Any Wizard or Druid can use the summon spells to call forth allies. But when I think about what a Summoner class should be and how it would function without stepping on the toes of the existing classes, I picture something along the lines of a Final Fantasy Summoner. That is, give them only a hand full of creatures to summon. But make those creatures powerful, customizable to an extent, and let them scale in power with their master. I would key the creatures to different elements (fire, water, electricity, acid, sound, and maybe one for positive/negative energy) and give them different strengths. One could be good for offense, one for defense, one for healing, one for spying.

I would give the Summoner mostly spells to augment her summons. Spells that will heal and buff them. I would give them very few directly offensive spells and mostly a selection of personal protection spells. I think I would probably make them spontaneous casters.

Give the different summons different looks/feels. Perhaps as she gains level she can learn new summons. Or perhaps she starts out with all of them and they each get more powerful as she does. I would give them different modes of movement, for instance the air/electricity summon would have flight, and the Summoner may be able to ride it or the summon may be able to carry its master. One of the summons could be totally unrelated to combat. Perhaps there could be one for knowledge who she could summon to answer questions.

I also like the idea of having small statues of her Summons maybe hanging at her belt or from a staff. These statues could be a focus for her summon abilities or perhaps even be the summon creatures in a dormant state.

An interesting mechanic to play with might be to give the Summoner a certain number of rounds per day that she can sustain a summoned creature. But then if some of her summons are more powerful than others it might cost double the number of rounds to keep them out. So if a Summoner can sustain a summon for 10 rounds per day. But the summon she casts is powerful and costs 2 rounds for every round it is out, then she can only sustain it for 5 rounds. Just a though, if the different summons have different power levels that might be an interesting mechanic for it. Almost like a modified spell point pool.

There could also be a large pool of possible summons from which a summoner would chose a creature at 1st lvl, and then another at 3rd and so on. Or if she gets all her summons at lvl 1 she could have a total of 5 and have to choose them from a pool of 15 or 20 possible creatures.

By lvl 20 she should be able to sustain at least one of her lower power summons as a constant guardian, even to look after her while she sleeps.

That actually gives me another idea. Maybe the capstone could be that she can sustain one summon indefinitely and it would not count against her total number of rounds per day. So she could always have one out, and then she could summon a second if need be which she could sustain for a certain number of rounds/day.

A lot of very cool stuff

The Creature should be on the field, basically (with the Summoner in the background to guide it).

Think also of the 'Stands' feature of the JoJo's Bizarre Adventure Manga/Anime. ('THE WORLD !!! Toki yo tomare !!!(...) Soshite, Toki wa ugoki desu !!!')

Just my 2c.

What about allowing the summoner to call a creature either in physical form, or in a form of possessing spirit, which could cover something like totem shaman or pact magic. I don't know how close do I get to Shadowlord's ideas with this, but it would be a nice thing to try...

This is what I think fight that includes a summoner should look like.

‘The image flickered into view for less than a second. A view of the Aranian coast, lush rolling hills leading down to sun kisses shores. Olive groves grew as far as the eye could see. Lady Ann Valn looked back from the train’s window, as the image was blotted out by the tunnel’s wall. Beside her, Sid ‘fingers’ Quickman worked with his picks, opening the compartments lock, cursing to himself. The lock clicked suddenly and opened a little, prompting a sigh of relief from the rogue.
‘We’re in boss.’ whispered Sid Fingers.
Lady Ann, turned to him, giving a withering look.
‘Yes, I did notice tha…’ Her words where cut short by voices , which halted almost a suddenly as two men in gentleman’s garb turned the corner into the carriage. They stared in disbelief at Lady Ann and Sid for a long moment. Long enough to see the bulge of revolvers on their hips, long enough to see their rough hands, the hint of tattoos at their cuffs and the ill fit of their cloths, no gentlemen where these.

‘Saffviel, I call to thy by your true name and sworn pack. Your attendance and servitude I demand, defend me in this hour of need.’ Screamed Lady Ann raising her hands, as the men drew ugly, squat revolvers. The taller one, a man with a face like a boxer, with squashed nose and rough skin sneered at her as he levelled the gun.
‘Nice try lady, but mumbo-jumbo don’t scare us.’
The screams stared a moment later, the scent of boiling flesh and burnt hair filled the corridor as the angelic form of Saffviel held each of the would be gentlemen. By a shoulder, blue flames lapping at the corridor, without burning anything but flesh and blood. The angels booming voice, entoned with speech like thunder, twisting metal and a chorus of out of tune children. ‘That is the second of the three acts I have have sworn to perform for you.’ With that, the being faded, leaving the broken, chared remain. The train continues on, the rhythmic thud of the trains passage and the roar of the engine the only sound in the corridor for a few moments. Lady Ann stepped over Sid. Her henchman lay twitching on the floor, his hands covered in blood, where he had torn out his own eye at the sight of Saffviel.
‘Damn it…now I am going to need a new thief.’

--

I am hoping that we can have a fair variety of 'Summonable' creatures. Celestials, elementals, ghosts, frankenstien's monsters, fiends, shamanic spirits and so on.

Having a variety of spells, related to communication with other worldly entities would be good too. It would be great to play an arcane spell caster who can actuaslly speak with the dead, like necromancers should be able to do :P

Any Wizard or Druid can use the summon spells to call forth allies. But when I think about what a Summoner class should be and how it would function without stepping on the toes of the existing classes, I picture something along the lines of a Final Fantasy Summoner. That is, give them only a hand full of creatures to summon. But make those creatures powerful, customizable to an extent, and let them scale in power with their master. I would key the creatures to different elements (fire, water, electricity, acid, sound, and maybe one for positive/negative energy) and give them different strengths. One could be good for offense, one for defense, one for healing, one for spying.

I would give the Summoner mostly spells to augment her summons. Spells that will heal and buff them. I would give them very few directly offensive spells and mostly a selection of personal protection spells. I think I would probably make them spontaneous casters.

Give the different summons different looks/feels. Perhaps as she gains level she can learn new summons. Or perhaps she starts out with all of them and they each get more powerful as she does. I would give them different modes of movement, for instance the air/electricity summon would have flight, and the Summoner may be able to ride it or the summon may be able to carry its master. One of the summons could be totally unrelated to combat. Perhaps there could be one for knowledge who she could summon to answer questions.

I also like the idea of having small statues of her Summons maybe hanging at her belt or from a staff. These statues could be a focus for her summon abilities or perhaps even be the summon creatures in a dormant state.

An interesting mechanic to play with might be to give the Summoner a certain number of rounds per day that she can sustain a summoned creature. But then if some of her summons are more powerful than others it might cost double the number of rounds to keep them out. So if a Summoner can sustain a summon for 10 rounds per day. But the...

BBEG fight. DM "What do you do?"
player - "I summon Yojimbo"
Yojimbo - Zanmato

On a more serious note, I would like to see summons get stronger as the summoner levels up. Maybe gaining things like DR, fast healing, etc. based on the summoner's level.

I agree i think allowing it to be flexible and fill as many voids as possible would be nice, to a point. The danger there is the class loses any flavor to it. If they can be anything from a elementalist to a angelic summoner to a beast lord would all be potionaly very different. If paizo can pull that off great.

Because I lean more towards the beast lord idea for a summoner but I doubt I see that. Someone like a ranger but not as good with a companion like the druid has and spell progession like a ranger but most of the spells focused on healing, buffing the companion. But I imagine some 3pp will make one for pathfinder sooner or later.

I agree i think allowing it to be flexible and fill as many voids as possible would be nice, to a point. The danger there is the class loses any flavor to it. If they can be anything from a elementalist to a angelic summoner to a beast lord would all be potionaly very different. If paizo can pull that off great.

Because I lean more towards the beast lord idea for a summoner but I doubt I see that. Someone like a ranger but not as good with a companion like the druid has and spell progession like a ranger but most of the spells focused on healing, buffing the companion. But I imagine some 3pp will make one for pathfinder sooner or later.

I have to say that personally i am not that keen on the idea of beast lords.

... or make a beast lord a variant of the druid. There will be additionall class variants aside from the new classes, won't they?

Lose wild shape / gain additional powers for your companion...

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.")

Yeah, most racial hit dice are only 3/4 BAB (undead, oozes, and fey are the only poor BAB, and IIRC only outsiders and dragons get good BAB).

Some of it depends on the properties of the creature you can summon. If you can summon a creature with massive size/ strength he would kill the fighters in terms of damage output if it had full BAB.

I suppose it makes a pretty big difference whether the summon will be able to use manufactured weapons, though. I'd been thinking in terms of natural attacks. Even if they're weaponlike ones, clockwork soldier with a sword-arm etc., no extra iterations for high BAB.

Anyway, I'm thinking of a model where the summon gets more abilities than the summoner. Like, at first level you choose a basic summon type (chassis?) and one special ability - thick armor, poison sting, an extra slam attack, etc. You also get a spell-like ability, "maintenance," which allows you to heal your summon a certain amount each day. Probably touch range, possibly a long casting time... it needs to be dangerous or even impossible to do this in combat. However, you can probably bring your summon back from the dead even at 1st level. (That's assuming a persistent summon... if it's something that you call from nowhere when combat begins, there would be no healing abilities, but I really hope that's not how it works.)

The summon would improve in some small way at every level, and your healing pool would probably improve at even levels much like lay on hands. Minor spellcasting starting at 4th level. The vast majority of your eggs are in that one stitched-and-bolted, fire-fearing basket. You should compete with the fighter, ranger, paladin and barbarian, because you're filling the same niche.

Edit: Zurai, you might want to check the changes PF made to creature types. :) Constructs, magical beasts and monstrous humanoids all get full BAB now. Undead and oozes also got bumped up a tier, fey are the only type with slow progression.

Zurai, you might want to check the changes PF made to creature types. :) Constructs, magical beasts and monstrous humanoids all get full BAB now. Undead and oozes also got bumped up a tier, fey are the only type with slow progression.

Yeah, I havn't read the Bestiary closely yet. Guess I should refrain from commenting on that kind of stuff until I have, huh?

I doubt that'll be an issue. While it'll certainly have customization options for special abilities, I doubt any of them will hold a candle to weapon training, and the summon won't have the fighter's feat progression. I'm also running on the assumption that the summon won't be fully autonomous (at least initially), requiring the summoner to spend actions controlling it... the puppet master can't take his hands off the strings.

I almost made the same comment Zurai did regarding BAB but when I looked in the bestiary I was surprised, I think there are a good number of creatures who have full BAB that didn't previously.

Zurai wrote:

Yeah, I havn't read the Bestiary closely yet. Guess I should refrain from commenting on that kind of stuff until I have, huh?

Heh, the only reason I noticed any of those changes was that I used some of the preview material before the full bestiary was out. Made a dire ape skeleton, and noticed the undead change to d8's and 3/4 BAB; that's when I decided to fully review creature types. Monstrous hit dice now use the same locked d#/BAB scheme as player classes. (Dragons are barbarians.)

... or make a beast lord a variant of the druid. There will be additionall class variants aside from the new classes, won't they?

Lose wild shape / gain additional powers for your companion...

I like the metaphor of the custom car. You pick a chassis (e.g. Undead brute, demonic scout, robotic defender), then you customise with options (ala the astral construct power from XPH). What i don't want to see (ironically) is a need to actually summon the monster (you can have the choice to do so with a feature- allowing you to store the pet in a lamp/pokeball/devil box).

I like the metaphor of the custom car. You pick a chassis (e.g. Undead brute, demonic scout, robotic defender), then you customise with options (ala the astral construct power from XPH). What i don't want to see (ironically) is a need to actually summon the monster (you can have the choice to do so with a feature- allowing you to store the pet in a lamp/pokeball/devil box).

Haha Final fantacy gave me the greatest idea.

BBEG fight. DM "What do you do?"
player - "I summon Yojimbo"
Yojimbo - Zanmato

On a more serious note, I would like to see summons get stronger as the summoner levels up. Maybe gaining things like DR, fast healing, etc. based on the summoner's level.

Otherwise, you only get a double-drop kick from his fancy spirit-dog sidekick...

Playing Devils advocate here but does the Summoner have to be all about one thing? summoning a monster to fight for him?

What about the rest of the conjuration spells? Mage armor, acid arrow, Obasucring mist, summon swarm, web, minor creation, etc?

For me a summoner needs to fill a support role besides just having a powerful PET. otherwise whats the character going to do once his pets in the battle? having offensive spells steps on the conjurer too much i agree.

So heres my rundown.

The summoner conjures a creature of element or force. using fire, water, earth, air, or force to shape a vesal of destruction. This creature grows in level. Or the summoner binds a creature to his will, calling minor devils, demons or angels to do his bidding.
Neither have the fexability of summon moster or nature ally spells however.

The elemental version is always present while the devils are called swiftly during battle.

The elemental version learns to shape his element at first causing it to grow in size but later knowing how to split the creature into smaller allies or even into large swarms of fine creatures.

The devil caller draws more powerful devils or more weaker creatures as his power grows.

The summoner improves his allies and his creatures with weapons and armor cunjored from thin air. granting magical armor of special materials or weapons with special qualities akin to magic weapons. If a specific tool is needed to get a job done the summoner can call it.

The summoner also learns to create solid matter from nothing. he can cause it to rain into a small chamber rapidly flooding the room after sealing the exit with a creation of stone blocks. He can create walls to hide behind during an ambush or create a shelter from fire raining down from the sky.

--------------------------

If the summoner can be exclusive of a spell list the class will be unique enough to not be called the arcane druid and this will be a good thing IMHO. The summoner has the ability to fall into the same trap as the Warmage. If it does then you will never see a conjurer in a game that allows a summoner. It has to be different from the arcane class it mimics so to make the two work in the same party.

Playing Devils advocate here but does the Summoner have to be all about one thing? summoning a monster to fight for him?

What about the rest of the conjuration spells? Mage armor, acid arrow, Obasucring mist, summon swarm, web, minor creation, etc?

Ideally, a Conjuror and a Summoner should be able to group with each other and not step all over each others toes just as readily as a Cleric and a Druid can.

Quijenoth wrote:

Playing Devils advocate here but does the Summoner have to be all about one thing? summoning a monster to fight for him?

What about the rest of the conjuration spells? Mage armor, acid arrow, Obasucring mist, summon swarm, web, minor creation, etc?

That's all stuff a Conjurer can do, 'though. Why create a new class that's nothing more than a Specialist Conjurer with a Companion?

Ideally, a Conjuror and a Summoner should be able to group with each other and not step all over each others toes just as readily as a Cleric and a Druid can.

short version is I agree with you and i dont think simply taging on the truncated spell list to the summoner is a good idea as this would kill off the conjurer (like the warmage vs evoker) but leaving the summoner only with a Pet makes him too pigeon-holed, a one trick pony, and ultimately very boring.

Damn browser ate my post!

short version is I agree with you and i dont think simply taging on the truncated spell list to the summoner is a good idea as this would kill off the conjurer (like the warmage vs evoker) but leaving the summoner only with a Pet makes him too pigeon-holed, a one trick pony, and ultimately very boring.

Depending on how the summoning works (is it a specific critter, called up and bound for the day?), it's possible that Abjuration and Enchantment spells will be as important as Conjuration (to make those magic circles and banish those bad-boys when you're done, and to bind and command them while they are present).

short version is I agree with you and i dont think simply taging on the truncated spell list to the summoner is a good idea as this would kill off the conjurer (like the warmage vs evoker) but leaving the summoner only with a Pet makes him too pigeon-holed, a one trick pony, and ultimately very boring.

I would also think that, even with the entire range of summon spells the conjurer has, the summoner wouldn't necessarily step on their toes. After all, the conjurer will still have fireballs, lightning bolts, teleportation, and battlefield control spells (I know very few conjurers who only use summon monster spells) The druid gets spontaneous summon and a pet and doesn't seem to overtake the conjurer.

True, but I'd prefer if the spells a Summoner used were less conjurations and more buff-the-pet spells. On the other hand, if the Summoner is indeed based entirely on calling up some protean thing that can be reshaped as he/she wills, perhaps it would make all kinds of sense for the Summoner to also be able to call up some proteanic matter from wherever, that can be formed into walls or whatnot, being just as responsive to his/her will as the summoned companion critter.

It's possible that the solution lies in having a different list of spells rather than a truncated list of spells. The Druid shares a lot of (arguably necessary) spells with the cleric but still has a list of its own with a very different theme and feel. Perhaps the best thing to do would be to make sure the summoner has the 'necessary' spells, then invent some new spells, perhaps even borrow a bit from the bard, druid, or cleric, so that the end product ends up being completely different.

That's all well and good in theory, but that risks it being a "one-book-wonder", where because it has a unique spell list, no spell is on its list unless it specifically says so, meaning all future books either have to be written with the Summoner in mind or completely ignore the Summoner. This is the hell that most WotC spellcasting classes ended up in, because almost all of them had unique lists. Paizo's already said they're reluctant to commit to continuing support for the APG classes in all their books going forward, which is why I'm behind categorical spell lists ("all abjuration, transmutation, and divination spells from the sorcerer/wizard spell list") rather than unique lists ala Bard or Druid.

Maybe, but I'd much rather have to figure out whether or not new spells work with the class on my own than just have it listed as school "X, X and X," as that proposal is thoroughly uninteresting and uninspiring (and potentially leaves spells that the class SHOULD have off of its list). Aside from that, I really hope they do continue directly supporting APG classes in future supplements, as I think that's the only way NOT to fall into the WOTC trap (and really, how hard is it to list summoner on a new spell alongside wizard/sorc?).

grasshopper_ea wrote:

Haha Final fantacy gave me the greatest idea.

BBEG fight. DM "What do you do?"
player - "I summon Yojimbo"
Yojimbo - Zanmato

On a more serious note, I would like to see summons get stronger as the summoner levels up. Maybe gaining things like DR, fast healing, etc. based on the summoner's level.

Yes, but only if you give him enough money and he is in the mood.

Otherwise, you only get a double-drop kick from his fancy spirit-dog sidekick...

Velderan wrote:

Maybe, but I'd much rather have to figure out whether or not new spells work with the class on my own than just have it listed as school "X, X and X," as that proposal is thoroughly uninteresting and uninspiring (and potentially leaves spells that the class SHOULD have off of its list). Aside from that, I really hope they do continue directly supporting APG classes in future supplements, as I think that's the only way NOT to fall into the WOTC trap (and really, how hard is it to list summoner on a new spell alongside wizard/sorc?).

What about just allowing all spells with the "Summoning" or "Calling" subtype, along with all the transmutation spells? In fact, if you limited it to subtypes, you get a cherry-picked spell list without having things you don't want.

Personally, I don't want the Summoner to have ANY spells of the Summoning or Calling subtypes. I don't want him being a "Conjuror as a base class".

Zurai wrote:

Personally, I don't want the Summoner to have ANY spells of the Summoning or Calling subtypes. I don't want him being a "Conjuror as a base class".

+50

I mean I kind of get where this is coming from but the class is called the summoner, he should have at least the Summon Monster spells. Otherwise the name is just all kinds of silly.

Conjurer is a completely different beast, they have tons of battlefield control spells, teleportation, etc that are not summoning related.

As for the whole 'one book wonder' aspect, I would suggest just give them a fixed spell list and let them add 1-2 additional transmutation spells per level.

Hmm... wait, the summoner can't summon? Errm wot?

[Of course he can summon. He's got the biggest, baddest summon on the block. But he's focused on that summon, not on creating armies of temporary minions through summon monsters. Frankly, if he has to get some kind of summoning spells, I'd rather the planar binding types, where it's only ever a single relatively powerful creature, than the summon foo types, where you can trade down for 1d4+1 cannon-fodder creatures.

I agree the thrust of the character should be a single large summon, but allowing trans + summoning + calling is a very small list, much less the the "Conjurer". It's also fixed to be very thematic.

I would give the summon and trans spells, but maybe make the calling spells SLA of the class. AND they should be a spont. caster, IMHO.

I'd prefer neither Summoning nor Calling, but Calling is the lesser of the two evils (to be cliche/melodramatic). Calling also seems to fit more in the very small snippet of flavor we have for the class as well.

I would say paladin type spellcasting progression, just focused on buffs and support (for monster and party alike).
And of course class features relating t hs pet (including upgrades with lvl).

I really woldn´t like just another spellcaster.

I'd like the class to have a pet thats customizable and either constant or with enough times/day and durations that it is a near constant in combats. A paired down spell list that includes the summon monsters/natures and some low power buffs and battle field control spells. Some spell like abilities tied to buffing and healing the companion.Maybe a class abliity for his spells that have the same descriptor as his companion have extra effects, more power, longer duration, ability to exclude the pet etc.

I would say paladin type spellcasting progression, just focused on buffs and support (for monster and party alike).
And of course class features relating t hs pet (including upgrades with lvl).

I really woldn´t like just another spellcaster.

I would say bard level casting is a minimum for a class like this, and, even then, it would need 3/4 bab to at least get to the jack-of-all trades niche. In order to fit the archetype, and to work as a companion to the druid and wizard (which I believe the good folks at paizo have said is their intent), full casting is probably for the best.

This class interests me the most ut of all the new classes, so here my list.

The name should either be Occultist or Cabalist. (both sound cooler)

Bard-like spell progression only non-spontaneous, and Int. based.

Weapon proficiencies; Dagger staff, crossbows (light, heavy), Sickle, short spear, short sword, and scythe , no armor. (weird huh)

Despite being arcane they should have heals, but they only effect their pet.

No major damage spells, just a mix of pet enhancements and de-buffs on enemies. The pet does all of the damage.

As others have said, a build your own pet feature running along a theme (undead, construct, outsider, ect.)

Actually some of their spell selection can relate to the type of pet they use. (undead give bonus spells from the necromancy school)

The summoner should have d8 hp's and rogue/priest BAB. Their pet depends on the it's type some are magical some physical.

Ritual like special abilities that add all day lasting buffs/mutations/special effects to their pet.

2 skill points a level.
Skill selection should be the same as the wizard, plus intimate. Skills should also be effected by the pet's type.

Kinda weird list, but I would likely play this type of class to the exclusion of many others, I just like the idea.

Dennis da Ogre wrote:

Hmm... wait, the summoner can't summon? Errm wot?

Of course he can summon. He's got the biggest, baddest summon on the block. But he's focused on that summon, not on creating armies of temporary minions through summon monsters. Frankly, if he has to get some kind of summoning spells, I'd rather the planar binding types, where it's only ever a single relatively powerful creature, than the summon foo types, where you can trade down for 1d4+1 cannon-fodder creatures.

Then the class should be called something other than "summoner".

Dennis da Ogre wrote:

Then the class should be called something other than "summoner".

Why? The class name isn't "Summoner of hordes of monsters". It's "Summoner". The class is based around summoning a creature (and a powerful one); that warrants it the name "Summoner".

Playing Devils advocate here but does the Summoner have to be all about one thing? summoning a monster to fight for him?

What about the rest of the conjuration spells? Mage armor, acid arrow, Obasucring mist, summon swarm, web, minor creation, etc?

For me a summoner needs to fill a support role besides just having a powerful PET. otherwise whats the character going to do once his pets in the battle? having offensive spells steps on the conjurer too much i agree.

So heres my rundown.

The summoner conjures a creature of element or force. using fire, water, earth, air, or force to shape a vesal of destruction. This creature grows in level. Or the summoner binds a creature to his will, calling minor devils, demons or angels to do his bidding.
Neither have the fexability of summon moster or nature ally spells however.

The elemental version is always present while the devils are called swiftly during battle.

The elemental version learns to shape his element at first causing it to grow in size but later knowing how to split the creature into smaller allies or even into large swarms of fine creatures.

The devil caller draws more powerful devils or more weaker creatures as his power grows.

The summoner improves his allies and his creatures with weapons and armor cunjored from thin air. granting magical armor of special materials or weapons with special qualities akin to magic weapons. If a specific tool is needed to get a job done the summoner can call it.

The summoner also learns to create solid matter from nothing. he can cause it to rain into a small chamber rapidly flooding the room after sealing the exit with a creation of stone blocks. He can create walls to hide behind during an ambush or create a shelter from fire raining down from the sky.

--------------------------

If the summoner can be exclusive of a spell list the class will be unique enough to not be called the arcane druid and this will be a good thing IMHO. The summoner has the ability to fall into the same trap as the...

If you were more construct oriented by mid levels you could ride inside your beast granting it extra actions or some such.

On a slightly different note.

The recent interview with Jason, has shed a little info. on the new classes including that they will be up for playtest soon. I'm a bit concerned that this class in particular may end up as essentially a wizard/sorcerer variant. regardless on how cool the pet mechanic may be, I would prefer not to fall into the category of just another type of wizard. With the Alchemist, oracle, and witch all presumably being full on spell casters, I would rather the summoner not fall into the trap of just being a variant of a wizard given full class status. I'm really interested in seeing what role a summoner fills and how it looks different mechanically from other classes.

For what it would seem, all this classes should be able to fill different roles in a party without using the base classes.

Summoner - Support Melee
Oracle - primary Divine caster
Witch - Primary Arcane caster
Cavalier - Primary Melee
Alchemist- Boost guy/Support caster
Inquisitor - No freaking clue

I hope the summoner isn't just support melee.

Inquisitor looks like strong support melee with a minor in skillmonkey, something like a ranger with Favored Enemy: Round 4.

I'm expecting Summoner to fill a role which can swing between barbarian and monk, depending on the creature: either just flat-out beefy, or less so but with a lot of special attacks.

Cavaliers look the least interesting right now... just a divine combat bard, from the looks of it. Hopefully there'll be more to it than that.

Are we sure the Witch is arcane? I haven't seen any actual declaration of a magic type.

For what it would seem, all this classes should be able to fill different roles in a party without using the base classes.

Summoner - Support Melee
Oracle - primary Divine caster
Witch - Primary Arcane caster
Cavalier - Primary Melee
Alchemist- Boost guy/Support caster
Inquisitor - No freaking clue

The alchemist stands a good chance of being primary melee also. The Mr Hyde concept is definitely a primary melee sort of role.

The cavalier looks a little less like the bard to me and more like a paladin with no spells, and more loyalty to a specific order and cause as opposed to some sort of faith.

I believe the witch was suppose to be arcane and divine, in the interview the witch was compared to the adept with a unique twist on spell-casting.

The alchemist is the least interesting to me, but I didn't recall a spell-casting type (arcane vs. divine) being mentioned at all. Jason did say alchemists spells basically fallowed a similar formula as other spell-casters, but they start their day brewing potions instead of memorizing spells.

Inquisitor was labeled as a Van Helsing type, and was described as being skill based. From the description he sounds close to a divine rogue.

The oracle was just labeled as a divine sorcerer, with a focus (kinda like a domains but a little more involved). Controversially, oracles start off cursed, but learned to turn the curse to their favor (very unique). Blindness giving you extra sensory perception was the example given.

The summoner had the least discussion, it just sounded like a wizard with a build a monsterous companion feature, that's what concerns me I would like a little more then that.