Questions with Gate

[Kilroy]

Advancing creatures for Gate is way better than having to go to other books for wacky monsters with enough HD.

When I played an Alienist with 3.0 Gate, the advanced pseudonatural solar was one of my favorites. I had several different creatures stated up, in various states of 'advanced' and 'leveled'. They weren't intended as specific entities as much as "The baddest pseudonatural purple worm gate can find me", to save the DM from having to stat up 34/36/38/40HD of horror every time I cast it. It's Gate. It's freakishly powerful. The bad guys get to use it too.

My favorites off the random gate list were:

- advanced pseudonatural solar
- advanced awakened pseudonatural iron golem barbarian/psychic warrior (think Evangelion)
- pseudonatural stirge swarm (all feeding aparati of a single Far Realms creature)
- advanced pseudonatural grizzly mastodon (The Trompplodon)
- advanced pseudonatural purple worm (The Finger. A collosal finger poking through the gate, dragging it around behind them. It's swallow whole attack was replaced with "squish and drag through the gate" and it's stinger was replaced with "swing the gate at someone")
- advanced paragon pseudonatural black pudding barbarian (Just eeew.)

 

[Infiniti2000]

Not true.

"I summon a (size) Huge Solar."

Why would that give you a 34HD solar and not a normal 22HD solar or not a 66HD solar? Why did you capitalize Huge in a PC's quote? Do you not sense the blatant metagaming in that quote?

I'm just trying to get a narrowed down definition of "kind." This is used in more than one place. Note that if you can gate in a 34HD solar, then a balor could summon a 60HD balor with 1000 class levels. So, I submit that by the use of the word "kind" and a desire not to metagame, that you cannot stipulate an advanced creature for gating (or other summoning/calling) as a non-specific calling. To get the 34HD solar, it would have to be a unique being, like Ralphie Boy.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Note that if you can gate in a 34HD solar, then a balor could summon a 60HD balor with 1000 class levels.

He could - unless the only creature like that is a unique being.

Is "Ralph the Solar" - a stock solar from the SRD, whose name you just happen to know - a "unique being"?

 

[Infiniti2000]

No, Ralph would be the 34HD solar. There is no "stock" 34HD solar that you could summon as a non-unique being.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

That doesn't answer my question.

EDIT:

Change his name to George, if it helps.

 

[Kilroy]

It seems really odd that if creatures of all sizes exist, Gate can only ever summon the smallest one. A "solar of the 10th gate" or a "fiend of the 621st pit" could be an in character way to specify the biggest critter you can control without being overly numbery, without being a "specific creature" in the same way that "Joe, the Pit Fiend Blackguard who ate my lunch 6 levels ago" would be.

 

[Nail]

Why would that give you a 34HD solar and not a normal 22HD solar or not a 66HD solar?

Because I asked for a specific type of solar, of course, as allowed by the spell description! A 22HD solar wouldn't fit the bill. A 66HD solar would be outside of my character's control.....but a DM could impose such a thing.

Why did you capitalize Huge in a PC's quote?

Because that is how I, the player, describe the solar my character wishes to gate. If it makes you feel more comfortable, I could ask for such a creature "in-character", and use flowery language to do so. Would such prose make a difference in a Rules Forum?

Do you not sense the blatant metagaming in that quote?

Like most, you are using the term "metagaming" - adding the word "blatant" for color - to mean "using rules in a way I dislike". I'm not sure that's helpful.

 

[Nail]

It seems really odd that if creatures of all sizes exist, Gate can only ever summon the smallest one.

Since it's not written that way (must summon smallest), I'm looking for other rules that might limit it. Hence my question.

A "solar of the 10th gate" or a "fiend of the 621st pit" could be an in character way to specify the biggest critter you can control without being overly numbery.....

Exactly.

One presumes the PC knows how the Gate spell works, and in what directions the envelope may be pushed.

 

[Infiniti2000]

That doesn't answer my question.

EDIT:

Change his name to George, if it helps.

Oh, I understand your question now. Yeah, changing his name helped me understand it. I thought we were talking about Ralphie.

Yes, if you want to specifically summon Ralph, it's a unique being. If you want to summon a stock solar, you get a stock solar, perhaps with a new name, perhaps not. The difference is that, presumably, if you summon Ralph specifically then you have a history and the bargain could differ. "Hey, buddy Ralph, how ya been?"

Because I asked for a specific type of solar, of course, as allowed by the spell description!

The spell description allows you to ask for a 34HD solar? That's the way you read "kind" I take it? Obviously, I disagree. I think that's a metagaming approach.

Because that is how I, the player, describe the solar my character wishes to gate. If it makes you feel more comfortable, I could ask for such a creature "in-character", and use flowery language to do so. Would such prose make a difference in a Rules Forum?

IMO, it would make a difference because I feel that metagaming actions are part of the rules. The whole issue here is on how you define "kind". As I've stated earlier, I think it's plainly restricted to asking for the monster, not for the monster + class levels + templates (though I could be persuaded on this one, subject to DM restrictions -- i.e. no half-fiend solar or other stupid combinations IMC) + extra HD + sphere of annihilation + etc.

If you want to define "kind" in game to be "I want a 34HD solar with the pseudonatural template" then go for it, but I don't think it's part of the rules. I think metagaming is against the rules and identifying specific HD outside of certain mechanics (e.g. detect magic, detect evil, etc.) is against the rules. Since your game is supposed to be by-the-book, I'd think my view was pertinent.

I'm not trying to add "blatant" for an ulterior motive, so I apologize for my use of that word. I'm not trying to be offensive at all, but offering what I hope is constructive feedback. I know some people take serious offense at their actions being called metagaming, and I hope you don't, but that's the way I see it. I could see no other way to run it. If you have any means whatsoever in identifying specific HD or class levels or whatever without actually identifying a unique individual, then I feel (and feel strongly) that that is metagaming.

It seems really odd that if creatures of all sizes exist, Gate can only ever summon the smallest one.

Note that your interpretation is wrongly biased. The existing monsters are not the smallest specimens, but per the RAW the "most commonly encountered version".

 

[Nail]

Yes, if you want to specifically summon Ralph, it's a unique being.

This assertion has come up before, in other threads about gate. As the RAW doesn't explicitly define "unique" (it's not a game term or category, like "solitary"), it seems unsupported and overly restrictive to call a named individual of a species unique. But, YMMV.

The spell description allows you to ask for a 34HD solar? That's the way you read "kind" I take it? Obviously, I disagree. I think that's a metagaming approach.

Whereas I think it's just being smart - something I hope you all think your PCs would be. Although my PC may not use the term "hit dice", he can't help but observe and understand the concept within the gaming world.

The whole issue here is on how you define "kind". As I've stated earlier, I think it's plainly restricted to asking for the monster.....

That's over-stating the case. There's nothing "plain" about such a reading. In fact, my reading might be substantially closer to the "spirit" of the rules (whatever that is!) than yours is. By your reading the calling might even be random....and then "why don't I ever get a larger solar" would be a valid question.

I'm not trying to add "blatant" for an ulterior motive, so I apologize for my use of that word.

No worries; really. The terms "metagaming", "munchkin", "power gamer"......they're all of dubious value.