I also think that evolutions are badly priced.
Some are. Some are just too multiplicative.
If summoners get nerfed in power they could use some quality of life improvements. Eidolons should be able to wear armor. Sharing magic items slots is awful. A weaker eidolon could be standard action summoned, instead of 1 minute summoning.
1 per 3 would probably be enough. The rend one doesn't seem necessary. You can only get one rend per round anyway.
Power attack shouldn't be disallowed as it's vital to game math.
I do agree that some repricing would be in order and that sounds about right. I'm excited to see how the Summoner gets changed as Paizo can only seem to be original with casting classes lol
Eidolons need less exceptions, not more. So I agree power attack should stay, and be balanced around if necessary after other assorted changes.
-3 for +6
If your going to count each instance of bonus damage, then you need to include each instance of attack penalty.
... That Eidolon was definitely optimized.
Aside from that Big Cat animal companions get Grab, Pounce, and Rake just like the Eidolan... and power attack.
What you're having a problem with is not Power Attack, which is necessary for the basic damage math of the game, but with Eidolons having too many Primary Natural Attacks for there level and opportunity cost.
Im not commenting on the math, just the fact that your adding the bonuses together to make the number associated with power attack more alarming and ignoring the fact that each bonus has an associated penalty.
Have you ever considered running for office? Those guys do this sort of thing all the time.
I'm not going to do that because your ignoring the point of my previous post. If your going to post numbers, then do it in a way that does not obfuscate the truth. To do what you are doing is disingenuous.
Welcome to melee optimization. It begins and ends with Power Attack.
Aside from that, the Eidolon you described is optimized for damage. Literally the only thing you could do to optimize it MORE for damage is make it quadruped and give it pounce.
... That Eidolon was definitely optimized.
Aside from that Big Cat animal companions get Grab, Pounce, and Rake just like the Eidolan... and power attack.
What you're having a problem with is not Power Attack, which is necessary for the basic damage math of the game, but with Eidolons having too many Primary Natural Attacks for there level and opportunity cost.
Didn't I just say that was the problem and not power attack?
You're barking up the wrong tree. Eidolons are strong for the same reason you don't fight a dragon in melee. Natural attacks be whack yo.
The eidolon loads up on primary natural attacks, but their to-hit doesn't fall off like animal companions. This leads to a class feature with better full attacks than a fighter.
I would like to see a hunter like summoner. Where both the eidolon and the summoner are expected to invest their actions into damage for them stay on pace with DPR.
You could take away and ban Eidolon multi-attack feat. Then separate out max number of attacks into max number of primary and max number of secondary. 2 primary attacks and 1 secondary attack at first level sounds like a good starting point. The number of secondary could go up faster than primary, so that at max level, most of the eidolon attacks are secondary. This is good for nerfing multiple attack eidolon's while allowing natural form eidolons to not be so affected.
You could add rules allowing you to count primary attacks as secondary to reach your max secondary attacks if you want, but that may cause too many complications.
I could see where limiting the number of primary attacks in the early levels would make sense. If they have too many attacks that would normally be primary, the later attacks can still be used as secondary. What about at 9th level where the Eidolon is given Multi-Attack, would you open it up so all attacks can be primary at that point?
You still need to rule that weapon attacks count against the maximum number of attacks.
The Large and Huge enhancements still give too much for the cost.
I could see where limiting the number of primary attacks in the early levels would make sense. If they have too many attacks that would normally be primary, the later attacks can still be used as secondary. What about at 9th level where the Eidolon is given Multi-Attack, would you open it up so all attacks can be primary at that point?
You still need to rule that weapon attacks count against the maximum number of attacks.
Well, banning multi-attack from eidolons would solve all of those problems. A simple line of "Eidolons cannot benefit from the multiattack feat" would do the job.
This also takes care of weapon using eidolons, since their natural attacks would all be at -5, which doesn't sound too over powered.
An eidolon should be midway in power level between an animal companion and a fighter/ranger. It represents more of a summoner's power than an AC does for a druid, but it should still be less powerful than another full character class.
So a good first step would be to try and determine just how powerful an optimized AC would be at various levels and then scale the eidolon from there.
That sounds like a thing to do, but then you also have to make sure the summoner is about as powerful as a druid excluding companions.
And that doesn't really address how strong and weak the eidolon can be. We have been talking about ultra-optimized eidolons for the most part, but not everyone builds one of those. Do we want the non-optimized to be nerfed along with the optimizers? By comparison the animal companion is good right out of the box. You don't actually have to do much in the way of optimization to it.
Well, banning multi-attack from eidolons would solve all of those problems. A simple line of "Eidolons cannot benefit from the multiattack feat" would do the job.
This also takes care of weapon using eidolons, since their natural attacks would all be at -5, which doesn't sound too over powered.
You realize that one of the higher-level abilities an Eidolon gets is the Multi-Attack feat at 9th level, right? What do you plan to replace that with?
You realize that one of the higher-level abilities an Eidolon gets is the Multi-Attack feat at 9th level, right? What do you plan to replace that with?
If the argument is that the Eidolon is a little too powerful, then you give nothing back.
It's a two part nerf:
1) Remove possibility of multiattack feat.
2) Split maximum attacks into max primary and max secondary attacks. As you level you will get many more secondary than primary extra attacks.
If you want to have a lot of attacks, you still can, but many of your extra attacks just won't be very accurate. With this fairly simple change, "normal" builds wouldn't be very affected, but most hyper-optimized builds would be nerfed. It's a lot simpler than having scaling costs for evolutions that stack too well.
Addendum to nerf idea:
You can buy a primary attack evolution as a secondary attack version. This just allows you to build a new rules version of any old rules creature.
2nd Addendum:
You can fill max primary attacks with secondary attacks. These are still treated as secondary attacks for all other purposes.
If you just have to give Eidolons something at 9th level, give them light armor proficiency and remove the silly armor limitation.
I disagree with many people saying that summoners spell list isnt a problem. It is. Not because summoners are OP with it, but because they break the game at many points. Having lvl 4 spells at lvl 3 is a big deal in a gane where magic items are built based in lvl. Potions can be only lvl 3 for example. Summoners existance implies potions of dimensional door for everybody
Clearly it was intended that some entities must be illiterate in the CRB since that line would be superfluous otherwise.And those entities are called out as such. True Primitive Barbarians and the like.
Now that we have resolved our differences, can we let the thread try to get back to the unchained summoner?
Wait so does that mean True Primitive Barbarians is banned by PSF? Aren't they Society and illiterate?