Most nova tactics blow up in a player's face. I would like to see it in game before I call it overpowered. Many of us will be playing this weekend I assume, so we can come back with reports. I still dont know how effective a summoner with most of his spells and his pet really will be. If given a chance I will throw a summoner against a BBEG with most of his spells in tact, and report back here or in another thread. If the summoner is a factor I will vote for the reduction of the summon monster ability.
I will try to do this at various levels. 1, 7, 13, 17
The BBEG's and crew will be EL 4, 11, 17, 22. I dont know what the BBEG's will be but I am open to suggestion. A better idea is to have many of us run the same BBEG to see how it works with different play styles.
On this matter I'll only say that a well-designed game should NEVER be based upon players's kindness (ESPECIALLY a competitive/gamistic one where you're supposed to be strong and effective at your best). Let the social problems OUT of the playing table, please.
A conjurer or (worst) a summoner who wants to maximise its efforts breaks the game's pace dramatically. This is a fact (and not a good one).
A paladin or barbarian or fighter or whatever simply can't (and this is GOOD, for God's sake!)
This is a well-known issue of 3.x casters who can summon things that give them extra actions/rolls in the round. This is usually balanced by a long casting time, but not always (and it doesn't stop the nova preparation effect in every case). A future incarnation of PF RPG should take care of these matters ABSOLUTELY.
BUT I think there are a few workarounds for the summoner at least...
-Summoner's conjurations doesn't last a minute/level, but are simply affected by "extend spell" feat for free.
-Summoner should SHARE ACTIONS with his eidolon on a one by one basis. In other words, in my idea eidolon can't take a standard/full round/move/swift/immediate action until the summoner sacrifices its standard/full round/move/swift/immediate action.
-No way the eidolon should be able to outshine the party's fighter. no way in the hell.
It should be enough. :)
|
I like the summoner. But I have to say that I feel the SLA summons are out of whack. There should be a limit on how many can be going at once, and they should be 1 round per level like the rest of them (or even shorter IMO). The class already has a mega summon and access to all of the other summons? Does it really need minute per level show stoppers?
It is obviously unbalanced. I want to buy the Advanced players guide and make it an option for my characters, but if the book is not going to be balanced against the current core classes we just won't buy it. That was the problem that I had with WOTC supplements, and why so many of them sat on the shelf never used.
Summoning has always been problematic in 3.x (along with undead armies of necromancers) because it allows one player to DOMINATE the spotlight in a team game. I like the eidilon, I like it a lot in fact. But the SLA summons need adjusting IMO. One player should not have a horde of level appropriate monsters , one badass monster at his side, and then the ability to summon more as they see fit.
Put the summoner in an arena against any party of its own level. Who statistically wins? Hell give the summoner 3 rounds to prep and then put him in against a whole party (four other players). Who statistically wins?
love,
malkav
I like the summoner. But I have to say that I feel the SLA summons are out of whack. There should be a limit on how many can be going at once, and they should be 1 round per level like the rest of them (or even shorter IMO). The class already has a mega summon and access to all of the other summons? Does it really need minute per level show stoppers?
It is obviously unbalanced. I want to buy the Advanced players guide and make it an option for my characters, but if the book is not going to be balanced against the current core classes we just won't buy it. That was the problem that I had with WOTC supplements, and why so many of them sat on the shelf never used.
Summoning has always been problematic in 3.x (along with undead armies of necromancers) because it allows one player to DOMINATE the spotlight in a team game. I like the eidilon, I like it a lot in fact. But the SLA summons need adjusting IMO. One player should not have a horde of level appropriate monsters , one badass monster at his side, and then the ability to summon more as they see fit.
Put the summoner in an arena against any party of its own level. Who statistically wins? Hell give the summoner 3 rounds to prep and then put him in against a whole party (four other players). Who statistically wins?
love,
malkav
Arenas are not good examples of actual value in an adventure.
I dont know what you meant by against a party because later you said a whole party so I cant answer that.
The summoner does not win against a whole party does not win though. Not with decent players on the other side anyway.
It's the summoner his buddy, and 3 summoned monsters after 3 rounds, against an adventuring party. The summoner better go find some friends to help.
You could take a cleric, who is a better combatant than a summoner, give him a meatshield, and 3 summoned monsters, and I would expect the party to win.
If the cleric can't hack it I dont see the summoner surviving either.
His best chance is first level, but that is swingy anyway since a first level wizard with color spray or sleep can wipe an entire party alone.
|
|
Fair enough. I still think the summoner could give the party a good fight at any level with three rounds of prep. Wether or not the summoner would win seems to be up to debate however (as you clearly think he will not).Maybe if I get some time today I will do up a few mock combats to test this, although my optimization skills may not be up to the standards of the board.
I guess I have just had bad experience with summoners and necromancers in the past. Seen them take whole encounters and trivialize the rest of the party with their massive armies.
I wish that there had been some type of action sacrifice for summoners in PF. (like trading their actions to make the summons take actions). Oh well, at least we have the witch this round (which I am totally digging on)
How about this:
The first summoned critter the summoner commands eats up a free action, the second a move action, and the third finally takes the standard action away from the summoner. This could be worked so that a creature that already has an attack action does not need it reissued every round, but it would lower the battlefield chess aspect of the summoner.
But thats just a thought.
love,
malkav
|
The conjuror already has a mechanic for increasing the duration of their summoned critters. I think that this should be applied to the summoner as well, instead of giving him 10x the duration.
I've been playing a conjuror in CoT (just cresting level 4 now), I find that an extra round or two at low levels is really effective without going overboard (especially combined with a Varisian Tatoo and Acadamae Graduate feats).
I'm not totally convinced that this class needs average BAB (and HD by extension) or armour proficiency either. I think that makes the class too good. The monster buddy and summoned mini buddies plus spells seems to be enough IMO (alien buddy also needs to be toned down a bit too if he's to function in a standard adventuring party).
Would someone who spends his training reaching his mind out over the expanses of the multiverse to contact alien beings have time to learn how to fence?
Finally, is Cha the best attribute for this class? If they are, in fact, contacting other planes and binding an alien mind/being to their will, would Wisdom not be a more appropriate ability? You need a strong will to avoid going totally mad when doing that kind of thing, I'd expect. A Wisdom-based arcane caster would be kinda cool too.
|
|
The conjuror already has a mechanic for increasing the duration of their summoned critters. I think that this should be applied to the summoner as well, instead of giving him 10x the duration.
I've been playing a conjuror in CoT (just cresting level 4 now), I find that an extra round or two at low levels is really effective without going overboard (especially combined with a Varisian Tatoo and Acadamae Graduate feats).
I'm not totally convinced that this class needs average BAB (and HD by extension) or armour proficiency either. I think that makes the class too good. The monster buddy and summoned mini buddies plus spells seems to be enough IMO (alien buddy also needs to be toned down a bit too if he's to function in a standard adventuring party).
Would someone who spends his training reaching his mind out over the expanses of the multiverse to contact alien beings have time to learn how to fence?
Finally, is Cha the best attribute for this class? If they are, in fact, contacting other planes and binding an alien mind/being to their will, would Wisdom not be a more appropriate ability? You need a strong will to avoid going totally mad when doing that kind of thing, I'd expect. A Wisdom-based arcane caster would be kinda cool too.
Where eidolons come from has been left to the GM and player to determine. That way you can come up with where your's came from in a way that matches your concept. I.e. you could have found and made a pact with an eidolon from the celestial realms, the depths of hell, an elemental plane, or from the vast reaches beyond/in between the planes.
I don't get the argument, I don't think.
In my campaign, if you use all of your daily abilities in one fight, there are two and a half scenarios....
1) The encounter was NOT intended to be the only encounter that day and you've pretty much wasted a ton of resources on it.
2) The encounter WAS intended to be the only encounter that day (or is the BBEG encounter) and summoned monsters are going to be pretty much useless except as aid another machines or controlling the BBEG's minons.
I see very little wrong with the Summoner as written. I had a full 3.0 Artificer 2 campaigns ago. He was a bit annoying to deal with, but I don't think it'll be as bad with the Summoner because only the Summoner's main pet will be customizable. The individual summons will be ready to go right out of the book.
Or maybe, as a DM I'm an Arzhole and make the encounters too powerful.
|
|
Where eidolons come from has been left to the GM and player to determine. That way you can come up with where your's came from in a way that matches your concept. I.e. you could have found and made a pact with an eidolon from the celestial realms, the depths of hell, an elemental plane, or from the vast reaches beyond/in between the planes.
Respectfully, I don't see your point. Which of my comments is that directed at, and how does it apply?
|
|
Or maybe, as a DM I'm an Arzhole and make the encounters too powerful.
You should make encounters that are challenging based on the characters you have in the game. Personally, if I am playing a summoner, there is no way I am going to be spending all my SLAs on one fight. I know we are going to be fighting more battles that day and it seems silly to waste everything on the next group of goblins we encounter. I think using an average of 1 per fight would be about right for most summoner players. Obviously if people start dropping you bring in more to fill the ranks and give you more of an advantage, but I don't see most people blowing utility on one fight.
|
|
Respectfully, I don't see your point. Which of my comments is that directed at, and how does it apply?
Where eidolons come from has been left to the GM and player to determine. That way you can come up with where your's came from in a way that matches your concept. I.e. you could have found and made a pact with an eidolon from the celestial realms, the depths of hell, an elemental plane, or from the vast reaches beyond/in between the planes.
After re-reading, I'm not sure. I think I got your wisdom point confused with someone else's wisdom point. Sorry about that. However, I think any ability score could be useful for the summoner depending on how you describe the way he contacts/summons/binds/makes pacts with/tricks/bullies/bribes his eidolon. It's one of those things where how the summoner gets the job done is different depending on who you ask. I don't particularly see a problem with Wisdom, Intelligence, or Charisma being the primary casting stat depending on exactly how you see the summoner accomplishing his task.
|
|
After re-reading, I'm not sure. I think I got your wisdom point confused with someone else's wisdom point. Sorry about that. However, I think any ability score could be useful for the summoner depending on how you describe the way he contacts/summons/binds/makes pacts with/tricks/bullies/bribes his eidolon. It's one of those things where how the summoner gets the job done is different depending on who you ask. I don't particularly see a problem with Wisdom, Intelligence, or Charisma being the primary casting stat depending on exactly how you see the summoner accomplishing his task.
I guess it's a matter of how fluff and crunch meet. :)
Fair enough. I still think the summoner could give the party a good fight at any level with three rounds of prep. Wether or not the summoner would win seems to be up to debate however (as you clearly think he will not).Maybe if I get some time today I will do up a few mock combats to test this, although my optimization skills may not be up to the standards of the board.
I guess I have just had bad experience with summoners and necromancers in the past. Seen them take whole encounters and trivialize the rest of the party with their massive armies.
I wish that there had been some type of action sacrifice for summoners in PF. (like trading their actions to make the summons take actions). Oh well, at least we have the witch this round (which I am totally digging on)
How about this:
The first summoned critter the summoner commands eats up a free action, the second a move action, and the third finally takes the standard action away from the summoner. This could be worked so that a creature that already has an attack action does not need it reissued every round, but it would lower the battlefield chess aspect of the summoner.
But thats just a thought.
love,
malkav
I understand, I DM'd a dread necromancer once. It wrecked a lot of my encounters because I had never DM'd against a dedicated summoner before. I started running more encounters to make him use more spells, so he got smart and started to scribe scrolls, and also buy them. I am sure he would have eventually gotten smart and purchased a wand. Dispel Magic would take care of a number of summons.
If the BBEG has any info on the heroes that could be a factor also. Having your own summons is also not a bad idea in addition to a few henchmen who's only real purpose is to eat up the Summoner's actions. I think its just one of those things you have to prepare for before the fight. I will be trying to get some playtesting in this weekend against a variety of BBEG's with the Summoner having summons, and also when he only has his Eidolon. I do have a few NPC's around that I could try to Pathfinderize for you to use as NPC bosses. If you give me a CR I will try to work something up for you to use by Friday to save you some time. My public email is w33w33@aol.com. Hopefully that will save you some time if you accept the offer so you can try different scenarios.
I am not a great optimizer either, but I have been blessed/cursed with a variety of creative players, and I was a constant lurker on the WoTC boards so between being over there, and being over here I have picked up a few tricks.
If I seem combative I apologize. I just like to see something tested before its shot down.
|
|
Fair enough. I still think the summoner could give the party a good fight at any level with three rounds of prep. Wether or not the summoner would win seems to be up to debate however (as you clearly think he will not).Maybe if I get some time today I will do up a few mock combats to test this, although my optimization skills may not be up to the standards of the board.
I guess I have just had bad experience with summoners and necromancers in the past. Seen them take whole encounters and trivialize the rest of the party with their massive armies.
I wish that there had been some type of action sacrifice for summoners in PF. (like trading their actions to make the summons take actions). Oh well, at least we have the witch this round (which I am totally digging on)
How about this:
The first summoned critter the summoner commands eats up a free action, the second a move action, and the third finally takes the standard action away from the summoner. This could be worked so that a creature that already has an attack action does not need it reissued every round, but it would lower the battlefield chess aspect of the summoner.
But thats just a thought.
love,
malkav
I understand, I DM'd a dread necromancer once. It wrecked a lot of my encounters because I had never DM'd against a dedicated summoner before. I started running more encounters to make him use more spells, so he got smart and started to scribe scrolls, and also buy them. I am sure he would have eventually gotten smart and purchased a wand. Dispel Magic would take care of a number of summons.
If the BBEG has any info on the heroes that could be a factor also. Having your own summons is also not a bad idea in addition to a few henchmen who's only real purpose is to eat up the Summoner's actions. I think its just one of those things you have to prepare for before the fight. I will be trying to get some playtesting in this weekend against a variety of BBEG's with the Summoner having summons, and also when he...
Protection from X is your friend...
Part of his schtick is that the summoner can do adventures solo because he CAN conjure an army. As in, "my GM is going to run a solo campaign for me, I'm going to play a summoner because he's especially suited for it."Why would you even design a class around this concept?
Yes, in a standard group the summoner can go overboard with all of his summoned creatures' actions... and a courteous player won't dominate the game that way. Just as another character with summonings, animal companions, and cohorts should give the other players time to play.Wait, wait, wait. You're saying that the summoner shouldn't use his class abilities because it's discourteous? If those abilities are going to break the game, then they shouldn't be given to the class.
That's like saying that wizards in 3.5 shouldn't use save-or-dies because they might one-hit the BBEG and that's not fun.
I'm not sure about that. It's important that EVERYONE has a good time, and if one player's turn is taking forever that's just not a lot of fun. I agree that summoning a horde could be considered discourteous, which is what I really liked about the eidolon. I'd almost like to see a restriction on the summoner that limits it from casting the summon monster spells while using it's eidolon, or that limits it to a set number of creatures summoned at any given time.
-No way the eidolon should be able to outshine the party's fighter. no way in the hell.
The fighter is not too much better than it was in 3.5. I would not hold it as the idea of balance. If the fighter was as effective as it was supposed to be I would agree with you.
People keep playing up how if they have time to prepare the summoner can nova his SLA's and dominate a fight, but the same is true in reverse. One magic circle and you got a whole bunch of critters taking up space. Heck the summoner's primary class feature is subject to a dismissal spell.
If the summoner starts summoning at the beggining of a fight he is no more effective then any caster. And for those who are worried about the 1min/level, for christs sake, space out your fights a little. Its not that hard, even if you are running a module or AP, add in a few long hallways or a few traps to slow the party down a bit, problem solved and it took about 4 minutes to do.
There is also the added fact, that the summoner no longer has direct control over a summoned monster. By RaW you cannot communicate with the vast majority of summoned monsters. So they will attack 'to the best of their ability', thats the DM's discretion there. Sure they will attack but they will not use the tactics a party would, so the 'a summoner is a party all by himself' point is moot. The summoner can place the monsters but the DM decides who and how they attack. Suddenly the power is much less then a whole party un to themselves.
Reducing the duration of the summoner's SLA to normal would be a poor idea, it would make the ability far less useful, since this is supposed to be a staple. I would rather see it be 1minute per 2 levels or maybe per 3 levels with a minimum of 1. That way it is long enough for a fight, but far less likely to be around for the next one.
Comments about the summoner:
1. They are designed to dominate in specific instances. I played a dedicated cleric summoner in Living Greyhawk. I had the Animal and Summoner domains along with the summoning feats such as Augment Summoning, etc. In addition, I took Rapid Spell and could exchange my turns for cutting full-round summons into standards. The very idea of a summoner class should focus on these very ideas while limiting other avenues of pursuit.
2. The summons that last minutes per level are only at your CHA modifier bonus. You would need an 18 stat in CHA (at stat which gives NO other benefits to saves, etc.) just to get 4 of these per day. Looking at a 20 point build, that gives only one, maybe two other stats any kind of bonus.
3. The BAB is irrelevent to this class. I can count on two hands how many times my character entered into melee by the time he hit 10th level. Sure I plinked with a crossbow on occasion but that was more due to boredom than a desire to take down bad guys.
4. Summoned monsters are fairly easy to negate. One protective spell such on the BBEG and all of your summoned monsters are hedged out. That is a level 1 spell. Now throw up circles and entire encounters negate summoned creatures.
5. Out-of-combat encounters are just as much fun with summoned creatures as combat encounters. Cross the river = summon some crocs.
I vote for keeping the Summoner but agree that the BAB can be toned down to help balance things out.
Comments about the summoner:
1. They are designed to dominate in specific instances. I played a dedicated cleric summoner in Living Greyhawk. I had the Animal and Summoner domains along with the summoning feats such as Augment Summoning, etc. In addition, I took Rapid Spell and could exchange my turns for cutting full-round summons into standards. The very idea of a summoner class should focus on these very ideas while limiting other avenues of pursuit.
2. The summons that last minutes per level are only at your CHA modifier bonus. You would need an 18 stat in CHA (at stat which gives NO other benefits to saves, etc.) just to get 4 of these per day. Looking at a 20 point build, that gives only one, maybe two other stats any kind of bonus.
3. The BAB is irrelevent to this class. I can count on two hands how many times my character entered into melee by the time he hit 10th level. Sure I plinked with a crossbow on occasion but that was more due to boredom than a desire to take down bad guys.
4. Summoned monsters are fairly easy to negate. One protective spell such on the BBEG and all of your summoned monsters are hedged out. That is a level 1 spell. Now throw up circles and entire encounters negate summoned creatures.
5. Out-of-combat encounters are just as much fun with summoned creatures as combat encounters. Cross the river = summon some crocs.
I vote for keeping the Summoner but agree that the BAB can be toned down to help balance things out.
AGREED on point #4.
I think its hilarious that people are freaking out about Summon Monster when there are so many easy, readilly available ways to nuetralize it in combat... The enemies, if they're smart will know the goodies are coming and be prepared ( I use prot from good/evil a LOT) my big concern with summon monster is when you hit the Summon Monster 3 range you basically have a permanent Hippogriff mount for free.
Edit -- It's not permanent, I exaggerated. Still, A variety of summons allow you to do unexpected things...like the elementals.
Boosting his save DCs (which are going to be low anyway, due to low spell levels)
What save DCs? There's like one spell per level that allows a save.
Ok I have to ask, how many people actually expect their players to take summon monster spells with their very few spells known? I mean, you can already do that and better, why bother with Summon monster spells? It seems to me that is a waste when you could devote those spells know to you know, buffs.
As for the duration of combat, that depends on the style and the group i guess. Most of my fights involve terrain, and movement, stealth, encounter traps, and other such elements, and they generally last. Its rare for a 'you walk into the room, there are goblins, hit them with sharp things' encounter to creep in (though it happens). I have seen low level fights go over 12 rounds, and forget about high level ones. So I do think the minute per level duration is required. I also know that at my table it will be rare untill very high levels that the minute per level duration will bring the summon into the next one. I rarely see my group hit encounters in rapid succession, after all generally they search the room after an encounter, since I tend to leave clues around as to what to do next, and to highlight plot points. That takes a few minutes at least.
There is a valid point about the potential abuse if the summoner has time to prep for a fight, but honestly that is the case for all casters. Give a wizard or cleric 5 or 6 rounds to get ready for a fight and you might as well not have had the fight especially hat mid to high levels. I dont see why that needs to be different for the summoner, other then the fact that his nova is less subtle.
|
|
With my DM's blessing I think I'm gonna try a rebuild of my conjuror as a summoner and get him to do a job shadow the conjuror in the Pathfinder AP we're playing. Basically, every encounter we have, I'll run it with my conjuror character and then compare it to the performance of the summoner in the same situation with the same dice rolls.
If the classes are more or less balanced, they should have equal success. If one is more effective than the other, I'll know pretty soon and in which kinds of encounters. My hypothesis is that the summoner is going to end up on top.
We play Friday. If it's a go, I'll have notes soon after.
With my DM's blessing I think I'm gonna try a rebuild of my conjuror as a summoner and get him to do a job shadow the conjuror in the Pathfinder AP we're playing. Basically, every encounter we have, I'll run it with my conjuror character and then compare it to the performance of the summoner in the same situation with the same dice rolls.
If the classes are more or less balanced, they should have equal success. If one is more effective than the other, I'll know pretty soon and in which kinds of encounters. My hypothesis is that the summoner is going to end up on top.
We play Friday. If it's a go, I'll have notes soon after.
Balanced classes to not mean balanced results in the exact same situation. Different classes shine in different situations. Heck individual classes can vary depending on how they are built. A trip manuever fighter with a reach weapon, will not perform the same in the same situations as a sword and board high ac fighter. That doesnt mean one of the two is unbalanced. Will the conjurer and the evoker have the same success in the same encounters? I highly doubt it. I am not saying its not a good point of comparison, that kind of playtesting is a good thing, but it doesnt mean the class is or isnt balanced. Honestly I think a summon happy druid is a better point of comparison then a conjurer wizard, but thats just me.
|
|
After further thought I think I still have issue with the SLA summons. Has it been considered to just remove them altogether and give the summoner some appropriate summoning/metamagic feats as bonus spells? (maybe bonus extend, augment summoning, quickened, etc?)
Another thought that popped in my head would be instead of just piling on more castings of summon monster, is to perhaps enhance the summoners castings of it in unique ways. Maybe allow them access to an expanded list (maybe combine natures ally and summon monster or add a couple of summoner only summons at each level). Or perhaps even augment his summons in a limited fashion so that some of the creatures may have access to special abilities like flaming or keen (or any other such static ability or enchantment that would be easy to add to the creature on the fly).
On the whole I like the class a lot. The static pet is really, really cool,a nd has several members of my group really excited.
But in the end it is pretty much a full casting progression caster (there are many spells above 6th level in its list. It gets access to several iconic spells before full progression casters: Haste for instance) with the same BAB, armor and hit die benefits of other classes that have a 6th level casting progression (but those classes have much lower level spells int heir lists), with a fairly powerful companion creature (I would argue its more powerful than an animal companion, but it really does not matter), and the ability to spam more critters into the battle on top of that.
I think two major points should be strongly considered in the class.
1. The SLA summons needs adjusting IMO. But i have seen a variety of opinions on the subject, and I am going to playtest it.
2. Wether or not the classes spellcasting from spells is closer to a full progression caster in usefulness or a 6 level caster. If it is closer to a full progression caster then I think the HD,BAB, and armor reqs. should be closer to those classes. If not then leave as is.
But all in all, I think the class is a great concept, and I cannot wait to make it available for my players. I just don't want it to be substantially better than other options.
love,
malkav
Going nova is a bad idea.
1 You justed flash burned your abilities.
2 You (summoner) don't have any really effective combat spells(damaging)
3 You just tweaked the DM, (let's be honest we are a vengful lot) and the blood thristy power/munchkins.
4 Summon monsters are usually weaker that their caster.
5 YOUR DM CAN NOVA HIS SUMMONER, live in fear.
Heck the summoner's primary class feature is subject to a dismissal spell.
I was beginning to wander if I was the only one.
The summoner should keep his extended summon SLA. This enables a versatility that other casters won't have outside combat. The summoner must be able to summon something that will make skill checks, transportation, use SLAs and other things that require time.
The creatures from the summon lists are generally underpowered for the level when they become available, so even if they can help in combat, they will not win it by themselves.
Also, I've been playing for a lot of time, and I've almost never seen any player summon lots of things at once. Its not very fun to keep lots of sheets and control a mountain of critters.
I can see this ability of the summoner as something that will mostly be used out of combat, and when used in combat, will not be very different from the normal.
All those summons are really something outstanding, but the class is SUMMONER, and I think it should really excel at this.
Going nova is a bad idea.
5 YOUR DM CAN NOVA HIS SUMMONER, live in fear.
Lmao, I am just picturing a Summoner with a clairvoyant wizard friend with a group of adventures sitting on the other side of a door, buffing up for the encounter, the summoner is meanwhile summoning a ton of devils, and his eidolon is hovering over the door.
I'm not sure about that. It's important that EVERYONE has a good time, and if one player's turn is taking forever that's just not a lot of fun.
Why does this assumption keep coming up? If the stats for the monster are printed/written out before the game session it should not take forever. Now if the player thinks the party should sit around while he looks the stats up, well you skip his turn. I run several NPC's as a DM so there is no way a player should be taking forever, unless he does not know what to do, but that is when I start a countdown.
|
|
Balanced classes to not mean balanced results in the exact same situation. Different classes shine in different situations...
Agreed, but I think that they fill very similar roles so the comparison is fair IMO. I play my conjuror as a battlefield controller and monster caller, and interpret the summoner to be something along those lines, so I think it'll be a pretty fair comparison.
Since I don't play a druid, the other comparison is not possible in the AP I'm playing in. I'm gonna do what I can with the situation at hand to generate some feedback. It's not a perfect solution or comparison, but it's the best I got. :)
One of the things I think needs to be considered is how these new classes will function in the Pathfinder AP's. Will they fit in seamlessly, die horribly or stomp it flat? By trying to fit the Summoner into part of an existing AP, I hope to get a peek at that.
I guess I'd just like to straight-up agree that badly nerfing this ability would probably make the class less fun to play, especially getting rid of the max spell level aspect of it. A Summoner should be able to cast level 9 summons at the high levels. I'd rather see a hit die nerf than a special ability nerf, not that I think ANY nerf is necessary at this point. I may have a player who is considering this class for the new campaign. I'll post my thoughts if he does.
Comments about the summoner:
2. The summons that last minutes per level are only at your CHA modifier bonus. You would need an 18 stat in CHA (at stat which gives NO other benefits to saves, etc.) just to get 4 of these per day. Looking at a 20 point build, that gives only one, maybe two other stats any kind of bonus.
Generally, I agree that Charisma is a dump stat. But here we have a Charisma-based class with UMD as a class skill, which mitigates any concerns about the non-combat nature of the summoner's spell list (with a wand of scorching ray, a summoner can keep up the blastage quite well). I'll be putting a minimum of 16 in this stat (which gives me 6 uses per day).
I was beginning to wander if I was the only one.Heck the summoner's primary class feature is subject to a dismissal spell.
You're also subject to a dismissal spell?
SAY NO TO NERF!
Play test in real games before you judge something.
I can make a bunch of numbers say anythink I want. The Media does it all the time and so does the Gov.
You're also subject to a dismissal spell?I was beginning to wander if I was the only one.Heck the summoner's primary class feature is subject to a dismissal spell.
I am a skull of fire. There shall be no jokes at my expense.