@Astrocrab Read the spell again, it says "You summon fey spirits that take the form of beasts and appear in unoccupied spaces that you can see within range. Choose one of the following options for what appears:" When a sentence lacks the subject of a command, you look at the sentences prior to it, from closest to furthest, until you find the subject, which in this case is You.

Further, not once does it say the GM chooses, only "The GM has the creatures' statistics." Which, given that the GM also has the races', classes' and other statistics, but doesnt choose the PCs' races or classes, should be clear as meaning that the chosen creatures must be ones the GM has statistics for.

You do you. I don't really care what you choose to do since you aren't my players or my DM.

I'm playing a Shepherd Druid, and I've only ever used this spell once as that was when I learned that I don't get to choose what I summon. I think that's asinine game design. I had wanted to summon tankier beasts to hold a line, but my DM rolled up a bunch of giant spiders. The entire experience soured me on this spell.

Thats my exp we were fighting a adult black dragon and inwanted to summon giat owls to do arieal attacks but instead got lizzards which were completely pointless so havnt used any conjure spell since

Any DM that doesn't allow the player to choose what and how many critters show up within the confines of the spell is just being a dick. This spell alone is what gives druids like 30% of their influence in the game and what gives rangers like 60% of their influence in the game. If the option of 8 creatures is too much for the DM to handle (and that is the only reason why I've ever seen a DM choose to nerf the player in this way, because the DM is new or unexperienced) then just make a deal to only choose 4 or less creatures. The power of the spell is more in the choosing of what creatures appear rather than the amount of creatures anyway. Not in terms of damage output, but in terms of utility, tactics, and fun.

The sage advice compendium part on spells like this one, although they specifically use conjure woodland beings as the example spell, is there 100% as a way to avoid fights about conjure fey summoning pixies and either polymorphing the enemies to something harmless or PCs to something awesome for fighting. It’s strange to me that they (WotC) would rather cause unnecessary disappointment and fights among players rather than just errata pixies and take off their polymorph spell. 

Cast this at 9th level: 32 velociraptors start swarming lol.

Pixies only have a spell save DC of 12. You'd be much better off casting fly and polymorph on 4 of your party members, then have the Ranger/Druid and Pixies hide somewhere.

Quote from FrankReynoldsGaryGygax >>

Any DM that doesn't allow the player to choose what and how many critters show up within the confines of the spell is just being a dick. This spell alone is what gives druids like 30% of their influence in the game and what gives rangers like 60% of their influence in the game. If the option of 8 creatures is too much for the DM to handle (and that is the only reason why I've ever seen a DM choose to nerf the player in this way, because the DM is new or unexperienced) then just make a deal to only choose 4 or less creatures. The power of the spell is more in the choosing of what creatures appear rather than the amount of creatures anyway. Not in terms of damage output, but in terms of utility, tactics, and fun.

 Yes, this exactly. As DM, I would never choose for my players.  It would completely remove them from immersion and personal agency.  It's their choice.

Which animals can a Hunter or Druid summon? Can he summon all the animals in the bestiary (challenge rating 2 or lower) after learning the spell? Or just the animals with which character has met or knows them from books/teachers?

Seems werid that the dm would choose this I wouldn't take this spell if that was the case. Its an rpg if the player wants 8 badgers then I think you should let him. I do agree that having 8 creatures and all different stats for them would be too much up keep. I reckon chuck them as a mob combat and stick to one or two types of creature if you can pick more than 4.

If anyone is having trouble balancing this spell, I have an approach which still lets the player choose the animal and encourages creativity:
Balancing:

• One beast of challenge rating 2 or lower
• Two beasts of challenge rating 1 or lower
• THREE beasts of challenge rating 1/2 or lower
• FIVE beasts of challenge rating 1/4 or lower

Explanation:

The current state of the spell is that summoning eight 1/4 CR creatures is way superior in almost every situation and the scaling (higher slot casting) just makes it's problem even worse (in caves or other smaller spaces the next higher CR, for instance four 1/2 CR would become the automatic best next choice).
This is happening because the lack of the "CREATURES MULTIPLYER".
The same multiplier DMs' use to create XP balanced encounters (actually called Encounter Multiplier).

Having this in mind there is some Math to be made here ; )

So here is what I have found:
XP (depending on CR; like for a 1/4 CR = 50 XP)*number of Creatures conjured*multiplier X (Basic Rules, DM section, P.165 "Encounter Multipliers"; X only counter animals summoned forgoing the amount of party members) = Effective XP

When running the standard eight 1/4 CR on 3rd lv spell rules, the "Effective XP" is the equivalent to a CR 4 creature, which I believe we can all agree on makes not all too much sense (you are supposed to get this at lv 9 with the 5 lv slot).
In addiction making the other alternatives (one CR 2; two CR 1...) unattractive and stopping players from having flavoursome solutions or creativity and adaptability because eight wolves kill all (“how imaginative”).

So what I did was enter all of this data into excel and adapted the number of animals you can summon and how it would affect the "Effective XP" for 3 lv; 5 lv; 7 lv; and 9 lv casting.
The magic numbers ended up being as listed above: 1,2,3,5 (3 Lv. Spell slot)
The scaling stays the same so it continues with: 2,4,6,10 (5);   3,6,9,15 (7)   4,8,12,20 (9)

This way the Effective XP is so similar enough that is it negligible.

I hope this makes the spell more interactive and immersive for the Players as well as the DM.

again this was solved in the sage advice. the DM is supposed to choose. 

When you cast a spell like conjure woodland beings, does the spellcaster or the DM choose the creatures that are conjured? A number of spells in the game let you summon creatures. Conjure animals, conjure celestial, conjure minor elementals, and conjure woodland beings are just a few examples.

Some spells of this sort specify that the spellcaster chooses the creature conjured. For example, find familiar gives the caster a list of animals to choose from.

Other spells of this sort let the spellcaster choose from among several broad options. For example, conjure minor elementals offers four options. Here are the first two:

• One elemental of challenge rating 2 or lower
• Two elementals of challenge rating 1 or lower

The design intent for options like these is that the spellcaster chooses one of them, and then the DM decides what creatures appear that fit the chosen option. For example, if you pick the second option, the DM chooses the two elementals that have a challenge rating of 1 or lower.

 

A spellcaster can certainly express a preference for what creatures shows up, but it’s up to the DM to determine if they do. The DM will often choose creatures that are appropriate for the campaign and that will be fun to introduce in a scene.

@Uruloki_M Excellent!

It looks like you managed to balance the spell(s), just using the framework of 5e itself, AWESOME.
If possible, I would suggest sharing your fix elsewhere as well, because it really needs to be shared.

Now if we can just get WOTC staff to see and pay attention to it.

Of course, why they couldnt have done this fix in the first place...

@jon I will be honest, it doesnt matter how much the staff at WOTC claim their intent was the DM choose, because that isnt what the spell says, which we can see by comparing the spell with its spell-less ranger feature 'clone' Call Natural Allies:

Conjure Animals states: "You summon fey spirits that take the form of beasts and appear in unoccupied spaces that you can see within range. Choose one of the following options for what appears:"
So, in the spell, it explicitly gives choice to the user. What does it say about the DM? "The GM has the creatures' statistics." That's it; no mention of choice or selection.

Call Natural Allies states: "Starting at 13th level, when you are in an area of your favored terrain, you can call natural creatures from that terrain to fight on your behalf, using your attunement to the natural world to convince them to aid you. The DM chooses beasts appropriate to the terrain to come to your aid from among those that could hear you and that are within 1 mile of you, in one of the following groups:"
So, in this case, it explicitly says the DM chooses, not the user (the player). Of course, it also says: "The DM has the creatures’ statistics."

Why does this matter? Because the DM must have the creatures' statistics to ensure that the player doesnt just choose overpowered homebrew(s), but that doesnt mean they get to choose the specific creatures, unless the feature or spell explicitly says otherwise.

Also, if WOTC is correct that their intent was the DM chooses, what is stopping them from simply releasing an errata to correct the spell, by making it explicit that the DM chooses? Especially since Crawford has said that spells do (work like) they say they do, which in this case is having the player choose specific creatures with number limited by CR.

traditionally the player is not allowed to look in the monster manual. ie. it was seen as "cheating" in a way. hence why it always says 'the DM has the creatures statistics". if the player is not supposed to go through the monster manual then how is the player to choose? now a website like this one makes that pretty easy, for anyone to look up monster stats but i assume that was why the intent of the original spell was the have the DM choose. that would also put it in alignment with the spell you had in your example

Technically, everything in a game is the DM's choice.  The smart DM will make the choice of letting the player decide the critters summoned.

if the player is not supposed to go through the monster manual then how is the player to choose?

This is actually really easy. The DM simply picks out a selection of creatures that the given player's character has seen (or works with that player to choose a selection). Then that player has a selection of creatures to choose from, in addition to any eligible creatures encountered during gameplay. Thus ensuring that player has a degree of agency, preventing crazy shenanigans, and even making narrative sense.

but i assume that was why the intent of the original spell was the have the DM choose.

Exactly, you are assuming intent. WOTC staff is claiming intent (with no evidence). I am doing neither, just looking at how the spell is written, and applying linguistic rules to determine function.

Quote from Journer >>

@jon I will be honest, it doesnt matter how much the staff at WOTC claim their intent was the DM choose, because that isnt what the spell says, which we can see by comparing the spell with its spell-less ranger feature 'clone' Call Natural Allies:

Agreed.  Regardless of what the claimed intention was, there is nothing in the rules-as-written to say that you don't have control over what beasts you get, nor that you can get a lower CR beast than you hoped for.   If the druid say "I summon... 8 wolves", then they have chosen "Eight beasts of challenge rating 1/4 or lower", as required by RAW.

Furthermore, I would always have assumed that the meaning of the "up to" clause was so that if circumstances required the services of exactly one wolf, then the druid could summon that.  Not that it meant you declare "I'm summoning one CR 2 beast", and have no idea whether you would get an allosaurus, or a single frog, or something in between.

To add to that (and to the example you gave), there are all sorts of things in D&D where the results are either random or chosen by the DM.  These all state that explicitly, and usually give an indication of how to determine what to get (e.g. a table to roll on).

I have a question concerning this spell, and amazingly it has nothing to do with choosing which form the summoned creatures take. :)

“They obey any verbal commands that you issue to them (no action required by you). If you don't issue any commands to them, they defend themselves from hostile creatures, but otherwise take no actions.”

If I cast this spell, and whatever creatures show up, I verbally command to “attack any of my enemies”, or perhaps “attack any and all Orcs” (if I needed to be specific), and then Wild Shaped into a beast (implying I can no longer verbally command them). Would this be an acceptable use case? Would the beasts then methodically (perhaps at the DM’s discretion) successively attack the enemies as I did my wild shape beastie thing?

Thanks.