So... Do Summoned Creatures Suck?

[keterys]

The Summoning Keyword's duration limit is ALSO in those same books.

It actually isn't in Heroes of Shadows, where this power appears.

There _are_ a bunch of summons, all of which include an encounter length duration note, except for this one, which specifically excludes that line, says it lasts until you use the power again or it's destroyed, and has text noting that a necromancer almost always has its summon with it, since it lasts until it is destroyed.

Rules arguments are hardly new things to D&D, because the people writing it don't write with a particularly legalistic bent, nor particularly care as long as the game works fine without going to that length. So, again, I heartily encourage you to submit that this power should be errata-ed for unclear duration alteration, if you feel strongly about it.

 

[Kannon]

It actually isn't in Heroes of Shadows, where this power appears.

There _are_ a bunch of summons, all of which include an encounter length duration note, except for this one, which specifically excludes that line, says it lasts until you use the power again or it's destroyed, and has text noting that a necromancer almost always has its summon with it, since it lasts until it is destroyed.

Rules arguments are hardly new things to D&D, because the people writing it don't write with a particularly legalistic bent, nor particularly care as long as the game works fine without going to that length. So, again, I heartily encourage you to submit that this power should be errata-ed for unclear duration alteration, if you feel strongly about it.

I agree with keterys, on both counts. Personally, I'm a murderous DM, and I'd read that it lasts until it's destroyed. Either way, errata would be great to clear that up.

I've also been kicking around the idea of full on normal monsters (With own actions, stats, and everything) as summons as well. And with the caveat that there's been limited playtesting, and I tend to run very dangerous encounters, they're better balanced than the limited summons are. The increase in the action economy is easily offset by the fact that they don't live all that long. Enough to do a little more than a daily's worth of damage, spread out. (Depending on the daily).

 

[WarlockLord]

I get that.

But if you're fighting creatures that put out a megaton of damage really quickly... doesn't it make sense to wait until those creatures blow their load before summoning the things that those creatures' load can negate?

Tactics man, tactics. Your summons (and any daily power designed to swing combat) is better used in the middle of the fight, not the first round.


As well, Summon Shadow Servant doesn't last beyond the encounter. For any power to do so, it must explicitly state that it can last that long. All powers have a duration of five minutes, or end of the encounter, no matter what other conditions they state, unless they have a clause stating they can last longer.

It specifically says it can.

 

[Moorcrys]

I'm with Keterys and Kannon - its clear to me.

4e is exception based. The fact that they worded in the power specifically how long it lasts - that is until the summons reaches 0 hit points, if you use a minor action to dismiss it, or until you use the power again - pretty clearly tells you how long the power is meant to last. This is where it diverts from the more general summoning rules, otherwise they would just be reprinting material that is already clearly stated: we already know that a summons can be dismissed with a minor action. We already know that, in general, you can use ANY power again - if I have ANY daily attack power I can use the power again in the same day if I have a way of recalling a daily attack spell, regardless of whether it lasts for an encounter or not. There is no reason to tell us these things if it works the same as any other summons or any other daily attack power. The fact that they state specifically how long this particular daily power works is a blunt indication of how long it lasts - it lasts until the summons reaches 0 hit points. Otherwise, it lasts until you use a minor action to dismiss it, or until you use the power again, just like the power says.

 

[DracoSuave]

The fact that they state specifically how long this particular daily power works is a blunt indication of how long it lasts - it lasts until the summons reaches 0 hit points. Otherwise, it lasts until you use a minor action to dismiss it, or until you use the power again, just like the power says.

None of those things, however, render the original rule impossible. I've said it before... by that logic, any moveable conjuration that specifies a conditional duration can ignore the existing conditional duration on ALL moveable conjurations (power ends if the conjuration is outside of range from its caster)

And that would be ALL of them.

 

[Moorcrys]

So you're saying all conjurations follow the same wording. And in fact the zone spells you mention only state an additional caveat by which the zone will be dispelled?

The necromancer/nethermancer ally summons does not follow the same wording as the other summoning spells in the book(s), and specifically tell you how they end.

Little matter ... Obviously in a game you run they would last for an encounter. But the intent seems clear to me as does the power's text in addition to the intent of those spells laid out crystal clear in the magazine 'upcoming' article.

 

[DracoSuave]

So you're saying all conjurations follow the same wording. And in fact the zone spells you mention only state an additional caveat by which the zone will be dispelled?

All moveable conjurations.

The necromancer/nethermancer ally summons does not follow the same wording as the other summoning spells in the book(s), and specifically tell you how they end.

As does the Summoning Keyword. And not a single word in those spells says that the Summoning keyword's ending condition goes away, or otherwise indicates that it does not.

Little matter ... Obviously in a game you run they would last for an encounter. But the intent seems clear to me as does the power's text in addition to the intent of those spells laid out crystal clear in the magazine 'upcoming' article.

WHere does it -state- it doesn't last until the end of the encounter? What other powers say is actually irrelevant... what DOES matter is what the power does NOT say. The power does not -state- that it does not end at the end of the encounter... and therefore there's no reason to assume the keyword's rules do not apply.

The only reason we're having this discussion is because some advertising blurb not in the power... or the book... says it does. But that's not exactly the power's text is it?

 

[keterys]

The book says it summons a "creature that can accompany their master until dismissed or destroyed. Because of this fact, such a wizard is rarely seen without a shadowy creature at his or her side" and then excludes the encounter duration that it has on all of the other summons.

The intent is completely clear. The power could certainly be written even more clear, of course. Almost every power could. You did report it for errata I saw, so hopefully that will get cleared up eventually.

 

[DracoSuave]

The book says it summons a "creature that can accompany their master until dismissed or destroyed. Because of this fact, such a wizard is rarely seen without a shadowy creature at his or her side" and then excludes the encounter duration that it has on all of the other summons.

The intent is completely clear. The power could certainly be written even more clear, of course. Almost every power could. You did report it for errata I saw, so hopefully that will get cleared up eventually.

It does have that duration written on it. It's in the keywords, when it says 'Summoning.'

By including the keyword, it is not required to include any rules text that is inherent to the keyword. Stance powers don't -need- to include the stance rules, runic powers don't -need- to include the runic rules... it's the whole reason keywords have rules text to begin with.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Yeah, I don't think you're going to win this one DS. Any of us who have spent time doing careful 4e rules parsing are aware of the fact that the rules are often vague about exactly what is overriding what. If they had understood how to make perfectly precise rules (and believed it was of overriding concern) they'd have done what real wargames do and put every effective rule into a numbered clause and then the exceptions would list the clauses they replace.

In the reality of D&D this just isn't so. Some rules will mention a way in which they extend or modify another rule, with the expectation that only the mentioned clauses are impacted. Others, like this case, simply list some new clauses without clearly stating they replace others. However ANY ATTEMPT to strictly construct the rules such that EITHER all mentions of any part of a rule are a total replacement of that rule OR that any override must state exactly what it overrides is unworkable. I'm not going to go through the corpus of 4e rules and show you all the ways that your 'exact' interpretation blows up the rules, but it does, and at fundamental levels that you'd just laugh at if you look at them.

Personally I don't think they even screwed up with this power. Overall it is clear how it works and I am pretty sure they simply considered the text as provided to be sufficient to make it clear what sort of exception it is (one that replaces another rule entirely). Equally movable conjurations are clearly still subject to the normal rules. Despite the way 4e's rules are organized MORE independently of the story they support than other editions, they still DO rely on some degree of applying the underlying context to make sense of them. Thus the conjuration rules are clear because clearly the caster is, story wise, 'running' the conjuration and he can't do that if he can't see it anymore. Likewise the Necromancer's minion summon lasts all day because clearly the STORY of that power is that Necros have undead following them around, actual physical undead, albeit raised by magic.