High-Level Play: Nightmare for DMs?

[rushlight]

SRD:
Calling Creatures: The second effect of the gate spell is to call an extraplanar creature to your aid (a calling effect). By naming a particular being or kind of being as you cast the spell, you cause the gate to open in the immediate vicinity of the desired creature and pull the subject through, willing or unwilling.

Looks like you can call joe the mage just fine, so long as you arent on his home plane.

You failed to read the entire spell.

The second effect of the gate spell is to call an extraplanar creature to your aid (a calling effect). By naming a particular being or kind of being as you cast the spell, you cause the gate to open in the immediate vicinity of the desired creature and pull the subject through, willing or unwilling. Deities and unique beings are under no compulsion to come through the gate, although they may choose to do so of their own accord. This use of the spell creates a gate that remains open just long enough to transport the called creatures. This use of the spell has an XP cost (see below).
If you choose to call a kind of creature instead of a known individual you may call either a single creature (of any HD) or several creatures. You can call and control several creatures as long as their HD total does not exceed your caster level. In the case of a single creature, you can control it if its HD do not exceed twice your caster level. A single creature with more HD than twice your caster level can’t be controlled. Deities and unique beings cannot be controlled in any event. An uncontrolled being acts as it pleases, making the calling of such creatures rather dangerous. An uncontrolled being may return to its home plane at any time.

A controlled creature can be commanded to perform a service for you. Such services fall into two categories: immediate tasks and contractual service. Fighting for you in a single battle or taking any other actions that can be accomplished within 1 round per caster level counts as an immediate task; you need not make any agreement or pay any reward for the creature’s help. The creature departs at the end of the spell.

Of note:

1) "second effect of the gate spell is to call an extraplanar creature to your aid" The mage must be an extraplanar creature. Also, your definition of "aid" must be different than mine.

2) The above point is irrelevent because the spell clearly states, "Deities and unique beings are under no compulsion to come through the gate, although they may choose to do so of their own accord." Note that the spell clarifies: "If you choose to call a kind of creature instead of a known individual you..." and "Deities and unique beings cannot be controlled in any event." The spell clearly states that only a kind of creature can be controlled, and if specific beings are called, they choose if the come, and are uncontrolled.

Also, who cares if the caster gets almost no exp from the battle. Effectively he just won. Sending in a CR 30 creature to do the battle you were about to do means, in nearly every case, that he just won. So against a battle a few CR above his level he can take it out single handedly. If it costs you 1k exp to cast but you get 8k exp from defeating it then it sounds like the best option ever.

Probably a bit too powerful yes?

If your PCs are calling a monster to go and fight a creature far above their level just to get XP then the problem isn't with the spell, it's with your idiot players who are trying to break the system and the misguided DM who is allowing them. I could make the same case that if a DM allows a Fireball spell to kill the whole world, then Fireball is broken and should be banned. Duh - the problem isn't with the spell, or the rules. More / different / better rules will never fix broken players.

 

[Saeviomagy]

You failed to read the entire spell.



Of note:

1) "second effect of the gate spell is to call an extraplanar creature to your aid" The mage must be an extraplanar creature. Also, your definition of "aid" must be different than mine.

And your definition of "extraplanar" must be different to that of D&D.

Extraplanar Subtype: A subtype applied to any creature when it is on a plane other than its native plane. A creature that travels the planes can gain or lose this subtype as it goes from plane to plane. Monster entries assume that encounters with creatures take place on the Material Plane, and every creature whose native plane is not the Material Plane has the extraplanar subtype (but would not have when on its home plane). Every extraplanar creature in this book has a home plane mentioned in its description. Creatures not labeled as extraplanar are natives of the Material Plane, and they gain the extraplanar subtype if they leave the Material Plane. No creature has the extraplanar subtype when it is on a transitive plane, such as the Astral Plane, the Ethereal Plane, and the Plane of Shadow.

So - if it's not on it's home plane, then it's extraplanar. Which means for some obscure reason gate summons creatures that are away from home.

Personally I think this ISN'T how it works - I'm pretty sure the intent is that the spell should summon creatures which are not from the plane that the spell is cast from - ie creatures which would become extraplanar if they responded to the spell.

Although I could be wrong.

As to point 1b - if my enemy allows himself to die, he's aided me.

2) The above point is irrelevent because the spell clearly states, "Deities and unique beings are under no compulsion to come through the gate, although they may choose to do so of their own accord." Note that the spell clarifies: "If you choose to call a kind of creature instead of a known individual you..." and "Deities and unique beings cannot be controlled in any event." The spell clearly states that only a kind of creature can be controlled, and if specific beings are called, they choose if the come, and are uncontrolled.

That's not quite what it says. It says that a UNIQUE being cannot be controlled. If we go down your path, then every single creature in the multiverse is a unique being. They're all different, they're all special. Therefore gate cannot summon or control anything.

If, on the other hand, you assume that it means "there is one, and only one, of this type of monster in the universe", that's a bit different, because now it really only refers to specific creatures that have been designated as unique.

If your PCs are calling a monster to go and fight a creature far above their level just to get XP then the problem isn't with the spell, it's with your idiot players who are trying to break the system and the misguided DM who is allowing them. I could make the same case that if a DM allows a Fireball spell to kill the whole world, then Fireball is broken and should be banned. Duh - the problem isn't with the spell, or the rules. More / different / better rules will never fix broken players.

If a CR30 monster fights a CR20 monster by the rules as written, it will almost invariably win. If a fireball is launched at the world, by the rules it will kill whatever low-level critters or NPCs stand within the blast radius, and nothing else.

Essentially you're saying that allowing a single party member to defeat any equivalent level challenge for a net profit is just fine by the rules, and that somehow a player who does so is some sort of cheat or monster.

And if you're going to argue that any problem with the rules is because the players utilising them are idiots, then there is absolutely no point having a rules-conversation with you, because we already know your response to any problem with the rules - that our players are idiots.

 

[Scion]

The players are at fault for useing the spell as written? Wow.. we have very different defintions of 'at fault' and where to lay blame.

The spell is the problem, not that players might actually cast it. If a spell is only balanced if it is never used then there is a problem.


Also, Bob the mage is not a 'unique being', there are millions of other people of his same race floating around, a good number of which are mages.

If your definition of unique being is 'someone with a name' then the whole part of the spell about naming the intended creature is completely worthless.

So obviously you can call someone if you know their name, and they are not a diety or some sort of strange 'unique being', which would seem to me to be more like an entity (sortof like a god, go figure).

In addtion, 'aid' seems reasonable to be used towards defeating a foe. That is a pretty big use of aid anyway. Like the spell aid (combat use) or the aid another action (mostly combat uses). Aid in combat seems more than reasonable.

Or you could just go to the negative material plane, gate in your hated enemy, and tell him to make you pancakes until the duration expires. Aiding you in alleviating your hunger.


In your own words though, you have failed to read the spell. It is all very clear.

You can call a creature if you know their name. Assuming you do then they can only have up to double your caster level in hd. After that you have them for a period of time before they go away and they must do what you say.

The problem is definately the spell, not that some characters might actually cast it!

 

[rushlight]

Here's how I see it:

1) "Extraplanar" is a modifier to a creature type. Just like some creatures are "cold" creatures - those creatures have the "cold" subtype, and that has specific game effects. It doesn't just mean they need a jacket. See the entry for "Angel, Solar" on page 12 of the Monster Manual. That creature is defined as "Large Outsider (Angel, Extraplanar, Good). The same goes for Demons, Devils, and other creatures. Other types can be "Extraplanar". The Etheral Marauder is a Magical Beast (Extraplanar), and elementals are Elemental (Extraplanar). Rakashaa and Planetouched are Outsider (Native).

By my reading of the spell, and the definition of the "Extraplanar" subtype on page 309 of the MM it seems to me that creatures native to the Material Plane are not valid targets for the Gate spell.

2) Even if I were to concede the "Extraplanar" thing, you still totally missed the boat the "Unique" creature references. The spell clearly states that if you call a specific creature, rather than a creature type, it is uncontrolled.

If you choose to call a kind of creature instead of a known individual...

If you select a type ("I'd like an Angel, Solar please") INSTEAD of a known INDIVIDUAL ("I'd like Bob the Solar Angel who made the wizard eat his own foot that one time")

...you may call either a single creature (of any HD) or several creatures. You can call and control several creatures as long as their HD total does not exceed your caster level. In the case of a single creature, you can control it if its HD do not exceed twice your caster level. A single creature with more HD than twice your caster level can’t be controlled.

So, if you've chosen the "kind of creature" option, this part of the spell text indicates the HD requirements for you to establish control. If you've chosen the "known individual" option, then these rules don't apply. (Hence, the "IF" at the beginning. If both options allowed control, it would say "When you choose to call a creature..." and there would be no difference between "a type of creature" and "a known individual".)

Anway, the second part of the "If" statement follows:

Deities and unique beings cannot be controlled in any event. An uncontrolled being acts as it pleases, making the calling of such creatures rather dangerous. An uncontrolled being may return to its home plane at
any time.

The references to calling a specific creature state that they choose if they want to come through, and if the do, they are uncontrolled. And at the end of the spell it states that doing so can be dangerous.

It is fairly clear. The only thing that they could have done better would have been if they had driven by your house, and explained it to you personally.

As for the whole "Let's call a CR 30 guy to go and fight that CR 20 guy for us so we get XP! Yeah!" thing - this is a problem with the players (and DM) not the spell. What kind of fun is it to let the DM play one monster versus another and give the PCs Xp for it? The DM doesn't need to allow this obviously dumb idea if he doesn't want to. Or he can just assume that everything goes as planned - and just make all the PCs 208,439,028,750,432th level since they would just use Gate after Gate. Then he can roll up their treasure and they can be RICH d00d!!11!1! And then they can do it all again! Woo! We're 371T3! w3 R0XX0r!!

So sure, if your players are powermonger d00ds who are there to only gain XP and gold without any shred of role-playing skill at all, and the DM is fine with running one monster against another for eternity while the players watch and count XP then yes, perhaps under those circumstances, the Gate spell might get misused. But honestly, if that's the gaming environment you are in, can you really blame the spell for your gaming conditions?

Where's the *roll eyes* smiley when you need it. If you can't see that the problem there is the players (and DM) then there really is no way of reaching you. I can only thank the stars you've got no real ability to actually change the game.

 

[hong]

I think there are more ways to keep challenges balanced than you are accounting for. Sure, Gate is powerful. However: first, the players are toying with creatures of far greater power - and that can bring role-playing consequences or even direct retribution (say from a deity who's tired of the PCs getting his most powerful angels killed!).

And as the omnipotent DM, I can bring forth a 100 dice lightning bolt on any PC who is so lacking in social graces as to leave the toilet without washing his hands. What is your point, d00d?

Second, the XP cost is significant.

And so is the laundry list of things you're allowed and not allowed to do. What is your point, d00d?

Consider this: with the basic assumptions (4 players in a party, all of whom are 19th level) Gate is generally a bad idea unless it's absolutely nessecary. A CR 19 creature gives 5700 XP, divided by the number of people in the party - that means the caster gets 1425 XP from defeating the monster. If, in the process of defeating the monster, the player casts Gate then he only gains 425 XP from that encounter. If the caster does this every time (which is the assumption here - if the caster only used the spell a single time ever, you wouldn't be calling it broken)

Consider the possibility that there is a continuum between "every single time" and "a single time ever".

Sorry, Abominations are not Extraplanar creatures, they are Outsiders only - which are forbidden by the Gate spell.

Sigh.

I am currently running an epic level game, and honestly, I have never had issues with any of these spells.

This is because you have players who are not interested in the integrity of the rules framework. Or who don't know what they're missing. Or you are not interested in the integrity of the rules framework. Or you don't know what you're missing. Pick one.

 

[hong]

Here's how I see it:

1) "Extraplanar" is a modifier to a creature type. Just like some creatures are "cold" creatures - those creatures have the "cold" subtype, and that has specific game effects. It doesn't just mean they need a jacket. See the entry for "Angel, Solar" on page 12 of the Monster Manual. That creature is defined as "Large Outsider (Angel, Extraplanar, Good). The same goes for Demons, Devils, and other creatures. Other types can be "Extraplanar". The Etheral Marauder is a Magical Beast (Extraplanar), and elementals are Elemental (Extraplanar). Rakashaa and Planetouched are Outsider (Native).

By my reading of the spell, and the definition of the "Extraplanar" subtype on page 309 of the MM it seems to me that creatures native to the Material Plane are not valid targets for the Gate spell.

Your reading of the extraplanar subtype is nonsensical. Unlike other types and subtypes, its application depends on the situation. The MM simply lists extraplanar as applying only to creatures not from the material plane because it, like the rest of the D&D ruleset, is written from a material plane-centric viewpoint. This is also why, for example, there is one Outsider type to cover zillions of different planar beings, while the material plane gets zillions of types to cover a much smaller variety of earthly creatures.

As for the whole "Let's call a CR 30 guy to go and fight that CR 20 guy for us so we get XP! Yeah!" thing - this is a problem with the players (and DM) not the spell. What kind of fun is it to let the DM play one monster versus another and give the PCs Xp for it?

I seem to recall some babble from you about letting the players use the spells and powers they've earned.

Hint 7: The fact that you are having to invoke the DM's discretion clause means that this spell is too powerful to allow unchecked. Just because you have failed to connect the dots doesn't mean others have not realised this.

The DM doesn't need to allow this obviously dumb idea if he doesn't want to.

Next thing you know, you'll be banning gate.

Or he can just assume that everything goes as planned - and just make all the PCs 208,439,028,750,432th level since they would just use Gate after Gate. Then he can roll up their treasure and they can be RICH d00d!!11!1! And then they can do it all again! Woo! We're 371T3! w3 R0XX0r!!

Babbling again, I see.

Now, while you're cleaning up the wet spot, I will mention how gate has never been mentioned as something you use to win _every_ fight. Gate is broken because, even with the XP cost and assorted riders on its use, the potential to pull a solar or worse out of one's ass (powerful ass, eh?) at short notice is something that grants you strong odds to win _any one fight_ with minimal risk and expenditure of other resources.

So sure, if your players are powermonger d00ds who are there to only gain XP and gold without any shred of role-playing skill at all,

It's a good thing that straw men don't need wages, or you'd be the next Enron.

and the DM is fine with running one monster against another for eternity while the players watch and count XP then yes, perhaps under those circumstances, the Gate spell might get misused. But honestly, if that's the gaming environment you are in, can you really blame the spell for your gaming conditions?

In a perfect world, balance is meaningless. Which leads to:

Hint 8: Assuming a perfect world renders your opinions on balance meaningless.

Where's the *roll eyes* smiley when you need it.

Go ahead, punk. Make my day.

If you can't see that the problem there is the players (and DM) then there really is no way of reaching you. I can only thank the stars you've got no real ability to actually change the game.

Yes, yes. And I'm sure you thought 3.0 harm and haste were perfectly fine too.

 

[reanjr]

If your PCs are calling a monster to go and fight a creature far above their level just to get XP then the problem isn't with the spell, it's with your idiot players who are trying to break the system and the misguided DM who is allowing them. I could make the same case that if a DM allows a Fireball spell to kill the whole world, then Fireball is broken and should be banned. Duh - the problem isn't with the spell, or the rules. More / different / better rules will never fix broken players.

Except the case he made falls under the RAW, while the ridiculous case you made does not.

 

[rushlight]

Except the case he made falls under the RAW, while the ridiculous case you made does not.

My case and his are the same. Mine just was funny.

Sending in a CR 30 creature to do the battle you were about to do means, in nearly every case, that he just won. So against a battle a few CR above his level he can take it out single handedly. If it costs you 1k exp to cast but you get 8k exp from defeating it then it sounds like the best option ever.

His example was based on PCs sending in a CR 30 creature to fight the battle - one "a few CR above his level" so that he gets lots of XP for no loss. That's the exact setup I presented. The problem here is again players wanting something for nothing - not a broken spell. If these were my players, I'd politely ask if they were intending to play the game themselves at any point, or if I should just run some monster demos to amuse them.

Oh, and hong - what's your point?

 

[Darklone]

Oh, and hong - what's your point?

Pouring Napalm on an igniting A-bomb, eh?

Just wanted to add: LOW LEVEL GAMES ROCK!

 

[hong]

My case and his are the same. Mine just was funny.

For very small values of funny, obviously.

His example was based on PCs sending in a CR 30 creature to fight the battle - one "a few CR above his level" so that he gets lots of XP for no loss. That's the exact setup I presented.

Poppycock.

The problem here is again players wanting something for nothing - not a broken spell.

The definition of a broken game mechanic, boiled down to simplest terms for the benefit of simpletons, is one that _allows_ something for nothing. Cf Hint 8, and cease prattling about how if only noone used this spell, it would not be broken.

If these were my players, I'd politely ask if they were intending to play the game themselves at any point, or if I should just run some monster demos to amuse them.

Geez d00d, don't tell me you intend to ban gate?

Oh, and hong - what's your point?

My point has been perfectly obvious all along.