Reneshat's page

I didn't think of Wall of Thorns, they definitely need that one.

Thanks.

I didn't just mean leadership. At level 7, you can get a large Roc as an animal companion, and it has more than enough strength to carry a rider. Of course, you would probably need a DM okay on that, or maybe they could mention it in the APG. If you are light, the dire bat could carry you as well, also at 7th level.

LazarX wrote:

The archetype of the witch involves cursing others with shapechange, not shapeshifting themselves for the most part. Think Circe... she never changes shape but she turns legions of men into the beasts that she believes suits thier natures.

At most you might see a witch in stories taking on a minor glamour to appear as another person, for this the alter self spell suits sufficiently.

Really?

That's much less common than witches shapechanging others in stories and lore.

Personally, I would make the witch a wisdom caster, bump them to 4+int on the skills and add survival, perception, and sense motive to the skill list. I understand why they did it the way they did, I just think making the witch a wisdom caster would be better.

They get Baleful Polymorph. I think that's the one that really matters for playing a witch.

Jason has stated, in reply to a question regarding the bipedal eidolon, that the claws should be considered a primary attack. Is this only in regards to the claws that the bipedal eidolon starts with, or is it in regards to the claw evolution as well? Specifically, I am trying to create a bidpedal eidolon with four claw attacks. Does that make two primary attack claws and two secondary attack claws, or does it make four primary attack claws? Thanks.

In regards to the player, I hope he is doing okay and he gets better soon.

As far as the fluff and social aspects of the summoner class are concerned, sorry if I was coming across as a jerk. I didn't mean to. What I meant, was that the discussion of other, fluffier, aspects of the summoner have popped up multiple times on the board. Some broader concepts seem to be more popular, others less, but each opinion seems to be somewhat unique, and the general consensus is as long as the DM and player agree, and it works for them, then it should be fine.

Personally, I consider the eidolon the physical manifestation of an aspect of a greater spiritual in a different plane. This manifestation is possible do to a connection to the summoner. Since it's an aspect of a greater being, it has it's own nature, which is the nature of the greater being. Since the summoner is the link, as the summoner grows more powerful, so does the manifested aspect. If the nature, goals, or methods of the summoner and the greater being differ, this could lead to a battle of the wills. In this case, a weaker aspect would be easier to control than a stronger aspect.

I like this take because I think it offers more interesting RP opportunities if the summoner and the greater being are not always on the same page. This does seem to be variation on one of the more popular broader concepts. The other two most popular concepts seem to be that the eidolon is a physical manifestation of the thought and will of the summoner, and that the eidolon is essential an evolving monster partner like seen in various cartoons. In neither of these concepts would you have the summoner and eidolon acting in opposition to the summoner. The evolving monster eidolon would have a mind of it's own, but the relationship between the summoner and the eidolon would be closer to best friends, where one friend is definitely dominant in the relationship.

These different concepts would cause a very different world view of the summoner and his eidolon. In a world where you have evolving monster eidolons, eidolons and summoners would probably be rather common, and the view of the local populace would of course differ based on that. In one where it is the physical manifestation of will and thought, it would probably be more rare, though the learned among the populace would probably recognize it for what it is. In the concept I favor, it could range where the PC is one of the only (if not the only) summoner, to it's a common and accepted practice. How common summoner are in the world obviously would have a large impact on how the eidolon is accepted.

Finally you have to consider what the eidolon looks like and how worldly the town or city you are in is. Pathfinder has a great number of odd creatures, and if people are used to it, they are less likely to be surprised by the eidolon. A medium bipedal eidolon could pass as a rare race that people simply hadn't encountered yet. A medium or large quadruped eidolon could be an exotic pet or beast of burden. The biggest issues I see are with large or huge bipedal eidolon or serpent eidolons. Also, if the eidolon has something out of the ordinary, like multiple sets of arms or especially tentacles, I don't see it going over so well. Tentacles normally scream aberration, and I can't believe most communities would be cool with letting an aberration walk around town.

The non-mechanical aspects of the summoner have been discussed, but normally a bit here and there. That was primarily my take on the situation mixed with some stuff I've seen come up multiple times in other threads.

That's really up to the player and the DM.

I have found the oaths, while cool for RP purposes, underwhelming in play. I think I would like them better if, rather than doing them for a minor bonus to yourself, the cavalier upholding his oaths inspired his fellow party members, granting an additional minor bonus to the party through the banner ability. The biggest issue I see with this, is the Order of the Dragon does not play well with others, and the more the abilities of the cavalier are party focused, the less it seems to mesh with the Order of the Dragon cavalier. Does my idea have any merit, or is it untenable?

There are more options at higher level 7 if the cavaliers mount dies.

If the eidolon took the strength increase and weapon focus, he would be attacking at one higher than the fighter (two if the fighter is using power attack for every attack.) There should not be that great of a difference between the two. If the fighter had a masterwork weapon already (I'm surprised he doesn't), that would decrease the difference by one. Meanwhile, the eidolon could be running with an AC as high as 17 before spells. If the combats got tougher, the AC should make a world of difference between the fighter and the eidolon.

Personally, I don't like the fluff connotations of equipping the eidolon. I am not planning on equipping my eidolon either way (when I finally get to test it), and I don't really see the appeal of giving an eidolon any items except weapons. So conceptually, I like the idea of greatly limiting what the eidolon can use to almost nothing. However, I see a potential problem in that. We already have seen people making ridiculous eidolon builds. While equipment makes these builds more powerful, even without equipment we are talking about very powerful builds. If you limit the ability of the players to equip their non-optimized eidolon, it might lead to more players optimizing their builds to compensate. I think either requiring evolution points to unlock slots or summoner spells to equip the eidolon would probably go a long way towards fixing this problem.

Personally, I would lean more towards evolution points than spells. Maybe a 1 point evolution to open up a slot so you can use a minor wondrous item. A 2 point evolution to open up a slot to use a medium wondrous item, with the 1 point evolution being a pre-req (like large for huge.) 3 points would unlock the slot for a major woundrous item. Then it would take 6 points for someone to put a belt of physical perfection +6 on their eidolon, not counting the costs of the item itself.

This is off the top of my head, so it might cost too much.

The imaginary friend made real? Though 'friend' in this case may be stretching it...

Yes/no. Think less imaginary friend, more Buddhist monk meditation technique.

Basically, a tulpa is a being that comes into existence through sheer willpower. He kept referring to it as a thoughtform. Basically, imagine creating the eidolon out of nothing but thought, giving it form and substance through sheer willpower. In this case, the minute ritual would probably some manner of meditation necessary to collect yourself enough to create the eidolon for the day.

It seems I'm coming from a different direction than pretty much everyone else that has commented on this class. I'm a bit too old to have watched Pokemon, Digimon, ZOMGcutemon, or any other variation thereof. I had a younger sibling who watched said shows, and they annoyed the heck out of me. However, the moment I read the class description, my creative juices started flowing. I NEEDED to play this class. This was the class I never realized was always missing from the games I played.

I immediately had a vision in my head about the eidolon I wanted to create, and figured out what it would take to make it via evolution points. I was lucky enough to have enough points left over at level 20 so I could give it a SLA that fit with the concept and still have a couple of points left over. How effective this would actually be in combat never crossed my mind once. By the time I was done figuring out how to make the first creature in my head, I already had a second idea forming. None of this was an attempt to make something from the rules, but for once having the rules give me the freedom to create something, and then look at the rules on how to make it.

To me, the eidolon was some kick*ss mythic creature, an aspect of a greater being that my character and only my character could call forth from the ether. To be honest, the idea of equipping it with anything other than possibly weapons didn't even cross my mind. I loved the spell list for the Summoner. Buffs, wall spells, and even black tentacles? I love battlefield control and support roles. The thing that threw me for a loop was the hit die, BAB, and armor proficiency of the summoner. I just couldn't fit wearing any armor into the concept I had, so I figured I would ignore it.

To be honest, I was initially shocked that people were upset about the idea that the eidolon would be more combat effective than the summoner. I figured that was the point. The idea of it "stealing the spotlight" from the summoner just kind of confused me. To me, it was all in how you RPed it. I guess I just don't get the idea that the creature that is more combat effective or has more options is the more powerful one. It all goes back to the line from Conan when Thulsa Doom beckons the girl to jump to her death, "That is strength boy! That is power! What is steel compared to the hand that wields it?" To me, the eidolon is the steel, and the summoner the hand.

I think it's important to note that during the playtest, the Frost Giant rolled abnormally low. He got 7 attacks and rolled only two number above a 10, one 10, and then the rest didn't even break 5. That's the majority of his rolls failed to beat a 5 on the die.

In comparison the Eidolon had half of it's rolls beat a 10. If you ran the same test over again, it might have gone differently. When the Frost Giant whiffs 3 times in a row with 7, 12, and 9 needed on the die, that's a little abnormal. I'm not saying the Frost Giant would win if you ran it again, but I'm sure it would be a bit closer.

In general I'm starting to think that no lasting effects should remain on the eidolon. The fact that all hit point damage is removed when you re-summon him makes me think the Eidolon's form on this plane is transient and that if you boost or damage the eidolon that goes away when the eidolon returns to his native plane (and presumably native form).

That was my take on the class, but I could see people arguing the other way.

Then again, I wasn't planning on equipping my eidolon either, except with maybe a weapon or shield. To me it ruins the flavor that I was getting from the class. I really can't wait to try out the class (I'll have to wait), but it has been for flavor purposes from the beginning. I wouldn't do many things that I technically could, because it would ruin the flavor for me.

As a requirement, umm, no. It talks about it as " an ascetic character must be as extreme in works of charity as she is in self-denial. The majority of her share of party treasure (or profits from the sale thereof) should be donated to the needy, either directly or indirectly." It's not a requirement for the feat, and it doesn't state anything about characters who would be getting a smaller share of the treasure, such as cohorts or in this case, and eidolon.

In regards to Vow of Poverty, it requires DM fiat, which is easy because it's not a specific Pathfinder feat.

Edit: Technically the feat gives you abilities by the level, and Eidolae do not have levels, so there is a pretty good argument in and of itself.