Just curious to see if a druid/summoner at low to medium levels (say from 2 through to 10) is a viable choice. The concept being to have an overwhelming number of allies via Eidolon, Animal Companion and Summoned creatures to control the battlefield. If you were to build this from levels 2 through to 10, how would you do it from an optimisation point of view? Also, how would it compare in power to a straight Summoner or Druid?
I don't really have anything for you from an optimization standpoint but to answer your question in the title, yeah, of course. Everything is worth considering.
Forgot to mention that I generally play in heroic games so that's a 25 point build which helps with MAD (multiple attribute distribution).
|
Even with a 25 point buy, I'm not sure you can manage enough for two good casting stats and physical stats sufficient to make your Summoner a good combatant as well. Unless you plan for him to be a pure buffer and SLA summon user.
I think you're still going to have some issues with the relative power level of the AniCom and Eidolon, though. They are each going to be weaker than they ought to be, though you'll have buffs you can apply and action economy out the ass.
Forgot to mention that I generally play in heroic games so that's a 25 point build which helps with MAD (multiple attribute distribution).
Are you permitted 3.5 feats and or something else to keep up your animal companion/eidolon progression? If not, its not worth it, pick one or the other. If you cant advance your 2 pets they will be weaker then a single fully advanced pet.
Alternatively you may want to consider the beastmaster prestige class from 3.5 (for druid)if allowed which allowed you to have multiple animal companions, and beefed up your primary one.
Forgot to mention that I generally play in heroic games so that's a 25 point build which helps with MAD (multiple attribute distribution).Are you permitted 3.5 feats and or something else to keep up your animal companion/eidolon progression? If not, its not worth it, pick one or the other. If you cant advance your 2 pets they will be weaker then a single fully advanced pet.
Alternatively you may want to consider the beastmaster prestige class from 3.5 (for druid)if allowed which allowed you to have multiple animal companions, and beefed up your primary one.
Thanks for the reply. Only considering Pathfinder core books.
I don't think it will work very well:
Your might have access to lots of summon monster and summon nature's ally castings, but the summoned critters will be weak (and a full-fledged druid or summoner can more or less match your flood of low-level critters by casting the higher-level summoning spells he has and opting for lots of lower-level critters)
And you do have both an eidolon and an animal companion, but they're both weaker than they could be (though there are ways to compensate for that).
In the end, I'd go straight summoner or druid here, depending on how strongly you want to focus on those summoned helpers:
Druid (or conjurer-wizard) are good if it's not that important for you - you still get to conjure some critters, but can affect the action more directly (a summoner with all the versatility of the wizard's spell list, the druid in a more focussed manner with druid spells, but with wild shape - and a stronger champion in the form of your animal companion)
If summonables are the real focus, go summoner and go nuts. You'll have the eidolon and the summon critters class abilities and can supplement that with summon monster spells. You could even get leadership for followers and a cohort, if you want to go all-in on the commander thing. My recommendation for a cohort: bard!
I don't think it will work very well:
Your might have access to lots of summon monster and summon nature's ally castings, but the summoned critters will be weak (and a full-fledged druid or summoner can more or less match your flood of low-level critters by casting the higher-level summoning spells he has and opting for lots of lower-level critters)
And you do have both an eidolon and an animal companion, but they're both weaker than they could be (though there are ways to compensate for that).
In the end, I'd go straight summoner or druid here, depending on how strongly you want to focus on those summoned helpers:
Druid (or conjurer-wizard) are good if it's not that important for you - you still get to conjure some critters, but can affect the action more directly (a summoner with all the versatility of the wizard's spell list, the druid in a more focussed manner with druid spells, but with wild shape - and a stronger champion in the form of your animal companion)
If summonables are the real focus, go summoner and go nuts. You'll have the eidolon and the summon critters class abilities and can supplement that with summon monster spells. You could even get leadership for followers and a cohort, if you want to go all-in on the commander thing. My recommendation for a cohort: bard!
Mother of god, even a lower level bard cohort would have a massive impact with a summoner as the primary player...so many crittors buffed.
Interesting topic. Our group is now working on rewriting the Druid to have no wild shape ability but more summoning. We're looking at the summoner in APG as a model, and are gonna have them make pacts with animal lords and elemental lords. Still a work in progress. But it gives the druid more of a feel that we like rather than be a shapeshifting fighter.
Two classes with highly level dependent attributes and straight casting and different base attributes? I'm not quite certain there are many worse mixes...
Monk/bard
Two classes with highly level dependent attributes and straight casting and different base attributes? I'm not quite certain there are many worse mixes...Monk/bard
Actually if you used the enlightened fist prestige class that could almost work eventually.
Actually if you used the enlightened fist prestige class that could almost work eventually.Two classes with highly level dependent attributes and straight casting and different base attributes? I'm not quite certain there are many worse mixes...Monk/bard
Yeah, exactly.
Actually, I think it's a very viable build.
The issue is, everyone is usually solely worried about sheer muscle power and strength. This build would not be one of those. This wouldn't be a build about getting big heavy hitters out on the battlefield, it would be about overwhelming it with sheer numbers of cannon fodder minions. The amount of summons you could get off would be staggering. The objective wouldn't be straight DPS, it would be about a small but steady DPS stream with a flood of minions, controlling the battlefield, flanking, soaking attacks, and taking tons of free Attacks of Opportunity when such arise. Augmented Summoning is a must have feat, and Boon Companion could give you a bit more oomph from your Animal Companion, if you want. Leadership could just add to the mayhem fun.
Group buffs that affect the entire party, such as Bless, Bardic abilities, Mass Bulls Strength, etc., would be magnified when you have countless minions available to take advantage of the buffs.
The biggest drawback of this build, however, is the time management and record keeping. It may take five to ten minutes every time your turn rolls around to move, attack, strategize, and so on for all of the minions under your control. This might eventually annoy the other players and DM. It would also be a huge hassle keeping track of all the numbers, HP's, stats, and durations.
I can see the obvious advantages of this combination (you, companion, eidolon hit squad), but the summoner is a non-combatant... and do you really want to have to manage three "characters" every round?
I've seen people build similar characters, here's what happens...
1st level = just like everyone else. Druid is an advantage here, you start with all the gear you need, unlike melee types.
2nd level = druid 1/summoner 1 you are HUGE. You can cast spels all day long without sweating. You have an eidolon and a companion, which are both useful in combat. You are an invincible army.
3rd level on = You get slowly but steadily worse, and it will never change.
10th level - You are druid 5/summoner 5. You can cast 3rd level druid spells and 2nd level summoner spells.
So, think about this. You great offensive options are call lighning and summon nature's ally III. Compare to:
A 10th level sorceror can hit all of your pals with an empowered fireball while soaring overhead with overland flight.
A 10th level fighter can do a charging vital strike with power attack and improved critical, and come close to killing you in one round.
At higher levels, you won't be able to compete.
Actually, I think it's a very viable build.
The issue is, everyone is usually solely worried about sheer muscle power and strength. This build would not be one of those. This wouldn't be a build about getting big heavy hitters out on the battlefield, it would be about overwhelming it with sheer numbers of cannon fodder minions. The amount of summons you could get off would be staggering. The objective wouldn't be straight DPS, it would be about a small but steady DPS stream with a flood of minions, controlling the battlefield, flanking, soaking attacks, and taking tons of free Attacks of Opportunity when such arise. Augmented Summoning is a must have feat, and Boon Companion could give you a bit more oomph from your Animal Companion, if you want. Leadership could just add to the mayhem fun.
Group buffs that affect the entire party, such as Bless, Bardic abilities, Mass Bulls Strength, etc., would be magnified when you have countless minions available to take advantage of the buffs.
This is the angle I was thinking of with this build. Must have feats would be Augment Summoning and Leadership to increase numbers and hitting power of minions. You would go human with Int as your dump stat, 16 CHR and 14's in the others for a heroic build.
It could potentially become a nightmare for a GM to manage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From a pure "I don't hate your fellow players" perspective, I would strongly recommend against any build that focuses on filling the battlefield with summoned creatures.
Having played a Malconvoker (dedicated summoner in 3.5 whose specialty is getting extra summoned creatures with every casting) in a recent long running campaign, I can say that every summoned creature you have on the map makes your turn take longer, and having lots of critters gets to the point where your turn takes so overwhelmingly longer than the other players, that you significantly reduce the fun for them.
From an optimization standpoint I would also recommend against it. The mechanics of summon spells provide you with more efficient ways to get more summons on the ground faster with higher level summon spells than with multiple lower level spells - plus provide you with the versatility of being able to get the one bigger hitter if so desired.
Furthermore, you would constantly be replacing dead animal companions and Eidolons. Remember that these companions are already less powerful than a PC if they are level appropriate. If they are working on half the level appropriate for the CR of the challenges - they will die regularly.
The objective wouldn't be straight DPS, it would be about a small but steady DPS stream with a flood of minions, controlling the battlefield, flanking, soaking attacks, and taking tons of free Attacks of Opportunity when such arise.
Have you tested this? I have. Here's the results:
1) Battlefields in D&D tend to be limited in scope. Once you have a few summoned critters - they start to interfere with each other. Any extra summons stop providing any beneficial result, and can actually hinder your own party.
2) There are a limited number of squares around an enemy - if you fill them with critters that all require 20's to hit (usually way above 20, but 20 always hits) for little damage - than the DPS isn't steady at all. Here's an exercise for you. Roll 9d20 - how many 20's did you get? Roll again. Roll again. How steady is that?
3) If your objective is to fill squares - walls do this far more quickly than summoning one little critter per square. Big critters fill lots of space - but in turn they require a high level spell to summon. Big summons can also control battlefields with Grapple, trip and bull rush. Little critters have no chance of success on these maneuvers.
4) Little creatures do not soak attacks as much as big summons do. Since they are providing less inconvenience for the big bad dude than a big summons is a less attractive target.
There's more - but that's the big stuff.
From a pure "I don't hate your fellow players" perspective, I would strongly recommend against any build that focuses on filling the battlefield with summoned creatures.
Having played a Malconvoker (dedicated summoner in 3.5 whose specialty is getting extra summoned creatures with every casting) in a recent long running campaign, I can say that every summoned creature you have on the map makes your turn take longer, and having lots of critters gets to the point where your turn takes so overwhelmingly longer than the other players, that you significantly reduce the fun for them.
From an optimization standpoint I would also recommend against it. The mechanics of summon spells provide you with more efficient ways to get more summons on the ground faster with higher level summon spells than with multiple lower level spells - plus provide you with the versatility of being able to get the one bigger hitter if so desired.
Furthermore, you would constantly be replacing dead animal companions and Eidolons. Remember that these companions are already less powerful than a PC if they are level appropriate. If they are working on half the level appropriate for the CR of the challenges - they will die regularly.
The objective wouldn't be straight DPS, it would be about a small but steady DPS stream with a flood of minions, controlling the battlefield, flanking, soaking attacks, and taking tons of free Attacks of Opportunity when such arise.Have you tested this? I have. Here's the results:
1) Battlefields in D&D tend to be limited in scope. Once you have a few summoned critters - they start to interfere with each other. Any extra summons stop providing any beneficial result, and can actually hinder your own party.
2) There are a limited number of squares around an enemy - if you fill them with critters that all require 20's to hit (usually way above 20, but 20 always hits) for little damage - than the DPS isn't steady at all. Here's an exercise for you. Roll 9d20 - how many...
I think you have successfully killed off the concept build with your arguments. Personal experience is always worth more than just theory crafting. It sounds like the law of diminishing returns comes into play with regards to numbers of minions.
One other aspect worth serious consideration is the enemy response to the full round casting time. If an adversary of yours starts casting and continues casting past their standard action into the next persons actions you know that when the spell finishes something bad is going to happen. As such, the caster becomes the party's #1 target so the spell can be interrupted. So, unless you want to be making frequent concentration checks and be the priority target for enemy spells I'd suggest passing on playing a summoner. The creatures summoned are not worth the penalties.