Getting Players to Use TCOE Summons Instead of Animate/Conjure/Create/etc.

[dmhelp]

For people that prefer to not DM minionmancy what is your experience shunting players toward the TCOE summon spells?

After reading thru all the responses again I think I’m going to go with something like:

May only summon and control one creature at a time (not counting class features such as Primal Companion) and spells that summon only bring 1 creature (however upcasting that previously increased numbers may instead increase the CR limit, e.g. animate dead can create things like ogre zombies)

[nickl_2000]

Have you considered asking the players politely? Or are you a Adventure League DM where that isn't an option?

Personally, I don't need TCOE summons sweetened to use them. They are the only minionmancy I will use, and my DM requested that we avoid summoning more than 1 at a time because he doesn't want to deal with that many more creatures in initiative order. So, it we use it every once in a while it's fine, but it's a gentleman's agreement not to use them all the time.

[Segev]

In my case, I probably just wouldn't play a summoner if those were all that was available, unless I specifically wanted to play custom-creature-creator or was a summoner of a specific creature or small suite thereof. The TCE summons don't feel like you're summoning iconic creatures of particular sorts; they feel like you're summoning a specific creature of no specific sort. They are awkward, at best, in terms of trying to make them into existing creatures. You might have one or two specific creatures they're designed to emulate that you can force them into, but that's it.

Meanwhile, the PHB summons are all going to feel generic in terms of what creature(s) you're getting. It's not going to be Temast the Great Wolf you're summoning each time with conjure animals, it's going to be a wolf and maybe several of is packmates. Making a custom summon you have a personal relationship with is much easier with the TCE ones.

I also would only use the TCE "undead spirit" summon under duress; it's lame, because "summon undead" is lame, and "summon custom undead" is really lacking in flavor. Undead should be closer to constructs than summons, even if they're cheap constructs that are meant to be disposable.

[OldTrees1]

If I were playing a Necromancer, I would probably use Summon Undead but be sad that it is basically Conjure Undead for only Skeletal Archer, Minor Ghoul (no paralysis), and Ghost. If the spell was expanded to a greater variety and allowed to scale qualitatively with spell level rather than only quantitatively, that would be an improvement (maybe at 5th level it could summon a shadow or a stronger ghost). Even better would be if the DM was willing to work with the player to add new undead options based on the necromancer's research.

Oh, and if it was not 5E I would like the spell to represent the maintenance of a permanent squad of undead. But I dare not risk actually representing a necromancer's bodyguards in 5E.

[LudicSavant]

For people that prefer to not DM minionmancy what is your experience shunting players toward the TCOE summon spells?

Do you have to add a house rule or sweeten the pot (e.g. you can have two concentration spells running as long as one is a TCOE summon spell)? Or do you just ban them? Or do you have another strategy?

I would assume that Necromancer gets summon undead for free instead of animate dead and Shepherd's Faithful Summons does a level 9 summon beast instead of conjure animals.

TCoE summons aren't weak compared to most Concentration spells; giving one effectively Concentration-free would be ill-advised.

[stoutstien]

For people that prefer to not DM minionmancy what is your experience shunting players toward the TCOE summon spells?

Do you have to add a house rule or sweeten the pot (e.g. you can have two concentration spells running as long as one is a TCOE summon spell)? Or do you just ban them? Or do you have another strategy?

I would assume that Necromancer gets summon undead for free instead of animate dead and Shepherd's Faithful Summons does a level 9 summon beast instead of conjure animals.

Seems like an odd question. If you are the DM you determine the content in play. Obviously this requires a conversation with the other players but in the end if you don't want to deal with a lot of minions in a game you can remove them. For your shepherd druid example, you are probably just better off not having them in the game and stay away from higher level play when most full casters can start amassing armies.

The harder but more blunt truth is that they are part of the game and it's best to just become more familiar with player options and make sure your content doesn't have glaring flaws in design. It's mostly a process of repeating failure until it starts clicking.

[diplomancer]

For people that prefer to not DM minionmancy what is your experience shunting players toward the TCOE summon spells?

Do you have to add a house rule or sweeten the pot (e.g. you can have two concentration spells running as long as one is a TCOE summon spell)? Or do you just ban them? Or do you have another strategy?

I would assume that Necromancer gets summon undead for free instead of animate dead and Shepherd's Faithful Summons does a level 9 summon beast instead of conjure animals.

Remind them that in the Conjure Spells line, the DM chooses the summons. I'm not saying to give them useless things, but maybe to give them more thematic (though less useful) minions depending on location, for instance.

[SharkForce]

have you considered the alternative option of applying house rules to how the PHB spells are used?

for example, require that *they* do the preparation. if they want to be able to summon wolves, they need to be prepared in advance with the stat block for that, including some form of paperwork that lets them track how much damage they've taken, which token is which wolf, what status effects are on any given wolf, etc.

(if you want to be able to choose the creature, that may be harder for you... personally, my policy is that the player chooses what shows up within the constraints of what can survive on the location they're summoned to, barring some effect that would give a reason for the world to alter their decision... so, for example, if you're in a sea elf temple there may be something that prevents sharks from showing up there just to make life harder for sahuagin. I'm not gonna pick for the player, but if they ask for sharks I am going to tell them they need to pick something else in that case. alternately, if you consider an egypt-themed temple, maybe the only thing that can be summoned are giant scarab beetles because the area is designed for summoning them... and they're a little stronger than usual as a result)

the other big change... I'm guessing you want to get away from large groups of critters as your main thing, and you could probably care less if they summon a single CR 2 critter. so nerf the large groups of critters options. not down to nothing, but if they can get 1 CR 2, 2 CR 1, 3 CR 1/2, or 5 CR 1/4, the group of lower CR critters starts to look less appealing. even if that only gets them down to a pair of CR 1 creatures, that's a lot easier to keep track of than 8.

yes, that is a nerf. you're the DM. if you feel that something is harming the game experience, change that thing. it doesn't matter even the tiniest bit whether that thing causes problems at anyone else's table, if it is causing problems at your table, change it. if you absolutely entirely loathe the PHB spells, simply say "those don't exist in my game world".

alternately, I do also like segev's idea about "custom" summons; obtain the favour of a wolf spirit and suddenly, you have a slightly stronger wolf with a smaller pack as an additional option when they use the spell (say, a dire wolf that rolled maximum on its hit dice, with 2 or maybe 3 regular wolves that also rolled maximum on their hit dice).

but again, it isn't *your* job to track them. it isn't your class feature, it's theirs; the obligation to do the work is on them.

(but really, I have to agree with segev... the TcoE spells are pretty lackluster. what they summon is rarely much like summoning an actual creature. it might vaguely resemble one or two things if you are careful to never look directly at it, but mostly it is a vague blob of hit points and damage with nothing to really suggest that it is anything more than said vague blob of hit points and damage. frankly, the undead one is actually one of the *least* bad in my opinion, because with something like the constructs spell I feel like it doesn't even remotely resemble a golem at all, in spite of that being very obviously what they were aiming for. I really wish they had settled on animated objects; armour, sword, rug. they could've actually done justice to that idea)

[Hael]

Some of the TCOE summons are interesting. For instance the summon fey spell is really nice for warlock archers/blastlocks as it gives them a one tile darkness blob (so all the usual benefits without the alleged negative party effects) on top of the extra hps and damage. So eg basically a straight upgrade to their usual concentration spells.

[Trask]

Honestly, I already house rules the minionmancy spells to only summon 1 big creature a long time ago. I do not want to handle or watch the headache of a bunch of minions just for minmaxing purposes.

[Kane0]

Yeah probably just have a chat with the table. if you say something like ‘handling multiple summons is a pain in the ass for me as DM, i’d prefer it if you guys could make use of the Tasha’s summon spells instead’

[samuraijaques]

Honestly I was really worried about playing a summoner in 5e with all the negative opinions of it. I talked through it with my DM beforehand and we agreed on some general changes.

- Summons go immediately after the player who summoned them so you don't roll initiative
- The summoner picks what they summon from a list of pre agreed upon summons i.e. wolves are always okay but if you wanna summon deep rothe that's up to the dm
- Have the stats for what you're summoning ready (already solved by playing on a virtual tabletop)
- Don't abuse the pixie spell list

I've been rolling all their attacks in batches. I move the wolves up and say "3 attacks against this guy, 4 against this guy" then I roll all their attacks and add the damage together. I wouldn't do it with actual dice, you really gotta have some kind of roller. It works perfectly on a virtual tabletop. My turns take less time than most of the people in our party, I just hit the attack button 8 times instead of 2.

I've been playing this character for months now and cast conjure animals probably at least 30 times and it has literally never been an issue. Yeah it's strong as heck but so is fireball. It hasn't ever felt like it overshadows the other players and in literally every single combat they've been excited to have them because it evens the action economy and they like talking tactics.

Honestly I really don't get why everyone is so against summoner builds. They're such an iconic character archetype, they're fun to play and they're a huge asset to the team. If you put in even the scantest bit of prep in they run perfectly smoothly.

So to the original question I guess my answer is why would you want to? Save the energy that you were using convincing your players to use the new summoning spells and use it on making the original summoning spells run better. It's not tremendously difficult.

[MaxWilson]

For people that prefer to not DM minionmancy what is your experience shunting players toward the TCOE summon spells?

Do you have to add a house rule or sweeten the pot (e.g. you can have two concentration spells running as long as one is a TCOE summon spell)? Or do you just ban them? Or do you have another strategy?

I would assume that Necromancer gets summon undead for free instead of animate dead and Shepherd's Faithful Summons does a level 9 summon beast instead of conjure animals.

I give summoned creatures (and hirelings) a share of earned XP proportionate to their share of the total levels/CR, rounded up to CR 1. This tends to encourage casters to use summons only when needed, and to use one big summon (e.g. CR 4 Shadow Demon or CR 2 Giant Constrictor) instead of dozens of skeletal archers or conjured wolves or hobgoblin mercenaries. The message in-game and out-of-game is the same: you gain more experience from challenges than curbstomps.

[NecessaryWeevil]

Yeah, as someone who's currently running a Shepherd Druid and having a blast, I would hope that I could at least persuade my DM to give me a chance to demonstrate that minionmancy doesn't have to be disruptive. A lot good ideas have already been given.

But maybe you've already learned that it is disruptive with your particular players; that's your prerogative of course.

[Pex]

Spiting players can backfire. In my paladin game the druid wanted to summon 8 wolves. DM wouldn't let him because he literally did not have 8 wolf minitiatures. The fighter player purposely purchased 8 wolf miniatures and brought them to the next game so the druid could summon them, and the druid casts the spell almost every combat.

Don't punish players for using the spell. If you absolutely can't stand the spell you're better off banning it outright. Don't be passive aggressive of teaching them a lesson not to use the spell by making them wish they never casted it. Play with your players, not against them. It's fine to say only use the Tasha spells. If Shepherd Druid gives you connipton fits ban it. Otherwise work with your players. If a player really, really wants to play one but you can't deal with all those summoned creatures, compromise. House rule the class features work on the Tasha spells. The player does have to do his part in accepting the compromise. If using the Conjure spells a predetermined list of creatures is fine. Be friendly, not adversarial.

[Valmark]

Some of the TCOE summons are interesting. For instance the summon fey spell is really nice for warlock archers/blastlocks as it gives them a one tile darkness blob (so all the usual benefits without the alleged negative party effects) on top of the extra hps and damage. So eg basically a straight upgrade to their usual concentration spells.

Meh, magical darkness that doesn't stop Darkvision means that most enemies will see through it.

I'd rather keep Darkness if that's my tactic.

[Hael]

Meh, magical darkness that doesn't stop Darkvision means that most enemies will see through it.

I'd rather keep Darkness if that's my tactic.

I interpret ‘fill a cube with magical darkness’ as having properties functionally identical to the spell darkness, and hence dark vision does not see through it. Legalese aside, I think that’s clearly the intent.

[Valmark]

I interpret ‘fill a cube with magical darkness’ as having properties functionally identical to the spell darkness, and hence dark vision does not see through it. Legalese aside, I think that’s clearly the intent.

Except that we know that's the opposite of the intent, at least according to the SAC. More specifically, spells that create magical darkness and stop darkvision say so- there's no rules that make magical darkness work as Darkness. It's not really an interpretation as much as an house rule (which is perfectly fine, but not assumable for discussions outside of your group).


More related to the thread: Tasha's summons cover entirely different roles from the multi-summoning spells, so I wouldn't really touch them. They'll get enough use normally (except maybe a Sheperd Druid bothered by the fact that they can't boost the hp of a Tasha's summon because WotC decided so).

[OldTrees1]

I will say 1 thing in favor of Conjure Animals:
It can provide flying mounts for the party that last for an hour. That was helpful in a high altitude aerial combat.
There are other ways to enable fights in the sky, but this is one reason you might want to keep Conjure Animals unbanned even if you want them to focus on Summon Animal.

[Segev]

I will say 1 thing in favor of Conjure Animals:
It can provide flying mounts for the party that last for an hour. That was helpful in a high altitude aerial combat.
There are other ways to enable fights in the sky, but this is one reason you might want to keep Conjure Animals unbanned even if you want them to focus on Summon Animal.

This only works if you don't use the "the DM chooses what beasts are conjured" interpretation, or the DM for some reason chooses to give you what you want (in which case, are you really having the DM choose?)

[dmhelp]

I give summoned creatures (and hirelings) a share of earned XP proportionate to their share of the total levels/CR, rounded up to CR 1. This tends to encourage casters to use summons only when needed, and to use one big summon (e.g. CR 4 Shadow Demon or CR 2 Giant Constrictor) instead of dozens of skeletal archers or conjured wolves or hobgoblin mercenaries. The message in-game and out-of-game is the same: you gain more experience from challenges than curbstomps.
That sounds interesting. What do you use for TCOE summon spells? If I used spell level/2 that would probably promote some use of those spells.


TCoE summons aren't weak compared to most Concentration spells; giving one effectively Concentration-free would be ill-advised.
What would be the worst situation that would arise? Bard/Aberrant Sor/Wiz could run with a level 9 bigby's clenched for 12d8 (54) and a level 8 beholderkin for 4d8 + 44 (62) plus a spell or main action each turn.

32 CR 1/4 wolves with a level 9 conjure animals could do average 7 * 32 = 224 (****ty attack but they get advantage) plus a spell or main action. Sure they have a lot less staying power, but that is also pretty annoying. So I wouldn't be against rewarding the person doing TCOE summons to make the other obsolete (nerf by proxy).

[LudicSavant]

What would be the worst situation that would arise? Bard/Aberrant Sor/Wiz could run with a level 9 bigby's clenched for 12d8 (54) and a level 8 beholderkin for 4d8 + 44 (62) plus a spell or main action each turn.

That's a rather odd example to choose if it's supposed to be a "worst situation."

Bigby's Hand is generally not worth upcasting to level 9. What's more, it lasts 1 minute, and it eats a first-turn action, then additional bonus actions to operate, meaning it's directly competing with other things you could have been spending those bonus actions on (like, I dunno, Crown of Stars). A Tasha's summon lasts an entire hour and doesn't make any demands of your action economy.

Beholderkin is one of the low-damage options. Consider instead a Summoned Celestial dishing out 4 attacks at 2d6+10 each, with the accuracy of a PC. This summon deals more damage than some entire martial characters (for example against AC 19, more than a Reckless Raging GWM greataxe half-orc Bear-barian). It's also got an emergency 2d8+8 (17) yo-yo heal, is a Large flying intelligent mount, has a better damage type (Radiant), and a long range (150/600 feet).

And you're basically having that around at no action economy or even Concentration cost to the caster.

I think core summons are awful janky design, but the answer is not to give casters giant buffs by removing Concentration limits.


32 CR 1/4 wolves with a level 9 conjure animals could do average 7 * 32 = 224 (****ty attack but they get advantage) plus a spell or main action. Sure they have a lot less staying power, but that is also pretty annoying. So I wouldn't be against rewarding the person doing TCOE summons to make the other obsolete (nerf by proxy).

Your houserule doesn't make Conjure Animals obsolete. It allows you to cast a Conjure Animals and a TCOE summon at the same time.

[KorvinStarmast]

Honestly, I already house rules the minionmancy spells to only summon 1 big creature a long time ago. I do not want to handle or watch the headache of a bunch of minions just for minmaxing purposes. not a bad approach. I have a great DM who works with me (I have conjure animals as a 6th level bard magic secrets spell) and right now, it's either two CR 1s or 1 CR2. The druid I DM for (Shepherd) and I have a similar arrangement. I also have the summons on the same initiative as the druid to make play flow more quickly.

if you say something like ‘handling multiple summons is a pain in the ass for me as DM, i’d prefer it if you guys could make use of the Tasha’s summon spells instead’ That's another fine idea, and narratively, you can even present, in a dream or in a quick cut scene, how The Archfey has put a moratorium on summoning of his servants (conjure animals) due to how much trauma it creates yadda yadda yadda). Depends on the table. Free agents (per the Tasha's spell) he'll allow to be summoned.

If you absolutely can't stand the spell you're better off banning it outright...It's fine to say only use the Tasha spells. Otherwise work with your players...The player does have to do his part in accepting the compromise. If using the Conjure spells a predetermined list of creatures is fine. Be friendly, not adversarial. Buckets of goodness in that post. Good DM advice.
I will say 1 thing in favor of Conjure Animals:
It can provide flying mounts for the party that last for an hour. That was helpful in a high altitude aerial combat.
Yes, yes it does. (And having a 'feather fall' spell as a back up isn't a bad idea. :smallbiggrin:

[OldTrees1]

This only works if you don't use the "the DM chooses what beasts are conjured" interpretation, or the DM for some reason chooses to give you what you want (in which case, are you really having the DM choose?)

That was me speaking as DM to DM. If the DM wants to have encounters in exotic environments, maybe leave Conjure Animals unbanned as an extra possible option for how the PCs reach the fight.

However that was a good guess. As a DM I use "the Player chooses and the DM can veto" interpretation.

[LudicSavant]

Currently experimenting with:

Conjure Animals is 1/2/3/4 instead of 1/2/4/8, but you get to choose the animals.

Animate Dead now requires you to "invest" a spell slot, and lasts indefinitely. It still has the "reassert" option 1/day, it just doesn't take a new casting. The spell slot can't be recovered until the Animated Dead are dead.
Same rule applies to Goodberry. Basically the idea is that you can't dump all your leftover spell slots into Goodberry or Animate Dead in order to have the benefits for "free" tomorrow. It also prevents the "what if someone with a short rest recharge gets Animate Dead?" issue.

[Mitchellnotes]

I think it mivht be helpful to explore why the push to the TCoE summons. Is it the power level or the logistics of the spells?

At the end of the day, the best response would be to talk with your players. If the focus is more logistical, i would 2nd a number of things people have already said. Have them go after the player. Simplify the turns (this can be as easy as the player identifying an incredibly basic command "attack this person" etc.) Controlling each summon individually? Yikes! Also, take a look at mob rules. Much more streamlined way of using summons. There are some things to account for (pack tactics, save riders, etc), but it can help to make controling those 8 wolves take a similar amount of time to the one tcoe summon.

Power level of the spells is an entirely different beast, and depends on the class. I would be verrrryy hesitant to tell a shephard druid they cant use their summons... bc thats probably why they chose the class, but there may ways to tone the power level down. Fewer, but stronger, creatures may be the way to go (summon greater demon may be a guide to start with to think about what CR may be a place to start)

[dmhelp]

Your houserule doesn't make Conjure Animals obsolete. It allows you to cast a Conjure Animals and a TCOE summon at the same time.

That obviously wouldn’t be my house rule. You can’t use RAW against the gist of what someone is saying. You would be able to have 1 summon spell and 1 non pet spell assuming you had no other creatures under your control (animate dead, planar binding, etc would not let you have 2 concentration spells up).

So if you have an example of a worst case scenario that doesn’t involve stacking summon spells that is what I’d like to hear about.


I think it mivht be helpful to explore why the push to the TCoE summons. Is it the power level or the logistics of the spells?

So combat can proceed quickly and smoothly without a self congested battlefield and having to reference alternative war rules.

[KorvinStarmast]

So combat can proceed quickly and smoothly without a self congested battlefield and having to reference alternative war rules. In which case I suggest making a firm, declarative statement:
"The multiverse has changed. Conjure Animals (and whatever other spell) no longer function. The following Tasha's spells do, however. Feel free to sub that in."

While we are at it, though, if they do summon beasts my druid player and I had to work out a way to make Shepherd summoning bonus (for HP) fit better. I'll go and check my notes, can't recall just what we did. I think we added a hit die per spell level, but I need to double check.

[da newt]

Personally I HATE the DM chooses interpretation of the conjure spells, but really the important bit is to have a conversation at the session ZERO and ensure everyone involved is cool with whatever rule set you go with.

If you don't like a whole bunch of summons, limit it to one or two but do what you can to ensure they stay as impactful / balanced as you can. Sure this means some subclasses become less optimal, but as long as everyone knows and agrees before session 1, no big deal.

[Hael]

In which case I suggest making a firm, declarative statement:
"The multiverse has changed. Conjure Animals (and whatever other spell) no longer function. The following Tasha's spells do, however. Feel free to sub that in."
.

I’m not a DM, but it’s difficult to change spells that are essentially class features without really warping intended game balance. I’m pretty sure a fight between 8 velociraptors would be competitive vs two Tasha summons of the same spell lvl. And it gets worse when upcast.

It’s sorta like changing fireball, find familiar, spirit guardians and find greater steed. They’re intentionally overtuned relative to their lvl.

I think most would agree they’re too powerful even taking that into account, but it’s a major nerf to rangers and druids to outright remove them entirely.

[LudicSavant]

You would be able to have 1 summon spell and 1 non pet spell assuming you had no other creatures under your control (animate dead, planar binding, etc would not let you have 2 concentration spells up). That's not solving the main problem with your suggestion, which is that giving 2 Concentration spells at once is a massive buff for casters that they don't need.

[MaxWilson]

That sounds interesting. What do you use for TCOE summon spells? If I used spell level/2 that would probably promote some use of those spells.


I don't allow Tasha's so it's a moot point. If I did I'd either figure out (or look up) the CR or use a simple heuristic like Spell Level = Effective CR for those spells. Whichever one the players preferred most likely.

[Segev]

That was me speaking as DM to DM. If the DM wants to have encounters in exotic environments, maybe leave Conjure Animals unbanned as an extra possible option for how the PCs reach the fight.

However that was a good guess. As a DM I use "the Player chooses and the DM can veto" interpretation.
That works. It would not work as something players would use to solve specific problems beyond needing warm bodies in combat if it were essentially random (as it is from the PC's perapective when he casts the spell). He'd have no reason to expect a group of flying mounts

With your way of doing it, he at least expects he will usually get what he wants.

[Captain Panda]

The harder but more blunt truth is that they are part of the game and it's best to just become more familiar with player options and make sure your content doesn't have glaring flaws in design. It's mostly a process of repeating failure until it starts clicking.

100% agreed.

Not a fan of stripping players of their major class abilities. Conjure animals, regardless of how you feel about it, is a pretty important part of the druid kit. Taking it away is like taking away the cleric's spirit guardians or the wizard's fireball.

[Salmon343]

I think if there's a concern about the balance of the OG Summon spells in combat but the versatility for out of combat uses is to be kept, then I think a good solution would be to up the casting time, maybe from 1 action to 1 minute (for the 1 action spells). That way you can't use it instantly in combat, which means that enemies will be able to plan for the summons so they won't break an encounter wide open, while a minute casting time is pretty small in terms of circumventing exploration encounters. It keeps the TCOE Summons as the premier combat option, while letting the OG Summons be useful in exploration.

[KorvinStarmast]

So combat can proceed quickly and smoothly without a self congested battlefield and having to reference alternative war rules. Just to let you know, I found the notes from what we arrived at. For the Tasha's summons, beast kind, since the Shepherd druid has a per HD bonus, we arrived at this:

1 HD + 1 HD per spell level

Are the HD for that alternative Tasha Summons when applying the Shepherd Druid 6th level bonus. Hope that's helpful.

Personally I HATE the DM chooses interpretation of the conjure spells, but really the important bit is to have a conversation at the session ZERO and ensure everyone involved is cool with whatever rule set you go with.
Let's be fair to most DMs out there.
Until you run into how cluttered a pile of summons makes a combat encounter, you don't tend to know what a mess it can become.

Thankfully, my DM and I, and when I DM my druid and I, work together (well and long after session zero, since it does not come on line until level 5) to make a 'best fit' for our tables. You don't have to be prescient. You can adjust on the fly as things arise in play. :smallcool:

[Yakk]

Houserule.

* All of the 1/2/4/8 conjure spells produce instead 1/2/3/4
* They add your proficiency bonus to their AC, attack rolls and save DCs.
* Higher level adds +1 creature of the CR you picked.

I find the most abusive minionmancy comes from many over-powered low-CR creatures, and also the biggest on-board headache.

This makes using fewer, bigger creatures more tempting, and gives them a boost so you don't feel neglected when using them.

If that doesn't go far enough, require knowing the true name of the creature type; a given spellcaster can't leaf through the MM and find monsters. They have a stable.

[MaxWilson]

Houserule.

* All of the 1/2/4/8 conjure spells produce instead 1/2/3/4
* They add your proficiency bonus to their AC, attack rolls and save DCs.
* Higher level adds +1 creature of the CR you picked.

I find the most abusive minionmancy comes from many over-powered low-CR creatures, and also the biggest on-board headache.

This makes using fewer, bigger creatures more tempting, and gives them a boost so you don't feel neglected when using them.

If that doesn't go far enough, require knowing the true name of the creature type; a given spellcaster can't leaf through the MM and find monsters. They have a stable.

My biggest objection to this form of houserule for Conjure XYZ is that it doesn't fix the root problem: you still have the exact same quantity-over-quality strategy open via Animate Dead, Tiny Servant, Planar Binding, and/or even just mercenary hirelings (or Mass Suggestioned/Geased hobgoblins, or whatever). There's nothing wrong with this change per se but it really only "fixes" druid minionmancy, kind of, and why single out the druid specifically?

Incidentally it also makes Quicklings an even better summon than they were before. AC 20ish Quicklings with +12ish to hit, doing 3x d4+6 (8.5) per hit? Sure, why not? Their biggest weakness is low HP but it's easy enough to get them temp HP, and now they have a higher AC. I expect that's probably by design on the DM's part, so that druids don't feel completely nerfed.

[Amdy_vill]

For people that prefer to not DM minionmancy what is your experience shunting players toward the TCOE summon spells?

Do you have to add a house rule or sweeten the pot (e.g. you can have two concentration spells running as long as one is a TCOE summon spell)? Or do you just ban them? Or do you have another strategy?

I would assume that Necromancer gets summon undead for free instead of animate dead and Shepherd's Faithful Summons does a level 9 summon beast instead of conjure animals.

I have found the best way to deal wiht i9t is not moving players over its just using the mob combat rules.

[GentlemanVoodoo]

For people that prefer to not DM minionmancy what is your experience shunting players toward the TCOE summon spells?

Do you have to add a house rule or sweeten the pot (e.g. you can have two concentration spells running as long as one is a TCOE summon spell)? Or do you just ban them? Or do you have another strategy?

It is established early on whether such spells will be used or not. But a compromise of sorts can be given if you have players insisting on use. Only one summon is permitted (whatever the spell is) in combat. RP or out of combat events they can summon however many things the spell allows provided intent is declared for needing so many creatures at once.

[dmhelp]

After reading thru all the responses again I think I’m going to go with something like:

May only summon and control one creature at a time (not counting class features such as Primal Companion) and spells that summon only bring 1 creature (however upcasting that previously increased numbers may instead increase the CR limit, e.g. animate dead can create things like ogre zombies)

[SharkForce]

My biggest objection to this form of houserule for Conjure XYZ is that it doesn't fix the root problem: you still have the exact same quantity-over-quality strategy open via Animate Dead, Tiny Servant, Planar Binding, and/or even just mercenary hirelings (or Mass Suggestioned/Geased hobgoblins, or whatever). There's nothing wrong with this change per se but it really only "fixes" druid minionmancy, kind of, and why single out the druid specifically?

Incidentally it also makes Quicklings an even better summon than they were before. AC 20ish Quicklings with +12ish to hit, doing 3x d4+6 (8.5) per hit? Sure, why not? Their biggest weakness is low HP but it's easy enough to get them temp HP, and now they have a higher AC. I expect that's probably by design on the DM's part, so that druids don't feel completely nerfed.

it gets rid of the cheap, easy method of gaining minions with the fewest drawbacks.

planar binding typically causes some major problems if it is dispelled, and costs a lot of money except at the very highest levels (when you can have long-duration planar binding and possibly even the wish spell) which are the least likely to show up.

geas is not reliable (it punishes them for disobeying, but does not force them to obey) and can be removed as well, leaving you with an enemy. also, those resources are not renewable, and again, the duration doesn't get long until the highest levels, which is only potentially a problem for a very small number of groups; you will likely need to go on special adventures just to set up your squad of geased minions.

mass suggestion is limited by the nature of suggestions; it has to be reasonable. granted, for a given DM reasonable can be extremely generous, but there is already a lever there to limit things. in all likelihood, "do everything I say to do for the next 6 months" is not reasonable enough unless you're paying them... at which point your limitation is money (as it was for planar binding).

and animate dead requires your spell slots on a daily basis, at least. also, in my experience most games have an assumption that creating murderous undead (even if they're under your control for now, and even if they're made from "evil" creatures) is a good way to become very unpopular very quickly. still, if the DM is not willing to deal with that headache, I would certainly agree that this particular spell could use some attention as well.

so yes, it leaves options... but it takes care of what are probably the easiest ones that start causing problems the earliest.

[Witty Username]

I give summoned creatures (and hirelings) a share of earned XP proportionate to their share of the total levels/CR, rounded up to CR 1. This tends to encourage casters to use summons only when needed, and to use one big summon (e.g. CR 4 Shadow Demon or CR 2 Giant Constrictor) instead of dozens of skeletal archers or conjured wolves or hobgoblin mercenaries. The message in-game and out-of-game is the same: you gain more experience from challenges than curbstomps.

Are summoned creatures that much more powerful then concentration spells of the same level?

[MaxWilson]

Are summoned creatures that much more powerful then concentration spells of the same level?

Hirelings, Tiny Servants, and Animate Dead don't require concentration. Even Conjure Elemental and Conjure Animals are disproportionately efficient in many circumstances. So basically yes. There needs to be an additional cost or they tend to dominate play.

[Pex]

Are summoned creatures that much more powerful then concentration spells of the same level?

No.

It's subjective to the user. They are effective. If you want to use the word "powerful" that's fine too, but there's nothing wrong with being powerful. As is often the case with powerful things people have different tolerance levels of power. In my opinion what makes something powerful enough to be objectively too powerful is something that makes the game unplayable as in I Win D&D. One spell slot casting of Conjure Woodland Beings to get 8 pixies and thus 8 castings of Polymorph falls in that category. The problem is in the pixies, not Conjure Woodland Beings. Because Internet others have a different point of view and will blame the spell itself. We agree on the result but not the cause. I don't think banning the spell outright is the proper solution. An offered solution I do like is increase pixies to CR 1, but I don't oppose making the spell Conjure Woodland Beings Except Pixies.

For some people the problem with Conjure spells is not in power but in game play. Conjuring one or two more creatures into the battlefield is fine. Conjuring 4 or more lengthens the combat a significant amount of time to the point of frustration. They aren't wrong in having that frustration, but you can't apply it as a universal truth for everyone. In my opinion the better solution is to limit the player to two creatures max option, not get rid of the spell. Which gets back to what I said earlier. If you have a problem with the Power and Numbers the Conjure spells bring only using the Tasha versions, now that they're available, is again in my opinion an acceptable solution and house rule Shepherd Druid and Conjurer Wizard works on them for those players who really really enjoy playing "Pokemon".

[Jerrykhor]

Are summoned creatures that much more powerful then concentration spells of the same level?

It depends on the spell that is being compared to. Like i would say Conjure Elemental is without a doubt better than Immolation, but not better than Wall of Force.

[Damon_Tor]

At my table:

Five or more identical creatures attack as a unit. The unit takes its turn at the same time and makes one attack roll against a target. If they hit the AC of the target exactly, half of the creatures hit, rounded down. For every one point above or below the target AC, one additional creature in the unit hits or misses. Use the average damage, multiplied by the number of hits. a nat 20 means exactly one of the creatures crits. If any of the creatures have advantage or disadvantage, the whole unit does.

This system works great for animate dead, conjure animals, and animate objects. It can also be used for hordes of low-level NPCs that aren't summoned but are nonetheless numerous.

[MaxWilson]

It depends on the spell that is being compared to. Like i would say Conjure Elemental is without a doubt better than Immolation, but not better than Wall of Force.

It tends to be more efficient than Wall of Force though, except in uber-Deadly fights, because Wall of Force is overkill and immobile. Say you're in a Hard fight at 9th level against two Trolls and an Ettin. Are you really going to want to blow a Wall of Force on isolating one of the Trolls? On the other hand, if you had sixteen wolves/snakes/draft horses/whatever, not only would they hammer the Trolls and Ettin flat but you would still have a dozen or so animals left over for the next fight. Same thing applies to Conjure Elemental: you might have a partial-strength Earth Elemental left over who can still do scouting with Tremorsense, or a partial-strength Fire Elemental.

This isn't generally true for Summon Greater Demon of course (although if you pick something simple like a Barlgura and if your DM lets you do the "make it tell me its true name" thing, it can be sort of true as long as the next fight is relatively soon).