| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wish they would just implement this concept as a class. But with the stated fear of class bloat, sadly I don't see it happening.The only campaign that I would allow a synth summoner is in a steampunk world where I (as the GM) build the Eidolon-Armor.I've always liked this interpretation, with the Eidolon as a Construct rather than an Outsider. So you either have a robot buddy, or an Iron Man suit.
Homebrewed, but here you go:
|
@Kimera757
this is y i have many restrictions on the games i host all of which are writen down and give to each player in front of every other player. Mostly those restrictions are only core races, x class not aloud because it does not fit the game, x spells dont exists because they dont fit the game (primarily telepotation spells because of simple laws of physics that i implement in the games along with conversion of energy), no stat below 10 unless modified by racial, and more that i dont feel like getting into.
They're simply too strong. I've seen an optimized synthesist at work from level 6 to 12 and it was utterly ridiculous. Without good items (we were below the average wealth by level from lvl9 to 12) he was untouchable by plenty of monsters, had great saves, did loads of damage and simply felt like a fighter+caster rolled into one with extra benefits.
Being able to completely reshuffle points when you level also means you have a significant edge over a lot of classes that got to plan everything out from lvl1 and on.
Besides the untouchable part (and everyone can roll Nat 20s, btw), a standard Summoner is just as good at all of those things, except he's doing twice as much. If a Synthesist is too strong, what about real Full Casters?
Synthesists may not have huge, glaring weaknesses, but they absolutely aren't the kind of unstoppable behemoths most people who dislike them seem to claim.
synthesist's have on glaring weakness, it's easy to banish the Edilon. At low level Color Spray and Sleep work well. Charm person is another way. The slumber hex for higher levels. Lots of area of affect damage and arrows do quite well. Weapons that target outsiders helps out a lot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No syntesist aren't unstoppeable - but if you play a paizo AP there's liek 1/10 encounters that might hurt the synetesist. The rest is a matter of waiting for the syntesist player to add up all his damage dices and see how many enemies within his reach fell that round...
A gm COULD change monsters, to make them dangerous to the syntesist. BUT:
1) if he gives them a to hit big enough to hit the syntesist other players are almost auto hit.
2) takes more work for the GM and there's a big change you just m1ake something to dangerous for other players.
3) why not just admit class not well designed - ban it and move on..
Doing damage to things is the absolute least effective way of dealing with most problems, especially when you could be warping reality to your liking. .
This is another Pathfinder Urban Legend. It’s true that battlefield control is better than simply blasting away from round one. But in the end, you pretty much have to kill the bad things by reducing their HP below 0.
A smart arcanist might battlefield control and or buff the first two rounds, but then settling in for some smack down is a fine choice.
Hate for synthesist is mostly due to the long drawn out arguments and rules debates that occur constantly, not to mention that the DM has to carefully check the math every level.
It’s broken. Not “broken as in overpowered” but “broken as in poorly written”. And, it’s pretty darn powerful too.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree that it's poorly written, and that's why I believe Aviannfoo's changes, which I linked earlier, make for a better, more reasonable Synthesist. I just don't believe the Synthesist is nearly as strong as people claim, especially when people play Wizards all the time without getting so much as glanced at funny.
That's my problem with all the b$!%$ing about the Synthesist. The Wizard class exists.
And it turns out that most wizards aren't played in a manner that is even close to their theoretical maximum as espoused by Schroedinger's Wizard so they aren't actually issues at tables. That's why you only very rarely see "wizards too powerful?" threads but you can find a dozen such threads per day about the eidolon.
Hardly anyone would ask if a DM banned the geisha archetype.
I'll go ahead and ask.
Why would you ban the Geisha archetype?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Tea doesn't exist in my world.
Tea doesn't exist in my world.
It's unacceptable that Paizo hasn't adjusted the rules to account for such a world.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And it turns out that most wizards aren't played in a manner that is even close to their theoretical maximum as espoused by Schroedinger's Wizard so they aren't actually issues at tables. That's why you only very rarely see "wizards too powerful?" threads but you can find a dozen such threads per day about the eidolon.
And my experience with Synthesists is much the same. But I get shouted at when I state as such.
90% of problems with Eidolons/Synthesists is people who don't read the damn rules, and the other 10% are people abusing things such as age categories and other loopholes.
I'm guessing vonklinen has a pretty good idea of why they're so often banned now (including in PFS) at this point.
Tea doesn't exist in my world.
But...then how do all the British people live? D=
And it turns out that most wizards aren't played in a manner that is even close to their theoretical maximum as espoused by Schroedinger's Wizard so they aren't actually issues at tables. That's why you only very rarely see "wizards too powerful?" threads but you can find a dozen such threads per day about the eidolon.
I think that a big part of the issue is the matter of optimization ceilings and floors. The synthesist might not max out have the highest level of theoretical optimization out of any class, but (aside from the rules issues) it's very easy to make a reasonably optimized Synthesist, and hard to make an unoptimized one unless you're actively trying to.
Really, that's one thing I've noticed with all the Paizo-created classes. They tend to be pretty hard to mess up if the person creating the character has a basic understanding of how the rules work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why do DMs frequently ban Synthesist Summoners in their campaigns?
Because DMs treat them as melee and melee can't have nice things.
But seriously, I think that is the reason. Because are a mixture of melee/caster, DMs get scared.
You can't get pounce and cast unless you take extra arms and end up a centuar (since only Quads can get pounce but quads don't have hands naturally).
I wish they would just implement this concept as a class. But with the stated fear of class bloat, sadly I don't see it happening.The only campaign that I would allow a synth summoner is in a steampunk world where I (as the GM) build the Eidolon-Armor.I've always liked this interpretation, with the Eidolon as a Construct rather than an Outsider. So you either have a robot buddy, or an Iron Man suit.
Ask and you recive: http://mcarchetype.wikispaces.com/Clockwork+Mage
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
90% of problems with Eidolons/Synthesists is people who don't read the damn rules,
The archetype is about twice as long as others, of an already confusing and super NUMBer crunching class.
There are ten FAQs with twice that many explanation paragraphs. More, by far, than any other class/archetype.
The Rules Questions for that Archetype on this board alone will fill a good sized rule book, and they make clear that the existing FAQ are pitifully inadequate.
So “90% of problems with Eidolons/Synthesists is people who don't read the damn rules”? Give me a break.
|
|
90% of problems with Eidolons/Synthesists is people who don't read the damn rules,The archetype is about twice as long as others, of an already confusing and super NUMBer crunching class.
There are ten FAQs with twice that many explanation paragraphs. More, by far, than any other class/archetype.
The Rules Questions for that Archetype on this board alone will fill a good sized rule book, and they make clear that the existing FAQ are pitifully inadequate.
So “90% of problems with Eidolons/Synthesists is people who don't read the damn rules”? Give me a break.
Misremembering, improperly reading, and generally not being aware of what the rules say is covered by "not reading the damn rules."
I had to read the rules four or five times before I fully understood them. Should I have to read a class' entry that many times to understand it? No. But that's how the cookie crumbles, and it's not like it takes more than an hour or so to acquaint oneself with the Synthesist's complete ruleset.
The class is pretty strong, as far as martials/partial-spellcasters go, but it's hardly unkillable or omnipurpose.
What a horrible place to live!
I absolutely agree!
Tea doesn't exist in my world.But...then how do all the British people live? D=
Why are they banned? Like others have said, I tend to believe its mostly
1. A knee-jerk reaction to these boards. After all there are certain KNOWN truths in PF if you listen to posters here. Monks suck, Paladins fall from grace for stepping on an ant, and Syth Summoners ar OMFG overpowered. Solid proof for all of these is still promised to come shortly.
2. Wonky wording tends to cause people to build them/ play them incorrectly. Eidolons are more often built wrong then right. Its very easy to make a mistake. Add in Syth and you have a whole list of ways you can build your character to be more powerful then intended.
3. PFS banned it.
My personel opinion... A Synth Summoner gains very little compared to a NORMAL summoner.
1. Your Eidolon shell isnt any more powerful then a normal summoner's pet. At All. Zero benefit.
2. The only advantage is the added defense you gain from your shell. This is significant but not game breaking. Your Temporary HP are hard to heal. You can get rid of the Shell and this usually makes the Summoner dead in the water. Most Syth's focus so much on the shell they are near useless outside it. Thats a weakness.
3. You LOSE action economy. This is huge. It is what makes a Syth a weaker option vs a normal summoner or a master summoner. While the Syth can only Attack or Cast... the normal Summoner is Attacking (via pet), and Casting. Its two powerful characters vs one. And I completly disagree with the posters who say the Summoner is the "weak" link. They are casters, with Medium BAB, and Can wear Armor.
Master Summoner > Normal Summoner > Synth Summoner.
Ban what you want. But allowing a normal Summoner while banning the Synth is really odd.
It's not a class for beginners any more than a Wizard, Druid or Gunslinger is.. (and these classes are easily on par as powerful).I don't care about the gunslinger, but I'm currently playing a druid and am very good at playing wizards too. (I would say on both sides of the screen, but haven't DMed since 3.5.)
The summoner seems like a much more advanced class than the wizard.
How long have you been playing? You've been a DM before, and back in the days of 3.5, so I presume you've been playing a while. The druid and wizard are both very complicated classes. You're probably just used to them after years of playing, which is likely why you don't see them as complicated as they really are.
The summoner and synth archetype really aren't any more complicated than the druid or the wizard, it's just new, so it seems complicated when compared to something we already know very well.
I guarantee a brand new player would see all three as equally complex.
I've taught chemistry, and chemistry does not seem very complex to me. But I've been doing it for years. New students find it very complicated, and often have trouble understanding some of the most basic concepts. You know why? Because it is complicated. I had that same trouble when I first started. I'm just experienced, so it doesn't seem complicated to me, anymore.
The same is true of the druid, wizard, and summoner. They are all very complex classes, but the first two don't seem that way because you are experienced with them. The third is new, and like all new complex things, they take time to master. Play the class for a couple of years, and it won't seem that complicated anymore.
And I completly disagree with the posters who say the Summoner is the "weak" link. They are casters, with Medium BAB, and Can wear Armor.
I've found that when people are saying that, they're just echoing the sentiments of this guy.
it needed a weakness and it made good design sense that the weakness should be built into its connection with the summoner.
Why do DMs frequently ban Synthesist Summoners?
Because they are afraid, very, very afraid.
And I completly disagree with the posters who say the Summoner is the "weak" link. They are casters, with Medium BAB, and Can wear Armor.
I've found that when people are saying that, they're just echoing the sentiments of this guy.
it needed a weakness and it made good design sense that the weakness should be built into its connection with the summoner.
There is a difference between what he is saying and what others are implying about the Summoner. You would think the Summoner is some weakling commoner who requires his big bad Eidolon to be effective at all. That without his pet he is a waste of space... and because of that the Synth is overpowered because he protects his weak master.
James isnt saying that. He is simply saying the weakness for Eidolons is its connection to the Summoner... not that the Summoner itself is weak. And a Synth's connection to his shell is still a weakness. You knock out a Synth his shell goes away just like a normal Summoner's pet goes away.
Mmm, I think you're mistaking what people mean by weak link. It's not that the summoner is weak by himself; he's alright. But he's the chain that tethers the eidolon to this world, and if he goes out, the eidolon winks away. That's why he's the wink link. The summoner is the weak section in the system that is the summoner and eidolon, and it's often easier to knock out the summoner to get rid of the eidolon. It's just one sleep-type spell away to really hurt the summoner because even if he is awoken, he can't easily get the eidolon back without some big resources being used (2nd level spells). The synth does get an advantage here as they're less likely to be knocked out by the same stuff a regular summoner is, thanks to the higher saves at level 4, evasion at level 2, and Devotion at level 6. Shielded Meld and Devotion basically make going asleep against your will as a way to knock out the eidolon a non-issue.
Mmm, I think you're mistaking what people mean by weak link. It's not that the summoner is weak by himself; he's alright. But he's the chain that tethers the eidolon to this world, and if he goes out, the eidolon winks away. That's why he's the wink link. The summoner is the weak section in the system that is the summoner and eidolon, and it's often easier to knock out the summoner to get rid of the eidolon. It's just one sleep-type spell away to really hurt the summoner because even if he is awoken, he can't easily get the eidolon back without some big resources being used (2nd level spells). The synth does get an advantage here as they're less likely to be knocked out by the same stuff a regular summoner is, thanks to the higher saves at level 4, evasion at level 2, and Devotion at level 6. Shielded Meld and Devotion basically make going asleep against your will as a way to knock out the eidolon a non-issue.
And I see what your saying. All very true. Its an advantage. I even called it a significant advantage. More defensive. But lets not get hasty. That added defense comes at the cost of the Summoner getting seperate actions. Something that has been argued as not a big deal because the Summoner is the "weak link".
But the Summoner has Decent HP, Good saves, Can wear Armour, and has very nice casting. Its harder to knock a Summoner out of the fight then some would like to believe. A few extra points on your saves and evasion is all good and well... but losing half your actions a round just isn't worth it(from a pure power standpoint).
Action Economy is king. Its why you dont throw a Single BBEG against a whole party. Its why larger parties are harder to balance. Its why Gestalt characters are not worth 2 characters in power.
Number of Actions per round matter. Thats where the power of a Summoner is. He is effectivly two people... A strong Melee combatant, and a Medium BAB, Light Armor, 6th lvl caster with strong CC abilities. A Synth takes those two characters and combines them into one slightly more powerful Gestalt like thing... sure its better then either of its parts, but in my opinion... less then two taken on seperate.
Yep, agreed about the action economy being important. For the longest time, that's why I was calling the synthesist the "munchkin trap".
Although now I'm reminded of my bard I tried to make into a "caster bard", only to discover that with so few spells at such a staggered rate compared to when the full casters get, I really wasn't able to consistently cast a spell that was actually useful at any given time. I wonder if that maps over to the summoner too. I should look into that some more.
My personel opinion... A Synth Summoner gains very little compared to a NORMAL summoner.
1. Your Eidolon shell isnt any more powerful then a normal summoner's pet. At All. Zero benefit.
I disagree. What happens when your 10 CON Summoner get's hit with a few archers or a fireball? He goes down and so does his pet. What happens when the same thing happens to the 10 CON Synthisist? He get's mad and destroyes everything on the board.
2. The only advantage is the added defense you gain from your shell. This is significant but not game breaking. Your Temporary HP are hard to heal. You can get rid of the Shell and this usually makes the Summoner dead in the water. Most Syth's focus so much on the shell they are near useless outside it. Thats a weakness.
Since there is never a reason to be outside of it, I fail to see how it's a weakness.
3. You LOSE action economy. This is huge. It is what makes a Syth a weaker option vs a normal summoner or a master summoner. While the Syth can only Attack or Cast... the normal Summoner is Attacking (via pet), and Casting. Its two powerful characters vs one. And I completly disagree with the posters who say the Summoner is the "weak" link. They are casters, with Medium BAB, and Can wear Armor.
Right, which puts you at a level of everyone else, except you also have the survivability and fighting ability of the fighter combined with the spells of a wizard (almost). All your stats are MUCH higher than anyone else can come close to.
I'm also wondering why people think wizards are complicated. What is confusing? They get a certain number of spells per day. That seems pretty simple to me. Some spells might be confusing I suppose, but most are pretty straight forward.
Picking the right spells is usually the tricky part for me. I always find myself going "Dangit I KNEW I needed Spell X today but I memorized Spell Y instead! Argh!"
So much prefer spont casting.
I disagree. What happens when your 10 CON Summoner get's hit with a few archers or a fireball? He goes down and so does his pet. What happens when the same thing happens to the 10 CON Synthisist? He get's mad and destroyes everything on the board.
I think you misunderstand me. I was talking about the Damage potential of the Eidolon vs the Eidolon shell of a Synth. They have the same number of Evolution points. They have no significant advantage. What the Summoner's CON has to do with that I cant deduce. That ties into the defence of the shell... which is nice. But your shell isn't dealing any more damage then a Normal Eidolon Pet is. None. They have the same number of Evolution points.
Since there is never a reason to be outside of it, I fail to see how it's a weakness.
Do you have to sleep? Can you be knocked unconsious with spells? Can you be held or grappled? The fact that if a Summoner's Eidolon is grappled and pinned by the Dragon... the summoner is still casting. The Synth goes and grabs a Mountain Dew from the fridge and hopes he rolls a 20 on his next roll to get away.
Right, which puts you at a level of everyone else, except you also have the survivability and fighting ability of the fighter combined with the spells of a wizard (almost). All your stats are MUCH higher than anyone else can come close to.
I'm also wondering why people think wizards are complicated. What is confusing? They get a certain number of spells per day. That seems pretty simple to me. Some spells might be confusing I suppose, but most are pretty straight forward.
THATS MY POINT. You do have the Fighting ability of a Fighter... and the Spells of a Wizard... but a Synth can [ONLY DO ONE OF THOSE A ROUND.
A normal Summoner... DOES BOTH EACH ROUND.
Im not here to discuss if a Summoner is overpowerd (Personally I think they are on the high end of the power scale for sure). What I am saying is that a Syth is LESS powerful then a Normal Summoner. If your going to ban a Synth... you should probably ban Summoner all together.
Again, altho they are hardly a weak class, the main reason given here is that the rules for them are confusing and it’s just too much work for the DM to be carefully math and rules checking that PC all the time.
The archetype is broken due to poor and confusing rules, not just due to power.
I allow synthesist summoners simply because I love the flavor of the archetype. There are tons of characters from popular fiction that you can only emulate with this archetype.
It is possible to abuse the class, but that isn't anything that can't be fixed without a few houserules. My main fixes are nerfing the Improved Natural Armor evolution and not allowing the eidolon's buffs to stack with anything from other classes (such as monk AC and Paladin saves).
I find it amusing that people have so much trouble with the class' complexity though. The one time I ran a synthesist was as Gestalt (synth 20)/ (monk 3/ ninja 17). Yes, I admit that I abused the monk AC bonus here, but the other players were making broken characters as well. Anyway, if you think the standard synth was complex then the Naruto clone monstrosity that I created for that campaign would make your heads explode. Guess what? My GM didn't have to check my character or my math. I even looked up all the FAQs on the class on my own.
Just don't let a player run a Synthesist unless you trust his ability to follow the rules. If you're afraid of the class creating extra work for you then require your player to do the work for you instead.
Banned summoners here as well, although I have a version of the master summoner I may allow.
I allow them. Haven't yet seen a reason not to.
My yardstick for brokenness is "Can it outdo a well-optimized wizard" for what it's worth.
|
|
Group make up at the time was my Syn with a Bard and a Wizard. All they did prety much at high end was Invis, buff, fly away and watch me kill. They did at times of course go on the offensive against those i could not handle like others with high DR but crap touch. The wizard focused primarily on buff and ray spells while the bard was buff and archery.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
100!
Seriously though, there are lots of reasons why GMs don't allow summoners and/or synthesist summoners into their games:
1) They are too lazy to learn the complex rules behind the class.
2) They realize that their PLAYER is too lazy to learn the complex rules behind the class.
3) They don't own the Advanced Player's Guide and don't allow things from books they don't own or otherwise have easy access to.
4) The class as a whole is not a good fit for the campaign setting.
5) The class as a whole is not a good fir for the group's gaming style.
6) The player in question is a showboater who would not use the class as a tool to increase fun, but to hog the spotlight from everyone else.
7) They fundamentally disagree with the mechanics behind the class.
8) They believe the class to be unbalanced, which can lead to showboating rather than cooperative play, or at the very least, unintentionally placed feelings of inadequacy.
9)They have heard rumors of how terrible the class is and aren't willing to give it a chance.
10) They love the class TOO much, and that makes it dangerous. A PC synthesist stomping all over the bad guys doesn't change the game's dynamic much, but a NPC synthesist stomping all over the good guys ends campaigns. So the GM just saves himself the aggravating double-standard by not letting anyone use it.
There are plenty of other reasons to be sure.