summoners are outrageous


Advanced Player's Guide Playtest: Final Playtest

101 to 150 of 158 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Mul wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
Mul wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
Except that you have no firewall at all. The protection spells do not keep out an eidolon. It offers no protection at all.

And yes.... "due to its tie to its summoner, an eidolon can touch and attack creatures warded by protection from evil and similar effects that prevent contact with summoned creatures."

3rd - Level Summoner Spells : Wall of Fire

Ok we are on the same page now... I missed the wall of fire initially as well.

However said spell isn't all that useful in this case... as a ring it prevents you from aiming through it with arrows... burns them up as they travel through it, and the spell gives cover to both sides at minimum. Basically the party outside can walk away or prep at their leisure.

We got twisted here. Intially I forgot about the circle protection not impacting the Eidolon and my use of the fire wall was for anyone trying to use the circle to stay safe from the Eidolon. Little misunderstanding ;-) Yes, Eidolon nasty and Summoner buffs more nasty.

People that don't think so, either - a. have a lack of understanding combat, please read the class and get familiar with the game; b. have a lack of understanding spells and saves, please read the class and get familiar with the game; or c. need to play pathfinder more please do so it is time well spent ;-)

Or you could improve your mastery of the english language and how you describe what you are trying to get across. After all when multiple people have issues just trying to understand what you are trying to get across you can hardly say the problem resides with them.

It's funny you calling people out for not understanding the rules when you yourself couldn't figure out at first that PoE was useless.

Silver Crusade

This debate is nice and all, but the bloody topic title has put the damned theme song from Jem in my head every time I've seen it the past few days.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game, Maps, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So it isn't just me hearing that song?


Mul wrote:

We got twisted here. Intially I forgot about the circle protection not impacting the Eidolon and my use of the fire wall was for anyone trying to use the circle to stay safe from the Eidolon. Little misunderstanding ;-) Yes, Eidolon nasty and Summoner buffs more nasty.

People that don't think so, either - a. have a lack of understanding combat, please read the class and get familiar with the game; b. have a lack of understanding spells and saves, please read the class and get familiar with the game; or c. need to play pathfinder more please do so it is time well spent ;-)

Also remember that Wall of Fire isn't mobile, but Magic Circle is.


Mul wrote:

8th Level Biped

HD(Hp): 6d10+35 (71 hp.)
AC: 21 (touch- 10; ff- 20)
BAB: +6
Fort: +8
Ref: +3
Will: +5
Initiative: +5

4 Claws - Attack/Damage: +15, 1d6+8/magic
Rend (chance of 2!) - 1d6+12/magic

Test this on a party of 5th level characters and let me know how it goes. Now don't forget to add the invisible buff buddy that comes with him.

Sure, I'm game for this discussion. To the sake of brevity in my response I've eliminated some of the superfluous statistics in your post. It doesn't really matter what his stats are beyond those above for the sake of the discussion.

Your monster has a 50% chance of saving against a 3rd level spell targeting fortitude, a 25% chance against one targeting reflex, and a 35% chance against one targeting will assuming the caster has a 20 in his casting score (15 base, +2 racial, +1 level, +2 magic item). Deep slumber effectively ends the fight 65% of the time, while slow cripples him for a round (until his summoner buddy can haste him to counter it). Ray of exhaustion which he fails against 50% of the time seriously limits his offense and defense (-3 attack, -3 damage, -3 AC, no charging, half speed).

Glitterdust (which you'll note also ruins his buddies invisibility) he fails against 40% of the time. IT does bad things to him, costing him 3 points of armor class and causing him to miss on half of his attacks. You can freely assume that after the first round he's failed a save against one of these effects. Take your pick as to which.

The fighter hits roughly 55% of the time without buffs (5 BAB + 4 Strength + 1 Weapon Training + 1 Weapon Focus + 1 Magic Weapon) for between 9-22 damage, depending on how he is spec'd. A Two handed fighter will do more, while a sword and board will do less.

In return you will connect 35-85% of the time, again, depending on how the fighter is built. As an AC focus you'll hit less, while as a damage focus you'll hit more. Assuming you hit 3 times in a round you're likely to drop the fighter into negatives unless he's got above average con (47 average hit points vs. 50 average damage). Against an AC focused fighter you're more likely to hit once or twice a round.

In either case the cleric is likely spending his actions trying to heal the fighter in either case. If he's a healing focused cleric he can for a couple rounds dish out ~25 points of healing. A DPS focused fighter won't have a chance, but an AC focused fighter in that case probably has 3-5 rounds to stand face to face with your monster and swing.

This of course assumes that the fighter stands and swings at your monster in melee allowing it to full attack, which, bluntly, is stupid. He's far better off swinging then provoking an AoO from you by moving away (denying you 4 attacks a round and your Rend).

The rogue is in a difficult position against the summon, and is probably best using his actions to harass the summoner if possible. Otherwise he's using a bow and hoping the caster is inclined to use glitterdust so he can get his sneak attack dice at range. He can't stand up in melee with the combat brute.

The real danger here is the rend, which is just vicious. I'm assuming your math is correct, and if it is that's vaguely terrifying.

Exactly what tactics are used here really determines how hard this fight is. If the PCs play it stupid they could easily wipe themselves against a very challenging foe. If they play it smart they can probably escape without a causality in a prolonged battle by taking advantage of the main weakness of the summon (namely it is completely dependent on getting its full attack). The longer the frontliners restrain themselves and avoid meleeing the monster the better the fight goes. If they get lucky with two debuffs on it before they commit to melee they can probably roll the fight easily, but even one drastically improves the survivability of the frontliner against it.

You're throwing an 8th level summoner against a 5th level party. Under the Pathfinder challenge breakdown that is a CR 7 vs. APL 5, a hard encounter (EPL + 2). I don't think Paizo breaks down what exactly goes into a hard encounter (if they do I can't find it), but the 3.5 Dungeon Master's Guide says this on the same encounter "One PC might very well die. The encounter level is higher than the party level. This sort of encounter may be more dangerous than an overpowering one, because it' not immediately obvious that the players should run." This seems to fit pretty well with that description. I don't think the summoner in this case is really any more dangerous than another CR 7 monster, like an Aboleth, Lillend, Black Pudding, or Chimera.


Mul wrote:

8th Level Biped

Str: 27
Dex: 13
Con: 17
Int: 7
Wis: 10
Cha: 11
HD(Hp): 6d10+35 (71 hp.)
AC: 21 (touch- 10; ff- 20)
Fort: +8
Ref: +3
Will: +5
Initiative: +5
4 Claws - Attack/Damage: +15, 1d6+8/magic
Rend (chance of 2!) - 1d6+12/magic
Lets also pretend that the Summoner starts off typically with some long duration buffs:
-Mage Armor on he and Eidolon (+4 AC Force/Deflection)
-Protection from Arrows (80/DR*)
These cast still leaves a Summoner with a Cha. of 10, 2 1st level spells, 2 2nd level spells (Bulls Str. anyone?) and 2 3rd level spells.

First off, CR7 (summoner lvl 8, -1 = CR7) encounters are going to be a bit of a challenge for an APL5 group anyway. However, lets look at a typical adventuring group:

Fighter lvl 5
Rogue lvl 5
Wizard lvl 5
Cleric lvl 5

First off, the fighter likely has at least 42 hp (10+4d10avg+14con), so he is likely to survive a round of combat. Second, he will likely have full plate (lvl 5, remember) and a shield (why not?) and a 14 dex. With the shield focus feat, that AC is now 24. Eidolon has a 60% chance of any hit landing, 37 DRP (avg dmg * %to hit).

But wait, there's more! Party of four, standard tactics. I think, seeing a big monster with a glowing rune on his head, there is likely a knowledge (planes) roll to identify the eidolon. Even if not, the fighter and rogue will stand ground to prevent the E's advance and be in position to flank. Wiz casts Haste, Cleric casts Prayer. E needs a will save to not get penalties DC 16 (lvl 3, 16 wis). E has 50% chance to make it.

E moves up to attack, defenders move to flank, summoned monsters show up, enemy is now apparent (summoner). Round 2. E has likely taken some minor damage, but buff spells make him tough. Wiz casts Slow (will saves abound), Cleric casts Circle Pro Evil to keep out the summons, summoner buffs.

Now here things get hairy. If E makes the save vs Slow, he is fine and the party is in trouble. Wiz can still cast Ray of Enfeeblement, or Scorching Ray, if he wants. Rogue + Fighter still has a good chance of killing E, since they will have had 3 full rounds of attacks and E only got 2. Cleric may need to heal Fighter.

If he failed, he is dead and the party is fine. Killing the E, wiz casts See Invisibile and catches sight of the fleeing Summoner. Chase down begins, wiz casts Grease in front of him, then glitterdust to reveal him, party eats him for breakfast. Thank you CofP!

Tough fight, but certainly CR7. Want to see what the 7th lvl party does?


Mul wrote:

...

LOL, a 3rd level group; not a chance. A well built 5th level group would have issues with that with no question.

Unless your 3rd level group is running around with Magic Items out the ass there is no way.

1. 3rd level fighter (3d10 = about 22 hp + 6 from con, dead 2 hits which would hit; rend would seal the deal if damage was rolled poorly)
2. 3rd level rogue (good luck sneaking, and dead in 1 maybe 2 hits)
3. 3rd level caster (wizard, cleric, druid; nothing special at all and the spells that require will saves are nothing at that level)
4. 5th level there are more hp and more spell options which is what gives the 5th level party a chance and fleeing without a entire party kill.

3rd level! LOL. I like you Caineach, you're funny.

My 3rd level party consists of 6 people. I play the Ranger, so some of my nubmers for the other characters could be off. I have no idea how close we are to wealth by level.

Paladin: avg damage against this thing is 18, 50% chance to hit. 25 AC. Better against evil.
Ranger: avg damage 7, 45% chance to hit, 22 AC, ranged
Witch: evil eye or cure every round. Haven't seen her ever need to do much more.
Bard: +1 to everyone + demoralize. roll of 1 still affects it for a round. Backup healer.
Druid: Wand of cure moderate + battlefield control spells. Entange hoses your E. Custom swarm familiar deals 3.5 average damage + DC11 poison for dex damage.
Evoker: Lots of will or reflex save spells to remove E from combat for a round with 50% chance to save on the lvl 1 spells. Can always fall back on dirrect damage

With the debuffs, if it gets a chance to attack without getting stunned by color spray or removed from combat with entangle/grease, it has less than a 50/50 of hitting the front line Paladin. The Paladin can take 2 average attacks + rend from it thanks to good HP, but will be almost dead. It has no ranged combat ability, so it will have a hard time fighting 1/2 the party, who will keep their distance. Our expected damage can kill it about 4 rounds. It will be a tough fight, but one that I think my party can survive.

Edit: My orriginal claim was against the Eidolon itslef, not against the Summoner + Eidolon, so I did not include buffs from the summoner.


Now I KNOW my current party can easily take it.

Paladin, lvl 6
Fighter (meele), lvl 6
Druid (meele focused), lvl 6
Sorceress (blaster), lvl 6
Bard (buff/control), lvl 6
Fighter (Ranged DPS!), lvl 6

APL7 vs CR7. This isn't even a challenge for us. TWO summoners with Eidolons MIGHT be a challenge, but we barely chewed through a CR 11 encounter last week. AND we have about half WBL, since the DM is running a more "challenging" type of game. I'm pretty sure at lvl 5 we could have taken it too.

Summoner as-is is ok, but even a party of 5 OLD summoners, before the first Jason nerf, could be defeated by 5 druids. And you just CANT be OP if you are less powerful than a core class.


nate lange wrote:

Summoners need to be fixed-

their summon monster ability is VERY potent: nearly every summoner (with a racial +2 cha) will be able to use it 7+ times per day, far more than any other caster, and with its extended duration it allows for a lot of summoned help, even if you can only have one at a time (and starting @4th level, the summoner can use Invisibilty and remain invisible while summoning them).

Eidolons are much worse!
for example: make a biped; give it Weapon Proficiency-Greatsword for its 1st level feat; put every stat increase point in strength and buy the evolutions listed (plus whatever else you want with the leftover)-

level | evolutions | str | greatsword (hit;dmg)
1 | +2 str | 18 | +5;2d6+6
5 | ... | 21 | +9;2d6+7
6 | large, +2 str(x2)| 31 | +14;3d6+15
7 | ... | 32 | +16/11;3d6+16
10 | ... | 34 | +19/14;3d6+18
11 | huge | 42 | +23/18;4d6+24
12 | +2 str (x3) | 45 | +24/19;4d6+25
14 | ... | 45 | +26/21/16;4d6+25
15 | ... | 47 | +28/23/18;4d6+27
17 | ... | 48 | +30/25/20;4d6+28
18 | +2 str (x4) | 50 | +32/27/22;4d6+30*

if those numbers don't convince you imagine adding feats (Weapon Focus, Power Attack, Improved Critical, etc.), a magic weapon and a couple buff spells (summoners can learn Bull's Strength, Haste, Rage, etc; none of which end Invisibility)- then watch your party Fighter or Barbarian throw away their character sheet in disgust and start looking for a 4th edition game to join...

Paizo, please fix this class!

(* sorry, i r n00b and cant figure out how to format this chart; if you try you should be able to decipher it- if someone wants to tell me how to fix it i will...)

This is the same problem many have run into. You made him huge. You are only looking at the benefits ignoring the consequences. That being he is huge. He won't be able to go most places parties go. So unless you plan on only fighting in an open field...


xJoe3x wrote:
nate lange wrote:

Summoners need to be fixed-

their summon monster ability is VERY potent: nearly every summoner (with a racial +2 cha) will be able to use it 7+ times per day, far more than any other caster, and with its extended duration it allows for a lot of summoned help, even if you can only have one at a time (and starting @4th level, the summoner can use Invisibilty and remain invisible while summoning them).

Eidolons are much worse!
for example: make a biped; give it Weapon Proficiency-Greatsword for its 1st level feat; put every stat increase point in strength and buy the evolutions listed (plus whatever else you want with the leftover)-

level | evolutions | str | greatsword (hit;dmg)
1 | +2 str | 18 | +5;2d6+6
5 | ... | 21 | +9;2d6+7
6 | large, +2 str(x2)| 31 | +14;3d6+15
7 | ... | 32 | +16/11;3d6+16
10 | ... | 34 | +19/14;3d6+18
11 | huge | 42 | +23/18;4d6+24
12 | +2 str (x3) | 45 | +24/19;4d6+25
14 | ... | 45 | +26/21/16;4d6+25
15 | ... | 47 | +28/23/18;4d6+27
17 | ... | 48 | +30/25/20;4d6+28
18 | +2 str (x4) | 50 | +32/27/22;4d6+30*

if those numbers don't convince you imagine adding feats (Weapon Focus, Power Attack, Improved Critical, etc.), a magic weapon and a couple buff spells (summoners can learn Bull's Strength, Haste, Rage, etc; none of which end Invisibility)- then watch your party Fighter or Barbarian throw away their character sheet in disgust and start looking for a 4th edition game to join...

Paizo, please fix this class!

(* sorry, i r n00b and cant figure out how to format this chart; if you try you should be able to decipher it- if someone wants to tell me how to fix it i will...)

This is the same problem many have run into. You made him huge. You are only looking at the benefits ignoring the consequences. That being he...

Even with my large Eidolon there is a lot of situation where he isn't as effective. The cover rules for reach and his size makes the cover happen more often. Since my Eidolon has been large I bet 50% of his attacks have been at -4. Most of the time cover is caused by my own party members.


Mul, I would just like to add that Rend does not give you 2 if you hit with all 4 claws. From the beastiary: you can only get rend once per round.

Dark Archive

Caineach wrote:

Mul, I would just like to add that Rend does not give you 2 if you hit with all 4 claws. From the beastiary: you can only get rend once per round.

Noted, thanks for the correction. I was reading it as no more then 1 per set of claws; meaning something with 2 claws and 4 attacks could not rend twice, but something with 2 sets of claws (6 limbs; otherwise it would be Rake with rear claws)could still rend with second set of claws. I can see it both ways.

Dark Archive

Mul wrote:
Mul wrote:
Mul wrote:

(Edit- previous format was bad)

8th Level Biped

Str: 27
Dex: 13
Con: 17
Int: 7
Wis: 10
Cha: 11

HD(Hp): 6d10+35 (71 hp.)
AC: 21 (touch- 10; ff- 20)
Fort: +8
Ref: +3
Will: +5
Initiative: +5

4 Claws - Attack/Damage: +15, 1d6+8/magic
Rend (chance of 2!) - 1d6+12/magic

Lets also pretend that the Summoner starts off typically with some long duration buffs:

-Mage Armor on he and Eidolon (+4 AC Force/Deflection)
-Protection from Arrows (80/DR*)
These cast still leaves a Summoner with a Cha. of 10, 2 1st level spells, 2 2nd level spells (Bulls Str. anyone?) and 2 3rd level spells.
One other thing, this is a NAKED Eidolon, NO Gear at all. 8th level companion style creature; there would be gear.

Also your proposed summoner can't cast spells higher than 0th lvl with a 10 charisma. So no buffs, no Wall of Fire, no spells except cantrips.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I've been doing some playtesting of the summoner in a PbP with darkjoy and a few others. From what I have seen the summoner actually compares very well against a druid. The combat focus pounce lion animal companion was about as deadly as the eidolon despite the druid being 2 levels lower then the summoner. The playtest was a level 9 summoner (cr 8) against a part of APL Level 7, a bard, an archer fighter, a paladin and a druid.

The party has won most of the encounters handily, with some being more difficult (where the summoner made the best use of his summon sla), but still favoring the party in the end. In particular the druid has been very good at thwarting the summoner. This seems to me to be a descent sign that the summoner isnt as Overpowered as he has appeared when compared to a comparable class. Comparing the summoner to a fighter is an inappropriate comparison. It should be staged against the druid for the sake of balance with core classes.


Kolokotroni wrote:
Comparing the summoner to a fighter is an inappropriate comparison. It should be staged against the druid for the sake of balance with core classes.

I'm not sure how to link post but several people have compared the summoner to the druid with the druid being the clear winner. While Big E is more versatile than druid's AniCom, without a pet the druid is still a valid class to play, the summoner without his Big E is terrible.

The opposing argument seems to be that you cant compare it to a druid cause they are the holy cow.

Another good point someone brought up was if its weaker than a core class (druid) then its not over-powered.

Personally i think it was hit with the nerf bat too hard.

Dark Archive

Draeke Raefel wrote:
Mul wrote:
Mul wrote:
Mul wrote:

(Edit- previous format was bad)

8th Level Biped

Str: 27
Dex: 13
Con: 17
Int: 7
Wis: 10
Cha: 11

HD(Hp): 6d10+35 (71 hp.)
AC: 21 (touch- 10; ff- 20)
Fort: +8
Ref: +3
Will: +5
Initiative: +5

4 Claws - Attack/Damage: +15, 1d6+8/magic
Rend (chance of 2!) - 1d6+12/magic

Lets also pretend that the Summoner starts off typically with some long duration buffs:

-Mage Armor on he and Eidolon (+4 AC Force/Deflection)
-Protection from Arrows (80/DR*)
These cast still leaves a Summoner with a Cha. of 10, 2 1st level spells, 2 2nd level spells (Bulls Str. anyone?) and 2 3rd level spells.
One other thing, this is a NAKED Eidolon, NO Gear at all. 8th level companion style creature; there would be gear.
Also your proposed summoner can't cast spells higher than 0th lvl with a 10 charisma. So no buffs, no Wall of Fire, no spells except cantrips.

Man there are a number of people on these boards that just take things with the wrong context. 10 Cha = no bonus spells which I was talking about number of spells. I am aware of the requirement for Primary stat equal level - 10 to determine what level you can caste. Again it was intended to show NO BONUS SPELLS (2, 2 and 2).


Kolokotroni wrote:

I've been doing some playtesting of the summoner in a PbP with darkjoy and a few others. From what I have seen the summoner actually compares very well against a druid. The combat focus pounce lion animal companion was about as deadly as the eidolon despite the druid being 2 levels lower then the summoner. The playtest was a level 9 summoner (cr 8) against a part of APL Level 7, a bard, an archer fighter, a paladin and a druid.

The party has won most of the encounters handily, with some being more difficult (where the summoner made the best use of his summon sla), but still favoring the party in the end. In particular the druid has been very good at thwarting the summoner. This seems to me to be a descent sign that the summoner isnt as Overpowered as he has appeared when compared to a comparable class. Comparing the summoner to a fighter is an inappropriate comparison. It should be staged against the druid for the sake of balance with core classes.

If the druid is the one consistently making the difference against an opponent 2 levels higher, then no, it doesn't compare. It means the druid is going to eat a summoner of equal level for breakfast, then spit him back out because there's not enough there to make it satisfying.


Peter Stewart wrote:
...To the sake of brevity in my response.../cast walloftext

i lol'd


Slacker2010 wrote:
Kolokotroni wrote:
Comparing the summoner to a fighter is an inappropriate comparison. It should be staged against the druid for the sake of balance with core classes.

I'm not sure how to link post but several people have compared the summoner to the druid with the druid being the clear winner. While Big E is more versatile than druid's AniCom, without a pet the druid is still a valid class to play, the summoner without his Big E is terrible.

The opposing argument seems to be that you cant compare it to a druid cause they are the holy cow.

Another good point someone brought up was if its weaker than a core class (druid) then its not over-powered.

Personally i think it was hit with the nerf bat too hard.

They could have just changed the size mod away from the +8. That wouldn't have been so bad. +4 to two scores is still worth 4 points. Not to mention better armor. Do it again for huge, and suddenly Big E's damage has dropped a bit. And the baseline stuff which wasn't broken is unaffected! Why would you do something out of the MM when the Eidolon is not like an outsider out of the MM? That is not sound logic. Just tweak stuff so it works!


Slacker2010 wrote:
I'm not sure how to link post...

Just because I appreciate a well linked post:

Spoiler:
Okay, just to keep the code from being converted I will use { and } instead of [ and ].

If you want to link to a thread:

  • EITHER: Right click on the thread link and select "Copy Link Location" OR copy the URL from the address bar when you have the thread open.
  • Replace "<code you copied>" with the URL you grabbed, and "<text you want displayed>" with whatever you want in the following code: {url=<code you copied>}<text you want displayed>{/url}.

If you want to link to a specific post, follow the same procedure above EXCEPT replace "thread link" with "time/date stamp of selected post." (You can click on the time/date stamp to reload the page with the URL of that specific post to copy.)


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
MaverickWolf wrote:
Kolokotroni wrote:

I've been doing some playtesting of the summoner in a PbP with darkjoy and a few others. From what I have seen the summoner actually compares very well against a druid. The combat focus pounce lion animal companion was about as deadly as the eidolon despite the druid being 2 levels lower then the summoner. The playtest was a level 9 summoner (cr 8) against a part of APL Level 7, a bard, an archer fighter, a paladin and a druid.

The party has won most of the encounters handily, with some being more difficult (where the summoner made the best use of his summon sla), but still favoring the party in the end. In particular the druid has been very good at thwarting the summoner. This seems to me to be a descent sign that the summoner isnt as Overpowered as he has appeared when compared to a comparable class. Comparing the summoner to a fighter is an inappropriate comparison. It should be staged against the druid for the sake of balance with core classes.

If the druid is the one consistently making the difference against an opponent 2 levels higher, then no, it doesn't compare. It means the druid is going to eat a summoner of equal level for breakfast, then spit him back out because there's not enough there to make it satisfying.

When i say making the different i dont mean he beat it alone, i mean for instance that when the summoner used invisibility the animal companions scent directed the druid's faerie fire to reveal him. Or that the druid combined with the animal companion held off the eidolon long enough for the paladin to get to the summoner for some smiting fun.

Edit:
As an aside in the most recent test run, the summoner killed the over zealous druid by more or less focusing on him. He certainly isnt eating him for breakfast alone.


Madcap Storm King wrote:
They could have just changed the size mod away from the +8. That wouldn't have been so bad. +4 to two scores is still worth 4 points. Not to mention better armor. Do it again for huge, and suddenly Big E's damage has dropped a bit. And the baseline stuff which wasn't broken is unaffected! Why would you do something out of the MM when the Eidolon is not like an outsider out of the MM? That is not sound logic. Just tweak stuff so it works!

Changing the size modifier is a red herring. As before, the only real issue with Eidolons is the number of attacks they can get. Manufactured attacks need to be limited as well as natural attacks (8 is plenty; it's more than a 20th level archer fighter with rapid shot and manyshot gets when hasted). Do that and it won't really matter what the size modifiers are.

EDIT: That and pounce. Pounce is too good, especially at 1 point.


Just limit pounce to natural attacks


Mahrdol wrote:

Just limit pounce to natural attacks

I really hope that they don't add more rules exceptions to this class.

A single class should not need to bend and break all the rules of the game to exist. If this is how they have to proceed then they are better off removing the class entirely.

It is something that I think that 3e did wonderfully and 4e has dropped (in favor of being a video game): a set of laws of physics for the game world.

Exceptions to the normal order of things disrupts immersion, and should be avoided in design.

For example if they want to try to deny Eidolon's armor.. simply let them wear it but have the arcane spell failure apply to the summoner. In the same way if they want to 'share' magic item slots then sharing enhancements between the two would make more sense. At least imho. Mind you I dislike even this and figure that simply lowering the natural armor progression would suffice here.

-James


james maissen wrote:
For example if they want to try to deny Eidolon's armor.. simply let them wear it but have the arcane spell failure apply to the summoner.

You realize that makes even less sense than the current implementation?

The Exchange

Peter Stewart wrote:
Mul wrote:

8th Level Biped

HD(Hp): 6d10+35 (71 hp.)
AC: 21 (touch- 10; ff- 20)
BAB: +6
Fort: +8
Ref: +3
Will: +5
Initiative: +5

4 Claws - Attack/Damage: +15, 1d6+8/magic
Rend (chance of 2!) - 1d6+12/magic

Test this on a party of 5th level characters and let me know how it goes. Now don't forget to add the invisible buff buddy that comes with him.

Sure, I'm game for this discussion. To the sake of brevity in my response I've eliminated some of the superfluous statistics in your post. It doesn't really matter what his stats are beyond those above for the sake of the discussion.

Your monster has a 50% chance of saving against a 3rd level spell targeting fortitude, a 25% chance against one targeting reflex, and a 35% chance against one targeting will assuming the caster has a 20 in his casting score (15 base, +2 racial, +1 level, +2 magic item). Deep slumber effectively ends the fight 65% of the time, while slow cripples him for a round (until his summoner buddy can haste him to counter it). Ray of exhaustion which he fails against 50% of the time seriously limits his offense and defense (-3 attack, -3 damage, -3 AC, no charging, half speed).

Glitterdust (which you'll note also ruins his buddies invisibility) he fails against 40% of the time. IT does bad things to him, costing him 3 points of armor class and causing him to miss on half of his attacks. You can freely assume that after the first round he's failed a save against one of these effects. Take your pick as to which.

The fighter hits roughly 55% of the time without buffs (5 BAB + 4 Strength + 1 Weapon Training + 1 Weapon Focus + 1 Magic Weapon) for between 9-22 damage, depending on how he is spec'd. A Two handed fighter will do more, while a sword and board will do less.

In return you will connect 35-85% of the time, again, depending on how the fighter is built. As an AC focus you'll hit less, while as a damage focus you'll hit more. Assuming you hit 3 times in a round you're likely to drop the fighter into...

Sorry. Way too many ways to abuse the eidolon. Standard buffs via umd at the least would include invis on eidolon and summoner.

Start of combat... summoner summons d4+1 to attack enemy rear (wizard).
(As its not an attack..... remains invis). Eidolon engages fighter. Eidolon drops fighter. Repeat.

Or Summoner casts haste or invis.

Vs a druid - umd a touch of idiocy.


cp wrote:

Vs a druid - umd a touch of idiocy.

An all-or-nothing Will save vs a caster class with Wis as a casting stat? Good luck with that...


cp wrote:

Sorry. Way too many ways to abuse the eidolon. Standard buffs via umd at the least would include invis on eidolon and summoner.

Start of combat... summoner summons d4+1 to attack enemy rear (wizard).
(As its not an attack..... remains invis). Eidolon engages fighter. Eidolon drops fighter. Repeat.

Anyone else notice how these guys keep adding new stipulations as their scenarios of doom are shown to be garbage? You've gone from the Eidolon three levels higher than the party wiping a party on his own (shown to be false) to a summoner and the Eidolon three levels higher than the party wiping a party (shown to be unlikely), to a summoner and Eidolon with multiple short duration buffs active at the onset of combat wiping a party.

I'll be honest, if you're setting up the party like that there isn't really a class that can't wipe a party. I'm pretty sure an 8th level fighter with active buff spells can wipe a 5th level party assuming he gets to act first, and I'm damn sure a 9th level wizard could do it to a 6th level party without trouble. Same for the druid. The idea that the summoner could do the same really doesn't hold much weight for me when you're trying to make the argument that it is overpowered.

Honestly I've seen no case made on this thread that the Summoner or the Eidolon are overpowered, not even when you use levels that are most advantageous to them. I have seen a case on another related thread that showed an exploit that will likely be clarified (Eidolen using manufactured weapons to bypass the # of attacks limit), but even with that it was shown that in terms of damage per round the Summoner isn't really all that out here against a CR appropriate opponent. Even if you'd shown that a summoner could wipe a party 3 levels lower without trouble on even ground it still wouldn't convince me in the slightest.

The game isn't built around PC death matches, it is built around numerous challenges thrown against the PCs that they have to overcome. Saying that one class can beat another in a stand up fight may be true, but it is also irrelevant to game balance. A 20th level wizard in an arena can probably kill a 20th level fighter every single time if prepared. That doesn't mean the 20th level fighter isn't more effective in many situations that the party is likely to face, or that the the wizard is unbalanced. The game isn't set up for PC vs. PC play from a balance stand point. Nor should it be. There is already a system out there that does that very thing - 4th Edition.

cp wrote:
Or Summoner casts haste or invis.

Haste which is countered by slow, or any number of abilities that will limit the Eidolon's ability to make a full attack, completely negating the haste benefit. You already mentioned invisibility above, you don't get to reuse it to pad your argument here.

cp wrote:
Vs a druid - umd a touch of idiocy.

As noted, good luck with that. Even if you do get off one on a druid, and even if they fail their save (can you say unlikely?), you still have an animal companion and a wildshaped druid, both of which can probably stand toe to toe with anyone in the party.


I'm a little concerned with a PC class that absorbs so much of a group's focus when in combat. The Summoner gets his full round of actions, the Eidolon gets a full round of actions, the SLA summoned critter gets a full round of actions. Then the Rogue goes and the fighter goes and the caster goes, and then the Summoner et al all over again. The Summoner and ordinary use of abilities takes up as much action as the entire rest of a 4 person party. Is this desirable? Haven't we seen playtest results that show the Summoner dominates many of the combats that it is in? Play balance should perhaps involve factors beyond comparative power levels.


Robert Young wrote:
I'm a little concerned with a PC class that absorbs so much of a group's focus when in combat. The Summoner gets his full round of actions, the Eidolon gets a full round of actions, the SLA summoned critter gets a full round of actions. Then the Rogue goes and the fighter goes and the caster goes, and then the Summoner et al all over again. The Summoner and ordinary use of abilities takes up as much action as the entire rest of a 4 person party. Is this desirable? Haven't we seen playtest results that show the Summoner dominates many of the combats that it is in? Play balance should perhaps involve factors beyond comparative power levels.

Blah Blah Blah DRUID Blah Blah Blah

Seriously though, replace "Summoner" with "Druid" and "Eidolon" with "Animal Companion", factor all the summons a druid can get, and the post is only slightly different.

And then there's the Conjurer/Druid/Mystic Theurge. Granted, the summons will be weaker, but there will still be a lot.


But are they truly outrageous?


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Robert Young wrote:
I'm a little concerned with a PC class that absorbs so much of a group's focus when in combat. The Summoner gets his full round of actions, the Eidolon gets a full round of actions, the SLA summoned critter gets a full round of actions. Then the Rogue goes and the fighter goes and the caster goes, and then the Summoner et al all over again. The Summoner and ordinary use of abilities takes up as much action as the entire rest of a 4 person party. Is this desirable? Haven't we seen playtest results that show the Summoner dominates many of the combats that it is in? Play balance should perhaps involve factors beyond comparative power levels.

The short answer is no, the long answer is Not more then existing classes. It all depends on the players. I in fact saw something of the reverse. In a playtest I ran at level 5, the summoner went very smoothly, he had stats for summon monsters ready and he took basic measures to make his turn go fast (rolled dice together planned ahead). Where as the conjurationist wizard was the one who bogged things down, not thinking ahead for his spells, and when he summoned, he didnt have the stats handy and I had to hand him the bestiary to copy them down. I genuinely think it is more the player then the class. Any class can bog things down, even a fighter can agonize over movement and who he attacks and how (cleave, vital strike, do i want to power attack? hmmmm.... well i could attack that guy instead).

Not to mention this is hardley new. with a limit of 1 SLA summon at a time this is no worse then a druid and only slightly worse then a summoning wizard, or someone with leadership.


The Bard wrote:
Robert Young wrote:
I'm a little concerned with a PC class that absorbs so much of a group's focus when in combat. The Summoner gets his full round of actions, the Eidolon gets a full round of actions, the SLA summoned critter gets a full round of actions. Then the Rogue goes and the fighter goes and the caster goes, and then the Summoner et al all over again. The Summoner and ordinary use of abilities takes up as much action as the entire rest of a 4 person party. Is this desirable? Haven't we seen playtest results that show the Summoner dominates many of the combats that it is in? Play balance should perhaps involve factors beyond comparative power levels.

Blah Blah Blah DRUID Blah Blah Blah

Seriously though, replace "Summoner" with "Druid" and "Eidolon" with "Animal Companion", factor all the summons a druid can get, and the post is only slightly different.

And then there's the Conjurer/Druid/Mystic Theurge. Granted, the summons will be weaker, but there will still be a lot.

+1 (.....I can't believe I just did that)

Seriously, folks, these complaints are not even close to new to the game. I've been in games where the druid did just that, though I don't think I've ever played with a conjurer. Also, as has been stated, this is the Advanced Player's Guide. If you think it's too much to handle at your table, don't allow it (but you better be banning summon-focused conjurers and druids too).


Is anything truly outrageous? Our group finely has another session tomorrow since the latest update, until then I'll refrain from saying the class is either to strong or to weak. Although our group seems to think its the latter of the two.

We have a summoner in our group, not only did the player enjoy his summoner, but the rest of the group enjoyed it as well. He has had fun roleplaying it, and even though he gets 3 turns / round to himself. That hasn't bothered the rest of us in the slightest as our group, without optimization, has rarely had a single fight go 3+ rounds in Rise of the Rune Lords. That and the classes that need more time to think, such as rogues for positioning, wizards, and clerics have extra time to figure out what they are gonna do on their turn.

All Robert Young has pointed out is some people can be impatient and a class that can slow down combat shouldn't be used in a group of such players, OR you can have a summoner with quick cards for all of his summons so he can slam them out without thumbing through any books. Roll attack dice with damage dice, ect... or in other words. All the things you can be doing to make your turn go quicker anyway.


The Bard wrote:

Blah Blah Blah DRUID Blah Blah Blah

Seriously though, replace "Summoner" with "Druid" and "Eidolon" with "Animal Companion", factor all the summons a druid can get, and the post is only slightly different.

And then there's the Conjurer/Druid/Mystic Theurge. Granted, the summons will be weaker, but there will still be a lot.

Okey doke then.


Robert Young wrote:
I'm a little concerned with a PC class that absorbs so much of a group's focus when in combat. The Summoner gets his full round of actions, the Eidolon gets a full round of actions, the SLA summoned critter gets a full round of actions. Then the Rogue goes and the fighter goes and the caster goes, and then the Summoner et al all over again. The Summoner and ordinary use of abilities takes up as much action as the entire rest of a 4 person party. Is this desirable? Haven't we seen playtest results that show the Summoner dominates many of the combats that it is in? Play balance should perhaps involve factors beyond comparative power levels.

Personally, I think it is a valid concern for any GM when looking at this class. That said, it can easily be handled and made efficient. You may not want certain players in this class, I can think of a few people I would request not play one. Overall, it doesn't get as many options as a wizard, so I don't think it is that bad.


Caineach wrote:
Robert Young wrote:
I'm a little concerned with a PC class that absorbs so much of a group's focus when in combat. The Summoner gets his full round of actions, the Eidolon gets a full round of actions, the SLA summoned critter gets a full round of actions. Then the Rogue goes and the fighter goes and the caster goes, and then the Summoner et al all over again. The Summoner and ordinary use of abilities takes up as much action as the entire rest of a 4 person party. Is this desirable? Haven't we seen playtest results that show the Summoner dominates many of the combats that it is in? Play balance should perhaps involve factors beyond comparative power levels.
Personally, I think it is a valid concern for any GM when looking at this class. That said, it can easily be handled and made efficient. You may not want certain players in this class, I can think of a few people I would request not play one. Overall, it doesn't get as many options as a wizard, so I don't think it is that bad.

As people have pointed out this is no different from the Druid/Animal Companion/Summon Nature's Ally or Wizard/Familiar/Summon Monster.

I don't see any complaints about that.
Its not a concern for me or the designers and to keep bringing this up doesn't make it so. If there is a problem then it is probably down to disorganised players thumbing through books because they haven't got critter stat blocks to hand.


Zurai wrote:
james maissen wrote:
For example if they want to try to deny Eidolon's armor.. simply let them wear it but have the arcane spell failure apply to the summoner.
You realize that makes even less sense than the current implementation?

Not if the explanation is that the eidolon and summoner count almost as one creature.

That is to work on the concept of why an eidolon cannot be far away from the summoner, etc.

Bottom line if they are going to make strange weird rules, they should come up with compelling story based reasons for those rules rather than simple fiat.

-James


Spacelard wrote:

As people have pointed out this is no different from the Druid/Animal Companion/Summon Nature's Ally or Wizard/Familiar/Summon Monster.

I don't see any complaints about that.
Its not a concern for me or the designers and to keep bringing this up doesn't make it so. If there is a problem then it is probably down to disorganised players thumbing through books because they haven't got critter stat blocks to hand.

But it is a little different. The Summoner is built to do this all the time. The Wizard's Familiar is hardly comparable to the Eidolon in its capacity to dominate combat or chew up table time. And those SNA's and SM's cost the Wizard and Druid part of their limited resources. The Summoner doesn't lose other spellcasting options by using his SLA's does he? Add these all up and the Summoner does this all the time rather than usually or sometimes.

But if it's not a problem, then it's not a problem....just an observation.


james maissen wrote:
Zurai wrote:
james maissen wrote:
For example if they want to try to deny Eidolon's armor.. simply let them wear it but have the arcane spell failure apply to the summoner.
You realize that makes even less sense than the current implementation?

Not if the explanation is that the eidolon and summoner count almost as one creature.

That is to work on the concept of why an eidolon cannot be far away from the summoner, etc.

Bottom line if they are going to make strange weird rules, they should come up with compelling story based reasons for those rules rather than simple fiat.

-James

Armor has arcane spell failure chance because it is stiff and doesn't offer a full range of movement, meaning that any spell with somatic components (gestures and other movements) is more difficult to complete.

It makes no sense, no matter how you term it, for armor on the Eidolon to make it harder for the Summoner to move his limbs.

At least the current explanation makes a little sense.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Card Game, Maps, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Evil Lincoln wrote:
But are they truly outrageous?

Truly, truly outrageous?


Tim Statler wrote:
Evil Lincoln wrote:
But are they truly outrageous?
Truly, truly outrageous?

Summoners are adventure!


Tim Statler wrote:
Evil Lincoln wrote:
But are they truly outrageous?
Truly, truly outrageous?

Thanks tim, I thought these guys would leave me hanging there.


Evil Lincoln wrote:
Tim Statler wrote:
Evil Lincoln wrote:
But are they truly outrageous?
Truly, truly outrageous?
Thanks tim, I thought these guys would leave me hanging there.

Maybe not... but be careful... they will shoot you in the back.


Abraham spalding wrote:
Evil Lincoln wrote:
Tim Statler wrote:
Evil Lincoln wrote:
But are they truly outrageous?
Truly, truly outrageous?
Thanks tim, I thought these guys would leave me hanging there.
Maybe not... but be careful... they will shoot you in the back.

Meh, that is so 1865.


Spacelard wrote:
Caineach wrote:
Robert Young wrote:
I'm a little concerned with a PC class that absorbs so much of a group's focus when in combat. The Summoner gets his full round of actions, the Eidolon gets a full round of actions, the SLA summoned critter gets a full round of actions. Then the Rogue goes and the fighter goes and the caster goes, and then the Summoner et al all over again. The Summoner and ordinary use of abilities takes up as much action as the entire rest of a 4 person party. Is this desirable? Haven't we seen playtest results that show the Summoner dominates many of the combats that it is in? Play balance should perhaps involve factors beyond comparative power levels.
Personally, I think it is a valid concern for any GM when looking at this class. That said, it can easily be handled and made efficient. You may not want certain players in this class, I can think of a few people I would request not play one. Overall, it doesn't get as many options as a wizard, so I don't think it is that bad.

As people have pointed out this is no different from the Druid/Animal Companion/Summon Nature's Ally or Wizard/Familiar/Summon Monster.

I don't see any complaints about that.
Its not a concern for me or the designers and to keep bringing this up doesn't make it so. If there is a problem then it is probably down to disorganised players thumbing through books because they haven't got critter stat blocks to hand.

Can the Druid's Animal companion really take down an encounter by itself?

Could you elaborate a bit?


Madcap Storm King wrote:
Spacelard wrote:
Caineach wrote:
Robert Young wrote:
I'm a little concerned with a PC class that absorbs so much of a group's focus when in combat. The Summoner gets his full round of actions, the Eidolon gets a full round of actions, the SLA summoned critter gets a full round of actions. Then the Rogue goes and the fighter goes and the caster goes, and then the Summoner et al all over again. The Summoner and ordinary use of abilities takes up as much action as the entire rest of a 4 person party. Is this desirable? Haven't we seen playtest results that show the Summoner dominates many of the combats that it is in? Play balance should perhaps involve factors beyond comparative power levels.
Personally, I think it is a valid concern for any GM when looking at this class. That said, it can easily be handled and made efficient. You may not want certain players in this class, I can think of a few people I would request not play one. Overall, it doesn't get as many options as a wizard, so I don't think it is that bad.

As people have pointed out this is no different from the Druid/Animal Companion/Summon Nature's Ally or Wizard/Familiar/Summon Monster.

I don't see any complaints about that.
Its not a concern for me or the designers and to keep bringing this up doesn't make it so. If there is a problem then it is probably down to disorganised players thumbing through books because they haven't got critter stat blocks to hand.

Can the Druid's Animal companion really take down an encounter by itself?

Could you elaborate a bit?

I am replying to the concern raised about a single player having multiple actions in a round. I fail to see what your question has to do with either the question or answer.


Spacelard wrote:
Madcap Storm King wrote:
Spacelard wrote:
Caineach wrote:
Robert Young wrote:
I'm a little concerned with a PC class that absorbs so much of a group's focus when in combat. The Summoner gets his full round of actions, the Eidolon gets a full round of actions, the SLA summoned critter gets a full round of actions. Then the Rogue goes and the fighter goes and the caster goes, and then the Summoner et al all over again. The Summoner and ordinary use of abilities takes up as much action as the entire rest of a 4 person party. Is this desirable? Haven't we seen playtest results that show the Summoner dominates many of the combats that it is in? Play balance should perhaps involve factors beyond comparative power levels.
Personally, I think it is a valid concern for any GM when looking at this class. That said, it can easily be handled and made efficient. You may not want certain players in this class, I can think of a few people I would request not play one. Overall, it doesn't get as many options as a wizard, so I don't think it is that bad.

As people have pointed out this is no different from the Druid/Animal Companion/Summon Nature's Ally or Wizard/Familiar/Summon Monster.

I don't see any complaints about that.
Its not a concern for me or the designers and to keep bringing this up doesn't make it so. If there is a problem then it is probably down to disorganised players thumbing through books because they haven't got critter stat blocks to hand.

Can the Druid's Animal companion really take down an encounter by itself?

Could you elaborate a bit?

I am replying to the concern raised about a single player having multiple actions in a round. I fail to see what your question has to do with either the question or answer.

Up in the first post in this giant chain the poster expresses concern over the Summoner dominating encounters. I was simply wondering if you were addressing that concern. No word-twisting intended.


Madcap Storm King wrote:
Spacelard wrote:


As people have pointed out this is no different from the Druid/Animal Companion/Summon Nature's Ally or Wizard/Familiar/Summon Monster.
I don't see any complaints about that.
Its not a concern for me or the designers and to keep bringing this up doesn't make it so. If there is a problem then it is probably down to disorganised players thumbing through books because they haven't got critter stat blocks to hand.

Can the Druid's Animal companion really take down an encounter by itself?

Could you elaborate a bit?

I am replying to the concern raised about a single player having multiple actions in a round. I fail to see what your question has to do with either the question or answer.

Up in the first post in this giant chain the poster expresses concern over the Summoner dominating encounters. I was simply wondering if you were addressing that concern. No word-twisting intended.

I replied to that concern. The poster was concerned that the Summoners total number of actions during a round with Eidolon and summnoned critters.

I still fail to see what your question "Can the Druid's Animal companion really take down an encounter by itself?" has to do with a concern about a players actions per round.


A druid has as many or more actions then the summoner since he can spontaneously cast and has no limit on the summon nature ally spells so I really fail to see the issue. With the 30 or so people that I know who play pathfinder no one has any issues with Druids and actions.

101 to 150 of 158 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Advanced Player's Guide Playtest / Advanced Player's Guide Playtest: Final Playtest / summoners are outrageous All Messageboards