Eidolon and Magic Items


Advanced Player's Guide Playtest: Final Playtest


OK, I don't think I've seen anything regarding this yet. What are the thoughts on the changes to how magic items in regards to the eidolon? I'm really not fond of the mechanics at all. If you're equipping both of them, you're splitting gold anyway, just like if you equip any other companions. I see no reason to cut off magic item slots.

And before anyone pulls the 'Not all slots are open on other companions' argument, just start using your imagination. Companions may not wear things in the exact same manner, but the slots will be open. (Not to mention the gorilla, which actually does have all the human slots without thinking about it.)

The eidolon is already short on HD, and it's d10 doesn't boost it's HP enough to account for that compared to a d8 (1 point/HD, yay), and shutting down magic items like that seems unfair.

(Yes, this will be the first rule I throw out the window if it sticks.)


Yeah, I really dislike that change, too. It just seems like it comes completely out of left field. I don't see what the problem is with allowing the Summoner to equip the Eidolon normally. I don't even have a problem with the Eidolon having fewer slots (for example, I can tolerate the no-armor rule since otherwise Eidolons would have truly ludicrous AC), but saying that if you equip your Eidolon with an amulet of mighty fists -- which is standard issue for druid companions and thus shouldn't be restricted for Eidolons -- that your own character can't wear an amulet of natural armor -- which is going to be vital for a medium BAB/light armor character if he wants to actually make use of his medium BAB -- is just way too much.


Maybe if the eidolon and the summoner shared slots and effects, things would make more sense, since they are just as one.
If the summoner has a +6 intelligence item, he and the eidolon would receive the benefit, but the eidolon would not be able to receive effects from items he wore in the same slot.
The other way should work too: the eidolon wearing an item would make the summoner's slot occupied, but both would receive the benefit.


This should be a gold issues and not a summoner issue. At x level you have x amount of gold per character. Unless a DM says a Eidolon should get full share of gold, It can be easily controlled. Someone please explain why a summoner needs to share magic items and a druid does not? They both have links

I know a Druid player who is buying her ape adamantite full-plate. If she chooses to put all her gold into her animal companion and gimp her character then that is her choose.


Heladriell wrote:

Maybe if the eidolon and the summoner shared slots and effects, things would make more sense, since they are just as one.

If the summoner has a +6 intelligence item, he and the eidolon would receive the benefit, but the eidolon would not be able to receive effects from items he wore in the same slot.
The other way should work too: the eidolon wearing an item would make the summoner's slot occupied, but both would receive the benefit.

I see a problem with that then you are getting 2x the benefit per gold piece spent.


Mahrdol wrote:
Heladriell wrote:

Maybe if the eidolon and the summoner shared slots and effects, things would make more sense, since they are just as one.

If the summoner has a +6 intelligence item, he and the eidolon would receive the benefit, but the eidolon would not be able to receive effects from items he wore in the same slot.
The other way should work too: the eidolon wearing an item would make the summoner's slot occupied, but both would receive the benefit.

I see a problem with that then you are getting 2x the benefit per gold piece spent.

Yes and no. For certain items, yes. But for other items, you are either missing a bonus the eidolon could use or missing a bonus the summoner could use. See Amulet Might Fists vs Amulet Natural Armor.

If the Eidolon doesn't get its own magic items and the Eidolon and Summoner share item slots, then it follows that they would share effects from items in said slots.


Cartigan wrote:
Mahrdol wrote:
Heladriell wrote:

Maybe if the eidolon and the summoner shared slots and effects, things would make more sense, since they are just as one.

If the summoner has a +6 intelligence item, he and the eidolon would receive the benefit, but the eidolon would not be able to receive effects from items he wore in the same slot.
The other way should work too: the eidolon wearing an item would make the summoner's slot occupied, but both would receive the benefit.

I see a problem with that then you are getting 2x the benefit per gold piece spent.

Yes and no. For certain items, yes. But for other items, you are either missing a bonus the eidolon could use or missing a bonus the summoner could use. See Amulet Might Fists vs Amulet Natural Armor.

I don't disagree both should get whatever items they want. A character should only have so much gold so there is already a mechanic in place to limit what he can buy. If he wants to buy 2 amulets then he just needs to pay for them. Other classes would have a better magic amulet or would buy more magic items instead of the 2nd amulet. Seems balanced already


Mahrdol wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
Mahrdol wrote:
Heladriell wrote:

Maybe if the eidolon and the summoner shared slots and effects, things would make more sense, since they are just as one.

If the summoner has a +6 intelligence item, he and the eidolon would receive the benefit, but the eidolon would not be able to receive effects from items he wore in the same slot.
The other way should work too: the eidolon wearing an item would make the summoner's slot occupied, but both would receive the benefit.

I see a problem with that then you are getting 2x the benefit per gold piece spent.

Yes and no. For certain items, yes. But for other items, you are either missing a bonus the eidolon could use or missing a bonus the summoner could use. See Amulet Might Fists vs Amulet Natural Armor.

I don't disagree both should get whatever items they want. A character should only have so much gold so there is already a mechanic in place to limit what he can buy. If he wants to buy 2 amulets then he just needs to pay for them. Other classes would have a better magic amulet or would buy more magic items instead of the 2nd amulet. Seems balanced already

Or balanced previously rather.


Zurai wrote:
Yeah, I really dislike that change, too. It just seems like it comes completely out of left field. I don't see what the problem is with allowing the Summoner to equip the Eidolon normally.

It's just another reactionary change. One of many that's destroyed the class.

-James

Sovereign Court

james maissen wrote:
Zurai wrote:
Yeah, I really dislike that change, too. It just seems like it comes completely out of left field. I don't see what the problem is with allowing the Summoner to equip the Eidolon normally.

It's just another reactionary change. One of many that's destroyed the class.

-James

James buddy, the class isn't even a class yet... we're still in playtest. When the APG comes out and then paizo comes in and nerfs your favorite thing in it you can make a statement like this. Right now just breathe easy and play with the tweak and know that things can still change between now and august!

I mean we should all feel lucky we're privileged enough to get a say in how these new classes are developed. The Open Playtest is really a testament to the fantastic relationship between Paizo and we the community.

--Vrock the Casbah!


King of Vrock wrote:


James buddy, the class isn't even a class yet... we're still in playtest. When the APG comes out and then paizo comes in and nerfs your favorite thing in it you can make a statement like this. Right now just breathe easy and play with the tweak and know that things can still change between now and august!

I mean we should all feel lucky we're privileged enough to get a say in how these new classes are developed. The Open Playtest is really a testament to the fantastic relationship between Paizo and we the community.

--Vrock the Casbah!

Well what I'm seeing here is simply knee-jerk reactionary changes with little thought behind them.

Consider how many rules 'exceptions' the summoner class has, and ask yourself if any of them are even needed.

I, honestly, think that a statement for each class should be provided where the designers say how they envision the class serving in a party. Considering that a summoner's focus isn't summoning but one customizable pet, an oracle doesn't focus on being an oracle, etc.

I'm disappointed with the way I've seen the summoner develop in its incarnations. Not only in the end result, but in the process of thought that I see behind them.

For example: why disallow the critters to wear armor? If the AC is a problem its far easier (imho) to alter the table which gives them loads of natural armor than to make them a rules exception.

-James

Paizo Employee Creative Director

It's important to keep in mind that the design and playtest process is organic; we've still got MANY weeks of in-house design and playtest and work ahead of us making the classes right. And that includes reading and analyzing all of the feedback on these boards. It may well be that this latest version of the summoner went TOO far into the nerfing, in which case it's our job to recognize that and fix things.

So by all means keep posting feedback! But don't assume that something's going to be stuck as it is forever just because this is the last round of public playtesting...

Shadow Lodge

James Jacobs wrote:
So by all means keep posting feedback! But don't assume that something's going to be stuck as it is forever just because this is the last round of public playtesting...

The last round of public playtesting? That hardly seems fair to all of us waiting to see the final(and hopefully, the best) APG.


james maissen wrote:
King of Vrock wrote:


James buddy, the class isn't even a class yet... we're still in playtest. When the APG comes out and then paizo comes in and nerfs your favorite thing in it you can make a statement like this. Right now just breathe easy and play with the tweak and know that things can still change between now and august!

I mean we should all feel lucky we're privileged enough to get a say in how these new classes are developed. The Open Playtest is really a testament to the fantastic relationship between Paizo and we the community.

--Vrock the Casbah!

Well what I'm seeing here is simply knee-jerk reactionary changes with little thought behind them.

Consider how many rules 'exceptions' the summoner class has, and ask yourself if any of them are even needed.

I, honestly, think that a statement for each class should be provided where the designers say how they envision the class serving in a party. Considering that a summoner's focus isn't summoning but one customizable pet, an oracle doesn't focus on being an oracle, etc.

I'm disappointed with the way I've seen the summoner develop in its incarnations. Not only in the end result, but in the process of thought that I see behind them.

For example: why disallow the critters to wear armor? If the AC is a problem its far easier (imho) to alter the table which gives them loads of natural armor than to make them a rules exception.

-James

It looks like the design of the summoner is to make the Eiodlon free form as much as possible. If you just reduce the natural armor so they can wear armor then you are pretty much requiring all Eidolons to wear armor and I don't think that is the intent. Of all the exceptions the summoner has the armor one is the least offensive to me. I think there is a solution to satisfy everyone. Reduce the natural armor and allow armor and change the natural armor evolution to have greater effect with the caveat that if you take this evolution you can't wear armor.


Maybe the table could split the armor increase into 2 columns. One regarding natural armor and other with armor bonus that would not be cumulative with bonus from armor.

Animal companions can wear armor. Their bonus could be used as a balancing factor when dividing the bonus. Remembering that animal companions are not the main class feature of the druid class. (and they are very customizable, on the contrary of what many people say)


Heladriell wrote:

Maybe the table could split the armor increase into 2 columns. One regarding natural armor and other with armor bonus that would not be cumulative with bonus from armor.

Animal companions can wear armor. Their bonus could be used as a balancing factor when dividing the bonus. Remembering that animal companions are not the main class feature of the druid class. (and they are very customizable, on the contrary of what many people say)

The problem with this is simply the over-complication of rules (and I say this from the standpoint of a designer who had to get himself away from this problem). As it stands, especially since the eidolon looks however you want it to, the ability to wear armor is actually unnecessary. The current natural armor (or armor) bonus gives it a decent Armor Class at upper levels, although I think it's a little bit too low at early levels, especially with the HD drop.

Rules restricting the bonus would come down to being rules for the sake of rules. Hell, right now, you're better off. The eidolon's bonus applies without applying an ACP or a Max Dex. It also provides an armor bonus (if that's what you want it to be) without charging 2-8x as much for the armor as it would cost for the equivalent human armor.


The real problem is that not being able to wear armor because "god says no" just doesn't sound good. I would rather have a bit of complication and a concept that makes sense.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Dragonborn3 wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
So by all means keep posting feedback! But don't assume that something's going to be stuck as it is forever just because this is the last round of public playtesting...
The last round of public playtesting? That hardly seems fair to all of us waiting to see the final(and hopefully, the best) APG.

Well... playstesting's goal isn't to be fair. It's to involve the public in helping us work out the bugs of these six classes. Involving tens of thousands of gamers in a public playtest gives us an INCREDIBLE resource to work with in making sure the classes are balanced and fun. It's not intended to form a special club for folks to get co-desinger credits or anything like that.

The final work on fine tuning the classes needs to draw upon all the resources we have, including Jason's design experience, the design experience of the rest of our staff, feedback and observations from the playtest, and so on. But the final work needs to be focused and efficient—and involving hundreds, if not thousands, of various inputs at these final stages would paralyze progress and result in a final product that, like everything else that's designed 100% by committee, would be too rooted in mediocrity since it would be trying too hard to please everyone and annoy no one.

It's the same method we used for the Core Rules, in any event; a window of public playtesting followed by a few months of in-house design and work that used the results of the public playtest as a resource. It worked very well, so there's no need to change that.

The Advanced Player's Guide will release at Gen Con late this summer, and barring a few previews we'll be likely to post on our blog or at conventions or elsewhere... that's where the final rules will be revealed. I know everyone's excited to see the final rules, but after the playtest ends in a few weeks, I need everyone to sit back and be patient, basically.


James Jacobs wrote:
The Advanced Player's Guide will release at Gen Con late this summer, and barring a few previews we'll be likely to post on our blog or at conventions or elsewhere... that's where the final rules will be revealed. I know everyone's excited to see the final rules, but after the playtest ends in a few weeks, I need everyone to sit back and be patient, basically.

\

Patient? Gamers??? The same people who od on Mountain Dew to stay awake when gaming?

Oh to live in your world! LOL

Love the classes so far, looking forward to the final versions when they come out in the APG.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber
MaverickWolf wrote:

The eidolon is already short on HD, and it's d10 doesn't boost it's HP enough to account for that compared to a d8 (1 point/HD, yay), and shutting down magic items like that seems unfair.

This actually seems to be my biggest worry. Instant death effects aside (and Eidolons can have nice saves), between restraining magic items (I get armor but the rest?), dropping HD progression, the distance "damage" effect when the Summoner is too far away, damage memory on re-summon, AND the Summoner's lack of true healing magic it just seems like the creature is just getting a target painted on it that says "Kill me and leave behind a crippled Sorcerer."

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the class and have already dumped massive doses of a summoner influenced culture into my games, and I'd probably even play one in a game I was allowed. Its an awesome flavor, and I just hope its balancing doesn't leave it lonely like a 2.0 Bard...


Heladriell wrote:
The real problem is that not being able to wear armor because "god says no" just doesn't sound good. I would rather have a bit of complication and a concept that makes sense.

This I can completely agree with. That said, I have no better suggestions for handling it that don't make rules that are far more complicated than necessary.


The problem with me (aside from sheer logic saying that they share items is BS) is surviveability.

With the serious nerfs to the Eidolon, it needs all the equipment just to keep from getting murdered by any spell caster who walks along. Their saves (due to their HD) are low and their HD being low just makes it worse. You'll eventually have the primary feature of a class 5 HD behind the spell casters they are going up against. To combat that, they need the gear to keep their saves up and such.

The problem is that now, you can't protect yourself And your primary class feature. You have to choose one or the other. That, or you have to pay extraordinary amounts of gold to get slot-inappropriate stats and stick them hither and yon across your character and Eidolon. Things like amulets for con or natural armor, cloaks for displacement or resistance, bracers for armor and such. those things are seen as required for characters to wear in the current model of the game yet here we have a character class who has to decide either to be ineffective in battle (by letting his primary class feature be dispelled every day) or can have himself extremely susceptible to those attacks while letting his primary class feature survive. It isn't a choice- its a terrible terrible decision to be made.

Imagine for a moment that wizards, clerics, or druids, had to decide to forgo their equipment in exchange for their spells.
Yet the Summoner is expected to do this very thing. Sacrifice their own survivability for the sake of using the class ability that they are most known for.

As others have said- there is already a balance in place. That balance is in the wealth by level guidelines. If you assume that the Dm uses that guide (and we must assume that, or any and all discussion goes out the window), then the Eidolon and Summoner are already having to make those decisions but on a much less drastic scale. Instead of deciding who dies, they have to decide which to give the better bonuses to. Thats a tough choice- but a good choice to make. And they can make that choice without destroying the class.

Of all the changes to the class, please undo this change. This is the one change that totally unmakes the class and makes it nearly unplayable- at least in my opinion.

-S


I actually like the idea of them sharing slots, but I think it would be neater if they shared bonuses. It makes the choice between an amulet of NA, and an amulet of MF a hard one. Do you get armor for the summoner and Big E, or do you get offense for the Big E?


MaverickWolf wrote:

OK, I don't think I've seen anything regarding this yet. What are the thoughts on the changes to how magic items in regards to the eidolon? I'm really not fond of the mechanics at all. If you're equipping both of them, you're splitting gold anyway, just like if you equip any other companions. I see no reason to cut off magic item slots.

And before anyone pulls the 'Not all slots are open on other companions' argument, just start using your imagination. Companions may not wear things in the exact same manner, but the slots will be open. (Not to mention the gorilla, which actually does have all the human slots without thinking about it.)

The eidolon is already short on HD, and it's d10 doesn't boost it's HP enough to account for that compared to a d8 (1 point/HD, yay), and shutting down magic items like that seems unfair.

(Yes, this will be the first rule I throw out the window if it sticks.)

My problem with the new eidolon magic item rule is it sucks, I think, considering that the Druid, Paladin, Ranger, and even the Wizard can equip magic items to their animal companion/special mount/familiar without this kind of drawback. Ok, granted the familiar's not a "melee" type of ally, but the other 2 are.

Why should the Summoner be restricted like this? One can't say they have their spells as a balancing factor, because the animal companion and special mounts also receive magic buffs via Share Spells trait. All that's left is the Summoner and his Eidolon, which I believe should be given full benefit of wearing magic items without hindrance. Limit the slots a few, maybe, but don't penalize the Summoner for it.


i agree with you...gold in itself is the balancing factor here
eidolons are pretty much half of the summoner class and restricting them like this is just too much


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I have to agree, gold should be the balancing factor. Eidelon's should be given slots based on base form (biped vs quadruped vs serpentine), and then specific evolutions can add slots (for example, two arms add ring slots if the base form doesn't already have them).

Honestly, to me, the easiest fix for AC would be to halve the NA on the table, but allow the Armor Evolution to be purchased once per 4 or 5 levels. That would allow the maximum freedom/flexibility vs balance. If you want a high AC but don't want to spend the money on it, use evo points. If you want to maximize your ac and damage, then you spend your money on armor for the Eidelon (and unless it's medium humanoid, you are paying a premium for it). And if you want a ludicrously high AC you spend evo and equipment to get that 60AC, but you don't have the evo points to do a lot of damage.

That would balance things out, I think, especially with the attack limits (which I agree were needed badly).

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Advanced Player's Guide Playtest / Advanced Player's Guide Playtest: Final Playtest / Eidolon and Magic Items All Messageboards
Recent threads in Advanced Player's Guide Playtest: Final Playtest