Of all the new classes, this one seems the least "needed." The basic description is reminiscent of a cool Prestige Class not a base class

Having said that, what do we want this class to accomplish? What powers, abilities, etc?

Of all the new classes, this one seems the least "needed." The basic description is reminiscent of a cool Prestige Class not a base class

Having said that, what do we want this class to accomplish? What powers, abilities, etc?

I reserve my judgment on that until we see the alpha test...same for all the new core classes.

I kind of see this class as the replacement/ upgrade for both the druid's animal companion and for the druid's wild shape ability. There are a significant number of people who want to be Godzilla. Or even... Pokemon fans.

Summoner should have a companion creature which is medium or maybe a flexible large creature (because eventually you are going to have to get the creature up or down a cliff). The summoner would have a spell list which augments the creature, plus some additional defensive spells for the caster, or buffing spells which can be used on the creature or other party members. The summoner should have some way of healing his companion creature, either through a X times/ day ability or possibly just some healing spells.

I don't think the summoner should have any offensive spells or even any battlefield control spells.

Different creatures should have different abilities which the summoner can trigger. Perhaps some have a breath weapon or some stealth capability.

Is the creature actually summoned or is it persistent? I would prefer it was persistent myself but that might get awkward in towns, in particular if it's large.

So far, it looks like either Pokeman or Victor Frankenstein & Co. Neither sound like an archetype I'd want to play nor run for.

Now, something like the Mage from EQ (elemental pet summoner, 1 at a time, boost/heal the pet and stand back) might be better, but still, meh. I'd much rather see the archetypical "summoner" be someone who brings in demons/devils/devas/elementals/etc one or a few at a time, or binds one or two bodyguards in addition to spellcasting, or just an improved Monster/Nature's Ally summoner even.

I say template choices and racial abilities added to your monster as you level up. That´s the only thing I would really really like. To basically make my own monstruosity from bits and pieces from others.

Actually, I'd say that the summoner is the most needed, from the descriptions. You could easily play a Witch as a Sorcerer, a Cavalier as a Fighter, an Alchemist as pretty much any spellcaster, and an Oracle as a Cleric. "Summoners" (which hopefully won't be the final name), as in a character who creates and/or summons a powerful creature (or perhaps a very small subset of powerful creatures) as their entire focus, are completely unrepresented in the game as a base class (and extremely poorly represented in prestige classes). There exists no base class with a "companion" more central to the character than the Druid, and there's really no way to build a Druid such that his animal companion is a viable combat choice on its own.

Anyway, as for suggestions, here's some of mine:

Keep it open-ended. Dr. Frankenstein, Rydia/Yuna/etc from the Final Fantasy games, Abarai Renji from the Bleach anime/manga, and Gepetto of Pinocchio fame should all be "Summoners" (although of course some may be multi-classed). No real reason to separate out "summoned" creatures from "created" creatures in this manner. In this same vein, make sure the creatures are customizable. Not necessarily point buys for different abilities, but at least make it so that Frankenstein and Bahamut have different capabilities. I'm reasonably sure, given the description we've been given, that this is already covered.

Keep the spellcasting of the class very limited and tightly-focused on the Summon. Also be sure to include definitive rules for deciding which future spells should be in the class list.

Keep it focused on either one single Summon or a very small set of them. Personally, I don't want to see any summon monster[i], [i]summon nature's ally, create undead, or any similar spells or abilities on their list to create a massive army of summoned creatures. Wizards (and clerics, with undead) can already cover that niche just fine. Let the Summoner have the niche of single, powerful summons, rather than plentiful, individually weaker ones.

Don't define the flavor any more than you have to. I know it's not OGL, but look at the Warlock for an example of the type of "non-flavor" I'm referring to. WotC intentionally left Eldritch Blast unflavored so that PCs could make it whatever they wanted it to be. Similarly, while the names of the invocations have the default "infernal warlock" flavor, the actual text of the invocations doesn't. Keep that same flavor-lite design with the Summoner.

I know this will sound kind of random, but give them th ability to at some point fuse with their monster.

I say template choices and racial abilities added to your monster as you level up. That´s the only thing I would really really like. To basically make my own monstruosity from bits and pieces from others.

When it was originally announced they suggested the possibility of either using some prebuild companion creatures or piecing it together. At one point I think they suggested maybe literally piecing the creature together from bits of other monsters which would be kind of cool. "Hold on guys, let me cut the wings off this dragon so junior can fly"

That would only lead to A LOT of dirty jokes and monster maiming.

PIC-A-Chu!

sorry had to done :)

I actually like the idea of having a horde/swarm of smaller creatures (sort of like the Minions from the Overlord games), or Tiffany Aching from Discworld and her Wee Free Men.

Essentially the little horde must travel in a pack like a swarm, and would use swarm rules to govern its attacks etc. A Lord of the Pictsties would be just as fun for me to play as a Doctor Frankenstein, or Diabolist.

Just as there are different flavours of wizard, psion, cleric and sorcerer, so too should there be different flavours of summoner (each with their own specialty: The Builder, The Binder, The Master, The Shaper etc)

As always options are what separates a good class from a great class.

I think it would be neat if you could change the template or whatever of your "summoned" (or created/carved/called/stitched together/jury-rigged/animated) beastie on a daily basis. So some days it would have wings, other days horns, other days be stealthy, other days Large, sometimes breathes fire, sometimes petrifies with its gaze, etc. etc.

The "summoner" would stand back and cast buffs, cures, and remove negative conditions, maybe Aiding Another.

The summoner could have a creator look by having, besides creating live companions, some focus on creating magic items. he should be able to create some special tools.

Alright, a few ideas from me.

1: Plenty of options.

The idea of being able to 'level up' your partner(s) with templates is an interesting idea, base it off the CR adjustment of the template and you've got an awesome bit of mix and match going on.

Also, it should be viable to have a number of partners at once, that are weaker, or to have a single partner, as the player chooses.

Additionally, a small spell list of buffs would probably be a good idea, along with a 'bending' of viable subjects.

For example, animal growth would likely be very good spell to bring to bear (especially for those of us looking to simulate various mythology and fiction involving creatures that grow and change for combat)

Granted, I'm likely to cut the thing apart and rebuild it my own way in my homebrew, but that doesn't mean I don't want to try to help make this class the best it can be for the public too :)

I know this will sound kind of random, but give them th ability to at some point fuse with their monster.

Hum... perhaps that could be one of the base flavors? Jekyll/Hyde, Banner/Hulk. The base class is equivalent to an Expert or maybe an Adept, but has transformation as a class feature. :)

The "swarm" idea has some solid literary basis, too... most frequently a swarm of ravens or bats. Diablo II did exactly this (poorly, but hey) with their Druid class.

Obligatory derail:

I saw that, Kyrt. ;)

Frerezar wrote:

I know this will sound kind of random, but give them th ability to at some point fuse with their monster.

Hum... perhaps that could be one of the base flavors? Jekyll/Hyde, Banner/Hulk. The base class is equivalent to an Expert or maybe an Adept, but has transformation as a class feature. :)

This is exactly what the Alchemist class does. I don't think summoner is gonna get that.

This is exactly what the Alchemist class does. I don't think summoner is gonna get that.

Aha! Okay, I missed that update. Works for me!

Having read through, and I know some of this duplicates above, but showing my support :

1) I like the idea of a Final Fantasy type summoner, one who can summon powerful creatures. But they have to form bonds with them first. So, at level 1 you start with a moderately powerful creature you can summon. Then every 3 levels or so, you can add another creature to your list of summons. I think the summons though should have some limits based on who you already can summon. For example, if you can summon an ice princess (ala Shiva) you can't then pick the fire prince (ala Ifrit).

2) I like the idea of being able to learn templates you can apply to the summons, like say Shadow template, that makes the Shiva type summon Shadow Ice, or Black Fire Ifrit. Or, something like the Woodling template from MM3, so that an Earth type summon takes on plant properties. And there should be limits on which summon can have which templates applied.

3) I like the idea of the summoner, at higher levels, being able to fuse with his creature. Basically a new template that get's applied to the summoner for the duration of the summons. The templates based on which creatures he has made pacts with. And then the templates from 2 can be applied to the summoner's merged form.

I know the above is a lot of work, but all of it can be 'front loaded' because all the templates and creature stat blocks can be determined ahead of time. I think the base creatures should have a given power level for a certain level of summons (So a level 1 summon summoned by a level 20 chaaracter stays longer, but is still the same creature). The boosts in power should come from the new summon creatures you make pacts with (probably 9 levels to keep it consistent), and by applying templates to your weaker summons. Then give them so many summons of a certain level per day (very vancian like). This sort of mechanic would be immediately understood by all players, and make it much easier to keep track of. And... I wouldn't give them ANY spells, they are summoners, not spellcasters.

Even though it is currently called "The Summoner" the creature should be permanent, like an animal companion.

I like the idea behind the "Malconvoker" PrC in 3.5

He is a non-evil caster who summons powerful evil creatures, and then essentially has a battle of wills with them to keep them under control.

Kind of fits my view of a typical fantasy summoner. The misguided mage who messes with forces beyond his reckoning.

Having read through, and I know some of this duplicates above, but showing my support :

1) I like the idea of a Final Fantasy type summoner, one who can summon powerful creatures. But they have to form bonds with them first. So, at level 1 you start with a moderately powerful creature you can summon. Then every 3 levels or so, you can add another creature to your list of summons. I think the summons though should have some limits based on who you already can summon. For example, if you can summon an ice princess (ala Shiva) you can't then pick the fire prince (ala Ifrit).

2) I like the idea of being able to learn templates you can apply to the summons, like say Shadow template, that makes the Shiva type summon Shadow Ice, or Black Fire Ifrit. Or, something like the Woodling template from MM3, so that an Earth type summon takes on plant properties. And there should be limits on which summon can have which templates applied.

3) I like the idea of the summoner, at higher levels, being able to fuse with his creature. Basically a new template that get's applied to the summoner for the duration of the summons. The templates based on which creatures he has made pacts with. And then the templates from 2 can be applied to the summoner's merged form.

I know the above is a lot of work, but all of it can be 'front loaded' because all the templates and creature stat blocks can be determined ahead of time. I think the base creatures should have a given power level for a certain level of summons (So a level 1 summon summoned by a level 20 chaaracter stays longer, but is still the same creature). The boosts in power should come from the new summon creatures you make pacts with (probably 9 levels to keep it consistent), and by applying templates to your weaker summons. Then give them so many summons of a certain level per day (very vancian like). This sort of mechanic would be immediately understood by all players, and make it much easier to keep track of. And... I wouldn't give them ANY...

Or perhaps the fire prince would be the next logical summon. The summoner could be themed. Elemental summoner, infernal summoner, celestial summoner, etc. I'm interested to see what they come up with, this could be a really cool character from a lot of different angles.

Of all the new classes, this one seems the least "needed." The basic description is reminiscent of a cool Prestige Class not a base class

Having said that, what do we want this class to accomplish? What powers, abilities, etc?

After reading The Dread Empire series by Glen Cook, this is the class that excites me the most.

I hope I can do a Varthlokkur type of character, or any wizard in that world really.

I would really like it being limited to a small number of very maleable summons.
A limited number of creatures available with many templates and varians to be picked and applied when called.
And even if it might be unpopular, I say stick to one at the time.
I see this class as being a replacement front liner.

I am thinking along the lines of an Effigy Master with maleable traits, like an Astral Construct kind of table. You summon your ally, much like a paladin mount, and apply whatever abilities you like, based on your level.

That way, you can have a meele monster, a flying scout, a ranged sniper, or anything else you may need with a summons. Spells should be limited to personal defensive or transmutative spells that can be shared with or retargeted to the ally.

Glen Cook

<3

Well, looks like "summoner" is set in stone as the official name of the class. Link.

I have never read Glen Cook

I have never read Glen Cook

Do.

The Black Company is one of those books that I have two copies of, so I can give one away.

Ideally, the summoner is a very very open class that can be used for a lot of creature types.

Here's how I would do it:

Basically, I'd like to see them use the current animal companion system. Rather than a wide variety of base creatures, as the current system does, I would have it use the various monster types as its base creature (so instead of cat, dog, bird, velociraptor, it would have Aberration, Dragon, Undead, Construct, Etc).

Then, rather than getting a special advancement at 4 or 7 as druid pets do, I would have the summoner pet gain abilities along tables similar to astral constructs. It's important, of course, that there be a wide enough variety of options to emulate existing monsters or make your own.

Then, rather than getting wildshape, I would give the summoner template abilities that they can apply toward their pet long term, such as aquatic or fire. I think it's important that, compared to the druid pet, the summoner pet has less raw power, but has a much cooler, much wider variety of abilities. A summoner's mini-dragon may not have the str score or the base damage of a Lion, but it makes up for that with its breath weapon. Same with a Dire Wolf v a blink dog.

As for spells, I think the summoner needs to be int based. there's one int caster in the game, 3 wisdom, and 3 charisma, and I don't see crafting a monster a matter of influence so much as ingenuity. It does need an extremely pared down spell list, but it still needs to be able to fill in for a wizard or sorc, in a lesser capacity. So, I'd keep most of the utility spells. Logically, a pet-based caster would have buff spells. The big flashy spells like nukes, SODs, Teleports, and some battlefield control would probably have to go.

Then, rather than getting wildshape, I would give the summoner template abilities that they can apply toward their pet long term, such as aquatic or fire. I think it's important that, compared to the druid pet, the summoner pet has less raw power, but has a much cooler, much wider variety of abilities. A summoner's mini-dragon may not have the str score or the base damage of a Lion, but it makes up for that with its breath weapon. Same with a Dire Wolf v a blink dog.

Errr... keep in mind that it has to be relatively balanced vs the druid. If its pet is less powerful than the druid's pet, it has a restricted spell list, it doesn't get wild shape, it doesn't get medium BAB (which seems a very safe bet), etc etc .......

I think it would be neat if you could change the template or whatever of your "summoned" (or created/carved/called/stitched together/jury-rigged/animated) beastie on a daily basis. So some days it would have wings, other days horns, other days be stealthy, other days Large, sometimes breathes fire, sometimes petrifies with its gaze, etc. etc.

I got the impression from the initial description, and it may have been sheer raving delusion on my part, that the Summoner would be tapping into some sort of Protean entity that doesn't necessarily have predefined attributes, but assumes the form that the Summoner imposes upon it when called up for the day.

The beastie would basically be psychomorphic, manifesting with the attributes that it's Summoner crafts, like extraplanar jello pouring into the mold the Summoner has fashioned in the material plane. On it's native plane, the protean beastie would be formless and have random abilities, round by round, ever-shifting and infinitely versatile. At higher levels, the Summoner may be able to attempt an instant change, if he suddenly needs his brute to be able to fly, or project fire, or something, causing it's template here in the material world to suddenly warp and shift, but normally the creature is 'set' for the day, once called up into that form.

Velderan wrote:

Then, rather than getting wildshape, I would give the summoner template abilities that they can apply toward their pet long term, such as aquatic or fire. I think it's important that, compared to the druid pet, the summoner pet has less raw power, but has a much cooler, much wider variety of abilities. A summoner's mini-dragon may not have the str score or the base damage of a Lion, but it makes up for that with its breath weapon. Same with a Dire Wolf v a blink dog.

Errr... keep in mind that it has to be relatively balanced vs the druid. If its pet is less powerful than the druid's pet, it has a restricted spell list, it doesn't get wild shape, it doesn't get medium BAB (which seems a very safe bet), etc etc .......

Well, what I meant by raw power was straight up combat ability. In which case, I think yes, it should be less powerful. I know a lot of players who'd rather have a dimension-dooring, firebreathing, water-breathing pet with human int than a combat brute. I don't mean to say that it should be weak, but no, I think it should have a bit less raw power, or there starts to be toe stepping.

In terms of spell-list, I think it needs to reflect the wizard in the same way that a druid reflects the cleric. Is the druid's list as powerful as the clerics? Except for a couple of exceptions, God no. But it does still cover a lot of the same bases (if nobody's playing a cleric, paladin, or bard, SOMEbody's going to have to heal). That's sort of the angle I'm going for.

Remember also that it has to be balanced versus the wizard and cleric as well as the druid. To me, raw power is for divine casters and "I can do neat things" is for arcane casters. So, if you're making an arcane companion to the druid, I think its more important to have usefull spells than awesome spells.

I think it should have a bit less raw power, or there starts to be toe stepping.

Huh? Animal companions are a side-note to the druid class. The summon is the central focus of the summoner class. If anything, you're proposing that the druid trod all over the summoner's feet.

Is the druid's list as powerful as the clerics? Except for a couple of exceptions, God no.

Hell, yes it is. I'd rather have the druid list than the cleric list for any purpose but straight-up healing.

if you're making an arcane companion to the druid

Speaking for myself, that's not what I want out of the class at all. The druid is a caster first, a melee combatant second, and a pet class third EDIT: or alternately a melee combatant first, a spellcaster second, and a pet class third; the important element is that it's basically impossible to make the druid's pet seriously combat-viable past the first couple levels. The summoner, IMO, should be a pet class first, a caster second, and some other niche (knowledge would fit, but whatever) third.

Velderan wrote:

I think it should have a bit less raw power, or there starts to be toe stepping.

Huh? Animal companions are a side-note to the druid class. The summon is the central focus of the summoner class. If anything, you're proposing that the druid trod all over the summoner's feet.

Quote:

Is the druid's list as powerful as the clerics? Except for a couple of exceptions, God no.

Hell, yes it is. I'd rather have the druid list than the cleric list for any purpose but straight-up healing.

I beg to differ on pretty much all of that. The first depends on how you play it. If you center your spell choices on your pet then it's pretty central. Wildshape is certainly the standard druid, but I wouldn't call it a sidenote. Also, the druid can't step on the toes of a class that doesn't exist yet. It's more important not to step on the toes of an existing class. And really, that was a minor note in my post. I'm not talking a lot less power, but I am talking enough to make it feel like a different animal.

As for the power of the spell lists, I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree. Personally, I'd prefer the Druid list, as it's more interesting, but the general consensus, and my general experience, has been that the cleric is simply more powerful.

Fact of the matter is, the Summoner's companion, under ideal conditions (such as under the effect of a buff, being healed by the summoner, etc) should fill the 'tank' roll in the party. (I hate using that term, but it fits)

The Summoner = a substitute for the Fighter/Barbarian. it's NOT (in my humble oppinion of what it should be of course) a substitute for a wizard/druid.

(AKA the summoner's companion should be SIGNIFICANTLY better than the Druid's companion.)

I beg to differ on pretty much all of that. The first depends on how you play it. If you center your spell choices on your pet then it's pretty central. Wildshape is certainly the standard druid, but I wouldn't call it a sidenote. Also, the druid can't step on the toes of a class that doesn't exist yet. It's more important not to step on the toes of an existing class. And really, that was a minor note in my post. I'm not talking a lot less power, but I am talking enough to make it feel like a different animal.

If I may interject, I have to disagree with you on this point. The Druid has an animal companion, wild shape and a good, general spell list. The Summoner has a not-animal companion and maybe a severely limited spell list. Thus, the Summoner should have a stronger companion because it doesn't get anything else.

Fact of the matter is, the Summoner's companion, under ideal conditions (such as under the effect of a buff, being healed by the summoner, etc) should fill the 'tank' roll in the party. (I hate using that term, but it fits)

The Summoner = a substitute for the Fighter/Barbarian. it's NOT (in my humble oppinion of what it should be of course) a substitute for a wizard/druid.

(AKA the summoner's companion should be SIGNIFICANTLY better than the Druid's companion.)

My concern with that is that then you have to nerf the crap out of their spells.

I hate to use the term economy of actions even more than you hate to use the term tank (like, I think I'm becoming physically ill from doing so) but being able to fight well AND cast in a round for 20 levels of gameplay is a significant boost, so the only way to balance a superpet like that is to give them a crappy spell list, and, I believe, the current plans are to make them a full caster, like a wizard or a sorcerer. So they'd basically have to have a worthless spell list if they're also going to take up the fighter/barbarian roll.

(though, if they go that route, then yes, their pet certainly does need to be more powerful than the druids. They just need to lose out on casting).

If I may interject, I have to disagree with you on this point. The Druid has an animal companion, wild shape and a good, general spell list. The Summoner has a not-animal companion and maybe a severely limited spell list. Thus, the Summoner should have a stronger companion because it doesn't get anything else.

That's certainly true.

But remember, I'm not talking about a less powerful pet. People keep reading that into what I wrote. I'm talking a pet with slightly lower strength scores and weaker attack modes in exchange for having cool special abilities. And, I'm not arguing for a bad general spell list, I'm arguing for a less-good-than-wizards general spell list, which could still be pretty good.

That's certainly true.

But remember, I'm not talking about a less powerful pet. People keep reading that into what I wrote. I'm talking a pet with slightly lower strength scores and weaker attack modes in exchange for having cool special abilities. And, I'm not arguing for a bad general spell list, I'm arguing for a less-good-than-wizards general spell list, which could still be pretty good.

Oh, alright. I say they should be stronger in general because the Summoner is based around the pet and I'm probably assuming the spell list will be weaker than you are. No hard feelings.

Anyway, on topic, I say there probably should be something similar to the Sorcerer's bloodlines for the type of pet you have. (Celestial, you get bonus X, Abberation you get bonus Y, etc)

Well, to be blunt, I wouldn't be surprised (or displeased) to find that the Summoner gets Bard or even Ranger/Paladin spell progression. I don't think we need yet another arcane full caster with an only-slightly-nerfed spell list, especially because that would prevent the class from doing what it is billed as doing ("an arcane spellcaster who conjures powerful servitor creatures"). If Summoners are roughly equivalent to Wizards in spellcasting, there's absolutely no room for powerful servitors.

Velderan wrote:

That's certainly true.

But remember, I'm not talking about a less powerful pet. People keep reading that into what I wrote. I'm talking a pet with slightly lower strength scores and weaker attack modes in exchange for having cool special abilities. And, I'm not arguing for a bad general spell list, I'm arguing for a less-good-than-wizards general spell list, which could still be pretty good.

Oh, alright. I say they should be stronger in general because the Summoner is based around the pet and I'm probably assuming the spell list will be weaker than you are. No hard feelings.

Anyway, on topic, I say there probably should be something similar to the Sorcerer's bloodlines for the type of pet you have. (Celestial, you get bonus X, Abberation you get bonus Y, etc)

Yes, that's true. I suppose it depends greatly on spell list. I guess I'm hoping it can still fulfill the wizard role.

A pet-based spell list would actually be extremely interesting.

I'm with Zurai on this one. I was expecting to see 4th level spells, with lots of buffs, some healing, maybe a few minor battlefield controls, and maybe a few spells at lower levels than wizards/druids get them, but the class as I saw it was meant to fill the "fighter" role.

(Although now that I think about it, I'm liking the bardic spell progression, gives more room and fits better over 20 levels.)

(Although now that I think about it, I'm liking the bardic spell progression, gives more room and fits better over 20 levels.)

Personally I think it fits my conception of the class almost to a T. Paladin/Ranger progression would be a little on the weak side for me for a class theoretically devoted to pulling creatures in from the Outer Planes from level one, but Wizard (or even Sorcerer) progression is too good -- a significant part of their magical power should be directly tied up into their Summon, IMO.

Using Bard progression gives them the ability to use spells of a decent power level while still showing that a lot of their mystical energy is devoted to their Summon. It prevents them from being powerful combat casters when the Summon isn't around (presumably the Summons will indeed have special abilities like breath weapons or petrifying gazes, which should help make up for the lack of similar spells in their progression), which fits because, as I've said in this thread, I really do think that the Summon should be what the class is all about. A Summoner without a Summon should be like a Cleric without a holy symbol or a Wizard without a spellbook: in dire straits (though not completely helpless -- not every Cleric spell requires a Divine Focus, and Wizards still have their Arcane Bond and any spells they'd already prepared before they lost their spellbook).

One of Paisos strengths is to give all classes ample space for creative players to fill given niches. This was the communities request, peoples favorite 3.5 class alterations facilitated this, people were over the infinite extra books that don't tie in to source material and ever increase costs and creep power.

If you need builds made as classes ad-infinitum 4th ed is probably a better system.

Current rules leave ample room for a summoner type:

Sorcerer Abyssal Bloodling gives all summoned creatures DR, bonus feats include augment summons, empower spell, knowledge: planes AND they get a 15th level ability where an extra evil creature is summoned each summoning spell.

Someone mentioned the malkonver.. the above is better just add in the appropriate character history. Channeling the power of the pit to fight evil, gain strenth, claws, summoning supremacy etc.

Celestial Bloodline also makes for a great summoner.

Summoning lists and templates when increased were a massive uncontolable unbalancing headache. Like the old polymorph and wild shape issues with ever more creatures to mimic.

Also why would wizards NOT be able to cast these better summoning spells suggested, I know the specialist summoner wizard in our party would feel very disappointed.

That said.

1. A prestige class might be useful.

2. A base class that is utterly different would be wonderful. As the ideas above are pointing to some sort of construct master class would be great and fill a mechanics void as opposed to a imagination void.

Plenty of players would love creating a custom construct, mabe even at later levels its big enough to put on like a suit.... that would be very awesome, unique and well outside any existing classes ability to satiate.

Animator
Animus mage
Construstacon...

My concern with that is that then you have to nerf the crap out of their spells.

Assuming they even have spells. They might just have class abilities relevant to calling up and shaping / healing / buffing their particular gumby.

Velderan wrote:

My concern with that is that then you have to nerf the crap out of their spells.

Assuming they even have spells. They might just have class abilities relevant to calling up and shaping / healing / buffing their particular gumby.

To be fair, the product page for the APG lists them as an arcane spellcaster.

To be fair, the product page for the APG lists them as an arcane spellcaster.

Ooh, good point. I had forgotten that.

Hrm... is the Alchemist going to have anything resembling a spell progression? Chances are good, IMO; and in that case I'd expect it to have 3/4 BAB and Bard-ish progression. It seems more likely that the summoner will have Pal/Rgr spell progression, with class features (and, y'know, the summon) filling the gaps. (I wonder if the Cavalier will be a divine bard...)

It just makes more sense to me for what is essentially a full-BAB class: the summoner himself will probably have 1/2, but if his creature doesn't have "base attack bonus equal to your Summoner level" I'll be very surprised. (I'd also put my money on "twice your hit points.")