From what I can understand summoning the Eidolon doesn't have a ASF%.
Aside from the check penalty and the massive spell failure chance what are the drawbacks to giving my summoner Full plate and a Tower shield?
I was thinking of having her turtle and possibly take a few levels in cleric for burst healing while using her Eidolon as her sword.
Not just standing around but also casting support spells from the cleric list.
From what I can understand summoning the Eidolon doesn't have a ASF%.
Neither summoning eidolon nor summon monster spell-like abilities suffer from ASF chance. You can use them in full plate with tower shield and so on.
I was thinking of having her turtle and possibly take a few levels in cleric for burst healing while using her Eidolon as her sword.
Multiclassing as a summoner tend to weaken the eidolon more than it is worth. It would be probably better go for full summoner with feats optimized for defense or augmentation of the eidolon itself (Extra Evolution, anything that improves your AC and/or saves, Toughness to get extra hp which can later be shared with eidolon). Possibly take Still Spell and be able to cast healing spells by using slot one level higher. I suggest getting Magical Lineage trait (if traits are allowed) for haste to be able to cast it with Still Spell metamagic feat without level adjustment.
Why not play a Synthesist? It's like what you're proposing, except the summoner is in the safest place possible - hiding inside the Eidolon. And it even lets you actually cast spells if needed.
If you've taken enough levels in cleric for your cleric spells to be useful in combat, then you've taken too many levels outside of summoner for your Eidolon to be effective.
The party composition will be a lawful evil cleric, a rogue, and (what I'm trying to make) a broodmaster who will provide flanking, distractions, and party support. Hence the cleric thought.
Max out your UMD then get the awesome paladin spells as wands. Like bless weapon and some of the others. You can also get to use cure critical wands as well.
That may work. I can't remember, does the armor check penalty apply to using skills such as UMD?
If you don't have the armor proficiency, yes, the armor check penalties apply to ALL skills, including UMD.
If you're going to do this, I'd do a single level dip into a cure casting class, Oracle due to CHA stat would be my suggestion. That get's you wands on the entire list, and UMD for scrolls when you're not in armor.
A character who is wearing armor with which he is not proficient applies its armor check penalty to attack rolls and to all skill checks that involve moving.
I suppose you could argue that UMD is a "skill check that involves moving".
There's not a lot that doesn't involve moving. Knowledge skill checks, sense motive, spellcraft (to id spells as they are cast) and linguistics skills (to understand someone) is about all I can think of. It's easier to just say all skills and adjudicate the ones when they don't apply.
But yeah, using an item usually involves movement of some type. Hard to use a wand if it's in your belt pouch. And hard to touch it to someone without moving it.
Hmm... lets see.
If I start as a summoner then for level two dip into an oracle I would have a summoner who is haunted.
Now if I start as an oracle then dip into a summoner I would already have the medium armor prof so that would be easier feat wise. I could also take the Bones mystery for early armor or zombie flanking. Not a bad option. Thanks for the idea.
Edit: I forgot to mention that the group is actually only my wife and myself. She wants to have monster pets hence the Broodmaster. I'm not too concerned with power but I don't want the character to be dead weight either.
There's not a lot that doesn't involve moving. Knowledge skill checks, sense motive, spellcraft (to id spells as they are cast) and linguistics skills (to understand someone) is about all I can think of. It's easier to just say all skills and adjudicate the ones when they don't apply.
But yeah, using an item usually involves movement of some type. Hard to use a wand if it's in your belt pouch. And hard to touch it to someone without moving it.
All STR and DEX based skills suffer Armor Check penalties. This is RAW; I see no reason to invent new systems or adjudicate things in any other way.
If you don't have the armor proficiency, yes, the armor check penalties apply to ALL skills, including UMD.
If you're going to do this, I'd do a single level dip into a cure casting class, Oracle due to CHA stat would be my suggestion. That get's you wands on the entire list, and UMD for scrolls when you're not in armor.
ACP (armor check penalty) applies to all physically based skills, those relying on STR or DEX (note that there are no skills based on CON). UMD is based on a mental stat (CHA) and is not effected in any way shape or form by armor.
From what I can understand summoning the Eidolon doesn't have a ASF%.
Aside from the check penalty and the massive spell failure chance what are the drawbacks to giving my summoner Full plate and a Tower shield?
I was thinking of having her turtle and possibly take a few levels in cleric for burst healing while using her Eidolon as her sword.
Since summoners are not proficient in either full plate or tower shields you would take a -16 on all Strength and Dex skills and a -16 on all to hit rolls. That would make even touch attacks difficult.
Not to mention the 20 foot movement rate and the insane ASF on all your Somatic Summoner spells.
Why even be a summoner at that point? If your going to splash cleric for more spells just take a full cleric with the animal domain for the animal companion and take the feat to make it's effective druid level equal your character level.
Animal companion may not be as customizable as the Eidolon but with the armor and shield your proposing there is no real reason to be a summoner anyways, especially with multiclassing watering down the eidolon.
Also note that even as a cleric you would still take -16 to skills and attack rolls since clerics are not proficient with heavy armor or tower shields, again assuming you use that setup.
If you really want to pull this off, I'd recommend taking a single level of oracle in the battle mystery with the Skill at Arms revelation to pick up proficiency in all martial weapons as well as medium/heavy armor and shields (except tower shields). Then, take the Still Spell feat to cast summoner spells in medium/heavy armor and/or using a shield without arcane spell failure (granted, it adds +1 to the spell level). All you lose is one level of summoner class feature/eidolon/spell progression. The Extra Revelation feat to pick up War Sight (roll initiative twice and take either result) might also be worthwhile.
All STR and DEX based skills suffer Armor Check penalties. This is RAW; I see no reason to invent new systems or adjudicate things in any other way.There's not a lot that doesn't involve moving. Knowledge skill checks, sense motive, spellcraft (to id spells as they are cast) and linguistics skills (to understand someone) is about all I can think of. It's easier to just say all skills and adjudicate the ones when they don't apply.
But yeah, using an item usually involves movement of some type. Hard to use a wand if it's in your belt pouch. And hard to touch it to someone without moving it.
ACP (armor check penalty) applies to all physically based skills, those relying on STR or DEX (note that there are no skills based on CON). UMD is based on a mental stat (CHA) and is not effected in any way shape or form by armor.
A character who is wearing armor with which he is not proficient applies its armor check penalty to attack rolls and to all skill checks that involve moving.
You two might want to read the rules before you start haranguing me about 'making up' new rules. ANY skill that involves moving get's the non-proficiency penalties. Craft (INT based)? Yep, you move when you craft. Bluff? If you're bluff includes feinting (which requires movement) then yes, you get the penalties. Appraisal? You manipulating the item to examine it? Or you walking around it and peering at it? Then yes, you are moving, and the penalty applies. Perform check? Unless it's perform Oratory, then yes, you're moving and yes you get the penalties (despite it being a cha skill). Again, read the rules before slamming someone for making up things.
ON a different note, a one level dip into Magus rather than Oracle would net you martial weapon proficiency, armor proficiency (granted light, but no ASF), and a nifty arsenal of minor abilities and lots of 1st level spells.
|
All STR and DEX based skills suffer Armor Check penalties. This is RAW; I see no reason to invent new systems or adjudicate things in any other way.There's not a lot that doesn't involve moving. Knowledge skill checks, sense motive, spellcraft (to id spells as they are cast) and linguistics skills (to understand someone) is about all I can think of. It's easier to just say all skills and adjudicate the ones when they don't apply.
But yeah, using an item usually involves movement of some type. Hard to use a wand if it's in your belt pouch. And hard to touch it to someone without moving it.
ACP (armor check penalty) applies to all physically based skills, those relying on STR or DEX (note that there are no skills based on CON). UMD is based on a mental stat (CHA) and is not effected in any way shape or form by armor.You two might want to read the rules before you start haranguing me about 'making up' new rules. ANY skill that involves moving get's the non-proficiency penalties. Craft (INT based)? Yep, you move when you craft. Bluff? If you're bluff includes feinting (which requires movement) then yes, you get the penalties. Appraisal? You manipulating the item to examine it? Or you walking around it and peering at it? Then yes, you are moving, and the penalty applies. Perform check? Unless it's perform Oratory, then yes, you're moving and yes you get the penalties (despite it being a cha skill). Again, read the rules before slamming someone for making up things.
A character who is wearing armor with which he is not proficient applies its armor check penalty to attack rolls and to all skill checks that involve moving.
I don't know where you're getting those quotes from, but this quote is from the fifth printing of the CRB:
Nonproficient with Armor Worn: A character who wears armor and/or uses a shield with which he is not proficient takes the armor’s (and/or shield’s) armor check penalty on attack rolls as well as on all Dexterity- and Strength-based ability and skill checks. The penalty for nonproficiency with armor stacks with the penalty for shields.
I don't see anything there that would give a penalty to Craft, UMD, or anything else that isn't Dex or Str-based.
|
By RAW, ACP Penalties apply only to str and dex based skills. Armor proficiency, or lack of, has not affect on this.
The only penalty for lack of proficiency is the ACP applying to attack rolls.
Personal suggestion: mithral breastplace and a mithral buckler. No chance of spell failure while retaining full eidolon progression.
He is getting it from this entry in the feat list.
Armor Proficiency, Light (Combat)You are skilled at wearing light armor.
Benefit: When you wear a type of armor with which you are proficient, the armor check penalty for that armor applies only to Dexterity- and Strength-based skill checks.
Normal: A character who is wearing armor with which he is not proficient applies its armor check penalty to attack rolls and to all skill checks that involve moving.
Special: All characters except monks, sorcerers, and wizards automatically have Light Armor Proficiency as a bonus feat. They need not select it.
Which is inconsistent with the entry in the equipment chapter about non-proficiency with armor.
Though I consider the idea that wearing armor would inhibit your ability to determine the value of a statue because you had to walk around it to view it from all sides... very silly.
Likewise UMD to read a scroll being affected by ACP would fall into the same category in my mind.
Logically I could see it being applied against a crafting skill. Though I'd consider that a moot point since if you are busy crafting something you probably aren't in a location where you need to be wearing armor cause you might be attacked at any moment.
The question is did the equipment chapter leave out that detail to save words and the feat description needs to be expanded upon as to which non-str/dex skills require movement? Or is the feat description in error and it needs to be errata'd to remove that portion and only list that non-proficiency gives an attack roll penalty.
Given that clarifying a list of specific mental based skills that require movement to perform could never really be complete as one could easily contrive all kinds of different scenarios where movement wouldn't be required in some cases and would in others (and would therefore always just fall to GM adjudication anyway) I expect an errata would remove that text from the feat description rather than expand upon it.
Ok,
Will give on this, there is inconsistency in the book. I generally go by the feat section, so didn't notice the inconsistency.
On the other hand, I don't consider it silly to say that it's harder to move around a statue, get hands on with it, try to look in crevaces, etc while wearing a suit of full plate (even if you remove the helmet which affects vision, you're still in 50 lbs of metal and you don't know how to move in it, so it's distracting). Try to walk around after strapping 50 1 lb weights to your body, it get's hard to do anything unless you're absolutely still.
As to UMD, try to pull out a delicate paper scroll, unroll it, and read it properly while using gauntlets (which you aren't trained in), and read it properly (while wearing a helmet that limits your line of sight), and while wearing 50lbs of armor that is hot and cumbersome. I'd say that's a good distraction. Heck, just holding your arms up and unrolling it without ripping it is a good trick.
Even more so for a wand or staff, where you have to hold it in your hand, invoke it, point it in the right direction, touch it in the correct spot to 'short circuit' the wand and fool it into thinking you know what you're doing, all that jazz. Not easy at all I'd think.
@Gilfalas- The reason I want to be a summoner as mentioned before is that my wife wants to have monsters as pets. And he easiest way for the group to have monsters as pets is the brood master.
Wife wants a dullahan? Bipedal eidolon. Wants a batgirl? Same thing. She wants a flaming tiger with a snake tail? Slap around some evolutions and there we go.
Light armor doesn't come with gauntlets - probably not a helmet either (though rules don't say on that iirc).
All the below comments really just show why this would come down to GM adjudication to resolve various states of whether ACP should apply or not.
While it would be harder to walk around a statue while wearing a heavy pack, that encumbrance doesn't hamper your vision - keep you from telling what kind of stone it is made of, keep you from seeing if it is copper/silver/gold plated. Doesn't prevent you from seeing if it has gems for eyes. Did I have to move to view it from all sides? Yes. But my evaluation of its worth is a mental exercise, not an issue of physical strength agility. It could be argued you need to feel the stone with your bare hand to better evaluate it - but it would be very odd to say that taking the feat suddenly lets you feel things through your gloves/gauntlets. In reality regardless of the feat or not you most likely remove the gauntlet if feeling the texture will make a difference.
If I'm holding a gem in my hand, I need to use my fingers to turn it over, or hold it up to the light - which is movement. But I do that only so I can see it better and mentally evaluate it.
If I'm standing in front of a painting to appraise it, then of course I don't have to move it all - even though I might still have a helmet on limiting my vision - yet because I don't move I don't get an ACP in this case?
Opening a scroll would be harder with gloves on, but opening it is not using it. Once it is open the UMD part kicks when you read it. But under the scenario of ACP being applied to UMD it also creates this very strange scenario where a wizard can read a wizard spell from a scroll without using UMD and thus with no penalty, but if said wizard wants to read a cleric scroll and thus has to use UMD now suddenly the armor interferes with his ability to do so. Same could said for a wand of magic missile (no UMD required for the wizard) vs a wand of Cure Light Wounds where the wizard needs a UMD to activate it.
Or a craft skill (blacksmith) would definitely involve movement. What if I'm just doing Aid Another though to aid the real blacksmith? My involvement might be simply holding the tongs with a piece of iron in them and placed atop the anvil. Now I'm not doing any movement to aid another who is, so I can aid a blacksmith with no penalty while dressed in full plate, but I can't be the blacksmith while dressed in full plate without taking a penalty.
Last of all the word movement as used in the feat needs to be defined. Is this the generic definition for movement that would include such things as breathing or blinking your eyes or tapping your foot? Or is this the game specific term and definition for movement by which they mean physically moving from one grid square to another on a grid map? Its unclear which is meant, though I lean towards it meaning game term definition of movement - but that leaves the whole thing poorly worded since ONLY Str/Dex based skills would ever include movement of that kind, and so they should have just stated it that way to begin with (like the do in the benefit part of the feat) - and some skills (Disable Device) while Dex based may not include such movement at all (such as standing in front of a door and picking the lock).
Can a mod please close this thread or something? I didn't want my question to turn into a glob of bickering over fine print.