Summon Monster Action Economy


Rules Questions

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

So, I've been having a discussion with various local GMs and I wanted
to get a larger opinion.

So you have a caster that has summon monster as a standard action (regardless of how). And they start with an already existing summoned creature.

I personally have not been allowing this type of action but they claim they can:

1. Full Attack with the existing creature
2. Summon a new creature as standard, which sends back the old creature
3. Full Attack with the new creature

All in the same round.

I haven't been allowing this, but I am interested in the opinions.


Yup, that's legal.

Sczarni

One reason why the APG Summoner is now no longer legal in PFS ;-)

Unless they're grandfathered in, of course.

Sczarni

@Nefreet

Arcanist can do it all the same.


Totally legal. Totally cheese.

I don't allow it in my home games, either. It's gaming the system.


It's not actually all the great. You waste a lot of resources for a one round advantage. All in all there are better, more effective ways to summon monsters.

Sczarni

Malag wrote:
Arcanist can do it all the same.

Oh, I guess so. Coincidentally someone was just telling me about this yesterday.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Barker wrote:

So, I've been having a discussion with various local GMs and I wanted

to get a larger opinion.

So you have a caster that has summon monster as a standard action (regardless of how). And they start with an already existing summoned creature.

I personally have not been allowing this type of action but they claim they can:

1. Full Attack with the existing creature
2. Summon a new creature as standard, which sends back the old creature
3. Full Attack with the new creature

All in the same round.

I haven't been allowing this, but I am interested in the opinions.

It's an illegal move. You can not call out a new summon, UNTIL you dismiss the active one, said dismissal requiring a standard action. Unless you have the archetype which allows multiple SLA's in play.

Sczarni

APG Summoner wrote:
If this ability is used again, any existing summon monster immediately ends.


Acadamae Graduate Feat


Nefreet wrote:

One reason why the APG Summoner is now no longer legal in PFS ;-)

Unless they're grandfathered in, of course.

No it was banned because of the false assumptions that the Summoner is broken. This is just an emulation of how society works, there's a lot of issues in our society that because people think it's an assault on their values they want it to not exist or be allowed. This is even when shown evidence against or said issue exists in other forms, in fact in these situations they usually double down on it's "wrongness".

tldr: Summoner was fine as it was and only an issue in specific cases; such as low point buy, low gold, low magic, or low powered campaigns in general. Though other pet classes have the same if not more benefits of this style campaign.

Liberty's Edge

Nefreet wrote:
APG Summoner wrote:
If this ability is used again, any existing summon monster immediately ends.

I am sorry if I'm missing something but how can two characters at the same time attack when only one of them can be there?

If you interrupt the first summoned creature before it full-round attacks, then that time is available to the newly summoned creature.
I see it as a 6sec time span. Whatever action the first summoned creatures take becomes removed as options for the newly summoned creatures.


TorresGlitch wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
APG Summoner wrote:
If this ability is used again, any existing summon monster immediately ends.

I am sorry if I'm missing something but how can two characters at the same time attack when only one of them can be there?

If you interrupt the first summoned creature before it full-round attacks, then that time is available to the newly summoned creature.
I see it as a 6sec time span. Whatever action the first summoned creatures take becomes removed as options for the newly summoned creatures.

Because the six second timespan and the rotating-turns framework don't get along.

It's cheesy and I'd slap a player who tried it, but the RAW answer to your question is "because the rules say they can".

First one attacks, standard action casting/SLA which includes dismissal of first one, second one attacks. Works by the rules.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Onyxlion wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

One reason why the APG Summoner is now no longer legal in PFS ;-)

Unless they're grandfathered in, of course.

No it was banned because of the false assumptions that the Summoner is broken. This is just an emulation of how society works, there's a lot of issues in our society that because people think it's an assault on their values they want it to not exist or be allowed. This is even when shown evidence against or said issue exists in other forms, in fact in these situations they usually double down on it's "wrongness".

tldr: Summoner was fine as it was and only an issue in specific cases; such as low point buy, low gold, low magic, or low powered campaigns in general. Though other pet classes have the same if not more benefits of this style campaign.

I played an APG Summoner all the way through Eyes of Ten. The only reason I did not pretty much make everyone irrelevant is because I deliberately chose not to do so. I enjoyed playing the character a lot and will definitely miss the class. But it was a nerf bat that definitely needed to be swung, because of all the players that proved unwilling to restrain themselves from taking over the show.

Grand Lodge

Nefreet wrote:

One reason why the APG Summoner is now no longer legal in PFS ;-)

Unless they're grandfathered in, of course.

The Unchained Summoner can still do this just fine. The Summon Monster SLA class ability was unchanged.


LazarX wrote:


I played an APG Summoner all the way through Eyes of Ten. The only reason I did not pretty much make everyone irrelevant is because I deliberately chose not to do so. I enjoyed playing the character a lot and will definitely miss the class. But it was a nerf bat that definitely needed to be swung, because of all the players that proved unwilling to restrain themselves from taking over the show.

How's that any different than a wizard, cleric, druid, hunter, sorcerer, any other tier 1 & 2 classes? What did the other people play? Where you more optimized? This isn't evidence, I do this with every character I play but that doesn't mean every class I play is broken.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Onyxlion wrote:
LazarX wrote:


I played an APG Summoner all the way through Eyes of Ten. The only reason I did not pretty much make everyone irrelevant is because I deliberately chose not to do so. I enjoyed playing the character a lot and will definitely miss the class. But it was a nerf bat that definitely needed to be swung, because of all the players that proved unwilling to restrain themselves from taking over the show.
How's that any different than a wizard, cleric, druid, hunter, sorcerer, any other tier 1 & 2 classes? What did the other people play? Where you more optimized? This isn't evidence, I do this with every character I play but that doesn't mean every class I play is broken.

Yes... the Summoner is not the only class that can break the game, but it's one of the one's that does so with the least effort. It doesn't require dipping in another class, taking a freakish archetype, an oddball magic item, or using some obscure feat, or race trait, the plain jane vanilla summoner can do shennanigans just out the gate. It's not such a big deal at high levels, but at low levels, the 1st-2nd level Summoner leaves wizards crying in their buckets, and the fighter completely redundant.


Barker wrote:

So you have a caster that has summon monster as a standard action (regardless of how). And they start with an already existing summoned creature.

I personally have not been allowing this type of action but they claim they can:

1. Full Attack with the existing creature
2. Summon a new creature as standard, which sends back the old creature
3. Full Attack with the new creature

All in the same round.

I haven't been allowing this, but I am interested in the opinions.

Not allowed, as per RAW.

p. 216 of PCR, "CONCENTRATION: The spell lasts as long as you concentrate on it. Concentrating to maintain a spell is a standard action..."

You'd be making 2 separate standard actions as you described it.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Uh, Summon Monster doesn't require concentration.


Create Mr. Pitt wrote:
It's not actually all the great. You waste a lot of resources for a one round advantage. All in all there are better, more effective ways to summon monsters.

Around level 4 or so, the Summoner has plenty of fuel for the four-encounter workday, and burning summons that would otherwise go to waste in order to squeeze out another creature-round worth of actions is a perfectly fine use of resources and actions.


Summon Monster also does not force you to send the old monster back. They can just keep piling them on.

Grand Lodge

wraithstrike wrote:
Summon Monster also does not force you to send the old monster back. They can just keep piling them on.

It does when it's the Summoner's SLA, which is the "usual" way of standard action summoning.


Jeff Merola wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Summon Monster also does not force you to send the old monster back. They can just keep piling them on.
It does when it's the Summoner's SLA, which is the "usual" way of standard action summoning.

That is an SLA with a specific exception, not a spell or general summoning SLA.

So by the normal rules it is allowed to spam monsters.


Jeff Merola wrote:
Uh, Summon Monster doesn't require concentration.

Where is this stated? I searched a long time trying to find it.


Other casters do not have that SLA. They have no limit to numbers of monsters.


Cyg wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:
Uh, Summon Monster doesn't require concentration.
Where is this stated? I searched a long time trying to find it.

Spells that require you to concentrate to maintain them have a duration of Concentration. The summon monster spells have a duration of 1 round/level, not concentration.


Jeraa wrote:
Cyg wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:
Uh, Summon Monster doesn't require concentration.
Where is this stated? I searched a long time trying to find it.
Spells that require you to concentrate to maintain them have a duration of Concentration. The summon monster spells have a duration of 1 round/level, not concentration.

Ah, thank you! I had no idea there was even a "concentration" duration until just now. Thank you!


Summoning creatures get you a slight boost to your action economy, taking away a few actions right at the beginning by a full-level caster, replacing them with a few more actions per summoned creature by a creature at about half the caster's level. So long as this is limited to one creature, it's not much of an issue. If not, as if with a non-summoner summoning hordes of creatures, it's more of one... but it takes a good while to get going. PF has combats of a few turns at most.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Summon Monster Action Economy All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.