Where do summoned animals come from?

[Hiro Quester]

Summoned monsters are ported in from another plane. But a druid's summoned animals are natural creatures.

My druid character summons a lot. Usually as disposable tanks who take hits that would otherwise be on my friends.

In our game my summoned crocodile helped defeat one monster in a dungeon, and still had a few rounds left, so I sent hi ahead to spring traps. He got surrounded by giant spiders waiting around the corner, and dealt with one or two, and alerted us to their presence.

I thought this was a good use of a summons. One of my party members suggested this was mean, since the crocodile is a real natural creature, and my druid is abusing his influence in using him to spring a trap like that.

Is it mean to natural animals to summon them to spring traps and take hits for us?

[Tommy_Dude]

Personally I think this is a pretty mean tactic anyway, but again that is a bias. It also depends on your DM. One game I played in, you could only summon from the druid list if the animals were from the area you were in. So you wouldn't be summoning crocodiles underground unless it was very close to a swamp/river/bayou/what have you. In another game the DM said the druid opened portals to the Feywild where all manner of natural creatures reside (he really liked the feywild from 4th edition as a concept), and finally, I had a DM say that despite having the stats of natural creatures, my summoned monsters were actually made of tree roots and plant fiber that I manipulated.

So it really depends on what your DM says. But if you are a druid and you are using summon nature's ally, you should have at least a bit of respect for the creatures you summon, whether or not they come from natural places. A druid is supposed to revere nature, or they can fall like a paladin. People often forget that rule.

[Necroticplague]

Each conjuration spell belongs to one of five subschools. Conjurations bring manifestations of objects, creatures, or some form of energy to you (the summoning subschool), actually transport creatures from another plane of existence to your plane (calling), heal (healing), transport creatures or objects over great distances (teleportation), or create objects or effects on the spot (creation). Creatures you conjure usually, but not always, obey your commands.

You aren't actually bringing an animal to you when you use Summon Nature's ally. You're bringing the manifestation of an animal. If it actually brought an animal to you, it would be a Calling spell. And as for its death, the summoning subchool has some specific words on that:

A summoning spell instantly brings a creature or object to a place you designate. When the spell ends or is dispelled, a summoned creature is instantly sent back to where it came from, but a summoned object is not sent back unless the spell description specifically indicates this. A summoned creature also goes away if it is killed or if its hit points drop to 0 or lower. It is not really dead. It takes 24 hours for the creature to reform, during which time it can’t be summoned again.

So after a day, he'll just poof back into existence wherever he originally was in the first place. Arguably, it's less of a big deal to summon unintelligent creatures than intelligent ones, since the animal lacks the understanding of exactly what's happening to it.

[Bronk]

Yeah, the rules definitely back you up. On top of that, you're using a spell specifically for nature types, druids and rangers, for its intended purpose.

[Maglubiyet]

This how I look at it: The life of many animals is brutal and short and they accept their fate as part of the dance of life. The ones you summon are no different, living in the now, and when their time comes, it comes. They may even be honored to die in the service of a "protector of the wild".

That being said, if you abuse your power and needlessly kill or torture animals, you could temporarily lose your abilities as a druid and may need to perform an Atonement.

[Brendanicus]

Yeah, the rules definitely back you up. On top of that, you're using a spell specifically for nature types, druids and rangers, for its intended purpose.
Sorta going alsong with this, I'm also playing a summon (slaughter)-happy Druid in my current game. How wer rule t is that since summoned extra-planar monsters typically use the essence of the plane to create the creature summoned, using SNA creates an animal put of the essence of nature. It's not like high-level Druids are summoning conveniently-located T-rexes to help them.

[Psyren]

This how I look at it: The life of many animals is brutal and short and they accept their fate as part of the dance of life. The ones you summon are no different, living in the now, and when their time comes, it comes. They may even be honored to die in the service of a "protector of the wild".

That being said, if you abuse your power and needlessly kill or torture animals, you could temporarily lose your abilities as a druid and may need to perform an Atonement.

Since summons aren't real and don't actually die though, that should never happen. Any GM who makes a Druid fall because summoned nature's allies die is using very strict houserules.

[Maglubiyet]

Since summons aren't real and don't actually die though, that should never happen. Any GM who makes a Druid fall because summoned nature's allies die is using very strict houserules.

They ARE real in my game worlds and come from the local fauna, so you can only summon animals that live in the area.

I don't mean normal wear and tear from combat -- if you summon a bear to fight for you and it falls, well, that's life. Abuse would be summoning an animal for something non-survival related that causes it unnecessary pain and suffering.

[Psyren]

They ARE real in my game worlds and come from the local fauna, so you can only summon animals that live in the area.

Right - houserules, like I said :smalltongue:


I don't mean normal wear and tear from combat -- if you summon a bear to fight for you and it falls, well, that's life. Abuse would be summoning an animal for something non-survival related that causes it unnecessary pain and suffering.

All right, that's less strict (albeit still pretty vague.)

[Maglubiyet]

All right, that's less strict (albeit still pretty vague.)

Well, it's never come up. I don't see that the OP is doing anything wrong.

I suppose if druids were summoning animals to fight each other like a Pokemon battle, or to torture for sport that might be crossing the line.

[Hiro Quester]

I suppose if druids were summoning animals to fight each other like a Pokemon battle, or to torture for sport that might be crossing the line.

Actually, I have been thinking about it like Pokemon (my son is currently obsessed with Pokemon, which gave me the idea). But battling for the party's mission instead of for sport. Like the Paladins in OOTS (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0432.html) (which I finally understand, thanks to my son's obsession), the last few games I've reflavored the summons process as like Pokemon.

I throw (or spit, if in wildshape) out a little red and white ball ("Knuckles, I choose you!") from which the animal springs next round. When it dissipates it goes back into the ball after to rest and heal. DM is okay with this flavor.

This also fits with the summoning subschool rule (Thanks, Necroticplague). This idea of summoning a manifestation of a creature, that takes 24hours to recover after being defeated, seems to fit with the way we have been playing it. I'll explain it that way if the issue comes up again.

[Psyren]

If you really want a pokemon master, go with a Preservationist (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/alchemist/archetypes/paizo---alchemist-archetypes/preservationist) Alchemist (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/alchemist) with Planar Preservationist. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/planar-preservationist) Now you have SMIX and SNAIX on the same character, and you summon them all as a standard action.

[Flickerdart]

If you really want a pokemon master, go with a Preservationist (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/alchemist/archetypes/paizo---alchemist-archetypes/preservationist) Alchemist (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/alchemist) with Planar Preservationist. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/planar-preservationist) Now you have SMIX and SNAIX on the same character, and you summon them all as a standard action.
Can you use SNAIX to summon snakes? :smalltongue:

[Hiro Quester]

If you really want a pokemon master, go with a Preservationist (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/alchemist/archetypes/paizo---alchemist-archetypes/preservationist) Alchemist (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/alchemist) with Planar Preservationist. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/planar-preservationist) Now you have SMIX and SNAIX on the same character, and you summon them all as a standard action.

Hahaha. That's perfect. (Though it took me a while to parse SNAIX as SNA IX)

[Psyren]

Can you use SNAIX to summon snakes? :smalltongue:

Yep! 1d4+1 :smallbiggrin:

[Toilet Cobra]

Since summons aren't real and don't actually die though, that should never happen. Any GM who makes a Druid fall because summoned nature's allies die is using very strict houserules.

I agree that it's a bit much to make a druid fall, but I think even though they're not real animals the druid should treat them with respect. Using your nature-given power to "needlessly kill or torture" even just a manifestation seems like a pretty serious foul for a druid to commit.

Just my $.02. As a DM I rarely spring falling on players, unless they knowingly go way over the line, and even then I give a last chance warning.

[Psyren]

Yeah I guess that, I dunno, summoning a bear and making it stand in your campfire would make Silvanus raise his eyebrows. But since he clarified that mere combat doesn't trigger this I'm mollified.

[Necroticplague]

Why would torturing summoned animals make a druid fall? It seems like a valid philosophy for an evil druid to go "in nature, the leader is the strong one who can exert his dominance, and it does as it pleases. The strong either prey upon the weak, or else control them. That they are allowed to live is a gift given to them." Therefore, by torturing animals he summons, he instills his place in the natural order as the one at top. Sure, it's a rather self-serving view of nature, but what else would you expect from Evil?

[Karl Aegis]

I feel like it is a dumb idea to use summoned creatures as storage devices who also take hits. Mules are cheap, use those. At least when a mule dies it isn't questionable whether or not your stuff winks out of existence with the animal.

[Maglubiyet]

"in nature, the leader is the strong one who can exert his dominance, and it does as it pleases. The strong either prey upon the weak, or else control them. That they are allowed to live is a gift given to them."

I could see it for CE. But I would think there would need to be some payoff for NE, maybe as a demonstration of power or a savage rite to dark gods in return for something. Just doing it to pass the time seems not in character for that alignment.

I don't know, I don't game evil.

[Bronk]

I feel like it is a dumb idea to use summoned creatures as storage devices who also take hits. Mules are cheap, use those. At least when a mule dies it isn't questionable whether or not your stuff winks out of existence with the animal.

I think the Pokemon idea is flavorful and cool, but the problem with that '24 hour' healing bit is that nothing says there is only one of each type of animal, or one per summoner, and so on. A druid could easily summon a crocodile, say, have it die, and cast the same spell and get another crocodile.

So, for the OP, it's cool as long as you're okay with limiting yourself.

For the idea that you could use summoned creatures as storage devices: If it worked like that, some other druid would find and get all your stuff as soon as they summoned the same animal.

For using a mule... that would go back to being pretty tough to justify as a druid.

[jaydubs]

For using a mule... that would go back to being pretty tough to justify as a druid.

My initial response was, that sounds about right. Druids shouldn't go around just needlessly hurting animals. But then I thought - is that really part of D&D, or just something I've attached to it from how druids are often portrayed?

I think I (and probably a lot of other people) have kind of taken a lot of the stereotypical "hippie, animal rights, eco-terrorist, nature hermit" stuff that shows up on most druids and conflated that with things that all druids are required to take part in. Taking a look through the PHB, none of that seems to actually be mandated. You just have to "revere nature," not teach the wrong people druidic, and avoid using certain items.

I don't see why a druid couldn't just say "mules are unnatural hybrids, that's why they're sterile" or "mules are domesticated animals," rule them as not a part of "nature," and then be utterly careless about their well-being. Or on the flip side, say that humanoid settlements are just as much a part of "nature" as forests, and support the expansion of cities as some kind of natural force of evolution.

[Psyren]

I feel like it is a dumb idea to use summoned creatures as storage devices who also take hits. Mules are cheap, use those. At least when a mule dies it isn't questionable whether or not your stuff winks out of existence with the animal.

This doesn't have to be complicated. If it came with the summon then it leaves when the summon does, but if it was something that was here before it will stick around when the summon is gone.

[(Un)Inspired]

When a mommy summoned animal and a daddy summoned animal love each other very much...


Did anyone else think about that when they read the thread title?

In answer to you question about whether or not it's mean to use summoned monsters to spring traps; how is the word "mean" defined?

The definition I found for mean states that for something to be mean it is: unkind, spiteful, or unfair.

It doesn't seem like the action it spiteful (you player isn't walking the animals into traps because he purposefully wants to hurt them right?).

I'm not sure about it being unkind or unfair? Fair seems too difficult to define. I can't possibly do it so I'll ignore it.

What we are left with is the question of whether or not your player is being unkind. I suppose an argument could be made that he is being unkind to the summoned creatures. It seems like it's possibly unkind to lead something into a trap, yes?

So... I think it could be reasonably argued that what your player is doing is "mean"(although I believe the opposite could be argued just as well ) but I don't think he should be punished for it.


This doesn't have to be complicated. If it came with the summon then it leaves when the summon does, but if it was something that was here before it will stick around when the summon is gone.

Is this true? If a summoned creature injects a poison into me does it leave my body when the summoned creature departs?

[Psyren]

Is this true? If a summoned creature injects a poison into me does it leave my body when the summoned creature departs?

I was referring more to equipment or items than conditions or effects actually.

[(Un)Inspired]

I was referring more to equipment or items than conditions or effects actually.

Isn't poison an item?

[Psyren]

Isn't poison an item?

Not when it's in your system, or that of an attacking creature.

[(Un)Inspired]

Is "item" a defined in game term?

[Psyren]

Is "item" a defined in game term?

In the game, it would be something with an item entry. A dose of poison in a container has an entry, but not in your bloodstream; it's no longer an item at that point. Similarly, a potion in a bottle is an item, but after you drink the potion, is it still an item?

[(Un)Inspired]

In the game, it would be something with an item entry. A dose of poison in a container has an entry, but not in your bloodstream; it's no longer an item at that point. Similarly, a potion in a bottle is an item, but after you drink the potion, is it still an item?

You could be right but I'm not sure if an "item" strictly speaking needs to have an item entry insofar as something would loose it's status as an item once it would no longer fit within its previous entry form.

Hmmm. Well let me drop this line of inquiry as I'm derailing the thread.

[Hiro Quester]

As part of an email conversation about this with my DM and group, I sent the message below, with addendum, explaining how my character sees Nature, the role of a druid of Obad Hai, and summoned animals. I'm repeating it here, as thanks to you all for helping me figure out how my character would see this.

As a ground, my Druid character, Uilion, is a shy, socially awkward, weak and clumsy little forest gnome who was held captive and forced to serve as cabin boy on an elven pirate ship for 30 years before being sole survivor of a shipwreck. Now level six, he is finally wildshaping and kicking butt and feeling more powerful than ever before, and enjoying that.

----------

As Uillion has come to see it, a druid doesn't have to be a treehugging hippie, protecting all creatures from harm. That would be totally naive.

Nature is exploitation, the strong using the weak for their own purposes. Everything in the Great Cycle of Life is a matter of living creatures using (often eating) other living creatures, and eventually being used themselves. The most powerful predator will eventually be old and weak, and will become food for others. In the meantime, he will use his power to exploit others as he wishes, for his own ends.

Uilion's god, Obad Hai, has this as part of his dogma:


Obad-Hai teaches that the wilds can sometimes be ugly, dangerous, or terrible, but that these things are a part of nature and should be respected as much as those that are beautiful, harmless, or wonderful, for these characterizations mark a newcomer’s perspective.

Hunting and killing a creature often needs to be done, because you have to eat. As long as you are not wasteful or needlessly cruel, and use the creature with gratitude for the service it provides, then treating an animal as a means to your own ends is just How Nature Works. Some things die so others can live, and so the ecosystem can continue.

Nature isn't all sunshine and hummingbirds and baby seals and flowers. It's also a lioness slightly wounding a gazelle, then giving the terrified and suffering gazelle to her cubs to catch and release, over and over and over again, because the cubs need to practice hunting. It's a wasp laying its eggs inside the body of a still-living paralyzed caterpillar, so it's larva can eat the caterpillar alive when they hatch. Nature is a forest fire that incinerates all the creatures and plants in a valley, so that the soil is fertile for the next generation of trees to grow back. Nature is a herd starving to death because they have eaten too much of their food supply and the land can only support a smaller herd. Nature is sea turtles laying dozens of eggs on the beach, most of which are eaten immediately after hatching; only a small fraction of them even make it to the sea, and still fewer grow to adulthood.

Obad Hai teaches us that this is how things are and must be. Trying to prevent these things would be futile. And reckless.

There are usually more important large-scale matters at stake, and the life of one creature, or a herd of beasts, or even a village of people, is often insignificant in the bigger picture. Most of the time, the death of millions of individual creatures is essential to the continuing cycles of nature. So it goes.

Uilion knows that he, like all mortal persons, will eventually be exploited by other living creatures. His body will one day be worm-food, or chewed on by a bear, or have his bones picked clean by vultures. So it goes.

Everything uses other things, and this is as Natural as can be. Nature is teeth and claws, disease and parasites, tsunamis and forest fires.

Nature is not nice. And neither should Druids be. The Laws of Nature are not Good. They are fiercely, coldly, terribly, brutally, Neutral.

And Lawful Neutral Uilion respects that sacred system, and would not presume to undermine the Law of the Jungle.

Those who think of Nature as somehow separate from People and Culture forget this Law, or mistakenly think people are exempt from it. But people have to eat, and defecate, and breathe, and die. Cities need water supplies and forests and farms and sewage systems. Even a wizard specializing in the most abstract manipulation of arcane energies still needs to eat and visit the outhouse at the end of his meditation. All mortals, and most Gods, are still part of Nature. (Aberrations and Undead are totally freaking Unnatural, though. Their existence cannot be tolerated.)

As long as the ecosystem (network of exploitation) is balanced, and nothing (or no species) is taking more than its share, then all is as it should be. And when it's unbalanced, Nature has ways of righting the balance. (The herd starving because the forest cannot sustain their numbers.)

Though sometimes we Druids need to give the system a nudge. Or teach over-exploiting people a lesson.

So a Druid with a mission, who summons a few (manifestations of) creatures, respectfully, not wastefully or in an unnecessarily cruel way, to serve a small task as part of a worthy and important mission for our party, is also being part of the Great Network of Exploitation. Even if the animal was summoned purely to take hits or spring traps to save damage to party members, the animal is less important and less powerful, and its natural role is to be used by the more Powerful Druid.

As long as it's done with respect and gratitude, and not unbalancing or distressing the ecosystem, then this is part of the Natural Way Things Are. It's how things always have been. So it goes.

So Uilion doesn't feel remorse when a summoned animal expires in service of the party and returns back to the natural energies and essences from whence it came. He's neither joyful, nor remorseful. He is doing what needs to be done. He is emotionally rather detached.

Uilion is no more remorseful at the death of a creature (or a person or monster) who dies in the service of a worthy cause, than you are when you have steak and vegetables for dinner, or bacon and eggs for breakfast. So it goes.

He's even less remorseful for a summoned creature which isn't a real animal, and which doesn't ever die. Summoned creatures exist outside of the Natural cycle of life, even if they are conjured by the druid from the Natural energies that flow through and constitute the world. Uilion respects these natural energies, and the ecosystem(s) they constitute. So he would not abuse the system, nor throw it out of balance. And at least Uilion calls the animal by name, and thanks it at the end of its service.

Being emotionally detached is exactly the proper attitude for seeing the system working as it should.

In Uilion's mind (and as far as he knows, his god, Obad Hai, agrees) being sad at the glorious death of a worthy creature who played its natural role in the service of a more powerful druid (and our party), who is working towards great and important goals, would be to fail to see the Forest for the Trees.

-----------

Of course, this is all utter BS.

IRL, as a vegetarian player I think thinks this "exploitation is natural" attitude of Uilion's is mostly self-aggrandizing rationalization of his emotional stuntedness, pragmatism, and his Will to Power.

Uilion is just a tiny weak person who for most of his pathetic life has been forced, as a survival strategy, to be nice and quiet and invisible and servile, who is finally getting a taste of Power, and he's just relishing it and wanting more.

So Uilion is mostly rationalizing finally being the exploiter rather than the exploited. He's using being "lawful neutral" as an excuse for continuing, rather than addressing and undermining, an exploitive system of which he was once a victim.

At least, it's fun to roleplay the character this way.

[Necroticplague]

I don't see why a druid couldn't just say "mules are unnatural hybrids, that's why they're sterile" or "mules are domesticated animals," rule them as not a part of "nature," and then be utterly careless about their well-being. Or on the flip side, say that humanoid settlements are just as much a part of "nature" as forests, and support the expansion of cities as some kind of natural force of evolution.

The fact their are quite a few Urban Druid ACFs actually implies the last one isn't horrifically uncommon.

[zergling.exe]

I think the Pokemon idea is flavorful and cool, but the problem with that '24 hour' healing bit is that nothing says there is only one of each type of animal, or one per summoner, and so on. A druid could easily summon a crocodile, say, have it die, and cast the same spell and get another crocodile.

So, for the OP, it's cool as long as you're okay with limiting yourself.

For the idea that you could use summoned creatures as storage devices: If it worked like that, some other druid would find and get all your stuff as soon as they summoned the same animal.

For using a mule... that would go back to being pretty tough to justify as a druid.

Hmm, I cannot find what I was looking for but found something similar instead. Unearthed Arcana has individualized summon lists as a variant, though this would require ALL spellcasters to use it.

I was thinking of one that had a spellcaster able to choose a few creatures that they can summon and build indiviually. The example they used was three different griffons. Does anyone know what this was?

[atemu1234]

So after a day, he'll just poof back into existence wherever he originally was in the first place. Arguably, it's less of a big deal to summon unintelligent creatures than intelligent ones, since the animal lacks the understanding of exactly what's happening to it.

There was a OoTS strip that had this back in Dragon Magazine, I think. It involved a celestial dog and a fiendish dire rat.

Also, one of my players once managed to summon a Blink Dog, and used it to check for traps. My immediate response was, "You here a click, a boom, a yelp, and a pop, in that order, and smell burnt dog hair."

[Galen]

Out party visited Mount Celestia on level 17, and the Cleric got a chance to meet all the Celestial creatures she summoned over her career. And apologize to them, in some cases.

[Psyren]

Hunting and killing a creature often needs to be done, because you have to eat. As long as you are not wasteful or needlessly cruel, and use the creature with gratitude for the service it provides, then treating an animal as a means to your own ends is just How Nature Works. Some things die so others can live, and so the ecosystem can continue.

Nature isn't all sunshine and hummingbirds and baby seals and flowers. It's also a lioness slightly wounding a gazelle, then giving the terrified and suffering gazelle to her cubs to catch and release, over and over and over again, because the cubs need to practice hunting. It's a wasp laying its eggs inside the body of a still-living paralyzed caterpillar, so it's larva can eat the caterpillar alive when they hatch. Nature is a forest fire that incinerates all the creatures and plants in a valley, so that the soil is fertile for the next generation of trees to grow back. Nature is a herd starving to death because they have eaten too much of their food supply and the land can only support a smaller herd. Nature is sea turtles laying dozens of eggs on the beach, most of which are eaten immediately after hatching; only a small fraction of them even make it to the sea, and still fewer grow to adulthood.

Obad Hai teaches us that this is how things are and must be. Trying to prevent these things would be futile. And reckless.

I agree, and I think the operative phrase there is "needlessly cruel" - all the things you listed would be cruel by our standards, but not needlessly so because Nature at least has a reason for all of them. So a Druid could do some things society might consider to be cruel, but nature would deem acceptable and let them keep their powers.

I'm not sure where to draw that line in regards to summons though.

[Hiro Quester]

I agree, and I think the operative phrase there is "needlessly cruel" - all the things you listed would be cruel by our standards, but not needlessly so because Nature at least has a reason for all of them. So a Druid could do some things society might consider to be cruel, but nature would deem acceptable and let them keep their powers.

I'm not sure where to draw that line in regards to summons though.

For what it's worth, I don't think the DM was considering a fall as a consequence of using summoned creatures. This was a philosophical discussion among players about how "revering nature" might limit the way a druid use4s summoned creatures.

But if I was my DM (thank the Gods that I'm not) I might start making creatures that are repeatedly summoned to die, or who are summoned for tasks that are not "worthy" of them, start to resent me and perhaps give them a chance of disobeying instructions, or mistaking me or our party tank for the target I intend it to fight.

[Psyren]

But if I was my DM (thank the Gods that I'm not) I might start making creatures that are repeatedly summoned to die, or who are summoned for tasks that are not "worthy" of them, start to resent me and perhaps give them a chance of disobeying instructions, or mistaking me or our party tank for the target I intend it to fight.

See, I personally would not go this route - because the "creatures" brought into being by Summon X are not actually creatures, they are merely manifestations of creatures. The creatures themselves are not real and therefore would not harbor any memory or resentment of your actions.

Now, whatever power of nature produces those manifestations for you (deity, spirits, nature itself etc.) might do so, but such a power can make its displeasure felt in much more immediate ways, e.g. putting Commune with Nature in all your slots above 4th level or something, or sending a fey to read you the riot act.

[Duke of Urrel]

As I understand it, the ethic of druids is respect for biological diversity. Depending on their particular alignment, druids may not care for individuals, but they do care for species. Every species must be preserved unless Nature Herself determines it to be unfit. Extinction is forever...

I believe the creatures summoned by druids come from Obad-Hai's realm in the Outland, so that Obad-Hai himself can judge whether the use of a summoned creature is appropriate.

Obad-Hai is not a moralist, as others have pointed out. However, it seems not to be in the nature of a crocodile to waddle through a dungeon setting off traps. Fortunately, the trap described in the original posting was a monster trap, and the crocodile got the opportunity to chomp on some Vermin. That is in accord with its nature.

If it too often happened that a druid sacrificed wild Animals to the artificial devices of Humanoids, I can imagine that Obad-Hai might take offense. However, there are ways to balance this out. A Good druid who inflicted regrettable harm upon a summoned Animal might actually heal it, simply out of compassion. An Evil druid, on the other hand, might balance out the scales by sacrificing a Humanoid or two to a crocodile at the next best opportunity. A druid of any alignment would of course work to defend crocodile habitat against Humanoid destruction.

[goto124]

Let's make a Crocodile Druid.