|
A) You're the one who claimed they used data.
B) SM is incredibly disruptive for several reasons. First and formost, every time someone busts out a summon, unless they both have amazing information recall or premade monster stat reference cards, the phones come out and both the player who cast it and the GM have to look up what the dang thing can do and how well it can do it (or sort through the books to take longer to find the same info). After that, it extends the round as each summoned monster takes their turn (likely with more PRD referencing), adding minutes to each round. And, keep in mind, the summoner can drop that as a standard that lasts minutes instead of rounds. Only after dealing with all that disruption can we discuss how disruptive their actual actions and abilities are.
a) It's a reasonable claim to make. Pathfinder is a business, and Society-play even moreso; business decisions are generally made based on data.
b) None of that has anything to do with the efficacy of summons themselves. Yes, they have the potential to slow down play if either party is unprepared - but (1) that is hardly unique to the Summoner class (summons have been part of the game since core after all), and (2) that is easily managed by being prepared.
I'm completely baffled at what you're suggesting there. Are you saying Summon Monster itself should be banned? It seems to me that if they thought the spell was causing a problem, they wouldn't have released an entire Player Companion supporting the playstyle.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Too bad the unsummoner did almost nothing to fix any of the problems you mentioned.If it kicks exactly as much ass as before as easily as before, then what in Hades are you folks complaining about? Continue to stomp PFS with the UnSummoner until they both get banned (or "clarified" into oblivion), then.
I think the point of most is that you ultimately end up with all of them being nothing but a combat beast with zero room for flavor. That the actual bases wont matter and they will all be the same in order t get the most out of it. No sense in choosing flavor over function when you only have room for function. Dead characters don't have flavor.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
a) It's a reasonable claim to make. Pathfinder is a business, and Society-play even more so; business decisions are generally made based on data.
Actually most business decisions are based on the loudest negative feedback not data. In fact even in the face of hard data most people will still hold the false opinion, in most cases hold it even more passionately.
|
I have to agree with RavingDork on their AP design. Most if not all Aps are written with complete novices in mind. Sp the BBEGS are designed very poorly imo. So much so that even a group that does modest optimization can easily defeat almost anything thrown at them. The Summoner or even SM spell does not help the situation. Yes I know I can change the npcs but I buy APS to save time on game prep. Not add more.
I don't mind a nerf when it's requested by those in the community who play with all the rules. PFS that has it's own rules imo should not be dictating what can or cannot be allowed in terms of rules, classes, feats etc. Maybe it's because what comes across as broken usually ends up being a overreaction by some of the fanbase. Sometimes it is broken. Usually it's not imo. A remember someone complaining that a Cleric with Mythic levels could feed a entire army. Well what do you expect when your at that level. To be casting the same boring spell effects.
Feedback is data. Feedback generally comes from experiences. The more experiences, the louder the feedback. Companies don't listen to the one angry, yelling nerd. They listen to to the many, many, many upset customers. If a couple hundred/thousand/large number of customers are saying something needs attention, there might just be fire under that smoke.
Actually most business decisions are based on the loudest negative feedback not data. In fact even in the face of hard data most people will still hold the false opinion, in most cases hold it even more passionately.
I think you overestimate what you consider data. They in fact do listen to the "one angry, yelling nerd" because all the others who play and have no issue don't have an issue to find a way to report. In most cases the loud minority forces change on the majority because the majority didn't think there was a problem.
|
|
I think the point of most is that you ultimately end up with all of them being nothing but a combat beast with zero room for flavor. That the actual bases wont matter and they will all be the same in order t get the most out of it. No sense in choosing flavor over function when you only have room for function. Dead characters don't have flavor.
Too bad the unsummoner did almost nothing to fix any of the problems you mentioned.If it kicks exactly as much ass as before as easily as before, then what in Hades are you folks complaining about? Continue to stomp PFS with the UnSummoner until they both get banned (or "clarified" into oblivion), then.
But here's the thing - what you're basically saying here is that the folks claiming Paizo nerfed the wrong aspect of the class were wrong. Because the summons weren't changed at all, so if you need a purely combat-focused eidolon in order for your summoner to "not die" because "dead characters don't have flavor," you can just have him rely on summons instead and then build whatever eidolon you want for out of combat. So are the summons adequate, or aren't they? And if they're adequate in a fight, even strong, then it doesn't matter that the eidolon kicks less ass than before.
This is why I imagine the naysayers in this thread are so hard to follow, there's too much vacillating between positions to be taken seriously.
I think you overestimate what you consider data. They in fact do listen to the "one angry, yelling nerd" because all the others who play and have no issue don't have an issue to find a way to report. In most cases the loud minority forces change on the majority because the majority didn't think there was a problem.
And this is wrong too. They actively collect feedback from everyone who DMs for PFS, and not just through the boards either - all the VCs and other regionals have public e-mails, open-door policies etc. The data they've been collecting through that process has been "When a player shows up at my table with a summoner, I cringe." Trying to dismiss this as "one angry nerd" betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of their business model, one egregious enough to make me and likely others glad that anyone who holds such an opinion is not a decision-maker.
I have to agree with RavingDork on their AP design. Most if not all Aps are written with complete novices in mind. Sp the BBEGS are designed very poorly imo. So much so that even a group that does modest optimization can easily defeat almost anything thrown at them. The Summoner or even SM spell does not help the situation. Yes I know I can change the npcs but I buy APS to save time on game prep. Not add more.
I don't mind a nerf when it's requested by those in the community who play with all the rules. PFS that has it's own rules imo should not be dictating what can or cannot be allowed in terms of rules, classes, feats etc. Maybe it's because what comes across as broken usually ends up being a overreaction by some of the fanbase. Sometimes it is broken. Usually it's not imo. A remember someone complaining that a Cleric with Mythic levels could feed a entire army. Well what do you expect when your at that level. To be casting the same boring spell effects.
Couldn't agree more. I honestly ban very very few things when I run, as well as usually run at superhero levels of power because that's what our group likes. To date I've really only had a problem with one thing and that was the mythic version of cloud kill. I have not found an issue present in any class that's more powerful than a druid, wizard, or cleric. In fact most are considerably weaker than those. I usually let people build what they want, baring thematic games, and then adapt the story to them.
Personally I'd choose to play a druid 9 times out of 10 over a summoner. Why? Because I feel that after low tier levels summoner loses way to much versus a druid. The only time I'd consider it is in a low power, low magic game but I'm also of the opinion that companions should scale to the power level of the game and not be static. Which brings us to why I think some have a dislike for the summoner, they play low power, low magic, low level games. Games which beef stated companions are much more powerful relative to the pcs. Games in which I've played/gm where the marital has good to great all around stats have always been a success for them, yet in lower powered games the tend to suffer and struggle.
But here's the thing - what you're basically saying here is that the folks claiming Paizo nerfed the wrong aspect of the class were wrong. Because the summons weren't changed at all, so if you need a purely combat-focused eidolon in order for your summoner to "not die" because "dead characters don't have flavor," you can just have him rely on summons instead and then build whatever eidolon you want for out of combat. So are the summons adequate, or aren't they? And if they're adequate in a fight, even strong, then it doesn't matter that the eidolon kicks less ass than before.This is why I imagine the naysayers in this thread are so hard to follow, there's too much vacillating between positions to be taken seriously.
There isn't though. I also haven't stated a stance in this thread. I do think they butchered the original intent of the class which was build your own monster from scratch. You can build a completely functional unchained summoner but it has a distinct lack of feel from the purpose of the original. In fact imo they should have banned the original and make a whole new class, new name and everything. Only for pfs of course.
This lego monster part of the summoner is what most gms have with the class. It's not how strong the class is its they gm isn't in control and the rules require over site. They aren't quite as straight forward as an animal companion. I feel most gms are honest with why they dislike the class and hark to it being op where in fact it isn't. I could make a druid of nightmares in which you'd beg to have a summoner instead but that's not the point. Most gms have a image of how things should go in game and a "what ever the crap I want it to be" infringes on them.
This is why summons/animal companions don't bother them even if it does the exact same thing. It's only perception nothing more. At the end of the day the summoner itself is the weak link, always has been.
You don't think they watch forums where these things are debated? Do you think they hear 10 comments about summoners and go ''hey, maybe we should make a whole book and fix that.''They're going off many, many, many complaints. They're looking at boards and comments from both sides. Perhaps even better, they are getting PFS GM feedback, which let's be honest is about twice as good as PFS player feedback.
I think you want to believe it was just the loudest couple of whiners, but it's not.
I think the people who debate are in the vast minority of the people who play overall, therefore the loudest on the forums and such do get more weight. I mean why would you complain if you don't see anything wrong? Which means that data is lost.
|
A) You're the one who claimed they used data.
B) SM is incredibly disruptive for several reasons. First and formost, every time someone busts out a summon, unless they both have amazing information recall or premade monster stat reference cards, the phones come out and both the player who cast it and the GM have to look up what the dang thing can do and how well it can do it (or sort through the books to take longer to find the same info). After that, it extends the round as each summoned monster takes their turn (likely with more PRD referencing), adding minutes to each round. And, keep in mind, the summoner can drop that as a standard that lasts minutes instead of rounds. Only after dealing with all that disruption can we discuss how disruptive their actual actions and abilities are.a) It's a reasonable claim to make. Pathfinder is a business, and Society-play even moreso; business decisions are generally made based on data.
b) None of that has anything to do with the efficacy of summons themselves. Yes, they have the potential to slow down play if either party is unprepared - but (1) that is hardly unique to the Summoner class (summons have been part of the game since core after all), and (2) that is easily managed by being prepared.
I'm completely baffled at what you're suggesting there. Are you saying Summon Monster itself should be banned? It seems to me that if they thought the spell was causing a problem, they wouldn't have released an entire Player Companion supporting the playstyle.
A) See posts upthread.
B) We weren't discussing efficacy, we were discussing disruption. I have yet to EVER see a summon monster that didn't slow down play (in fact, regardless of preparation, they will ALWAYS slow down play due to the added action economy). The difference between the summoner and the conjurer is that the summoner can double the amount of summons on the board. He casts a standard SM, then when it pops on his next turn he can IMMEDIATELY drop his SLA SM. also his SLA summons stick around a lot longer. Also he doesn't have to bother preparing it.Were there absolutely no issues with the eidolon? Of course there were, but they didn't really address the issue. A lot of people are missing the forest for the trees.
I have to agree with RavingDork on their AP design. Most if not all Aps are written with complete novices in mind. Sp the BBEGS are designed very poorly imo. So much so that even a group that does modest optimization can easily defeat almost anything thrown at them. The Summoner or even SM spell does not help the situation. Yes I know I can change the npcs but I buy APS to save time on game prep. Not add more.
I don't mind a nerf when it's requested by those in the community who play with all the rules. PFS that has it's own rules imo should not be dictating what can or cannot be allowed in terms of rules, classes, feats etc. Maybe it's because what comes across as broken usually ends up being a overreaction by some of the fanbase. Sometimes it is broken. Usually it's not imo. A remember someone complaining that a Cleric with Mythic levels could feed a entire army. Well what do you expect when your at that level. To be casting the same boring spell effects.
Couldn't agree more. I honestly ban very very few things when I run, as well as usually run at superhero levels of power because that's what our group likes. To date I've really only had a problem with one thing and that was the mythic version of cloud kill. I have not found an issue present in any class that's more powerful than a druid, wizard, or cleric. In fact most are considerably weaker than those. I usually let people build what they want, baring thematic games, and then adapt the story to them.
Personally I'd choose to play a druid 9 times out of 10 over a summoner. Why? Because I feel that after low tier levels summoner loses way to much versus a druid. The only time I'd consider it is in a low power, low magic game but I'm also of the opinion that companions should scale to the power level of the game and not be static. Which brings us to why I think some have a dislike for the summoner, they play low power, low magic, low level games. Games which beef stated companions are much more powerful...
Yeah, I kind of had a brain-fart with that one. I was thinking "all the options that allow the things you don't like are still there." I wasn't thinking about the reduced evolution points at all, not until I came back to this thread saw your responses. That will go a long way towards delaying the builds you fear, which does help reduce the likelihood you will see those kinds of problems in organized play--either because players don't stick with the character long enough or because by the time they get there, they aren't completely destroying everything. Nevertheless, they missed a lot, and handled other things poorly. Mass summoning still slows the game down and causes problems, and the new restrictions seem wholly arbitrary and does little for balance, instead just making it harder for people to achieve the concepts they want.
I still stand by my statement that organized society adventure design is a much worse problem (in that it helps to create the lop-sized situations you describe) than the even the original summoner.
|
|
There isn't though. I also haven't stated a stance in this thread. I do think they butchered the original intent of the class which was build your own monster from scratch. This lego monster part of the summoner is what most gms have with the class. It's not how strong the class is its they gm isn't in control and the rules require over site. They aren't quite as straight forward as an animal companion. I feel most gms are honest with why they dislike the class and hark to it being op where in fact it isn't. I could make a druid of nightmares in which you'd beg to have a summoner instead but that's not the point. Most gms have a image of how things should go in game and a "what ever the crap I want it to be" infringes on them.
But here's the thing - what you're basically saying here is that the folks claiming Paizo nerfed the wrong aspect of the class were wrong. Because the summons weren't changed at all, so if you need a purely combat-focused eidolon in order for your summoner to "not die" because "dead characters don't have flavor," you can just have him rely on summons instead and then build whatever eidolon you want for out of combat. So are the summons adequate, or aren't they? And if they're adequate in a fight, even strong, then it doesn't matter that the eidolon kicks less ass than before.This is why I imagine the naysayers in this thread are so hard to follow, there's too much vacillating between positions to be taken seriously.
Of course you can make a Druid, Wizard or Cleric that is more gamebreaking than a Summoner. They are T1 after all. But what you're forgetting is the level of system mastery that takes to do. It's just not nearly as much of a problem in practice, even if they are stronger in theory.
Whereas with OG Summoner, all you needed was to take your Eidolon's pile of EP and pick some spells to support it. Even if you picked some crap evolutions you'd have plenty left over to make your killipede. Then you level up just once and refine it even further by removing the stuff that didn't make much difference. Before long everyone ends up with a murderbeast and the GM is either making the encounters so hard they stomp everyone else, or the eidolon is steamrolling everything. (In PFS, likely the latter.)
-Raises eyebrow-Do you know how much system mastery it requires to make an Op druid... a lot more than it takes to make an Op summoner. Btw... go ahead and make an Op druid. I'll kick it's ass with a chain shirt.
It's also incredibly... I don't even know the word for it... to try and pass off actual criticism of a class as ''Gm's are control freaks.'' If a Gm wants to make things conform to how they feel it should, they just fracking will. Now grant it, it's easier to please a player with exceptions rather than restrictions.
Well unless you hold they character down and forcibly make him wear it, even then that still wouldn't violate the druid oath since you didn't voluntarily wear it.
That said most are, in fact it comes with the territory else you really are a gm. I also didn't say there was anything wrong with controlling your game, just that they are using the wrong excused for what is actually wrong.
|
|
I still stand by my statement that organized society adventure design is a much worse problem (in that it helps to create the lop-sized situations you describe) than the even the original summoner.
Even if you're right about this, here's the thing - Summoner is the only class that's had these kind of organized play issues. So even if it's a shortcoming of the format itself that makes them seem stronger than they really are, it's still easier to approach the issue by tweaking one class than it is tweaking every module and scenario they've ever released or will release.
A) See posts upthread.
B) We weren't discussing efficacy, we were discussing disruption. I have yet to EVER see a summon monster that didn't slow down play (in fact, regardless of preparation, they will ALWAYS slow down play due to the added action economy). The difference between the summoner and the conjurer is that the summoner can double the amount of summons on the board. He casts a standard SM, then when it pops on his next turn he can IMMEDIATELY drop his SLA SM. also his SLA summons stick around a lot longer. Also he doesn't have to bother preparing it.Were there absolutely no issues with the eidolon? Of course there were, but they didn't really address the issue. A lot of people are missing the forest for the trees.
a) I've looked upthread and I'm not seeing anything to support your assertion. "Business decisions are based on data" is a rational point of view, and the sky hasn't fallen since they've made the change either.
b) If summons were causing the disruption you believe they are, we'd have gotten a ruling like "Players can only summon X,Y and Z with Summon Monster" and then GMs would have a much smaller list to memorize. We haven't, so they haven't.
''A druid who wears prohibited armor or uses a prohibited shield is unable to cast druid spells or use any of her supernatural or spell-like class abilities while doing so and for 24 hours thereafter.''Doesn't have anything to do with whether they willingly put it on.
Okay just because you drape it over me doesn't mean I'm wearing it, that line is about intent not contact. If you forcibly strap it to me it doesn't mean I'm wearing it, it's nothing more that a blanket which isn't excluded by the rules. You are doing nothing but trying to nit pick. In fact good luck trying to do it to me while I'm flying in the air, while both my summons and animal companion eat you, and I rain spell death upon you. Sorry bud you don't win this fight unless you gm fiat it period, what rules are you getting that shirt on me? In fact using your fiat there's nothing stopping you from doing the same to the eidolon and causing it do disappear.
And I'm sorry, but while I agree sometimes the summoner's player-made flavors are annoying, they are no where near as annoying as what the Eidolon is capable of [especially since they are capable of it at very low levels].
But here is the real meat. Try not playing low level, low power, or low magic. As just ban it if you don't like it. I don't get this thing where you hate it but allow it. If you don't like it and it doesn't fix your low power world the just ban it saying you don't like it.
Even if you're right about this, here's the thing - Summoner is the only class that's had these kind of organized play issues. So even if it's a shortcoming of the format itself that makes them seem stronger than they really are, it's still easier to approach the issue by tweaking one class than it is tweaking every module and scenario they've ever released or will release.
I still stand by my statement that organized society adventure design is a much worse problem (in that it helps to create the lop-sized situations you describe) than the even the original summoner.
I'm failing to see how this is any different than druids, who can have companions who can pounce or fly as well.
|
|
Dominate Person, "teach me druidic." Now you're a commoner :P
Really, this is irrelevant. Again, building a super-druid (and definitely a "super-animal companion") is much, much harder than building a Super-Eidolon. Taking a machete to the EP goes a long way to resolving that.
I'm failing to see how this is any different than druids, who can have companions who can pounce or fly as well.
And just like before I'm left asking - if druid companions are so awesome, why are the folks in here complaining so strenuously? Druids weren't nerfed, go play one. Your stance is self-defeating.
But I would love to hear which Druid companion you felt could outperform an Eidolon from the old Summoner.
Dominate Person, "teach me druidic." Now you're a commoner :P
Really, this is irrelevant. Again, building a super-druid (and definitely a "super-animal companion") is much, much harder than building a Super-Eidolon. Taking a machete to the EP goes a long way to resolving that.
Again nit picky, you could just do the same to the summoner. And this whole forcing thing is also moot, doesn't work guys and if you as a gm are using it then you are straight up dicks period.
It's not hard, you can literally change your AC with zero consequences baring time spend training as much as you want. Get tired of your lion, bam now I have a dino.
Edit: I do play the summoner over the druid. Your agreement is the self defeating one imo. You say the summoner is just crazy op yet the druid does everything the summoner does plus more all at the same time but claim the druid is fine nothing wrong with it. This is illogical and doesn't make sense to the rest of us.
No animal companion comes near to an APG eidolon.I'm failing to see how this is any different than druids, who can have companions who can pounce or fly as well.Even if you're right about this, here's the thing - Summoner is the only class that's had these kind of organized play issues. So even if it's a shortcoming of the format itself that makes them seem stronger than they really are, it's still easier to approach the issue by tweaking one class than it is tweaking every module and scenario they've ever released or will release.
I still stand by my statement that organized society adventure design is a much worse problem (in that it helps to create the lop-sized situations you describe) than the even the original summoner.
Stat one up and I will at the very least equal it.
Stat one up and I will at the very least equal it.No animal companion comes near to an APG eidolon.I'm failing to see how this is any different than druids, who can have companions who can pounce or fly as well.Even if you're right about this, here's the thing - Summoner is the only class that's had these kind of organized play issues. So even if it's a shortcoming of the format itself that makes them seem stronger than they really are, it's still easier to approach the issue by tweaking one class than it is tweaking every module and scenario they've ever released or will release.
I still stand by my statement that organized society adventure design is a much worse problem (in that it helps to create the lop-sized situations you describe) than the even the original summoner.
I find your statement somewhat dubious as well, Nicos. At the very least, it's not the universal blanket truth you seem to think it is.
For one thing, the ability to use magical items more easily than the summoner/eidolon pair, can make a druid's animal companion more powerful at mid-to-high levels. (Though I will allow that the eidolon tends to be more intelligent and versatile.)
|
|
Stat one up and I will at the very least equal it.
You can get a Gargantuan animal companion with 7 attacks? I'd love to see that.
Really, this is irrelevant. Again, building a super-druid (and definitely a "super-animal companion") is much, much harder than building a Super-EidolonAnd that is besides the point. The less breakable stuffs int eh game the better.
The stuff that breaks more easily is what causes more problems. Wizards haven't been touched in years of PFS despite being the most powerful class in PF. Optimization floor matters.
You can get a Gargantuan animal companion with 7 attacks? I'd love to see that.
Stat one up and I will at the very least equal it.
Gargantuan gets you -4 to attacks and AC and also makes you a much larger target that can't go indoors. That goes a long ways towards balancing it towards a smaller animal companion with similar stats.
|
|
Gargantuan gets you -4 to attacks and AC and also makes you a much larger target that can't go indoors. That goes a long ways towards balancing it towards a smaller animal companion with similar stats.You can get a Gargantuan animal companion with 7 attacks? I'd love to see that.
Stat one up and I will at the very least equal it.
It also gets you 20ft. reach, so good luck to the animal companion who is trying to get close. And that's before tentacles, reach evolution, grab/constrict etc.
1. Never get in an arms race with a GM, they will win. I don't need GM fiat to do it.2. That line says nothing about intent. Of course draping it over you isn't wearing because there is a mechanical description of wearing something. Now if you apply the armor bonus to you, you're wearing whether you decided to wear it or not.
3. The point you're missing is the very vital Achilles heel in the druid. It has an alignment restriction, it has a code. Can't where metal armor, can't teach druidic to people, must be Neutral.
Vanilla summoner has none, or at least none that the druid doesn't share. Even if you dismiss/banish an eidolon, it comes back with the casting of 1 simple spell.
Quoting ''A druid can do X, Y, Z too'' isn't an argument for summoners until the summoner has an equally strong Achilles heel. Oh hey unchained summoner, welcome to the pool.
1. Um yes I will if hes is trying to rules me into something then yes there better be non fiat rules or he is just being a jerk plan and simple. So again how are you making me wear it? What rules? You are literally just making up stuff and saying it balanced. Just because you would let your players do it doesn't mean I would. I can see why you have such problems its not an arms race you are just as much responsible to the rules as your players even fiats should be agreed upon before the game starts.
2. Armor Bonus - The number noted here is the eidolon’s base total armor bonus. This bonus may be split between an armor bonus and a natural armor bonus, as decided by the summoner. This number is modified by the eidolon’s base form and some options available through its evolution pool. An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, as the armor interferes with the summoner’s connection to the eidolon.
If you can magically do it to my druid you should have zero problems doing it to that eidolon, hell by what it says that summoner wouldn't be able to get it back until it was freed.
I also apologize for presuming.
It also gets you 20ft. reach, so good luck to the animal companion who is trying to get close. And that's before tentacles, reach evolution, grab/constrict etc.Gargantuan gets you -4 to attacks and AC and also makes you a much larger target that can't go indoors. That goes a long ways towards balancing it towards a smaller animal companion with similar stats.You can get a Gargantuan animal companion with 7 attacks? I'd love to see that.
Stat one up and I will at the very least equal it.
Oh eidolons certainly are more versatile. I just don't think they beat animal companions in raw numbers (attack roll modifiers, damage values, saves, etc.) as often as many people seem to think. It's easy to forget that eidolons don't often have the magical item support that animal companions often do, among other things.
Yet Eidolons theoretically have as many slots as a character, assuming the summoner isn't using that spot. Animal companions are limited to a number of slots depending on it's type. Kind of half dozen of 1, 6 of another.
Oh eidolons certainly are more versatile. I just don't think they beat animal companions in raw numbers (attack roll modifiers, damage values, etc.) as often as many people seem to think. It's easy to forget that eidolons don't often have the magical item support that animal companions often do, among other things.
Animal slots are only limited in PFS, not in the base game.
If the Eidolon has all the available items then I would never need to ever attack the eidolon, 1 or 2 rounds on the summoner and both are gone.
@Onyxlion
1. I could think of a number of situations to get the armor on. While you sleep, a powerful illusion to make it look like a shirt, a dimensional dervish grappler that forces you into one, a hundred imps casting suggestion [you'll roll a 1 eventually]... should I go on? I'm the Gm, I have unlimited resources at my disposal. The point is not how, the point is I can take away all your powers.
2. By RAW, an Eidolon can not wear armor. Period. You can't put it on the eidolon. Doesn't it make sense? Not really, but if we're doing the bubbled void ''X is stronger/just as bad as Y cause blah...''
2.5 Let's say it did work and you put armor on the Eidolon. Great. It's dismisses it, it poofs back to the home plane and takes off the armor. Then the summoner casts Summon Eidolon. Woot. [If you argue that the summoner can't even dismiss the eidolon, okay. Summoner drops unconscious, Eidolon automatically disappears.]
2.6 Even if the armor on the Eidolon worked, you can still force the Druid to teach you druidic or... alignment shift. Act a little too lawful, ah shucks there goes your powers. Little too chaotic, ah shucks... You've still got 2 gaping Achilles heels the summoner doesn't.
3. Thank you for apologizing. Sorry If I tend to get a little... aggressive when debating.
Its cool I like debating being called out at times when unfounded assumptions is the right thing to do.
My ultimate point was and you said it yourself you have unlimited resources in which to act yet you keep claiming for some reason the summoner is beyond all you can do. To me it weakens your claim that they are over powered by some how being beyond your control.
All your examples are literally all fiat which in turn works on the summoner as well. Nothing you suggested wouldn't work on them and actually be more potent.
Well if it both can't wear armor and armor interferes both raw which wins because it says both?
|
|
All your examples are literally all fiat which in turn works on the summoner as well. Nothing you suggested wouldn't work on them and actually be more potent.
My "teach me druidic" response was largely meant to be silly (even if it would work RAW) but you missed the underlying point. The point is that divine casters, including Druids, are less of a problem in most games because their players have RP rules to follow. Not only does this give the GM another lever to keep the game on track, it actively discourages the kind of players who like to be disruptive from taking those classes to begin with.
And in a sense that is exactly what Unchained Summoner does, pushes it a bit towards being divine. Slapping an alignment/ethos on the eidolon is a way of giving the GM more control. You know that line in Ultimate Campaign about how the summoner and their eidolon can occasionally have an antagonistic relationship? The Unchained eidolon gets more of an excuse to do that if the GM thinks the player is being uppity.
The Eidolon, like all companions, is actually an NPC under the GM's control. This is a way of reinforcing that and setting the player's baseline expectations lower than they were in terms of the control they should have. It is empowering the GM, which is what the rules are supposed to be doing. After all, without GMs, you have no players.
All your examples are literally all fiat which in turn works on the summoner as well. Nothing you suggested wouldn't work on them and actually be more potent.My "teach me druidic" response was largely meant to be silly (even if it would work RAW) but you missed the underlying point. The point is that divine casters, including Druids, are less of a problem in most games because their players have RP rules to follow. Not only does this give the GM another lever to keep the game on track, it actively discourages the kind of players who like to be disruptive from taking those classes to begin with.
And in a sense that is exactly what Unchained Summoner does, pushes it a bit towards being divine. Slapping an alignment/ethos on the eidolon is a way of giving the GM more control. You know that line in Ultimate Campaign about how the summoner and their eidolon can occasionally have an antagonistic relationship? The Unchained eidolon gets more of an excuse to do that if the GM thinks the player is being uppity.
The Eidolon, like all companions, is actually an NPC under the GM's control. This is a way of reinforcing that and setting the player's baseline expectations lower than they were in terms of the control they should have. It is empowering the GM, which is what the rules are supposed to be doing. After all, without GMs, you have no players.
Honestly I really don't see that. In fact the more you guys talk to more it seems you guys are "control jerk" that only want an passable in game excuse to be jerks. I just don't see how it's so much incredibly harder to do the exact same things to the summoner. You keep talking about RP restrictions being some god DM tool to "hahaha now you have zero powers tool". Who plays in your games that you constantly do these things to? It sounds awful to constant go against such adversarial gms. I in all my years as DM/Player have never had or been subject to such things, it just seems to counter the point of the game.
Its cool I like debating being called out at times when unfounded assumptions is the right thing to do.My ultimate point was and you said it yourself you have unlimited resources in which to act yet you keep claiming for some reason the summoner is beyond all you can do. To me it weakens your claim that they are over powered by some how being beyond your control.
All your examples are literally all fiat which in turn works on the summoner as well. Nothing you suggested wouldn't work on them and actually be more potent.
Well if it both can't wear armor and armor interferes both raw which wins because it says both?
1. Non of my examples were fiat. They were all legitimate ways, to trick you or force you into metal armor.
It's not that the summoner is beyond my control as a GM, the point is that saying ''I can make a druid just as bad'' is pointless because the druid comes with restrictions that quite honestly is a pretty easy kill switch.
If I want to kill/disable the summoner I will too. I'll just have a harder time at it. It doesn't have a glaring achilles heel... til now.
2. The Eidolon plain flat can't wear armor. Not may not. Not is prohibited. It can not wear armor. That's the wonderful world of RAW.
3. So by RAW the animal companion doesn't have a defined amount of slots. Meaning it's up to GM discretion.
All of them where fiat, thousands of imps isn't common sorry bud, and none of them would be trivial against a fighting druid. In fact most of fail miserably, baring as I said extreme gm fiat. From the way you guys tell it, its as simple as rolling a single dice as a standard action and bam commoner. In fact if I played in your games I would constantly do the same to everyone of your npcs, even use the fact that armor shuts down eidolons without actually having them wear it.
Yes it does its the summoner himself, how do people not know this. One knowledge check tells you its a eidolon, the glowing ruin shows you the summoner.
It also says by raw armor interferes with the eidolon period that's RAW too, hell maybe he doesn't have to wear it for it to interfere but it interferes no getting around it.
Honestly I really don't see that. In fact the more you guys talk to more it seems you guys are "control jerk" that only want an passable in game excuse to be jerks. I just don't see how it's so much incredibly harder to do the exact same things to the summoner. You keep talking about RP restrictions being some god DM tool to "hahaha now you have zero powers tool". Who plays in your games that you constantly do these things to? It sounds awful to constant go against such adversarial gms. I in all my years as DM/Player have never had or been subject to such things, it just seems to counter the point of the...Let me give you an example from a different system I played last night.
The party was sent in to rescue 3 of their friends from an interment camp. In the process one of them planted and detonated C4 all over the compound to target heavy weapons. Detonating high explosives near a civilian population has consequences and a lot of people died.
After knowing this, he proceeded to set up several more, killing over half the civilians they could have rescued. I'm running a game about hero's and so fate [an in game mechanic] cut him off from his powers for a short period of time.
It was agreed this was acceptable because the character was acting -badly.- He stopped and the character actually started talking about looking for redemption, etc...
Now imagine your typical many-armed flying pounce murder machine and player. They don't care about the story, they don't care about the nameless npc's. They care that they are raking in the damage per round and nothing short of the GM shouting ''rocks fall'' [or specifically targeting them] is going to stop them. Because they have found a vastly OP mechanic with no restriction and no killswitch.
Unchained made that restriction, that kill switch. Now the problem players will probably wander around looking for the next OP thing, sure. Those that like the class will adapt and new, creative eidolons will emerge.
Unchained literally changed nothing. The APG eidolon has an alignment and has free will, it doesn't have to help it can refuse. All you guys have done is demonize a class in which ever single one of your problems happens with every other class. I just don't get why you guys feel it's so hard to gm the class. Well I'm done with this for awhile because all you guy are doing is saying "but it's so hard for me to be a jerk to a summoner for reason".
|
|
Honestly I really don't see that. In fact the more you guys talk to more it seems you guys are "control jerk" that only want an passable in game excuse to be jerks. I just don't see how it's so much incredibly harder to do the exact same things to the summoner. You keep talking about RP restrictions being some god DM tool to "hahaha now you have zero powers tool". Who plays in your games that you constantly do these things to? It sounds awful to constant go against such adversarial gms. I in all my years as DM/Player have never had or been subject to such things, it just seems to counter the point of the...
All your examples are literally all fiat which in turn works on the summoner as well. Nothing you suggested wouldn't work on them and actually be more potent.My "teach me druidic" response was largely meant to be silly (even if it would work RAW) but you missed the underlying point. The point is that divine casters, including Druids, are less of a problem in most games because their players have RP rules to follow. Not only does this give the GM another lever to keep the game on track, it actively discourages the kind of players who like to be disruptive from taking those classes to begin with.
And in a sense that is exactly what Unchained Summoner does, pushes it a bit towards being divine. Slapping an alignment/ethos on the eidolon is a way of giving the GM more control. You know that line in Ultimate Campaign about how the summoner and their eidolon can occasionally have an antagonistic relationship? The Unchained eidolon gets more of an excuse to do that if the GM thinks the player is being uppity.
The Eidolon, like all companions, is actually an NPC under the GM's control. This is a way of reinforcing that and setting the player's baseline expectations lower than they were in terms of the control they should have. It is empowering the GM, which is what the rules are supposed to be doing. After all, without GMs, you have no players.
It's not about "lol you have no powers now." That's a last resort as Redjack's example shows. Rather, it's about the GM being able to say something like "your eidolon doesn't go along with that order" or "you feel a sense of foreboding, as though continuing in your current course could have dire consequences" or even "your angelic eidolon charges at the drunken mercenaries, yet you notice he is knocking them out with nonlethal despite your command to kill" and so on. It's a way of reminding the player that having a pet doesn't make him a god, and that giving orders doesn't necessarily mean they will be obeyed in exactly the way you expect them to be.
Dominate Person, "teach me druidic." Now you're a commoner :P
Really, this is irrelevant. Again, building a super-druid (and definitely a "super-animal companion") is much, much harder than building a Super-Eidolon. Taking a machete to the EP goes a long way to resolving that.
I'm failing to see how this is any different than druids, who can have companions who can pounce or fly as well.And just like before I'm left asking - if druid companions are so awesome, why are the folks in here complaining so strenuously? Druids weren't nerfed, go play one. Your stance is self-defeating.
But I would love to hear which Druid companion you felt could outperform an Eidolon from the old Summoner.
Druids got a huge nerf in that their wildshape armor no longer gives their AC bonus.