Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
some problem about the damage of summoned creature
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 7227625" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Yeah, frankly this is just bad 4e design. Page 121 of the Rules Compendium makes it clear that when a summons is granted the ability to make an attack, then the attack is made BY THE SUMMONER and that attack and damage bonuses are those of the summoner (which really need not even be said explicitly since they've already stated the summoner is making the attack, yet it IS stated, reinforcing the point). This doesn't include any 'temporary' bonuses (which is a bit ambiguous in some situations, but we can generally interpret this to mean bonuses from conditions or effects). One might also assume, though it isn't really stated explicitly, that certain effects on the SUMMONS should also be considered (IE if it is dazed, if it is flanking something, etc), but nothing explicit is ever stated here, and given the slightly odd situation that the summons isn't the attacker a VERY literal reading would say that something like flanking can never provide a bonus, though I think few GMs would rule that way.</p><p></p><p>The point is, the bonus from this feat ALREADY applies, beyond any doubt, at least as of RC. I believe even PHB2 has the same basic wording though, so go figure. Someone just plain did not understand summons when they wrote the text of that pact reward. I guess another interpretation is you get the bonus TWICE in the given situation, though I think that probably is NOT the intended reading (still, it doesn't seem like a BAD way to go, summons aren't exactly game-breakingly good powers to start with).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 7227625, member: 82106"] Yeah, frankly this is just bad 4e design. Page 121 of the Rules Compendium makes it clear that when a summons is granted the ability to make an attack, then the attack is made BY THE SUMMONER and that attack and damage bonuses are those of the summoner (which really need not even be said explicitly since they've already stated the summoner is making the attack, yet it IS stated, reinforcing the point). This doesn't include any 'temporary' bonuses (which is a bit ambiguous in some situations, but we can generally interpret this to mean bonuses from conditions or effects). One might also assume, though it isn't really stated explicitly, that certain effects on the SUMMONS should also be considered (IE if it is dazed, if it is flanking something, etc), but nothing explicit is ever stated here, and given the slightly odd situation that the summons isn't the attacker a VERY literal reading would say that something like flanking can never provide a bonus, though I think few GMs would rule that way. The point is, the bonus from this feat ALREADY applies, beyond any doubt, at least as of RC. I believe even PHB2 has the same basic wording though, so go figure. Someone just plain did not understand summons when they wrote the text of that pact reward. I guess another interpretation is you get the bonus TWICE in the given situation, though I think that probably is NOT the intended reading (still, it doesn't seem like a BAD way to go, summons aren't exactly game-breakingly good powers to start with). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
some problem about the damage of summoned creature
Top