Summoning spells

[Dermit]

Well, the basilisks and beholder are useless as summons, see their attacks work from a script, and so you really cannot order them to attack anyone as the script gets undone. The trolls have the same trouble with the 'death' script.

 

The ogre berserkers and such run on scripts don't they? I don't know a lot about the scripting, but wouldn't the player be able to move them around, just without controlling their abilities once they sighted an enemy? I wouldn't call a scripted basilisk or beholder useless.

 

I guess trolls regenerating at all would be a balance problem, though conjured ones could just die normally.

 

The rakshasa would be a little too strong, even as a high level summon. Though fighters could handle them.

[Demivrgvs]

Feel free to suggest creatures for those spells, as my only idea was to use golems, and I'm not too sure about it.

 

Constructs would be cool, though battle horrors would seem more appropriate. Doesn't feel quite like a summoning spell though, unless you're whisking away some wizard's already made sentinels.

 

I'll think up some more later, but I think it would be good to continue in the line of the earlier level's more common monsters. Trolls, minotaurs, sahuagin or kuo-toa, yuan-ti, giants, basilisks, umber hulks and at higher levels maybe beholders or rakshasas.

 

Best thing is that all those creatures have different varieties, so there could be some scaling like you did with the early levels.

Let's analyze each creature.

* Trolls would be cool, but the AI probably wouldn't handle them well (their death script which require fire or acid)making them immortal.

* Minotaurs and Umber hulks are fine for a 6th or 7th lvl spell.

* Sahuagin, Kuo-toa and Yuan-ti are all good candidates as they offer a great variety of characters (fighters, mages and priests). Between them I'd say Yuan-ti are the coolest, but it may be just me. Anyway, they are mid-high lvl creatures, and their spellcasting variants (e.g. Yuan-ti Mage is a 13-15th lvl caster) make them worth an 8th lvl slot.

* Giant's size make them unusable in most areas

* As Yarno says Basilisk's gaze attack is handled via script, and such ability itself may cause balance issues too imo. Even if it's a cool creature I'd avoid to mess with it if we can.

* Beholders are again a pain to handle, and they proably are really too powerful imo. A 9th lvl slot may be fine for it, but I wouldn't be so sure.

* A Rakshasa pratically is a Genie on steroids. A single rakshasa is worth at least an 8th lvl slot, and a 9th lvl one would probably be more balanced. But are we sure the AI can handle their insane immunities when facing it?

 

 

This discussion has got my attention much more than I thought, but after thinking about it a little more I'd say I actually like the idea of having a Monster Summoning spell for each and every lvl. At the same time I'd leave the current Conjure Elementals/Genies spells as unique spells, though I may agree to make them use a single slot per lvl.

 

The end result would be something like:

1) Monster Summoning I

2) Monster Summoning II

3) Monster Summoninge III

4) Monster Summoning IV, Spider Spawn

5) Monster Summoning V, Summon Lesser Elemental

6) Monster Summoning VI, Summon Elemental, Summon Invisible Stalker, Summon Nishruu

7) Monster Summoning VII, Summon Genie, Summon Hakeashar

8) Monster Summoning VIII, Summon Fiend

9) Monster Summoning IX, Gate

Note that I've not included necromantic summons (e.g. Summon Shadow, Create Undead, ...), Mordy Sword (which is an Evocation) and the new illusionary summons.

 

When it comes to choosing the creatures for each MS spell...

 

 

Monster Summoning I

A swarm of 1HD Gibberlings! I'd grant them PnP "pack" bonuses (+1 thac0 for each gibberling attacking the same target) as I did for wolves summoned by druids.

 

Monster Summoning II

I think 2HD Kobold Commandos and either a Kobold Shaman (3HD priest) or Witch Doctor (3HD Necromancer) would work well.

 

 

Monster Summoning III, IV & V

As per V3's MS I, II & III. I think they were fine, weren't them?

 

 

Monster Summoning VI

Here we have various possibility. We may use 6HD Umber Hulks (two at 12th lvl, and three at 15th, but a fourth at 18th lvl may be too much imo) or we might keep Wyverns (in this case to improve the spell it may first summon two 6HD Baby Wyverns and then a 7HD Wyvern at 15th lvl).

 

 

Monster Summoning VII

If we use Umber Hulks for MSVI we may use here 7HD Wyverns. In this case, like Ardanis suggested, I may add a 10HD Greater Wyvern at 18th. Unfortunately while we have different avatars for baby and adult wyverns, I don't have a custom one for the Greater Wyvern.

 

 

Monster Summoning VIII

I don't know here, perhaps a couple of Yuan-ti fighters with a Yuan-ti Mage later on?

 

 

Monster Summoning IX

Here I really have no idea, and it's the toughest choice to make because the summoned creature(s) must be very powerful, but at the same time balanced. In terms of effectiveness this spell shouldn't be as powerful as Gate (for obvious reasons) and probably even less powerful than Summon Planetar (at least imo).

[the bigg]

Rule of thumb: 50% of what Jarno says is at best inaccurate.

 

The beholder's and basilisks's gaze attacks are scripted (unlike mages, which have spells that are selectable by the end user), so using their abilities is hard for a summoner.

 

That said, it's vastly easier than Jarno leads you to believe to either

1) write a script for summoned beholders, basilisks and whatnot

2) add the special abilities as innates (and make it so that you can cast all of them in short sequence and once per round).

[Dermit]

Ha, gibberlings would be awesome for a low level summoning! Conjurers need that extra constitution so they can handle watching them go to work.

 

Yup I like all the old monster summons you had for V3.

 

Oozes of some sort would be an option for a mid level summon, like level 6.

 

Wolfwere maybe?

 

Some Githyanki could be another option for a high level.

[Ardanis]

1) Monster Summoning I

2) Monster Summoning II

3) Monster Summoninge III

4) Monster Summoning IV, Spider Spawn

5) Monster Summoning V, Summon Lesser Elemental

6) Monster Summoning VI, Summon Elemental, Summon Invisible Stalker, Summon Nishruu

7) Monster Summoning VII, Summon Genie, Summon Hakeashar

8) Monster Summoning VIII, Summon Fiend

9) Monster Summoning IX, Gate

Good enough.

 

Yuan-ti I'd leave for 9th level - they can cast 7th wizard spells, so summoning one on 8th is like casting a Simulacrum accompanied with few grunts.

 

Unfortunately while we have different avatars for baby and adult wyverns, I don't have a custom one for the Greater Wyvern.

Optional component for new animations? Although I don't see it a problem, game does have at least two greater versions (Planar Prison and Abazigal's Lair) using the same animation as regulars.

 

Umber Hulks - 8th level, and an elder on 18th-20th level?

 

6th, I always thought this game could make a richer use of Minotaurs. One problem with them is they're pretty weak in vanilla.

Otherwise, Wolfweres.

 

Beholders - imo Monster Summoning shouldn't conjure aberrations. For some reason it sounds like a blasphemy to me.

 

So:

6) Wolfweres

7) Wyverns

8) Umber Hulks

9) Yuan-ti

 

Shades

I'd move it to 9th level, as per Pnp and the only level with no illusionary spells.

[Guest guest]

I like the idea of just 2 spells: Summon lesser elemental, and summon elemental rather than 6 variants! Everything the same except 33% chance of any of 3 being summoned.

 

Not sure I agree the same for djinni/efreetis, partly because I don't see what name you'd give to the spell...summon genie i guess since the FR wiki classes all (dao, efreeti, djinni, marid, etc) under the term genie. But it might throw off some people into thinking it's just for djinnis, with a different spelling. Speaking of which, dao could be an option to add in so that you have the same situation as for the elementals - one for fire, earth, and air. Not sure if there is an interesting enough spell selection for them...you can hardly give them earthquake now can you, and that's about the one thing you would want because it fits thematically!

 

Anyway, i'm not in favour of bland naming of everything to summon creature blah, keep it as it is.

[Kalindor]

This discussion has got my attention much more than I thought, but after thinking about it a little more I'd say I actually like the idea of having a Monster Summoning spell for each and every lvl. At the same time I'd leave the current Conjure Elementals/Genies spells as unique spells, though I may agree to make them use a single slot per lvl.

The genies make sense as a separate summon since they are casters and not physical meat shields like the other monster summoning X spells, so you gain something different when you have both them and a monster summoning spell in the same level. Do the elementals really function that differently from a regular monster summon, though, the warrant a separate spell slot at these levels?

 

The end result would be something like:

1) Monster Summoning I

2) Monster Summoning II

3) Monster Summoninge III

4) Monster Summoning IV, Spider Spawn

5) Monster Summoning V, Summon Lesser Elemental

6) Monster Summoning VI, Summon Elemental, Summon Invisible Stalker, Summon Nishruu

7) Monster Summoning VII, Summon Genie, Summon Hakeashar

8) Monster Summoning VIII, Summon Fiend

9) Monster Summoning IX, Gate

Note that I've not included necromantic summons (e.g. Summon Shadow, Create Undead, ...), Mordy Sword (which is an Evocation) and the new illusionary summons.

 

If you are set on a monster summoning spell for every level (I have no preference here), I throw my hat in with the wyverns and the minotaurs as summons due to their sparseness as enemies in vanilla. Githyanki were not used much either, perhaps they could be a high-level summon? I also really think beholder summoning is a bad idea at any spell level... The AI cannot be trusted to combat them effectively (heck, even many players cannot!). Ditto for trolls to a much lesser extent.

 

If you are going to make the 10th-level spells into innates, you really don't have to worry about balancing Monster Summoning IX with Planetars as the option to summon more Planetars when one fell would no longer exist. Just preserve the "Pit Fiend > Level 9 summons" dynamic. Perhaps in Kit Revisions you could also add a Monster Summoning X HLA for only conjurers that could conjure something on par with a Planetar (maybe even... ugh... a beholder).

 

One last thing... the players in my BG2 LAN-party games are very adamant about playing with summoning cap removal. If you have the extra patience, it would be nice to attempt to make the summons "balanced" vs. other spell choices in this environment as well. (I can help with balance playtesting without the summoning cap if you like).

[Demivrgvs]

Beholders and Rakshasas

The beholder's and basilisks's gaze attacks are scripted (unlike mages, which have spells that are selectable by the end user), so using their abilities is hard for a summoner.

 

That said, it's vastly easier than Jarno leads you to believe to either

1) write a script for summoned beholders, basilisks and whatnot

2) add the special abilities as innates (and make it so that you can cast all of them in short sequence and once per round).

I know, but the second solution would require players an absurd amount of micromanagement (manually selecting 6 rays each round isn't fun), while the first one would pratically make them uncontrollable except for moving them around. For basilisk both solutions could probably work much better because we'd have only the gaze attack to handle.

 

Anyway, my concerns regarding their power remain. Basilisks may not be uber-powerful, but I do fear their petrifying gaze attacks may be exploited by players. Beholders instead are magical heavy machineguns, and unless I'm overstimating them (do I?) I think that even a 9th lvl slot may not be appropriate for such a powerful creature.

 

 

Gibberlings

Ha, gibberlings would be awesome for a low level summoning! Conjurers need that extra constitution so they can handle watching them go to work.

 

 

Oozes and Githyanki

Oozes of some sort would be an option for a mid level summon, like level 6.

...

Some Githyanki could be another option for a high level.

For some reason I cannot see them fit the MS serie of spells. Oozes don't seem "monsters" so much, while Githyanki are powerful psionics creatures with very high will power, making them not an easy candidate for being controlled by a conjurer without a "fight" (like vanilla's elementals) or a bargain (like PnP Planar Binding serie of spells).

 

 

Yuan-ti

Yuan-ti I'd leave for 9th level - they can cast 7th wizard spells, so summoning one on 8th is like casting a Simulacrum accompanied with few grunts.

You're right about Yuan-ti power lvl, though I don't like them too much for a 9th lvl spell...I admit it's a stupid reason, but they don't sound "epic" enough to me for such a slot.

 

 

Minotaurs, Umber Hulk and Wolfweres

Umber Hulks - 8th level, and an elder on 18th-20th level?

 

6th, I always thought this game could make a richer use of Minotaurs. One problem with them is they're pretty weak in vanilla.

Otherwise, Wolfweres.

Minotaurs are indeed the weakest of them, more or less acting as 6HD warriors.

 

I don't understand why you'd consider Umber Hulks so much better than Wolfweres though. The formers are 6HD monsters with a confusing gaze, the latters are 7HD monsters with a tremendous regeneration rate. If you ask me Wolfweres are quite more effective summons. The 10HD Elder Umber Hulk is a different story, but I think the "base creatures" should define the spell, not the greater version of it (though both must be taken into account for balance purposes).

 

In theory it would be quite easy to adjust all these creatures to fit whichever slot we wish by changing their stats, but I do prefer to remain true to pre-existing creatures as much as possible.

 

 

Shades

I'd move it to 9th level, as per Pnp and the only level with no illusionary spells.

Well, AD&D version of Shades is a 6th lvl spell which summons illusionary creatures, while 3ed version is a 9th lvl spell which allow the Illusioner to create semi-real invocations and evocations (duplicating almost all Evoker's spells up to 8th lvl). Don't ask me why the changed the spell so much between the two versions...

 

 

Genies

Not sure I agree the same for djinni/efreetis, partly because I don't see what name you'd give to the spell...summon genie i guess since the FR wiki classes all (dao, efreeti, djinni, marid, etc) under the term genie. But it might throw off some people into thinking it's just for djinnis, with a different spelling. Speaking of which, dao could be an option to add in so that you have the same situation as for the elementals - one for fire, earth, and air. Not sure if there is an interesting enough spell selection for them...you can hardly give them earthquake now can you, and that's about the one thing you would want because it fits thematically!

I'd call it Summon Genie yes, though it would probably be better something like Call/Conjure Genie considering these creatures aren't considered "summons" by Death Spell within SR and/or SCS.

 

Regarding Daos, I sort of like your suggestion (I'm pretty sure other players asked it ages ago) though it's another evil aligned genie. The spell selection would completely up to us (though Stoneskin and Conjure Lesser Earth Elemental would be obvious choices). I've to think about it.

 

EDIT:

The genies make sense as a separate summon since they are casters and not physical meat shields like the other monster summoning X spells, so you gain something different when you have both them and a monster summoning spell in the same level. Do the elementals really function that differently from a regular monster summon, though, the warrant a separate spell slot at these levels?

You do have a point. Both solutions have their pro and their con.

 

 

Summoning Cap Removal

One last thing... the players in my BG2 LAN-party games are very adamant about playing with summoning cap removal. If you have the extra patience, it would be nice to attempt to make the summons "balanced" vs. other spell choices in this environment as well. (I can help with balance playtesting without the summoning cap if you like).

Well, I'm not sure how taking into account the cap or not would affect my work when balancing the creatures. Low level summons are still fine without the cap (you're not going to kill Irenicus with 20 hobgoblins), but mid-high lvl ones can become quite overpowered (running around with dozens of elementals, genies and so on is insane imo). Jarno's suggestion to have different caps (e.g. no cap for weak creatures, x mid-lvl ones, and only one uber powerful creature) probably is a better solution, but it may not change much.

 

Have you played with V3 without the cap? If yes you might be able to tell me yourself if summons are still balanced and how they perform compared to other spell choices.

[the bigg]

Anyway, my concerns regarding their power remain. Basilisks may not be uber-powerful, but I do fear their petrifying gaze attacks may be exploited by players. Beholders instead are magical heavy machineguns, and unless I'm overstimating them (do I?) I think that even a 9th lvl slot may not be appropriate for such a powerful creature.

Re: Basilisks, you're basically buying castings of Flesh to Stone (except easier to save against). Lvl 7 or even 6 seems OK (see: D4 Woodland Being, that gives you extra D4 castings, or P6 Woundrous Recall, that gives you three extra P5 castings).

Re: Beholdiers, I think they're OK for a lvl 10 spell, and there's always the less-OP Gauths (which would be OK for lvl 7). You can have them have a ranged attack that simulates the various eyes' effect (2 or 3 attacks per round, no actual damage, 20% chance of processing each for lightning, cause damage, slow, death spell, charm creature). The Anti-magic ray should be scrapped since it's a win-button vs. mages, though.

[Dermit]

For some reason I cannot see them fit the MS serie of spells. Oozes don't seem "monsters" so much, while Githyanki are powerful psionics creatures with very high will power, making them not an easy candidate for being controlled by a conjurer without a "fight" (like vanilla's elementals) or a bargain (like PnP Planar Binding serie of spells).

 

Oozes are a little lame. Salamanders perhaps, or were we staying away from outsiders where possible?

 

Good point about the Githyanki, it would be a bit like summoning wizards or illithids. Though that makes me wonder, what exactly are the summon monster spells doing? The name makes it sound like you are bringing existing creatures to fight under your control (sounds more like enchantment), but the spell school makes it sound like you are conjuring up a new one (pretty strange for intelligent creatures). Either way it has some strange implications when you consider that you are using sentient species (or for a druid random animals).

 

But that is a whole lot of off topic.

 

I think beholders would make a good 9th level in my estimation at least, since I wouldn't want to micromanage them anyway. A lesser sort of beholder could always be used, Bigg mentioned Gauths. They are deadly, but they can actually be pretty fragile, the sorts of enemies you fight in TOB and the end of SOA (demons, golems, rakshasas) could tear one up pretty easily.

 

Ardanis makes a good point about the convention of not using aberrations though

[Ardanis]

Umber Hulk vs Wolfweres

My judgement is based on their in-game performance. Wolfweres (even greater ones, to extent) are generally easier to kill than Hulks and deal less damage, and latter can confuse people too.

Whether you were to pit a Hulk vs Wolfwere or an Elder vs Greater, I'd place my bet on the first at any time.

Unless you plan on beefing Wolfwere's poor HP, that is. And still, their ApR is 2 as opposed to Hulks' 3.

 

Summoning Cap Removal

Jarno's suggestion to have different caps (e.g. no cap for weak creatures, x mid-lvl ones, and only one uber powerful creature) probably is a better solution, but it may not change much.

Imo folks who deliberately want to choke AI with two dozens of 10+ HD summons should be left in Sikret's care. Besides, whom can you choke? Any decent wizard worthy of such tactic should know Banishment anyway. Dragons? They can fend off quite effectively. ToB grunts? Equal fight, more or less. And those two dozens also need the same amount of slots wasted, and I think we can safely assume that loading those slots with disabling and offensive magic would yield the same result.

[Demivrgvs]

Umber Hulk vs Wolfweres

My judgement is based on their in-game performance. Wolfweres (even greater ones, to extent) are generally easier to kill than Hulks and deal less damage, and latter can confuse people too.

Whether you were to pit a Hulk vs Wolfwere or an Elder vs Greater, I'd place my bet on the first at any time.

Unless you plan on beefing Wolfwere's poor HP, that is. And still, their ApR is 2 as opposed to Hulks' 3.

Ok I've looked into it a little more, and guess what I've discovered...wolfwere cres are terribly messed up!

 

c6were1 & c6were2 - 41hp and 50% magic resistance (it should have been 10%)

gorwowe - 95hp but 0% magic resistance

wolfwe01 - 35hp and 50% magic resistance

wolfwe02 - 35hp and 0% magic resistance

 

Then I'm an idiot because these creatures don't have regeneration at all (only the greater one has it), but they are immune to non-magical weapons.

 

I've just discovered that in PnP they are 5HD monsters, that's probably why most of them in BG have so few hp despite their 7HD.

 

Umber Hulk otoh are 8HD monsters both in AD&D and 3ed, and thus their BG's 6HD is misleading, because they do have lots of hp and better apr compared to Wolfweres.

 

What a mess...

 

 

Summoning Cap Removal

Imo folks who deliberately want to choke AI with two dozens of 10+ HD summons should be left in Sikret's care. Besides, whom can you choke? Any decent wizard worthy of such tactic should know Banishment anyway. Dragons? They can fend off quite effectively. ToB grunts? Equal fight, more or less. And those two dozens also need the same amount of slots wasted, and I think we can safely assume that loading those slots with disabling and offensive magic would yield the same result.

Translated: remove the cap and don't care?

[DrAzTiK]

In my game with SCS, it seems that ennemy mage are able to summon a large number of creatures. Can someone confirm to me that AI is not restricted to summon only 5 cre ?

[Constantine]

Yuan-ti I'd leave for 9th level - they can cast 7th wizard spells, so summoning one on 8th is like casting a Simulacrum accompanied with few grunts.

I think Yuan-ti are too weak for the 9th level. 7th wizard spells? so what? The common high level enemies (SOA after the Underdark, TOB) would make short work of them. They're not worth the precious 9th level slot.

[Shaitan]

Personally RP wise I see no argument for removing the summon cap. Computer hardware wise I don't like it (I'll have to buy a new laptop sooner or later anyway).

 

Cheers