Silly Summon Question

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by JmOz

I disagree, most head of states are going be alot less than you seem to think, 15 points in COM/PRE, 30points in perks, 30 in skills, I would be surprised if most even broke 150 points total

 

There's no reason to bel;ieve most heads of state are much more than competent normals. A 150 point character ("Hero") would seem more than adequate to design a world leader.

 

After all, how many of THEM get their own comic book or movie?

 

Remember that Hero focuses on adventure gaming, so many skills and perks, and most talents and powers, are combat oriented. Leaders of state don't need combat abilities, so they don't cost much to build. They have "extensive non-combat influence", which comes from that perk "head of state".

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by OddHat

Fair enough, that's the GM's call. He's still worth more base points than the average NY City taxi driver.

 

He's not worth that much more. And let's take the comparison further - 150 points would be a ton to build our hypothetical world leader with, so a 30 point summon with a +1.5 advantage to select from a group of world leader makes 75 points. Or we can buy a similar summon to get a specific 150 point fire demon.

 

Compare this to the power to Summon a (random) 300 point Fire Demon who's friendly, so will do what you request within reason. Same cost - 60 points and a +1/4 advantage to make him Amicable. Which ability is more useful?

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

He's not worth that much more. And let's take the comparison further - 150 points would be a ton to build our hypothetical world leader with, so a 30 point summon with a +1.5 advantage to select from a group of world leader makes 75 points. Or we can buy a similar summon to get a specific 150 point fire demon.

 

Compare this to the power to Summon a (random) 300 point Fire Demon who's friendly, so will do what you request within reason. Same cost - 60 points and a +1/4 advantage to make him Amicable. Which ability is more useful?

 

Now this is just getting silly.

 

I have no problem with whatever house rules you like to use, and I've explained why I mostly agree with the rules as published on this. If you disagree, that's cool: neither of us are in the same campaigns.

 

If your GM were willing to let you build the "Summon Tony Blair" power, I'd say that would be a hell of a lot more powerful in most circumstances than "Summon Random Fire Demon." After all, Tony Blair could call on a heck of a lot of additional resources for your character. If I were GMing, and I permitted that power, I'd build Tony Blair on quite a few points to reflect that, mostly puting the points into bases, vehicles, followers (including British supers), whatever. You could do much of the same thing with just the Head of State perk, but considering what the player would actually be able to do in game over the long term with control over a head of state it would be very, very unballanced.

 

The real question is whether the random fire demon is more valuable than the specific named fire demon. I'm guessing that your position is that if you've spent the same number of points on both then they should be equally valuable. Cool, that makes sense. If you then say that the number of benefits you get from a 150 point random fire demon are greater than the benefits you get from a 75 point named fire demon, I'd say that the problem is with the use you and the GM plan to make of the demon. If you just want a fire-demon shock trooper, a random fire demon will do the job better for the same points. If you want a weak fire demon with specific skills and knowledges (and maybe powers) that are useful in a given situation, that's what the Summon Specific Being advantage is for. At the same point cost for the power he should be just about as useful, though probably in a different way. If you want someone who is both a kick-ass shock trooper and possessed of specific and controllable knowledge and skills that will have an impact on the game, he should cost more, otherwise you're getting something for nothing.

 

If it wouldn't make a difference in your campaign, that's fine. That's what house rules are for.

[Crimson Arrow]

Now this is the cup of a carpenter, er, an interesting argument.

 

Do you get a less powerful character than you have paid points for? For example, Wilbur can summon riding horses. Sometimes they are black, sometimes brown, or piebald or whatever. However, each of them has the same characteristics, powers, disadvantages. Do you ever get a horse that's lame, or bad-tempered etc? IIRC, the answer (subject to house rules), is "no". You've paid the points, you get what you've paid for.

 

Now, what if Wilbur can summon Mr Ed? This is not a special horse; he's just the same as all of the other riding horses.

 

Why should it cost more to get a named horse, which is identical to others? I think talking about characters is misleading, as of course Lenny might have his points distributed differently from Bud (who's younger and fitter, not so good at knowing the best routes round town, but still only costs 50 points).

 

The benefit of specifying a named individual is if that individual has special powers, skills, contacts, knowledge etc. which makes him particularly useful. Also, the character can (generally) only be in one place at a time.

 

If Wilbur summons the TV Mr Ed, who can speak, not only is he more points (no Animal Intelligence Disadvantage, higher INT etc), but he costs more because he is effectively unique. He's a talking horse.

 

My take (and yes, this would not be official), is that if you summon somebody or an animal who is familiar to you and therefore there are advantages (eg you don't need time to get the horse friendly), maybe that is an Advantage in game terms. However, you've already (probably) paid for the creature to be amicable, so that points begin to add up, for no real game benefit. For example, Lenny says, "Oh great, my wife'll kill me. Where are we off to this time?" instead of you having to explain everything to Joe Newbod. Even a +1/2 seems a little costly for this kind of benefit, bearing in mind amicability plus the fact that the length of conversations is unlikely to matter much, especially out of combat.

 

I would be in favour of a sliding scale for the level of the advantage, dependant upon how useful it is to be able to summon the named character.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by OddHat

Now this is just getting silly.

If your GM were willing to let you build the "Summon Tony Blair" power, I'd say that would be a hell of a lot more powerful in most circumstances than "Summon Random Fire Demon." After all, Tony Blair could call on a heck of a lot of additional resources for your character. If I were GMing, and I permitted that power, I'd build Tony Blair on quite a few points to reflect that, mostly puting the points into bases, vehicles, followers (including British supers), whatever. You could do much of the same thing with just the Head of State perk, but considering what the player would actually be able to do in game over the long term with control over a head of state it would be very, very unballanced.

 

The Summoned creature should clearly be built on a point base which is appropriate to his power/usefulness in the game. And the summoner pays for that extra-powerful character. If his Summon is 1 point, standard human, he doesn't get Tony Blair - he's clearly got more points than "nil balance".

 

But if he's paid for the ability to summon a 150 point human instead, he should get a 150 point human. The Summon should be somewhat better defined (which is why it works better with summoning generic creatures). But why should my "Summon spirit of Mentor" power cost twice as much as your "Summon spirit of a random knowledgeable wizard power when we both get the same effects? As pointed out elsewhere, if the only advantage is that the "specific person" is amicable, either I must have paid for "amicable", or I will quickly wear out his good feelings by constantly bugging him.

 

The ability to select ANY specific person from your potential summonees is clearly a big advantage, well worth the +1. The ability to summon only one specific entity, rather than a broad range, is a restriction. Going back to my "specific wizard versus generic wizard spirit", if I use my Summon and ask about the Talisman of Iq'Kwerty, and my mentor says "never heard of it", I'm out of luck

 

Your randomly summoned spirit says "No, never heard of it", so you say "Oh well - thanks anyway! Back you go" and call up a different one, until you get an answer. Assuming the information would be known by a reasonable subset of "knowledgeable wizards", you'll get an answer eventually. I won't.

 

If this is knowledge our group wouldn't have (eg. a question about fencing styles), neither of us will get an answer - that's the limitation of the Summon we selected, and we need a broader group (like "all spirits of the dead") to get beyond that limit.

 

Which of us has the power which should cost more points, the guy who gets one chance, or the guy who gets to keep trying until he gets what he wants.

 

But, you say, My character knows exactly what he gets - perhaps my mentor is an expert in spell research and knows little about magic objects. Advantageous? Well, I guess I know to save the END and not summon him to ask my question - is that worth +1? What would truly be advantageous to the point of making it worth doubling the cost would be the ability to select from a pool of Knowledgeable Wizards, and pick one I know (or who was reputed to be) expert in magical artifacts.

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

The Summoned creature should clearly be built on a point base which is appropriate to his power/usefulness in the game. And the summoner pays for that extra-powerful character. If his Summon is 1 point, standard human, he doesn't get Tony Blair - he's clearly got more points than "nil balance".

 

But if he's paid for the ability to summon a 150 point human instead, he should get a 150 point human.

 

I agree with all of this. Before dropping the Tony blair example, I'd ask just how useful having a head of state is going to be in your game, to your player. That determines the base points on which you (as GM) would build the summoned NPC. If Tony Blair doesn't bring much more benefit to the summoner than a valuable hostage, then in game you could make a case that he's only worth 150 points or less. If summoning and controling Tony Blair gives your PC effective control over much of the government and military of the UK, including intelligence services, campaign specific special resources, etc, then Tony is worth a hell of a lot of base points.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

The Summon should be somewhat better defined (which is why it works better with summoning generic creatures). But why should my "Summon spirit of Mentor" power cost twice as much as your "Summon spirit of a random knowledgeable wizard power when we both get the same effects?

[/b]

 

If they have the same effects (in most likely in game situations), there's no advantage. I said the same thing in an earlier post.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

As pointed out elsewhere, if the only advantage is that the "specific person" is amicable, either I must have paid for "amicable", or I will quickly wear out his good feelings by constantly bugging him.

[/b]

 

I didn't suggest that the main advantage should ever be that the spirit was amicable. I did mention continuity of experience, but that's a different issue.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

The ability to select ANY specific person from your potential summonees is clearly a big advantage, well worth the +1. The ability to summon only one specific entity, rather than a broad range, is a restriction.

[/b]

 

Or, as Steve Long posted, it's a -1/2 restriction on the original +1.5 advantage. That's why I suggested allowing players to take a +1.5 summon any specific individual advantage.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Going back to my "specific wizard versus generic wizard spirit", if I use my Summon and ask about the Talisman of Iq'Kwerty, and my mentor says "never heard of it", I'm out of luck

 

Your randomly summoned spirit says "No, never heard of it", so you say "Oh well - thanks anyway! Back you go" and call up a different one, until you get an answer. Assuming the information would be known by a reasonable subset of "knowledgeable wizards", you'll get an answer eventually. I won't.

[/b]

 

This is kind-of valid. On the other hand, there are always situations where a given power would be more or less useful. If your GM wants to make your +1 Summon Mentor worthwhile compared to Summon Knowledgeable Wizard, he should probably allow for situations where your mentor has knowledge that is very applicable to a given situation. I admit that it's a bit of a kludge to say that the GM should find a way to make something worthwhile. On the other hand, that's true with almost all non-combat skills. Why spend points on stealth / lipreading / universal translator / whatever if it's not going to be useful in a campaign? The answer is that it would be a waste of points in that campaign, but that doesn't mean that it should be free in the standard rules.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

If this is knowledge our group wouldn't have (eg. a question about fencing styles), neither of us will get an answer - that's the limitation of the Summon we selected, and we need a broader group (like "all spirits of the dead") to get beyond that limit.

 

Which of us has the power which should cost more points, the guy who gets one chance, or the guy who gets to keep trying until he gets what he wants.

[/b]

 

A fair question. Maybe the GM goofed by permitting a category like "Spirits of Knowledgeable Wizards" that was, in his campaign, more powerful for the same puposes than a more expensive power.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

But, you say, My character knows exactly what he gets - perhaps my mentor is an expert in spell research and knows little about magic objects. Advantageous? Well, I guess I know to save the END and not summon him to ask my question - is that worth +1?

[/b]

 

If there are other circumstances where he is more useful (as there should be if the GM green lighted the power), then yes.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

What would truly be advantageous to the point of making it worth doubling the cost would be the ability to select from a pool of Knowledgeable Wizards, and pick one I know (or who was reputed to be) expert in magical artifacts. [/b]

 

Yep. I'd say that would be a +1.5 advantage.

[Jinx999]

I wouldn't do "Summon the Spirit of my Dead Mentor" as a summon at all. I'd do it as a contact or ally, with the summon part as a special effect. As far as I can tell, the whole point of this power is to be able to call on your teacher for advice.

[DoItHTH]

Wouldn't only being able to summon a specific being be balance out by the fact that they can be injured and killed?

 

If we accept the +1 advantage to limit summon to an individual how much of a disadvantage would you give for "must be allowed to heal fully or comes hurt." To me this would be a -1 limitation.

[OddHat]

Originally posted by DoItHTH

Wouldn't only being able to summon a specific being be balance out by the fact that they can be injured and killed?

 

If we accept the +1 advantage to limit summon to an individual how much of a disadvantage would you give for "must be allowed to heal fully or comes hurt." To me this would be a -1 limitation.

 

That's a tough one as well. IMO the advantage was designed for people summoning specific spirits of the dead to learn their secrets, greater demon princes to work a deal, a specific Djinn to ask for a wish, a specific loa to ride a character or npc, etc. Most of these are non-combat situations. If you plan to use the power in combat, at a guess the GM might;

1) Ask you to stick to summoning generic spirits and beasts as cannon fodder.

2) Tell you to suck up the lost points if your specific summon gets killed, as if it were a follower.

3) Allow you to learn to summon something new worth the same number of points, just as he might let you replace a dead follower with someone new.

[Gary]

One advantage to summoning specific being is that it's much harder to dispel them (more active points). You're much more likely to keep your summons around.

 

Summoning specific being could be extremely unbalancing, since you could start summoning specific enemies and keeping them out of combat or killing them.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by OddHat

That's a tough one as well. IMO the advantage was designed for people summoning specific spirits of the dead to learn their secrets, greater demon princes to work a deal, a specific Djinn to ask for a wish, a specific loa to ride a character or npc, etc.

 

The description indicates that the advantage should be allowed only for summoning deceased beings (Kid Eternity, anyone, or Necromancy) or has been precisely located with some other power.

 

Hence my "spirits of the dead" example.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by OddHat

I agree with all of this. Before dropping the Tony blair example, I'd ask just how useful having a head of state is going to be in your game, to your player. That determines the base points on which you (as GM) would build the summoned NPC. If Tony Blair doesn't bring much more benefit to the summoner than a valuable hostage, then in game you could make a case that he's only worth 150 points or less. If summoning and controling Tony Blair gives your PC effective control over much of the government and military of the UK, including intelligence services, campaign specific special resources, etc, then Tony is worth a hell of a lot of base points.

 

This seems to highlight at least some of the problem. Summon was designed (or so it seems) to summon creatures to aid you in combat. Summon was introduced in Fantasy Hero (many editions ago) presumably to match the Summoning spells available in other fantasy RPG's. It wasn't created (at least initially) to let you, for example, create lions with your Power Ring, or Summon a head of state.

 

Oh, and if I can summon "Tony Blair", what happens if, in campaign, he is killed or retires from politics? Do I get points back? If I choose the generic "PM of Great Britain", I have a useless power if a new PM with a higher point base is elected, or I lose some points for no reason if he has a lower point base.

 

If they have the same effects (in most likely in game situations), there's no advantage. I said the same thing in an earlier post.

 

Lenny the Cabbie vs any other NY cabbie. Dead mentor vs. a random experienced wizard. The rules indicate there is an advantage - it is +1.

 

I didn't suggest that the main advantage should ever be that the spirit was amicable. I did mention continuity of experience, but that's a different issue.

 

Now that you mention continuity of experience, Amicable notes even a devoted being can have their loyalty strained. Would you rather have the ability to ditch your (now not so loyal) summoned creature and get a new one? Can't do that if you only Summon the same one over and over (ie a specific being), can you?

 

Or, as Steve Long posted, it's a -1/2 restriction on the original +1.5 advantage. That's why I suggested allowing players to take a +1.5 summon any specific individual advantage.

 

Actually, Steve posted the assertion that "specific being" was made up of an advantage and a limitation. He used +1/2, but seemed to indicate he hadn't considered the relative values.

 

To me, moving from "You can only summon this one being" to "you can summon any being in the pool" merits more than an added 1/2 advantage.

 

This is kind-of valid. On the other hand, there are always situations where a given power would be more or less useful. If your GM wants to make your +1 Summon Mentor worthwhile compared to Summon Knowledgeable Wizard, he should probably allow for situations where your mentor has knowledge that is very applicable to a given situation. I admit that it's a bit of a kludge to say that the GM should find a way to make something worthwhile. On the other hand, that's true with almost all non-combat skills. Why spend points on stealth / lipreading / universal translator / whatever if it's not going to be useful in a campaign? The answer is that it would be a waste of points in that campaign, but that doesn't mean that it should be free in the standard rules.

 

I don't see any cases where moving quietly/reading lips /speaking and understanding any language is a disadvantage. There are lots of examples where being restricted to one specific being, rather than having access to the whole pool (even at random) is a drawback, and very few where it is an advantage.

 

Sometimes, a Disadvantage or a Limitation works to your advantage, but if it acts to your advantage more often than not, it stops being a point saver and you need to pay points for it. Similarly, if an advantage doesn't carry a benefit, it should cost points.

 

A fair question. Maybe the GM goofed by permitting a category like "Spirits of Knowledgeable Wizards" that was, in his campaign, more powerful for the same puposes than a more expensive power.

 

I think the rule book goofed by charging the character a +1 advantage for something that actually limits the effectiveness of his power.

 

If there are other circumstances where he is more useful (as there should be if the GM green lighted the power), then yes.

 

This sounds like the GM should only allow the +1 advantage if the benefits actually justify the point cost. Wouldn't it be simpler to just allow a sliding scale for the advantage, so the cost of the power would depend on its utility?

[Hugh Neilson]

Perhaps we need to re-examine the Summon paradigm. In my view, it was designed for "combat helpers" where significant variance was not hugely advantageous. Getting "White Fang" instead of a generic wolf made no difference if their stats were the same.

 

Perhaps "specific being" should be +1/4 to +1, similar to the handling of expanded class. +1/4 would permit the summoner to select one specific being he may summon instead of a random pick. +1 would permit any specific being from the class available (within the point limits, of course). Not sure how 1/2 and +3/4 would work, or if these are even needed.

 

If the character restricts the pool, he should get a limitation.How about -1 for this specific being" assuming he can be replaced if he dies. Note that I get +1 for "any wolf" and -1 for "only that wolf until he dies" for a net nil - Summon Generic Wolf is identical, and should cost the same. If he's irreplaceable, a further -2 might apply (ie he's "expendable"/"independent), to reflect the fact I can lose these points permanently if something bad happens to my "summonee".

[caris]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

But if he's paid for the ability to summon a 150 point human instead, he should get a 150 point human. The Summon should be somewhat better defined (which is why it works better with summoning generic creatures). But why should my "Summon spirit of Mentor" power cost twice as much as your "Summon spirit of a random knowledgeable wizard power when we both get the same effects? As pointed out elsewhere, if the only advantage is that the "specific person" is amicable, either I must have paid for "amicable", or I will quickly wear out his good feelings by constantly bugging him.

 

The ability to select ANY specific person from your potential summonees is clearly a big advantage, well worth the +1. The ability to summon only one specific entity, rather than a broad range, is a restriction. Going back to my "specific wizard versus generic wizard spirit", if I use my Summon and ask about the Talisman of Iq'Kwerty, and my mentor says "never heard of it", I'm out of luck

 

Your randomly summoned spirit says "No, never heard of it", so you say "Oh well - thanks anyway! Back you go" and call up a different one, until you get an answer. Assuming the information would be known by a reasonable subset of "knowledgeable wizards", you'll get an answer eventually. I won't.

 

I think part of the problem is differing assumptions over the base nature of the power, and the nature of the fact that you are summoning from a “group†of something. Personally, I assume that at the base level that the group has to be so homogenized that there is no in game benefit from pulling the “I Summon this one, and if he doesn’t know what I want I’ll Dispel him and Summon another trick.†That if you are building a base generic Summon power with no advantages on it and the characters summoned with it have any KS’s, a single KS roll pretty much covers all uses of Summon for that question. Also you would never just through “random†chance get the specific individual you needed to answer a question. To be exact if there were such a chance of that happening, than the group is inherently too diverse to qualify for the base level of Summon. For me the potential for abusive Summon constructs is too great if I were to allow a base “Summon Spirits of Dead Wizards†as anything other than an expanded class. I might even require it to have both Specific Individuals and expanded class, but that would depend on a lot of factors.

 

I think the putting the advantage on Summon specific being is to discourage attempts to effectively build a follower with an unlimited teleport/EDM, and/or with limitations. Summon specific being has the potential to be extremely powerful, since it can be used to create a teleport/EDM usable as an attack effect that is virtually limitless in range and does not require an attack roll.

[DoItHTH]

hmmm 2x the cost to have a summon that can be a plot aid seems silly. A GM probably wont create a plot limited on a players ability to summon someone with specific powers or knowledge. There would most likely be a work around.

 

Ok I admit that I like the hack-n-slash and design mostly with combat in mind. Summoning a specific being that could die or be hurt is, to me, more limiting than the base power. This limitation more then makes up for some small advantage to plot development which the GM would provide anyway. Hmmm ok if ressurection and full heals are thrown in then you are getting close to the value of the base power. So you have something like this.

 

1) summon generic being (+0)

 

2) summon specific being who comes in the same condition he was at last time only modfied by normal healing (+0)

 

3) summon specific being who comes ressurected and fully healed (+1)

 

Do these not sound balanced? So then is the full heal implied in the advantage?

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by DoItHTH

1) summon generic being (+0)

 

2) summon specific being who comes in the same condition he was at last time only modfied by normal healing (+0)

 

3) summon specific being who comes ressurected and fully healed (+1)

 

Do these not sound balanced? So then is the full heal implied in the advantage?

 

But "Summon generic creature" pretty much means it always shows up fully healed, so I'm paying +1 to get a specific wolf that comes wounded, instead of a generic creature with exactly the same stats. This is where the problem lies.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by caris

I think part of the problem is differing assumptions over the base nature of the power, and the nature of the fact that you are summoning from a “group†of something. Personally, I assume that at the base level that the group has to be so homogenized that there is no in game benefit from pulling the “I Summon this one, and if he doesn’t know what I want I’ll Dispel him and Summon another trick.†That if you are building a base generic Summon power with no advantages on it and the characters summoned with it have any KS’s, a single KS roll pretty much covers all uses of Summon for that question. Also you would never just through “random†chance get the specific individual you needed to answer a question. To be exact if there were such a chance of that happening, than the group is inherently too diverse to qualify for the base level of Summon.

 

Restricting to one knowledge roll seems reasonable. But this means I either pay +1/4 to broaden the group (or up to +1 to summon anything I want) and get to keep chaning my choice until I get my answer, or pay +1 for Specific being and get one roll only. Where's the advantage?

 

For me the potential for abusive Summon constructs is too great if I were to allow a base “Summon Spirits of Dead Wizards†as anything other than an expanded class. I might even require it to have both Specific Individuals and expanded class, but that would depend on a lot of factors.

 

See, there's the problem in a nutshell - there is no "specific individuals" advantage. There is only "Specific Individual" - you get this one guy, and that's it. If +1 allowed you to choose any specific individual from your chosen class, this would be worth the points. In fact, maybe the advantage should be based on the class available.

 

No expanded class = no ability to summon specific individuals - they're generic. "Summon anything" means a further +1 advantage to select the specific "anything" rather than a random generic "whatever you summoned".

 

I think the putting the advantage on Summon specific being is to discourage attempts to effectively build a follower with an unlimited teleport/EDM, and/or with limitations. Summon specific being has the potential to be extremely powerful, since it can be used to create a teleport/EDM usable as an attack effect that is virtually limitless in range and does not require an attack roll.

 

Duplication can generate the follower effect quite nicely. All Summon really does is bring you a follower, assuming it's amicable - which is an advantage.

 

I think the bigger issue is the "I summon Grond here now that we're all ready to Push and fire on where he will appear" construct - one which should clearly be disallowed anyway, not simply "Oh, I paid the +1 advantage so I can do this."

[caris]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Restricting to one knowledge roll seems reasonable. But this means I either pay +1/4 to broaden the group (or up to +1 to summon anything I want) and get to keep chaning my choice until I get my answer, or pay +1 for Specific being and get one roll only. Where's the advantage? .

 

No, you misunderstood me the expanded classes is not what would be giving you the additional roll. “Spirits of Dead Wizards†by my interpretation of the rules is an inherently expanded class. I would still not let you get an unlimited number of rolls for just having the expanded class, nor would I let you keep Summoning until the particular Dead Wizard you want shows up. I find both tactics abusive, and not in keeping with the rules as written.

 

Now your interpretation is valid and there is certainly a strong case for it, but it is not the only interpretation. My interpretation is that inherently Summon is for “generic†creatures and beings. It is used to bring in your basic “mooksâ€, “thugsâ€, and “cannon fodderâ€. If you want something more interesting than a “faceless drone†as an individual you have to apply the Specific Being Advantage, and accept that you only get one. (e.g. In my game you could Summon “dogs†and you would get a different “generic†dog each time, but that dog would never (or so rarely as to be as good as) be your pet collie “Lassieâ€, even though she is built on the appropriate number of points. Alternatively, you could choose to pay the +1 Advantage to be able to Summon “Lassieâ€, but you would never get any other dog.) The I’ll keep summoning the “Spirits of Dead Playwrights†until I get William Shakespeare, so we can ask him who really wrote his plays stunt just does not fit with my interpretation of the rules. Summon, can not do that inherently. You will never get from basic summoning someone or something that has a value in and of itself.

 

Since inherently the “Spirits of Dead Wizards†are all unique individuals and not generic. The only way that I would allow you to use Summon the way you’ve been describing is with both the Expanded Class (at the +1 level) and the Specific Being advantage. I would house rule that in conjunction those two advantages together could produce the results that you’ve been describing as the base effect of Summon. I would probably, let you get a limitation put on it for restricting it to a certain group, and the fact that you get a random one each time you use the power, but the Active Cost and END should be higher do to the potential abuse of the power.

 

See, there's the problem in a nutshell - there is no "specific individuals" advantage. There is only "Specific Individual" - you get this one guy, and that's it. If +1 allowed you to choose any specific individual from your chosen class, this would be worth the points. In fact, maybe the advantage should be based on the class available.

 

No expanded class = no ability to summon specific individuals - they're generic. "Summon anything" means a further +1 advantage to select the specific "anything" rather than a random generic "whatever you summoned".

 

Well, you see, I don’t see where there is an expanded class “anythingâ€. I see an expanded class “any type of beingâ€, which is a fine distinction. Even at the +1 class level, I still rule that you are limited to generic types and not unique types. You could summon a dog, a demon, or a robot. You would not be summoning a randomly selected dog, demon, or robot from all in existence.

 

Duplication can generate the follower effect quite nicely. All Summon really does is bring you a follower, assuming it's amicable - which is an advantage.

 

You’re right, Duplication can generate a follower quite nicely, when you apply a +1 advantage for the duplicate not being identical. You can do it with the lesser levels of the advantage, depending on how much like your character you want your follower to be, but it is a trade off I can live with. I seriously think you are underestimating the benefits of bringing you that follower. Since there are no mechanical limits that inherently prevent summoning, except the summoner being subject to an adjustment power. You have a way to instantly rescue the follower from pretty much anything. Heck, just as an exercise, try building the teleport and EDM that you would need to build for a follower to come to your character the way Summons allows them to. You also have the ability to apply limitations to the cost of the follower.

 

I think the bigger issue is the "I summon Grond here now that we're all ready to Push and fire on where he will appear" construct - one which should clearly be disallowed anyway, not simply "Oh, I paid the +1 advantage so I can do this."

 

Yeah, but if I have Summon “Mutated four-arm monstrosities†or “super powered beingsâ€, can I keep using and dispelling the Summon, until Grond appears for my team to pummel away on?

[Blue Jogger]

Where the +1 might have come from.

 

The main idea of Summon a Specific Being was not to summon Tony Blair (if only he knew). I believe, the main idea was really to allow reverse teleport of Stuff (Vehicles, Extra-dimenisonal Headquarters, Followers, etc) to the heroes location. This is far more powerful than summoning standard stuff, because it's your stuff, one way or another...

 

GM: "Mr. Blair says he's not coming, and nothing you can do will change his mind, he slams the phone down."

Player: "I use my new Summon Tony Blair spell...."

GM: "As you complete your spell, there is a puff of smoke and Mr. Blair stands before you wearing nothing but pajamas, shaking as if you pulled him through the gates of Hell, twice."

Player: "Ah. So glad you could join us."

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by caris

Now your interpretation is valid and there is certainly a strong case for it, but it is not the only interpretation. My interpretation is that inherently Summon is for “generic†creatures and beings. It is used to bring in your basic “mooksâ€, “thugsâ€, and “cannon fodderâ€.

 

I think we're on the same page here - if I choose to Summon Dogs, I set the point value of my dog. I probably pick a combat-effectove dog, so I don't get a miniature french poodle. I get basically the same dog every time - color, gender, etc. vary, but it has more or less the same stats (note that the rules envision only very minor statistical changes for basic Summons, with examnples topping out at shifting half a dozen character points).

 

If you want something more interesting than a “faceless drone†as an individual you have to apply the Specific Being Advantage, and accept that you only get one. (e.g. In my game you could Summon “dogs†and you would get a different “generic†dog each time, but that dog would never (or so rarely as to be as good as) be your pet collie “Lassieâ€, even though she is built on the appropriate number of points. Alternatively, you could choose to pay the +1 Advantage to be able to Summon “Lassieâ€, but you would never get any other dog.)

 

The issue to me is "Lassie" versus "generic dog". If you paid to summon a 75 point dog, and Lassie is a 150 point dog, you will NEVER get Lassie - you didn't pay the points. If you paid the points to summon a 150 point dog, what is the game advantage to getting the same color, gender, etc. dog every time ("Lassie")? I don't see this as worth double the points. Note that the dog is no friendlier - you must pay for "amicable", regardless of whether you summon a specific being or a generic "dog".

 

The I’ll keep summoning the “Spirits of Dead Playwrights†until I get William Shakespeare, so we can ask him who really wrote his plays stunt just does not fit with my interpretation of the rules. Summon, can not do that inherently. You will never get from basic summoning someone or something that has a value in and of itself.

 

I think it twists the rules greatly - I would suggest that, to get "William Shakespeare" specifically of all those possibilities merits an advantage. However, if you can summon generic spirits of the dead (rather than a specific spirit of the dead), their knowledge should logically vary.

 

ASIDE: Why you would use Summon Spirit of the Dead instead of simulating this with a Knowledge skill bonus, maybe with some limitations, would be a good question. With the cost of a Summon, you could get a pretty good skill bonus.

 

[/b]Since inherently the “Spirits of Dead Wizards†are all unique individuals and not generic. The only way that I would allow you to use Summon the way you’ve been describing is with both the Expanded Class (at the +1 level) and the Specific Being advantage.[/b]

 

So presumably you think that this is worth three times the cost of "summon generic dead wizard". To me, the generic "Summon" gets basically the same generic character sheet every time. Room for customization is, as noted for the base power, very limited, if at all. To get more room for customization, you buy "expanded class" - now I can summon any type of dog, so some statistical variance is possible, but I get a generic dog of the species I choose. Moving up the charts to +1, I can summon a generic **anything** at +1. Summon Human? Sure. Summon Circus Ringmaster? I suppose - depends on SFX. Summon PT Barnum? No.

 

[/b] I would house rule that in conjunction those two advantages together could produce the results that you’ve been describing as the base effect of Summon. I would probably, let you get a limitation put on it for restricting it to a certain group, and the fact that you get a random one each time you use the power, but the Active Cost and END should be higher do to the potential abuse of the power.[/b]

 

If I'm reading you right, we're getting a lot closer to the same page here. I would buy Summon, +1 advantage "Anything" expanded class, +1 "specific person". Now I can basically choose anyone I want (within my point limit, of course). Then I limit the potential choices to a specific group and a random choice, so my actual cost comes back into line.

 

However, the actual rule is "Specific being" means you summon one, and only one, specific being. My position at the outaset is that we restrict the generic "spirits of dead wizards" to all having identical stats (and, absent an advantage, they would) and "you get one knowledge roll and that's it" (which should also be the case - guven the spirit serves little other purpose, he's likely got a high enough roll that most knowledge is a given anyway). That said, however, I fail to see how saying "I only summon one dead wizard - he has the same stats as the generic dead wizard, but his name is "Wilberforce", he has a thick scottish brogue, he has a long white braided beard and always wears a kilt" means the power should be doubled in cost. It's probably no more limiting - how do you kill someone who's already dead anyway? But it also carries no benefits whatsoever - it's a special effect. As such, it should not carry an extra cost.

 

Similarly, I believe the advantages and drawbacks of "Only summon this specific being" instead of "summon a generic being of this type" balance out - assuming the "specific being" has the same point cost, is as amicable, etc., as the "generic being". As such, ot should carry no extra cost. However, the ability to select between specific beings at will DOES carry a significant advantage, and is worth the +1 advantage. I also agree with FREd that the ability should generally be restricted in some fashion - "rescue the Princess" is a lot easier when I say "No Problem - Summon the Princess", but that's a matter of game construct and genre (eg. "no telepathy because it's a mystery campaign"), not point balance.

[Hugh Neilson]

Getting long - Part II

 

Originally posted by caris

Well, you see, I don’t see where there is an expanded class “anythingâ€. I see an expanded class “any type of beingâ€, which is a fine distinction. Even at the +1 class level, I still rule that you are limited to generic types and not unique types. You could summon a dog, a demon, or a robot. You would not be summoning a randomly selected dog, demon, or robot from all in existence.

 

I agree with the game mechanic - "any type of being" is basically generic. My disagreement is whether +1 "specific being" should mean "only that one specific being may ever be summoned" or "you may choose to summon any specific being within your available class". In my view, to be a +1 advantage, the ability should be "You may select any Summonee desired from your available class within your maximum point total". Perhaps this is only a duplicate of the original (Green Lantern making a power ring lion, for example). Perhaps (and this is a power that should be examined carefully and easily abused) it is a magic spell that summone the real person. "Good evening, Mr. Blair."

 

You’re right, Duplication can generate a follower quite nicely, when you apply a +1 advantage for the duplicate not being identical. You can do it with the lesser levels of the advantage, depending on how much like your character you want your follower to be, but it is a trade off I can live with.

 

A completely different duplicate of a 350 point character costs 140 points. The duplicate costs no END to create, but takes a full phase to create, and another to recombine (IIRC). If the duplicate dies, your points are lost.

 

Let's use Summon instead. Start at 70 points so I can Summon the "duplicate" to begin with. Make him slavishly loyal, because (like my duplicate) he's under my control. That's +1. It's a "Specific Person", so that's another +1. There are some other differences (time to create/combine duplicate; END cost for Summon), but let's assume these balance out.

 

If "Only this specific person" costs +1, it costs 210 points as a Summon, or 140 for Duplication. If "Specific person" and "can only summon this one specific person" balance out to +0, it costs 140 - exactly the same as Duplication. This seems reasonable to me, since it creates exactly the same effect.

 

I seriously think you are underestimating the benefits of bringing you that follower. Since there are no mechanical limits that inherently prevent summoning, except the summoner being subject to an adjustment power. You have a way to instantly rescue the follower from pretty much anything. Heck, just as an exercise, try building the teleport and EDM that you would need to build for a follower to come to your character the way Summons allows them to. You also have the ability to apply limitations to the cost of the follower.

 

Assuming a 70 point follower, you have 70 points to work with under my logic (the +1 advantage to make the Summoned being slavishly loyal, or to make him a duplicate), or 140 points under your model. Teleport with Trigger ("When I snap my fingers, you will return")? Slap it in a multipower starting with ordinary teleport and, say, 16x noncombat, and work your way down through various Megascale options, add an EDM slot, and I think you'll find it can be done for 70 points, remembering that it only works on one person (that's got to be a -2 limitation).

 

Yeah, but if I have Summon “Mutated four-arm monstrosities†or “super powered beingsâ€, can I keep using and dispelling the Summon, until Grond appears for my team to pummel away on?

 

Which is why "select a specific person" should be a very carefully examined advantage. If I can ONLY summon grond, I can only beat him up so many times. Yeah, I took Grond off the streets, but I've got no real points left to be effective against anyone else.

 

Note that, even if one accepts the "Summon brings a randomly selected real person", structure, the odds of getting the specific one you're looking for from the pool is infinitissimal. My example (try again for someone with the knowledge) assumed knowledge fairly common in the class, such that getting someone who has this knowledge is pretty likely. Getting the guy who built the artifact in question? Clearly you'd need "specific person" for that!

[caris]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I get basically the same dog every time - color, gender, etc. vary, but it has more or less the same stats (note that the rules envision only very minor statistical changes for basic Summons, with examnples topping out at shifting half a dozen character points).

 

Actually, I do not see the rules discussing how much variation on the game definitions of the summoned beings. To me that means how much individual specimens are allowed to vary is up to GM discretion. Personally, I don’t allow any, but I’m pretty lazy about things like that in the game. Because of that, a large number of suggested groups people have been throwing around would never fly in my campaign.

 

I think the biggest issue between us is our perceptions of two key issues.

 

The first is the abusive uses of the power. If I allow you to build the “Summon: Bob†power, I need a good and clear reason not to allow the “Summon: My Enemy†power, or the “Summon: Person I Want to Rescue†power. This is not quite the same as your telepathy example. In your telepathy example, I’m disallowing the entire power, or a specific type of construct across the board equally. In this case it would be equivalent of telling a player, that they can buy telepathy normally, but they can never use it successfully when I want to run a mystery session. By allowing the construct to exist with the advantage, I’m making the attempts to build the abusive construct more in line with the power they are getting. This is particularly true when the people are putting Summon into a power framework. The ability of “Summon: Specific Being†in a VPP is so great as to make that I may disallow using the VPP to Summon specific individuals. Then again, I’m still stuck with how do I justify allowing it out of the VPP, but not in the VPP. (I just thought of a number of other abuses for Summon: Specific Being that revolve around “is neutral to the character, and the Ego vs. Ego skill roll mechanic.)

 

The other issue is similarity to Follower. The primary disadvantages of Summon in comparison to Follower are that you have to pay for the points from Disads, the being can be forced away with an adjustment power, the being starts out only neutral to the character (and presumably will always stay that way until the character adds the amicable advantage). The advantages of Summon over Follower, the summon can be more powerful than the character and maintain the 1/5 ratio for base cost, an EDM and a Teleport of any distance with infinite levels of Armor Piercing that only affects the specific being comes for free (no one has to pay any points for this ability, the fact that it costs the character controlling it END seems irrelevant to me), limitations can be applied to Summon. As far as I’m concerned the down sides of Summoning do not offset the benefits, sufficiently, in comparing it to Follower to allow it to create a follower without increasing the active cost of the power in some way.

 

Those two issues together are more than sufficient reason for me to be glad that the default option on Summon Specific being isn’t a +0 advantage or any kind of limitation.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I think it twists the rules greatly - I would suggest that, to get "William Shakespeare" specifically of all those possibilities merits an advantage. However, if you can summon generic spirits of the dead (rather than a specific spirit of the dead), their knowledge should logically vary.

 

I’m not sure which you consider to be twisting the rules. The tactic or my ruling why the tactic will fail? If Captain Kidd is the only person who knows where Captain Kidd buried his treasure, than Summon: Pirates, no matter how many times it is used will never produce Captain Kidd. To put it simply, while there may be some variation between the knowledge the individual pirates possess it will never be meaningful within the game. The uniqueness of always getting a specific being allows for it to be potentially meaningful, and potentially unbalancing. With the potential effect being sufficient that the official rules slap an advantage on the power to be able to summon a single specific being, and the even greater potentially abusive ability to pick and choose specific beings from a group of beings is just not even allowed, period. It is like the artificial cap on Healing. Personally, I don’t think Healing needs to have a cap, or at the least should have some way of it being raised. Steve feels that allowing unlimited healing is potentially abusive, and creates an inappropriate feel for gaming. I don’t agree with him, but I can see why he did it. I just in my games blithely ignore him, and go on. This is the first time I’ve ever mentioned my disagreement in this forum, and hopefully, the last.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

ASIDE: Why you would use Summon Spirit of the Dead instead of simulating this with a Knowledge skill bonus, maybe with some limitations, would be a good question. With the cost of a Summon, you could get a pretty good skill bonus.

 

Primarily, to take advantage of the 1/5 price break, and the fact that Summon is inherently a power. If you can get it so that the “basic†template is built with a large percent of the points spent that you have to account for are put into the skill you can end up with a higher skill roll, than if you had put your own points into the skill. This works best if the GM created such a creature for his own campaign already, or the GM doesn’t pay attention to what they let you build.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

A completely different duplicate of a 350 point character costs 140 points. The duplicate costs no END to create, but takes a full phase to create, and another to recombine (IIRC). If the duplicate dies, your points are lost.

 

Let's use Summon instead. Start at 70 points so I can Summon the "duplicate" to begin with. Make him slavishly loyal, because (like my duplicate) he's under my control. That's +1. It's a "Specific Person", so that's another +1. There are some other differences (time to create/combine duplicate; END cost for Summon), but let's assume these balance out.

 

If "Only this specific person" costs +1, it costs 210 points as a Summon, or 140 for Duplication. If "Specific person" and "can only summon this one specific person" balance out to +0, it costs 140 - exactly the same as Duplication. This seems reasonable to me, since it creates exactly the same effect.

 

With Duplication, you can not recombine at range without the use of a +1/2 advantage, which would bring the duplicate version up to 175, but you still would be limited in the distance that you could call the duplicate from and the need to be on the same plane of existence. Personally, the extra distance on the recombine would easily be worth an extra +1/2, which would take us back up to the 210 active point level for the Duplication.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Assuming a 70 point follower, you have 70 points to work with under my logic (the +1 advantage to make the Summoned being slavishly loyal, or to make him a duplicate), or 140 points under your model. Teleport with Trigger ("When I snap my fingers, you will return")? Slap it in a multipower starting with ordinary teleport and, say, 16x noncombat, and work your way down through various Megascale options, add an EDM slot, and I think you'll find it can be done for 70 points, remembering that it only works on one person (that's got to be a -2 limitation).

 

Given that the player character would have to be buying these powers, since to mimic Summon that is the person paying the END on them, you would also have to apply the Usable as an Attack Advantage and Ranged on all of them, and either Megascale again for the range or TransDimensional on some of them. I would say that you are getting well over 70 active for your Multipower Reserve, and I’m not going to about the real cost. I’m far more concerned with active costs.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Note that, even if one accepts the "Summon brings a randomly selected real person", structure, the odds of getting the specific one you're looking for from the pool is infinitissimal.

 

No the odds of getting the specific person is directly dependent on the size of the group. Let us say that you go with “Summon: Castaway from Gilligan’s Islandâ€. I need advice on farming my odds of getting Mary Anne is 1:6 every time.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by caris

Actually, I do not see the rules discussing how much variation on the game definitions of the summoned beings. To me that means how much individual specimens are allowed to vary is up to GM discretion. Personally, I don’t allow any, but I’m pretty lazy about things like that in the game. Because of that, a large number of suggested groups people have been throwing around would never fly in my campaign.

 

Realistically, any variation should be minimal, and "none" would be my default as well. This makes "Summon specific person" meaningless unless you've expanded the class - all of the Summoned "specific individuals" should have identical stats. I have no problem with that restriction - you want variety, expand the class.

 

I think the biggest issue between us is our perceptions of two key issues.

 

The first is the abusive uses of the power. If I allow you to build the “Summon: Bob†power, I need a good and clear reason not to allow the “Summon: My Enemy†power, or the “Summon: Person I Want to Rescue†power. This is not quite the same as your telepathy example. In your telepathy example, I’m disallowing the entire power, or a specific type of construct across the board equally. In this case it would be equivalent of telling a player, that they can buy telepathy normally, but they can never use it successfully when I want to run a mystery session. By allowing the construct to exist with the advantage, I’m making the attempts to build the abusive construct more in line with the power they are getting. This is particularly true when the people are putting Summon into a power framework. The ability of “Summon: Specific Being†in a VPP is so great as to make that I may disallow using the VPP to Summon specific individuals. Then again, I’m still stuck with how do I justify allowing it out of the VPP, but not in the VPP. (I just thought of a number of other abuses for Summon: Specific Being that revolve around “is neutral to the character, and the Ego vs. Ego skill roll mechanic.)

 

The "summon my enemy" is as legal (or illegal) as you want to make it. The only issue I have a problem with is whether the + means "one specific person" or "choose a specific person or get a standard version". Like any power, restrictions exist, and even the rules as written suggest some pretty serious limits before "summon: specific person" is allowed.

 

The other issue is similarity to Follower. The primary disadvantages of Summon in comparison to Follower are that you have to pay for the points from Disads, the being can be forced away with an adjustment power, the being starts out only neutral to the character (and presumably will always stay that way until the character adds the amicable advantage). The advantages of Summon over Follower, the summon can be more powerful than the character and maintain the 1/5 ratio for base cost, an EDM and a Teleport of any distance with infinite levels of Armor Piercing that only affects the specific being comes for free (no one has to pay any points for this ability, the fact that it costs the character controlling it END seems irrelevant to me), limitations can be applied to Summon. As far as I’m concerned the down sides of Summoning do not offset the benefits, sufficiently, in comparing it to Follower to allow it to create a follower without increasing the active cost of the power in some way.

 

Followers are presumed loyal (to some extent, at least), where Summon requires the Amicable advantage (up gpes the point cost) or an ego roll. A mistreated follower will leave. A mistreated "generic summon" can just be resummoned, but a "this specific guy only" summon, if mistreated, will presumably remember, so your "amicable" points are lost.

 

As well, to me, the follower always exists and the Summoned being either does not, or does not on this plane of existence. If you are captured, and rendered powerless (common comic book plot device), your follower will come looking for you. Your Summon will not. Most games I've seen assume your follower comes with you (or not) as you see fit, so there is generally no need to Summon him. Until your Summoned creature is "dismissed", he or she cannot be resummoned - you already have your "one creature" limit summoned.

 

I’m not sure which you consider to be twisting the rules. The tactic or my ruling why the tactic will fail? If Captain Kidd is the only person who knows where Captain Kidd buried his treasure, than Summon: Pirates, no matter how many times it is used will never produce Captain Kidd. To put it simply, while there may be some variation between the knowledge the individual pirates possess it will never be meaningful within the game. The uniqueness of always getting a specific being allows for it to be potentially meaningful, and potentially unbalancing. With the potential effect being sufficient that the official rules slap an advantage on the power to be able to summon a single specific being, and the even greater potentially abusive ability to pick and choose specific beings from a group of beings is just not even allowed, period.

 

My example assumes knowledge that anyone with the knowledge skill might possess. Keep asking enough art experts (all with KS: Art), and one will identify your Van Gogh. Yours assumes knowledge only one specific being possesses - you won't get that info unless you get that one specific being. If you are looking for more general knowledge, each "spirit of the dead" will have different gaps in his knowledge.

 

It is like the artificial cap on Healing. Personally, I don’t think Healing needs to have a cap, or at the least should have some way of it being raised. Steve feels that allowing unlimited healing is potentially abusive, and creates an inappropriate feel for gaming. I don’t agree with him, but I can see why he did it. I just in my games blithely ignore him, and go on. This is the first time I’ve ever mentioned my disagreement in this forum, and hopefully, the last.

 

Or an advantage to remove the cap (you can reverse engineer this from Regeneration pretty easily). But the fact we need to assume rules away because reasonable effects are not covered is indicative of a problem in the rules which should be addressed.

 

Primarily, to take advantage of the 1/5 price break, and the fact that Summon is inherently a power. If you can get it so that the “basic†template is built with a large percent of the points spent that you have to account for are put into the skill you can end up with a higher skill roll, than if you had put your own points into the skill. This works best if the GM created such a creature for his own campaign already, or the GM doesn’t pay attention to what they let you build.

 

Ummmmm...pay for Summon a spirit of a dead wizard (desolidification, stats and who knows what else) or pay for a Knowledge Skill with (say) +3 to the roll. Even with no point break because the skill is "really" a power, I pay what, 9 points for the skill (a 45 point deceased wizard that I pay END to summon and have to mind wrestle with to get an answer). The skill is way cheaper.

 

With Duplication, you can not recombine at range without the use of a +1/2 advantage, which would bring the duplicate version up to 175, but you still would be limited in the distance that you could call the duplicate from and the need to be on the same plane of existence. Personally, the extra distance on the recombine would easily be worth an extra +1/2, which would take us back up to the 210 active point level for the Duplication.

 

With summon, I can't make the summoned creature go away without another power, and I don't have to share the Summoned being's damage when I do send him away.

 

 

Given that the player character would have to be buying these powers, since to mimic Summon that is the person paying the END on them, you would also have to apply the Usable as an Attack Advantage and Ranged on all of them, and either Megascale again for the range or TransDimensional on some of them. I would say that you are getting well over 70 active for your Multipower Reserve, and I’m not going to about the real cost. I’m far more concerned with active costs.

 

I paid the End when I set up the Triggered teleport, so that's done and recovered. I don't need Range since I set the power up to be triggered when I was with my follower. He's not going to object, so I need "usable by others". I don't need any range because he was in range when I used the power (to set up the trigger). Active cost will definitely be high, but the limits bring it right back down again.

 

 

No the odds of getting the specific person is directly dependent on the size of the group. Let us say that you go with “Summon: Castaway from Gilligan’s Islandâ€. I need advice on farming my odds of getting Mary Anne is 1:6 every time.

 

There were seven castaways.

 

Now, this opens another issue. I can vary the stats on my Summoned creatures with an expanded class (eg. "all canines" - I can select the canine whose stats are most to my liking). Why can't I choose between seven castaways (each with their own fixed stats) for a similar advantage?

 

You and I would both disallow the ability to just Summon an enemy for a beating - it's abusive, whatever the rules say. The issue here is where we're Summoning a specific being with a name, an appearance and maybe the occasional quirk, rather than a generic being, and getting no special advantage. You're willing to boost the cost if it's exceptionally effective, but not to reduce the cost if it isn't?

[caris]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Realistically, any variation should be minimal, and "none" would be my default as well. This makes "Summon specific person" meaningless unless you've expanded the class - all of the Summoned "specific individuals" should have identical stats. I have no problem with that restriction - you want variety, expand the class.

 

Here is where we are probably running into the biggest difference of assumption, and we keep running into it because I apparently haven’t been doing a very good job of expressing myself. For purposes of relating to Summon, all beings fall into one of two categories for me, generic and specific. It is a little hard to describe the distinction here in terms other than Summon can never be used on beings in the “specific†category. As a GM I do not even allow the “Summon: Specific Being†with the +1 Advantage. If I were going to allow you to Summon: Bob the Dead Mage at all, I would need to be able to justify why you could do that, and why Tony couldn’t build Summon: Mary the Barmaid, who is his girlfriend that just got kidnapped, particularly if there isn’t some way for Bob the Dead Mage to get kidnapped. I really dislike as a campaign rule sticking on a “Lim: Power only works when it won’t screw with the GM’s plot†as a requirement to any power construct.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

The "summon my enemy" is as legal (or illegal) as you want to make it. The only issue I have a problem with is whether the + means "one specific person" or "choose a specific person or get a standard version". Like any power, restrictions exist, and even the rules as written suggest some pretty serious limits before "summon: specific person" is allowed.

 

Sorry, I don’t really consider them that restrictive. You have to be able to precisely determine the specific being’s location or the character is already dead, and even then they are only suggestions.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Followers are presumed loyal (to some extent, at least), where Summon requires the Amicable advantage (up gpes the point cost) or an ego roll.

 

I firmly acknowledge that without an advantage, Followers start out friendly to the player, and Summon’s are only “neutralâ€. I even counted that fact as an advantage to follower, even though you can not compel a Follower to obey orders with an Ego contest, unlike a summoned being.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

A mistreated follower will leave. A mistreated "generic summon" can just be resummoned, but a "this specific guy only" summon, if mistreated, will presumably remember, so your "amicable" points are lost.

 

A mistreated follower, who leaves may never come back, meaning the points invested in the character are lost. A Summoned “Specific Person†who is mistreated will have to come every time he is summoned, and can be compelled to follow orders by an Ego contest. In addition logically, if a Summoned specific being can become less friendly over time without causing a cost break to the PC, than it should be able to become more friendly to the PC over time without costing the PC additional points. The power write up does not address the issue of the Summoned Being’s attitude changing over time. It would be equally valid to assume that the power “Summon†can also influence the attitudes of the beings summoned so whenever the Specific Being is summoned the power compels him to react to you at the level at which you paid the points regardless of past history. A distinct possibility given its ability to force the summoned being to perform tasks after the Ego contest.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

As well, to me, the follower always exists and the Summoned being either does not, or does not on this plane of existence. If you are captured, and rendered powerless (common comic book plot device), your follower will come looking for you. Your Summon will not. Most games I've seen assume your follower comes with you (or not) as you see fit, so there is generally no need to Summon him. Until your Summoned creature is "dismissed", he or she cannot be resummoned - you already have your "one creature" limit summoned.

 

I would have to disagree with your assessment of the default status of the power. The power does not as a default presuppose the where the creature is at all. Since “Arrives Under Own Power†is a limitation, I would rule the generic beings are presumed to exist, and are on whatever plane is appropriate for them to exist. If I am summoning a cat, and cats exist on the plane with me than I’m summoning a “generic†cat from my plane.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

My example assumes knowledge that anyone with the knowledge skill might possess. Keep asking enough art experts (all with KS: Art), and one will identify your Van Gogh. Yours assumes knowledge only one specific being possesses - you won't get that info unless you get that one specific being. If you are looking for more general knowledge, each "spirit of the dead" will have different gaps in his knowledge.

 

Which takes us back to getting a KS, that you can keep rolling over and over again until you succeed, which I do not interpret the rules as allowing. In turn my interpretation means that Louie the art expert is not any more limiting than any other art critic. The fact that allowing you to summon Louie the art critic, who may not be any more beneficial than a random generic art critic opens me up to requests to Summon potentially abusive uses of the power means that either I don’t allow Specific Being Summons at all, or I make everyone buy the advantage. Granted this best fits my sense of fair play. You may feel that it is more appropriate for this to be ruled on a case by case basis. Steve apparently felt that the flat application rule with a stop sign best met his sense of fair play.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Ummmmm...pay for Summon a spirit of a dead wizard (desolidification, stats and who knows what else) or pay for a Knowledge Skill with (say) +3 to the roll. Even with no point break because the skill is "really" a power, I pay what, 9 points for the skill (a 45 point deceased wizard that I pay END to summon and have to mind wrestle with to get an answer). The skill is way cheaper.

 

Not all constructs are geared to take advantage of the benefits, and the GM is specifically warned to watch the power carefully, that doesn’t prevent players from trying to take advantage of the possibility. Your construct assumes that the Dead Wizard has to have points spent on a large variety of things. I could make a good case for selling back all of the physical primary stats 1, movement powers to 0, not requiring the Desolid (I summon it into a vessel that is represented by the Body that I included in the write up. Destroying the vessel effectively “kills†this generic dead wizard.), and not having to pay any points for any spells since my Dead Wizards no longer can manipulate/access/whatever magic. Meaning that I can dump all the points into the appropriate skills, and getting someone to answer a few questions shouldn’t take more than a +1/4 advantage which means that it is now a 1.25 to 5 ratio.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

With summon, I can't make the summoned creature go away without another power, and I don't have to share the Summoned being's damage when I do send him away.

 

Since a Summoned being may leave at anytime unless the coerced to stay, I always took the paragraph discussing dispel, or suppress vs. Summoning only applying to other characters, in most cases. The paragraph in question also references “otherwise coerce the being into leavingâ€. None of this qualifies as defining when the Summon beings no longer qualifies as applying towards the Summoner’s limit for number of beings summoned. The rule also applies to defining how many of the summoned beings that the character has present at one time, it does not address using summon to bring the same being back to the closest available area to contain the being. In the case of summoning a different generic being each time, he would not be able to summon the already existing being, since by definition he can only summon different ones each time, no impact. In the case where he is summoning a specific being, he can keep summoning that being as many times as he wishes to pay the END to do so.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I paid the End when I set up the Triggered teleport, so that's done and recovered. I don't need Range since I set the power up to be triggered when I was with my follower. He's not going to object, so I need "usable by others". I don't need any range because he was in range when I used the power (to set up the trigger). Active cost will definitely be high, but the limits bring it right back down again.

 

You are simply replacing “ranged†with “triggerâ€. As a GM I would require you to buy a megascaled transdimentional sense of some sort with it to go with it, but you would theoretically need it for the summon too, so I won’t quibble. On the other hand the follower can not choose if you put the power on him, or refuse to use the power if triggered. You are still in complete control of the power and pay the END for it, that is Usable as an Attack, not Usable by Others. (I’m sorry, I just don’t consider Followers inherently “slavishly devotedâ€.)

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

There were seven castaways.

 

Sorry, I expressed it as the ratio of right answers to wrong answers not as the ratio of successes to all possible results.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Now, this opens another issue. I can vary the stats on my Summoned creatures with an expanded class (eg. "all canines" - I can select the canine whose stats are most to my liking). Why can't I choose between seven castaways (each with their own fixed stats) for a similar advantage?

 

Well, I touched upon my reasoning earlier. For me the seven castaways would all be “specific beings†and therefore the entire category would be useless. I wouldn’t allow “Summon: Castaways from Gilligan’s Island.†On the other hand I’m also glad that I do not allow Summon: Specific Being option, because thinking about how x2 the number of Summoned beings for +5 points would enter into all of this is making my head hurt. Could you legally increase the number of summoned beings by using the +5 adder? If you can do you have to summon all of them at once, or can you summon less than the max? If you can summon less than max, do you get to pick and choose which ones come?

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

You and I would both disallow the ability to just Summon an enemy for a beating - it's abusive, whatever the rules say. The issue here is where we're Summoning a specific being with a name, an appearance and maybe the occasional quirk, rather than a generic being, and getting no special advantage. You're willing to boost the cost if it's exceptionally effective, but not to reduce the cost if it isn't?

 

Well, you have yet to convince me that there is a case where Summon: Generic Being is more effective than Summon: Specific Being, so I certainly will never allow it to cost less than the basic form of Summoning. Since I have a very tiny mind when it comes to keeping my rulings consistent for my players, the fact that I can see it’s potential for being more powerful than the generic, means that everyone has to pay an advantage for it, if I allow it at all.

[AnotherSkip]

After all, how many of THEM get their own comic book or movie?

 

[/b]

 

ERm I have a copy of the first issue of the Saddam Hussein "It's my Reich and I'm gonna do what I want to" comic book.

 

 

Also er What about Good old Ronnie Regan? he had a few moies under his belt.