Should the Synthesist be banned?


Advice

51 to 100 of 118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Robespierre wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
It should be banned as it is simply so badly written that it's unplayable and broken.
Actually the class isn't broken nor is it unplayable. It's just good and can become overpowered.

Beyond that many of the obvious problems have been addressed in errata and FAQ. As is the class is currently playable.


DrDeth wrote:
It should be banned as it is simply so badly written that it's unplayable and broken.

it is my life's goal to optimize to my fullest extent until GM's with the said viewpoint learn to loath, hate, and eventually ban the Fighter, the Rogue, and all other classes of equal or Greater power. Go Commoner! :D


Wiggz wrote:
Interzone wrote:
pipedreamsam wrote:

As far as summoner archetypes go the synthesist pales in comparison to the master summoner.

I find that the action economy is a much bigger factor in how combat plays out rather than how uber one particular character or monster is.

Yes Master Summoner is more powerful in that respect, but the time-consumingness and sillyness of it mean i woudl actually consider banning them... I wouldn't ban Synths though they are pretty reasonable.
What exactly is 'silly' about a Master Summoner?

I am referring to the silly things you can do with it.. such as having an army of 10d4+20 Lantern Archons.. at level 9....


Interzone wrote:
Wiggz wrote:
Interzone wrote:
pipedreamsam wrote:

As far as summoner archetypes go the synthesist pales in comparison to the master summoner.

I find that the action economy is a much bigger factor in how combat plays out rather than how uber one particular character or monster is.

Yes Master Summoner is more powerful in that respect, but the time-consumingness and sillyness of it mean i woudl actually consider banning them... I wouldn't ban Synths though they are pretty reasonable.
What exactly is 'silly' about a Master Summoner?
I am referring to the silly things you can do with it.. such as having an army of 10d4+20 Lantern Archons.. at level 9....

Don't you mean my army of zap!


Kryzbyn wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
joah wrote:
Should the Synthesist be banned?

No.

In other news, for anyone who'd like to see something heavily resembling a synthesist in something besides the PFRPG, you should check out Armor from X-Men. Her mutant power allows her to create a psionic exoskeleton that she shapes with her will; turning her into an ubertank and powerhouse.

Image 1, Image 2, and a video of her crushing a monster.

Wouldn't she be more of an Aegis from DSP's Psionics Expanded?

Quite possibly. I haven't seen the Aegis from DSP yet, but I will say it's likely they did it very well, and I'd be willing to bet it is basically an astral construct exoskeleton?

It wouldn't surprise me if DSP had a class that was better for Armor than Pathfinder. Most of their mechanics are better than core Pathfinder. Their metamorphosis powers are epic in terms of being useful and playability, when compared to similar polymorph school effects.


It's basicly the soulknife, but with armor.
It's very much like the person in the video!


TarkXT wrote:
Robespierre wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
It should be banned as it is simply so badly written that it's unplayable and broken.
Actually the class isn't broken nor is it unplayable. It's just good and can become overpowered.
Beyond that many of the obvious problems have been addressed in errata and FAQ. As is the class is currently playable.

They need to simply re-write the class then, too many patches make it incomprehensible.


Writer wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
It should be banned as it is simply so badly written that it's unplayable and broken.
it is my life's goal to optimize to my fullest extent until GM's with the said viewpoint learn to loath, hate, and eventually ban the Fighter, the Rogue, and all other classes of equal or Greater power. Go Commoner! :D

"Broken" doesn't mean too powerful, it means it can be either too power to too weak depending on how you read the (badly written) rules for it. Witness the Truenamer.

Fighter, etc or even the PF Wizard isn't broken as the rules are mostly understandable.


DrDeth wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
Robespierre wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
It should be banned as it is simply so badly written that it's unplayable and broken.
Actually the class isn't broken nor is it unplayable. It's just good and can become overpowered.
Beyond that many of the obvious problems have been addressed in errata and FAQ. As is the class is currently playable.
They need to simply re-write the class then, too many patches make it incomprehensible.

I'm sure they'll get right on that. Just as soon as they fix the umpteen other things that need rewriting.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
joah wrote:
Should the Synthesist be banned?

Yes.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

A properly built wizard will blow any summoner out of the water. Let it be.


Kryzbyn wrote:

It's basicly the soulknife, but with armor.

It's very much like the person in the video!

Spiffy. :)

I've been toying around with the idea of a character concept and possibly new mechanics that involve encasing yourself in an astral construct, very similar to the flavor of the synthesist, but with psionics, which likely means it's better by default. :P *jokes*


TriOmegaZero wrote:
joah wrote:
Should the Synthesist be banned?
Yes.

Why you hating?

Shadow Lodge

You think I'm...hating?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

In our game, we banned the Summoner, but the Synthesist balanced the Summoner in our opinion. The whole problem with summoner in our group is the economy of actions that the summoner gets around being 2 beings (summoner/eidolon), so forcing the two together into one being, actually removes this economy of actions benefit.

An optimized barbarian is tougher than a Synthesist. When you can say a martial class is more powerful than a caster, that has to make you think, when somebody suggests the Synthesist is all that. My barbarian eats Synthesists for breakfast.


TOZ wrote:
You think I'm...hating?

Why yes Theo I think you don't appreciate what a jello pudding pop really means.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I see. *bubblepipe*


gamer-printer wrote:

In our game, we banned the Summoner, but the Synthesist balanced the Summoner in our opinion. The whole problem with summoner in our group is the economy of actions that the summoner gets around being 2 beings (summoner/eidolon), so forcing the two together into one being, actually removes this economy of actions benefit.

Do you also ban druids?


TriOmegaZero wrote:
I see. *bubblepipe*

Oh the kids now a days with their drugs and bubbles.


Kryzbyn wrote:
gamer-printer wrote:

In our game, we banned the Summoner, but the Synthesist balanced the Summoner in our opinion. The whole problem with summoner in our group is the economy of actions that the summoner gets around being 2 beings (summoner/eidolon), so forcing the two together into one being, actually removes this economy of actions benefit.

Do you also ban druids?

No, the summoner was the one and only class we banned.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Preservationist alchemist with tumor familiars bad too?


gamer-printer wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:
gamer-printer wrote:

In our game, we banned the Summoner, but the Synthesist balanced the Summoner in our opinion. The whole problem with summoner in our group is the economy of actions that the summoner gets around being 2 beings (summoner/eidolon), so forcing the two together into one being, actually removes this economy of actions benefit.

Do you also ban druids?
No, the summoner was the one and only class we banned.

This seems odd to me, because a druid with their pet enjoys the same action economy as a summoner.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Summoner misconceptions are what get the class hated by some. Give the class some time. There will be a time later in which people will say "Remember when we thought this class was broken? Hah ha! Those were the times".


Kryzbyn wrote:
gamer-printer wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:
gamer-printer wrote:

In our game, we banned the Summoner, but the Synthesist balanced the Summoner in our opinion. The whole problem with summoner in our group is the economy of actions that the summoner gets around being 2 beings (summoner/eidolon), so forcing the two together into one being, actually removes this economy of actions benefit.

Do you also ban druids?
No, the summoner was the one and only class we banned.
This seems odd to me, because a druid with their pet enjoys the same action economy as a summoner.

Druids pet do not get Evolutions. Besides, nobody in our group ever plays a druid. We had to beg one of the new players to play a cleric, because nobody seems to want to play divine casters in our group. We've got arcane casters up the wazoo (half the group are arcane casters.)


Druid pets do increase in other ways as the druid levels, gaining stats, feats, more HD, AC boosts...
Some druid pets are equal to or greater than an eidolon in combat ability.
I would take the simplicity of a druid with a large cat druid pet over a summoner and eidolon any day.

But, to each their own.


DrDeth wrote:
Writer wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
It should be banned as it is simply so badly written that it's unplayable and broken.
it is my life's goal to optimize to my fullest extent until GM's with the said viewpoint learn to loath, hate, and eventually ban the Fighter, the Rogue, and all other classes of equal or Greater power. Go Commoner! :D

"Broken" doesn't mean too powerful, it means it can be either too power to too weak depending on how you read the (badly written) rules for it. Witness the Truenamer.

Fighter, etc or even the PF Wizard isn't broken as the rules are mostly understandable.

Lol? Meh, you can get people on both sides of the fence I guess. Personally I think the synthesist is just fine when you consider the additional FAQ. Then again I'm used to people getting angry when they're used to being the best and something better comes along and gives them a run for their money. Like a wizard getting mad that a summOmer can outsummon him. He'd rather ban the class than give it a chance because if he does he will no longer be threatened by it. Nothing to do with fairness or balance, just people and their power. Meh, at least that's what I'm used to

I prefer to keep an open mind myself. Let people have their fun.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

You're the best, around! No one's gonna ever keep you dooowwwn...


blackbloodtroll wrote:
Summoner misconceptions are what get the class hated by some. Give the class some time. There will be a time later in which people will say "Remember when we thought this class was broken? Hah ha! Those were the times".

The reverse is just as likely. "Remember when we thought this might not be broken? Boy, were we ever wrong."


Kryzbyn wrote:

Druid pets do increase in other ways as the druid levels, gaining stats, feats, more HD, AC boosts...

Some druid pets are equal to or greater than an eidolon in combat ability.
I would take the simplicity of a druid with a large cat druid pet over a summoner and eidolon any day.

But, to each their own.

Sure, but bears and cats can't fly, it's just a cheap evolution to add fly, and many other abilities that basic animals can never do. Druid's nerf is in being stuck with Animal type. If they could be monstrous, then it would be a problem.

Really, I'm the GM, and when I play, I prefer martial classes pretty much exclusively, except for the rare paladin. Though I have a magus at this time, however, I've been GM for 3 months now in current campaign and haven't the opportunity to be a player yet.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Druid can have giant birds and bees, at first level. Their companions do not go away while you sleep either.


I don't think that the synthesis is overpowered compared to other melee builds (Fighter / barbarian). They can definitely seem overwhelming on paper and are easy to screw up though. We have a synthesis summoner in our PFS group and it can throw people off when they see his 32 Str at 10th level.

Dark Archive

SHOULD THE OP BE BANNED?

Just seems to me that they made an account made one thread and one post and then did nothing else, now posting seems obsolete because the thread resembles the virtual equivalent of a bathtup full of drunken cats, that makes me a sad panda.

:::cues music:::

who sat down by the willow tree
sexual harrassment
panda-a-a...


blackbloodtroll wrote:
Druid can have giant birds and bees, at first level. Their companions do not go away while you sleep either.

But you can't have a giant eagle, as that is not an animal, rather a monster. Birds and bees don't have the properties of a bear. But an eidolon can be a flying bear with a stinger for all practical purposes. Just because a class can summon something, doesn't even closely equate to what a summoner can do with an eidolon. And this doesn't include that a summoner can summon more than just his overpowered eidolon. A druid does not equal a summoner, not even close. If the summoner creates a suboptimal eidolon, then no problem, but that never happens.


Eidolons don't start with all of that, and by the time they have it...
Meh.

I don't care anymore. I was trying to figure out if it was truly the action economy that was the problem, or something else.

It's the idea that eidolons are 'op'.


I played a truenamer from levels 4-20. It works, but you have to know all of the rules, as well as ruling precedents and be able to make a strong case and reference rulebook listings within a minute or less or you are taking everyone else out of the game and not having fun. You also have to self regulate intensely if anything is going to be even remotely fair. I wound up winning every encounter with the least of my abilities though, once my build got rolling, but on occasion I had to roll dice for reasons no one else at the table fully understood, and abide by the results if they weren't sufficient by my own calculations. If I didn't constantly defeat every encounter, most of which were at least 4 above APL, I would have just had the character coup de grace himself and rolled up a less complicated character.

For a synthesist specifically, you have to remember all the little points of the FAQ and ho they interact with your interpretation of the rules text of the archetype and how that relates to both the original summoner class and the eidolon advancement rules.

You can play a synthesist summoner, if you know all of the rules and have self restraint. That does not mean you wouldn't have more fun with a two handing fighter and/or barbarian or a cleric, or a druid.


Kryzbyn wrote:

Eidolons don't start with all of that, and by the time they have it...

Meh.

I don't care anymore. I was trying to figure out if it was truly the action economy that was the problem, or something else.

It's the idea that eidolons are 'op'.

We don't need to discuss this, but as I said, the Synthesist is balanced for us, as those aspects which are OP in the Eidolon is balanced by the fusion with the summoner as a single being. Combine the Eidolons OP with the economy of actions, and those two things make it broken, which is why we banned it. Any of those advantages in isolation is less than a broken, combine them and now they are broken.

There isn't one issue to point at, you must look at the whole to see the problem.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
joah wrote:
Should the Synthesist be banned?
Yes.

I just find it ironic that the creater of AM BARBARIAN dosent like the synthesist...;-)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Who said anything about Trinam liking anything?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The first time I read about Synthesists the first thought that came to my mind was "It's Morphin' Time!" and if it was not your's you just don't like fun.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

I would consider banning paladins, just because of the retarded way so many players RP them. Summoners, of all kinds, would be welcome.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I like summoners. All the other players get to level up 20 times during their career. I get to level up 40 times. :D


Ok now i feel dumb.


Kryzbyn wrote:

Druid pets do increase in other ways as the druid levels, gaining stats, feats, more HD, AC boosts...

Some druid pets are equal to or greater than an eidolon in combat ability.
I would take the simplicity of a druid with a large cat druid pet over a summoner and eidolon any day.

But, to each their own.

Druid pets also get healed by clerics, and can guard the Druid and her party while they're sleeping.

Shadow Lodge

Sowde Da'aro wrote:
Ok now i feel dumb.

Don't, you're far from the first to do that. ;)


joeyfixit wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:

Druid pets do increase in other ways as the druid levels, gaining stats, feats, more HD, AC boosts...

Some druid pets are equal to or greater than an eidolon in combat ability.
I would take the simplicity of a druid with a large cat druid pet over a summoner and eidolon any day.

But, to each their own.

Druid pets also get healed by clerics, and can guard the Druid and her party while they're sleeping.

...and get get ability damage fixed, and...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Don't use the word "fixed" when talking about an animal companion.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Vermin animal companions are also immune to mind-effecting effects, and some can even fly.


I still don't see why people think its overpowered to begin with, can someone explain the problems with it? Because I really don't see anything overly powerful.


I'm currently playing in a game with a synthesist and find the character to be just fine. The biggest issue I've seen come up with any summoner is making sure the Eidolon is built correctly from the start and reviewed at every level. Taking 5 minutes to look over the Eidolon rules and ensuring a legal build before the game starts, when changes can be made quite easily, removes the vast majority of the issues.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Ringtail wrote:
Don't use the word "fixed" when talking about an animal companion.

You mean 'around an animal companion', right?

51 to 100 of 118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Should the Synthesist be banned? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.