|
Author
|
Comment
|
Tristan DArque
Pie
(12/6/02 9:20:28 am)
Reply
|
Re: Am I cheating my players?
Another potential difference is this (IIRC): the outward version of the spell protects against contact by summoned (and arguably called) creatures EXCEPT those of opposite alignment to the protection (I think what the description in PfE says is 'good outsiders are immune to this effect' or something like that).
On the other hand, the inward version of the spell might need to be specific to the outsider in question ie, against chaos or evil for a bebilith, for example. Not sure that is specifically stated in the description, but arguably is implied in that bit about called creatures that Trithereon quoted.
Personally, I don't have a problem with a distinction between the inward/outward effect - after all, the description of magic circle specifically says that it's a 'special' version of the spell when you focus it inward. But I think on a literal, straight interpretation, PfE works against 'conjured' creatures, and 'conjured' includes both 'summoned' and 'called' because both are conjurations.
I'm (very) surprised there's not a Sage Advice / FAQ entry for this one.
|
ZansForCans
Pie
(12/6/02 10:34:10 am)
Reply
|
SRD vs. PHB
Sorry I didn't check this before my first post MCvE vs. PfE. The wording is indeed different (SRD has summoned, PHB has called) which adds to the bit of confusion. However, I don't see the point of using MCvE inward with any summon spell because the duration is so short and the creature fights for you anyway. Called creatures don't have this onus on them and could turn on you in an instant if your barganing sucks and they so chose.
IMC, I plan to stick to the PHB intent to allow PfE and MCvE to hedge out (in) all conjured beings. I don't see a big problem with this on a few accounts though.
First as CR goes up, the creatures have other attacks besides just a physical one that can actually be more deadly, in some cases. Secondly, they also start to get SR, which can beat these spells. Finally, this only prevents physical (natural weapon) attacks that require touch. It's not going to prevent the creature from picking up a greatsword and dicing up the protected character.
The last point for me is totally campaign dependant, though. I haven't gone over every creature of this type yet in the adventure, but IMC, I don't see a problem with Outsiders being collected from around the material plane that have come here through any other means (gate, etc.). I'm not going to require them to be all locally (say, within the ToAC) summoned, called, or gated. A lot of the humanoids probably came from all over, why not the more supernatural creatures as well?
Group Editing & Authoring Support
flexible campaign management for the web
info :: demo
|
melanikus2000
Pie
(12/7/02 6:25:48 pm)
Reply
|
Re: SRD vs. PHB
I just want to check something about the Pf* spells:
In my RTTTOEE campaign the party were attacking the Earth Temple. There were several priests gathered nearby, Snearak on drums and Terenygit (I think) nearby with PfG cast on himself.
The NG druid in the party walked in, in a moment of inspiration, cast Summons Natures Ally, to summon a huge Orca whale ABOVE the priests, dropping it upon them. (as a NG druid he WILL regret this action later)
I said that PfG would hedge out the summoned creature moving it away from him and Snearak.
They argued that as the creature was forced upon the PfG the spell would be dispelled and the creature would crush them.
Others argued that as the creature was not Good (being a neutral whale) it would not be affected by the PfG.
It all got a bit messy and in the end I ruled in their favour and ran the crushing effect as a landslide.
I just wondered what others take on this would be. I was tired at the time.
Chris.
|
Zenon
Orc
(12/7/02 7:39:35 pm)
Reply
|
Re: SRD vs. PHB
Quote:
I just wondered what others take on this would be.
Hmm, this is one of those tactics that the players love to argue for when they use it, but would throw dice at the DM for when he used it against them!
I would slip in a house rule for the Summon spells that states that the creature being summoned has to show up in contact with it's native element, meaning that land based creatures must appear on the ground, water based creatures must show up in contact with a pool of water (to stop the summon an orca overhead in the rain tactic just because "it's in contact with water"), flying creature must be airborne. (It's kind of common sense).
If they fuss at you and give you an argument about it, tell them that you will then consider it a valid tactic for everyone, PC and NPC alike and they should expect to see it used against them.
|
Trithereon
Pie
(12/7/02 8:37:49 pm)
Reply
|
Dropping an Orca on your head
I must be a hard-ass on my players. They wouldn't even consider this tactic as they'd assume that summoning a solely water dependent creature out of water would be disallowed. While it is not excluded by the letter of the spell, I think it isn't within the spirit of the spell.
We joke that 13th level druids like to drop elephants (Summon Nature's Ally VII) on thier opponent's head. If allowed, its likely a more effective tactic then having it fight.
|
ZansForCans
Orc
(12/7/02 9:36:48 pm)
Reply
|
Fortunately...
...you can throw the book at them for this one. PHB pg. 157 or SRD:
Quote:
A creature or object brought into being or transported to your location by a conjuration spell cannot appear inside another creature or object, nor can it appear floating in an empty space. It must arrive in an open location on a surface capable of supporting it. The creature or object must appear within the spell’s range, but it does not have to remain within the range.
And, not only can you not summon floating creatures to fall on the heads of your enemies, but I could see one liberally translating "a surface capable of supporting it" as requiring water for an aquatic beast.
Finally, not that every druid has to be a member of PETA, but I'd consider it pretty horrendous RP for a druid, imho. You should throw more than the book at him/her :P
Group Editing & Authoring Support
flexible campaign management for the web
info :: demo
|
melanikus2000
Pie
(12/9/02 3:20:00 am)
Reply
|
Re: Fortunately...
----------------------------------------------------------
...nor can it appear floating in an empty space...
----------------------------------------------------------
Aha! Thanks for that. I did not remember seeing that before, I take it that this is under the general Magic section in the PHB?
As for the druid, this all happened last session (which took place a few months ago) So I have not had a chance to hit him with an alignment call or any other restriction as yet. He was taking cues from the CN Sorcerer at the time, which is never a good idea. 
The druid did plan on sending the orca back the round after he summoned it, but the Sorcerer then dropped a bead of Force in it's mouth. BOOM! Although this was a pretty bad move on the druid's part I am inclined to go slightly easy on him because it made us all laugh and how often do you get to ask "What's the damage for a falling orca whale".
I think that I am going to give him a warning that any further act of this nature will result in him becoming an evil character and an NPC. I will certainly give him a small XP penalty. The Paladin in the party has recieved a similar warning (although his alignment will shift to neutral), and has had his paladin powers restricted so that he cannot use them on himself (laying on hands, cure disease etc.) as he was wont to do at the time.
Thanks for all your help,
Chris.
|
madfox
Orc
(12/9/02 3:33:54 am)
Reply
|
Re: Fortunately...
Summoned creatures are not truly there. By the book they do not remember what has transpired and they are not truly dead when killed. The reason people summon creatures is to let them die or get hurt instead of you. So using them that way I would hardly consider evil.
|
Andorax
Orc
(12/9/02 7:46:02 am)
Reply
|
Re: Fortunately...
Quote:
The Paladin in the party has recieved a similar warning (although his alignment will shift to neutral), and has had his paladin powers restricted so that he cannot use them on himself (laying on hands, cure disease etc.) as he was wont to do at the time.
Is this *all* the Paladin has been doing? I'm sorry, but "thou shalt not be selfish" isn't in the book of Paladinal Law, so far as I'm aware. If he's up there dishing it out, and taking it, then he has a valid claim to his own healing.
Now, if he's being stingy with it "just in case", refusing to heal others when he's healthy and whole, then that might be another issue...but hardly a basis for stripping him of his Paladinhood entirely.
BTW, no player in my campaign has ever tried to pull the "falling Orca' trick, and they know full well that there wouldn't be in-game consequences...there would be out-of-game ones. Munchkin go sit in the corner and they can do without your character for the rest of the night. I would not tolerate such absurd abuse of the game rules.
"Whadda ya mean, Orcs get levels too?!?" |
madfox
Orc
(12/9/02 7:59:20 am)
Reply
|
Re: Fortunately...
Quote:
I would not tolerate such absurd abuse of the game rules.
What kind of absurd abuse of the game rules? It is simply not allowed by the rules, so that would be more like cheating then an abuse My players tend to joke a lot about it, but they nver considered doing it themselves.
|
melanikus2000
Pie
(12/9/02 10:34:10 am)
Reply
|
Re: Fortunately...
--------------------------------------------------------
Is this *all* the Paladin has been doing? I'm sorry, but "thou shalt not be selfish" isn't in the book of Paladinal Law, so far as I'm aware. If he's up there dishing it out, and taking it, then he has a valid claim to his own healing.
--------------------------------------------------------
It was rather more than being stingy. It was selfish actions that almost cost the death of other party members and a blatant disregard for his allies that forced my hand in this matter. Telling another wounded character to "sod off" because the paladin was looting a corpse is not the act of a knight devoted to good.
--------------------------------------------------------
...but hardly a basis for stripping him of his Paladinhood entirely.
--------------------------------------------------------
I did not strip him of his paladinhood. He simply cannot use Lay on Hands or Cure disease on HIMSELF. He is free to use these powers to help others but must rely upon his spells or the spells of another to heal himself. All his other powers are intact.
This has worked remarkably well in deepening his character. I also fully intend on returning his powers once he fulfils certain criteria set down by his god.
---------------------------------------------------------
I would not tolerate such absurd abuse of the game rules.
---------------------------------------------------------
Like I said, I was tired at the time, and besides, it sure was funny.  But you're right, I wouldn't let this happen again. I just missed the Natural Element part of the spell description.
Chris.
|
|
Okay -- Your Turn
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands