Summoning and the Hypothetical Battle Reality

[Rechan]

I dunno. A power that said, "Deal xd6 damage to a monster, and heal 18 damage" would be pretty nice.

That also assumes the summons manages to hit its target before it's killed, too.

I just look at the Summons, and compare them to say, Spiritual weapon, and there isn't a lot the summons have better.

Also, there's the issue of solo monsters. Summons are just going to get obliterated by solos, while not having enough to really work.

So the use of a summons is much more corner-case.

Points, however, to being an ally and providing flanking/receiving bonuses.

shouldn't he have bloodied value of 20 (10 + 14 + 4*4)/2?

I took the math straight from the Character Builder.

 

[Cadfan]

I just look at the Summons, and compare them to say, Spiritual weapon, and there isn't a lot the summons have better.

That's because Spiritual Weapon can only do two things- create combat advantage, and deal damage. The summon can create combat advantage, deal damage, and absorb damage. That extra ability has to be paid for somehow.

 

[On Puget Sound]

Sounds like summon spells add a pre-bloodied striker to the party. The party needs to treat the new member like any other striker; mark or impede its foes and let it get hits in without getting in too much danger.

 

[Stalker0]

I would suggest that you play it smart, have the monsters attack it.

Don't let a precieved weakness in a power change the way you DM. DM it the way you want, and if it appears too weak...change the power.

Currently the wizard in my party has the second highest AC in the game, so I'm not worried about summons having low AC, though for a particular wizard they could.

The big question comes down to....what would you rather have? A ball of fire that is indestructible, does auto damage, and provides no flanking....or a creature that has all the benefits and drawbacks of a normal creature, along with a lot lower hitpoints.

Personally I'd take the former but that's just me.

 

[77IM]

I can't access the Ampersand. Do the summons have Sustain Standard? It seems that it would be thematically appropriate, and that if they had Sustain Standard, the critter could have many more hit points and still be balanced (or at least no worse than flaming sphere and stinking cloud).

-- 77IM

 

[chaotix42]

Summons don't need to be sustained, but attacking with them is a standard action.

 

[Saeviomagy]

At worst, when simply plunked in front of a foe, a summon is a daily that doubles the value of one of your healing surges. Often it will do more (because it also effectively removes any nasty effects applied by the attacks that kill it).

At best, it's that, PLUS some random amount of damage caused to the foe. If you take really good care of it, it could put out quite a lot of damage.

It seems pretty good to me. Just treat it like you would any other player with the defense stats that it has (for a wizard who intends to do this, his AC should be within a couple of points of the defender anyway, so his mark should make him a more promising target).

 

[Regicide]

A standard action to make it act makes it sound pretty worthless for much beyond soaking damage and flanking. This whole "conservation of actions" is a pile of garbage. Just because Timestop was busted and they screwed up and made a level 1 druid animal companions better than a level 1 fighter in 3.5E doesn't mean you have to gimp everything in 4E. In 4E if the mobs are being out-actioned, just bring in more minions.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I took the math straight from the Character Builder.

Maybe a bug ought to be filed?

Cheers

 

[CapnZapp]

A standard action to make it act makes it sound pretty worthless for much beyond soaking damage and flanking. This whole "conservation of actions" is a pile of garbage. Just because Timestop was busted and they screwed up and made a level 1 druid animal companions better than a level 1 fighter in 3.5E doesn't mean you have to gimp everything in 4E. In 4E if the mobs are being out-actioned, just bring in more minions.

You sure you're not confusing "balance" for "fun".

To me it's pretty clear that any power that adds allies to the fight must either add crappy allies indeed, or effectively replace your own character in the fight.

"Balance" doesn't have anything to do with the opposition. It's the balance vs. the other characters' options we're talking about.

In other games it might be perfectly fine to have wizards and druids to occasionally cast spells that are much more powerful than a fighter's tricks, all in the best interests of the group.

Not so in 4E. And this brings us back to the fact that a summoning spell either must summon a feeble inconsequential critter (if the summoner can continue to act unhindered) or more or less a copy of the summoner (if the original is held up controlling the summonee)*.

*) And still this copy needs to suck compared to the original or it's overwhelmingly powerful. Or any damage needs to transfer across to the original, which raises the question of "why bother in the first place?"


Now, you might think I'm altogether disagreeing with you. But I'm not.

Because I do agree this is wrong.

Not because of balance issues, but because of fun issues. I completely agree it isn't much fun if all your allies need to suck badly. However, I think that is the price you must pay to keep things balanced.

Essentially, any power that brings in allies must choose between being balanced or being fun.

Put otherwise, don't play a summoner druid/wizard in a game such as 4E. You need a game of the traditional paradigm, where spellcasters were allowed a few big bangs a day. Bangs, that is, bigger than anything other characters could do.

"Real" summoning needs, by definition, to be more powerful than any ordinary power of the same level/occurrence. And I'm not holding my breath for a 4E class that does this.