Is Summoner too powerful?


Advice

1 to 50 of 69 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Thinking of Eidolon of lv5 Summoner with below settings:

Items: Amulet of Mighty Fists +2, Belt of Giant Strength +2
Feats: Power Attack(-2, +4), Improved Natural Attack
Evolution pool: 12 points (Half-Elf Wild Caller), Extra Evolution * 2 (lv1, lv5)
Evolution (Quadruped): Limbs(Arm)*3, Slam*3, Pounce, Improved Damage(Slam)

So a battle would start with a charge and followed by a full-round attack:

Bite: +10, 1d6+10
Slam * 3: +10, 3d6+10

Average damage is 13.5 + 61.5 = 75

A quick look at monsters shows most monsters of cr5 would be one-turn killed.

Just thinking how much damage a fighter could produce each round in level 5? Mostly 20 or even less.

So is there any rule I am missing? or should add some house rule to limit the Eidolon with multiple slam attacks?

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Unchained or Regular? Unchained can't have Pounce at level 5. That aside, both a +2 Amulet and a +2 Belt are way over character wealth by level and not normal at all.


You say "average" damage, but +10 to hit at Level 5 is actually a little below average. The number of misses they'll have drops that DPR sharply. Also, yeah, both those magical items is fairly unusual for Level 5. Just the belt, maybe, which'd reduce damage and accuracy even further.


GM Rednal wrote:
You say "average" damage, but +10 to hit at Level 5 is actually a little below average. The number of misses they'll have drops that DPR sharply. Also, yeah, both those magical items is fairly unusual for Level 5. Just the belt, maybe, which'd reduce damage and accuracy even further.

Summoner could take "Craft Wondrous Item" feat at lv3, and the cost to create "Amulet of Mighty Fists +2" is 8000gp , "Belt of Giant Strength +2" is 1000gp , 9000gp and 9 days to craft should be reasonable for a level 5 team.

To avoid the gold issue, we could take "Amulet of Mighty Fists +1" instead which costs 2000gp. And then the average damage would drop from 75 to 71, and the attack roll becomes +9.

To increase the chance to hit, could stop using power attack so the attack roll would be increased to 11 and the damage would be dropped to 63. There is also other way to increase the hi chance e.g. "bit of luck" from Cleric who get luck domain or "aid another" , both are cheap to get.

But the real problem is the huge advantage by comparing Eidolon and fighter in the same level , why a summoned monster could be even stronger than a "full-time employee".


Dragonborn3 wrote:
Unchained or Regular? Unchained can't have Pounce at level 5. That aside, both a +2 Amulet and a +2 Belt are way over character wealth by level and not normal at all.

Regular.

Could use +1 Amulet instead so the wealth issue should be solved , new average damage becomes 71 which is still too much ( "average damage" here didn't consider the possible miss rate)


At the hit rate, I think... what, average of 65% of attacks are going to hit? As-listed (and that is counting your effects, isn't it?), you've got 40 damage in static bonuses and 14 average from rolling dice, so a base of 54 damage. Factoring in the miss rate, and you've got roughly 35 DPR, which is a bit more than half a CR 5 foe's HP.


No, it's not objectively too powerful. It can be too powerful depending on the table its played at and how it's played, but that's true for many classes.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Hestwood wrote:


Regular.

Well then yes, the answer is that it IS too powerful. There is a reason that the Unchained Summoner exists, that it is the only legal option in PFS, and that almost every campaign mentioned on these boards allows only the Unchained Summoner

Jon Brazer Enterprises

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I thought the answer was so obviously "yes" that Paizo released a revised summoner in pathfinder unchained.


Yep, from actually playing one, seeing it in play and from hearing stories of others dealing with it the Summoner was the most consistently powerful class from 1-20.

I think one of the worse defenses for it not being op was how often it would be compared to Schrondingers wizard. The Summoner would be casually crushing threats and passing out buffs on the same turn from 1-10, when most games end.


I’ve always looked at the Summoner to be a 1.5 of a character.
That is it is one full PC (Caster), and one 1/2 PC (tank).

With this way of thinking, smaller parties can cover more of the needed classes. And letting bigger parties play with more RP characters.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
I thought the answer was so obviously "yes" that Paizo released a revised summoner in pathfinder unchained.

To be fair, just because Paizo thinks something is overpowered doesn't mean it is (remember that they swung the nerf bat on the Barbarian with Unchained, too). In this particular case I agree with their decision, though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

What makes the Summoner overpowered, and this is true of both chained and unchained, is that he gets way more daily resources than other classes. 6-level casting, the Eidolon, and the Summon Monster SLA just give him a ridiculous amount of staying power compared to other classes. The Unchained Summoner really didn't fix that. The nerf to Pounce and some of the under-leveled spells certainly helped, but that's just scratching the surface of what makes the Summoner such a great class and didn't get to the root of the issue.

The Summoner does become more toned down at higher levels; other classes start to catch up in terms of the number of daily resources, and the Summoner starts to suffer problems with respect to the shared item slots between the eidolon and master. However, at low levels this guy just keeps on going.


Also PFS isn't the be-all end all of "is it broken" It isn't even particularly good at reining in the worst of it.

Scarab Sages

OP, I would strongly suggest looking up the DPR formula, average AC and HP of a 5th level enemy, and running the numbers before you brag about damage. I've had players in my games that bragged SUPER hard about the potential damage they could deal, and then spent the game doing mostly nothing because they either kept missing, had to reload WAY too often, or relied on crits to get that damage they loved so much.

It seems like a fair bit of damage atm, but factoring miss chance in would likely drop it to a reasonable level.

Also, one-rounding an equal CR enemy is what Hammers are typically built to do, so it's not out of the ordinary for that kind of thing to happen.


How are you getting your attack bonus? It doesn’t seem to line up with applying power attack.

I do think you are underestimating a level 5 fighter though, using similar gear 5BAB+1WeaponTraining+1WeaponFocus+5strength+2MagicWeapon=+14 to hit or 12 when power attacking, unless we take furious focus, which we can easily afford. So, the fighter is much more accurate than the eidolon.

For damage, we will go simple with a great sword, so 2d6+7Strength+2magicweapon+2WeaponSpec+1WeaponTraining+6PowerAttack, for 25.5 average damage, with a better critical profile.

I’m not even properly min-maxing that fighter, but just showing a dead simple build. The fighter will also likely have a much better AC and hit points. And we could tack on the warrior spirit advanced weapon training to throw bane on that weapon whenever we need it.

The real problem with the summoner is the total package. The eidolon is just ok, the spells are just ok and the summons are just ok(if you don’t sink a ton of feats into them). But when you combine the pets with the buffs, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

Shadow Lodge

I can't help but feel a longbow fighter would deal more as well.

Silver Crusade

Arachnofiend wrote:


To be fair, just because Paizo thinks something is overpowered doesn't mean it is (remember that they swung the nerf bat on the Barbarian with Unchained, too). In this particular case I agree with their decision, though.

Note that there is another strong (if somewhat anecdotal) bit of evidence.

I hang out a fair bit on the PBP boards. Just about every campaign (there are the rare exceptions) ban the "Chained" summoner and only allow the unchained one.


I think personally the the Unchanged Summoner exists both because it's too easy to built and absurdly powerful eidolon and because it's too easy to build a woefully hopeless one. Those two things don't actually average out in any sense.

Personally, I don't allow either kind(as I dislike the flavour of the class), but I definitely think the chained one can get out of hand too readily.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Whether the Summoner is overpowered depends on your point of reference.

The Summoner makes the disparity between casters and martial characters WAY more visible, as they're using their magic and class features directly to directly and clearly out melee the melee fighter.

It's part of the reason Synthesist is banned in Pathfinder Society. It's strictly less powerful than a regular summoner, but makes it SUPER OBVIOUS how magic users just win.

I'd put the Summoner at a solid teir 3, or perhaps a low tier 2.


Synthesist could be banned just for breaking the point buy system. You could dump all of your physical scores and max your mental scores with little penalty. Alternatively, the more generous the rolling method you use, the less powerful the synthesist relatively becomes. Play in a game of 5d6 drop the two lowest and reroll ones, and the synthesist really falls behind.


Melkiador wrote:
Synthesist could be banned just for breaking the point buy system. You could dump all of your physical scores and max your mental scores with little penalty. Alternatively, the more generous the rolling method you use, the less powerful the synthesist relatively becomes. Play in a game of 5d6 drop the two lowest and reroll ones, and the synthesist really falls behind.

It was never an issue in my campaigns.

We never allowed ability score dumping for any class. After racial mods we only allow one score to go below 10, and that can only go to an 8.


Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

A Synthesist only gets away with dumping Str and Dex. Dumping Con is suicidal.

But even being able to dump two physical stats that way is a bit much unless you set up situations that all but require the Synthesist to dismiss his suit.


Though in practice, the extra stats aren't a significant boost in actual power. As much as people hem and haw over stats and dump stats, once you have a good primary or maybe secondary stat on a caster, you're golden, and anything above that is barely relevant.

Though non-casters and especially classes like the Paladin or Monk, of course, need the stats. Honestly, the no more than one dump stat and only that at 8 does more to hurt those two than casters in general or summoners in particular.


Arachnofiend wrote:
Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
I thought the answer was so obviously "yes" that Paizo released a revised summoner in pathfinder unchained.
To be fair, just because Paizo thinks something is overpowered doesn't mean it is (remember that they swung the nerf bat on the Barbarian with Unchained, too). In this particular case I agree with their decision, though.

I wouldn't say the Unchained Barbarian is nerfed. It's just different. Some powers are weaker and some are stronger. Which version works best depends on the build you're after.

But I agree that the Summoner needed revision - not only to tone it down but to bring eidolons more in line with actual outsiders. That said I don't like either version of the class, but that's because it's not my idea of what a summoner should be.


Melkiador wrote:
Synthesist could be banned just for breaking the point buy system. You could dump all of your physical scores and max your mental scores with little penalty. Alternatively, the more generous the rolling method you use, the less powerful the synthesist relatively becomes. Play in a game of 5d6 drop the two lowest and reroll ones, and the synthesist really falls behind.

Please do not forget that a Synthesist Summoner cannot be healed normally (no fast healing, no cure wounds etc) - only via Rejuvenate Eidolon spell, which would take up a lot of spells per day from the summoner.

But yes. Summoner in general, together with some other classes shine far more the more restrictive the GM is regarding magical items and stat generation.

And of course: the higher the game progresses the more the shared magic item slot, the increaesd damage reduction and the more non-AC-attacks from enemies tend to balance out the initial strong eidolon.

SYL


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Unchained Barbarian's utility got butchered. No Spell Sunder, nerfed Strength Surge... there's probably way more than that but I try not to think of that abomination too much.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Moonclanger wrote:
But I agree that the Summoner needed revision - not only to tone it down but to bring eidolons more in line with actual outsiders. That said I don't like either version of the class, but that's because it's not my idea of what a summoner should be.

I disagree. Or at least, I disagree relative to most other classes.

I find the muggles to be the greater problem; they need to be brought up, and the only ways that's going to happen is an edition overhaul (not happening) or bringing in something else entirely that shakes the paradigm (Paths of War, for example).

But Summoner itself is at a more reasonable and manageable balance point than, say, a Monk or a Wizard.


I'd agree with the Unchained Summoner, but remember that the Base Summoner was essentially a 9th level caster hiding in a 3/4 BAB chassis with all of the early access spells he got.


Arachnofiend wrote:
I'd agree with the Unchained Summoner, but remember that the Base Summoner was essentially a 9th level caster hiding in a 3/4 BAB chassis with all of the early access spells he got.

I felt it would have been better to just drop them to half BAB. Nothing about the name “summoner” makes me think this guy should be good at hitting things.

And then it’d basically just be job done. I doubt many would choose to synthesist with half BAB.


Apple123 wrote:
Please do not forget that a Synthesist Summoner cannot be healed normally (no fast healing, no cure wounds etc) - only via Rejuvenate Eidolon spell, which would take up a lot of spells per day from the summoner.

Wands. They are especially easy to get in PFS.


Arachnofiend wrote:
I'd agree with the Unchained Summoner, but remember that the Base Summoner was essentially a 9th level caster hiding in a 3/4 BAB chassis with all of the early access spells he got.

This is a bit of an exaggeration, since the spells did have lower DC's due to being lower level and he gets fewer spells per day. Instead, I would say the APG Summoner comes in somewhere between the 6th and 9th level casting paradigms, neither fully one nor the other. I feel he's a bit more like 9-level casters at low levels, and a bit more like 6-level casters at higher levels.

It's actually a really unique and intriguing design paradigm, but one that will forever be tainted by association with the design of the APG Summoner. And, as I already mentioned, I don't think that's the primary offender of what made the class OP in the first place, just the most obvious scapegoat.


Omnius wrote:


It's part of the reason Synthesist is banned in Pathfinder Society. It's strictly less powerful than a regular summoner

I think people who say this forget that surviving is still a requirement.

The Synthesist is less powerful when it comes to output but from playing one I was you are all but unkillable with little effort. Extremely high AC with the edilons natural armor coupled with some volutions, extra save bonuses and the hit points of 2 characters.


Melkiador wrote:

I felt it would have been better to just drop them to half BAB. Nothing about the name “summoner” makes me think this guy should be good at hitting things.

And then it’d basically just be job done. I doubt many would choose to synthesist with half BAB.

The BAB issue is pretty much irrelevant to the Summoner's effectiveness. It makes the Synthesist possible, but Synthesist isn't very good. On a regular Summoner, hittin' things ain't exactly high on their to-do list, nor particularly effective.

NoTongue wrote:

I think people who say this forget that surviving is still a requirement.

The Synthesist is less powerful when it comes to output but from playing one I was you are all but unkillable with little effort. Extremely high AC with the edilons natural armor coupled with some volutions, extra save bonuses and the hit points of 2 characters.

Those are all useful things, and the reason they generate negative play experience at PFS tables that have a Synthesist (and thus the reason it was banned), but it's still the less powerful option, because of action economy.

Having one great front line combatant is not as powerful as having one good front line combatant and one good support caster both capable of operating independently. Synthesist is not bad. In fact, it's better than a lot of classes. But it isn't as powerful as a vanilla Summoner for general use.


First, Improved Natural Attack feat and Improved Damage evolution don't stack. Second, average DPR only works if you actually calculate it including misses. The Eidolon from the opening post has an actual DPR against an average CR5 monster of 49.8. Without the illegal stacking and with only a +1 AOMF, it's 37.2 (or 44.1 with Haste).
Which isn't axactly the maximum, my current Summoner's eidolon had an average DPR of 37/52.6 (with/without haste) at that level, and that's with Iron Will, Improved Natural Armor evo, and only one Extra Evolution on my Summoner.

Melkiador wrote:
Synthesist could be banned just for breaking the point buy system.

It adds insult to injury, but the point buy or rolling method is not the Synthesist's problem. The Synthesist also shows that power level is not the #1 concern when it comes to class envy, as the regular Summoner is stronger.

What makes the Synthesist problematic is, in a way, it's default play style. A regular Summoner's eidolon can already outshine most martials, and it'se but one of a Summoner's multiple class features. But it's hard to feal resentful towards a Summoner who buffs you with Haste every combat (and possibly other buffs, it's not like he has anything better to do), thus significantly increasing your combat prowess. A Synthesist on the other hand has the same spotlight stealing power, but (as often played at least) without the feelgood effects from infight buffs.

Moonclanger wrote:
I wouldn't say the Unchained Barbarian is nerfed. It's just different. Some powers are weaker and some are stronger. Which version works best depends on the build you're after.

It's a buff at low levels of optimization (where temp HP is way better then a CON bonus that might kill you), a slight nerf at moderate levels of optimization (until they finally print an archetype, trait, or even feat that allows adopting a rage stance as a swift/free action), and a huge nerf at high levels of optimization (as it removes the cheesy rage cycling abuse).

Melkiador wrote:
I felt it would have been better to just drop them to half BAB. Nothing about the name “summoner” makes me think this guy should be good at hitting things.

All 6/9 caster have medium BAB. Half BAB is reserved for arcane full casters.

NoTongue wrote:
The Synthesist is less powerful when it comes to output but from playing one I was you are all but unkillable with little effort. Extremely high AC with the edilons natural armor coupled with some volutions, extra save bonuses and the hit points of 2 characters.

Sure, but a regular Summoner can easily stay in the back, possibly flying and/or invisible. Well, and doing nothing to draw aggro, of course.


Omnius wrote:
Melkiador wrote:

I felt it would have been better to just drop them to half BAB. Nothing about the name “summoner” makes me think this guy should be good at hitting things.

And then it’d basically just be job done. I doubt many would choose to synthesist with half BAB.

The BAB issue is pretty much irrelevant to the Summoner's effectiveness. It makes the Synthesist possible, but Synthesist isn't very good. On a regular Summoner, hittin' things ain't exactly high on their to-do list, nor particularly effective.

But that’s the point. People complain about the summoner because he’s a 3/4 BAB class who almost casts like a full caster. But casting like a full caster goes a lot more with the name “summoner” than having 3/4 BAB does. If one of the things were to be neefed it should have been the BAB instead of the spellcasting.


Melkiador wrote:
Omnius wrote:
Melkiador wrote:

I felt it would have been better to just drop them to half BAB. Nothing about the name “summoner” makes me think this guy should be good at hitting things.

And then it’d basically just be job done. I doubt many would choose to synthesist with half BAB.

The BAB issue is pretty much irrelevant to the Summoner's effectiveness. It makes the Synthesist possible, but Synthesist isn't very good. On a regular Summoner, hittin' things ain't exactly high on their to-do list, nor particularly effective.

But that’s the point. People complain about the summoner because he’s a 3/4 BAB class who almost casts like a full caster. But casting like a full caster goes a lot more with the name “summoner” than having 3/4 BAB does. If one of the things were to be nerfed it should have been the BAB instead of the spellcasting.

I’d probably get rid of their armored casting too. A class who’s thing is staying back and sending minions to fight shouldn’t need traditional armor.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

No.


Surely one of the most significant differences between the two versions (in terms of power) is the eidolon's maximum number of attacks.

The APG says: "Max. Attacks: This indicates the maximum number of natural attacks that the eidolon is allowed to possess at the given level. If the eidolon is at its maximum, it cannot take evolutions that grant additional natural attacks. This does not include attacks made with weapons."

Unchained says: "Max. Attacks: This indicates the maximum number of attacks that the eidolon is allowed to possess at the given level. If the eidolon is at its maximum, it cannot take evolutions that grant additional attacks. Attacks made with weapons, including those granted by a high base attack bonus, are counted against this maximum."


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It might help to qualify what one means by 'powerful' a bit (the following is based on my own experiences with the class).

The most important thing to note is that a summoner is fairly optimized right out of the gate. Summoning monsters is considered one of the most potent strategies in Pathfinder, and producing an extremely durable Eidolon is child's play. In essence, a summoner has a low floor.

However, their ceiling isn't particularly different from other casters. If you've got a summoner alongside well-optimized martials (like a pounce-raging barbarian) and casters (like a Treantmonk-style God Wizard), then they won't stand out at all.

What this means is that while the summoner is powerful, whether it's "too" powerful (in other words, whether the power is out of whack with the rest of the table) depends on the level of optimization of the rest of the players, and to a lesser extent the level (it's easier to optimize at higher levels, so the summoner's 'natural' power shines more early on).


NeoTiamat wrote:

It might help to qualify what one means by 'powerful' a bit (the following is based on my own experiences with the class).

The most important thing to note is that a summoner is fairly optimized right out of the gate. Summoning monsters is considered one of the most potent strategies in Pathfinder, and producing an extremely durable Eidolon is child's play. In essence, a summoner has a low floor.

However, their ceiling isn't particularly different from other casters. If you've got a summoner alongside well-optimized martials (like a pounce-raging barbarian) and casters (like a Treantmonk-style God Wizard), then they won't stand out at all.

What this means is that while the summoner is powerful, whether it's "too" powerful (in other words, whether the power is out of whack with the rest of the table) depends on the level of optimization of the rest of the players, and to a lesser extent the level (it's easier to optimize at higher levels, so the summoner's 'natural' power shines more early on).

Absolutely. But for most players I expect it's the low to mid levels that are the crucial ones. It's no consolation to be told at 5th level that you'll catch up with the summoner by the time you're 15th level. He'll still outclass you for most of the campaign, and just as you catch up the game will start to wind down - assuming that it even lasts that long.


Personally I've only ever seen one PC Summoner in play, and that was the APG version. The character didn't prove too powerful - indeed he died at 8th level. However the player in question, despite years of experience, just couldn't learn the game mechanics or employ effective tactics. Most of his characters were very ineffective. But his Summoner kept up with the rest of the group.

One of my regular players also plays Summoners, though not in any game I've ever taken part in. In the games we've played together his (non-Summoner) characters tend to struggle to keep up with other members of the group. But in other games (which include some of the same players) he's played Summoners and says he has to make sub-optimal choices so as not to outclass the other PCs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Google: "pf summoner powerful"

Might be faster than a thread;)


As a GM I never had a problem with the summoner or any so called over powered class. What I've noticed about many 'X class is OP' claims is that such claims are often presented in 'perfect case' scenarios. Case point:

Hestwood wrote:

So a battle would start with a charge and followed by a full-round attack:

Bite: +10, 1d6+10
Slam * 3: +10, 3d6+10

Average damage is 13.5 + 61.5 = 75

This scenario depends on:

A) The eidolon going first or otherwise have the opportunity to make
a charge followed by a full attack.

B) All the attacks hit.

C)The creature you're attacking has no DR and you roll average.

As both a player at GM I've frequently seen players unable to get off their awesome damage attacks because something in the combat situation prevented them from doing so; I've had fights that should have lasted no more than three or four rounds go on a lot longer because no one could land a hit; I've seen builds dependent on using multiple attacks have much of their damage nullified by DR they couldn't overcome and I've managed to roll all 1s on a 10d6.

Yes it's a high potential damage output compared to a fighter of equal level but said fighter would easily have a higher chance to hit (say +13 or +15 instead of the eidolon's +10). Also consider how survivable the eidolon is in combat. Without depending on spells fighter could easily have a higher AC and HP than the eidolon.

Finally there's a matter of player style and mechanical understanding. I've seen ostensibly powerful classes played in a not so powerful way either due to player RP preferences or simply not understanding class mechanics enough to make proper use of them. Before a GM declares a class 'too powerful' and starts nerfing or banning it outright its important to cosier these things. someone above mention wanting to nerf the summoner's BAB and armoured casting making the assumption that 'they don't need it' because the class 'thing' is standing back and using minions. This notion is rooted in the expectation that all players will want to play the summoner in the same cliched way. I'd happily play a melee summoner who fights alongside their eidolon; something like the hunter but instead of druidic magic it's arcane and instead of an animal companion it's an ululating tentacled horror from the Beyond.


You know what? I'm going to say Summoners are almost juuust right. They were brought down by the Unchained nerfs, but they still have their little tricks (Skilled evolution) and Summon Monster was untouched.

Combat Eidolons that don't have masters going Full Half Elf are still just a behind high end animal companions in damage output, but the tradeoff is a sentient ally with more skills. The new spell list is more balanced, if slightly crowded (I'm not a fan of Haste competing with Heroism) and missing some really synergistic spells. No Infernal Healing? On a class that makes a lact with a real devil?

The only thing that really bothered me was the Subtype system. Flavor was body types were restrictive, evolutions were gated, Protean was on crutches until 8th level, and the evolution restrictions are written in a way that gives the class really bad future proofing.

Well, that and the 2 skills per level thing. Makes it kind of hard to create a character that actually comes off as educated and competent when I have no points left after taking the obligatory Spellcraft and Knowledge Planes ranks.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Summon Monster X was always the most powerful ability of the Summoner, and it was left untouched by Unchained. The ability to summon a monster perfect for the environment you're in and immediately put it into combat exactly where you want it is immensely powerful.

It adds to the total hp of your team, it deals damage to the enemy with each passing round, and it doubles as a form of battlefield control simply by taking up space, allowing it to flank, threaten, perform combat maneuvers, etc. Some summons even have access to other spells!

Meanwhile the Eidolon is...just a pet Fighter with free, easy to access permanent buffs (i.e. evolutions). They are but a hammer in the Summoner's hefty box of tools. Hammers can do a lot, but sometimes it's better to just have the right tool for the job.

Dark Archive

Kaouse wrote:
Summon Monster X was always the most powerful ability of the Summoner, and it was left untouched by Unchained. The ability to summon a monster perfect for the environment you're in and immediately put it into combat exactly where you want it is immensely powerful.

That was my experience playing one. A half-dozen will-o-wisps attack us? I spam ice mephits that can cast CL 6 magic missile at them. They fire, I cast another batch, replacing the old ones who've shot their wad.

The eidolon was dead pretty much by round two of every combat. Love starting the game with a 'meatshield' that has half a d10 (+1 for Con) worth of hit points (less than the Summoner, who started out with max hit points at 1st level, since he was a PC!). Anything CR-appropriate that got a full attack on it killed it.

Shadow Lodge

Kaouse wrote:

Summon Monster X was always the most powerful ability of the Summoner, and it was left untouched by Unchained. The ability to summon a monster perfect for the environment you're in and immediately put it into combat exactly where you want it is immensely powerful.

It adds to the total hp of your team, it deals damage to the enemy with each passing round, and it doubles as a form of battlefield control simply by taking up space, allowing it to flank, threaten, perform combat maneuvers, etc. Some summons even have access to other spells!

Summoners want those summoned creatures to be attacked and killed by the enemy! How else are they going to use their 7+ extra spells of the highest spell a wizard of the same level can cast?

This was a major issue for my BBEG who found out that every other BBEG before her was killed by swarms of stirges (Wild-Caller archetype). If she spent any effort at all trying to kill the 1d4+1 stirges with her abilities, she would just be trading standard actions with a character who had way more uses of the exact same problem than she had solutions to it, and that character had three more friends!


BBEGs should have their own minions to take on the summons. If a BBEG doesn’t have minions, then he better have some serious area of effect attacks, like a dragon does.


Of course, if the Summoner has successfully single-handedly distracted the BBEG's minions, leaving their three friends to tackle the BBEG unhindered, they've still accomplished more than their fair share of the fight.

1 to 50 of 69 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Is Summoner too powerful? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.