i can't for the life of me find anywhere where it mentions how regular magic summoners and ki seal summoners effect each other, (ki seal summoning is fleshed out in dominus exxet). the only problem i'm really having is what happens if a ki seal user summons a monster and a magic summoner want to control or banish it, especially since the two ways of summoning work very different.

i'm thinking of working it one of two ways, and i'm having some trouble deciding which would be more balanced, though i may just toss together some homebrew rules involving some new mechanics, but that seems too dodgey.

idea 1) MK checks; when any conflicting checks with another summoner is required the ki seal user simply makes an MK check using their total martial knowledge score in place of the relevant summoning score. in this case a ki seal user could not initiate a bind, control, or banish check, only defend against one. but they could attempt a summon check by invoking their seals for that creature, then making an MK check against the summoners ability, and then the usual what-have-you ensues.

idea 2) ki sealers are bastards; when in conflict with a regular summoner the ki user has no method of mystically combating the offender, the creature is not technically considered summoned and the magic summoner would have to go about exerting their will upon the creature as if it were not summoned but their of its own will.

i dunno, what do you guys think.

I would probably say the latter. Since the creature is agreeing to work with the Ki summoner, it is manifesting through the summons of it's own free will. I would also consider giving the Ki summoned creature an increase to resist control/banish/bind checks because of the blood pact, like a +5 for each minor seal and a +25 for each greater seal used in the summons.

But that is my thoughts on it.

I actually have the same problem with a Wizard using Supernatural Control (Essense level 70) and normal Summoner using Control. How do they settle this? Deciding one version of Summoning is better than another is, at least in my opinion, a bad idea. But how do you contest between different styles of controlling creatures?

My current idea is an Opposed Attribute Check, Summoners using POW, Wizards using POW or INT, and Ki users using one of their attributes that controls Ki (POW, STR, DEX, AGI, WP, or CON). For characters that have a choice they choose at character creation (so a wizard chooses POW or INT when created/ the rule is implemented, and cannot change) to prevent them from using whichever is highest at the moment.

Obviously using this method gives Summoners the advantage, with Wizards being second and Ki users having the worse chance because they have to split their attribute bonuses. But, then, giving Summoners the best chance, Wizards second best, and Ki users the least chance kind of makes sense.

The Summoner's Control abilities do not come with a host of other ki powers or spells - that is all they have, and they have to work very hard to be good at it. A Summoner is able to do these things through secret formula passed down among Summoners and taught to them specifically, they are unique, specialized skills. In the rule book it is described in this way:
"the character invests Zeon points to alter the Soul Flow and influence supernatural creatures."

For supernatural creatures that are not undead, the Soul Flow is their source of existence. That is far more powerful than any spell cast on them, or a voluntary pact no matter how it is stamped. Simply put, creatures between worlds cannot resist this kind of power, and must answer to it for their very existence.

This is described in the rules pretty clearly:
"if the roll is successful, the character takes control over the entity, which can't do anything to stop it."

That means, a pact made with an ordinary being, or a spell they are being controlled with would be broken when this kind of compelling force is placed upon them. The only exception to this is when a Summoner's Control ability is already in effect, in which case the Summoner already controlling the entity may resist or counter attempts to Banish or Control by another Summoner.

Summoners may not be able to punch mountains into pieces with ki or wield high magic, but they really should be respected for these 4 abilities.

hellgeist said:

This is true only if you ignore Invocations and Incarnations. And, if you do so, it would make sense for the summoner to win automatically. I would also agree without the Incarnations and Invocations from Arcana Exxet, so if you do not have the book/use the rules from the book you are probably correct. If you use Arcana Exxet I have to disagree. As of Incarnations, Summoning abilities became a lot stronger. Prior all they could do was a few Invocations and summon things, but with the right knowledge of Incarnations and the new Invocations they have almost as many options as Wizards.

Further, you do have a leg to stand on for the Ki character, as that the creature has agreed to help. Though I do not believe this is exactly fair, especially if the Ki user specialises in summoning, and is about all they can do, but they do it well. But, technically, I suppose this is not a Control ability so much as a Summon Friendly Creature ability.

However, I have to say that a Wizard using Supernatural Control has as much reason to be able to Control the creature as the summoner. While a Wizard cannot Summon, Bind, or Banish the creature (or at least not that I have found) they can Control it, which is why this makes sense as being as powerful as the summoner. Further, Supernatural Control states;
"This spell grants total control of a spirit or Being Between Worlds"
And grants basically the same abilities as Control - control them with words which can be understood no matter what their language, letter not spirit of the words, only get another check if they are ordered something against their nature or once a day. Actually, this is a stronger link between the Wizard and the creature because Summoners Control allows a check to break free every hour, this allows it only once a day.

The Summoner has the advantage of being able to Summon what they want, Bind it so it cannot escape easily (and Bind anything the Wizard Controls so they can kill the Wizard with Invocations/Incarnations and take control of the creature later), or Banish it, which works without a counter check for the Ki and Wizard creatures. The whole Banish ability is why I say an Attribute check is a good way to decide who controls it, while all three have an attempt to control the creature, the Summoner can Banish it easily with no counter check.

My bigger problem, I suppose, is the idea that Control is the end-all, beat-all ability just because a Summoner has 4 abilities to choose from (one of which, Summoning, has enough abilities that it can be used all on its own). Control is contested, often, and is not the final most powerful ability to keep a creature under control. That would be Bind. The point of Bind is to make enemy Wizards and Summoners to have a lot harder time trying to Control your creatures, and give your creatures a lot harder time to try and escape. As long as they are in their container they are unable to be affected by others and are yours, if you take them out you run all the risks that implies.

I don't have Arcana Exxet, and until it becomes available in English, I'm using Core. However in the face of a spell description like the one you wrote (Total control with the valid assumption that it is the same as Summoner's Control), then I'd default to a power struggle - each side would roll D% and add their Magic Projection or Control (respectively) - the higher result attaining influence over the creature.

Binding does indeed present a problem to Wizards and Domine, as it can't really be turned around with another contest. Once Bound, the creature then 'belongs' to the Summoner as long as they possess the object, and the entity cannot be affected by further attempts to control, banish, etc. until released.

hellgeist said:

I would settle with this definition, except: I wouldn't say, that the pact is fully broken. So, for example, the "Ki-Summoner" defeats the summoner, which controls his "pact-partner", the pact would be like normal, after this.

But another aspect would be: The creature, summoned through ki, stays with the "ki-summoner", because he "maintance" them with ki. Now, if the creature get controlled or binded by a summoner, must the ki-summoner pay the maintance or not?

I would say: If the creature gets controlled, he must pay the maintance or the creature vanish. If the creature gets binded, he doesn't need to "maintance" the creature, because it is binded (yeah, I explain something with itself XD).

This was only some quick thoughts, I would appreciate if someone would comment on them.

So long,

wow, this got heated, and you all make good points. in fact, thanks for pointing out the control spell, i forgot about that spell, though i would go with hellgeist on that one, a magic projection vs control sounds good.

but i'm still feeling weary on when a ki summoner enters the field. i'm still curious on how everyone feels about the MK vs control idea, as i may just go with that, though i'll test the actual mechanics of that with some friends tomorrow.

oops, forgot half my post.

you make a very good point their f3nr1s, i personally would rule that differently depending on how well off the ki user was. if the ki summoner was at a disadvantage when protecting his creature against other summoners i would say he has to keeps paying the cost, so that when he loses control of a creature he could then simply undo it by halting the flow of ki.

though in the case of a ki user able to better protect his creatures i would say the magic user would completely supplant the maintenance with the appropriate amount of zeon until the pact was rebuffed. it seems more balanced that way to me, if the ki summoner can easily lose control of his creature he should have an ace in the whole, but if he can put up a good fight he shouldn't have such a luxury.

I don't like the idea with the MK check vs. control, because: an technican gets 50 MK per level, but a summoner doesn't get 50 control per level. The summoner would split his 60 DP magic primary (which he could invest in the best case) in summon, control, banish, bind, zeon. And usual one point in one of this ability would cost 2 DP (+ the +10 inniate class per skill in the best case). If the summoner doesn't buy zeon, but improve his summoner-skills equaly, he would get 25 control/summon/banish/bind per level. The ki-summoned creature would get nearly impossible to get controlled etc.

So long,

F3nr1s said:

Actually Summoners buy Summoning skills at +1 for 1DP. This does not change your argument as that Technitians getting 50MK/level would easily overpower any summoner who puts DP into Zeon or any of the other four Summoning Abilities.

With the Ki user, the more I consider it, the more it makes sense that hellgeist was right with choosing the second option (no contest, Ki User loses) could be used. Supernatural Control or Summoners Control would overpower the creature, because it is acting of its own free will. The creature will not like it, but it won't have a choice. Not to mention it is fairly hard to use Control in combat (for a summoner it will probably take 5+ rounds, for the Wizard 3-5 rounds) so there is that to consider (though I do not know how long it would take to summon something with Ki, using 2 Fatigue would make it fairly fast I think). However, I would only say this makes sense if the Ki User must spend Ki to keep the creature on this plane (as pointed out by brewmaster_vitty) so if the Summoner/Wizard do gain control of it all the Ki User has to do is stop using Ki and release it back to wherever it came from, making gaining control of it more of a Banish than a Control and as that Banish does not have a contested check in any situation this seems fair enough.

The Summoner vs Wizard control abilities is still more difficult. I'm going to let future Lia deal with that if it comes up in game. I'm sure future Lia can handle it.

heh, it can only take a single round to summon a creature with ki (though it does not fully manifest until the beginning of the next round). so yeah, i'm starting to feel that putting the ki users at a disadvantage isn't so much of a disadvantage. i think i got it all finagled out.

nice expedient discussion gentlemen/ladies.

I would just rule that Summoning always trumps Magic which always trumps Ki. I realize the RAW may not actually reflect that, but that's how it should be for balance purposes.

AlphaWhelp said:

...why? We already went over why that isn't the case, why do you think it is balanced that way?

Lia Valenth said:

I wouldn't say that you went over why that isn't the case, but here are the reasons why I feel it should work this way.

#1) There is no way to oppose controlling abilities of a different origin, at least not in any way that makes any sense, and is not heavily weighed in favor of one class over another.

#2) Summoning can only be used for summoning and controlling things, a Wizard with 70 levels in a path to gain Supernatural Control has 34 other spells at his disposal, a Summoner has nothing (1 or 2 arcana before he is out of Zeon is your best case scenario). If the only thing my character can do is summon stuff, I expect to be the best at it unquestionably.

#3) A Ki summoner is probably a fighter which means they'll have all their combat ability at their disposal even if they can't use the things they summon due to fighting a summoner or wizard capable of controlling creatures.

AlphaWhelp said:

#1) This is true, and is the reason for this discussion. I suggest an attribute check, which should weigh it in favor of the Summoner (as that I believe Summoners should be the best at this, have the best chance of success, but not win 100% of the time, more like 70-80%).

#2) With the use of Arcana Exxet I disagree on this one. I noted some reasons above, and while it is true that Arcana are way too expensive you can get quite a few of them off if you design it that way, and you can use a Incarnation and have about as good of combat abilities as the fighter in the group for the entire combat. 1-2 Arcana is not best case scenario, 1 Incarnation would be best case scenario. Of course level also plays a factor as that all sides get more options as they level.
Without the Arcana Exxet I might agree that Summoners could be allowed to win instantly and it be balanced. Incarnations really help Summoners in terms of power (mind you that many argue Summoners are already the strongest class, and while I disagree there is reason for it).

#3) I admit Ki summoning may be the weakest of the three, as that it is not control so much as a pact or agreement. The hard question comes between a Summoner and a Wizard, in my opinion.