|
The more I look at the interactions between "Command a Thrall" action and the "Conjurer of Corpses" feat the worse it gets. Conjurer of Corpses specifically needs a re-write, and the way in which clauses are split between the "thrall" rules and the effects of Command a Thrall exacerbates the problem.
The fundamental problem here is that the text outlining how Thralls (the creature) function, and the direct effects of the Command a Thrall action, are hopelessly tangled and unclear about which parts are simply descriptions of Thralls themselves (and so do not affect summons) and which parts are a direct effect of the Command a Thrall action and therefore do apply to a summoned creature. And, while the Thrall sidebar could be organized better, Conjurer of Corpses is the feat modifying the interaction and creating these problems. Yet it fails to address literally any of them.
Per the feat Conjurer of Corpses:
Undead creatures you summon with this spell can be destroyed and targeted by your spells or abilities as if they were thralls.
This means you can use the Command a Thrall ability to command a creature summoned by Summon Undead to Strike.
Unfortunately, the language stating that your own Spell Attack is used for this strike (and your own MAP) is not actually in Command a Thrall. It's in the general rules text under Thralls. Confusingly, if your Summoned Undead is trying to Escape, then the "use your spell attack and MAP" language is present in Command Thrall.
However, they can make checks to Escape using your spell attack modifier. Escaping this way uses and counts toward your multiple attack penalty.
RAW, it seems like you use your own spell attack and MAP to Escape when using Command a Thrall on a Summon, but use the Summon's attack and MAP when using Command a Thrall to Strike? Even if it is RAW that feels unintended, inconsistent, and extremely bad. It is pretty much never going to be worth spending one of your own actions for a single Strike via Command a Thrall if the Summon is using its own attack roll and MAP, especially after you've spent all three actions on your previous turn summoning it in the first place. A puppeteer could have made three thralls, cast Thrall Charge, and sacrificed a Thrall to do decent damage with those three actions. They'd even have two Thralls remaining for future turns. A max slot Summon is unlikely to match the damage of a Thrall Charge especially if the Thrall is destroyed for the bonus damage (and you're a puppeteer, why wouldn't you in most cases?).
The alternative reading here is that the text above Command a Thrall is relevant because it says "When you Command a Thrall to Strike" which still applies even when you're using Command a Thrall on a Summon, even if this specific text is not in the Command a Thrall action. It is still all in the same sidebar. But it is then followed by multiple clauses which are inextricably linked to the first. In which case you'd use the damage listed in the rules for Thralls, not the damage listed on the Summon's entry. Looking at the damage numbers, Thrall strikes seem to be in the same ballpark as max rank Summon Strikes up until about 5th level spells (assuming we're going with the use your Spell Attack modifier so accuracy is the same in both cases). After that there start to be some clear outliers favoring the Summoned undead's damage over default Thrall damage. And it only favors the Summons more from there. But if Command a Thrall supersedes the Summoned creature's damage, it very quickly becomes not worth using. And then there's the question of riders. Does a Ghast still have a paralysis rider? Worse, the same clause we're using to go this route also explicitly mentions you're limited to a melee unarmed strike. So summons with weapons are out? This quickly just becomes as big a mess as the stricter reading above.
On the bright side, it seems you can at least use Command a Thrall to move using its own speeds since the "A thrall has a Speed of 15 feet unless otherwise noted" clause is not part of Command a Thrall but part of general Thrall rules text. Command a Thrall also says "A thrall can take only simple Interact actions..." which contains clarification that it only applies to Thralls, but the fact that it's in Command a Thrall invites confusion. I think most reasonable GMs would let an intelligent summon perform more complex interactions, but the fact this clause is in the action and not in general Thrall rules is still a potential point of contention.
Lastly, there's this gem:
You can use the Command a Thrall action (see below) as long as you have at least one thrall.
Even with Conjurer of Corpses, your summons never have the thrall trait. So a strict reading here means you cannot even use Command a Thrall on a summon until you've spent an action making some actual thralls.
Overall, Necromancer is an exquisitely designed class. It's dripping with flavor, nails the class fantasy, and appears to be quite effective. But my initial excitement to build around Conjurer of Corpses deflated once I really dug into its text and the text of Command a Thrall. It's a really unfortunate blemish on what is otherwise a masterclass in TTRPG class design.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While you can Command a Thrall on a summon, I really don't think it's something that is intended to be used much. You already have a much better deal of separate MAP and two actions for the cost of one with the summon sustain rules. Even if you do want to put more actions into it, in the common case of needing a summon to move-and-attack, Thrall Charge will add bonus damage to your summon's base damage (maybe you want to show off with a perma-slowed zombie summon that can actually do something).
Conjurer of Corpses is giving you a free max-rank summon for when it's useful, and adding the perk of being able to make it explode with a focus point once it's no longer useful, or just make it a source of healing, a small psychic AoE, or some other such thing. The ability to pour actions into a summon at a worse-than-usual exchange rate is a tertiary benefit at best.
I know this is Rules Discussion, but I definitely wouldn't sweat a bit of weirdness like Command a Thrall requiring you have a thrall but a summon-that-can-be-targeted-like-a-thrall technically not being a thrall.
|
|
While you can Command a Thrall on a summon, I really don't think it's something that is intended to be used much. You already have a much better deal of separate MAP and two actions for the cost of one with the summon sustain rules. Even if you do want to put more actions into it, in the common case of needing a summon to move-and-attack, Thrall Charge will add bonus damage to your summon's base damage (maybe you want to show off with a perma-slowed zombie summon that can actually do something).
Conjurer of Corpses is giving you a free max-rank summon for when it's useful, and adding the perk of being able to make it explode with a focus point once it's no longer useful, or just make it a source of healing, a small psychic AoE, or some other such thing. The ability to pour actions into a summon at a worse-than-usual exchange rate is a tertiary benefit at best.
I know this is Rules Discussion, but I definitely wouldn't sweat a bit of weirdness like Command a Thrall requiring you have a thrall but a summon-that-can-be-targeted-like-a-thrall technically not being a thrall.
My main concern is that the rules as written are a confusing mess. You can Command a Thrall on a Summon, so the rules when doing so should be relatively digestible and reasonably free of contradictions and inconsistencies.
Whether it is ever a good idea to Command a Thrall on your Summon is a matter of opinion and not really the subject of my original post. And even if, for the sake of argument, it was almost never the right thing to do, that is not a valid counterpoint to the feedback that the rules interactions here are unclear and confusing.
|
|
Basically, anyone that somehow has a Thrall has access to the "Command a Thrall Action" the same way that anyone with a sword can Strike with a Sword. It's not a "Necromancer Ability or Spell".
It literally has the necromancer trait and gaining access to it requires the Necromancer class or Necromancer dedication.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I found shroudb’s comments quite useful in really trying to ascertain just what is going on. PF2e’s writing famously tends toward technical and the nesting of traits and following clauses does make it quite important to ensure that what appears to be “fact” is supported by the rules as written.
It might feel obtuse, and you can claim it is inept, but really I feel they are actually trying to clarify and help all reading here to further understanding.
|
|
I found shroudb’s comments quite useful in really trying to ascertain just what is going on. PF2e’s writing famously tends toward technical and the nesting of traits and following clauses does make it quite important to ensure that what appears to be “fact” is supported by the rules as written.
It might feel obtuse, and you can claim it is inept, but really I feel they are actually trying to clarify and help all reading here to further understanding.
Except that they're making arguments with built in assumptions that are incorrect.
They assume the ability being used must be a "class ability" or "necromancer ability." Nothing in Conjurer of Corpses limits the referenced spell or ability to only "class" or only "necromancer" abilities and spells. The only requirement is that the spell or ability normally targets Thralls.
They made use of straw men and red herrings instead of just changing their opinion (and I say that not to suggest they should change their opinion to agreeing with me, but they seem very certain where a reasonable person should have some doubt).
Absolutely no sound arguments or rules text references have actually been made that supports the idea Command a Thrall cannot be used on an undead summoned via Summon Undead cast by a Necromancer with the Conjurer of Corpses feat.
Despite my insistence on this, I'm actually willing to change my mind if someone can cite rules text that supports the idea an ability I am using which targets my thrall doesn't count as "my" ability. I'm pretty confident no one is going to find such rules text, but I do agree that PF2E is a complex and technical system and it's very possible I am not considering something.
That said, unless someone finds a clause somewhere that makes my original post moot, this entire line of discussion is a red herring.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think this entire thread is a red herring.
The easiest fix is to explicitly ban Command a Thrall from the list of abilities that you can use on your creatures summoned from Conjurer of Corpses. It avoids any rules wonkiness and avoids a trap option for players in the process.
|
|
I think this entire thread is a red herring.
The easiest fix is to explicitly ban Command a Thrall from the list of abilities that you can use on your creatures summoned from Conjurer of Corpses. It avoids any rules wonkiness and avoids a trap option for players in the process.
Oh I've already talked to my GM about this in my home game and we came to an agreement for how it would work.
But that's beside the point. The rules need clarification. You can ban it in your game if you want. But what about PFS?
This is still an issue with the rules themselves even if you solve it in your own game with house rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It may have the Trait, but there are other ways one may take control of a Thrall, as an example, if a caster uses Bind Undead (Thrall is a mindless Undead) he automatically gets the Command a Thrall Action as well.Basically, anyone that somehow has a Thrall has access to the "Command a Thrall Action" the same way that anyone with a sword can Strike with a Sword. It's not a "Necromancer Ability or Spell".It literally has the necromancer trait and gaining access to it requires the Necromancer class or Necromancer dedication.
This is wrong. Thralls have a rule in their side bar that they can only take an order from your necromancer ability (including those granted by feats) or grave spells (slotted spells can’t compel them, allied or archetype defensive swap can’t get them to move either).
a necromancer ability that's not a necromancer ability seems like a really clumsy way to try to try to build a restriction.
.. I'm not even sure if the 'broken' outcome is really a problem anyways. The corpse making strikes using its own statistics even when Commanded is both intuitive and mechanically reasonable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is wrong. Thralls have a rule in their side bar that they can only take an order from your necromancer ability (including those granted by feats) or grave spells (slotted spells can’t compel them, allied or archetype defensive swap can’t get them to move either).It may have the Trait, but there are other ways one may take control of a Thrall, as an example, if a caster uses Bind Undead (Thrall is a mindless Undead) he automatically gets the Command a Thrall Action as well.Basically, anyone that somehow has a Thrall has access to the "Command a Thrall Action" the same way that anyone with a sword can Strike with a Sword. It's not a "Necromancer Ability or Spell".It literally has the necromancer trait and gaining access to it requires the Necromancer class or Necromancer dedication.The Command a Thrall Action has the necromancer trait and in the same sidebar it says that you gain access to this Action if you have a Thrall.
So if you Bind Undead a Thrall, you gain access to this action, and since this Action has the Nevromancer Trait, you can use it to Command it (since you can only affect them with Actions and Abilities with said Trait).
This is so deeply confused I can tell there’s no point in discussing it. I simply note the correct answer for the benefit others.
|
|
a necromancer ability that's not a necromancer ability seems like a really clumsy way to try to try to build a restriction.
.. I'm not even sure if the 'broken' outcome is really a problem anyways. The corpse making strikes using its own statistics even when Commanded is both intuitive and mechanically reasonable.
Yes but that gets thrown into question by the wording of what happens when the Summoned Undead targeted by Command a Thrall is commanded to Escape. Why does that use the Necromancer's Spell Attack and MAP when Strikes do not? It's just weird.
The rules are all perfectly consistent when commanding a Thrall, but things get wonky when commanding a summoned undead via Conjurer of Corpses. Hence the title of the thread. Sure, the rules as written lead to the default assumption that a commanded summon uses their own attack and MAP on Strikes, but that is such an obvious trap one has to wonder if that is actually rules as intended. And the fact that Command a Thrall grants a summoned undead the Necromancer's spell attack and MAP on Escape checks only adds fuel to the speculation on the intent here. And worse, at least for me, is the fact that the way the Thrall entry is worded leaves no outs to use the summoned undead's manufactured weapons or riders, and overrides their damage entirely. Again, weird.
So while I've made reference to "rules as intended" what bothers me more than anything is actually a lack of intent. Or, an oversight. Conjurer of Corpses seems to have been designed and then immediately forgotten. Which is why I think it needs clarification.
Also, I want to be clear, I think it's entirely possible the clarification from Paizo could be the weird 100% raw interpretation. But I think explicitly stating that somewhere, whether it be FAQ or errata, is still needed.
|
|
Or, if they want something more rules-based, Command a Thrall never 'targets' any thrall. And Conjurer of Corpses only allows targeting and destroying. Targeting is a specific thing which requires a 'target' entry or the word 'target' at least. Yeah, that's probably a little wonky as they sometimes forget the word or use it in the wrong place, but still.
But also you and shroudb are right anyways.___
And in PFS rulings are still allowed when needed and not contradicting PFS guidelines.
Why does targeting explicitly require a target entry or the word "target"? How can you use an action on a specific creature without targeting it?
The rules for spells, which more explicitly declare whether they are targeted or not, are the rules for spells, not all actions.
Targeted non-spell actions almost always contain the word target but not always. And I am not aware of any general rules that require the literal word "target" to be targeted. Though actions which affect a target do usually use some word or words that make it clear a single creature is being affected such as "choose a creature" or "make one of your thralls ___."
Command an Animal also does not have the word "target" anywhere in its text, but it is very clearly an action with a target.
If you're choosing target, it's targeted. That should not be a statement worthy of debate.
|
|
Why does targeting explicitly require a target entry or the word "target"? How can you use an action on a specific creature without targeting it?
The rules for spells, which more explicitly declare whether they are targeted or not, are the rules for spells, not all actions.
Targeted non-spell actions almost always contain the word target but not always. And I am not aware of any general rules that require the literal word "target" to be targeted. Though actions which affect a target do usually use some word or words that make it clear a single creature is being affected such as "choose a creature" or "make one of your thralls ___."
Command an Animal also does not have the word "target" anywhere in its text, but it is very clearly an action with a target.
If you're choosing target, it's targeted. That should not be a statement worthy of debate.
There are rules for effects in general which are in agreement with rules for spells. 'Target' is a term, not a general expression in this game. It interacts with rules on senses for example. You can fail targeting and lose an action completely if you aim at concealed or hidden target. If you are not explicitly 'targeting', you can't fail an action because of concealment. That's why 'targeting' effect or just selecting something for it is an important difference.
Yes, you can fail a flat check and lose actions on Battle Medicine on an ally.
These are not statements worthy of debate, yes. These are indisputable rules.
Then cite them. What specific rules require that Command a Thrall explicitly uses the word "target" to be compatible with Conjurer of Corpses.
EDIT
Oh here we go, here's the description of Targets from Player Core:
Some effects require you to choose specific targets. Targeting can be difficult or impossible if your chosen creature is undetected by you, if the creature doesn't match restrictions on who you can target, or if some other ability prevents it from being targeted.
Some effects require a target to be willing. Only you can decide whether your PC is willing, and the GM decides whether an NPC is willing. Even if you or your character don't know what the effect is, such as if your character is unconscious, you still decide if you're willing.
Some effects target or require an ally, or otherwise refer to an ally. This must be someone on your side, often another PC, but it might be a bystander you are trying to protect. You don't count as your own ally. If it isn't clear, the GM decides who counts as an ally or an enemy.
Yeah, I don't think that supports your argument. When you Command a Thrall, you have to choose a thrall to command. The act of choosing a creature or object to effect IS targeting.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The more I look at the interactions between "Command a Thrall" action and the "Conjurer of Corpses" feat the worse it gets[...]
The more I read this thread, the more I think this is needlessly looking for a problem.
Conjurer of Corpses teaches the Summon Undead spell and grants a dedicated, top rank spell slot for it.
Summon Undead is a Summons spell. It creates a creature with the Summoned trait which means it has the Minion trait.
Minions are creatures that directly serve another creature. 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 the effect; if not otherwise specified, you issue a verbal command as 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. You can have a maximum of four minions under your control.
A minion has only 2 actions and 0 reactions per turn, though certain conditions (such as slowed or quickened) or abilities might give them additional actions or a reaction. Alterations to a minion's actions occur when they gain their actions for the round. A minion can't control other creatures.
Per the Minion trait, when you sustain Summon Undead, you may command the summoned necro-minion. Commanding the minion when sustaining the spell is, as far as I can tell, generally superior to Command a Thrall. The only reason, that I can ascertain, to use Command a Thrall on a summoned undead is to Escape using the Necromancer's spell attack modifier if that modifier is greater than the minions Athletics or Unarmed Attack modifier.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
100% agree with Pixel Popper.
There is no reason to use Command Thrall on a Summon. Done. If you sustain, the Summon is commanded as part of the sustain process. If you don't sustain, the Summon is gone so you can't use Command Thrall on it.
Done.
What Conjurer of Corpses does do is allow you to use your summon as the target of your Grave Spells or as the origin of your spell using Reach of the Dead.
This complaint is not really an issue.
|
|
Summon Undead is a Summons spell. It creates a creature with the Summoned trait which means it has the Minion trait.for a minion that's a spell or magic item effect, like a summoned minion, you Sustain the effect; if not otherwise specified, you issue a verbal command as a single action with the auditory and concentrate traits.
Command a Thrall does not grant an action for the creature to then use. A Slowed or Stunned Thrall can still Strike/Stride etc when the Necromancer uses Command a Thrall because they never gain actions to then lose. So a Summon targeted by Command a Thrall is not interacting with its own actions gained via Sustain a Spell in any way. It's entirely separate.
100% agree with Pixel Popper.
There is no reason to use Command Thrall on a Summon. Done. If you sustain, the Summon is commanded as part of the sustain process. If you don't sustain, the Summon is gone so you can't use Command Thrall on it.
Done.
What Conjurer of Corpses does do is allow you to use your summon as the target of your Grave Spells or as the origin of your spell using Reach of the Dead.
This complaint is not really an issue.
Command a Thrall is not the same as Command an Animal or Sustain on a Summon spell. Nothing in the Summoned Trait or Minion trait precludes Command a Thrall from affecting a Summoned Undead.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The more I look at the interactions between "Command a Thrall" action and the "Conjurer of Corpses" feat the worse it gets[...]
The more I read this thread, the more I think this is needlessly looking for a problem.
Conjurer of Corpses teaches the Summon Undead spell and grants a dedicated, top rank spell slot for it.
Summon Undead is a Summons spell. It creates a creature with the Summoned trait which means it has the Minion trait.
Per the Minion trait, when you sustain Summon Undead, you may command the summoned necro-minion. Commanding the...Minions are creatures that directly serve another creature. 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 the effect; if not otherwise specified, you issue a verbal command as 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. You can have a maximum of four minions under your control.
A minion has only 2 actions and 0 reactions per turn, though certain conditions (such as slowed or quickened) or abilities might give them additional actions or a reaction. Alterations to a minion's actions occur when they gain their actions for the round. A minion can't control other creatures.
The only use I can see is you could both Command with Sustain and Command a Thrall for 3 total actions; I can see some possible use with giving an extra move or Interact for your summons. I don't really see the issue the OP does.