Summon Monster... check it out

[Caliban]

Wht wouldn't an evil wizard want to upset his paladin enemy? When people are angry, they mke mistakes. When people make mistakes, you can usually take advantage of them. My NPCs (the smart ones) do whatever they can to anger the party into rash decisions...

I said this sounded like a tactic to annoy the player, not the character.

Also, trying to summon an archon and force them to do evil deeds is not guaranteed. They will misinterpret the commands, or outright refuse them if they oppose their ethos. The core rules explicitly state that summoned creatures can refuse to use their abilities in certain situations. I think commanding them to do evil deeds would be right up there with commanding them to use spells or abilities that cost them XP.

You will not be able to get a hound archon to murder an orphanage full of children for you.

Also, summoning creatures is a good/lawful/chaotic/evil act based on the creature you summon. Summon opposed alignment creatures enough and your alignment will start shifting.

 

[Blacksad]

I'm Evil!

OT: I know, it's bad to throw oil on fire, but I just wanted to point the Monte's definitions of munchkin:
http://www.montecook.com/arch_anrant3.html

Back on topic

Personnaly I would allow archon to be summoned by an evil caster, but as it is a good spell, some part of the caster soul will be sold to the seven heaven (so if he has already sold his soul to a demon, he won't be able to use any summoning spell with an alignement descriptor that isn't chaotic evil).

Also, I don't think that evil and good creatures in D&D should use the same method.

IMHO a LG creatures will act to the best of its capacity respecting the wording and the spirit of the contract that bind it.

CG respect the spirit but not the wording

LE respect the wording but not the spirit

and CE are somehow a bit unreliable.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I said this sounded like a tactic to annoy the player, not the character.

Also, trying to summon an archon and force them to do evil deeds is not guaranteed. They will misinterpret the commands, or outright refuse them if they oppose their ethos. The core rules explicitly state that summoned creatures can refuse to use their abilities in certain situations. I think commanding them to do evil deeds would be right up there with commanding them to use spells or abilities that cost them XP.

You will not be able to get a hound archon to murder an orphanage full of children for you.

Also, summoning creatures is a good/lawful/chaotic/evil act based on the creature you summon. Summon opposed alignment creatures enough and your alignment will start shifting.

It cheezes off the paladin not the player. I said, paladin for a reason. Luckily I play with poeple who can actually roleplay anger without being angry. Also I feel that if they intended summoned creatures to be able to avoid or misinterpret commands because of ethical dillemas they would of mentioned it. I think is just a safeguard v munchkins trying to get heavy exp cost spells off for free.

 

[Caliban]

Re: I'm Evil!

OT: I know, it's bad to throw oil on fire, but I just wanted to point the Monte's definitions of munchkin:
http://www.montecook.com/arch_anrant3.html

That's interesting but irrelevent, since I'm not using Monte's dictionary.

I already gave the definition of munchkin I use earlier in this thread.

 

[Caliban]

It cheezes off the paladin not the player. I said, paladin for a reason. Luckily I play with poeple who can actually roleplay anger without being angry. Also I feel that if they intended summoned creatures to be able to avoid or misinterpret commands because of ethical dillemas they would of mentioned it. I think is just a safeguard v munchkins trying to get heavy exp cost spells off for free.

I think it's also a safeguard against munchkins summoning oppositely aligned creatures and forcing them to do things against their morals or ethos. *shrug* That's my call anyway.

 

[Geo]

Man, I just read the whole thing, I don't know what is wrong with you Caliban, but it seems to me you are in a bad mood. That's just my opinion, and I don't want you to take it the wrong way.(then again, how couldn't you take that the wrong way... hmm... nevermind) Anyway to the topic at hand. Rules are made up to be bent, adjusted, manipulated, or otherwise followed to the tee. We use rules to get more fun out of the game. If you can do what AirElemental said, without argueing about the alignment of the character. Lets take for an example, a Lawful Good character summoning the Archon. He tells the archon that this bad guy, who happens to have a sword of soul stealing, and that without it the whole city dies, then I think the archon would go ahead and try to aquire the sword. Sure it would take a lot, or just wait till the guy was asleep, which is the best way I so far seen. Anyway, it would work. It can work, the rules back it up, it is clever, something that should be rewarded, not demeaned. So you use the archon for the personal gain. It could say no, but in reality it shouldn't, there doens't seem to be any reason why it can. It is under your power, you summoned it, not someone else. It isn't in nature, it is under your power. So, with that respect you should be able to summon anything you want. But where this should be prevented is at the gaming table. A house rule, or DM judgement should say that you can only summon things that are either close to your alignment, such as CG summoning something that is Good or Chaotic, never evil or lawful. Or CN, only things that are Chaotic, and never lawful. If you summon something that is stupid, too bad.

So, lets look at the idea again, using the 4th level spell to use a 7th level spell... sort of, but not quite, you aren't placing yourself in danger, something else, and it won't work unless you use a lot of preparation and planning. You have to scry the person, find out exactly where he is, use major image, after you cast the summoning, to tell where the guy is, while telling the creature in exact words what you want it to do, which we have already found does not require you to be able to speak celestial(it has tongues). Then to ensure it works, casting haste, improv invisibility, maybe stoneskin. It might have one round to do it... heh. But it can be done, it is within the rules. If I presented this to my DM explained it carefully, showed him that it can be done, and it's entirely limited scope, then he should say yes. If he doesn't, well, then I should think about playing with a DM who plays by the rules, not on some whim. I agree that the DM has every right to say no, but why should he. It is within the scope of the game's rules. I as a DM would allow it, but more often than not my NPC's usually spot the Scrying, the will know something is up. But in very specific, needful areas, where it might be the last resort to get an item from an escaping enemy. Yes, it more than likely would work. AND it is a good idea, the using of the Archon, not the evil guy trying to use it.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Interesting situation, that: I think the archon could refuse. I also think that if the evil conjurer is strong enough, he could force the archon to do the things (since the lantern archon is not that powerful). But evil beings of that power who force the divine agents of goodness to do nasty things will likely draw attention to themselves: The lantern archons (or other celestials, but let's stick to that example) will be summoned by some evil guy who forces them to steal and manages to do it right and seriously imperil some good guy in the process (i.e. by stealing the holy avenger from a paladin on her way to that evil dragon, rendering the poor lass unable to defeat the lizard!) First thing in the morning, that lantern will run to the trumpet archon of his confidence, whining about what he had to do. The trumpet archon, in turn, will be concerned about this evil-doer, and likely will tell some gods of his alignment. Next thing he knows, the evil conjurer will be hunted by countless worshippers, clerics, divine champions and paladins of Tyr, Torm, maybe Helm, Ilmater and maybe even Sune....

 

[gfunk]

I agree this is an interesting situation, one which has not yet come up IMC. However, in Caliban's defense remember that Summon spells used to summon Good or Evil creatures are automatically tagged with the Good or Evil descriptor. So, from a D&D alignment perspective, casting a Summon Monster spell to summon an Imp (LE) for example is the moral equivalent of casting Animate Dead, Unholy Blight, Blasphemy, or Unhallow. By the same token summoning an Archon (LG) is like casting Holy Word, Hallow, or Detect Evil.

We all know that in the real world that things are not so black and white. For example, I don't think people would call you evil if you gated in a Pit Fiend to help you dispatch a group of demons.

However, this is D&D, not the real world and alignment is black and white. Archons, while fully under your control as per the Summon Moster spell description, will not appreciate being told to do evil things. Keep in mind though, Lantern Archons are dumb as doornails (Int 6) and they are usually summoned after hostilities have broken out. Therefore, unless the Archon is obviously performing an evil act, he may not even know it. For instance, he may be ordered to attack a LG NPC w/o him knowing it.

Caliban's rather extreme example (summoning a Hound Archon to kill kiddies in an orphange) would have to be undertaken by the Archon whether he likes it or not. Of course he would try to subvert such orders by yelling warnings to the kids to get away, inflicting subdual damage, etc. The archon would, of course, report such henious orders to his superiors IMO and if such offenses are repeated, then divine retribution is probably called for.

So the bottom line is this:

- Summon Monster spells have Good and Evil descriptors
- Alignment in D&D is black and white
- Summoned Monsters *must* obey the will of the caster to "the best of its ability." However, the more powerful outsiders that are summoned may resent what you force them to do, leading to disastrous consequences.

 

[Caliban]

- Summoned Monsters *must* obey the will of the caster to "the best of its ability." However, the more powerful outsiders that are summoned may resent what you force them to do, leading to disastrous consequences.

Not in every case. The PHB very clearly states that summoned monsters will automatically refuse to cast spells that cost them XP.

Therefore they are not required to obey the will of the caster to the best of their ability in every instance.

My ruling is that trying to force a summoned creature to do something that is diametrically opposed to it's moral/ethical code will give it the option of refusing. I put it on the same level as casting spells that cost them XP. If that's a rule 0, so be it.

As for the other thing, there are very few things that I will call out and out munchkinism. I have a relatively strict definition of munchkin, but when you cross that line, I have no qualms about calling a spade a spade. It's not a personal attack, it's a statement of fact.

 

[WizarDru]

Caliban,

if I see one more post indicating that you've disappeared, I'm going to start treating you like Snake Pliskin.


FWIW, I agree with you. I certainly would never allow this sort of abuse (and let's be clear, I view it as such) IMG. It's merely a blatant attempt to circumvent the rules, and violates the obvious spirit and intent (as well as timing issues and specific rules information) that the designers laid out.