Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Undrave" data-source="post: 8081192" data-attributes="member: 7015698">Personally, I think this advice is BS. Not only does it mean the spell is just badly worded (why doesn't it specifies it instead of this ambivalent thing?) but if you pick say 'One X type of creature of challenge rating 2 or lower' then the DM can screw you over and just give you a single 1/4 creature instead, or give you a fish out of water and so forth. It's just a recipe for arguments at the table and wasting spell slots. It also totally fails at its intended archetype of the Summoner. Players who want to play the Summoner don't want to gamble with what they can summon, they want to be able to be strategic and pick the right creature for the job. And if the player can take care of the stats it's a lower burden on the DM. I mean, the PHB already has animals for Conjure Animals. Now, granted, some options are just too good. When I had a Druid I quickly realized there wasn't much that 8 wolves couldn't solve. Me and the Warlock took out two slavers caravan with nothing but my wolves and me and some Eldritch Blasts. After that my go-to was Giant spiders or Giant Frogs for the range grapple options. But i don't thnk that's the fault of the summoning mechanic and more of the specific options available.Anyway, if a spell is meant to be unreliable, it should say so clearly AND give you something pretty darn powerful for that element of randomness.</blockquote>