A whole thread, including an answer from them upstairs, and not one connection to the classic tale of the golem? Rune on forehead is pretty significant stuff mythologically...
|
In my games, the summoner doesn't have a mark, but hovering over the eidolon is an image of the summoner (one size category bigger than the summoned critter). Ditto for any monster summoned using a summon monster spell....
Wait, you mean all I need is a Summon Monster spell to grace the world with even MORE of my presence? Time for a Summon Dance Party, with me as my own backup dancer!
In my games, the summoner doesn't have a mark, but hovering over the eidolon is an image of the summoner (one size category bigger than the summoned critter). Ditto for any monster summoned using a summon monster spell....Wait, you mean all I need is a Summon Monster spell to grace the world with even MORE of my presence? Time for a Summon Dance Party, with me as my own backup dancer!
Does each individual monster have its own image? Can you get 1d4+1 (or whatever max number you can optimize to per spell) of you at once? You could form a band with that many.
So when you have a Final Fantasy XII moment and the eidolon follows you into a store, the shopkeeper knows who to say "Errr, Sir? Can you please take that... thing outside? It's... it's scaring away all the customers..." to.
My summoner protested that his eidolon wasn't really all that scary and would not hurt anyone without a very good reason. The shopkeeper replied, "I was talking to your eidolon."
In any case, the behavior of the summoner and eidolon in combat pretty much gives away their connection. You have a monster rampaging over the battlefield, and one person in the battle always stays near that monster and casts buffs on it. Outside of combat, they are given away by little things like finishing each other's sentences.
You really need to do more than cover your foreheads to conceal that intimate connection between summoner and eidolon.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A whole thread, including an answer from them upstairs, and not one connection to the classic tale of the golem? Rune on forehead is pretty significant stuff mythologically...
Various ideas of making a summoner named Emet are now coming to light. Much as I'm aware of sensitivities regarding the proposition, I can't help but thinking a halfling in Cheliax trying to defend the halfling quarter in one of the cities would fit thematically. I'll stow it away with my ideas of making David and Judah Ben-Hur.
To represent the Pact made between Servant and Master (Demon and Human). Sebastian and Ciel.... Fine.. I'm an anime nerd okay!
Basically, I always kinda though it did represent a pact of some sort... but mechanically, it's the bullseye that the baddies want to hit for if they wan't to get rid of the big beasty more easily. (i.e. his more squishy owner)
Does each individual monster have its own image? Can you get 1d4+1 (or whatever max number you can optimize to per spell) of you at once? You could form a band with that many.In my games, the summoner doesn't have a mark, but hovering over the eidolon is an image of the summoner (one size category bigger than the summoned critter). Ditto for any monster summoned using a summon monster spell....Wait, you mean all I need is a Summon Monster spell to grace the world with even MORE of my presence? Time for a Summon Dance Party, with me as my own backup dancer!I haven't thought of making the image move or make noise, but those are good ideas. I will definitely offer them to my summoning players. Throw in a bard and have the summoned critters sing and/or dance too, and it would put the party into adventuring party.
Obviously you summon creatures that work well with that. Lillends seems like a natural choice, since they have bardic performance (they can be backup singers, dancers, and they play the string), dancing lights, and hallucinatory terrain (to make a killer show with lights an instant stage no matter where the gig is)
just wear a ribbon or headband over the rune, or make the rune look as close to a tattoo as possible and move it to a place you prefer. nobody is going to bother to make the half elf lass lift the back of her tunic to inspect for a butterfly tattoo.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
just wear a ribbon or headband over the rune, or make the rune look as close to a tattoo as possible and move it to a place you prefer. nobody is going to bother to make the half elf lass lift the back of her tunic to inspect for a butterfly tattoo.
That might very well depend on where in Golarion you are.
I thought Auren was talking to himself for a second.
just wear a ribbon or headband over the rune, or make the rune look as close to a tattoo as possible and move it to a place you prefer. nobody is going to bother to make the half elf lass lift the back of her tunic to inspect for a butterfly tattoo.That might very well depend on where in Golarion you are.
truesies
I thought Auren was talking to himself for a second.
discomfort with my undesired biological gender aside; i was mentioning legitimate ways to reskin or conceal the rune. there is nothing wrong with a half elf female having a butterfly tattoo on her lower back. it is a perfect reskin to make the 'flavor rune' concealable.
just wear a ribbon or headband over the rune, or make the rune look as close to a tattoo as possible and move it to a place you prefer. nobody is going to bother to make the half elf lass lift the back of her tunic to inspect for a butterfly tattoo.The eidolon rune can't be moved from it's forehead spot.
the rune is flavor, not rules, the rune could just as easily be a tattoo on the lower back as it could be a mark on the forehead. either way, it is easy to cover up with clothing, so it shouldn't matter where you put it, as long as the place isn't too suggestive.
The rune is most certainly a rule as it's part of the class description. Or is the new definition of flavor, rules one feels like ignoring?the rune is flavor, not rules, the rune could just as easily be a tattoo on the lower back as it could be a mark on the forehead. either way, it is easy to cover up with clothing, so it shouldn't matter where you put it, as long as the place isn't too suggestive.just wear a ribbon or headband over the rune, or make the rune look as close to a tattoo as possible and move it to a place you prefer. nobody is going to bother to make the half elf lass lift the back of her tunic to inspect for a butterfly tattoo.The eidolon rune can't be moved from it's forehead spot.
flavor is anything purely descriptive or even purely cosmetic that has no impact on games mechanics without the assistance of DM Fiat. the Rune fits that territory, it is purely descriptive and doesn't influence mechanics whatsoever.
saying you have a rune over your forehead is no more a rule than saying a specific half-elf character has blue eyes. it is purely cosmetic and has no impact on game mechanics.
please Tell me what game mechanics are actually impacted by having the rune on their forehead, so far, the only things i can think of are NPC interactions, which is a circumstantial DM Fiat thing.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think when the class feature specifically calls out that the rune isn't hidden by spells like Alter Self and Polymorph, but that Invisibility does, it's more of a rules element than a pure cosmetic fluff point.
discomfort with my undesired biological gender aside; i was mentioning legitimate ways to reskin or conceal the rune. there is nothing wrong with a half elf female having a butterfly tattoo on her lower back. it is a perfect reskin to make the 'flavor rune' concealable.
Ah, this is the Bridal-Half of Auren's shared avatar? Wait, I'd gotten the impression you were married and the variant addresses was because the two of you shared an account. I'm confused now, but not enough so to use one of my own alternate avatars quite yet.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Knowledge (arcana) to realize the rune means eidolon or sumoner?
I think when the class feature specifically calls out that the rune isn't hidden by spells like Alter Self and Polymorph, but that Invisibility does, it's more of a rules element than a pure cosmetic fluff point.
discomfort with my undesired biological gender aside; i was mentioning legitimate ways to reskin or conceal the rune. there is nothing wrong with a half elf female having a butterfly tattoo on her lower back. it is a perfect reskin to make the 'flavor rune' concealable.Ah, this is the Bridal-Half of Auren's shared avatar? Wait, I'd gotten the impression you were married and the variant addresses was because the two of you shared an account. I'm confused now, but not enough so to use one of my own alternate avatars quite yet.
actually, you are talking to the other half at the moment. the Husband half. the bridal half is currently at a friend's house for the spring for vocational rehabilitation and currently cut off from a computer. so we used text messages.
|
Okay, now I'm confused enough to switch avatars. So have both husband and wife participated in this thread, one via their normal computer, and the other via text messages and relaying?
And to Sissyl. Knowledge Arcana or Planes both make sense. I'd make it DC 10+half the Eidolon's hit die to identify if I were to have it impact enemy tactics beyond their usual "Smack the one yelling orders to the five-mouthed, eighteen-clawed monstrosity that just crushed Boris' skull."
Okay, now I'm confused enough to switch avatars. So have both husband and wife participated in this thread, one via their normal computer, and the other via text messages and relaying?
And to Sissyl. Knowledge Arcana or Planes both make sense. I'd make it DC 10+half the Eidolon's hit die to identify if I were to have it impact enemy tactics beyond their usual "Smack the one yelling orders to the five-mouthed, eighteen-clawed monstrosity that just crushed Boris' skull."
just the husband in the thread, the wife is on a Vocational Rehabilitation program till July for the sake of improving her confidence.
flavor is anything purely descriptive or even purely cosmetic that has no impact on games mechanics without the assistance of DM Fiat. the Rune fits that territory, it is purely descriptive and doesn't influence mechanics whatsoever.The rune is most certainly a rule as it's part of the class description. Or is the new definition of flavor, rules one feels like ignoring?the rune is flavor, not rules, the rune could just as easily be a tattoo on the lower back as it could be a mark on the forehead. either way, it is easy to cover up with clothing, so it shouldn't matter where you put it, as long as the place isn't too suggestive.just wear a ribbon or headband over the rune, or make the rune look as close to a tattoo as possible and move it to a place you prefer. nobody is going to bother to make the half elf lass lift the back of her tunic to inspect for a butterfly tattoo.The eidolon rune can't be moved from it's forehead spot.
When I play a dwarf I tend to see the slow part of slow and steady as fluff, too. Just ignore it, doesn't matter.
When I play a dwarf I tend to see the slow part of slow and steady as fluff, too. Just ignore it, doesn't matter.flavor is anything purely descriptive or even purely cosmetic that has no impact on games mechanics without the assistance of DM Fiat. the Rune fits that territory, it is purely descriptive and doesn't influence mechanics whatsoever.The rune is most certainly a rule as it's part of the class description. Or is the new definition of flavor, rules one feels like ignoring?the rune is flavor, not rules, the rune could just as easily be a tattoo on the lower back as it could be a mark on the forehead. either way, it is easy to cover up with clothing, so it shouldn't matter where you put it, as long as the place isn't too suggestive.just wear a ribbon or headband over the rune, or make the rune look as close to a tattoo as possible and move it to a place you prefer. nobody is going to bother to make the half elf lass lift the back of her tunic to inspect for a butterfly tattoo.The eidolon rune can't be moved from it's forehead spot.
you can't ignore the slow part, that actually affects game mechanics, the rune doesn't have any such impact and is purely cosmetic and can thus be ignored or reskinned. there neither a modifier for having it or not modifiying it, slow and steady actually affects speed, which has a game mechanic
having a rune on your forehead is no more a rule than giving a half elf blue eyes. the slow and steady actually has rules attached to it that affect game mechanics.
Having a rune on the forehead has very much consequences and because of that it is cheating to ignore them as a player and favouritism to do it as a gm. As if the summoner wasn't overpowered enough, just let's ignore his one and only little drawback.
No more consequences than the DM feels like giving it. If it's in a society that hates summoners it's a liability, if it's in one that worships them, it's a bonus.
However there are no mechanical differences inherent to the summoner regardless of his circumstances.
So it's not a rule. I wouldn't call it entirely fluff either. More like a strongly worded suggestion. Given how easy it is to disguise (wear a hat), it's not going to change anything mechanically if it shows up as a tattoo.
How is being the glowing weak point of the huge 12 armed pouncing monstrosity not a mechanical difference? No matter the standing of summoners in general, enemies will be rather much against you and in favor of the option that turns off the thing that is eating them.
And even if it can be just covered up with a hat...you said it yourself, it is a DISGUISE. You need a disguise check to cover up the glowing ruin, or it will be fairly obvious to anyone with a perception score (either it peaks out from under the hat, or you did not get enough layers to cover up the glow)
And considering how few skill points summoners have, along with the fact that they usually need linguistics (for summoning spells, since the beasties might not speak common)...you have hard decisions to make.
You don't need linguistics to speak with your eidolon, it automatically speaks all your languages...
And at no point in the rules does it require a Disguise check to hide the rune. It says "it can be hidden through mundane means". Wear a headband. Or a hat. Or a balaclava. Or a Keffiyeh. Or a full faced mask. Hell, paint over it with thick clown make up.
No disguise check needed.
he is referring to his celestial or fiendish summons.
Having a rune on the forehead has very much consequences and because of that it is cheating to ignore them as a player and favouritism to do it as a gm. As if the summoner wasn't overpowered enough, just let's ignore his one and only little drawback.
it doesn't affect anything in the rules that a DM doesn't have to homebrew, fiat, or houserule special content for. in fact, nothing would be different if the half elf lass wore a headband over the rune on her head than if she wore a tunic over the butterfly tattoo on her lower back, it isn't being disguised, it is being covered, no roll needed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
he is referring to his celestial or fiendish summons.
Abyssal, Celestial, Infernal. That's only 3 points.
If he's that hard up for skill points, I'd say he's got other more pressing problems with his build.
Don't forget that elementals have a bunch of languages. Since summoners have them for minutes per level, grabbing the ones for earth and air elementals can be a big deal since they can scout for you.
You don't need linguistics to speak with your eidolon, it automatically speaks all your languages...
And at no point in the rules does it require a Disguise check to hide the rune. It says "it can be hidden through mundane means". Wear a headband. Or a hat. Or a balaclava. Or a Keffiyeh. Or a full faced mask. Hell, paint over it with thick clown make up.
No disguise check needed.
...what do you think characters actually do when they make a disguise check? That all sounds like things that go into it.
disguise checks are required for things far more complicated than wrapping a thick textured, opaque colored, wool headband around your forehead. something like that shouldn't require a roll unless the person is deliberately lifting your headband or removing it, but headbands are standard wear in any setting or time period.
If wearing a headband requires a Disguise check, so does wearing a glove to cover the scar on my hand or trousers to cover the mole on my gentleman's sausage.
-.^
and so would wearing socks to cover my deformed toenails
It's also an in-game thing, since eidolons can literally look like ANYTHING. That means that they can look identical to, say, a wolf or a minotaur or a vrock, or like something completely unique, such as the iconic's eidolon. Yet there still needs to be a way, in world, for characters to identify the fact that the creature is an eidelon and not a wolf or a minotaur or a vrock or some new monster. The rune is that way.
This makes it fun to guess if the minotaur like beast with a glowing rune is the eidolon....or is it the summoner?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Uh. Summoners wear armor and often wield weapons. They're usually much less castery looking than most classes.
|
If the only way to tell if someone is a wizard or sorcerer is to wait till they cast spells then the same should go for the summoner.
And there is a big difference in 'earning your power' and deliberately targeting a players character because you don't like that kind of class.
Pretty much this I've made my decision and I'm sticking by it. Which is why I haven't posted since then. I want to point out that I have no problems with suffering the negative effects of their decisions. However there is a huge difference between sending the guard after the party who casually beat up the merchant because they're "THE PC'S" and painting a huge glowing bulls eye on one particular class with associated restrictions (disguise skill tax, always needing to cover their head) that doesn't exist on others. Especially in a world where this glowing mark isn't going to say "caster" but "made a deal with a demon".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Btw celestial/fiendish templates do not give extra languages so you can't communicate with those summoned ones anyway.
This is true. The templates used to make them sentient (INT 3) and thus grant them a language. It's one of those little things I'm not terribly fond of Paizo changing.
(Incidentally, the template is functionally incorrect. It states that "celestial" creatures (as a for-instance) can be summoned with planar ally, except that line of spells explicitly states "outsider" creature type which the celestial template doesn't grant.)
Beyond the ones already mentioned, Aklo and Undercommon could also be useful.
That said, after reviewing the summon monster list, there are surprisingly few that actually need languages to communicate with. I find that rather unfortunately sad. I say that as a player - part of what makes it interesting is having that eldritch knowledge, studying from ancient tomes in all sorts of languages, blah-blah-blah, etc. - instead, the spells turn into "I summon stuff and it mindlessly attacks for me." Kind of sucks.
I'm supposed to be a slick-tongued bargainer who can persuade other creatures to serve me. Instead I just kind of cast a spell.
Pretty much this I've made my decision and I'm sticking by it. Which is why I haven't posted since then. I want to point out that I have no problems with suffering the negative effects of their decisions. However there is a huge difference between sending the guard after the party who casually beat up the merchant because they're "THE PC'S" and painting a huge glowing bulls eye on one particular class with associated restrictions (disguise skill tax, always needing to cover their head) that doesn't exist on others. Especially in a world where this glowing mark isn't going to say "caster" but "made a deal with a demon".
I want to say that I respect your decision, and that's fine. It's yours, your game, and I have no problem with that.
If I may, as both a fellow GM, and as a player, I'd like to explain my own reasoning for coming to a different conclusion: it's far more flavorful and interesting.
You've created a fascinating world, one with direct and potent consequences, deep-seated prejudices (justifiably so), and very intriguing world-lore.
For the sake for the players (which is commendable), you've made it easier on them to take a class without putting in hidden taxes... but in so-doing, you're bypassing roleplaying gold. Were I in the game world you mention, as a player, I'd love to be a summoner - one who didn't consort with demons - who still had his massive glowing mark. That would be so awesome! What a fascinating character - I know I didn't consort with demons, but really, how is anyone else going to know? Where did the legend originate from? What do I have to research to prove the difference between my mark, and those other marks? Am I somehow marked by demons? I'd have to use my charisma (which should be decent as a summoner) to bluff, diplomacy, and disguise my way into hiding who and what I was. I'd be trying to save a people who fear and hate what they don't understand. I'd basically be both a Final Fantasy hero and and a member of the X-Men at the same time! This thought made me genuinely excited about playing in your world! I'd slowly prove that I was a hero and, once I believe I'd be accepted, eventually reveal myself. I'd explain on a platform where people would listen because of my deeds that I am no demon's plaything, and I'd submit to magical scrutiny to prove it!
... however, under the paradigm that summoners who consort with creatures other than demons don't get a mark, it's foolish as a player to ask "can I have a mark?" - for one, it doesn't mesh with the rest of the setting (which will always bother me), and for two it places a liability in the party with absolutely no payoff. Without that option, being a summoner brings big things to the party (namely: being a summoner! which is really strong!), but with a bit of a liability - I'd have to be careful with my power-usage -, and it'd also generate interesting RP content. But with the above option in play, the mark is all liability, and that's a terrible thing to do to your party - bring liability with nothing extra to show for it.
And... that kind of killed my enthusiasm. It's not that I want to cause problems for my party... far from it! But rather, I liked the idea of having to hide myself, of having to be careful with my powers, of having to keep myself from being misunderstood again. If I'm just another caster with a more complicated mechanic than most... meh. Not really feeling it. I'll probably play a healing witch or a conjuring sorcerer or something.
And, I want to stress again, this is me, and my reaction at the idea of playing in your world. It's not that you're doing the "wrong" thing, but I wanted you to be able to see why I really liked the idea of keeping the summoners with that element. It creates really interesting consequences and ideas. If the rest of your table wouldn't like it, of course, you've got to make the best decision for your table. It just sounded so cool to me the other way. This way, as a player, it's just a piece of game-lore that I'm not really going to interact with in any personal way* - really nifty, I guess, but relatively uninteresting to me.
* Doesn't mean I won't interact with others that have a mark - it just means I won't have a direct or personal relationship with the mark.
EDIT:
And there is a big difference in 'earning your power' and deliberately targeting a players character because you don't like that kind of class.
Incidentally, I say all of the above almost exclusively as a player. As a GM I've no problem at all with someone being a summoner. Doesn't even come with drawbacks in my own games. (Point in fact, I'm running a PbP with a summoner now - I helped the player out in choosing some of the more optimal choices for the character in our game.) The only part where I say the above as a GM is the idea of creating a really cool and interesting bit of world-lore that dovetails nicely with existing rules to create interesting RP possibility... which I also say as a player. So no, it has nothing to do with me "targeting a player<'>s character because <I> don't like that kind of class" - kind of the opposite.
Again, however, that's just the way I often find interesting character ideas. Something cool about either world lore or mechanics generates interest, and I look at how that fits into whatever world at large and the game system to meld the lore and mechanics together. In this case it's been purposefully disassociated by the GM for the betterment of the players and the table, which is a really good thing to do; it just disinterests me as a character concept because of it.
If the only way to tell if someone is a wizard or sorcerer is to wait till they cast spells then the same should go for the summoner.
And there is a big difference in 'earning your power' and deliberately targeting a players character because you don't like that kind of class.
Well, you could count the 1 minute ritual to summon your eidolon as something along the lines of an ongoing 'summon murder death machine' spell.
Just because I didn't see the wizard cast it doesn't mean I won't assume 'wizard' when he walks in with 8 fiery shuriken hovering over his head. He has dangerous things, and there is a glow associated with him. How can I not think 'killing this guy might stop me from being hit with those shuriken'?