Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

RPG Superstar 2015

Should the Synthesist be banned?


Advice

1 to 50 of 118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Just seems to me that the class obsoletes the druid and mage and fighter.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

meh, it's a second-rate caster in fancy armour. full wizard kicks their ass at spellcasting, fighter can out-DPR them while at least matching their AC, and druid is kind of like both of the above combined. it's good, but it's not THAT good.

Grand Lodge

Really, its got bonus hitpoints at low levels. That's it. Fighter's a much better melee option if only for the bonus feats


Just like Fueldrop said, it's a caster in power-armor, versatile and hardy. You can cast or bash things. OR! Not really more effective than casting from the back and let your true eidolon bash things but a funny option.

Personally, I hate the 'you appear in your translucent eidolon' thing. It looks pathetic if you have a quadruped eidolon, worse for a serpentine one.
And I like the idea of a 'superhero' synthesist who uses his eidolon-suit as a disguise with superhuman powers and stuff.


Puma D. Murmelman wrote:

Just like Fueldrop said, it's a caster in power-armor, versatile and hardy. You can cast or bash things. OR! Not really more effective than casting from the back and let your true eidolon bash things but a funny option.

Personally, I hate the 'you appear in your translucent eidolon' thing. It looks pathetic if you have a quadruped eidolon, worse for a serpentine one.
And I like the idea of a 'superhero' synthesist who uses his eidolon-suit as a disguise with superhuman powers and stuff.

I always view the description as fluff. I have no problem with the eidolon being an actual living suit.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

No, I think that if it's mechanically powerful it should have unattractive fluff to balance it out. You wanna play a synthesist, you gotta look silly.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Fluff should never balance mechanics or vice versa. The whole point of fluff is that it is disconnected from the mechanics. If it is balancing anything, it it no longer fluff.


You didn't really take my last post seriously, did you?


Hi Captain


unless you want to say something about the tons of other optimized classes out there i would say no. Synthesist is just another powerful class, like the barbarian, alchemist, zen archer, and all the others of optimized builds that can kick butt. Personally, don't beat down one without at least taking into consideration the others.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Serpentine Synthesist Summoner

Quadraped Synthesist Summoner

Yeah, that "translucent" bit looks really silly, doesn't it?[/sarcasm]


Azten wrote:

Serpentine Synthesist Summoner

Quadraped Synthesist Summoner

Yeah, that "translucent" bit looks really silly, doesn't it?[/sarcasm]

I would say it looks silly. The quadruped makes me laugh.


Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

For some reason, those pictures made me think of the Reading Rainbow song.

Liberty's Edge

nice


Is the synthesist awesome? Heck yes.
It is crazily powerful? Sort of... it really depends a LOT on the build.
Should it be banned? No way. There are lots of other things that can also be crazy powerful if built in certain ways...
I don't think they are out of line with the power level of the rest of the game.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Butterfly in the sky, I can fly twice as high! Take a look, it's in a book. A Reading Rainbow!


i think blackbloodtroll has finally cracked.


FuelDrop wrote:
i think blackbloodtroll has finally cracked.

Agreed


He mixed up a line too. "Just take a look" goes before "it's in a book."


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

No, but if I make a synthesist summoner, he will look like LeVar Burton.

Dark Archive

Azten wrote:

Serpentine Synthesist Summoner

Quadraped Synthesist Summoner

Yeah, that "translucent" bit looks really silly, doesn't it?[/sarcasm]

BEEP BEEP INVISIBLE HYENA-CAR!


If it's invisible, how do you know it's shaped like a hyena?


Azten wrote:
If it's invisible, how do you know it's shaped like a hyena?

Because of the glitter. Duh.

Scarab Sages Star Voter 2013

Officially? No. In the PF games I run? Absolutely! Honestly, I never liked the Summoner base class, and it's variants like the Synthesist do nothing for me other than make me cringe. (Having said that, I can see it has potential for a weird NPC villain! But for players? Not in the games I GM please!)


Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Eventually, someone will create a very powerful build for any class. Banning a class every time that happens is a bad idea. You could always go for a commoner campaign though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Eventually, someone will create a very powerful build for any class. Banning a class every time that happens is a bad idea. You could always go for a commoner campaign though.

You're nuts, commoners are completely OP, what with their... uhm... stuff. Yeah.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
ZappoHisbane wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Eventually, someone will create a very powerful build for any class. Banning a class every time that happens is a bad idea. You could always go for a commoner campaign though.
You're nuts, commoners are completely OP, what with their... uhm... stuff. Yeah.

It is a common problem.


ZappoHisbane wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Eventually, someone will create a very powerful build for any class. Banning a class every time that happens is a bad idea. You could always go for a commoner campaign though.
You're nuts, commoners are completely OP, what with their... uhm... stuff. Yeah.

Yup! My 20th level Sheep Herder (Commoner archetype) rulez!

Lantern Lodge

if you are so worried about the synthesist. there are some glaring weaknesses. the suits HP pool can't be used once depleted, they gave up an action economy advantage to become Sailor Moon. and they have an extremely time consuming transformation sequence once every 24 hours that leaves them a sitting duck for it's duration. in other words, during thier 10 minute transformation, enemies have 100 rounds of actions to kill them with during that time. you can also penalize them for wearing thier "Suit" in civilization. it could be as simple as "Hey, that person is dressed awfully funny. i think he/she may be a little nuts."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
joah wrote:
Should the Synthesist be banned?

No.

In other news, for anyone who'd like to see something heavily resembling a synthesist in something besides the PFRPG, you should check out Armor from X-Men. Her mutant power allows her to create a psionic exoskeleton that she shapes with her will; turning her into an ubertank and powerhouse.

Image 1, Image 2, and a video of her crushing a monster.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
ZappoHisbane wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Eventually, someone will create a very powerful build for any class. Banning a class every time that happens is a bad idea. You could always go for a commoner campaign though.
You're nuts, commoners are completely OP, what with their... uhm... stuff. Yeah.
It is a common problem.

It's a "C'mon! I'm a pro!" ...blem.


Ashiel, I was thinking more like Spawn. In fact, I've been thinking of making a Spawn based Synthasist. I could have the eidolon look like a cloaker that he constantly wears. Even give it the disguise ability. Maybe take the eldrich heritage feats for the shadow bloodline. Hm.


It should be banned as it is simply so badly written that it's unplayable and broken.


Lune wrote:
Ashiel, I was thinking more like Spawn. In fact, I've been thinking of making a Spawn based Synthasist. I could have the eidolon look like a cloaker that he constantly wears. Even give it the disguise ability. Maybe take the eldrich heritage feats for the shadow bloodline. Hm.

That'd be really cool. ^-^


2 people marked this as a favorite.

As far as summoner archetypes go the synthesist pales in comparison to the master summoner.

I find that the action economy is a much bigger factor in how combat plays out rather than how uber one particular character or monster is.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I was thinking something very similar, these boards get my creative ideas going!


DrDeth wrote:
It should be banned as it is simply so badly written that it's unplayable and broken.

I thought that at first, but now the FAQ entries have cleared it up enough that I don't have any problems with it. Until those came around I did not even consider playing them. :P


pipedreamsam wrote:

As far as summoner archetypes go the synthesist pales in comparison to the master summoner.

I find that the action economy is a much bigger factor in how combat plays out rather than how uber one particular character or monster is.

Yes Master Summoner is more powerful in that respect, but the time-consumingness and sillyness of it mean i woudl actually consider banning them... I wouldn't ban Synths though they are pretty reasonable.


Synth's can be pretty damn crazy. And pretty damn lame. It really depends on the skill of the player and the quality of the build. It's very hard to find a tougher character that can eat a lot of hate and still be able to heal itself.


Winterthorn wrote:
Officially? No. In the PF games I run? Absolutely! Honestly, I never liked the Summoner base class, and it's variants like the Synthesist do nothing for me other than make me cringe. (Having said that, I can see it has potential for a weird NPC villain! But for players? Not in the games I GM please!)

This is the way I handle the summoner and a few other classes, and I've received no complaints about it yet.


pipedreamsam wrote:

As far as summoner archetypes go the synthesist pales in comparison to the master summoner.

I find that the action economy is a much bigger factor in how combat plays out rather than how uber one particular character or monster is.

I agree, and this is one reason that Paladins are way more nuts than Summoners in the right hands.

Shadow Lodge

joeyfixit wrote:

I agree, and this is one reason that Paladins are way more nuts than Summoners in the right hands.

You should see a Synthesist / Paladin build. It can get really nasty. In my home games we stop using the summoner class, worst piece of bad design ever made by paizo. And I usually love their products.

Liberty's Edge

FuelDrop wrote:
Meh, it's a second-rate caster in fancy armour. full wizard kicks their ass at spellcasting, fighter can out-DPR them while at least matching their AC, and druid is kind of like both of the above combined. it's good, but it's not THAT good.

I don't think this is true. In the hands of someone who knows what they're doing the synthesist will crush the fighter in the AC and DPR departments (because to get synthesist-like AC you'd need a shield, and then your DPR would drop), and he will have a lot more HP. They can out fighter the fighter sure, but they essentially have to heal themselves and spell casting wise there are much better options. Plus all the weaknesses listed in above posts.

Can they be the most versatile and "powerful" melee characters in the game? Yeah if built to be so, definitely. Should they be banned? Nah, they're not THAT much more powerful than other things, and they have several weaknesses to make up for it. The only time it might cause problems is an optimized synthesist in a party of noobs.


joeyfixit wrote:
pipedreamsam wrote:

As far as summoner archetypes go the synthesist pales in comparison to the master summoner.

I find that the action economy is a much bigger factor in how combat plays out rather than how uber one particular character or monster is.

I agree, and this is one reason that Paladins are way more nuts than Summoners in the right hands.

See it? I wrote it!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

@Jelani: isn't anything that's been optimized then dropped into a party of noobs going to be game breaking?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
joah wrote:
Just seems to me that the class obsoletes the druid and mage and fighter.

In my opinion it should be until the rules governing it are all very clear-cut and universally understood, apart from that, no.

My GM probably wouldn't allow a lot of the cheese that goes into making a really effective Synthesist (you're an 'old gnome'? Really?) and I've got a fun recurring villian for the party that's a gnome Anti-Paladin/Synthesist who works as an assassin and enforcer for a major power that they've PO'd.

To be honest, the standard Summoner seems the most overpowered with the Master Summoner just a touch behind - remember, the key to this game is more often than not economy of action, and those two have far and away the most actions in a round to play with.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Interzone wrote:
pipedreamsam wrote:

As far as summoner archetypes go the synthesist pales in comparison to the master summoner.

I find that the action economy is a much bigger factor in how combat plays out rather than how uber one particular character or monster is.

Yes Master Summoner is more powerful in that respect, but the time-consumingness and sillyness of it mean i woudl actually consider banning them... I wouldn't ban Synths though they are pretty reasonable.

What exactly is 'silly' about a Master Summoner?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
blackbloodtroll wrote:
For some reason, those pictures made me think of the Reading Rainbow song.

They made me think of Wonder Woman and her invisible jet. Whatever happened to that thing anyway? I never really got it, either - I mean, I get an amazon from a mystical island having a magical lasso and bullet-defeclting bracelets, but where does the bit of stealth technology come in? I mean shouldn't it at least be an invisible pegasus or something?

But I digress...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:
joah wrote:
Should the Synthesist be banned?

No.

In other news, for anyone who'd like to see something heavily resembling a synthesist in something besides the PFRPG, you should check out Armor from X-Men. Her mutant power allows her to create a psionic exoskeleton that she shapes with her will; turning her into an ubertank and powerhouse.

Image 1, Image 2, and a video of her crushing a monster.

Wouldn't she be more of an Aegis from DSP's Psionics Expanded?


DrDeth wrote:
It should be banned as it is simply so badly written that it's unplayable and broken.

Actually the class isn't broken nor is it unplayable. It's just good and can become overpowered.

1 to 50 of 118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Advice / Should the Synthesist be banned? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.