Paul the Dork's page

OP here: This drama is getting pretty tired. I originally came here for your favorite "Tank" builds, then things became out of hand.

So, please, someone post another Tank build. Preferably not anything that has been dramatized so far.

FROM ANOTHER POST OF NIGHTTRAIN'S

Take a look at it in another light;
4 people are going to participate in a race. All racers are given specific instructions on how to build their car. Three of the four racers read the rules and accept them at face value and build accordingly. The fourth racer reads the rules, agrees then decides to go against them. What would happen?

Rules: make a tank

I ask for advice, to GM: "How would you recommend doing this?" response: "However you feel would be best" me: "suggestions?" GM: "just do the best we can"

The problem arose when I (finally) stated what I chose, then there were rules arguments, which lead to these postings.

I like the anology:

GM: You and 3 others are in a race, build a car.
me: okay, i would like to build one with X engine (or speed, or whatever the anology is supposed to be about)
GM: okay
me: can you give me any pointers? suggestions.
GM: do whatever.
me: okay

later:

me: here is my car boat that can do everything you asked of me
GM: huh
other player: I quit
me and GM: huh?

Paul the Dork wrote:

Another player is reading this thread, and asks a line of questions to Nighttrain:

Okay, we get that you have a big problem with the summoner class as a Tank. But, what is the specific problem that you have with it? Can you give examples?

You keep saying, "It cannot work", "it does not work", "it is not a tank"

Why is this an unacceptable thing?

We have a 100+ posts saying the opposite, in this thread alone.

What is wrong with this build? It is not your sterotypical tank that people think of. But, it does not stop it from doing its job.

How does it not fulfill the roll, that we are not seeing?

/other player quote

First: I did not say it cannot work. I said the GM said it cannot work. I don't care one way or another other than the fact that this is not what you said you would play, the GM was counting on you playing a melee class not a class with a pet (regardless how awesome that pet is) and the mechanics as I understand from the initial meeting requires a specific type of tank and that was explained at the beginning. Either way you don't have to worry about it since another player has stepped up to fulfill the role. This is not a by-the-book pathfinder game and you know this. There are many things that have been modified from the core rulebook and this was also explained.

Okay, let us take this piece by piece:

First: I did not say it cannot work.

Everyone, Nighttrain is completely correct.

Here are 3 things he did say (With links to the posts, just so everyone knows they are not out of context)

Snip: from: http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz6lz9&page=5?Question-about-Tanking#219

"5) Once I heard about the “Tank” I was frustrated and decided the game was no longer worth my time if no one else was going to take their role seriously (as seriously as you can in a game of imagination). I want to have fun. I want to chuck dice. I want to make smartass comments when someone does something silly, even at me if I do something silly. I want to play a game and at least be somewhat successful at the same time. So I decided it would be best for me to leave the game since I would not be comfortable with the given situation. Since then, Dave the DM had to go and find another person to fulfill the role of the front-liner."

also:

"7) The class of Summoner was never disallowed. It clearly did not fit what was promised by the player..."

Snip: from: http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz6lz9&page=5?Question-about-Tanking#234

"The question isn't whether he made a good tank or not, the question is will it work and the DM said no. No offense meant, when a DM says it wont work that pretty much leads me to believe it wont work"

I said the GM said it cannot work.

It is not on this thread. And he has been here.

Hello everyone.

I just wanted everyone to know, that Dave the DM never said to me:
"You cannot play the summoner"

Despite what Nighttrain says.

The closest he ever said was
"Hey man, I've been thinking this over. You agreed on melee\tank with group, could you at least stick with it. If the eidolon dies you lose the tank for 24Hr."

Dave, if this is wrong in any way, please let me know. I have complete text logs, and if I missed something, please let me know.

What I don't understand, and I am assuming Paul does not either is why does it matter if he does the job by using a summoner instead of "traditional" full BAB character?

If I use the bard archaeologist instead of the rogue to find and disable traps, while being the party face does it really matter that I did not play a rogue.

It is not that we are trying to be judgemental. We just don't understand why it matters that Paul is using a summoner. There was a mention of certain mechanics requiring a specific type of tank. Is that due to house rules or an understanding of the game that has not been presented.

Paul did you intentionally mispresent Nighttrain or were you paraphrasing what you thought he meant? I only ask because you have admitted to being passive-aggressive at times.

I am on the same boat as you.

To which paraphrasing are you talking about, wraitstrike (i have paraphrased a lot)?

@Paul the Dork

btw the a dw whip fighter with a splash of rogue has been 1 of my favorite and most powerful characters. Reasoning being the normal staple points of any whip character being Whip Mastery and Improved Whip Mastery combined with the two-weapon fighting feats, the trip feats and a 3 feat combo that makes me wet my self with the idea. Intimidating Prowess, Shatter Defenses, and Dazzling Display = 30ft intimidate that makes all enemies flat footed to u for x amount of rounds is rape with a lunge whirlwind attack or against foes u tripped and attacked through attacks of opportunity.

I like the way you think.

Bk i was getting food but ya Whip Mastery and Improved Whip Mastery are essentials if ur gona use a whip and if u want to be a sneaky rat get the lunge feat and the whirlwind attack feat and its prerequisites to do a 20ft aoe attack against all enemies.

Oh goddess! That is disgusting. It rocks!

Yes, just talked to him. He wanted to take the feat Alignment Channel. Looks like a pretty crappy feat to me, especially when compared to the Selective Channeling feat.

That feat is not needed. If you are speaking of channel alignment it would not affect the eidolon anyway because the eidolon does not have an alignment subtype. Like I said though positive energy affects all living creatures so the feat is not needed.

I was just going off of what the Healer told me, I did not look into it.

Paul if you take augment summoning then your summoned eidolon will have extra hit points, and be better in combat. That feat also helps with your summoned creatures.

*evil grin* I know, +4 Str & Con.

@ Psion-Psycho

My backup build is a Whip and Shield (that i have only started making).

Not great on the damage, but able to control a lot of space, as well as shielding allies.

Conversely, the eidolon can also trip, it has more attacks, good ac, and higher strength. It also has the bonus of being able to be resummoned, if it gets killed, plane shifted, banished, etc.

@ Psion-Psycho

Thank you, Psion-Psycho, good overall points.

I am playing a Human though (for extra HP).

As far as my eidolon "the pet requires to be specialized in in order to make it powerful and stand on par with say the fighter tank." Well, what is the fighter but a whole bunch of specializations? You build a fighter tank in a specific way you think will help out. But, it still cannot be the best Tank in all situations.

Cure spells work on the creature. And the healer player took the feat to allow his channel energy to effect my eidolon.

Another player is reading this thread, and asks a line of questions to Nighttrain:

Okay, we get that you have a big problem with the summoner class as a Tank. But, what is the specific problem that you have with it? Can you give examples?

You keep saying, "It cannot work", "it does not work", "it is not a tank"

Why is this an unacceptable thing?

We have a 100+ posts saying the opposite, in this thread alone.

What is wrong with this build? It is not your sterotypical tank that people think of. But, it does not stop it from doing its job.

How does it not fulfill the roll, that we are not seeing?

/other player quote

That was a major read lol but to answer your orriginal question the following is what i would do for a "tank" build:

Human
Fighter with the Armor Master Archetype

No archetypes allowed.

I love your feat choices, though.

Sooo, what role is the Monk doing? <.<

Melee DPS, a pretty kick a** one, too.

What was the role of the 'Shaman' custom class?

I think it is/was Ranged DPS

I assume the Oracle is is Healing/Buffing?

Correct

Dave the DM, thank you for popping into this thread and admitting when you are wrong.

Like i have said, i love my GM, he is a good guy

I'll agree with Maxx about the party roles thing and add, most importantly. is that the "Roles" can assumed by a pretty nice number if characters. Some Roles might be harder to fill than others, but still doable.

EDIT: Saw Maxx's post, not Grimmy's. Doh.

It was hard even trying to get the right build of the creature. Just as I would have had trouble If I made a straight up fighter. A Barbarian would have been tough (trying to NOT take the place of the Melee DPS), but doable. It was a hard role to nail down.

Jeebus, what a long post!

2) Everyone sat at a table and discussed the roles they would fill within the party.

Player A: Monk
Player B: Oracle
Paul the dork: Specifically stated he did not want to play a ranged character nor a caster. He also stated he wanted to play melee class and a tank.
Nighttrain: Playing a custom class for the first time with a backup character made in case the custom class does not work out (too overpowered, broken abilities etc.)This was cleared with the DM at the time we were deciding on which role we would be fulfilling. The DM also had a custom class he offered to the party as well as 2 custom races.

My first idea was to play a druid (focus on wildshape). I found out in the Pathfinder system, that it was severely nerfed, compared to 3.5.

I was busy trying to figure out how to do the role. I was going through the main book, trying to figure it out. It was not until the next day, that I finally found the Summoner (i forgot to check the advanced players options for classes.)

Also, I said that i would prefer not to play a caster. Not, that I would not. Not to mention, that a caster was not one of the 4 roles (Ranged DPS, Melee DPS, Healer, Tank), a caster could fulfill any of those role, if build right. There was no restriction on how you would fulfill your roles, so long as you could do it well.

3) ALL of the rules and expectations were given out BEFORE character creation had started. Everyone talked about the role they were playing and what the other players expected out of each other. There were no exceptions. Everyone was at the same table and everyone was communicating on their class, potential builds, limitations, gear etc., except Paul the dork.

I was running through class after class, trying to wrap my head around a class that could do what was expected of me. I even asked at the table what did people recommend to "Tank".

4) The role of “tank” was clearly explained at the same time. What the expectations were for both the player and the class. Please understand, none of this should have been a surprise to anyone about the role they were to fulfill since the players selected their roles.

I knew I was to be in the tank role. I did not know that I would be restricted on how I did it.

5) Once I heard about the “Tank” I was frustrated and decided the game was no longer worth my time if no one else was going to take their role seriously (as seriously as you can in a game of imagination). I want to have fun. I want to chuck dice. I want to make smartass comments when someone does something silly, even at me if I do something silly. I want to play a game and at least be somewhat successful at the same time. So I decided it would be best for me to leave the game since I would not be comfortable with the given situation. Since then, Dave the DM had to go and find another person to fulfill the role of the front-liner.

You leave (as the ranged dps) so the GM had go and find front-liner?

6) ...If a player says they are going to play a role, I expect them to go through with it...

"Summoners cannot fulfill the role of tank"?

7) The class of Summoner was never disallowed. It clearly did not fit what was promised by the player. When someone says they do not want to play a caster and do not want to play ranged then build a ranged caster with a pet, something is clearly wrong. Someone had either gotten their lines mixed up when they chose their role, or decided to play whatever they wanted instead of what they chose, regardless of what everyone else is expecting.

Caster was not a role. As stated above, a properly built caster can do any role.

His GM already said yes. 6 hours ago. He registered an account and posted in the OP's other thread. He admitted he was wrong and apologized.

Grimmy is completely right, he just pointed out my mistake.

My apology is here:

http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz6lz9&page=5?Question-about-Tanking#216

Going to close this thread, Thank you all for your support, ideas, and laughs.... (poor James Jacobs)

Maxximilius wrote:

Nope, it sounds like a spell which effects are :

- 1 round spellcasting time.
- 1 minute/level duration.
- Summon your eidolon as if you were summoning it normally (so, go to the summoner's Eidolon class feature description and follow exactly what it says, including the (Su) descriptor and the fact it isn't treated as a summon spell)....etc, etc...

Didn't you forget to list the ONE major qualifier that settles whether this spell is affected by Augment Summoning feat?

School conjuration (summoning)

That is what makes it a summon spell, period, thus qualifying it for the Augment Summoning feat. And its use in this manner is long-settled by developers now, anyway, so I'm not sure what you two are arguing about.

You are my hero.

I normally don't find occassion to use phrases about dead-horses and straw-men but Jesus Christ.

I apologize, i guess i was lost in the reply of the reply of the reply.

I was wrong for beating a dead horse.

I apologize to Dave, my kick-ass GM.
I apologize to everyone else, for wasting their time (as well as thanking you all for your support).

Now, how can i railroad this to a kick-ass conversation about the best character to keep the crunchy casters from getting harmed.

Tactics are key (obviously)

But, as a general rule. A class build that can keep harm from them. From specific fighter builds (still working on mine), to weird class jumping, standard builds, ooh neet-o factors and anything else.

Thank you all

Nope, it sounds like a spell which effects are :

- 1 round spellcasting time.
- 1 minute/level duration.
- Summon your eidolon as if you were summoning it normally (so, go to the summoner's Eidolon class feature description and follow exactly what it says, including the (Su) descriptor and the fact it isn't treated as a summon spell).
Exceptions trumping rules :
- This eidolon remains with you only for the duration of the spell.
- This eidolon cannot touch any creature warded by protection from evil or a similar effect and can be sent back to its home plane by dispel magic.

I guess you could argue either way for the Augment Summons feat to work with it (or not), but it is more than ambiguous. Remember that an enhancement bonus would not stack with any item or spell like Bull's Strength or the stat-improving belts.

So...

Unless a regular summon spell is completely different.... why would it not work?

Let me check the differences between this spell and a regular summon spell. Which is....?

Elamdri & Maxximilius:
reminds me of a quote from a Shadowrun game

"Well, yes, I did it...but it's not my fault."
"Alright, it is my fault...but I'm not responsible."
"Well, maybe I am responsible...but I'm not to blame."
"Yes. I am to blame...but they made me do it."

Countries and politics are no games despite what some Throne may say in fiction, anyone treating them as such by seeing only the columns and losses/profits curves would make for a terrible real-life master. ;)

Maxximilius, yeah, i agree.

To everyone:

The Sentence Maxximillius keeps quoting goes:
Treat this as if you had summoned your eidolon normally, except that it only remains with you for the duration of this spell.

hmmm, sounds like a summon spell to me

By casting the spell, you are effectively performing the ritual as a full-round action instead of a minute.

Thus, you wouldn't improve your eidolon as you would do with any other summoned creature if you have the feat empowering your summons ; and you could not use your "Summon Monster (Sp)" spell-like ability since your eidolon would be treated as summoned through normal means.

Torn between proving Maxximilius wrong, and keeping on topic.

(Maxximilius:

First, just finish the sentence you started. Otherwise, flags!

also:

1) Summon Eidolon is a spell (see above for references)
2) The spell is a Summon spell (because well, look at the title of the spell)
3) Feat: Augment summoning: full quote of its description:
Each creature you conjure with any summon spell gains a +4 enhancement bonus to Strength and Constitution for the duration of the spell that summoned it.

Source 1
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/augment-summoning---final
Source 2
Core Pathfinder Rulebook. Page 118. Right column.)

Sorry everyone, I could not resist.

And like a lot of people said, there is no argument to have about this spell : you are right. The spell does allow you to summon your eidolon back from the dead from it's home plane (as both are the consequence of too much HP damage).

In case of doubt when dealing with the rules of a game you are not used to, always trust the 100% confident guys with some thousand posts on the official game's messageboards.

... so tempting to tie politics into this...

But, on a serious note, i have yet to find anything online that disagrees with us. It is his interpretation. I wish he would he either, accept the fact that this is the way it works, or just drop the ban hammer.

Accept the rulings, house-rule others, or bring the boom.

Easy, simple.

Paul the Dork wrote:

Excuse me?

"Treat this as if you had summoned your eidolon normally [...]"

Are you saying that the spell, is not a spell?

I notice the quote you just posted, only uses the first half of the sentence.

Would you please finish the sentence, in its entirety?

To the OP - The DM might be grasping at straws because he's frustrated by the fact that even if he manages to kill the eidolon it "comes back" the very next battle. If the DM considers the eidolon overpowered this opinion could be tough to change, but you could try pointing out that the Summon Eidolon spell takes a full round to cast and therefore is extremely subject to being disrupted by attacks. Enemies who let you stand around casting for a full round without hitting you to disrupt the spell probably deserve to get attacked by your eidolon.

Honestly, the monsters you can call in with your SLA are pretty effective, so another solution might be to show the DM that the eidolon isn't really much worse than the stuff you can call in with a standard action (a celestial leopard/lion/dire tiger summoned in position to pounce an enemy while using smite evil could really reinforce that point)

To answer you, it a whole other thread that I started. Titled "Question about tanking"

Keep in mind that "Summon Eidolon" is not a 'spell'. It's a ritual that was categorized as, iirc, a supernatural ability. So rules regarding "summon spells" are moot unless explicitly brought up by the wording of the Summon Eidolon ritual.

Excuse me?

The spell "Summon Eidolon": Advanced Player's Guide. page 248 (lower left corner)

You open a rift between dimensions that summons your eidolon.
Treat this as if you had summoned your eidolon normally, except
that it only remains with you for the duration of this spell. While
summoned in this way, your eidolon cannot touch any creature
warded by protection from evil or a similar effect and your eidolon
can be sent back to its home plane by dispel magic.
If you cast this spell while your eidolon is already on your
plane, this spell has no effect. This spell allows you to summon
your eidolon even if it has been returned to its home plane due
to damage.

Thank you both ithuriel & Maxximilius

1) only 5 books are allowed

2) i am stubborn, too

I really have no way of knowing how he interprets it.

All I know is:
his interpretation is correct (because there is nothing official that contadicts it)

and my interpretation (and everyone in the Pathfinder forums, and all the summoner guides, and off topic discussions) are wrong in their interpretations...

I really wish he would just fiat it to his preference. But, he is stuck on the wording.

Truthfully, i would prefer a GM fiat. God says "This spell does not exist" I am okay with that.

But him and I are arguing about the wording of the spell.

Paul the Dork wrote:

I meant no offense, Stome. Maybe I should have chosen my words better.

I just want a definitive rule on whether or not the Summon Eidolon spell can call back an eidolon that was killed.

It does. The whole point of the spell is to bring back your Eidolon if it went away after being killed or because you were knocked unconscious or went to sleep and didn't have time to summon it after waking up.

Like i said, in the fore mentioned thread, his interpretation was that because the spell did not specifically say "bring back from death" but instead said "sent to home plane, due to damage", it will not bring back a "killed" eidolon.

I just want an official response.

cartmanbeck wrote:

Your eidolon counts as a summoned creature, so if it drops to 0 HP or lower it is sent back.

Are you 100% positive the text "The eidolon remains until dismissed by the summoner (a standard action)." doesn't override that? Because the HP restoration only happens if the Eidolon dies. If the eidolon is forced to leave at zero HP, it isn't dead. Next time it shows since it did not die, it is still at zero HP thanks to the specific healing rules of the eidolon. It would leave immediately again, because it was at zero HP.

The rules state:

Advanced Player's Guide. Page 55. Under the Class Power, "Eidolon". 1st paragraph. Sentence 4.

Wow wow, wait, both of you.

First, when "damage suffered from ability damage" is concerned by the effects of a spell, it is ALWAYS stated out in the spell's description. It is that specific. If "ability damage" is not mentioned in any fashion, then we are only talking about Hit Point damage. The spell to summon his own eidolon basically allows you to summon back your tank with half full HP in the same state you left it.

Second, Damage Reduction only reduces physical hit point damage, either lethal or non-lethal. It does NOT reduce damage from spells or ability damage. But it effectively means that if you have an enemy attacking twice per round with 1d8+10 damage, if it hits twice it would deal 1d8+5 + 1d8+5 damage. Thus from a tank perspective, the eidolon basically possesses a +5 HP equivalent per attack, not even accounting the summoner's HP as potential HP bonus.

My best advice would be to drop the party roles and stick to the core rules for the time ; so much books are hard to digest when you just enter the game, and they are not intended for "advanced players" without reason.
Allow additional content on a case-by-case basis : most martial feats from later books and archetypes are perfectly balanced and just allow a specific character concept not to suck (like the whip mastery feats).

For the first part:

Sorry, for my part in that. But, the basis of my standpoint was the given concept, that what he said was right.

My take on the spell, was this:
The ONLY way to send an eidolon back to its home plane (with the restriction being limited to "damage") was death. So, the spel Summon Eidolon, WILL bring it back (albeit, for a limited duration).

I was being passive-aggressive again. Sorry.

---

For the second part:

I will not say anything, I would just be passive-aggressive again...

I meant no offense, Stome. Maybe I should have chosen my words better.

I just want a definitive rule on whether or not the Summon Eidolon spell can call back an eidolon that was killed.

Please, everyone: Not not bag on my GM. Or insult him.

You can call him on any of his rulings. You can completely disagree with him. But, take each part by itself.

Like each player has his strengths AND weaknesses. So does any GM. I am a frikking rules lawyer, who cannot write a story. Does that automatically make me a bad player for just those faults? I have many more, too.

But, please, do not call him any type of a negative GM.

Critiques are welcome. Insults or disrespectful comments, not so much.

(sorry, touchy about these things)

Sad to say but after reading the mentioned thread it seems like a problem that a FAQ can't fix.. that problem is a bad DM. Even if it got FAQed this kind of DM would just find another way to make problems.

No disrespect, Stome, but please: do not call him a bad GM.

Bad ruling, fine. But, not his style.

My question was posted here: (short read, 1 page)
http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz6l5r?Question-about-Summon-Eidolon

My GM read it, and still does not agree to the wording of it.

If the GM said: "This spell does not work like that" or "This spell does not exist", i would be fine with that. In fact, I told him so.

But, he continues to disagree. I just want an official stamp of "yea" or "nay".

I have looked through the FAQ, and I have the only instance of this specific question.

How would I know if an someone with a real official say answers my question?

I would like to get an official Pathfinder SRD ruling on something.

How does one go about getting an "official" ruling on something?

David knott 242 wrote:

Dave the DM wrote:

Paul on a technical aspect as much as you love technical and wording... what about ability damage? If its returned home with Con Damage, does it mean, in case of summon eidolon spell, that its dead upon summons or a wasted spell?

I'm just putting it out there as a serious question since I'm apparantly reading it wrong.

I think they come back in the condition they would be in if you had been able to wait a day and summon them via the ritual then. Taking some developer quotes that I recall seeing but cannot find at the time, the eidolon would return with the constitution score it had from ability damage (minimum 1, since an eidolon cannot actually die and thus cannot lose that last point of constitution) and half the maximum hit points that it would have at its adjusted constitution.

Thank you. So in this case it normally has say 80 hit points. If the Con is dropped to 1 he would lose roughly 40 hit points. So ability damage alone doesn't send it away. But on summon per spell would it then come back at 20 or 40 hit points?

It depends. Do spells fade when a summoned creature goes away?

If no? then i can buff him to the max, and if he dies, and i re-summon him, he stays with all spells okay

If yes? He gets a de-buff, then I can un-summon him at any time and cast the Summon Eidolon spell to make him like new.

Your choice.

Paul on a technical aspect as much as you love technical and wording... what about ability damage? If its returned home with Con Damage, does it mean, in case of summon eidolon spell, that its dead upon summons or a wasted spell?

I'm just putting it out there as a serious question since I'm apparantly reading it wrong.

The spell says:

"This spell allows you to summon your eidolon even if it has been returned to its home plane due to damage"

If you are saying Attribute damage counts, then players have a lot less to fear from Undead.

Ability drain = damage, thus Damage reduction gets a THOUSAND times better.

Also, my creature HAS damage reduction. can you drain over 5 points of ability? If so, EVERY frikkin' player is screwed!

I am ready for your next Scenario.

EDIT: Also, Con damage is against Max HP, not current. Your scenario to work, you have to drop a character to 0Con. Which is basically: "what happens if drop any creature to 0 Con?"

It dies (unless it is undead. but it is still technically (un)dead)

Eidolons "die" at Negative Con. At that point they go back to their home plane.

If the dice are with you, so be it
If the player is stupid, so be it
If the party does not care and rushes in, without learning, so be it.

I am fine with all of that

But, if you are saying you will not kill ME... then... ALL HAIL! KillMeDamnIt the Un-killable bard of destiny

EDIT: ... his sweat smells like chocolate, and his blood tastes like cheesecake.

Paul, from what you posted.

If the eidolon is sent back to its home plane due to death, it cannot be summoned again until the following day.

How much clearer does it get?

To Dave:

This spell allows you to summon your eidolon even if it has been returned to its home plane due to damage."

... and not mean death?

Me being passive aggresive:

Anyone else here read the thread I linked to?

Or

Anyone know of a way to get an OFFICIAL ruling?

Icyshadow wrote:

Better a temporarily dead Eidolon than a dead Player Character.

Your right. But as I mentioned before the module I'm running takes less then 24 hours. A dead eidolon on a 24 hour count down between the beginning and near end of it could lead to PC deaths. I'm concerned with the longevity of the run.

I could just be underestimating the class, which in turn leads to me underestimating a really good player. Of which I don't doubt Paul as a player, so therefore I should not doubt his chosen class.

So in a way, thank you all for seeing my side of the equasion and giving a new perspective to a new pathfinder DM.

And if I played a "real" tank and I die....

"Anyone have 5,000 gp worth of diamonds?"
"..."
"No?"
"Oh well, wait until we get back to town"

vs.

Do not progress.... just wait.

Read the Summon Eidolon post for a lot more details (not long, less than One page)

Paul, again, let me say that the summon eidolon spell in conjunction with the information I showed you in the book, doesn't work if your eidolon is put to negatives equal to it's constitution score. The 24 hour thing is still in effect.

As a helpful note, if you take the standard action of banishing the eidolon when its at 0 or in negatives not reaching constitution score, then use the summon eidolon spell, that keeps it happy and around longer.

Anyone else feel free to chime in on this if you feel my ruling is incorrect.

THIS LINK (remove spaces):

I can ask official SRD people (I WILL figure out how to get an official ruling on this).

For those who do not wish to click a link, here is the first post:

My GM says that because of the wording in the spell, if my eidolon dies, I cannot cast Summon Eidolon to bring it back.

His belief is because of the wording from AdvPH: (page 55)

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. The eidolon
remains until dismissed by the summoner (a standard
action). If the eidolon is sent back to its home plane due to
death, it cannot be summoned again until the following
day. The eidolon cannot be sent back to its home plane
by means of dispel magic, but spells such as dismissal and
banishment work normally. If the summoner is unconscious,
asleep, or killed, his eidolon is immediately banished.

And the wording of the spell "Summon Eidolon": page 248

You open a rift between dimensions that summons your eidolon.
Treat this as if you had summoned your eidolon normally, except
that it only remains with you for the duration of this spell. While
summoned in this way, your eidolon cannot touch any creature
warded by protection from evil or a similar effect and your eidolon
can be sent back to its home plane by dispel magic.
If you cast this spell while your eidolon is already on your
plane, this spell has no effect. This spell allows you to summon
your eidolon even if it has been returned to its home plane due
to damage.

He says because of the wording "Treat this as if you had summoned your eidolon normally", that is cannot be summoned for a full day, no matter what. I just want an official ruling on it.

Thanks

You can AWLWAYS, as a GM, just say "No, that spell does not exist in this world" and it will be so.

But, disputing wording with me, is a poor choice.

gnomersy wrote:

Dave the DM wrote:

My idea of a tank as a role is something that can effectively protect it's party members, can take more than a few hits, has a high AC, something that can't be immediately eliminated from an encounter scenario.

If your asking my view on the Summoner/Eidolon, then here it is: The health potential is mediocre since as Paul informed me would be 40 without CON, if it reaches neg constitution score it becomes useless for 24 hours, it would need to burn it's feats to wield/wear equipment to gain effective AC.

In my honest opinion it is better as a disposible beat stick from which I have already informed Paul as how to essentially keep it going without worry of healing it as a damage dealer.

Mind you, he still gets to play what he wants.

Riiiight. So care to elaborate as to how a Sword/board fighter effectively protects it's party members. Trust me that's not an actual question because that isn't actually possible.

As for the Eidolon it's not hard to have one with a high AC/HP at all you should have instead asked Paul if he could think of any ways to make it tankier.

To be perfectly honest, from my own perspective, a sword and board fighter is better at it by feat selections. It has the proficiencies to get it started of which the Eidolon doesn't.

An example tank I created using all the same restrictions given was a human/samurai who utilizes tower shield and katana. AC 37 - 40 depending. Feats including:

Combat Expertise, Dodge, Shield Focus, Tower Shield Proficiency, Combat Reflexes, Bodyguard, and Improved Critical.

We will be using a modified Hero Point system as well. The modified being challenged based to get 1-3 hero points back. Over 10 challenges total.

High AC means to monsters (and players) alike. "Screw this F**ker, let us target something else, we are never going to hit him until much later. We will deal with this piece of crap later."

Responses:

To Dave the GM: You Rock! Thank you for showing up (once again, thanks to Darth Grall for the Suggestion. Now... Darth, please casting that spell in me. I have a horrid Will save.)

Now, to respond to:

gnomersy wrote:

Dave the DM wrote:

If there are any questions for me, please ask. I'm only on here to make things easy for a concerned player.

Define your idea of tank. -> Problem solved -> ??? -> Profit.

My idea of a tank as a role is something that can effectively protect it's party members, can take more than a few hits, has a high AC, something that can't be immediately eliminated from an encounter scenario.

My eidolon, had about 80 hp, 30 Str, a 28 AC, and damage reduction 5.

On top of that, if it died, i could resummon it 4 times a day with the spell Summon Eidolon (which would also boost its Str and Con via Augment Summoning feat) thus bringing it back with 1/2 hp. Meaning they have to defeat it 5 times, before it will not return (They have to go through over 250 hp, not counting its DR)

Reach would let my creature have healers behind it. Any who approach, get stopped, and attacked.

If it looks bad, i keep the eidolon there, retreat (with other squishy characters) back as far as feasable. The creature gets overrun or killed, either teleport it to me, or re-summon it.

("DPS" should be helping too, by the way)

If your asking my view on the Summoner/Eidolon, then here it is: The health potential is mediocre since as Paul informed me would be 40 without CON, if it reaches neg constitution score it becomes useless for 24 hours, it would need to burn it's feats to wield/wear equipment to gain effective AC.

Oh, i forgot to mention the other thread i started, http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz6l5r?Question-about-Summon-Eidolon#4

In my honest opinion it is better as a disposible beat stick from which I have already informed Paul as how to essentially keep it going without worry of healing it as a damage dealer.

Mind you, he still gets to play what he wants.

See above