Woodland Friends is a poweful healing spell!

[Aaedimus]

A dryad is CR 1 and can cast goodberry 3 times, meaning 1 level 4 spell slot gets you all of their combat ability plus 60 points of healing perfectly distributed wherever it's needed.

I also never noticed how awesome the quicklings seem to be. Everyone always focuses on the Pixies!

[Rukelnikov]

A dryad is CR 1 and can cast goodberry 3 times, meaning 1 level 4 spell slot gets you all of their combat ability plus 60 points of healing perfectly distributed wherever it's needed.

Yup! Those dryads sure know how to pick berries!


I also never noticed how awesome the quicklings seem to be. Everyone always focuses on the Pixies!

Quicklings are rudely OP for CR1. Actually if you run them by the DMG guidelines they have Defensive CR 1/2 Offensive CR5, which averages to CR3.

[nickl_2000]

Quicklings are rudely OP for CR1. Actually if you run them by the DMG guidelines they have Defensive CR 1/2 Offensive CR5, which averages to CR3.

It's funny, the only time I have summoned them they were pretty useless. They don't have a magical attack, and we were up against a critter immune to magical attacks :smallfrown:

Still, I will likely summon them again on another day.

[Sigreid]

It's funny, the only time I have summoned them they were pretty useless. They don't have a magical attack, and we were up against a critter immune to magical attacks :smallfrown:

Still, I will likely summon them again on another day.

The answer to that problem is Disney Princess, I mean Shepard Druid.

[nickl_2000]

The answer to that problem is Disney Princess, I mean Shepard Druid.

Rather than changing my subclass from Moon Druid, I made them use the help action over repeatedly. It worked well enough. Although making a shepherd druid out of snow white/cinderella would be pretty awesome.

[MaxWilson]

The answer to that problem is Disney Princess, I mean Shepard Druid.

Actually, Shepherd Druid only makes natural weapon attacks magical. Would work with wolves or snakes or horses, but doesn't help quicklings, except for the HP boost.

[Sigreid]

Actually, Shepherd Druid only makes natural weapon attacks magical. Would work with wolves or snakes or horses, but doesn't help quicklings, except for the HP boost.

Fair point. Wonder what a quickling bite would be. 😂

[Willie the Duck]

A dryad is CR 1 and can cast goodberry 3 times, meaning 1 level 4 spell slot gets you all of their combat ability plus 60 points of healing perfectly distributed wherever it's needed.

I also never noticed how awesome the quicklings seem to be. Everyone always focuses on the Pixies!

Well, first of all, let's get out of the way that you might get to choose which woodland creatures you get, or might not, depending on how the DM reads the spell.

Anyways, yes, the spell is good. I think all other (really useful) uses for the spell got overshadowed by 1/4 CR Pixies being able to polymorph the whole party into T-rexes (and all the back-and-forth over that).

As to dryad/goodberry, it is certainly good. To note: 1) it is 60 points of healing which takes 60 character actions to consume, so it is best for OOC healing, and 2) the classes that gets the spell also have access to Healing Spirit. So, while useful, the combo might be a little redundant (although still useful in that it is one spell with many uses, so if you find spells-memorized to be a limiting constraint, this will be helpful).

[MaxWilson]

Well, first of all, let's get out of the way that you might get to choose which woodland creatures you get, or might not, depending on how the DM reads the spell.

Also worth noting that even if the DM rules you don't get to choose, you might get to influence what you get, or even outright request stuff (perhaps based on what Fey are in the local area), so it's still worth thinking through your options.

[Chronos]

And if your DM chooses completely on his own, without considering your input, then it's good to know how to use all of them well, so you're prepared for whatever appears. So if you get quicklings, you might hold back and let them do the lion's share of the fighting, but if you get nymphs, you know that you can afford to be a lot more aggressive, since you know you'll have access to a lot of healing afterwards.

[Rukelnikov]

And if your DM chooses completely on his own, without considering your input, then it's good to know how to use all of them well, so you're prepared for whatever appears. So if you get quicklings, you might hold back and let them do the lion's share of the fighting, but if you get nymphs, you know that you can afford to be a lot more aggressive, since you know you'll have access to a lot of healing afterwards.

Yup, this is very important actually.

On to what is summoned, according to RAW, the caster chooses the general type of the summons:

"Choose one of the following options for what appears:

One fey creature of challenge rating 2 or lower
Two fey creatures of challenge rating 1 or lower
Four fey creatures of challenge rating 1/2 or lower
Eight fey creatures of challenge rating 1/4 or lower"

Then the DM decides which specific creatures come according to that choice. The problem with this, is that if you choose "Two fey of challenge rating 1 or lower" DM douche can choose two sprites, which are CR 1/4, because 1/4 is lower than 1.

I guess the better way to use this is for the DM to decide what comes and then set the number of creatures based on that, i.e: if sprites answer the call, there's 8 of them, if Satyrs answer there's 4 of them etc.

[stoutstien]

Yup, this is very important actually.

On to what is summoned, according to RAW, the caster chooses the general type of the summons:

"Choose one of the following options for what appears:

One fey creature of challenge rating 2 or lower
Two fey creatures of challenge rating 1 or lower
Four fey creatures of challenge rating 1/2 or lower
Eight fey creatures of challenge rating 1/4 or lower"

Then the DM decides which specific creatures come according to that choice. The problem with this, is that if you choose "Two fey of challenge rating 1 or lower" DM douche can choose two sprites, which are CR 1/4, because 1/4 is lower than 1.

I guess the better way to use this is for the DM to decide what comes and then set the number of creatures based on that, i.e: if sprites answer the call, there's 8 of them, if Satyrs answer there's 4 of them etc.
Mostly me and my players agreed that player chooses the CR and DM chooses the actual fey.

[Laserlight]

And if you get pixies and ask them to polymorph you into T Rexes, don't be surprised if they polymorph you all into turkeys. :-)

But yeah, if you're going to summon, you should probably know beforehand "if I get A, I will use to it do B" rather than ask the DM to pause the game while you figure it out.

[Aaedimus]

I don't like the "the DM chooses what appears" caviatte. When I DM I let them pick.
Especially since if you ask for 1 CR2 creature, it's CR 2 or less, so technically if you're trying for 2 Dryads they can give you two boggles even though you could have just asked for 8 cr 1/4 creatures and gotten 4 times as many creatures.

This to me is horrible game design. For one, you're being conditioned to pick the lower CR creatures because it's less of a gamble. That means more creatures on the board taking up more rounds.

If you don't want the player to choose pixies or giant bats, talk to them. Or just let them summon pixies without polymorph. Other than that, the spell's real value is its flexibility and usefulness in a million situations. If you don't get to choose, that goes away.

[Aaedimus]

And I'm not a fan of conjour celestial either. You get what... Pegasus, Unicorn, and Coatl. All they had to do is add 2 or 3 more celestial creatures CR 5 or less and it would feel like it deserved to ba a 7th level spell.
The Coatl is strongish, the Unicorn is a great mount, and you can summon a pegasus with a 4th level spell... eh.

[Rixitichil]

I note Guildmaster's Guide to Ravinica adds the Battleforce Angel, (which is a fairly setting neutral low ranking Angel a DM might be willing to have in their setting.) It isn't the spellcasting powerhouse of the coatl, but Battlefield Inspiration is a nice permanent pseudo-Bless effect.
It might not be worth the ninth level spell slot, but options are options. Only going to get more as additional books come out.

[Willie the Duck]

I don't like the "the DM chooses what appears" caviatte.

Which is fine, it just makes it a more powerful spell if the Player gets to choose. It certainly isn't the most powerful spell in the game, although I also don't think it needs a boost.


This to me is horrible game design. For one, you're being conditioned to pick the lower CR creatures because it's less of a gamble. That means more creatures on the board taking up more rounds.

I think you mean taking up more time by making each round take longer, but yes. Although, if adding more creatures to a combat is a poor outcome, than the random factor or incentivization structure is irrelevant. The spell allows you to choose the 'many, low CR' option in the first place. If that's bad, it's bad regardless.

I'm not sure that it is bad, but it is annoying. OTOH, hiring a bunch of cheap (perhaps just durable enough to survive a fireball) archers is also inventivized. This seems to be a general problem with number of combatants in 5e, rather than specific to the spell.


If you don't want the player to choose pixies or giant bats, talk to them. Or just let them summon pixies without polymorph. Other than that, the spell's real value is its flexibility and usefulness in a million situations. If you don't get to choose, that goes away.

I think this comes down to preferred playstyle. There's something to be said for both high-risk, high-reward things*. Likewise, there's something to be said for 'here's something that may or may not be useful to you in your situation, get imaginative.' I mean, if those weren't things that at least some gamers really liked, why would there be so much randomness available in the game (not just rolling a dice at all, but things like random treasure distribution and bags of tricks and decks of many things)?
*couldn't think of a general term. Spells, treasures, opportunity, etc.

So I'm glad you say it is horrible game design to you, since I think it falls very much in the not-to-your-taste vein, more than generally-violates-a-principle-of-good-design vein.

[MaxWilson]

Then the DM decides which specific creatures come according to that choice. The problem with this, is that if you choose "Two fey of challenge rating 1 or lower" DM douche can choose two sprites, which are CR 1/4, because 1/4 is lower than 1.

I guess the better way to use this is for the DM to decide what comes and then set the number of creatures based on that, i.e: if sprites answer the call, there's 8 of them, if Satyrs answer there's 4 of them etc.

"DM decides" doesn't have to mean "DM arbitrarily picks something on the spot." There will be table variance, and some DMs will give you anything non-abusive that you ask for, others will give you a roll on a terrain-specific table, others will pick what seems funny to them or likely to be helpful, etc. There's nothing stopping you from expressing a preference when you cast the spell. "I set out some dandelion stems, favored food of brownies according to what you told me Mr. DM, and cast Call Woodland Creatures hoping for quicklings just like last time. I've got their stat block right here, Mr. DM." At many tables you will get what you ask for as long as it's reasonable.

I.e. ask your DM how this spell works in their game.

[OvisCaedo]

I'm still suspicious that the whole "GM chooses the creature" ruling was a knee-jerk reaction to realizing how broken things like pixies were as summons but not wanting to try to rewrite summon spells to specifically exclude them or to admit that there had been a mistake.

[MaxWilson]

I'm still suspicious that the whole "GM chooses the creature" ruling was a knee-jerk reaction to realizing how broken things like pixies were as summons but not wanting to try to rewrite summon spells to specifically exclude them or to admit that there had been a mistake.

FWIW, "DM obviously decides" is how I read it from the beginning, partly because that's how it works in AD&D and partly because how would the players even know what CR 2 creatures there ARE in the game world? It's not like they come with labels.

Also, pixies are just broken, not only as summons but as monsters too. Adding a Pixie to a fight has less impact on difficulty than adding a CR 3 Yeti or CR 4 Banshee but way more than adding a CR 1/2 orc. (Confusion, Sleep, friendly or hostile Polymorph, Entangle, etc.) DMG says to adjust CR if it seems wrong, so at my table Pixies are CR 2, like Intellect Devourers.

[OvisCaedo]

FWIW, "DM obviously decides" is how I read it from the beginning, partly because that's how it works in AD&D and partly because how would the players even know what CR 2 creatures there ARE in the game world? It's not like they come with labels.


I dunno, how are the players supposed to know what CR anything is for polymorph or wild shape effects? To me the CR limit just seemed like a way of making it open to future bestiaries and not having to have massive lists written in.

Still, if this is how things worked back in the AD&D days, I could sort of believe it. But I'm still always going to be skeptical, because I don't think I've seen summoning work like this in any system I've ever played. EDIT: though at a search, it sounds like 2e also had random tables for summon spells, so perhaps the reliable summons only really started with 3 as far as DnD goes. I'm sure there ARE other systems that were random or not the player's choice, mind you, it's just not something I've tended to see.

re-edit: it also seems like maybe the 2e summon table was just IN the Monstrous Manual, and it's really funny to glance over it. The range of things you could end up with in each level was massive. Or maybe a ten-headed hydra and a giant slug were somehow in the same ballpark in 2e? Could've been.

too many edits: also just noticing that, looking over 5e's conjure animals as an example, I don't think it even technically says that you'd get all the same creature when summoning multiple. Hm.

[Willie the Duck]

I'm still suspicious that the whole "GM chooses the creature" ruling was a knee-jerk reaction to realizing how broken things like pixies were as summons but not wanting to try to rewrite summon spells to specifically exclude them or to admit that there had been a mistake.

As a general rule (separate from this spell in particular), I highly suspect that the designers are not being particularly honest or forthcoming about what nuances of the game were deliberate or not. The one-handed quarterstaff with PAM (or just with shield) is the one that has me wishing I could magically compel them to just tell me what really happened and what they were intending. This spell, in particular, no. Probably because of the random nature of summons throughout the editions (not just the summon spells in pre-WotC D&D, but also Demons summoning other demons, which I think lasted into 3e).


Still, if this is how things worked back in the AD&D days, I could sort of believe it. But I'm still always going to be skeptical, because I don't think I've seen summoning work like this in any system I've ever played. EDIT: though at a search, it sounds like 2e also had random tables for summon spells, so perhaps the reliable summons only really started with 3 as far as DnD goes. I'm sure there ARE other systems that were random or not the player's choice, mind you, it's just not something I've tended to see.

There is a lot of D&D that started with 3e that is easy to forget about. Everyone remembers no more racial level limits and you can now have Dwarven paladins or Halfling wizards and everyone uses the same xp table, but there was a whole bunch of other things. One was consistency and reliability. Spells, magic items (outside of ones where randomness was part of the concept, like Bag of Tricks or Deck of Many Things), wilderness encounter tables, lots of it got a lot less variable.

We can go back and forth forever on whether any reappearance of that randomness is good or bad. I'll only say this: if, as the designers said was the case, 5e is attempting to bring existing WotC-D&D fans, old TSR-era fans, and new gamers all under one umbrella with a single edition of D&D. Spells like this, with a large random component (along with the resultant high-risk/high-reward and make-of-outcome-what-you-can gameplay), are entirely consistent with that supposed goal.

...which is not to say that they could not have spelled out more clearly in the spell description that it was supposed to be DM's choice, if it was indeed an intentional design decision.


re-edit: it also seems like maybe the 2e summon table was just IN the Monstrous Manual, and it's really funny to glance over it. The range of things you could end up with in each level was massive. Or maybe a ten-headed hydra and a giant slug were somehow in the same ballpark in 2e? Could've been.

No, the slug would be the skunked roll. They are not in the same ballpark. OTOH, having an effect where you could randomly get something from either the pros or peewee league (to maintain the baseball analogy) was absolutely consistent with the rest of the game.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Although I have no problem letting the players pick (with a rarely-used DM veto), I'm also fine with the DM picking.

The choice is:
Lots of small ones
OR
1 or 2 big ones.

And a DM who, when told a specific CR (that's available) intentionally gives lesser ones without a good reason is a jerk. Full stop. The "up to" wording is there to account for gaps in CR (in my mind), not as license to screw the players.

The DM should choose things that are campaign-appropriate but should let the players get the power of the spell. Polymorph shenanigans and the like are best handled OOC, with a simple "hey, let's not do that please" talk.

My personal bias is towards fewer, stronger things. Mainly because it takes less time at the table. Fortunately I've only had one druid who liked to summon stuff, so it has rarely come up.

[Sigreid]

FWIW, "DM obviously decides" is how I read it from the beginning, partly because that's how it works in AD&D and partly because how would the players even know what CR 2 creatures there ARE in the game world? It's not like they come with labels.

Also, pixies are just broken, not only as summons but as monsters too. Adding a Pixie to a fight has less impact on difficulty than adding a CR 3 Yeti or CR 4 Banshee but way more than adding a CR 1/2 orc. (Confusion, Sleep, friendly or hostile Polymorph, Entangle, etc.) DMG says to adjust CR if it seems wrong, so at my table Pixies are CR 2, like Intellect Devourers.

AD&D the summon spells had a table to roll on that gave you a monster type and number. Don't recall a DM pick mandate.

[Willie the Duck]

AD&D the summon spells had a table to roll on that gave you a monster type and number. Don't recall a DM pick mandate.

I don't think he was implying that there was one, only that 'player having to make use of whatever they got' was an existing model.

[Sigreid]

I don't think he was implying that there was one, only that 'player having to make use of whatever they got' was an existing model.

Oh, definitely. And because of this thread I'm considering creating my own summon tables in Fantasy Grounds for my table.