How do you do Summoned Monsters?

[Gamer Girl]

So the rules are vague and don't say anything much about summoning monsters. ''You just do it''. This came up in a game the other day, so I wonder how everyone does it.

I only see three ways to do it(and I do #1 myself):

1.The DM is in full control of the summoned creature. The character must tell the creature what to do or otherwise direct it. The creature is free to do things the way they want, unless specifically ordered. Game wise the player has no idea what the creature can or can't do. If there will be a lot of combat, the DM might give the player a short note card about the creatures abilities...but never give the 'whole monster manual page'.

2.The player has full control of the summoned creature. It's in effect another character for the player. Game wise the player just opens the monster manual and knows everything about the creature.

3.Somewhere in the middle. The player almost controls the creature as another character, but the DM has veto and ultimate control power.


Reasoning:

1.Pros-I like number one as it adds mystery and drama and role-playing. The creature summoned is a creature not just a bunch of game statistics. The player can interact with the creature and role-play. And it has the fun aspect that the player has to 'be careful' as the creature might do something the character might not want. For example if the character said ''Stop the halflings'', she meant to say ''Stop the halflings with out hurting or killing them'', but all the Djinni was told was to 'stop' them and he does so by smashing them to pulp. And if an unwise player wants the creature to cast 'charm person' on a centaur, the creature can just say that won't work. It also keeps all the game information away from the player.

Cons-The DM has to take the time to control the summoned creature. The player can't do summoning combat builds easily. It can slow down combat if the player tries to do fancy stuff every round.

2.Pros-The creature is just some game statistics. The player is free to form and do any sort of tactics they want to do with all their characters. This works out great for 'all combat' games as the player can crunch all the numbers and see all the effects.

Cons-No drama or role-playing, the game statistic creature is all roll playing. As a player's character the summoned creature does exactly what the player wants. The creature is limited by the players skill and knowledge, so they will waste a round casting 'charm person' on a centaur and then wonder why it did not work.

3.Pros-Like most middle ground sort of things it tries to make everyone happy, and fails:

Cons-The half and half control will not always work out. Should the player make a tactical mistake, they will complain to the DM ''well my creature(you) should have told me!''. If the DM 'occasionally' takes control of the creature the player will know 'something is up' at the very least. And a great many players won't like to share the control, as the player and DM won't always agree about the creature.



So how does everyone else do it?

[Jeff the Green]

It's pretty clear that it's supposed to be pretty close to #1.


This spell summons an extraplanar creature (typically an outsider, elemental, or magical beast native to another plane). It appears where you designate and acts immediately, on your turn. It attacks your opponents to the best of its ability. If you can communicate with the creature, you can direct it not to attack, to attack particular enemies, or to perform other actions.

The monster will always do what you tell it to, and it probably automatically knows who your opponents are, but unless you direct it you don't have any control over it.

That said, I prefer #2. Much cleaner, faster battles.

[Toliudar]

Both as player and DM, I tend towards #2. The DM has enough to deal with. And summoning is not usually so powerful an option that I've felt a need to nerf it.

[HunterOfJello]

As a DM, I've used #2 for the most part. Keeping up with 4 extra bugbear skeletons, a unicorn, and several whales would be way too much of a pain while also controlling all the enemies in a battle. One of my players likes summoning a lot and has even done shut-down attacks against enemies before by filling entire rooms and hallways with summons. It can be effective at completely stopping an enemy's mobility.

[That_guy_there]

I like a mix between #1 and 2... where the creature utalizes its abilities in the best way it can to achive the PC's goal. this usually means the PC directs the Creatures actions but a DM can step in and have the creature act use an ability that the PC might not have intened or though of.

Because, personally I dislike the idea of a summoner have no ideas about what he is summoning and the little blurb on summoning (already duplicated above) says they follow your directions and intentions since it explicitedly attacks your foes (and not just anyone).
Some of the creatures you can summon are quite intelligent, so I like the idea of the DM having a little say in their actions (to more of a degree than just letting the PCs run them like mini-characters)... but since it is a magic ability, it always felt like (at least to me) that control by the summoner is at the very least implied.

Additionally i think it is reasonable that a summoner (be it wizard, cleric, druid, whatever) is going to at least have a basic knowledge of what a specific summoned creature cna do and its intelectual / physical limits. Otherwise he is just randomly picking things out based on its name.
That would be like a character picking his armor based on its name, not any other factors such as weight, restriciveness, or ability to protect him.

A summoner would/ should know enough about what they intend to call forth to use them effectively. Otherwise its like tossing a fireball at a red dragon because you didn't actually find out what a fireball can do.