D&D 5E Am I missing something about Conjure Animal

[Pathkeeper24601]

You think this is annoying, wait until you get Animate Objects - tiny sized objects. I would talk to the player in question. Sure, the smaller CR many creatures is far more bang for the buck, especially for those that like to throw lots of dice, but there are some higher CR options that are still very useful with less of a time impact. This could become an especially good time to teach the newer players the idea of doing what is best for everyone as opposed to always playing for personal power.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Also, the Bard in my group took this spell and I am not super happy with it either. Like previously mentioned, the turns take a LONG time since he is trying to play himself and 8 animals. I'm also not sure how to handle the "Commands" because he wants to move each animal as tactically as possible, and I'm not sure that's the intent of the spell. For instance, I believe the "Command" should be like "Attack the armored human" and the animals attack, and not "Animal 1: attack the armored human, Animal 2: move in a zig zag pattern and come around behind to flank, Animal 3: Stand over there and protect the tunnel exit, Animal 4: etc....". So suggestions on how other DM's handle this spell would be appreciated.

My standard tactic for reining in players who are trying to do ridiculous things like carry fifteen greatswords at once just because their carrying capacity allows it is to ask for more specificity. "How exactly are you carrying these?" It generally works pretty well. The player thinks it over, and then shrugs and says, "I guess I'm not. Can I just carry one in each hand and one more sheathed on my back?"

In this case, that means I would treat the conjured animals like NPCs, which means that I'd give him a certain amount of leeway (because I really don't want to have to play eight more NPCs on the opposite side of the battle--it's too much like playing chess against yourself), but if he starts doing really complicated stuff, I'd say, "Really? Do you seriously think you're shouting all of those commands in time for the animals to execute them and all within six seconds? Come on, dude. What are you actually saying to them?"

In extreme cases I might even assign another player to play the conjuror's animals. Player #2 can't read player #1's mind, so player #1 now HAS to limit himself to commands simple enough for player #2 to remember. I believe I did that once with animated skeletons, not because of abusively complex commands but just because there were so many skeletons on the battlefield. It's more common though for me to do it with NPC hirelings.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I hate these Conjure spells simply because they bring combat to a grinding halt. Fireball is just as powerful, but it's fire-and-forget. One or two rolls and you're done.

The party encounters 20 orcs?
Cast Fireball - Bam, they're all dead.
Cast Conjure Animals - there are now eight extra actions to deal with every round. That's 8 attack rolls, plus 8 damage rolls, every -- single -- round -- until the caster loses concentration. On top of that, the battlefield is now choked with bodies.

Conjured animals disappear at 0 HP. Therefore, in both scenarios the field winds up choked with the exact same bodies.

 

[Prakriti]

Conjured animals disappear at 0 HP. Therefore, in both scenarios the field winds up choked with the exact same bodies.

I'm not talking about dead bodies. I'm talking about warm bodies -- combatants -- on the battlefield. That's 8 extra creatures whose positioning you need to keep track of -- a great burden with theater of the mind. With a grid and tokens, it chokes the battlefield to the point of limiting maneuverability.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Oh, sorry, I misunderstood your point.

I do think it's funny how often myself and my players, as well as online discussions, tend to forget that reducing something to 0 HP isn't the same thing as disintegrating it. Yes, 3" thickness of stone wall may have "only" 90 HP and AC 15, so technically you could reduce that stone wall to 0 HP using repeated Fire Bolts. Congratulations--you killed the stone wall! Now it's the mortal remains of a stone wall. ;-) It probably has some cracks in it, and you can shift the pieces with your bare hands, but there's no way you're using Fire Bolt alone to tunnel from here to China. You still have to dispose of the bodies.

 

[Saeviomagy]

My recommendation would be to change the casting time of conjure animals and conjure woodland beings to the same as every other summoning spell: 1 minute. This makes it mostly useless for combat unless you're very, very prepared for a fight. It still remains a very useful and powerful spell otherwise.

 

[The Human Target]

Yeah, its not your fault.

The design of these spells is very clumsy and not fun at the table.

 

[Horwath]

I'm not talking about dead bodies. I'm talking about warm bodies -- combatants -- on the battlefield. That's 8 extra creatures whose positioning you need to keep track of -- a great burden with theater of the mind. With a grid and tokens, it chokes the battlefield to the point of limiting maneuverability.

I would let the player choose the animal, if it's apropriate for terrain. No giant scorpions in middle of Arctic please.

And limit the spell to 1 or 2 creatures max. Just to be fair to other players.

 

[Gardens & Goblins]

We're currently switching to a system that uses the Companion Card System as a basis*. We still have ambulant NPCs within the game, but mobs/groups/additional bodies get their own card with some bonuses.

While it does reduce the power of certain options and spells (hiring 20 thugs for a few hundred gold/conjuring several fae creatures will always be more poweful than the card variants) we've found that it does provide a more player-centric game experience, speeds things up considerably and as a result, is leading to the DMs readily providing mobs/groups/additional bodies to support the player, when appropriate.

So, in play, when your player/players cast Summon Woodland Creatures, you grant them a card that represents the creatures supporting them. It's an abstraction, with a finite number of health levels (typically 1-4, are lost when the player is hit/crit/drops unconscious) and grants a constant buff (bonus to damage and/or defense, for example), a once per X (turn/encounter/rest/etc) bonus and perhaps another bonus depending on their loyalty or another factor. The clever thing about this system is that, because it does streamline things to such an extent, you can probably let the player choose the creatures they summon - a defensive option/offensive option/control option/utility option and so on.

And when introduced consistently, the relative 'power drop' is largely redundant. Of course, you will need to do a fair amount of work yourself, simply because the .pdf is lacking greatly in details and supporting material. Basically you're paying 5 bucks for suggestion of an idea. The rest will need to come from you.

[sblock]*Micro review: Good idea. Overpriced. Not enough detail on creating your own cards. [/sblock]

 

[Xeviat]

I'm left wondering if 4E style summons, where you had an action to sustain them, would have been easier to balance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk