My only worry is getting more slots they will take away our martial effectiveness.
Maybe limiting cantrips and making their progession similar to archetype caster would make it both versatile and limited?
Search Posts
If we agree that the design philosophy behind Magus is that it's a warrior first, mage second I could even agree with you, but a player don't take magus to be a mundane fighter and a caster if needed, they take magus to spellstrike. IMO if a class has a unique feature, the player should be able to use it at least once per combat. Relliable spellstrike being so limited takes out the fantasy of playing with magus.
Is it really necessary? Alchemist get better at advanced alchemy via features and not feats necessarily, same with barbarian and fury or ranger and prey hunt. The eidolon could evolve by features, maybe by sacrificing mastering to expert in weapon training. and make the proficiencies of the eidolon independent of the summoner.
Just brainstorming here with the idea of making the summoner and the eidolon separate HP pools, don't take it to serious. You could maintain the concept of sharing the same life force by making a conduit spell where you can transfer HP and maybe even conditions from one another, this way you keep then separate and still keep the ideia, which is pretty nice.
I might be a little to conservative on this point, but I think is to soon to experiment so much, the game is not even 1 year old. I've said this on another post, but this makes me afraid it becomes 3.5 all over again, if so much new rules and subsystems are being created this early in the game, imagine 4 or 5 years from now.
Exactly! I'm ok with making a whole new thing with summoners and apparently the community would hate animal companions on them, and I'm totally ok with that. But there's no reason to create so much exceptions and rule juggling on a class if there's already a rule that cover this problem, just make them minions for god sake! Thanks for translating my ideias so clearly
An Eidolon shluld be special, personal, and customizable. I think the same here, just thought enhancing animal companions would be a more elegant choice, I don't see why animal companions couldn't be all of those things, giving it the right attention. I'm not saying the way Eidolon works is bad, I just think it's unnecessarily complicated giving there's already a system that cover a similar way of playing
It looks like I'm the only one that sees a problem with this, but if this topic is already mentioned in another thread please redirect me. From what I read about the summoner it seems they have a very complex system for eidolons, they even have some cool stuff like shared HP and actions and all, very creative. But why? Why not just giving a sumomoner a animal companion? I mean, why creating a whole new rules and another complicated systems if you already have one that works and it's already pretty neat. I love the witch ideia of giving extra power to your familiar, it would be so much simpler to make the same with summoner here. Give the summoner the animal companion ability then give it extra stuff based on your eidolon origin.
What bugs me about this idea is that it breaks how the game works so soon since it's release. One thing I love about PF2 and what made me use it as my main system is it's organization, all caster have universal mechanics, all martials heavy had patterns on their feats and abilities, they all are still unique and fun, but they followed patterns. The magus and summoner breaks this idea entirely by creating a whole new system just for this two classes, I mean, if you guys wanted to make halfcasters, you could have made it with champion and rangers as well. And a simple solution to it is just use archetype spell system, this way they'll not be great at spellcasting, but they'll cast nonetheless I just think this 4 spells mechanic is a red alert for me, if they start putting new subsystems and different rules in a less then 1yo game, imagine what the game will look like in 4 or 5 years. i'm just afraid it becomes 3.5 all over again.
Totally on board with you on this, in my opinion if paizo had the intention of making halfcasters they should have done it with champions or rangers as well. The rulebook already set the standard, or you´re a caster hitting 10th level spells and all the progression or you´re a martial character, you could have a lot of fun tricks and focus spells, but you work mechanically as martial. If you want to play as a summoner caster, take a caster archetype, you'll get 6th level spells just like 1e.
Actually Ghilteras has a point, in the part 6 of Doomsday Dawn the main focus of it is to see how skills are working, and it really got me disappointed, until then I didn't pay attention about skills, of course the whole concept bothered me but the focus was killing foes and stuff so I ignored it. But when I read it I saw simple tasks like gathering informations that wouldn't be that difficult to gather, or picklocking a servant's room that should be a easy task if you stop to think that no one would care about a servant a DC 25 check. I'm pretty sure that if it was a low level adventure those DCs would be much lower. People talk about how epic it gets when you get high level but the only thing I'm seeing is the DCs getting higher for no reason, and don't call this bad GMing or nothing like that, because even the official content does this. and even if you can make pertinent DCs, climbing trees is each level easier and the solution to that is stop placing trees and start placing flat walls, it loses all sense, the challenge isn't gone, it's just skinned
I do believe +1/2 your lvl is a much simpler solution No proficiency is just to much like 5e, where Orcus, the lord of dead and necromancy, that has a CR 26, has a AC 17. My lvl 4 group can beat that easy. Of course it would be very easier to new gamers to get it, but it would piss of old players, something paizo don't want to do. Without having to say that would be out of one of the P2 topics: stay true to pathfinder Proficiency equal to its level its to complicaded and would imply the GMs to inflate their DCs (I'm not saying this is in the rules or that every one does that, just that without complicated tables upon every skill this would happen), of course old time players would like that, but a lot of new GMs would find that intimidating and might just stick to 5e or more interpretative systems Proficiency with 1/2 level just fits, being epic to high level characters that would roll +10 not counting ability bonus and skill ratings [making my counts right it would get to +19], being welcoming to low-level characters that even having a low bonus would still be able to be lucky and do awesome stuff, and the most important part, it would simplify encounter buildings a lot
I say this mainly beacuse the thing that most scares my new players is the score/modifier relation, or they brake their heads trying to get it, or they just ignore it and just say what the most experiencied players tell them to do with it, so thinking about that, wouldn't be simpler if this relation just vanished? In the character creation using the choices to determine scores [which is a great idea], the abilities increase 2 by 2, always gives a +1 to a choice made, if you stop to think about it, this conversion is already made: Instead of everything starting on 10 and increasing 2 by 2, everything start with +0 and increasing +1 to +1. About rolling abilities, you could think a new way to do it or just vanishe with it and there it is, no more obsolete scores that in the end mean the modifiers we will roll, just one number that have all those meaning Just saying that I don't think that scores being different to modifiers is a great flaw to the d20 RPGs, just that simplifying this could be much more friendly and wellcoming to new, and maybe old players
I have two large critics about level=proficiency designing.
|