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

More Synthesist Questions


Rules Questions


Okay, so the Synthesist and the Eidelon share gear. I'm assuming that this means that the Eidelon benefits from said gear. But what if the Summoner and the Eidelon are differently sized? I'm thinking about halfling and gnome synthesists whose Eidelons are Medium sized.

Does the gear not appear to be visible when the Summoner is wearing the Eidelon skin? Or does the gear appear to magically grow when the Synthesist skin is put on? What if an opponent wants to try and sunder the Belt of Giant's Strength, for example? The small-sized summoner acquired it for personal use; does it shrink back to small size when cut off of the Synthesist?

What if it isn't a magic item? Say, a MW backpack. Does it split apart when the small Summoner who wears one grows into Synthesist form? Contrariwise, if the summoner and all her gear are merely "floating" inside the Synthesist skin, can the summoner retrieve objects from said MW backpack while in Eidelon form?

Feats - that an Eidelon can benefit from feats taken by the synthesist has been, I think, pretty well established. What hasn't been established is Toughness - does the Eidelon gain the additional bonus HP? One would think that an independent Eidelon obviously would, but Synthesist armor seems to be stretching the payback of the feat, since the summoner's HP are available to the Eidelon via Life Conduit.

On the other hand, maybe this isn't an unfair advantage, since Eidelon's can't benefit from channeling or non-summoner heal spells?


Anyone?

Bueller?


Magic Items- It's more like they confer bonuses anyways, I mean it is magic. Since you can't not target both at once with affects, you can't not confer the bonuses to the eidolon just hby having the summoner wearing them.

Normal gear- I'd say you can reach it an use it if you have arms on your eidolon; just like how you need arms and hands to do somatics for spells as a Synthesist. If you're inside a large eidolon with hands, the synthesist reaches back and grab the item, mimicking the movement with the main body.

If you're in a medium eidolon with hands, like say a body-suit skin that's so popular these days; I'd say you can't unless the eidolon wears the pack over it's "skin", cause otherwise you can't get it. Considering the ritual to summon it takes 10 minutes, I think you can take the time to place down the pack and put it back on after you summon.

Mind you these are just flavor based opinions on my part, RAW there's nothing preventing you from taking out items but it seems to just make sense to do it this way.

Toughness- Doesn't benefit since it's temporary hp. I recommend you read the "One Synthesist Thread to rule them all", since SKR answers a few of these and others you may have.


A synthesist and its eidolon have to be the same size and they're the same creature.


Buri wrote:
A synthesist and its eidolon have to be the same size and they're the same creature.

They have to be at least the same size. The synthesized form can be bigger that the unbonded summoner alone.


I have more questions, and would rather not Necro the "One to rule them all" thread.

Armor:

The FAQ states that the Synthesist gets no benefit from armor he's wearing while wearing his Eidelon suit. What about penalties?

Say you've got a Fighter/Synthesist. Fighter is, I think, a decent dip for a synthesist; gives the summoner a running start on hp and feats, and provides weapon proficiencies that the Eidelon can make use of. I think it behooves her to strap on full plate armor first thing in the morning, and then do the summoning ritual for the Eidelon (which AFAIK, has no somatic component, no arcane spell failure chance).

"No benefit" makes me assume that other folks can't see the armor at all, that it's floating inside the Eidelon skin. And therefore can't interfere with spells being cast. The FAQ says (backed up by numerous statements from SKR) that in order to cast a spell with somatic components, the Eidelon needs limbs of it's own.

Full Plate underneath means the Eidelon is banished or runs out of HP, the Summoner inside can be fully armored up and ready to fire off Summon Monster standards as per her daily power (an SLA, no spell failure from armor) or cast DimDoor to escape whatever deadly situation she finds herself in.

Now the regular Summoner entry states that the Eidelon can't wear armor at all, because it "interferes with the summoner's connection to the Eidelon". But at the same time, the FAQ seems to assume that the Synthesist will have at least light armor on underneath the Eidelon suit. Meaning that there probably isn't a danger of connection there.

Now, if I was the literal police, I might argue that the Eidelon ought to be able to wear armor, since there seems to be little danger of interfering with a connection to a creature that is technically inside of you. But I understand the mechanical reason for the rule, and I accept that Eidelons simply can't wear armor. They're like, allergic. But I want to know if the Synthesist can wear heavier-than-light armor underneath the skin without worrying about Spell Failure from somatic spells.

It seems to me that there shouldn't be any danger of that, since the Synthesist's Eidelon must explicitly grow it's own limbs in order to cast spells with somatic components.

Heck, you don't even need the fighter dip. Arcane armor training seems perfectly reasonable for a Synthesist that's nerfed her STR and DEX and is worried about being caught with her pants down.


I am pretty sure armor just has no effect whatsoever (positive or negative) while you have your eidolon-suit summoned. One thing to note: If you are using the Arcane Armor Training feat, you have to use a swift action to activate it. Not everyone remembers that. (Important to remember, if for example you are playing a class who will most likely make great use of the Arcane Strike feat.. such as a synthesist)


joeyfixit wrote:


Now the regular Summoner entry states that the Eidelon can't wear armor at all, because it "interferes with the summoner's connection to the Eidelon". But at the same time, the FAQ seems to assume that the Synthesist will have at least light armor on underneath the Eidelon suit. Meaning that there probably isn't a danger of connection there.

the summoner doesnt state anywhere that they cannot wear armor(summoner or eidolon). what it does state is that they cant each use the same magic item slot. what this is saying is that 1 can have a magic armor and the other can use a mundane armor. It also states that they can both wear magic armor but the armor on the summoner supercedes and will take effect over the armor on the eidolon. effectivly making the eidolons magic armor mundane unless for some reason the summoners armor became mundane.


nick murray 549 wrote:
the summoner doesnt state anywhere that they cannot wear armor(summoner or eidolon). what it does state is that they cant each use the same magic item slot. what this is saying is that 1 can have a magic armor and the other can use a mundane armor. It also states that they can both wear magic armor but the armor on the summoner supercedes and will take effect over the armor on the eidolon. effectivly making the eidolons magic armor mundane unless for some reason the summoners armor became mundane.

Just... No. Read the section on armor. To quote:

Quote:
An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, as the armor interferes with the summoner’s connection to the eidolon.

So an Eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, however it can still get armor bonues via it's own bonus or a magical effect(like bracers or mage armor).

You are right though that they share magic item slots(rings, helm, neck, etc) and that in the case of conflict the summoner's wins, but in the case of armor its super clear. And the synthesist is equally clear:

Quote:

The synthesist uses the eidolon’s base attack bonus, and gains the eidolon’s armor and natural armor bonuses and modifiers to ability scores.

...

While fused with his eidolon, the synthesist can use all of his own abilities and gear, except for his armor.

He doesn't even use it. If you're not using it, you aren't incuring penalties either imo. It's the same logic behind cursed/magic items, simply carrying them doesn't use them; swinging a cursed/magic sword for an attack does. With the armor, it's not being "used" and as such doesn't do anything while merged.


Darth Grall wrote:
nick murray 549 wrote:
the summoner doesnt state anywhere that they cannot wear armor(summoner or eidolon). what it does state is that they cant each use the same magic item slot. what this is saying is that 1 can have a magic armor and the other can use a mundane armor. It also states that they can both wear magic armor but the armor on the summoner supercedes and will take effect over the armor on the eidolon. effectivly making the eidolons magic armor mundane unless for some reason the summoners armor became mundane.

Just... No. Read the section on armor. To quote:

Quote:
An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, as the armor interferes with the summoner’s connection to the eidolon.

So an Eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, however it can still get armor bonues via it's own bonus or a magical effect(like bracers or mage armor).

You are right though that they share magic item slots(rings, helm, neck, etc) and that in the case of conflict the summoner's wins, but in the case of armor its super clear. And the synthesist is equally clear:

Quote:

The synthesist uses the eidolon’s base attack bonus, and gains the eidolon’s armor and natural armor bonuses and modifiers to ability scores.

...

While fused with his eidolon, the synthesist can use all of his own abilities and gear, except for his armor.

He doesn't even use it. If you're not using it, you aren't incuring penalties either imo. It's the same logic behind cursed/magic items, simply carrying them doesn't use them; swinging a cursed/magic sword for an attack does. With the armor, it's not being "used" and as such doesn't do anything while merged.

This is about what I thought. I wanted to make sure I wasn't gaming the system.

Thanks, D.


I'd actually still apply spell failure penalties as well - for the suit within the suit...


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
Funky Badger wrote:
I'd actually still apply spell failure penalties as well - for the suit within the suit...

Okay, why? Arcane spell failure only applies to spells with somatic components. It's a matter of being able to make the subtle gestures involved in casting, not a matter of arcane casters being somehow allergic to metal.

According to the FAQ, whether or not the Summoner is actually moving inside the Eidelon skin or is immobile is "a matter of flavor". Furthermore, the Synthesist is explicitly NOT allowed to cast somatic spells while in the skin unless the Eidelon is given limbs to do so. Which says to me that if the Eidelon's limbs aren't interfered with by armor (and how could they be, if Eidelons can't wear armor at all), there really shouldn't be Spell Failure while the Eidelon skin is up.

My concern was more about whether or not armor as bulky as Full Plate could co-exist with a Synthesist's Eidelon, since the flavor text of the "no armor on Eidelons" rule concerns interference with the connection between Eidelon and summoner.


joeyfixit wrote:
Funky Badger wrote:
I'd actually still apply spell failure penalties as well - for the suit within the suit...

Okay, why? Arcane spell failure only applies to spells with somatic components. It's a matter of being able to make the subtle gestures involved in casting, not a matter of arcane casters being somehow allergic to metal.

According to the FAQ, whether or not the Summoner is actually moving inside the Eidelon skin or is immobile is "a matter of flavor". Furthermore, the Synthesist is explicitly NOT allowed to cast somatic spells while in the skin unless the Eidelon is given limbs to do so. Which says to me that if the Eidelon's limbs aren't interfered with by armor (and how could they be, if Eidelons can't wear armor at all), there really shouldn't be Spell Failure while the Eidelon skin is up.

My concern was more about whether or not armor as bulky as Full Plate could co-exist with a Synthesist's Eidelon, since the flavor text of the "no armor on Eidelons" rule concerns interference with the connection between Eidelon and summoner.

I'd agree with Funky Badger. To me, wearing the full plate underneath will still incur all of the penalties. Wearing your Eidolon isn't going to make it inherently easier to move in full plate.

From a DM standpoint, I would give you all the penalties because it feels like you're trying to "game" the system. You're vulnerable without your Eidolon, deal with it. Thats the price you pay for being a synthesist.

I'd also like to point out donning full plate takes longer than actually summoning your eidolon normally.


dunebugg wrote:

I'd agree with Funky Badger. To me, wearing the full plate underneath will still incur all of the penalties. Wearing your Eidolon isn't going to make it inherently easier to move in full plate.

From a DM standpoint, I would give you all the penalties because it feels like you're trying to "game" the system. You're vulnerable without your Eidolon, deal with it. Thats the price you pay for being a synthesist.

I'd also like to point out donning full plate takes longer than actually summoning your eidolon normally.

I'll admit it sounds pretty cheesy, but it's really a terrible decision all around and given the rules on use of items I don't think it applies since as I quoted he's not using the armor. Whether its fluffed away as he's floating inside a translucent eidolon and literally not moving his real body or the armor literally disappears for the eidolon's skin, it doesn't matter.

And the reasons why it's terrible are obvious: It's a terrible decision cause without your eidolon you sufer even more penalties than usual. Namely, they aren't proficient, so you get the penalties for it and take a penalty on all their attacks, which as a Synthesist is something they might do, since they have to have all the combat feats for their eidolon. Secondly, you are taking a movement penalty. Nuff said. And when their Eidolon goes down and then want to try to heal it with Summon Eidolon, or one of the other ones that "fixes" it, then you take the massive arcane spell failure rate when if they just wore light armor they'd completely avoid spell failure for free.

But when in the suit they avoid the penalties. I think it's a fair trade if they actually want to take on those penalties out of the suit for a marginal buff in AC.

Edited for clarity.


I agree with dunebugg. And his reasons.

As for not using the armour. He's wearing it, just not gaining any benefits.

Normally when a character wears armour, they get both the benefits and the penalties. A class ability is supressing the benefits, but not the penalties.


Funky Badger wrote:

I agree with dunebugg. And his reasons.

As for not using the armour. He's wearing it, just not gaining any benefits.

Normally when a character wears armour, they get both the benefits and the penalties. A class ability is supressing the benefits, but not the penalties.

The problem I see with that line of reasoning is that it doesn't say the benefits are suppressed, it says the armor is not used. It sounds to me like, by your reasoning, if a character carried a weapon that wasn't sized correctly for them, they would suffer the attack roll penalty even when it wasn't in use, they just aren't getting the benefit after all. Same with carrying a weapon in your offhand, if the character didn't use the weapon, would you still inflict twf penalties on the main hand attack?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Seeing as the summoner isn't actually casting the somatic part of the spell when in the synth 'suit' (the eid body is, it needs the limbs to use somatic components for the summoners spell) and the eid isn't wearing armor, there is no real reason to impose the % failure.


Quote:
A synthesist summons the essence of a powerful outsider to meld with his own being. The synthesist wears the eidolon like translucent, living armor. The eidolon mimics all of the synthesist’s movements, and the synthesist perceives through the eidolon’s senses and speaks through its voice, as the two are now one creature.

Bold mine.

The summoner IS actually casting the spell and needs to make the necessary movements.

More clarity:

Quote:
While fused, the synthesist loses the benefits of his armor

Loses the benefits. So, RAW says you still take ASF and ACP. Don't like it? don't wear full plate.

Sczarni

I've ruled it in my games that you lose your armor bonus and use the eidolons, and you still incur any penalties, encumbrance, arcane spell failure, etc.

The armor does not go away, it's there on you, you're just using your eidolon for protection now. Much how layering armor doesn't give you a much higher AC.


dunebugg wrote:
Quote:
A synthesist summons the essence of a powerful outsider to meld with his own being. The synthesist wears the eidolon like translucent, living armor. The eidolon mimics all of the synthesist’s movements, and the synthesist perceives through the eidolon’s senses and speaks through its voice, as the two are now one creature.

Bold mine.

The summoner IS actually casting the spell and needs to make the necessary movements.

More clarity:

Quote:
While fused, the synthesist loses the benefits of his armor
Loses the benefits. So, RAW says you still take ASF and ACP. Don't like it? don't wear full plate.
FAQ wrote:

Note: It is a matter of flavor and player's preference whether the synthesist floats immobile within the eidolon-suit and its limbs move at his mental command, if the synthesist moves his own arms and the eidolon-suit's arms echo this movement, or if the eidolon-suit is more form-fitting and the flesh-enveloping limbs move in direct response to the synthesist's own movements.

Sure, the Summoner IS actually casting the spell, but his limbs can be floating immobile, along with the rest of him. It is the Eidelon whose limbs and hands are moving.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

So the eidolon is being affected by penalties that come from something isn't wearing?

The fact that it 'mimics' is completely FLUFF. That means the combined creature does what the summoner wants to do, that the two creatures are not getting seperate actions during a round. It in no way backs up your claim ACP should effect a completely unencumbered creature because there is ineffectual armor worn by another (essentially physically helpless, whose physical stats are completely null and void) creature inside it.

The summoner is the intelligence and will of the combined creature, the eidolon is the physical aspect. The eidolon is the creature making somatic gestures at the desire of the controlling entity (aka summoner). When it 'mimics' what the summoner wants his body to do, it does it without being encumbered by armor, even if the summoner is. The summoner loses the benefit of the armor, the physical aspect has its own NA and/or armor without the penalty, the physical aspect wouldn't have any ACP as neither of the sources of that AC detail such a penalty.

Sczarni

The summoner who is controlling the eidolon is being affected by the armor he's wearing in this scenario. Even if it's offering no protection.

losing a benefit =/= losing a penalty.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
lantzkev wrote:

The summoner who is controlling the eidolon is being affected by the armor he's wearing in this scenario. Even if it's offering no protection.

losing a benefit =/= losing a penalty.

The eid's body is the one making the movements, who happens to not be wearing armor so ergo no penalty. The summoner cannot cast spells if the body he/she is in doesn't have the limbs to do so, the summoner isn't making somatic movement, the eid body is RAW.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber
Skylancer4 wrote:
lantzkev wrote:

The summoner who is controlling the eidolon is being affected by the armor he's wearing in this scenario. Even if it's offering no protection.

losing a benefit =/= losing a penalty.

The eid's body is the one making the movements, who happens to not be wearing armor so therefore no penalty for the eidolon body. The summoner cannot cast spells if the body he/she is in doesn't have the limbs to do so, the summoner isn't making somatic movement, the eid body is RAW.

A body not encumbered by armor = no ACP.


Skylancer4 wrote:

So the eidolon is being affected by penalties that come from something isn't wearing?

The fact that it 'mimics' is completely FLUFF. That means the combined creature does what the summoner wants to do, that the two creatures are not getting seperate actions during a round. It in no way backs up your claim ACP should effect a completely unencumbered creature because there is ineffectual armor worn by another (essentially physically helpless, whose physical stats are completely null and void) creature inside it.

The summoner is the intelligence and will of the combined creature, the eidolon is the physical aspect. The eidolon is the creature making somatic gestures at the desire of the controlling entity (aka summoner). When it 'mimics' what the summoner wants his body to do, it does it without being encumbered by armor, even if the summoner is. The summoner loses the benefit of the armor, the physical aspect has its own NA and/or armor without the penalty, the physical aspect wouldn't have any ACP as neither of the sources of that AC detail such a penalty.

The summoner is being affected by something it's wearing. Whether it's fluff or not, it still describes the eidolon (which is not an entity of itself) as mimicking the actions of the summoner. Thus, RAI. Backing up what is written afterwards, which is RAW. RAW and RAI seem to be in agreement.

You're walking into DM-fiat area regardless. And attempting to bypass a potential weakness of an arguably extremely powerful archetype with no penalty is very cheesy. I don't know any sane experienced DMs who would let it fly.

Read closely at the text in the description.. They are one being. The eidolon is not a thing, it's a living suit of armor that gives you free stats.

In short: don't be a munchkin.

Sczarni

Skylancer4 wrote:
lantzkev wrote:

The summoner who is controlling the eidolon is being affected by the armor he's wearing in this scenario. Even if it's offering no protection.

losing a benefit =/= losing a penalty.

The eid's body is the one making the movements, who happens to not be wearing armor so ergo no penalty. The summoner cannot cast spells if the body he/she is in doesn't have the limbs to do so, the summoner isn't making somatic movement, the eid body is RAW.

There's nothing in your argument that counters the point of you lose the benefit of armor, without anything be stated about losing the negatives of armor.

What you are talking about is a totally unrelated note.

Quote:
While fused, the synthesist loses the benefits of his armor. He counts both as his original type and as an outsider for any effect related to type, whichever is worse for the synthesist

When it doubt, it's best to just assume it's a negative. Of course these are separate sentences, but they are both related by paragraph and context.


It's not even cheesy or munchiny, it's just a bad decision. I already said why its a bad choice to actually wear heavy armor. They probably are at a medium load with the armor itself. How is it cheesy? Granted Synthesist are broken to all heck, but a Heavy Armor wearing Synth isn't.

Also, please read this entire thread before commenting.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

I agree totally that it comes close to DM fiat but RAW isn't saying it is or isn't one way or another. Here is why:

If a summoner creates a synth suit that doesn't have arms/limb equivalent they CANNOT cast spells, FAQ'd RAW. This means that a summoners own body is irrelevant to how a synth'd summoner cast spells. Even if naked and FoM'd their own body is NOT being considered when casting spells.
The eid's body is fully responsible for the casting of the spell, not the summoners body. RAW doesn't fully say what/how a summoners body is doing in the synth suit, it could be curled up in a feta position for all RAW cares/states (Probably doesn't define it so there is some freedom to describe what is happening from character to character). In the absence of rules we have to look at what rules we do have (in no particular order).

1) The eidolon needs limbs for the summoner to cast spells.
2) ACP occurs when a creature is wearing armor.
3) An eidolon is incapable of wearing armor.
4) The synth counts as both the outsider type as well as their own, and is considered to be which ever is worse for an effect.
5) Armor isn't an effect.

Also fluff says the eidolon mimics the movements of the summoner, which in certain cases means the synth is completely incapable of doing things it can if you take it to the extreme you are tryiing to shoe horn into into meaning. A synth typically isn't a quadraped, so summoner in a quad form would be incapable of running. A summoner in a synth suit with wings would be incapable of physical flight. A summoner in a synth suit with a tail attack would unable to use that tail attack. And on and on.

What it comes down to is RAW states the eidolon is casting the spell with its limbs, the eidolon isn't wearing armor, the summoner who is encased in that being is. There is nothing that states the ACP is transfered to the eidolon and enforcing that opinion it is, is a house rule. The summoners own physical body has no effect on the eidolons physical body with the exception of constant effect 'worn' magical items/effects.

I'm not saying it is intended to work this way, I am saying it isn't prohibited and RAW doesn't say it does happen the way you think it should.

Sczarni

The eidolon needs limbs to cast spells with a somatic component

Quote:
Casting an Arcane Spell in Armor: A character who casts an arcane spell while wearing armor must usually make an arcane spell failure check.

When you fuse with your eidolon, you no longer use your armor, you use the armor of the eidolon, this however does not bypass the effect wearing has on your movements to execute spells.

In fact your fluff is not fluff, but the actual mechanic.

Quote:
Also fluff says the eidolon mimics the movements of the summoner
Quote:
Armor restricts the complicated gestures required while casting any spell that has a somatic component

it's not just fluff, it's the actual mechanical description of what and how the fused eidolon and summoner work in relation to each other.

It's not a house rule that's saying you don't incur ASF, it's the actual reading of what's going on.

The book says you "lose the benefits of armor" not that you stop wearing it, not that it magically comes off, in fact it goes to specify that all your gear is intact, and that you cannot use the abilities of your armor nor benefit from it...

There's nothing that says you no longer wear it in fact it suggests that you have all your gear and items, that you merely no longer get benefit of it.

There is nothing that permits rule wise for you to wear armor and ignore ASF without the use of feats or special abilities, which this scenario is lacking


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

May I suggest we just click the FAQ button at this point?

I can only reiterate that the summoners body isn't the the physical form casting the spell so many times, the eidolon is doing it (and incapable of wearing armor so couldn't ever incur ACP from that piece of equipment).


Skylancer4 wrote:

May I suggest we just click the FAQ button at this point?

I can only reiterate that the summoners body isn't the the physical form casting the spell so many times, the eidolon is doing it (and incapable of wearing armor so couldn't ever incur ACP from that piece of equipment).

Agreed, I FAQ'd the orginigal question.

Osirion

Personally, I would just wear a mithral breastplate. Decent armor and can cast without spell failure if anything happens to my eidolon.

Sczarni

Artanthos wrote:
Personally, I would just wear a mithral breastplate. Decent armor and can cast without spell failure if anything happens to my eidolon.

This is the winning quote =P


Artanthos wrote:
Personally, I would just wear a mithral breastplate. Decent armor and can cast without spell failure if anything happens to my eidolon.

Mithral reduces arcane spell failure by 10%. Breastplate has a spell failure % of 15.

Anyway, I'd want to do it big or not at all.


joeyfixit wrote:
Artanthos wrote:
Personally, I would just wear a mithral breastplate. Decent armor and can cast without spell failure if anything happens to my eidolon.

Mithral reduces arcane spell failure by 10%. Breastplate has a spell failure % of 15.

Anyway, I'd want to do it big or not at all.

Summoners can cast in light armor. Mithral Medium Armors count as light for everything except proficiencies.

+1 Comfort Mithral Breastplate FTW no armor check penalty too.


Gignere wrote:
joeyfixit wrote:
Artanthos wrote:
Personally, I would just wear a mithral breastplate. Decent armor and can cast without spell failure if anything happens to my eidolon.

Mithral reduces arcane spell failure by 10%. Breastplate has a spell failure % of 15.

Anyway, I'd want to do it big or not at all.

Summoners can cast in light armor. Mithral Medium Armors count as light for everything except proficiencies.

+1 Comfort Mithral Breastplate FTW no armor check penalty too.

Well... yeah.

But if they're wearing armor they're not proficient in, wouldn't they take the spell failure chance? This strikes me as gaming the system a lot more deviously than what I'm talking about, which is casting in Eidelon form without armor penalties.


joeyfixit wrote:
Gignere wrote:
joeyfixit wrote:
Artanthos wrote:
Personally, I would just wear a mithral breastplate. Decent armor and can cast without spell failure if anything happens to my eidolon.

Mithral reduces arcane spell failure by 10%. Breastplate has a spell failure % of 15.

Anyway, I'd want to do it big or not at all.

Summoners can cast in light armor. Mithral Medium Armors count as light for everything except proficiencies.

+1 Comfort Mithral Breastplate FTW no armor check penalty too.

Well... yeah.

But if they're wearing armor they're not proficient in, wouldn't they take the spell failure chance? This strikes me as gaming the system a lot more deviously than what I'm talking about, which is casting in Eidelon form without armor penalties.

Well that is RAW and most likely RAI too since bards can cast in light armor starting from the CRB, and it isn't like mithral hasn't been around just as long. I am pretty positive a bard can also cast in mithral breastplate without ASF.


Yeah, but "proficient in light armor; can cast in light armor" isn't the same as "proficient in light armor; can cast in medium armor (that you're not proficient in) that counts as light armor for everything but proficiency".

RAW? Maybe. And that's a big maybe. RAI? Personally, I don't think so.

I'll admit that you're argument is interesting. Worth its own FAQ thread, I'd say.


RAW, that's actually fairly simple. Yes, a bard (or summoner) in mithral breastplate can cast without worries of ASF. It counts as light armor for movement and other limitations. However, said bard (or summoner) will take the armor check penalty on all applicable attack and skill rolls (anything Str or Dex based) because he is not actually proficient with it. Not saying that makes any sense, but that is how it works per RAW.


So the question at the heart of this thread is, "does a Synthesist incur a chance of arcane spell failure while wearing his Eidelon suit if he is wearing armor that he is proficient in but is medium or heavy armor?"

This may be a shot in the dark, but I'd love to get dev input. The issue will become very relevant to our campaign next week.

My opinion is that the requirement of the Eidelon to have limbs (and hands) to cast spells with somatic components is the crux of the issue. If the armor is really interfering with the Summoner's ability to cast spells while floating inside an Eidelon, said Summoner really shouldn't be required to have his Eidelon grow limbs to in order to cast the spell. Contrariwise, the Eidelon requiring limbs to cast the spell says to me that it's the Eidelon doing the actual verbal and somatic (and, I guess, material) portion of the casting. It shouldn't really matter what the Summoner floating in his tummy is wearing, any more than said Eidelon would incur ASF by swallowing a full-plate Paladin whole.

But I could be wrong. Anyone want to help me get this FAQ'd?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules Subscriber

Given the amount of time and number of FAQs/Errata the synth has already gotten AND that it has been removed from organized play, I wouldn't hold my breath on any more 'input' from them. Not to say they won't at some point, just they probably have their hands full with deadlines and new material and can leave it at 'check with your GM about how it works in their game.'

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / More Synthesist Questions 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.