Summoning Build for Melee Presence: Take 2

[Revolving Door Alternate]

Ok, making a second try at this since the previous post got bogged down in useless GM bashing. Probably at least partially my fault for giving too much lead-in information.

I have specifically been requested by several players to run a summoning build for my next PC in order to provide the group with a melee presence. If they get killed off, it is no problem and they can be easily replaced. I am (at least initially) hesitant about doing so, due to the issues that can come with having such a build in the party.

To be clear - I am trying to look at ways to mitigate the many issues (real or perceived) that a significant number of people have with a summoning build at the table.

Those issues include, but are not limited to:
A) Extremely complex causing mistakes and/or misunderstandings.
B) Most such builds already have an animal companion or eidolon. Many feel those are already as powerful as a second PC. If you start summoning creatures under your control, you are way too powerful.
C) Summoning builds hog the table time and spotlight. Making the game mostly about them. The other PC's are just tag-a-longs to clean up the crumbs when the summoner finally runs out of things to do.
D) "He can do everything! My character doesn't even need to be here!" A summoning build pretty easily has the potential to overshadow other builds, especially if they are not very well optimized.
Anything else that should be added to this list?

I have had some ideas. I would like your opinions on whether you think they will help or hurt the situation. Also if you have any other ideas that may help with the listed concerns.
1) Obviously this requires extremely good organization. I am very good at having everything already prepared ahead of time, so I don't have to go looking stuff up in 14 books.
2) Use a build or archetype that has Summon Nature's Ally rather than Summon Monster. The SNA list is usually somewhat less powerful than SM. Also they don't have the intelligence, spells, healing, magical abilities, resistances, etc... So they can't replace a whole raft of other PC builds. They are also mostly simpler in the options of what they can do. So they should also be quicker and easier to run and not take up too much table time.
3) If the build has an animal companion or eidolon, then don't build it for major combat grinder. It is pretty easy to have an animal companion to be a mount, body guard, or scout. It is even easier to build an eidolon to be a body-guard, scout, mount, diplomat, buff-bot, skill monkey, etc...
4) Have the character follow a theme. For example: a Vanarra that only summons Ape type creatures. If he can at all help it, he doesn't use any of the other types of critters. This will further reduce complexity and confusion.
5) Take the Superior Summons feat. Then summon one level below so there are multiples. But summoning player won't run the creatures. Have simple clear sheets and pawns ready and hand them to the other players. Then the summoning player won't be using up huge amounts of table time. The other players will have another creature to play for a short while. Would have to discuss with the GM, but I doubt most would have a problem with each creature delaying until the controlling player's turn next comes up.
6) Don't take ferocious summons, evolved summoning, or any of the others that make the summoned creatures more complex/powerful.Again that would keep the complexity and power down. Note: I am unsure about moonlight, sunlight, and starlight summons. No huge complexity or power, but would allow them to bypass some of the most common DR's.

Opinions, ideas, additions, questions, comments, concerns?

[JiaYou]

I would say Augmented Summoning is an absolute must regardless of which summoning you take. But I think Occultist Arcanist or a WIS-based Monster Tactician Inquisitor are the best because they are standard-action summons which last for minutes rather than rounds. Particularly at low levels SM and SNA are very similar, so if you're looking to take weaker summons just choose weaker SM summons (like Fire Elementals or Grigs instead of Earth or Air Elementals).

For a theme, you could go with "Four legs good, two legs bad", and certainly at lower levels that takes away the most powerful summons. If you go with Superior Summons it's especially true since you won't be summoning Cheetahs with SM3, you'll be summoning 1d3 grigs or weaker elementals or worker ants or 1d4+1 dogs...

[Quiddity]

Two words: aid another.

Summoning seems more powerful than many d20 build strategies and seems to hog spotlight time because it is and does.

That sentence, however, applies to all wizards and 9th level caster strategies, yet people manage to play them in parties without their non-caster fellow players immediately rejecting the game. Your solution is the same one people have been using for 20* years: pretend you can’t do what you can do.

Is it a good solution? No. Your question deliberately rejects a good solution since a good solution would require changing the parameters of the game (rules in play, fellow PC class selections, etc.). But again, that’s okay, because others have similarly rejected a good solution and instead used a kludge for this problem for two dec— for a period of time relevant to this discussion. Sometimes you could eat a nutritious meal but time is short so you eat a bag of chips. The best answer isn’t always best.

So what you will do is research the summons you want to call before the game and concentrate on a narrow list so other players become familiar with them. Then you will make sure that the summons “work for” the other PCs: they act as dedicated and loyal meatshields, they aid another whenever it could be conceivably valuable, they drag injured characters out of harm’s way, they use their abilities to heal or restore debuffed PCs, and so on.

You style your character as a support. For example: s/he was previously a military officer operating as an aide to a high-ranking front-line officer, keeping his soldiers alive and carrying messages and goods between them.

Have the summons be the “same” entities again and again, giving them distinct personalities. . . with relationships with the other PCs. If your summons like some PCs and dislike others, or like a particular PC but really dislike you, that adds some hooks for the other PCs to engage with. Run with that and have some summons straight-up consider themselves the partners of specific PCs. You’re just the portal for the dire tiger’s manifestation: her real pal is the party barbarian, and she’s annoyed that you waited so long to summon her: her buddy’s in trouble. Have the party members take command of their more personally-associated summons. All of this is pure rp, but note that it addresses points (c) and (d) in the main post completely.

Note that the summons can be plenty powerful in this case. So long as the other players feel that the summons complement their characters and the summons don’t demand table time be centered on you more than other players, there’s no need to reduce summons power.

The only caveat: no summon can step on a PC’s role, if you have those, but that’s an issue you’d have with any fullcaster.

To make this work, it’s best to talk to the other players beforehand. Note that your approach is important here: you’re not offering them a compromise, you’re offering them game assets, literal free stuff. Let them have some input into their favorite summons, informing the personality of the critter or the critter’s species itself.

You haven’t solved all of the problems with how fullcasters fit into d20 world backgrounds (they really don’t), but those problems exist even if no one ever summons a single beastie.

Will your character be far more powerful and useful than most noncasters? Undoubtedly. It won’t feel that way, however, because your character finds its power in the power of others.

* I hate this sentence.

[Revolving Door Alternate]

To a certain extent, I agree with most of what you both wrote. A few points.

I don't think I have ever noticed the Monster Tactician Inquisitor. I will give it a look see.

The 'aid another' action won't provide a melee presence for the group. No one in the group is interested in playing a melee character at this time. (I usually find them eminently boring. Personal preference.)

I don't want to get into yet another "martial vs. caster" dispute. However, I have never felt it is nearly as huge of an issue as some people seem to think it is. I believe it is more of an issue of play style (both the players and the GM), optimization, and intelligent tactics. I think I have seen nearly any basic type of build at least hold their own and and at least occasionally dominate the table (except maybe a rogue). I have also seen nearly any basic type of build be nearly useless.

This wasn't intended for low level play. The party is nearly 10th level and the campaign was intended to go to 18th.

I never hold back and just not play the character to his potential. To me that is disrespectful and insulting to the rest of the group. I hate when it is done to me and I won't do it to others. So, if necessary, I make builds/concepts that are self limiting. That is part of the reason for considering things like SNA instead of SM. It reduces some of the shenanigans the summoning character can pull. Yet, it seems like they would make perfectly adequate meat shields.

I do REALLY like the idea of it being the same creatures over and over again. I can even give them a name on the card I hand the players that are controlling them. They can develop the creatures personality over time.

Stepping on the PC's role should not be an issue. As I said, no one wants to play a melee character anyway. That's about 95% of what you can do with SNA anyway.

[nicholas storm]

I played an occultist and found that bralani azata was a good blocker (SM5). Good HP, DR, and spell like abilities (mirror image particularly). For blocking, I don't think augment summoning is required.

[Melkiador]

The monster tactician inquisitor probably has the strongest summons of anyone, and can spam them as much as anyone. The other summoning builds can do other great things in addition to summoning, but the monster tactician is probably the strongest pure summoning option. It's also one of the few things to get banned from PFS based on power alone.

[Temperans]

I will say from my biased experience, having a guard Eidolon isn't the best if the GM wont work with you. In my case my character died after getting its brain eaten due to being in the front line when the GM moved the characters.

For actual advise, how about a Preservationist Alchemist? This along with the infusion discovery let's summon monster be done by everyone in the group and each can choose what animal they want.

Later on if you need more power, you can grab Planar Preservatinist. Now the party can summon Monsters instead.

The idea of always using the same summons sounds really flavorful, although it doesn't work as well for the alchemist.