PathMaster's page

PathMaster wrote:

It's because they wanted to make Crossbow using and Gun using Gunslinger different

Then let them rapid reload their weapons fatser than any class...

I uh... don't understand what you are trying to say.

It's because they wanted to make Crossbow using and Gun using Gunslinger different

Most "create a weapon" guides I've seen put Reload's budget as 1 die size, when 2 handed is considered "bad" enough to be worth 2 die sizes.

I do think Reload is undervalued at its current value and should be bumped to 2 die sizes (the general sentiment seems that Reload is at least equal of a drawback compared to 2 handed).

Therefore, as a basic solution, I propose we increase the die size of all non-firearm reload weapons by 1. Simple, easy and (mostly) clean

For Firearms I propose a crazier idea: add Deadly to them.
And yes, this is meant to stack with the already present Fatal trait.
Is this balanced? Probably not! This definitely feels very powerful, but maybe I'm overstimating its power!
That's why I'll ask you to give me your thoughts on this idea.

Some people have mentioned the idea of "ranged manuevers", and I'd like to point out that they already kind of exist:
Called Shot allows you to spend an additional action to inflict a debuff on an enemy if you hit with a strike.
Obviously if we're going to make them universal they'll need some tweaking, but they're a good starting point.

There is no mechanical difference between slowed and stunned.

That's actually incorrect: Stunned prevents you from taking reactions, Slowed does not.

The first thing that comes to mind would be Ranged Flanking.
It would basically be just the current Flanking rules, but instead of two creatures having to be in melee, only one of them needs to be, or hell, even none at all, and instead of using reach it would use the first range increment (For attack spells and others attack roll ranged attack that just have range we treat that as the first increment.)

Another thing is that if you took cover you should at least be able to downgrade the amount of protection your cover gives to the enemy if not completely ignore it because if it doesn't you're not really benefiting from it unless some of the enemies are on the other side of the cover, which they probably won't.

I am just spitballing here, but hey, I figured it would get the ball rolling.

My guess is that since the Starfinder First Edition system uses the OGL license and the Second Edition hasn't released yet there is no ORC-related stuff for Starfinder.
You'll likely have to wait until September 3 to use the ORC license with Starfinder.

"Dr." Cupi wrote:

...it works in a specific way. The spell class feature essentially has the ability to ignore int via replacing it with a KAS attack.

Only for a very small selection of spells and only when trying to deal damage.

You're making it sounds like Spellstrike isn't pne of Magus' Core Features.

For everything else - regular casting instead of using Spellstrike, using buff/debuff spells, or even using Spellstrike with a spell that involves a saving throw - the Magus is using their INT for the casting attack bonus or save DC.

When casting buffs your spell proficiency is only going to matter when counteracting is involved, which isn't often.

As for a class being able to dump uts KAS even a bit, that feels a bit counterintuitive.
I've been told that you should max out your KAS first, and then worry about other stats.
To have a class going against that feels odd and IMO a bit of an Ivory Tower design, which is something Pf2e has tried to avoid.

I feel like Paizo is trying to make rhe errata fit the books, that's why we haven't gotten stuff like "Making Kineticist more compatible with the rest of the system" or "Clarifying what an instance of damage is".
Needless to say, that's dumb.
Unless you're writing errata for a book you're remastering (which I do have a couple issues with Paizo's approach) it's frankly better to just fix what is broken and worry later if it fits the physical books.

Well... with Dragonkin from Starfinder in at Large, Dragonbloods being able to niche into medium, Kobolds being Small, I wonder if Dragonets will be Tiny to round out the size categories.

Dragonbkoods can be any size. They're a Versatile Heritage.

Nothing states they're one handed only

Well, this was not on my list today. I'm not dissapointed though

The errata is cool and all, but you kind of didn't adress Robot companions having an additional tier compared to Animal Companions while not having any rule adressing what it actually does.

The physical book ships from the US, right?

It could be because the playtest didn't manage to do that.

Or your GM didn't make long range that common.

Really, it could be any number of factors.

Because the Starfinder 2e team said that.

Subclassing balance has always been terrible tbh, never understood why.

Ectar wrote:

Real shame that, given balance was touted as a major selling point of the edition.

I mean even the CRB had broken subclasses and wild variation between classes. Balance has always been more of a community idea, tbh.

Which are?

Why does it want to strike pretty often?

Because it's a Martial?

Also, the inventor doesn't add int to his strikes. Nor does the magus. the Swashbuckler,

Just because Inventor doesn't do it, it doesn't mean that it's unnecessary.

Unrelated, but if a Mechanic doesn't want to Strike they could just dump Dex and Str, wear Medium Armour and just eat the penalties.

I don't consider the three save Attributes must have by default, however since Mechanic is a Martial (as I've proven) they're going to want to Strike pretty often, and a Martials with +2 in its attacking class is kinda bad.

Some of these mods definitely shouldn't be something you can permanently give (at level 13) to an ally for their personal use.

Yeah, one of the mods is basically temporany Legendary Sneak, with Enduring Mods it essentially becomes a free Legendary Sneak.

My apologies if I misunderstood, the impression I got was that you were in fact claiming that boosting Dex made the Mechanic MAD, and that dumping one of their scores for Charisma was something they should be allowed to do without much consequence. If that's not the case, then disregard that part of my post.

My point is that since the Mechanic's Key Attribute is Intelligence, and they don't have a feature to add it to Strike Attack Rolls, which causes:

This is also why I take issue with the KAS of certain Rogue Rackets, Runesmith, Thaumaturge etc.

First of all, rude.
Second, I never said they should be able to dump their Key Attribute, in fact I said the exact opposite in my post.
Third, Wis is neither a Key Attribute the Mechanic can get nor an attribute that can be added to Strikes, so it's likely only going to be at +1 at level 1, and it's going to lag behind other Martial classes investing in Wis skills. Every +1 matters.

I'm sorry, what game are you playing if you think pushing a ranged character to boost Dex constitutes "forcing MAD"?

The same world where a class' KAS does not contribute to their main "to-hit" (inteded as Attack Roll, DCs and/or Class-relevant skills).

What are you even trying to do with that extra ability score you're freeing up?

A number of things: Intimidating foes into obedience, being harder to kill or remembering your deity's teachings better.

Focusing more on the 1-10 range is something I can understand completely, but never publishing 11+ SFS adventures is something I can't really get behind.
Especially as others have pointed out that higher starting levels might alleviate the issue entirely.
Hope that this decision will be reverted.

The Mystic and Witchwarper also come from a playtest that dealt with the system as a whole, so their balance isn't a strong argument for casters of other playtests.

What do you mean? You can easily have a +4 int and a +3 dex (which takes care of armor and most ranged weapons in this system). I was very confused by you constantly mentioning strength. If they really want to build for a character that uses weapons that require strength, those would be area weapons, which in SF2e use your class DC as the save. so they could easily build +3 int and +2 in dex and +2 str which, because they have medium armor proficiency means they are still covered for armor and the kind of weapons you're refering to.

I ask that you slowly reread the post, because it seems you are arguing against points different than those I made in my post.

Ehh, just adding some action feats for remote hacking or crafting related debuffing on tech enemies would help further justify the non strike KAS. PF2E gets along just fine with it's -1 martials; HOW WELL those classes utilize their non strike KAS is more of a case by case study.

The issue is not whether they can hit things well enough, is that to do so they have to invest a lot more compared to other classes, leaving little wiggle room for versatility in ability scores and skills, which isn't great.

So, the long awaited Tech Core Playtest is finally here, bringing with it the Mechanic and Technomancer, who are the last in a series of classes whose Key Attribute is Intelligence (Paizo really loves smart fellas, uh?).

They're both pretty neat classes, who both funnily seem in some way to improve on classes Pathfinder has already taken a shot at with Technomancer having a better implementation of "schools" and "school slots", and Mechanic filling better the idea of an Inventor capable of modifying their gear.

But this isn't the point of the post.

The point is that Mechanic's Key Attribute only covers half of the class. Allow me to explain:

-The Mechanic starts trained in Simple and Martial weapons, and increases its proficiencies at level 5 and 13, like every single Martial and Gish in the game;
-It gains Weapon Specialization at level 7 and improves it into its greater version at level 15, like every other Martial and (good) Gish;
-Its not going to use its Class DC as often as a Kineticist and Soldier or a Spellcaster with their Spell DC to warrant worse Strikes, except when selecting a Mine Exocortex, which is only one of the options available to a class.

Mechanic is a Martial, there's no doubt about that, and as a Martial it's going to want to Strike its enemies, and to do that they're going to want to have their Strength or Dexterity at +4 to hit as often as possible, but uh oh, its Key Attribute is Intelligence, which can't be used for Strikes.

This means that in order to reach the power other classes reach by having a +4 in their Key Ability Score, Mechanic is going to need to have to also get +3 in Strength or Dexterity, leaving the rest of the stats at either +1 or 0 (I have ignored Ancestries with 3 boosts and a flaw for simplicity's sake).

Needless to say, this isn't great. It doesn't ruin the class by any means, sure, but that doesn't mean it can't be better, as seen with the Cleric and Investigator remasters. (Admittedly a big buff for Cleric)

How do we fix this? The answer is surprisingly simple: just allow Int to be used for Strikes' Attack Rolls.

Ok, it's not just that.
Remember when I said that Intelligence can't be used for Strikes? That's not completely true, there is a class that can add the Intelligence modifier instead of the usual modifiers to the Attack Rolls of Strikes: Investigator.

How do they do that? Thanks to Devise a Stratagem, which allows to use Intelligence when Striking the target of the ability instead of Strength of Dexterity, so long as the weapon has the Agile or Finesse traits, is Ranged or is a Sap.

Now, we can't just slap Devise a Stratagem on the Mechanic, since that's the Investigator's thing, but we can draw inspiration from it, by tying the ability to add Intelligence to a Strike's Attack Roll to one of the Mechanics preexisting abilities.

There are two ways we could do this, in my opinion:
1) We can allow you to add your Intelligence modifier when Striking with a weapon under the effects of Modify, or
2) We tie it to the Exocortexes (for example, when a creature has taken damage from one of our Exocortexes).

What do you think?

TL;DR Mechanic should be able to add the Intelligence modifier to Strikes' attack Roll

Thanks for the news! I'm not able to take a look right now but, for those who have access and a bit of time, can your mechanic still ride the drone like a mount? I'm asking for a friend... (not really!)

There's nothing in the Drone mechanics that say you can't, and since they otherwise work like Animal Companions you can

PathMaster went overboard with his OP

Are you referring to the hyperbole?

Bar: not to rage is a choice which makes your melee suboptimal. Fighter: picking a weapon for which you are not fully proficient is a choice which makes your melee suboptimal.

Except that Fighters only suffer that in levels 5-18. Outside of those levels, a Fighter isn't considering Weapon Group (excluding planning for higher levels).

[Quote"Easl"]But I think you're reversing the burden of proof here. You're a player, making an argument about why the game should be changed. The burden is really on you to say what important, compelling or necessary reason there is for Paizo to change the game. Paizo's not going to change anything based on 'PathMaster's preferred alteration of the rules keeps game balance about the same, but PathMaster just likes it better." Nor should they. Given the number of players with different preferences, that sort of method for deciding when Pf2E should be changed would be crazy, right?

I am at a loss of words here.

Page 166: Take the sack with 5 rocks away from the fire giant’s items. The remastered creature doesn’t need them for any abilities.

I doubt Paizo considered this actually "important" or "neccesary", and nobody outside of Paizo cared before or after the change, and yet it happened, because why not?

Since I misjudged this thread let me asking a question then. What makes Fighter's one weapon group not needed or boring when you get classes like Rogue who MUST use a Agile or Finesse weapon unless you are a certain Racket? What about Gunslingers being good is only Guns, Crossbows & Combination (Gun-half) weapons?

First of all, Fighter being boring is not relevant at all to my argument.

Second, as I've already stated in my post, Fighters kind of already are limited by what weapons they choose by virtue of having to choose between Strenght or Dexterity, and besides, they can freely ignore Weapon Groups at levels 1-4 and 19-20, so why suddenly change that when you're going to flip back eventually?

As for Gunslingers, the answer is threefold: 1, their identity is of that of the gun (and crossbow) class, so they are limited by their flavour, whereas Fighter's flavour start and ends with "Fight good" (Not a bad thing in this case, mind you); 2, their mechanics only work with Reload weapons; 3, they get extra precision damage thanks to Slinger's Precision.

To be fair, the line between "higher proficiency in one weapon group" and "higher proficiency in all weapon groups" is thin for a reason, it doesn't change the class' effectiveness that much.

PathMaster wrote:

Second, I'm complaining because there's no good reason Fighters should be limited to a single weapon,

They aren't. Their fighter weapon mastery is for a weapon category.. All axes. All swords. Etc. Not just a single weapon.

Meant to write Weapon Group there, my apologies.

Second, "limited" is something of an exaggeration because a fighter can wield any simple or martial weapon with the same proficiency as other martials. Their class benefit is limited; their ability to wield a very wide range of weapons with full martial proficiency is not. This is quite normal. Bars only get their class benefit damage when raging. Rogues do their class bonus damage to off-guard targets. Etc.

It is in fact limited, and since you brought up Barbarians, I'll use them for my example: when is a Barbarian not going to Rage in combat, especially now that the Remaster allows them to do it as a Free Action and they no longer take a penalty to AC? Almost never, because the benefits rarely outweigh the drawbacks, and Rage isn't a limited resource. A Barbarian that never rages is making themselves worse for no reason.

A Fighter that uses a weapon from a different group than the one they chose isn't just as good as other Martial, they're worse because the bonus from Weapon Specialization is lessened and the other Martials have other stuff they get as their thing. Fighter's thing is their higher proficiency. Without it they're a worse Ranger, Rogue, Champion etc.
The only reason a Fighter would use a weapon whose group they don't specialize in is because their weapon is very innefective in the encounter (Flying enemies for a Melee Fighter; Enemies are immune to their weapon's Damage type[s]), and even then it'd used as a backup weapon, or their gear was stolen.

"Can't use the lance that shoots lightning." Not true. Can use it as well as any martial. Can transfer lighting rune to weapon of their choice and thus shoot lightning with their fighter weapon mastery to-hit.

The "Lance that shoots lighting" was meant to be a Specific Magic Weapon. Can't transfer their abilities out. Could have made it clearer, that is true.

"Fighter gets nothing at level 5". A bonus +2 to hit with a group of weapons is not nothing, either literally or figuratively. For this system, +2 to hit - even with just some weapons - is a substantial quantitative benefit.

Here's the relevant section for context:

Nothing. Fighters don't get anything that other Martials don't also get at that level.

In fact, you could argue they get less, since other Martials have their weapon proficiency uniformly increase, even for weapons they cant' really use. The only other thing unique to Fighter is Combat Flexibility, and that is a Level 9 Feature.

What I was trying to say here is that Fighters, other than the proficiency increase, don't get anything that would justify such a limitation being imposed on them.

"Fighter literally unplayable." You've admitted this is hyperbole for emphasis. So we'll put that aside. But your underlying point seems to be that this makes the fighter an unnecessarily weak class.

That is in fact, NOT my point. I had made a reply to the fourth comment clarifying my intentions, but for some reason it just... disappeared, somehow?

I'll restate what I said there here: Fighter, in its current state is a perfectly fine class with no significant issues, and that my complaint is about an unnecessary restriction that if removed wouldn't really impact the balance of the game.

For clarity's sake, the hyperbole follows a "formula" used elsewhere, where the post or video would be about a (very) minor issue, and the commenters would respond with "literally unplayable", in an obvious use of irony.

This seems more like a silly joke post which boils down to Fighter is a great class, why complain when the system makes switching weapons difficult? The Fighter can be the most consistent hitter in the game which is pretty alright, the class is quite ltierally consistent perhaps special strikes.

If you want something more interesting then simply do not play Fighter. Fighter is only 1 of the many Martial classes in Pathfinder Second Edition.

First of all, this is not a joke post.

Second, I'm complaining because there's no good reason Fighters should be limited to a single weapon, especially when it isn't for the first 4 levels.
Am I nitpicking? Yes. But that doesn't mean my point is invalid.

As for your second point, how interesting Fighter is as a class is irrelevant to my argument.

ElementalofCuteness wrote:

Money and Runes I think is the big issue with multiple weapons ro anything similar to it honestly.

Even that part of the OP I found to be hyperbolic. It may be true that you don't have the money to max-rune a whole arsenal through direct purchase, but to use OP's example, if you find that really cool lance after specializing in polearms, you can transfer the runes over for 10% the cost of buying them.

And then what? You still have what is essentially a -2 penalty to hit with your lance, which you'll want to use since you deruned your polearm.

And if you want to retrain FWM to Lances, that will be a momth of downtime spent retraining RAW.

So, Fighter.

You all know the meme of 'Human Fighter'. It's as basic you can get: no worrying about being a multi eyed paranoid horse-thingy, no getting worked up setting up sneak attack, no spell slots to worry about, you just go up to the enemy and hit them in the head until they die.
Easy, clean and simple.

Now, Pathfinder Second Edition has brought a whole slew of improvement for the Martial classes, allowing them to contribute to the team as much as their spellcaster friends.

Among these changes, Fighter was given more of an identity to call its own. In D&D, Fighter is the class that... fights good. Kind of vague, don't ya think?
In Pathfinder 2e, Fighter is the class that... fights good. OK, that hasn't actually changed, but it now actually means something, thanks to the class' unique niche of being one step ahead in weapon proficiency compared to other Martials of the same level, allowing them to hit AND crit more often (Shut up Gunslinger. You too, Rogue. Off guard is not a proficiency bump.)

And that's where the problem lies.

See, most martials have a preference for weapons due to their mechanics: Barbarians don't like Agile weapons, Rogues want to use weapons with Finesse and Thaumaturge suffer by being a martial with a Key Attribute different from Strength or Dexterity etc.

Now, you'd think that Fighter with their higher proficiency would be the most free to choose a weapon, and for the first 4 levels you'd be right, but once you hit Level 5 you can say all of that goodbye, because Fighter Weapon Mastery forces you to commit to a single Weapon Group.
Want to use that cool Lance you found that shoots lighting? Too bad, you choose Polearms for your weapon group, and Lances's weapon group is Spears, not Polearms (why are they different we may never know), so you sell it because the rest of the party is playing Thaumaturge and you don't have the time to retrain.

Now you might say this is in exchange for some class feature Fighters get at level 5.
Well, let's see:
Nothing. Fighters don't get anything that other Martials don't also get at that level.
In fact, you could argue they get less, since other Martials have their weapon proficiency uniformly increase, even for weapons they cant' really use. The only other thing unique to Fighter is Combat Flexibility, and that is a Level 9 Feature.

You could instead say that's to keep the class from becoming too strong, except that's not true, since for the first 4 levels they get free reign to pick up any weapon they like (except Advanced ones but they're another can of worms I'm not gonna get into) and swing it around with their higher proficiency. Not only that, but once a Fighter reaches Level 19, they gain the Versatile Legend feature, allowing them to once again ignore weapon groups just like in the good old days. And I haven t heard a thing about Fighters terrorizing those level ranges.

So, we've established that Fighter in its current state is literally unplayable by being forced to only pick a single type of weapon.
Where do we go from here?

Well, for all I ranted about Fighter Weapon Mastery being a bad feature, the idea of a Fighter specializing into a single Weapon Group isn't a bad one.
It just needs some polish:

First of all, it needs to be a choice on whether you focus on a single weapon group, or none at all.
Second, the choice should be made at level 1. Such a core part of a character's build should be made immediately, to let the character invest in it ASAP without it being kind of a waste (I'm looking at you Invulnerable Rager and Harbinger's Protection).
Third, there needs to be some kind of actual benefit for the tradeoff. Thankfully, Paizo has already done my job with the Slinger's Precision class feature: bonus precision damage, either +2 or +1d4. Since Fighter is all about consistency, I'll go with the +2 damage.
If that's too strong, we can instead let Fighters use Advanced Weapons of their weapon group without incurring in the proficiency drawback, since the budget for them is only one step of the damage die higher compared to Martial weapons. Whatever the bonus is, proficiency for weapons of other groups should be reduced to Trained and remain a step behind. Also, remove Versatile Legend, it's obsolete either way.

And if a Fighter doesn't want to specialize, no problem. They'll still get to enjoy a higher proficiency with their weapons.

So TL;DR fighter should have a choice between specializing or not, all the while keeping their higher proficiency bonus.

Like the Mythic rules were something they could have playtested, but so are the rules for guns.

Didh't they playtest the rules for guns alongside Gunslinger?

Yeah TBH the one thing you want to get right is Mythic.
It's a thin line between "extremely powerful but balanced", "Gamebreakingly overpowered" and "Kinda mid".

Which destinies would you consider weak if I may ask?

The first that comes to mind is Wildspell, following RAW, requires a Mythic Point and a Focus point to do its main thing, cast Spellsurge, a spell with horrible range (10 ft emanation), which requires an action tax either every turn or on the first and a second Mythic Point to expand it to 30 ft.

And to add insult to injury Spellsurge doesn't even distinguish between allies and enemies, meaning your enemies benefit just the same from the spell.
Its feats are good, sure, but Spellsurge drags everything down.

Beast Lord is also not great, but not as directly since it relies on animal conpanions (who really should be able to get Master proficency for their strikes even in normal pf2e), but doesn't improve them at all beyond allowing you both to reroll saves against emotion effects.
Compare that to Apocalypse Rider, who hands you a free Incredible Animal Companion, or upgrades your existing companion's damagie die by one step (yes its as incredibly underwhelming as it sounds).

It also isn't compatible with multiple animal companions, which while not gamebreaking is rather odd.

I'd also like to mention that while a fun archetype, Apocalypse Rider iverlaps with both Archfiend and Beast Lord.
Now, this wouldn't be neccesarily a bad thing by itself, it's kinda weird for it to be among the starting lineup.

I don't remember the source, but didn't Paizo say there won't be more "Core books", Since they're meant to be the ones you need at a minimum to play the game?

Monster Core 2 might have been planned originally and then scrapped, and whoever wrote the reference to it wasn't aware it wasn't released.

Someone said they can use Advanced Weapons as the base for their Weapon Innovation, but don't get the initial modification.

I'd like to see Ranged Unarmed attacks granted by stiff like Sprite's Spark, Foxfire, Spiend Azarketi etc. to be buffed:
Currently there are some Ranged Unarmed attacks that have a d4 for damage die, maximum range (not range increments) or both for seemingly no gain compared to ones such as Seedpod or innate cantrips. I'd like for those Ranged Unarmed attacks to be buffed to have a d6 damage die and 20 feet range increments.

Also, it seems really strange that the independent action an animal companion can us are limited to only Stride and Strike, and other movement types get nothing.
This is especially glaring with Amimal Companions with Fly speeds, which forces their owner to spend an action every turn to keep the in the air.

Ancestries

Good news for skittermanders who want to jump rope and wield a flamethrower at the same time: you are now going to be able to perform actions and use items with your other hands, but you can only wield items (such as shields and weapons) with your active hands

Multi-Armed ancestries have made a full recovery. Thaumaturges across the nation rejoice.

Traversal

One new element we'll be introducing is the traversal trait. This new trait mostly applies to player-facing rules that reference Stride. When it applies, traversal allows the use of alternative movement types (burrow, fly, and swim) to be used in place of land Speed, akin to how Sneak works. Expect to see this greatly impact some abilities used by the envoy and solarian (to name a few).

This is going to be so nice. Could you pretty please add something like that to haste?

I guess so.

Wait, didn't Howl come out after Rage? Why nothing for the kineticist?

'Cause the errata page got reorganized, the fall errata hasn't come out yet.

One of the notable changes you’ll see is an update to the sure strike spell. The spell could be very strong, with the reroll effectively making a much larger bonus than most abilities can grant. This benefit was usually in control at low levels when characters had few spell slots, but it could become disruptive and repetitive at higher levels on characters built to gain a huge number of copies of the spell and use it constantly. We’ve added temporary immunity to the spell, with the intent that it can still be very strong to create intense moments, but that there’s little incentive to use more than a handful of spell slots on it.

Sure Strike found dead in an alley. Millions of Magi are in mourning.

With the new errata,

Oh hey, that's actually a decent point I can get behind.

I'm very excited about Necromancer.
Getting to control a bunch of minion all at once is something that is really hard to do in Pf2e, so the class is bound to be interesting.

Dearest community, greetings.

I searched long in the Rules Question and I believe I did not find any sufficient answers to my questions. If there do exist please direct me and I will be happy to have this thread deleted as well.

I have just had a heated discussion about the Summoner's "Eidolon" class feature. I find the class simply marvelous and very interesting with the wording of the official source not enough to clarify. For the sake of simplicity, the Outsider and corresponding Eidolon are "he/his/him" and the character that can become a Summoner is "she/her" :

"A summoner begins play with the ability to summon to his side a powerful outsider called an eidolon. The eidolon forms a link with the summoner, who, forever after, summons an aspect of the same creature. An eidolon has the same alignment as the summoner that calls it and can speak all of his languages."
[http://aonprd.com/ClassDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Summoner]

1. Can any entity with the "Outesider" type become an Eidolon ?
For example, if a Golarion human for some reason ends up with the "Outsider" type would he be able to become an Eidolon ?

2. Is "Eidolon" a label given to linked Outsider's summonable aspect or is it merely another word for the Outsider himself (within the context of summoning his aspect and
apart from the class feature name) ?

3. Is the Outsider's alignment being relevant to the Summoner a prerequisite for forming the link ?
For example can a Lawful Evil Outsider form a link with a Chaotic Good person in order for said person to become its Eidolon's Summoner ?

4. Is the Outsider's knowledge of all of the Summoner's languages a prerequisite for forming the link ?

5. Is forming a link with the Outsider (that is to become the Summoner's Eidolon) a prerequisite in order to take the first level in the class or can one become a Summoner without being able to call forth an Eidolon right from the get go ?
An example of it would be a player who picks the class for their character who she trains to become a Summoner, comes in contact with an outsider that sucessfully lies to and never actually linking with her SO she ends up donning the class but without an Eidolon from the start.

6. Can the Outsider retract their link from a Summoner? If so, what happens to the character, do they lose their class or only the relevant class features, are they capable of forming a new link with the same or different Outsider, do they stop progressing as Summoners and/or do they automaticaly switch to a relevant class (such as Sorceress) ?

Also :
"Eidolons are treated as summoned creatures, except that they are not sent back to their home plane until reduced to a number of negative hit points equal to or greater than their Constitution score.
...
A summoner can summon his eidolon in a ritual that takes 1 minute to perform. When summoned in this way, the eidolon hit points are unchanged from the last time it was summoned. The only exception to this is if the eidolon was slain, in which case it returns with half its normal hit points. The eidolon does not heal naturally."
[http://aonprd.com/ClassDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Summoner]

7. What is the state of the Eidolon when sent back to his home plane after "dying", mechanicaly speaking ?
Is it considered *alive* and with how many current Hit Points ? If said Eidolon can travel through the Planes at his own will, can it pop back to the Summoner before 24 hours have passed and at how much HP (since she did not technically summoned him back before 24h period) ?

8. Under whose perspective does the 24h period need have passed, the Summoner's or the Eidolon's, given how time can flow differently throughout the Planes ?

9. What exactly constitutes natural healing and would this disallow something to grant the Eidolon the ability to heal itself over time (like potions or spells like Heal and Regenerate or abilities like Fast Healing) ?

My personal understanding is this :
An Outsider needs to be an entity sufficiently powerfull, at GM's arbitrary discretion in order to be elligible for granting an Eidolon. Eidolon is the label term for the Outsider's aspect that a Summoner may call forth. A link is a very vague term for "information or magic exchange" regardless of languages or alignment but with the chance and ability of comunication as a prerequisite. A character taking 1st level at Summoner means the following series of events take place in order :
0. Magic is working and the character and Outsider are compatible with it.
1. Character becomes capable of summoning an Eidolon.
2. A "sufficiently strong" Outsider "forms a link" with the character registering an aspect with her.
and as a result,
3. The character gains the ability to Summon the Outsider's Eidolon.
4. Said Eidolon immediately adopts the Summoner's alignment and languages, regardless of the Outsider.
Also, Eidolon returning to its home plane means that his registered aspect simply goes "poof" and actually the quality of the link gets some sort of backlash, returning at full power after 24h worth of time has passed from the Summoner's point of view. The same Outsider can be linked with various Summoners at the same time and various Eidolons of his can be present at once.

Thank you for taking time to read all this. Any and all perspectives and insights at mechanics is greatly appreciated.