|
I can't believe no one has replied to this thread...
Is it just me, or is there a total lack of interest in the roleplaying potential of these new classes? I understand new mechanics can be fun and exciting, but if thats all it takes to attract interest then we all might as well be playing that OTHER edition of the world's most popular roll playing game.
In my opinion, the mechanics of these classes, especially the summoner, alchemist, and witch; feels unnatural and betrays my expectations of how these classes should work in a believable world. Granted, you can't please everyone, but as this playtest has progressed it seems evident that these classes are meant to fill a mechanical niche with little to no regard for the world they inhabit.
Some of the best RP ideas I have seen involve tying the eidolon into the character's childhood.
The summoners imaginary friend as a kid come to life.
The exotic pet that the summoner always wanted as a kid.
An attempt to recreate a dead friend or family member.
There are a lot of cool RP options, but as freddy said, this is mostly about making sure the rules are balanced.
|
Rather than limit the summoner to one summoned monster at a time allow the summoner use one more casting per five levels, so that he would 2 monsters at 5th level, 3 at 10th and so on.The last thing that really bothers me is the changing of evolutions at every level. This seems to allow the summoner could completely revamp his eidolon at every level. I think that the summoner should only be allowed to switch evolutions once every four levels much like sorcerers switch spells.
correction here which people still keep getting wrong - the summoner is only limited to one SLA at a time not one summon monster so the summoner can use his SLA to summon multiple monsters of a lower level or one monster of the appropriate level but has to wait till they are killed, dispelled or time runs out on the spell duration before using their SLA again. also the summoner can spam summon monsters with his spells just like wizards & druids.
I agree about the complete revamp on the evolutions but I think maybe limiting it to 1/2 the evos pt each level may be reassigned which I think allows you to change some abilities but will require the summoner to plan ahead for other ones
I thought the summoner lacked any out of combat abilities - his spell list is terrible for utility/out of combat spells and his skill selection sucks as well.
Should at least get bluff (lied to make a pact) or diplomacy (made a pact) themewise and would give him some skills to focus in out of combat.
I can't believe no one has replied to this thread...
Is it just me, or is there a total lack of interest in the roleplaying potential of these new classes? I understand new mechanics can be fun and exciting, but if thats all it takes to attract interest then we all might as well be playing that OTHER edition of the world's most popular roll playing game.
In my opinion, the mechanics of these classes, especially the summoner, alchemist, and witch; feels unnatural and betrays my expectations of how these classes should work in a believable world. Granted, you can't please everyone, but as this playtest has progressed it seems evident that these classes are meant to fill a mechanical niche with little to no regard for the world they inhabit.
I don't need the book to tell me how to role-play something. I need it to have rules put down, that are well balanced. I came up with a great summoner that I can't wait to play. I don't need to share this info with people on the boards because it shouldn't effect what they do with the class. however what game effects the class has are very important to the people on the boards.
as far as the mechanics of the summoner, alchemist, and witch, these classes are optional, they are not automatically added into the campaign unlike the other classes which for the most part should be in the campaign. (this was stated at the start of the play test.) if you don't like them don't put them in, tell you're pc's no. if you dm is allowing them it's up to you if you want to play them. i'm not limiting what i play, and what is playable in my camp's based on how you feel.
|
|
I don't need the book to tell me how to role-play something. I need it to have rules put down, that are well balanced. I came up with a great summoner that I can't wait to play. I don't need to share this info with people on the boards because it shouldn't effect what they do with the class. however what game effects the class has are very important to the people on the boards.
as far as the mechanics of the summoner, alchemist, and witch, these classes are optional, they are not automatically added into the campaign unlike the other classes which for the most part should be in the campaign. (this was stated at the start of the play test.) if you don't like them don't put them in, tell you're pc's no. if you dm is allowing them it's up to you if you want to play them. i'm not limiting what i play, and what is playable in my camp's based on how you feel.
LMAO! Are we not discussing the Pathfinder ROLEPLAYING game? Characters are more than just numbers on a page. Your character is an idea--a personage given life by your imagination, inspired by the abstractions given in the rulebook. The assertion that your character and the rules which govern him/her are independent is simply false.
I am thus far, unimpressed with the summoner class because it seems as if the rules for a 'pet-based class' were created and then given a shallow explanation as an after-thought. I see the value in this, because it allows for a broad interpretation of the rules (i.e. bonding with a nature spirit, making a pact with an alien intelligence, communing with your higher-self, etc.) However, giving such a versatile class a role in a campaign world is difficult. If a given segment of people start gossiping about the local "summoner," just what are they talking about? Furthermore, what does the local non-adventuring summoner do to earn a living?
|
|
I've been having a discussion with my brother on this topic. My summoner has a fairly detailed back story, how he first got an Eidolon to what his father does for a living, but it doesn't get to come out much in game. He and the Eidolon are like best friends or brothers but its not like the two can have a conversation since I'd just be talking to myself while my friends looked on in dumbfounded silence.
Its possible that type of additional flavor will be added in later or at least in the final book much like how sorcerers have some additional flavoring/ideas perhaps as to where they obtained their powers.
At the same time, I notice in the more recent editions of D&D including Pathfinder there can be a lack of background information for the uninitated. In fact I had this conversation with my group specifically about how some of the books appear to be written as if you already have 20 years of playing under your belt (which we all do) - a good example of this is a lack of ecology information in the Monster Manuals.
I remember fondly reading all that and being amazed - especially the nice long ecology articles in Dragon magazine. Point being now days these books are often written with the assumption you can fill in the holes for yourself and don't need it all spelled out for you.
If that is a good thing or bad thing I suppose is up the individual to figure out for themselves. I actually would like to see more detailed background examples for people but I can see how paying for "examples" for the past 20 years may irk some people.
|
I've been having a discussion with my brother on this topic. My summoner has a fairly detailed back story, how he first got an Eidolon to what his father does for a living, but it doesn't get to come out much in game. He and the Eidolon are like best friends or brothers but its not like the two can have a conversation since I'd just be talking to myself while my friends looked on in dumbfounded silence.
Actually, you can. Eidolons can speak every language the Summoner can.
Bring along some play dough.
Then you can build your Eidolon so all the other players can see your make believe friend.
That reminds me of playing Monster Mash and Ogre Smash. Fun minature games where you made your toys and then got to destroy them by the end of the play session.
|
|
I have enjoyed reading all of the combat posts with the summoner that show case how powerful the eidolon can be if built right, but what about the roleplaying side where combat is not involved. My big powerful eidolon was useless to me as the townfolk would not allow he into their city.
My choice would be to take an eidolon that suits the local character. For instance, if I was using a humanoid eidolon, and operating out of Kaer-Maga, I would take advantage of the local Iridian Fold types to dress my Eidolon up in veils and have it appear to be my mysterious travelling companion.
Operating anywhere with a Druidic population, an Eidolon that resembles a bison, bear, horse or dire wolf (quadruped), giant constrictor / viper (serpentine) or ape (biped) would allow me to appear to be just another Druid. There's no reason my proteanic monstrosity from the otherworld needs to look alien, after all.
It can appear to be an animal, or a human.
Also note that this class, unless being specifically flavored to be unique, rare or exotic, 'from a far away land,' is going to be no more or less extant in the setting than a Druid or Wizard. There's little reason to single out the Summoner, if the community is allowing Druids to bring bears into town, in a game setting that has both as regular class options. Many towns *won't* allow Druids to bring bears, or even wolves, into town, or Wizards to openly carry around venomous Vipers, or malevolent Imps, and, in those areas, the Summoner will be similarly restricted, if his Eidolon doesn't appear as something not terribly threatening.
Depending on local culture and tradition, a Summoner might even have popular options available. If the locals train and ride giant lizards, as a result of living next to a swamp, then making your quadruped Eidolon take the form of a giant lizard makes sense.
Specific to Golarion;
A Land of the Linnorm Kings Summoner might have a serpentine Eidolon that resembles a 'tamed' linnorm.
A Summoner from the Mammoth Lords tribes, who 'adopt' Frost Giant children into their families, could make his biped Eidolon take on the form of a Frost Giant, whom he refers to as his spirit-brother.
A Chelaxian Summoner would be best suited to have his Eidolon take on the form of a Hellcat or Nessian Hellhound (quadruped), or some type of devil (biped). Few Chelaxians would dare to bother a pentacle-decorated fellow in black and red scaled leather, leading what appears to be a Barbed Devil around.
An Andoran Summoner would get mileage out of making his Eidolon take on Druidic Companion forms (bear, wolf, ape, etc) or forms such as that of a great golden 'Andoran Eagle' or a warhorse.
Qadiran Summoners would be best suited to having their Eidolons take on forms reminiscent of Genies, or, more mundanely, also of fine racing horses or hounds. A four-armed red-skinned Large biped whose fists crackle with flame would be close enough to most commoners understanding of what an Ifrit looks like that the Summoner could get away with it. Those with Knowledge (the planes), able to recognize that Efreeti don't generally have four arms, could be placated by the Summoner explaining that he honors the genies by forcing his bound servant into the likeness of their form, and refer to his Eidolon as a 'Servant of the Smokeless Flame.'
In ancient Thassilon, Black Dragons were enslaved as common beasts of burden, and an 'heir to Thassilon' might have his Eidolon take on a form reminiscent of a Black Dragon, claiming to have discovered some scraps of Thassilonian lore, allowing him to tap into their secrets. If a serpentine or bipedal form, he could describe this creatures as merely a dragon-blooded constrictor or lizardfolk, and that he has not discovered the greater secrets that would allow him to control a true dragon (or, to those who don't know any better, the oddly shaped Eidolon could be described as an immature, or mutated, example of the species).
If you want to be able to rationalize an Eidolon with a lot of tentacles, look towards sunken Azlant, and it's Aboleth ties.
The game setting is *filled* with flavorful reasons to justify all sorts of neat Eidolon options.
.
Alternately, just completely tweak the class to make the Eidolon not 'always on.' Borrowing from the round / level mechanics of the Barbarian and Bard, have the Eidolon only appear for X number of rounds per day, and require a standard action to summon up (and a free action to dismiss). The Summoner walks around, apparently alone, but, at any time, can call up his proteanic buddy to kick some arse. This greatly weakens the Summoner, in one respect, but could be mitigated by allowing the Summoner, at the beginning of each day, when he prepares spells, to re-allocate his Eidolon's evolutions (instead of only once / level). Furthermore, he can also change the base type in this manner, so that, on one day, he can have a quadrupedal Eidolon, and on the next day, a bipedal one. Make the rounds / day equal to level + Cha mod, or something, with some 'Extra Summons' Feat that adds 5 extra rounds / day or something, and it fits with the current Rage / Bardic music mechanisms.
You could add back some transportation / mount utility by having the Eidolon be able to remain out indefinitely, so long as it isn't engaged in combat. Any round in which it takes or inflicts damage takes a round of duration off, but if you just ride it from town to town, that's fine. When you get to town, 'poof,' it goes away, until you get accosted by the town guard, and call it forth to send them running and fly you to safety...
That's just a rough idea, and might be one way to play an 'Alternate Class Feature' sort of Summoner that has a much more limited duration to his pet's combat utility, but has the option of reconfiguring it daily, and 'storing' it when it would be inconvenient (in the city, in dungeons with cramped hallways, etc.).
.
Option three. Research a really long term Invisibility spell, and have your Eidolon spend most of it's non-combat time invisible (Make sure to give it the +8 bonus to Stealth to help it lumber around without bumping into people). Have people make Perception rolls from time to time to sense something large looming in your presence, like the Shadows invisibly accompanying Mr. Morden in Babylon 5.
|
|
Furthermore, what does the local non-adventuring summoner do to earn a living?
Once he can make an Eidolon large enough to ride (especially if it can fly!), he becomes one hell of a courier / messenger, able to deliver all sorts of things from town to town.
Spells like Acid Splash, Arcane Mark, Detect Magic, Guidance, Light, Mending and Message have commercial applications, as do Alarm, Endure Elements, Identify, Mount, etc. Mending and Mount, by themselves, can each serve as the basis of a successful business, renting out horses for short uses, or repairing items cheaper and quicker than any seamstress or woodworker could.
An Eidolon with the ability to Climb and a decent strength can serve as a construction aid. An Eidolon with Gills and Swim can dive for pearls, set lobster traps, fish, salvage, etc. An Eidolon with the appropriate Resistance can work in a hostile environment (go to the magma fields and retrieve the obsidian we need, go into the corrosive salt-swamps and bring back the rare flowers we need). One with Scent can track and hunt, either to assist it's owner in a career as bounty hunter, or to locate game to put dinner on the table. ANY skill at all that can be used to make money, the Eidolon can have a +8 racial bonus towards, making it anything from the belle of the ball (social skills) to the best darn craftsman in town (craft skills) to the most knowledgeable sage on the topic (knowledge skill) to the best chirurgeon for miles (heal skill), to say nothing of just giving the Eidolon an exotic and enticing appearance and renting out 'her' services by the half-hour. Give the sucker a bipedal form, and Weapon and Armor Training, and perhaps something special, like the ability to Slam or whatever, and he's the perfect gladiator, fighting for cash money, which the Summoner happily pockets. For that matter, a master of games will pay more for a 'lion' (or more exotic beastie!) to throw at the gladiators than he will for yet another dude with a sword, and, hey look, my Summoner can produce a lion (or whatever beastie the Eidolon resembles) a day, at no cost to himself!
By the time you get to higher levels, and your Eidolon can cast Continual Flame as a Spell-like ability, or create endless quantities of Poison or Webs, the question doesn't become 'how can I make money with this,' it becomes 'which of these dozen options makes me the most coin.'
LMAO! Are we not discussing the Pathfinder ROLEPLAYING game? Characters are more than just numbers on a page. Your character is an idea--a personage given life by your imagination, inspired by the abstractions given in the rulebook. The assertion that your character and the rules which govern him/her are independent is simply false.
I am thus far, unimpressed with the summoner class because it seems as if the rules for a 'pet-based class' were created and then given a shallow explanation as an after-thought. I see the value in this, because it allows for a broad interpretation of the rules (i.e. bonding with a nature spirit, making a pact with an alien intelligence, communing with your higher-self, etc.) However, giving such a versatile class a role in a campaign world is difficult. If a given segment of people start gossiping about the local "summoner," just what are they talking about? Furthermore, what does the local non-adventuring summoner do to earn a living?
Umm, yes, character are more than just number on a page. but, the other part of the character doesn't need to be talked about in a play test. i can tell you detailed info about my character, but it wouldn't change the damage per round the character deals out.
you are wrong, a character can be completely independent from rules... otherwise GURPS wouldn't work as a system.I'd believe you are unimpressed with the summoner... you want everything spelled out for you so you don't have to be creative.
I love the summoner class because of it's undefined, changeable abilities. i can have a wolf like creature that is summoned by a lonely elf far away from home. or it can be a figment of my characters imagination making it more of a disjointed creature with a flexible form.. I know you want all the rules tied down for you. I would tell you to not play this imaginative class instead, play a fighter, you can hit things good.
|
|
I love the summoner class because of it's undefined, changeable abilities. i can have a wolf like creature that is summoned by a lonely elf far away from home. or it can be a figment of my characters imagination making it more of a disjointed creature with a flexible form..
In that vein, the class screams for a few sideways options, such as an Undead base type, that can pick up Evolutions like Incorporeal or Ability Damage or Contagious touch.
|
|
Umm, yes, character are more than just number on a page. but, the other part of the character doesn't need to be talked about in a play test. i can tell you detailed info about my character, but it wouldn't change the damage per round the character deals out.
you are wrong, a character can be completely independent from rules... otherwise GURPS wouldn't work as a system.I'd believe you are unimpressed with the summoner... you want everything spelled out for you so you don't have to be creative.
I love the summoner class because of it's undefined, changeable abilities. i can have a wolf like creature that is summoned by a lonely elf far away from home. or it can be a figment of my characters imagination making it more of a disjointed creature with a flexible form.. I know you want all the rules tied down for you. I would tell you to not play this imaginative class instead, play a fighter, you can hit things good.
Like the playtest of the core rules, I am looking for feedback concerning the mechanics and flavor of these classes.
The author of the first post on this board appears to disagree with you concerning what does and what does not "need to be talked about in a play test."
Flavor-wise, I think the summoner is world-breaking. Kudos to Set for brilliantly summarizing several believable options for a summoner. An eidolon in the form of a Qadiran race horse reminded me of the Companions from Mercedes Lackey's Valdemar books.
However, I still take exception to the fact that the same summoner could be all of those options. Whats to stop a lonely elf from turning their wolf-like companion into a barbed devil, then into a tentacled cthuloid with sausages for eyebrows?
Furthermore, the fluid nature of the summoner means it faces none of the same cultural or ethical restrictions that face other classes, such as the cleric or paladin. One day your a devil summoning follower of Asmodeus, the next your singing hymns with a solar. Nor does an eidolon suffer the restrictions of other creatures of its form. "Protection from evil? Oh, sorry it only looks like a marilith."
I suppose my objections have more to do with the eidolon, than with the summoner as a whole. A class called "summoner" ought to be versatile and capable of changing its repertoire. However, I still think the eidolon facet could be damaging to the implied setting--ridiculously lucrative business ventures aside.
However, I still take exception to the fact that the same summoner could be all of those options. Whats to stop a lonely elf from turning their wolf-like companion into a barbed devil, then into a tentacled cthuloid with sausages for eyebrows?
Your argument doesn't make any sense. That's like asking why my wizard can use summon monster IX to summon both a scary demon and a half-dozen celestial My Little Ponies.
Much like a sorcerer learning new spells, or a fighter learning new feats, it's up to you (and your DM) to determine the whys and wherefores of different eidolon evolutions and builds. Hopefully, you've got enough sense and respect for the game and your character to make your eidolon changes logical and consistent with your character development.
|
Unless you're neutral, you can't summon both. And summoning one or the other supernaturally pulls your alignment in that direction, such that if you favor summoning the demon you will start kicking puppies sooner or later. Same is true in reverse for the ponies.
No, it doesn't, casting [evil] descriptor spells turning you evil is just as likely as casting [death] descriptor spells supernaturally pulling you towards being dead.
And only divine casters are restricted in summoning demons/angels, the only restriction in summon monster that applies to arcane casters is that the fiendish/celestial template is adjusted based on the caster's alignment.
|
|
Confuse the world. If you play a summoner you can get an illusionist to give everyone in the party a matching rune on the forehead.
An interesting application of Arcane Mark, perhaps.
Ooh, now I want a line of spells that require one to Arcane Mark an item or individual to gain some sort of effect on them, like the ability to cast spells on them at an increased range or something...
I want to second the sentiment that the new classes should feel like they belong in the campaign "world".
I wasn't able to organize a playtest of the classes in my group. I will say though that in our campaign, we do relatively little traditional "dungeon-crawling". Most of the action is story based with political intrigue, investigations of crimes or strange occurrences, well on and on. If a character class does not have, what I call "the Big 5"; bluff, diplomacy, intimidate, linguistics, sense motive, that character is going to spend a lot of time standing on the sidelines while the principals of the story argue.
I'd say how a character class fits into a world is extremely important. And if they don't the player is going to become frustrated with the character.
However, what I really wanted to add was; I don't see how the world fits the summoner. For the core classes, and classes like the cavalier, witch and oracle, I can imagine how a fantasy world is shaped by their talents. A campaign setting would not be the same if wizards or clerics did not have their spells. Wars would be fought very differently without rangers. On and on. But take away the Summoner or the Alchemist? I wouldn't see the need to revise anything. And that makes it feel like you came up with something to sell a supplement.
Am I a hard core, "Core classes only" zealot? Hardly! But the Summoner and Alchemist just don't feel like they are in the world nor is the world affected by them.
However, what I really wanted to add was; I don't see how the world fits the summoner. For the core classes, and classes like the cavalier, witch and oracle, I can imagine how a fantasy world is shaped by their talents. A campaign setting would not be the same if wizards or clerics did not have their spells. Wars would be fought very differently without rangers. On and on. But take away the Summoner or the Alchemist? I wouldn't see the need to revise anything. And that makes it feel like you came up with something to sell a supplement.
Am I a hard core, "Core classes only" zealot? Hardly! But the Summoner and Alchemist just don't feel like they are in the world nor is the world affected by them.
How they fit into your world depends entirely on the GM. Honestly, I think people are just having trouble with some of these new classes because they aren't part of the standard D&D fantasy list. Both of these classes have existed in other fantasy worlds for a long time.
The summoner for example...have you ever played Final Fantasy? The summoner class is similar to the summoners on those games, especially final fantasy IX and X. Final Fantasy IX even uses the name 'eidolon' for the creatures which are summoned. How did they fit into the story there? Well, being a summoner was extremely rare and considered a great honor in X, and had duties that went with it. In IX, there was an entire nation of people bound to eidolons at one point. The only difference is that summoners in the games didn't have to spend 10 minutes calling their summon, so it didn't have to walk around in the streets with them.
As for the Alchemist, this class lets you can have 'civilian' versions of them be your potion vendors in the towns at the very least. I always thought it was odd in D&D that you had to be a wizard or cleric to make potions. I would consider a player who is using the Alchemist class as someone who is 'weaponizing' alchemy instead of just using it for normal purposes.
At least that's my opinion. If you intend to stick with standard D&D and don't account for the existence of these classes, then they will fit as badly as a sorcerer would in our world. If you decide to give them a role in society, or at least have society know about them and fear/respect them (like witches for example) then they will fit and people will react appropriately. Whether or not they fit is going to be up to the individual GM.
As for me, I'm looking forward to fitting these classes into my campaign :D
Like the playtest of the core rules, I am looking for feedback concerning the mechanics and flavor of these classes.The author of the first post on this board appears to disagree with you concerning what does and what does not "need to be talked about in a play test."
Flavor-wise, I think the summoner is world-breaking. Kudos to Set for brilliantly summarizing several believable options for a summoner. An eidolon in the form of a Qadiran race horse reminded me of the Companions from Mercedes Lackey's Valdemar books.
However, I still take exception to the fact that the same summoner could be all of those options. Whats to stop a lonely elf from turning their wolf-like companion into a barbed devil, then into a tentacled cthuloid with sausages for eyebrows?
Furthermore, the fluid nature of the summoner means it faces none of the same cultural or ethical restrictions that face other classes, such as the cleric or paladin. One day your a devil summoning follower of Asmodeus, the next your singing hymns with a solar....
First i'd like to start off by apologizing for my last post, i was in a bad mood and took it out on you, i didn't even think about it until i re-read my post. I am sorry.
as far as the lonely elf turning the wolf in to a barbed devil, well i would say for one the rules, you can't change base forms, a quadruped is stuck with that form. you can only change all it's evolution points when you level up, excepting of course the spell that hasn't been introduced yet. and my DM would laugh at me if i wanted to make such a dramatic change without a damn good reason.
if the summoner is world breaking you should disallow the rogue, i've created hundreds of different flavors of rogue, from the country bumpkin skill using rogue that hates combat, to a sneaky bastard that would stab you in the back if he thought it would make him a buck. the lonely elf is in fact replacing a rogue i had made that avoided combat at every chance, first words at sign of combat where always, "Can't we talk this out?". I can go on and on, the summoner is only as world breaking in flavor as much as any other class, or your imagination.
I want to second the sentiment that the new classes should feel like they belong in the campaign "world".
this, as stated above, is entirely up to the DM, and these classes are not supposed to be like that, they are not core classes. this is stated in the beginning of the play-test.
I wasn't able to organize a playtest of the classes in my group. I will say though that in our campaign, we do relatively little traditional "dungeon-crawling". Most of the action is story based with political intrigue, investigations of crimes or strange occurrences, well on and on. If a character class does not have, what I call "the Big 5"; bluff, diplomacy, intimidate, linguistics, sense motive, that character is going to spend a lot of time standing on the sidelines while the principals of the story argue.remember even if you don't have it as a class skill you can still put points into it, you just don't get an additional +3, it's not as bad as 3.0 or 3.5, it's not divided in half.
I'd say how a character class fits into a world is extremely important. And if they don't the player is going to become frustrated with the character.It is, and they are, but this stuff is up to the players and the DM. to set it down in stone, is silly, the base classes (fighter/rogue/wizard/cleric) do not have how they fit into the world written down. a fighter can be a diplomat, a rogue can be a diplomat, a wizard can be a diplomat, a cleric can't be but we can't all be at something besides healing(just joking, cleric's can make great diplomats) the other classes in the core book are variants of these classes, specialized.
However, what I really wanted to add was; I don't see how the world fits the summoner. For the core classes, and classes like the cavalier, witch and oracle, I can imagine how a fantasy world is shaped by their talents. A campaign setting would not be the same if wizards or clerics did not have their spells. Wars would be fought very differently without rangers. On and on. But take away the Summoner or the Alchemist? I wouldn't see the need to revise anything. And that makes it feel like you came up with something to sell a supplement.
you are so very wrong, lots of summoners changes things fantastically think of all the "wars" that could be fought between eidolons instead of people, no deaths. suddenly there is a sprouting of arenas that focus purely on summoner fighting (thing pokemon) and the effects of that. then just take them away and the worlds go back to what they were before the classes, kinda sad huh.
Am I a hard core, "Core classes only" zealot? Hardly! But the Summoner and Alchemist just don't feel like they are in the world nor is the world affected by them.
That is limited by you and your imagination. I can't help you there.
I thought the summoner lacked any out of combat abilities - his spell list is terrible for utility/out of combat spells and his skill selection sucks as well.
Should at least get bluff (lied to make a pact) or diplomacy (made a pact) themewise and would give him some skills to focus in out of combat.
Er, what? No utility/out of combat spells?
Those are all spells with either only utility/non-combat applications, or some combat applications and some utility/non-combat applications.
As for skills, Summoners effectively get 6+Int skill points and all class skills, between themselves and their Eidolons.
I actually saw a guy try to use mount as a damaging spell. He would summon the mount above his target and let it fall on them.