One Synthesist Summoner Thread to rule them all


Rules Questions

901 to 950 of 976 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>

A quick question on Fused Link (SU)

"Starting at 1st level, the synthesist forms a close bond with his eidolon. Whenever the temporary hit points from his eidolon would be reduced to 0, the summoner can, as a free action, sacrifice any number of his own hit points. Each hit point sacrificed this way prevents 1 point of damage done to the eidolon (thus preventing the loss of the summoner’s temporary hit points), preventing the eidolon from being killed and sent back to its home plane.

This ability replaces life link."

It says the Summoner can sacrifice any number of his own hp
so what if he chose not to?
ex.
synth has 12 hp + 15 temp gets hit by a crit for 25
if he chose to not sacrifice hp would the power suit just pop, leaving
the synth unharmed or does it carry over? I couldn't find anything making it carry over damage unless you choose to.


Chaosknight199 wrote:

A quick question on Fused Link (SU)

"Starting at 1st level, the synthesist forms a close bond with his eidolon. Whenever the temporary hit points from his eidolon would be reduced to 0, the summoner can, as a free action, sacrifice any number of his own hit points. Each hit point sacrificed this way prevents 1 point of damage done to the eidolon (thus preventing the loss of the summoner’s temporary hit points), preventing the eidolon from being killed and sent back to its home plane.

This ability replaces life link."

It says the Summoner can sacrifice any number of his own hp
so what if he chose not to?
ex.
synth has 12 hp + 15 temp gets hit by a crit for 25
if he chose to not sacrifice hp would the power suit just pop, leaving
the synth unharmed or does it carry over? I couldn't find anything making it carry over damage unless you choose to.

Why wouldn't it carry over? A synthesist is one creature with his eidolon. If your eidolon suit pops any excess damage will get through because the sword (or whatever that did the damage) doesn't magically disappear.

Yes there are no rules concerning this because this is common sense. A synthesist is powerful enough as is, do we really need to throw out normal rules to make it nigh unkillable?


The book states "The eidolon has no skills or feats of its own"
Does that mean that the Weapon Training evolution is useless since the Summoner already has proficiency with Simple weapons or does this make him proficient in martial weapons?? I have been trying to get clarification on this question for some time

The Exchange

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

seems useless. since the summoner doesn't gain any proficiency as is through his eidolon suit. taking the evolution wouldn't provide any benefit.


Seraphimpunk wrote:
seems useless. since the summoner doesn't gain any proficiency as is through his eidolon suit. taking the evolution wouldn't provide any benefit.

the only challenge I have is that the Skilled evolution benefits the summoner according to the FAQ, and since both are evolutions wouldn't they both provide benefit?


shameless bump


Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Gignere wrote:
Can you use the fused physical stats to qualify for feats? Or must the synthesist use his own stats?

Just as a Str11 character wearing a belt of strength +2 bumps him to Str13 and allows him to take Power Attack, you can do this. You just couldn't use the feat without the belt/eidolon-suit.

I just had to make a ruling on this and thought I'd share:

Just as a Str 11 character wearing a belt of strength +2 bumps him to Str 13 and allows him to take Power Attack, you can do this. You just couldn't use the feat without the belt/eidolon-suit.

However, since the eidolon suit works just as a belt of strength would for this purpose, there's an inherent restriction not noted:

Just as a Str 11 character who takes his belt off before bed loses the prereqs for Power Attack (and thus the benefits of it) until after 24 hours of constant wearing it to make the temp ability permanent again, so a synthesist whose eidolon is banished while he sleeps loses the repreqs until after 24 hours of the eidolon being summoned again.


I am still not convinced on saving throws. Do you get the fort and/or reflex saves of the eidolon while fused?


You do not get the base saving throws of the Eidolon, but your ability modifiers may and can change.


GM Arkwright wrote:
You do not get the base saving throws of the Eidolon, but your ability modifiers may and can change.

Hmmm the lack of coverage in the write-up is my problem. I find it hard to believe you don't get one good physical save from your Eidolon. Your wearing it as a suit, its body and stats, doesn't make sense you wouldn't get the saves. I think this is more of an over-site. I think one save while your linked with your Eidolon.


Sirlink wrote:

The book states "The eidolon has no skills or feats of its own"

Does that mean that the Weapon Training evolution is useless since the Summoner already has proficiency with Simple weapons or does this make him proficient in martial weapons?? I have been trying to get clarification on this question for some time
Fused Link wrote:
The synthesist also gains access to the eidolon’s special abilities and the eidolon’s evolutions.
Weapon Training wrote:
An eidolon learns to use a weapon, gaining Simple Weapon Proficiency as a bonus feat. If 2 additional evolution points are spent, it gains proficiency with all martial weapons as well.

In this case, the feat is not inherent to the Eidolon (an Eidolon's "own feats" would be the ones it gains based on Summoner level), and is in fact entirely contingent on the existence of the Weapon Training evolution. So it would seem to me that it would apply to the Summoner, as it is an evolution. The language is specific, however - you gain Simple Weapon Proficiency as a bonus feat for 2 points, and martial weapons for 4 (meaning that even a non-Synthesist eidolon that already had SWP wouldn't get martial without the 4-point version). At least, that's how I read it.

(NOTE: I keep mis-typing "martial" as "marital". I'm pretty sure "marital weapons" includes at least Flower Pot, Coffee Mug, and Divorce Papers, possibly Car Keys if my ex is any indication)

Captain Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:
Hmmm the lack of coverage in the write-up is my problem. I find it hard to believe you don't get one good physical save from your Eidolon. Your wearing it as a suit, its body and stats, doesn't make sense you wouldn't get the saves. I think this is more of an over-site. I think one save while your linked with your Eidolon.

I'd say the only "oversight" is that they didn't explicitly state that you don't get access to your eidolon's saves. The list of what you do get, however, seems as if it should be interpreted as exhaustive (since almost all similar lists of "you get X, Y and Z" are also exhaustive), which implies that if it's not listed, you don't get it.


They don't get saves due to developer comment. It was worded like "why would you get something it doesn't say you get?"

Scarab Sages

As stated above: saving throws are not included in the list of traits gained.

Interesting to see my favorite thread necro'd.


Well, since the thread was necro'd nearly 2 weeks ago, I guess I'll do the honors of bringing it back from the dead again as I am interested in what seemed to be an unanswered question.

If you went quadruped, picked up limbs (arms) and a lance, do you get double damage from charge using a lance? It gives awesome visions of a sort of centaur black knight.

Also curious, what would the attack "pattern" look like if it did work? Charge - Lance - Claw (or other natural attack) - etc??

Another question, more a question of opinion, is the serpentine form any good? It looks like it'd only be useful for constrict builds and even then you need to work on it to get it going well.

Sorry for the necro.


The quadruple damage with a lance while charging is when you're on a mount and not while you could be a mount. RAW it wouldn't work.


This is a good thread. I always thought this would be stickied.


Once the synth was removed from PFS it fell to the way side, most people either liked the class/arch enough to houserule it or hated it enough to ban it. RAW the poor thing is a mess with all the FAQs/etc...


Third Mind wrote:


If you went quadruped, picked up limbs (arms) and a lance, do you get double damage from charge using a lance? It gives awesome visions of a sort of centaur black knight.

By RAW no. I certainly think there is room for centaur specific feats to allow them to count as a mount for purposes of charging with a lance. Also it is very visually satisfying.

Third Mind wrote:


Also curious, what would the attack "pattern" look like if it did work? Charge - Lance - Claw (or other natural attack) - etc??

With or without pounce? Without its just the lance. With it would be all attacks though natural attacks will count as secondary attacks with all the penalties that go with it.

Third Mind wrote:


Another question, more a question of opinion, is the serpentine form any good? It looks like it'd only be useful for constrict builds and even then you need to work on it to get it going well.

Also for a ranged build. Climb up a wall and rain arrows (given you have arms and the correct proficiencies) down on your enemies. And if they get too close, grapple them. :) Not a very powerful build (compared to the quadruped) but certainly doable.

Third Mind wrote:


Sorry for the necro.

Arise! Arise! And do my bidding! Muahhahaha!


as much as I love grinding 20 pages of comments and quadruple nested quotes, I'd rather necro this thread to answer questions about an upcoming campaign.

does a synthesist act independantly within his eidolon, with the eidolon acting out his will, or mimic the synth's actions?

If, hypothetically, the synthesist is a kobold, with the tail terror feat, can a tail attachement be crafted for an eidolon with the tail evolution, and be used accordingly?

does the eidolon see as a seperate entity, whereas in the afore mentioned hypothetical, the kobold is disabled by his light sensitivity, and the eidolon can still act normally?

Sczarni

Any penalties the synthesist has innately (ie light sensitivity) are applied regardless of the vision of the eidolon.

The eidolon is nothing more than a symbiot and they share senses etc.

The eidolon suits exact mode of operation is up to you as long as mechanically it doesn't alter anything.


shadowmage75 wrote:

as much as I love grinding 20 pages of comments and quadruple nested quotes, I'd rather necro this thread to answer questions about an upcoming campaign.

does a synthesist act independantly within his eidolon, with the eidolon acting out his will, or mimic the synth's actions?

If, hypothetically, the synthesist is a kobold, with the tail terror feat, can a tail attachement be crafted for an eidolon with the tail evolution, and be used accordingly?

does the eidolon see as a seperate entity, whereas in the afore mentioned hypothetical, the kobold is disabled by his light sensitivity, and the eidolon can still act normally?

The synth and the eidolon are one creature, there are no separate actions. The synth is encased in the eidolon and uses its 'body' for intent and purposes. How you want to fluff it, it doesn't really matter as long as the rules are enforced (IE cannot cast without having arms to do so, etc).

The kobold is a tricky one, in PFS-like setting I'd say no. The eidolon tail evolution is detailed to work a certain way, that is what it does. In a home game I'd probably allow it however.


Skylancer4 wrote:
The synth and the eidolon are one creature, there are no separate actions. The synth is encased in the eidolon and uses its 'body' for intent and purposes. How you want to fluff it, it doesn't really matter as long as the rules are enforced (IE cannot cast without having arms to do so, etc).

You don't need arms to cast spells, just limbs. So Biped and Quadraped can cast spells, but Serpentine and Aquatic cannot.


Incendax74 wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
The synth and the eidolon are one creature, there are no separate actions. The synth is encased in the eidolon and uses its 'body' for intent and purposes. How you want to fluff it, it doesn't really matter as long as the rules are enforced (IE cannot cast without having arms to do so, etc).
You don't need arms to cast spells, just limbs. So Biped and Quadraped can cast spells, but Serpentine and Aquatic cannot.

There is both an errata and FAQ regarding this. One says you need limbs, the other says you need arms. Neither contradicts the other, you need limbs, which need to be arms, to cast a spell.


Skylancer4 wrote:
There is both an errata and FAQ regarding this. One says you need limbs, the other says you need arms. Neither contradicts the other, you need limbs, which need to be arms, to cast a spell.

Nope. The Errata is almost two years more up to date than the FAQ. If it meant Arms, it would say Arms. Do you have limbs? If yes, then you can cast spells.


Incendax74 wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
There is both an errata and FAQ regarding this. One says you need limbs, the other says you need arms. Neither contradicts the other, you need limbs, which need to be arms, to cast a spell.
Nope. The Errata is almost two years more up to date than the FAQ. If it meant Arms, it would say Arms. Do you have limbs? If yes, then you can cast spells.

Thanks for your opinion on the subject, I guess. They are both 'official' and there has been nothing stated that invalidates the FAQ or that it should be ignored. Errata means changes to the pre existing books that has been made to new prints. The FAQ still stands regardless of the 'age' difference.


Skylancer4 wrote:
Thanks for your opinion on the subject, I guess. They are both 'official' and there has been nothing stated that invalidates the FAQ or that it should be ignored. Errata means changes to the pre existing books that has been made to new prints. The FAQ still stands regardless of the 'age' difference.

There has absolutely been something stated that invalidates the FAQ. They say limbs. If they meant arms, they would say arms. Anything further is just theorycraft on your part. We can still refer to the FAQ in places where the updated Errata does not overrule it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Incendax74 wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
Thanks for your opinion on the subject, I guess. They are both 'official' and there has been nothing stated that invalidates the FAQ or that it should be ignored. Errata means changes to the pre existing books that has been made to new prints. The FAQ still stands regardless of the 'age' difference.
There has absolutely been something stated that invalidates the FAQ. They say limbs. If they meant arms, they would say arms. Anything further is just theorycraft on your part. We can still refer to the FAQ in places where the updated Errata does not overrule it.

If you want to argue 'arms' aren't limbs that is fine by me, the rule book now states you must have limbs to cast a spell, the errata makes that the case. The FAQ further clarifies that those limbs need to be arms. They haven't taken down or sticken the FAQ from use two years later even after errata, it still stands as the 'official' opinion on the subject.

Errata and FAQ are theorycrafting in your opinion? Errata and FAQs are not mutually exclusive, errata is something that changes the rulebook and typically limited in what can be changed due to word count and layout changes to the book. FAQs are actual clarifications to the rules so we have the design intent when ambiguous wording is used in the book/rules.

I've got nothing more to say to you on this subject, its rather obvious you won't be changing your mind no matter what proof is given or facts stated.

Sczarni

Legs are limbs, I'm guessing you're saying when the rule book states

Quote:
Somatic (S): A somatic component is a measured and precise movement of the hand. You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component.

That a leg has a hand?

Sure I believe your argument completely...


Skylancer4 wrote:
If you want to argue 'arms' aren't limbs that is fine by me, the rule book now states you must have limbs to cast a spell, the errata makes that the case. The FAQ further clarifies that those limbs need to be arms. They haven't taken down or sticken the FAQ from use two years later even after errata, it still stands as the 'official' opinion on the subject.

I'm not saying that 'arms' aren't limbs. They are limbs, and so are legs. There is also no logical reason for them to issue Errata on a subject that would require further clarification from a prior document almost two years older. If the Errata intended it to be limited to arms, it would say arms instead.

Skylancer4 wrote:
Errata and FAQ are theorycrafting in your opinion? Errata and FAQs are not mutually exclusive, errata is something that changes the rulebook and typically limited in what can be changed due to word count and layout changes to the book. FAQs are actual clarifications to the rules so we have the design intent when ambiguous wording is used in the book/rules.

First you think I was arguing that arms are not limbs, and now you think I believe Errata and FAQ are theorycrafting? With all due respect, I do not think you have a firm grasp of my position.


Necro thread revived!
So, here is the question. My player takes Reach (One of an eidolon's attacks is capable of striking at foes at a distance. Pick one attack. The eidolon's reach with that attack increases by 5 feet.) And then takes Weapon Training (Ex) (An eidolon learns to use a weapon, gaining Simple Weapon Proficiency as a bonus feat. If 2 additional evolution points are spent, it gains proficiency with all martial weapons as well.) He thinks that now with a halberd or any reach weapon he has reach 15, which I ruled out as 10. Any suggestions who’s right?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Samurai117 wrote:
halberd or any reach weapon he has reach 15, which I ruled out as 10. Any suggestions who’s right?

The GM is right and if wrong can Rule 0 to be right ;-)

Making a natural attack stretch is one thing, but making a halberd stretch is another. Reach 10 sounds right.

GM caveat. I run a yearly PVP competition at GenCon, and I play in 3 to 4 others each year. The ONLY current class or archetype that every single one of the PVP competitions bans is Synthesis Summoner. The class is broken in every way on the power scale compared to every thing else.

This last GENCon, I wasn't convinced of this. I opened SS back up. The SS came to the competition with more AC, more HP, more Touch AC, more Attacks, more average to Hit, more gold for expensive one use items, and in general was better in every statistic you could measure a PC compared to even optimized PC in a narrow focus. So they make better generalist than any optimized specialist can become in a stat. There isn't any way on the planet I'd allow anyone use this archetype after that experience at GenCon. I shouldn't have reopened the archetype. The SS won the competition, he was a good sport. His class was just broken ;-)


Samurai117 wrote:
My player takes Reach [...] And then takes Weapon Training [...] He thinks that now with a halberd or any reach weapon he has reach 15, which I ruled out as 10. Any suggestions who’s right?

Here's the mentioned player so let me clarify something :].

1. As we know, no Weapon Training evolution needed to let your synthetist utilize (in the eidolon-armor) any manufactured weapons she is trained with.

2. Further, Reach evolution grants an increased reach to only one, specific, attack. You can't (for example) take Reach (tentacles) to get those +5 reach for all your, you know %]. It works just for one.

So no Reach (any weapon) just one Reach (specific weapon attack, not weapon type or quality or something). That means BTW you can't build a Kali-themed synthetist with Reach on all those hands.

3. Also, in 3.75, halberd isn't a reach weapon naturally :P.

Back to the topic, let's pay attention for example to the Improved Damage evolution: One of the eidolon’s natural attacks is particularly deadly. Select one natural attack form and increase the damage die type by one step. This evolution can be selected more than once. Its effects do not stack. Each time an eidolon selects this evolution, it applies to a different natural attack.

As you can see, rules are clearly stressing it is all about natural attacks. But in the Reach description there is no mention of that naturalness. So?


Quite a nightmarish read. The Synthesist is not particularly well thought out, though it is a great idea. Lots of room for fun.

One house rule I'm adding to the Fused Eidolon description: The eidolon and summoner use their individual Con modifers when determining hit points based on hit dice. The summoner's hit points are not modified by the eidolon's Con modifier when the summoner is fused with its eidolon. Each pool exists separately and must be tracked as such. A magic item, effect, or spell that increases Con that is not an inherent bonus adds to the Summoner's hit points, but not the eidolon's temporary hit points when they are fused. The Con increase affects the Eidolon's Con for all other purposes such as saves or ability checks when fused and the Summoner uses the Eidolon's modified Con for his Fortitude save or ability checks. Both the Eidolon and Summoner can benefit from permanent inherent bonuses to Con including increased hit points. They affect each hit point pool separately and must be increased individually for the summoner and eidolon. When the Eidolon and Summoner exist was individual entities using an ability such as Split Forms, use the appropriate rules for an Eidolon and Summoner that exist as separate entities.

I won't be having Con stat dumping or strange and confusing hit point tracking in and out of the suit. Boy, the Synthesist is quite a pain.


Eidolon Reach wrote:
One of an eidolon’s attacks is capable of striking at foes at a distance. Pick one attack. The eidolon’s reach with that attack increases by 5 feet.

This is a tough one. Since what do you choose as your "one attack"? "melee weapons"? "halberds"? "this specific halberd"? "your first attack a round with a halberd"?

I would rule that the PC can choose the "halberds" but only a single halberd would gain the benefit in a full round (in the odd case of a multi-halberd wielding monstrosity).

Also it is a brilliant observation (Tandoku) that halberd is not a reach weapon. :)

Speaking of rewriting the synthesist...


The intent is clearly dealing with a natural attack if you take the synthesist/eidolon write-up as a whole. It's what thematically makes sense with the class and archetype.

If you want to really mince out the wording, it applies to an attack, not a limb. A longsword is not an attack. It is a weapon used to make an attack. So, you can't say reach (left arm) as left arm is not an attack. You can't say reach (longsword) since that's not an attack. You can, though, say reach (claw) since claw is a natural attack. You can't say reach (melee) since the reach evolution only applies to one attack and melee is a classification of several attacks.


Raith Shadar wrote:

Quite a nightmarish read. The Synthesist is not particularly well thought out, though it is a great idea. Lots of room for fun.

[..write-up..]

I won't be having Con stat dumping or strange and confusing hit point tracking in and out of the suit. Boy, the Synthesist is quite a pain.

I would jump at the opportunity to play with this rewrite. It takes away one of the largest vulnerabilities to the archetype. If you dump con, take damage as the synth, get your eidolon banished, there is no more instant death. That is huge.


Buri wrote:
Raith Shadar wrote:

Quite a nightmarish read. The Synthesist is not particularly well thought out, though it is a great idea. Lots of room for fun.

[..write-up..]

I won't be having Con stat dumping or strange and confusing hit point tracking in and out of the suit. Boy, the Synthesist is quite a pain.

I would jump at the opportunity to play with this rewrite. It takes away one of the largest vulnerabilities to the archetype. If you dump con, take damage as the synth, get your eidolon banished, there is no more instant death. That is huge.

Not to mention no strange hit point tracking. That creates a ridiculous rule.You summon your eidolon, suddenly your con bumps up or down to 13. You have to add a total of 3 points per die to the summoner's hit points if he has a 7, while also applying the con mod to the eidolon. That's doubling hit points up from one stat for both entities. That is a nonsensical design choice. I don't like a stat doubling hit point pools like this. And if you spend points on Con with the Summoner rather than stat dumping, your hit points suddenly drop?

This set up basically encourages stat dumping Con. It practically requires that you do it. What kind of game designer makes a player stat dump Con as a class requirement? I can't believe all the bad design choices that could be easily fixed with more thought.

This a much better way to do things. The fused eidolon suit has its own temporary hit point pool based on its con and the summoner has his own hit points based on his con. Never the twain shall cross. No doubling up bonuses from magical belts, size bonuses, or any of that other stuff.

It's ridiculous that one Con enhancement belt would increase the temp hit points of the eidolon and the real hit points of the summoner. Or one con increasing shape changing spell would boost the eidolon and summoner's hit points. I want one hit point pool affected, not both. That double dipping Con is a bad idea.

This fixes those issues and simplifies the class some.


If you dump con, you're doing it wrong. As I said, if you have low con, take a large (but okay because you have tons of HP) amount of damage, then lose your eidolon due to banishment et al., you instantly die just like a barbarian can coming off a rage.

If you're a player and tank CON, you're hedging your bets on having a softball GM.

If you're a GM and don't play enemies intelligently who may now what summoners do and how to deal with them, you're letting your players literally get away with murder.

The eidolon suit being on can not be an assumed constant. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if people who hate synth's are also people who hate sundering items or don't utilize the collateral damage rules against worn item damage when you roll 1 on a save. Gear is not a constant. The synth suit is just a powerful piece of gear, but it is one that is easily dealt with around the same time they really start to shine. That is balance.

Balance is not self limitation. Balance is ecosystem that evens out given all factors. The eidolon can easily be dealt with as a GM. So easy, it's ridiculous, almost to the point that it should be discouraged. Synths are almost the epitome of the glass cannon. In a high level fight, you can easily hit one with a high level fireball, dismiss the suit, and the character is dead even if they saved. Done. UNLESS! You DO NOT dump con.

If you keep a solid con, you can retreat, get the suit back, and get back in the game. This is rounds out of combat if your build relies on the suit (as most synth builds do). This is what you want when you talk about balance. The player feels challenged, believes it's manageable (because it is), and keeps up an exciting experience.

The game far from requires you to dump con as a class requirement. Please, stick to facts.


You're not making much sense, Buri.

It is not that easy to get rid of the Synth suit. Not sure why you think it is. Most Synths will have an extremely high will save capable of shrugging off dismissal spells. If you don't have a high will save, you're doing it wrong.

It does encourage you to take a lower Con than the suit, otherwise you are wasting points.

The fact is that double dipping stats is always a bad design idea. I'm not going to allow it. So the hit point pools will be kept separate.

Your objective as a DM should be to make the game fun for players. Not take away their toys pursuing a nebulous idea of "balance". The party should be doing enough so that your Synth doesn't have to run out of battle to get his suit back. Most fights don't last anywhere near the minute it would take to get the suit back. Almost everything you stated does not apply to characters of any level. Combats are average 1 to 4 rounds for minion fights. A long combat might be 6 to 10. If the Synth is losing his suit all the time because the DM is raising saves to a level he can't resist, he might as well not even play a Synth.

I am sticking to facts. Fact is that the Synthesist as written encourages the dumping of physical stats including making sure your Con stays at 10 to ensure you are not wasting points. Then you buy magic items to boost it to survive if your suit is dispelled. A Con belt boosts both your temporary and real hit points how the rules are now. I don't think that's a very good mechanic.


I'm making perfect sense. Lots of things affect summoned creatures in various ways. The summoner can subvert some of these, like protection from spells and attacking said protected creatures, but not all. Increasing a monsters spell DCs is super easy as the GM. Given each increase is a difference of about ~5% chance to succeed, you don't need to add a whole lot to make something more difficult to resist. If you have an intelligent enemy, he should retreat and come back more prepared. If you have a singular, consistent BBEG, he should start making plans well in advance of encountering the party. Bad guys do not exist in a vacuum, or, at least, they shouldn't exist in a vacuum.

The design idea is fine since it's a fragile and exploitable one.

Facilitating fun as a GM should include introducing challenge. Face-rolling every encounter with no threat is NOT fun. You shouldn't negate a player's choice. However, it's perfectly legitimate to make them do a little work to justify it. There is no reward without struggle.

It's not written specifically to dump any stat. You're grasping for straws on that one. All half dozen or so synth builds I've done had a minimum of 16 con base. They still had good-to-high mental scores with point-by stat generation. At no time was that con wasted points. I don't know what kind of super easy campaigns you play but mine often include night-time ambushes and the like at various times when they fit with the story. They play out like a breathing world, not the static, isolated battles you seem to be framing your view with.

You're evaluating the synthesist with all its perks and none of its weaknesses. That needs to stop if you want to have an objective discourse about it. It's riddled with exploitable mechanics that are every bit as fair as any other class'.


I saw this question asked, but have been unable to find a response. Does the synthesist get the bonus from class skills from the eidolon? I recognize the text for synthesist clearly states the Eidolon gets no skills or feats of it's own. I took this to mean that on the "Eidolon Base Statistics" block you don't get those "skills and feats" listed as the Eidolon would get no skill ranks of it's own, and the synthesist has to use the summoners skill ranks. But the people I am gaming with feel that also includes the bonus' from class skills that the eidolon would get as an outsider. I get that this would be a lot of bonus' skill points for the class but with only 2+int it doesn't seem game breaking, just allowing more versatility in what the class can do. Some of them make thematic sense as well such as perception considering you are literally seeing through the eidolon's senses and get evolutions to increase those. Pretty cool with either way, just never thought of class skill bonus and skill ranks as the same category before this class. Thanks for any clarification.


The summoner does not get the eidolon class skills for the synthesist archetype. The synthesist is the summoner. You seem to be dividing the two. If you want uber perception just take skilled (perception) to get a racial +8 that stacks. It's just a single ep.

Lantern Lodge

Buri wrote:
It's not written specifically to dump any stat.

... Yes it is. Any synth worth his salt will dump stat. It's the reason most ppl have a problem with the archetype because it allows something paizo was fundamentally against, dumping stats. It's why they changed rules regarding beast shape, wild shape, ect.

As to easily getting rid of the suit, it should be very difficult. Synths can easily achieve higher AC than the "tank" (I say in quotations because tank isn't really a role in pathfinder due to practically no agro abilities) while dishing out more DPR than your best fighter. Additionally, as Raith pointed out he should have a high Will save because he was able to put all of his ability scores into Int, Wis, and Cha.

And honestly getting rid of the suit should be difficult because if you strip away the suit you basically strip away the class. As a GM, I wouldn't even want to do this because it completely negates the character making it no fun for the player. That said the summoner, not just synth, is banned from my home games because it can perform every role except for healer better than a class specifically designed for it.


Buri wrote:

I'm making perfect sense. Lots of things affect summoned creatures in various ways. The summoner can subvert some of these, like protection from spells and attacking said protected creatures, but not all. Increasing a monsters spell DCs is super easy as the GM. Given each increase is a difference of about ~5% chance to succeed, you don't need to add a whole lot to make something more difficult to resist. If you have an intelligent enemy, he should retreat and come back more prepared. If you have a singular, consistent BBEG, he should start making plans well in advance of encountering the party. Bad guys do not exist in a vacuum, or, at least, they shouldn't exist in a vacuum.

The design idea is fine since it's a fragile and exploitable one.

Facilitating fun as a GM should include introducing challenge. Face-rolling every encounter with no threat is NOT fun. You shouldn't negate a player's choice. However, it's perfectly legitimate to make them do a little work to justify it. There is no reward without struggle.

It's not written specifically to dump any stat. You're grasping for straws on that one. All half dozen or so synth builds I've done had a minimum of 16 con base. They still had good-to-high mental scores with point-by stat generation. At no time was that con wasted points. I don't know what kind of super easy campaigns you play but mine often include night-time ambushes and the like at various times when they fit with the story. They play out like a breathing world, not the static, isolated battles you seem to be framing your view with.

You're evaluating the synthesist with all its perks and none of its weaknesses. That needs to stop if you want to have an objective discourse about it. It's riddled with exploitable mechanics that are every bit as fair as any other class'.

You are not making sense. The fact that you don't understand why I made this house rule is an example of this misunderstanding. It has nothing to do with anything you are talking about. It has to do with simplifying mechanics and hit point tracking as well as preventing double dipping of stats.

No. The synthesis isn't fragile and exploitable. I'll toss out an assumption given your viewpoint, your players must not have a very good idea of how the mechanics of the Synthesist work. They must not be optimizing the character.

It isn't easy to do what you claim. If you create spell DCs high enough to defeat the will save of a well built Synthesist, you will destroy the will saves of your other party members. On top of that you have Synthesist who will invest in Use Magic Device allowing them to access spells like spell immunity to completely resist dismissal and banishment. So your opponent using standard actions to defeat the Synthesist's armor is wasting his time.

Also if you build enemies to stop the Synthesist, then you might not be able to build them to stop the other members of the party who aren't affected by dismissal and banishment. And what if your opponent is wasting actions casting those spells, while getting destroyed by the other members of the party. Then you have wasted your time as a DM designing enemies to stop one powerful character, only to be destroyed by the other powerful characters.

You as a DM must still limit your encounters otherwise you're using DM caveat to overpower your players. That's not a challenge, that's a frustrated DM incapable of designing a challenge that is both fun and dangerous. Any DM can overpower a group if he wants to.

I'm going to move on from this discussion. You are not making sense and don't seem to grasp why I made the rule change I did. It had nothing to with the power of the Synthesist. It's a rule to streamline and simplify mechanics as well as discourage stat manipulation that doesn't make sense.

Thanks for responding.

You are making far too many assumptions about how I play. I can pretty much guarantee our campaigns are every bit as difficult as anything you run.


I have been playing with Synthesist builds.

Your average Will save by about 12th level should be +14 without feats, traits, or magic items.

Your standard AC should exceed most classes that do not specialize in AC. An AC specialized class may match you. Your touch AC should be comparable.

If you focus on a melee build, you can keep your Charisma at 16 and focus on building up melee capabilities with very little need for offensive spells. Your strength should exceed what a similar melee can obtain. On top of that you can take Arcane Strike to make up for the damage difference due to a lack of specialization and weapon training. You are perhaps the best class to use Arcane Strike given you have nothing to do with your Swift Action.

I like the Synthesist Archetype. You can do some interesting character concepts. My main concern is the clunky mechanics. The power level is fine in my opinion. I do not like clunky, hard to adjudicate mechanics. I'm going to make them easier to DM when I feel the mechanics lead to confusion.


kaisc006 wrote:
Buri wrote:
It's not written specifically to dump any stat.
... Yes it is.

Quote it. If you can't, stop this nonsense.


Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Seraphimpunk wrote:
BECAUSE they're able to dump their physical stats.

Irrelevant. Even if you based the synthesist's hp on his own Con mod, dumping Con down to 7 (which is an incredibly stupid thing to do) is mitigated by the eidolon's hit points. Your own example of the Con 7 synthesist still has almost as many hit points as a Con 14 barbarian, and would maintain that parity as they leveled up. With even a 10 Con, that gets rid of the –2 penalty you've built into your example, and puts the synthesist at the same hp as a barbarian.

"Look, the synthesist has a Con mod -2 and the eidolon has a +1, that's a net of –1 Con mod, so it's totally okay that he has the same hp as the +2 Con mod fighter and almost as many as the +2 Con mod barbarian." False.

This type of thing is what I'm trying to fix with my ruling. I read this and felt that Sean K. Reynolds couldn't explain the Synthesist hit point mechanics in a "simple and elegant" way. When a game designer that should know can't explain something well enough to make it understandable to the average player, something is wrong.

Making the hit point pools separate removes all the headache of trying to track hit points when the Synthesist is inside and outside the Eidolon. It eliminates any strange attempts at figuring when to apply your own con modifier and when to apply the suit modifier to your own hit points. As well as how a Con belt affects the temporary hit points of the eidolon and the real hit points of the summoner. Pool is separate and size spells and magical enhancement items only apply once to the Summoner's real hit points. Confusion over at least where hit points are concerned.


Raith Shadar wrote:
You are not making sense and don't seem to grasp why I made the rule change I did. It had nothing to with the power of the Synthesist. It's a rule to streamline and simplify mechanics as well as discourage stat manipulation that doesn't make sense.

I do grasp it. Perfectly. You're trying to simply HP tracking by keeping the pools separate based on each creature's CON. What you are ignoring is that you change one of the main reasons a synthesist character would not dump their CON. You may keep the pools separate, but the character still gains a huge pool of temp HP. It doesn't really fix anything since the summoner can still funnel HP when the suit takes damage. The summoner can still be healed normally. The summoner can still use the rejuvenate eidolon spells to directly restore that temp HP. Both pools still grow as the character levels.

Also, you start to fudge the rules where the synthesist is a single creature. If you track things separately, then you open your design to rules debates about what thing is which creature. This can greatly confuse other rules such as targeting and what effects affect what. The unfortunate thing is that a player who would do so isn't even being argumentative. Being able to anticipate common rules so you know how to play a character is vital.

Furthermore, if the eidolon goes away, the summoner's HP remains unchanged. It makes investing in keeping the eidolon around less of a worry. If your own HP can go way down, potentially leading to an instant death, when it goes away, you need to find ways to either keep it summoned, or to find ways to cope when it goes away. This should be a good thing as it presents players a choice and they can feel good when that choice has meaning when it matters. In this case, that means combat. Also, if you invest in CON to prevent instant death, you have less points to spend into mental abilities which is a common gripe about the archetype. Another would be dumping strength, which I'd argue is stupid to do, since you still need to carry things when the suit isn't summoned. But, that's not this part of the discussion.

I don't see what's confusing about switching out an ability score for HP. Do you not use the various undead templates that switch many things from CON to CHA? Several class abilities and feats do ability score switching as well. Do you house rule them? Even if all you have issue with is the double dipping of a single ability score, realize there are several abilities that let you do this with skills and the like as well. So, to remain consistent, do you apply similar changes to those? If you don't, this makes for a very confusing edge case in your games since it has no consistent basis.

As far as making sense goes, I am. If I am not to you, explain why I'm not making sense. I've explained myself several times and have again in the paragraphs above. Just saying "you don't make sense" and skipping the thread is cheap. If you can't explain how, I argue I am, regardless of what you say, making sense. What's confusing to you? Why a RAW synthesist would keep a high CON? I've explained why several times. The threat of instant death is reason enough to not dump it drastically. It's not new to the rules. Barbarians face that threat constantly. Do you house rule that or fudge the rules so that threat can never actualize? Do you simply not have players that play barbarians? How do you deal with that situation when it comes up? Furthermore, any temporary bonus (which the synthesist's usage of the eidolon's CON is as it's NOT permanent in any way) has the potential to cause situations like this when they expire. Do you not track durations accurately or fudge how those work in your player's favor?

I'm honestly curious as there are flaws in your underlying reasons that create inconsistencies in play. If they haven't, I'd wager someone just hasn't been keen on noticing.

Keep in mind you brought a house rule into a rules forum thread. Awesome. You shouldn't expect it to simply pass in the category without challenge.


Raith Shadar wrote:
Making the hit point pools separate removes all the headache of trying to track hit points when the Synthesist is inside and outside the Eidolon. It eliminates any strange attempts at figuring when to apply your own con modifier and when to apply the suit modifier to your own hit points. As well as how a Con belt affects the temporary hit points of the eidolon and the real hit points of the summoner. Pool is separate and size spells and magical enhancement items only apply once to the Summoner's real hit points. Confusion over at least where hit points are concerned.

Whenever I play a bimodal character (lycanthropes being another type), I track stats separately. This way, in mid-combat, I can instantly know, at a glance, what is what. This includes HP. It just makes life so much easier.

If you lose a CON belt, or upgrade it, whatever, all you need worry about is adjusting the difference in modifiers. The math is very simple. If you go from a +1 mod to a +2, you get number of HD more HP in each pool. If it goes down, or away, you do the same, just with subtraction instead.

Are there any situations you've had where this wasn't easy? Perhaps, I can show you some ways to help as I've played a lot of bimodal characters.


Greetings:
Here's my question. A synthesist aasimar: can he cast Enlarge Person on himself while suited-up on his Eidolon?

Share Spells would allow for the Eidolon's outsider type to ignore the "humanoid" target recquisite. But the Synthesist "He counts both as his original type and as an outsider for any effect related to type, whichever is worse for the synthesist" and his other type also being Outsider would prevent Share Spells for working at all.

Is it so? Or would Share Spells override Fused Link?

901 to 950 of 976 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / One Synthesist Summoner Thread to rule them all All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.