|
An interesting discussion about summoners of more specific kinds of outsiders, perhaps with the ability to summon outsiders beyond their own alignments came up in the Pathfinder Unchained thread.
This thread is to continue that discussion, and perhaps offer some requests to Paizo about some archetypes for such options, or even suggestions for GMs who want to homebrew their own.
Here's a quick summary of that particular thread below:
However, that does open up room for an archetype that allows an eidolon with a different alignment, so that you can play up a non-evil character than signed an infernal pact for a devil. Or a neutral or evil character with a 'guardian angel' trying to redeem him. Or whatever.That's a pretty cool idea. Makes me wonder what kind of class abilities such an archetype would have in place of its regular features.Not sure it would have to give anything up. Just picking an outsider subtype and a corresponding alignment isn't a power boost in and of itself.
Maybe link it to the 'eidolon models' somehow so that if you've decided you want a LE devil for an eidolon, you have to buy evolutions listed for devils. Maybe reduced evolution points in exchange for certain free evolutions at various levels (especially if it's a racial power not normally available via normal evolutions, like maybe Genie eidolons could get wish 1/week at 17th level or something.)But that's mostly to prevent characters that pick Angel and then make it a multi-tentacled horror with poison attacks. It could be left on the honor system.
This was a summoner archetype I created a while back that did this specifically for genies. I could imagine something similar could be done for Devils (with free curses) and Angels (free healings/miracles).
But I suspect the summoner talk might be a slight threadjack as there's more to the product then the one class.
|
|
So flavor-wise I like demonic cultists, diabolists, angelic aspirants and lucky-person who found a magic lamp as flavor for Summoners. I also like the idea of an outsider with a specific agenda (the way deities have specific agendas).
I also like the idea of co-opting outsiders. Someone so vile they have bound an angel to do evil. Or someone trying to redeem a demonic soul (perhaps because it's the soul of someone they knew or are related too).
At its core I think there should be rules for taking an eidolon or outsider and "pushing" them to do stuff they don't like either via Diplomacy or Intimidate the way a Druid can "push" an animal with Handle Animal.
|
For the Akashic Mysteries project I'm working on for Dreamscarred Press, I did a Summoner archetype that gains access to a system specific outsider whose customization is more limited, but also very thematic and it's been pretty popular in the playtest groups. I think the idea of the blank slate eidolon is cool in theory, but devilishly hard to balance, so tighter themes could definitely help make it more acceptable.
I'm imagining this as a series of tightly-linked archetypes. Sort of like the animal totem druids. Technically they're different archetypes, but they follow similar patterns.
You pick an outsider race, you get an eidolon with that race's alignment and subtype. If you pick something like a genie, it's kind of like the draconic bloodline - you pick a type of genie, that determines the element and alignment, but choices are otherwise mirrored. (What to do for Janni?)
You get a progression for the racial abilities, unlocked on a table as you level up. Since these abilities would all have different costs, each outsider race has it's own evolution point progression compared to the base summoner.
That progression doesn't have to be equal to the base progression minus the point cost of the racial abilities, since many of the racial abilities aren't hyper synergistic the way some of the best eidolon builds are. Also, some of the racial abilities would be things not available to a typical eidolon.
There still need to be some evolution points left over for customization, so a summoner who's trying to make a bearded devil bodyguard can have a different eidolon to one with a sneaky imp or even a generic goat-horn-and-cloven-hooves tempter.
One thing that could be traded off, here, could be the generic summon monster power, or at least restrictions put on it. For instance, if you've made a pact with devils for power, maybe you can only get fiendish critters, even if you're LN or LG yourself. Or maybe your eidolon is it, unless you spend a spell known on a summon monster spell.
Ross --
That Genie Bound Noble looks a lot like an idea I was trying to develop but was stuck on some details of (and I know your idea is original because I never posted my idea). My idea involved the summoner being a non-caster -- it would be the eidolon who casts summoner spells. But it looks as though you solved the problem of an eidolon recovering from ability score damage that the summoner could not heal. I think I also wanted to change the stats that automatically increased with level from strength and dexterity to intelligence and charisma.
Anyway -- do the item slot sharing rules apply to this archetype? If so, how do you handle the case where summoner and eidolon both wear magic armor.
At its core I think there should be rules for taking an eidolon or outsider and "pushing" them to do stuff they don't like either via Diplomacy or Intimidate the way a Druid can "push" an animal with Handle Animal.
A Good (or at least well-intentioned) character with a bloodthirsty power source is a well known trope. Heck, Bladebound Magi are made of it. Likewise, the evil binding fiends.
But the evil binding angels to their will have never been a strong trope, and I'm not sure I like writing it into the game. Good and Evil are not perfect mirrors of one another, even if planar binding otherwise treats them as identical.
I suppose an ego-like or "push"-like (or even planar-binding-like) mechanic could be included, but for something like that I wonder if it might be simpler just to trust people to role-play appropriately.
|
|
Ross --
That Genie Bound Noble looks a lot like an idea I was trying to develop but was stuck on some details of (and I know your idea is original because I never posted my idea). My idea involved the summoner being a non-caster -- it would be the eidolon who casts summoner spells. But it looks as though you solved the problem of an eidolon recovering from ability score damage that the summoner could not heal. I think I also wanted to change the stats that automatically increased with level from strength and dexterity to intelligence and charisma.
Anyway -- do the item slot sharing rules apply to this archetype? If so, how do you handle the case where summoner and eidolon both wear magic armor.
Hi David,
I'm actually the creator of the Genie Bound Noble (although I can see how the nested quotes above make that unclear).
The slot sharing rules still apply to this archetype, but since Eidolons get a racial bonus to armor it's rare that you'd need to equip them with armor.
Regards,
Dudemeister
|
|
At its core I think there should be rules for taking an eidolon or outsider and "pushing" them to do stuff they don't like either via Diplomacy or Intimidate the way a Druid can "push" an animal with Handle Animal.A Good (or at least well-intentioned) character with a bloodthirsty power source is a well known trope. Heck, Bladebound Magi are made of it. Likewise, the evil binding fiends.
But the evil binding angels to their will have never been a strong trope, and I'm not sure I like writing it into the game. Good and Evil are not perfect mirrors of one another, even if planar binding otherwise treats them as identical.
I suppose an ego-like or "push"-like (or even planar-binding-like) mechanic could be included, but for something like that I wonder if it might be simpler just to trust people to role-play appropriately.
Yeah, but I like having rules in place that a GM and players can loosen if they feel it's too restrictive, rather than a GM trying to house-rule or enforce something that isn't written. Especially (and this is the pie-in-the-sky talking) if these archetypes were opened to PFS play.
My basic rules would be something like:
Getting an outsider to act outside the bounds of its alignment can be difficult whether it's asking an Angel to attack without provocation or asking a devil to act outside the bounds of its contract. A summoner may Push their Eidolon to act outside the bounds of their alignment as a Standard Action using either Diplomacy or Intimidate.
The base DC is 15 and increases by 5 for each step beyond the eidolon or outsider's alignment:
For example, Tash the Diabolist (Diplomacy +7, Intimidate +10) wants her Imp Quabbilaq to rescue some orphans from a burning building.
The Imp is Lawful Evil and the GM determines rescuing the orphans is a Neutral Good or Lawful Good act, the GM favors this act and says it's Lawful Good, two steps outside the Imps alignment so the DC to push the Imp to do this is 25. She decides to threaten the Imp with torment if he doesn't follow her instructions to the letter, she needs to roll a 15 to succeed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't like that mechanic. Especially if your concern is people deliberately choosing a mismatched creature type in PFS because they get a perverse joy out of having a captive audience and being able to hide behind RAW. As you've written it there, you've given that deliberately disruptive player an incentive in the shape of a +5 bonus on a roll to bring the game to a halt arguing over if a specific act is LN, LG, or NG. Alignment has never been good with such narrow hypotheticals as specific acts. It does much better with intentions and patterns of behavior.
Maybe something better would be an ego-like mechanic? Wherein, due to the nature of the bond between summoner and eidolon, the eidolon is required to obey, but can throw a tantrum and vanish to it's home plane if you're asking something outrageous, by making an ego-style opposed check? Like a black blade refusing to share its powers for 24 hours.
I guess what I'm saying is that people who want to be disruptive are going to be. I'd rather expect them to behave and give the GM power to just say 'No. You did not just compel an Angel to murder the mayor.' instead of trying to limit them with a mechanic that instead empowers them to say 'See? With my Diplomacy bonus of +x, I rolled a 72! The angel has to do what I say, no matter how depraved!'.
In this way, it's kind of like a cohort. Normally, the player gets to run their PC's cohort. But the GM can step in if they're being unreasonable, since ultimately the cohort is an NPC, not an extension of the player's will.
Maybe have a 1-step rule for the archetypes? A LG character isn't going to get along well with an infernal or abyssal companion, for instance, and an angel is going to stop answering the calls of an unrepentant CE character before very long, especially if he keeps getting forced into various vile acts.
That would cut down on most cases that would get you into 'opposing alignment' shenanigans.
|
|
You might be right. I like the idea of the outsider disappearing to its home plane if you compel it to do something it doesn't like. Perhaps a static DC of 20 plus Eidolon HD?. Which means at low levels it's unlikely you'll be able to convince the outsider to act beyond its nature but at higher levels it becomes somewhat easier.
Maybe tweak the Black Blade ego chart?
Also, it's easier to make Evil outsiders 'act' Good than vice versa.
This could be reflected by having different ego charts for the different archetypes.
|
I guess what I'm saying is that people who want to be disruptive are going to be. I'd rather expect them to behave and give the GM power to just say 'No. You did not just compel an Angel to murder the mayor.' instead of trying to limit them with a mechanic that instead empowers them to say 'See? With my Diplomacy bonus of +x, I rolled a 72! The angel has to do what I say, no matter how depraved!'.
In this way, it's kind of like a cohort. Normally, the player gets to run their PC's cohort. But the GM can step in if they're being unreasonable, since ultimately the cohort is an NPC, not an extension of the player's will.
This makes sense. It may be frustrating on the one hand for the 'rules' regarding ordering an eidolon to do something radically against its alignment to be 'the GM will adjudicate this' rather than 'you make a roll of Diplomacy at DC 40', but, ultimately, this seems better handled by the GM and good judgment, than by some sort of mechanic that can be min-maxed or 'broken' to the detriment of the game's feel or tone.
I think most people who would want to play a character with a mismatched eidolon have a dynamic in mind that they'd be happy to play out. A ne'er do-well stuck with a guardian angel. A well-intentioned character who made a deal with a devil. A Mendev native cursed with an abyssal sidekick. A Sarkorian God-Caller that doesn't always agree with the spirit originally cultivated by his grandfather's grandfather. A Jedi and a foul-mouthed assassin droid.
I'd rather make rules that let them play they way they want, because trolls are gonna troll. If they're not making CN (CE isn't allowed in PFS) characters who compel Angels to do unspeakable things this way, they'll do with with a regular wizard and a scroll of planar binding. Or write 'NG' on their character sheet to get an angelic Improved Familiar that they can likewise torture.
RE: Genie and Noble-bound.
That is in a way the direction I was somewhat contemplating for my aborted Sha'ir rewrite.
TL;DR Built like normal summoner with more spells based on element choice, eidolon has access to only a quarter of the evolution points for itself, but the rest of the total it would normally have count as 'spell points' for what spells per day can be retrieved for the gen's 'master'. Using less spells per day makes for a happier gen. Retrieval is quicker but stored as miscellaneous 'bling' on the sha'ir, that disintegrates on spell cast.
I actually didn't really think of how to use the same conceit in the direction of demon-binders, angel-callers, or the like.