I'm not saying there won't be summoning spells, but none of the previews I have seen have had any summons. It would not suppose me of summoning has been removed or at least weakened from pathfinder summons.Summoning is a fullcaster thing and nothing has 9 spell levels.
Cutting summons into 6th levels is awkward. So I'm thinking summoning if any will be like modular astral constructs from psionics.
I don't remember where it was said... But I think there's been discussion that 9th level spells exist in Starfinder; but essentially that the 7th to 9th level spells aren't going to have a class associated with them in core.
... Something like "full 1-9 level spellcasters will be in books after core"... Or something.
But arguing the point about such things it probably more suited for like... A thread for discussing a hypothetical "Starfinder Ultimate Legacy". Which I imagine will likely be like... A book for both primitive NPCs using old Pathfinder Classes, because for them they're still relevant; and Players who want to role-play such races (or traditionalists, or old isolated enclaves of wizards in time dilated whatever.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not saying there won't be summoning spells, but none of the previews I have seen have had any summons. It would not suppose me of summoning has been removed or at least weakened from pathfinder summons.Summoning is a fullcaster thing and nothing has 9 spell levels.
Cutting summons into 6th levels is awkward. So I'm thinking summoning if any will be like modular astral constructs from psionics.
Both Summoner and Unchained Summoner are 6-casters. Given that, saying that summoning is exclusive to 9-casters is a bit of a stretch.
I could see Mystics getting summons as a scaling connection power (Much like summoner 'Summon Monster' ability works). Every X level it scales up.
The scaling spells from Occult Adventures also seem to be be a thing if First Contact is anything to go by.
I wonder at what level it will be possible to have a drone that looks human and can hold a conversation with non-Mechanics?
I could see some interesting things to do with a drone that is not obviously a machine.
Both Summoner and Unchained Summoner are 6-casters. Given that, saying that summoning is exclusive to 9-casters is a bit of a stretch.I'm not saying there won't be summoning spells, but none of the previews I have seen have had any summons. It would not suppose me of summoning has been removed or at least weakened from pathfinder summons.Summoning is a fullcaster thing and nothing has 9 spell levels.
Cutting summons into 6th levels is awkward. So I'm thinking summoning if any will be like modular astral constructs from psionics.
That summons based on level 1 through 9 spells...
If 9th level casters aren't in then there is no reason to make 9 levels of summon alien just to attach an SLA to it.
You forget that spells have been rebalanced. A 6th level SF summoning spell could very well be as strong as a 9th level PF summoning spell was, at least internally.
|
I don´t think (and hope) there will be spells that summon multiple creatures which all act independantly.
Summoning was one of the most OP abilities in PF and it slows down combat a lot.
Summoning one creature or a swarm is okay, but it will probably either act on the summoners turn and in his stead or be an uncontrolled (read: played by the GM) monster attacking at random. ;-)
I wonder if it'll be possible to split non Move/Standard actions, like have one do a Move and Standard (or Full-Round) while the other does, like, a Move and a Swift. Probably not but it would be an interesting dynamic.
From what I have been able to make out there are no more Swift/Immediate actions. You get one 'Reaction' a round which can be spent as needed by circumstance of ability. Some reactions occur outside your normal turn.
Whether you can react or not is determined by the power your using or ability your using to actually 'react' to something/one else doing something to your character.
If they do include summons a simple solution would be to limit it to a single summon at a time.
Summoning one creature or a swarm is okay, but it will probably either act on the summoners turn and in his stead
Given that the Mechanic's drone apparently takes some of the mechanic's actions to operate, I'm guessing that any summons will be at LEAST as restrictive, if not more restrictive (caster taking a full action for the summons to make an action). Handy if you REALLY need something to take a few swings worth of damage and maybe get a few whacks of its own in, but you bleed action economy to do it.
If they do include summons a simple solution would be to limit it to a single summon at a time.
Edit: Also, yes. This too.
I could see the logic in having to directly control your summoned monster.
I wonder if it'll be possible to split non Move/Standard actions, like have one do a Move and Standard (or Full-Round) while the other does, like, a Move and a Swift. Probably not but it would be an interesting dynamic.From what I have been able to make out there are no more Swift/Immediate actions. You get one 'Reaction' a round which can be spent as needed by circumstance of ability. Some reactions occur outside your normal turn.
Whether you can react or not is determined by the power your using or ability your using to actually 'react' to something/one else doing something to your character.
Yeah, I forgot the change in terminology and how they combined them. I guess that would make it hard to deny a Mechanic their reaction even if the Drone's doing the Full.
If they do include summons a simple solution would be to limit it to a single summon at a time.
I'd rather they didn't have summons than do the video game thing and adding random number limits.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
If they do include summons a simple solution would be to limit it to a single summon at a time.I'd rather they didn't have summons than do the video game thing and adding random number limits.
Why is it a "video game thing" to put a limit on summons? Is it just to make the idea sound scarier to people who don't like computer games? Because there are tons of mechanical limits on numbers in Pathfinder and Starfinder, and putting one on summons makes sense from balance, time and gameplay perspectives- it's nothing to do with how computer games work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, to be fair the reasons would be similar. Let's say you had the ability to summon a pack of dogs. Which is easier to work for the player and gm? 1d4+3 individual dogs or say a creature called "pack, dog" with the troop subtype?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dog swarm.
Really hoping to get a class or iconic preview today. They've been being released at either 4pm or 8pm, so there's a chance (I hope).
Dog swarm.
Bingo! Pun intended.
Dog swarm.Bingo! Pun intended.
Can we not dog pile on the rabbit?
Can we not dog pile on the rabbit?
It's OK, you wascally wabbits always come out ahead.
Why is it a "video game thing" to put a limit on summons? Is it just to make the idea sound scarier to people who don't like computer games? Because there are tons of mechanical limits on numbers in Pathfinder and Starfinder, and putting one on summons makes sense from balance, time and gameplay perspectives- it's nothing to do with how computer games work.If they do include summons a simple solution would be to limit it to a single summon at a time.I'd rather they didn't have summons than do the video game thing and adding random number limits.
Because like every video game has a one creature per caster summoning limit.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because like every video game has a one creature per caster summoning limit.Why is it a "video game thing" to put a limit on summons? Is it just to make the idea sound scarier to people who don't like computer games? Because there are tons of mechanical limits on numbers in Pathfinder and Starfinder, and putting one on summons makes sense from balance, time and gameplay perspectives- it's nothing to do with how computer games work.If they do include summons a simple solution would be to limit it to a single summon at a time.I'd rather they didn't have summons than do the video game thing and adding random number limits.
I just played diablo 3 and had up to 23 creatures
From a story standpoint, maybe it's just another aspect of magic that was either lost or changed somehow. There probably won't be an in book explanation. It's just part of the way that magic works now. Can't hit 1 person with more than 1 magic missile, and you can't summon more than 1 monster. If that's even how it works.
I wouldn't say lost or changed, more like "made redundant". Given that by this point in the timeline, security robots are mass produced, and you could probably buy one for a pittance, a Spellcaster doesn't stand much to gain with using summoning for gaining large numbers of mooks. Especially considering that even if they're still of the "build your own stuff" type as a good set of spellcasters are, Mechanics probably get bonuses over them too.
... So I can imagine that Spellcasters using Summons that sacrifice quantity for certain qualities like power or utility, or even just for better use against specialized foes or as a temporary mount... That's probably something they'd go for.
In any case, the main advantage that Mechanics would have over Spellcasters is that a Spell has a duration. A Physical Object typically does not. So at the very least, the drone's still going to be there when the giant spectral fire dog the Mystic rode in on disappears.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because like every video game has a one creature per caster summoning limit.Why is it a "video game thing" to put a limit on summons? Is it just to make the idea sound scarier to people who don't like computer games? Because there are tons of mechanical limits on numbers in Pathfinder and Starfinder, and putting one on summons makes sense from balance, time and gameplay perspectives- it's nothing to do with how computer games work.If they do include summons a simple solution would be to limit it to a single summon at a time.I'd rather they didn't have summons than do the video game thing and adding random number limits.
Base summoner only allows you one summon SLA active at a time. Most action rpgs that feature summoning tend to let you run around with hordes (walk into cow level and everyone lags out as the game pulls in several dozens skeletons, a golem, your merc and whatever other nonsense you had at the time) so it's neither videogamey nor traditional to only limit one summon at a time.
Base summoner only allows you one summon SLA active at a time. Most action rpgs that feature summoning tend to let you run around with hordes (walk into cow level and everyone lags out as the game pulls in several dozens skeletons, a golem, your merc and whatever other nonsense you had at the time) so it's neither videogamey nor traditional to only limit one summon at a time.Because like every video game has a one creature per caster summoning limit.Why is it a "video game thing" to put a limit on summons? Is it just to make the idea sound scarier to people who don't like computer games? Because there are tons of mechanical limits on numbers in Pathfinder and Starfinder, and putting one on summons makes sense from balance, time and gameplay perspectives- it's nothing to do with how computer games work.If they do include summons a simple solution would be to limit it to a single summon at a time.I'd rather they didn't have summons than do the video game thing and adding random number limits.
one eidolon replacing SLA and as many accelerated access summoning spells as they want.
I wouldn't say most action RPGs because most of them don't. Diablo 2 and 3 let's you but most recent crpgs just don't. Shadow run at least had action economy for two drones but fetish summons were still capped at one for some reason.
So no I reject your idea that mono summons are anything more than a modern meta convention. Both 5e and 4e are either mono summon spell or mono summon games. I dislike it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem with just spamming loads of summons is that the game is built around a certain action economy and giving yourself a load of controllable monsters that act on their own turns is gonna really screw with the balance. A tabletop RPG could be designed in a way where the action economy is less important so extra allies isn't broken (though I can't imagine what that game would look like) but that deviates too much from the style of game the Paizo guys are trying to create so I don't think you'll be seeing multiple summons here, if there are any summon spells in the CRB at all.
The problem with just spamming loads of summons is that the game is built around a certain action economy and giving yourself a load of controllable monsters that act on their own turns is gonna really screw with the balance. A tabletop RPG could be designed in a way where the action economy is less important so extra allies isn't broken (though I can't imagine what that game would look like) but that deviates too much from the style of game the Paizo guys are trying to create so I don't think you'll be seeing multiple summons here, if there are any summon spells in the CRB at all.
This is always my problem with summoners. As much as I love the concept of them and I really really do having one guy plop out one big eidilon and a whole bunch of summoned critters always seems like once it hits their phase their bag full of actions in combat kinda stymie everybody else at the table as they wait for you to do a bunch of different things with all of your minions.
I think what it sounds like we are going to see here is the mechanic is going to need so spend some of his action economy directing his drone to do stuff so it winds up being more stuff you are doing than not having a drone without everything getting really bogged down waiting for your herd to do stuff.
The problem with just spamming loads of summons is that the game is built around a certain action economy and giving yourself a load of controllable monsters that act on their own turns is gonna really screw with the balance. A tabletop RPG could be designed in a way where the action economy is less important so extra allies isn't broken (though I can't imagine what that game would look like) but that deviates too much from the style of game the Paizo guys are trying to create so I don't think you'll be seeing multiple summons here, if there are any summon spells in the CRB at all.This is always my problem with summoners. As much as I love the concept of them and I really really do having one guy plop out one big eidilon and a whole bunch of summoned critters always seems like once it hits their phase their bag full of actions in combat kinda stymie everybody else at the table as they wait for you to do a bunch of different things with all of your minions.
I think what it sounds like we are going to see here is the mechanic is going to need so spend some of his action economy directing his drone to do stuff so it winds up being more stuff you are doing than not having a drone without everything getting really bogged down waiting for your herd to do stuff.
Not to mention games have a bad habit of turning into slog fests where plauers are parties unto themselves with 30 minute turns.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Both 5e and 4e are either mono summon spell or mono summon games. I dislike it.
Most 5e summons (Conjure "X") allow you to summon as many as 8 creatures (beasts, elementals, fey, etc). Of course, the action economy is every bit as powerful as you would imagine, especially for 5th edition (certainly when each of these summons is casting the already OP heat metal). And even the numerous 5e multi-summons pale in comparison to the horde a well-built necromancer can put together. It is because no limit is placed on 5e summoning action economy that makes the original beast master ranger look even worse. The 5e summoner wizard is running around with 9 (or more!) actions, while the poor ranger has 1 action split between 2 characters.
Wizard? Nah, both the ranger and druid just summon 8 elk and be done with it because they can trapple down pretty much anything in their way. They deal a unbelievable amount of damage at the end of a charge.
Wizard? Nah, both the ranger and druid just summon 8 elk and be done with it because they can trapple down pretty much anything in their way. They deal a unbelievable amount of damage at the end of a charge.
Ah but those devs said the official rule in 5e is the DM picks what you summon, you merely pick one of the CR categories that all include "x cr or lower".
Which means all your summons can be cr 0 critters and that's inherently a fair balanced interpretation of the rules.
EDIT: /s
5e has made me antsy about summon rules. I didn't buy their book until I checked to see if summoning was cool and then the devs ruined it with an official ruling.
|
Eh, I'll be happy if there is no summoning in starfinder, and even if there is I expect that the action economy of it will require the caster to sacrifice actions each round to direct the summoned creature.
Summoning is one of the most broken things in pathfinder, and starfinder is taking steps to reduce turn time. No 9th level spells. No iterative attacks. Controlling multiple summons slows down combat more than iteratives so i can't imagine that summons would be left unchanged from pathfinder when the rest of the game has been so thoroughly rebalanced.
I would rather they leave out summoning for now than solidify bad summoning. It was only important for me in 5e because there is already a good fantasy RPG that can handle summons just fine.
I for one find summoning to be the most balanced thing you can do as a full caster in pathfinder, but you have to manage your turn responsibly. Summoning little mini fighters or resistable SLAs is far more game friendly than hurtling all you foes through a gate into hell or high DC save and lose spells.
I find the problems with pf summoning are meta, the player just can't run their character well, problems.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Summoning Spells are the most annoying thing in Pathfinder.
There are very few player that are able to quickly pick ONE creature and let it do one thing (of more and more abilities the higher CR the creature gets) per round QUICKLY.
Most times the other players have to wait for minutes.
Keeping track of the initiative, hit points and abilities of additional creatures is also a nightmare for the GM.
It is also unrealistic and overpowered, no good comes from this as it is.
It would be another thing if you summon ONE creature (which can either attack or cast a spell) and have to split your actions between PC and the summoned creature.
Unrealistic is a silly complaint about magic without some explanation.
You complain about summons taking player time but I've waited minutes for fighters to take their turn. It's a failure in player etiquette to be slow.
You can blame game design, but I wouldn't want to limit design to whatever a discourteous player is capable of. Some players can't play anything with spells without taking 15 minute turns. That doesn't mean spell casting should be removed or players should only have one spell up at a time.
As for overpowered, I have a current character that can either summon or trash your encounter with high save shadow spells that just remove enemies from combat. Summons are solid and basically always work. They aren't silver bullets. They do trivialize classes with poor mechanics though.
I prefer the fire and forget type of summoning. You summon, then the critter does its thing as adjudicated by the GM.
I prefer the fire and forget type of summoning. You summon, then the critter does its thing as adjudicated by the GM.
Ah, the days in Bauldar's Gate 2... Where an Invisible wizard would cast "Protection from Evil" and then Gate into a room full of enemies. Only for the Pit Fiend to destroy literally everything in the room before disappearing.
Sorry if you meant a different kind of "fire and forget" summoning, but really, this is the only way I see summoning a thing you can't control working out: Is if its stronger than you, and has no compulsion to listen to you, and is basically Godzilla.
... That's not from a balance perspective, or a story perspective, its just from a "this is what happens when the players don't trust the GM" perspective.
---
Back to Mechanic... I suddenly find myself wondering if it might eventually get a "Titan Mauler" equivalent. Like, a drone that when being worn, you are a size or two larger... Something like that. I don't know... I occasionally imagine Gundam.
... No, I don't have a better way of phrasing that. Just... Imagine Gundam.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whiny so-called pacifists going into long winded speeches as they murder entire crowds of people? Because that is the only thing I can think of when someone says 'Imagine Gundam.' Over and over again, with trivial variations of the same characters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whiny so-called pacifists going into long winded speeches as they murder entire crowds of people? Because that is the only thing I can think of when someone says 'Imagine Gundam.' Over and over again, with trivial variations of the same characters.
That completely disregards emotionless highly skilled child soldier war orphan just trying to survive as he struggles with notions of happiness and family. Where war is just a means for the wealthy elite to make more money.
Back to Mechanic... I suddenly find myself wondering if it might eventually get a "Titan Mauler" equivalent. Like, a drone that when being worn, you are a size or two larger... Something like that. I don't know... I occasionally imagine Gundam.
... No, I don't have a better way of phrasing that. Just... Imagine Gundam.
Titan Mauler would be useless in starfinder since weapons gain no benefit from being larger.
I prefer the fire and forget type of summoning. You summon, then the critter does its thing as adjudicated by the GM.Ah, the days in Bauldar's Gate 2... Where an Invisible wizard would cast "Protection from Evil" and then Gate into a room full of enemies. Only for the Pit Fiend to destroy literally everything in the room before disappearing.
Sorry if you meant a different kind of "fire and forget" summoning, but really, this is the only way I see summoning a thing you can't control working out: Is if its stronger than you, and has no compulsion to listen to you, and is basically Godzilla.
... That's not from a balance perspective, or a story perspective, its just from a "this is what happens when the players don't trust the GM" perspective.
---
Back to Mechanic... I suddenly find myself wondering if it might eventually get a "Titan Mauler" equivalent. Like, a drone that when being worn, you are a size or two larger... Something like that. I don't know... I occasionally imagine Gundam.
... No, I don't have a better way of phrasing that. Just... Imagine Gundam.
That is exactly the type of summoning I speak of. Then again I'm usually the GM. Oh, and Milo is right, large weapons don't do more damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Of course bigger weapons do more damage. Anyone who says differently is trying to sell you something. Also red cars go faster. Fact.