enemy - can't tell - can only sense a single invisible token - will attack to my best of abilities.
I thought I bring up this story here. There is a danger to give instructions if you don't have the full picture.
I followed 3 as best as I could - I attacked the only invisible target close by which did a step 10 feet away and clearly could be sensed by the spider. In a sense this is similar to giving instructions while not knowing what is going on.
OP - Feel free to tell the story to your player. I regarded it hilarious that the player insisted on attacking his own comrade - the player regarded it foul play. All the summoned creature did - it followed instructions as best as it could. Not my problem that the player lacked meta knowledge that the spider was confused as the target he had attacked seemed to have disappeared. So when the instruction came - attack the invisible creature - it did attack the only invisible creature it was aware off. I even gave it a 50% chance to refuse ...
Yes - the player now actually has the feats to communicate with spiders (his favorite summoned creature) and he is more careful with instructions.
The largest issue (discussion) I had was after I relented on 1) and 2) and then the player was extremely unhappy with 3) as what I did was follow his command and followed it's instructions.
Situation: A summoned spider attacks the enemy. So far simple.
The enemy goes invisible - spider keeps attacking the spot where he/she last was. Still straightforward.
Enemy 'moves' - I tell the player - spider doesn't know where enemy is.
Player says - spider has tremor sense - spider knows. It will attack the invisible enemy.I ask - so you tell the spider to attack the invisible creature.
Player - yes - that is what I do.
I roll a dice - 50:50 if spider will follow instructions. Spider follows instructions.
Spider moves 10 feet and attacks the invisible rogue. Player outraged - that is not what I was telling the spider.
I ask again - you instructed the spider to attack the invisible creature. Yes - but the invisible enemy !!
What player didn't know - the invisible enemy used levitation (was build in the tactics) and therefore couldn't be sensed by tremor sense.
I can't agree with how you handled this from a RAW perspective, nor from RAI.
1. You're clearly trying to trap the player in word games. What you're conflating is the experience the player has with the rules and commanding summons via you as a GM, and the experience the PC would have with commanding its summons. The PC would know how to work the summon even if the player is clueless.
You can't draw a line about player meta knowledge vs PC knowledge and then insist the PCs have no knowledge/experience of their own.
2.
Tremorsense allows a monster to feel the vibrations through a solid surface caused by movement. It is an imprecise sense with a limited range (listed in the ability). Tremorsense functions only if the monster is on the same surface as the subject, and only if the subject is moving along (or burrowing through) the surface.Its clear from the...
I don't have all the information to paint an exact picture of the situation, but if the summoner was aware of the rogue, as an ally when they cast the spell, and the rogue had moved while the spider was in the room, such that the spider knew they were there during the prior attack against the enemy creature, then the spider should probably not MISTAKE the allied rogue, simply because it is an invisible creature. I'd feel claiming that it was important they attack the invisible creature, and the rogue was the only invisible creature it could sense, is implying you can convey a lot of information to it, as being Invisible is an ADVANCED concept to allow to be communicated. So actually, the spider likely sensed the use of levitation, basically a quiver as the weight vanished, but then lost track of the creature (not unlike someone going invisible, seen one moment, suddenly realizing you can see through them the moment later). That might even lead to the spider choosing to try to move into the target's old square and attack up 5 feet (which might not have been close enough) but would have been a valid tactic for a creature to attempt to continue attacking its foe. It is easier to imagine a spider thinking the enemy flew or jumped up and away, than for it to think it was an illusion that ceased to be, or teleport-ed to a different location an ally was in moments ago.
Now if the Rogue was invisible prior to the spider being summoned, and had not moved at all during the time of the spider being summoned, that might change my estimation. If the spider stopped sensing anything and couldn't feel anything where it last sensed it, and the rogue afterwards suddenly started moving, therefore suddenly being sensed, you might have reason for your scenario. The spider would think it wasn't enough force to justify that far of a jump, but might go for it anyway as a possibility. However, I am imagining that the rogue was not standing still during the whole time the spider attacked during its first round, so it should know the rogue isn't the target it is looking for.
I think more appropriate, would be to roll a die and use it to randomly pick a square, potentially making the last square the opponent was seen in having multiple instances of being chosen. You could do a d10 with 1-8 being squares around the past target, and 9 and 10 being the same square as last time, or like I mentioned give a good chance of attempting to attack the square one above where its target was last round.
So it is not an impossible story, but unless there was a lot of very specific things going on with the rogue that the spider would have been unaware of it prior to the enemy disappearing and only become aware of it after the enemy disappearing, I'd tend to agree that it feels like the GM taking the opportunity to be partial and against the players, rather than more impartial. I understand you felt you were justified, if I am right by asking them multiple times about attacking the invisible enemy, but that might have been kind of leading, as it sounds like you knew what you would have it do then.