| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My opinion when designing the initial Eidolon, we need as many side grade options as possible so we can get that flavor and so every Eidolon is different.
Here's a challenge for you - go find a friend, and each of you build a Summoner without communicating with each other at all. If you both build an identical Eidolon, you win!
That means the Eidolons must -
Share the same base type. With four options, that's a 25% chance of randomly picking the same thing.
Share the same attacks. Let's pretend for a second that the descriptions are irrelevant, which is untrue, but let's just do mechanics. You can pick 3 from damage types for each of two attacks, so assuming essentially random that means theres like, a 11% chance your attacks are mechanically the same.
Then, have have to share the same skills. That means you need to essentially pick the same backgrounds, the same ancestry, the same intelligence, and then select exactly the same skill choices from your elective skills. There is approximately zero chance, given the range of skills to pick from, that you will have the same choices here.
So what does that mean?
It means that as things stand right now, there is essnetially no chance at all that any two people will build an Eidolon that is mechanically similar to anyone else's, unless they choose to.
The very problem you are complaining about- identical eidolons - does not even actually exist.
Note: Eidolons aren't built randomly, but the point is you're already making a lot of choices at level one that define your Eidolon.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've still yet to see, figure it, or hear about any summoner not taking a dedication as finding a place to excel in combat. Even an investigator can have an impressive round and that's the lowest combat martial I can think of.
Still feel like boost eidolon holds your action economy back.
Still haven't felt like either half of the class combined makes up for another more focused class as a whole.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've still yet to see, figure it, or hear about any summoner not taking a dedication as finding a place to excel in combat. Even an investigator can have an impressive round and that's the lowest combat martial I can think of.
Still feel like boost eidolon holds your action economy back.
Still haven't felt like either half of the class combined makes up for another more focused class as a whole.
Asking for the class to excel seems like an impossible standard.
Specialists excel - Summoners are built as a jack of all trades. In straight capability, they're always going to come in behind a specialist, because they're designed to be just a bit behind multiple types of specialists.
They get spells just behind a spellcaster, and they fight just behind a martial.
No one else can claim that.
That's special, but its on you as a player to make it work in a party, and you as a player to come to terms that means you won't be the "best" at anything.
That's not a problem for you not to be the best.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've still yet to see, figure it, or hear about any summoner not taking a dedication as finding a place to excel in combat. Even an investigator can have an impressive round and that's the lowest combat martial I can think of.
Still feel like boost eidolon holds your action economy back.
Still haven't felt like either half of the class combined makes up for another more focused class as a whole.
Asking for the class to excel seems like an impossible standard.
Specialists excel - Summoners are built as a jack of all trades. In straight capability, they're always going to come in behind a specialist, because they're designed to be just a bit behind multiple types of specialists.
They get spells just behind a spellcaster, and they fight just behind a martial.
No one else can claim that.
That's special, but its on you as a player to make it work in a party, and you as a player to come to terms that means you won't be the "best" at anything.
That's not a problem for you not to be the best.
Excel can also mean equal to. Which it still is lacking in that.
It's an impossible standard to you and your tastes. For me it's a base expectation from any class.
It's not up to me to Force a square peg into a round hole. It's been repeatedly shown in 2e how half measures result in poor performance in this system.
If that's what you desire fine, but I'm not interested in discussing your fancy of believing a mechanically weak class is fine because your DM has a hair trigger with banning things and your fellow players get butt hurt over non issues because they cannot seperate objectivity from their feelings and knee jerk reactions
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is a 25% chance of creating the exact same Eidolon at level 1.
And a 100% chance of creating an Eidolon that feels practically the same at level 1 since every single Eidolon feels the same. Their level 1 ability is meh and doesn't really change much of the feel of them.
Vezren, I just laid out the mechanical differences in Eidolons at level 1. Theres a ton of them.
And I didnt even have to pull out the "in a roleplaying game, descriptive differences of appearance, personality and being are all fully relevant whether you like it or not".
Its simply factually not true that any Eidolons are identical, unless their creators intend for them to be so.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Excel can also mean equal to.
Citation needed. Every definition of excel i have implies that something is exceptional in some way.
In this case, Summoners are exceptional in their mechanics which allow them to have two bodies and extra actions with those bodies, without the inherent limitations of inferior minions like animal companions.
That is how they, definitionally, excel - though you don't appear to be interested in that.
You appear to desire the companion based class to excel and be exceptional by comparison to classes not based on a companion - which, I'll admit, is a very strange idea to me.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Excel can also mean equal to.Citation needed. Every definition of excel i have implies that something is exceptional in some way.
In this case, Summoners are exceptional in their mechanics which allow them to have two bodies and extra actions with those bodies, without the inherent limitations of inferior minions like animal companions.
That is how they, definitionally, excel - though you don't appear to be interested in that.
You appear to desire the companion based class to excel and be exceptional by comparison to classes not based on a companion - which, I'll admit, is a very strange idea to me.
Forgive me I was speaking within context of the game. A barbarian and rogue and ranger all Excel at doing damage. Yet they have the same to hit bonus, they just go about doing said damage in different ways.
That is what I meant. Every class has action economy boosters they can use and result in more impact on the game board then summoner. So the base act together while nice, doesn't cut it. Yes I know what mark said and it would help, but still regardless.
You got two options here for eidolon.
Give it options in combat, from what I've seen from feats and features, it's very bare bones. Options like unique monster abilities as feats or unique actions they themselves can take like many classes can line flurry of maneuvers. Combat grab. Furious grab. Running reload. Etc etc.
Or give it power.
But you don't hamper the one thing with potential with a per round binary action sink (boost eidolon)
After my groups scrapped boost eidolon and instead bumped the damage dice size for each attack by 1 and changed the eidolon stats to 18str and 14con. While you may not have been strictly impressive damage Wise in combat. What you were was open ended enough to choose a lot of last action options to perform in combat based upon how you built your summoner. The fun went way higher. We still felt it was on the weak side but not much worse than a swashbuckler at that point.
If summoner gets published as is (I doubt it) that's what my group will be doing. But then, my group doesn't see that as too much or overpowered, they don't get upset and didn't feel overshadowed and the DM, me and others, didn't think it was remotely ban worthy
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
No. There isn't. Show me where there is customization with the Eidolon itself aside from "picking an Eidolon package"There isn't. No. Skills do not count. Eidolons suck at all skills and have zero skill feats.
Using your imagination to say well, their attacks are different. No. They aren't. They ALL deal 1d8 damage. They have zero crunch. I don't know how else I can explain this to you.
Pick a package, pick your weapons (damage types matter), pick your skills.
You're attempting to prove there is no customization by claiming that the customization that exists "doesn't count" because you subjectively think it doesnt do enough.
Its easy to "win" a debate when you just dismiss anything that contradicts your position.
There is a 25% chance of creating the exact same Eidolon at level 1.
And a 100% chance of creating an Eidolon that feels practically the same at level 1 since every single Eidolon feels the same. Their level 1 ability is meh and doesn't really change much of the feel of them.
Vezren, I just laid out the mechanical differences in Eidolons at level 1. Theres a ton of them.
And I didnt even have to pull out the "in a roleplaying game, descriptive differences of appearance, personality and being are all fully relevant whether you like it or not".
Its simply factually not true that any Eidolons are identical, unless their creators intend for them to be so.
No. There isn't. Show me where there is customization with the Eidolon itself aside from "picking an Eidolon package"
There isn't. No. Skills do not count. Eidolons suck at all skills and have zero skill feats.
Using your imagination to say well, their attacks are different. No. They aren't. They ALL deal 1d8 damage. They have zero crunch. I don't know how else I can explain this to you.
Skills an Eilodolns can be good at
AthleticsAcrobatics
Stealth
Thievery
Also I think there is a chance Eilodolns could have varied ability scores but I don't know by how much. I think they're so similar in the palytest is so it a constant in the data.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tbf, I have no dog in the race for the build a bear option. I'm not for or against it and I'm fine with eidolons coming in packages so long as there is a good few more options to start with in the official book. Like double.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tbf, I have no dog in the race for the build a bear option. I'm not for or against it and I'm fine with eidolons coming in packages so long as there is a good few more options to start with in the official book. Like double.
Something buried in one of your posts I wanted to address -
You're not going to find me, or likely a lot of posters, who disagree that Eidolons could use minor tweaks at level 1 specifically like raising Strength to 18.
I definitely agree that the current "gaps" in accuracy where Eidolons lag behind in absolute terms should be removed. That means an 18 main stat at level 1.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tbf, I have no dog in the race for the build a bear option. I'm not for or against it and I'm fine with eidolons coming in packages so long as there is a good few more options to start with in the official book. Like double.Something buried in one of your posts I wanted to address -
You're not going to find me, or likely a lot of posters, who disagree that Eidolons could use minor tweaks at level 1 specifically like raising Strength to 18.
I definitely agree that the current "gaps" in accuracy where Eidolons lag behind in absolute terms should be removed. That means an 18 main stat at level 1.
That's fair yeah. I'm still going to remove boost eidolon if it stays as is though and do my mentioned changes. My play group was unable to find any imbalance by doing so and only increased the fun for the summoner from round to round and how it could support the party.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's fair yeah. I'm still going to remove boost eidolon if it stays as is though and do my mentioned changes. My play group was unable to find any imbalance by doing so and only increased the fun for the summoner from round to round and how it could support the party.Tbf, I have no dog in the race for the build a bear option. I'm not for or against it and I'm fine with eidolons coming in packages so long as there is a good few more options to start with in the official book. Like double.Something buried in one of your posts I wanted to address -
You're not going to find me, or likely a lot of posters, who disagree that Eidolons could use minor tweaks at level 1 specifically like raising Strength to 18.
I definitely agree that the current "gaps" in accuracy where Eidolons lag behind in absolute terms should be removed. That means an 18 main stat at level 1.
I doubt you're going to fundamentally break things by doing that - especially if that sort of enhancement works particularly well for your group, which it may.
My group is definitely more susceptible to questioning, though, why the player with two characters (and two rolls on most out of combat skill checks, twice the Exploration activities, twice the 18+ ability scores for skill checks, etc.) still gets to do as much damage as the monk and also gets the same level spells as the wizard. Or in this case, more damage per hit than the monk whose going to come out ahead only over time due to flurry.
Those things matter a lot to players I know, and I suspect I'm not alone.
My preference is still to try and fix Boost by making it more interesting, potentially by allowing it to fiddle with damage types and weapon traits, making it a situational power spike that rewards player interaction. Allowing Boost to add Fire Damage to my Fire Elemental isn't going to offend anyone when that turns out to be the key to wrecking an Ice Monster.
IMO - Boost Eidolon and Reinforce Eidolon should be switched to free actions BUT you must choose which one at the start of the turn and can't change it until next turn. THAT way people dont boost, attack twice, then reinforce. You need to make a choice if you want to deal more damage or tank.
I suggested somewhere making a focus spell that let you treat them as a stance, essentially. One action to turn them on, and one action to switch between them.
This isnt a bad concept, in my opinion. I'd still like there to be some sort of action cost myself, but I think reducing it is a direction worth exploring... especially if we can get a third option to spice things up further somehow.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's fair yeah. I'm still going to remove boost eidolon if it stays as is though and do my mentioned changes. My play group was unable to find any imbalance by doing so and only increased the fun for the summoner from round to round and how it could support the party.Tbf, I have no dog in the race for the build a bear option. I'm not for or against it and I'm fine with eidolons coming in packages so long as there is a good few more options to start with in the official book. Like double.Something buried in one of your posts I wanted to address -
You're not going to find me, or likely a lot of posters, who disagree that Eidolons could use minor tweaks at level 1 specifically like raising Strength to 18.
I definitely agree that the current "gaps" in accuracy where Eidolons lag behind in absolute terms should be removed. That means an 18 main stat at level 1.
I doubt you're going to fundamentally break things by doing that - especially if that sort of enhancement works particularly well for your group, which it may.
My group is definitely more susceptible to questioning, though, why the player with two characters (and two rolls on most out of combat skill checks, twice the Exploration activities, twice the 18+ ability scores for skill checks, etc.) still gets to do as much damage as the monk and also gets the same level spells as the wizard. Or in this case, more damage per hit than the monk whose going to come out ahead only over time due to flurry.
Those things matter a lot to players I know, and I suspect I'm not alone.
My preference is still to try and fix Boost by making it more interesting, potentially by allowing it to fiddle with damage types and weapon traits, making it a situational power spike that rewards player interaction. Allowing Boost to add Fire Damage to my Fire Elemental isn't going to offend anyone when that turns out to be the key to wrecking an Ice Monster.
The problem is that doesn't solve the issue of it being a binary decision to use every single round.
And the only time you don't, is if you multicass into something that lets you use a more powerful single action activity.
I don't like it about bard and they are powerful. Why would I like it about summoner.
It doesn't feel like a choice.
The problem is that doesn't solve the issue of it being a binary decision to use every single round.
And the only time you don't, is if you multicass into something that lets you use a more powerful single action activity.
I don't like it about bard and they are powerful. Why would I like it about summoner.
It doesn't feel like a choice.
This is a fair sentiment, and absolutely worth considering.
Let me ask this then - what if the choice was explicitly stated as, "In order to hit as hard as a Martial Class, you must temporarily give up your action economy advantage for being a Summoner."
I believe that's essentially the intent of the current design - at which point you can absolutely argue that you arent currently rewarded enough for trading that action. I'm all for exploring that context.
I do think though, that if we arent spending the action to augment our "pseudo martial" damage we'll likely see a result that splits the difference where we are currently - we'd probably end up in a situation where we're slightly better off than we are now without Boost, but worse than we are with it.
Thats essentially what you got by replacing boost with an increase to your damage die (essentially +1 damage per die).
Is that actually better?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO - Boost Eidolon and Reinforce Eidolon should be switched to free actions BUT you must choose which one at the start of the turn and can't change it until next turn. THAT way people dont boost, attack twice, then reinforce. You need to make a choice if you want to deal more damage or tank.I suggested somewhere making a focus spell that let you treat them as a stance, essentially. One action to turn them on, and one action to switch between them.
This isnt a bad concept, in my opinion. I'd still like there to be some sort of action cost myself, but I think reducing it is a direction worth exploring... especially if we can get a third option to spice things up further somehow.
You mean like shield, raise a shield, demoralize, feint, bon mot, recall knowledge, guidance, true strike, move, attack, etc etc etc etc etc etc
Yeah that would spice it up for me alright
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is that doesn't solve the issue of it being a binary decision to use every single round.
And the only time you don't, is if you multicass into something that lets you use a more powerful single action activity.
I don't like it about bard and they are powerful. Why would I like it about summoner.
It doesn't feel like a choice.
This is a fair sentiment, and absolutely worth considering.
Let me ask this then - what if the choice was explicitly stated as, "In order to hit as hard as a Martial Class, you must temporarily give up your action economy advantage for being a Summoner."
I believe that's essentially the intent of the current design - at which point you can absolutely argue that you arent currently rewarded enough for trading that action. I'm all for exploring that context.
I do think though, that if we arent spending the action to augment our "pseudo martial" damage we'll likely see a result that splits the difference where we are currently - we'd probably end up in a situation where we're slightly better off than we are now without Boost, but worse than we are with it.
Thats essentially what you got by replacing boost with an increase to your damage die (essentially +1 damage per die).
Is that actually better?
I don't share that balance point of view, but if my options were yes or no?
Emphatic yes it's better.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You mean like shield, raise a shield, demoralize, feint, bon mot, recall knowledge, guidance, true strike, move, attack, etc etc etc etc etc etc
Yeah that would spice it up for me alright
Yep, it'd feel SO much better to get something else in your rounds actions.
I don't share that balance point of view, but if my options were yes or no?
Emphatic yes it's better.
A big YES from me. I'd rather my summoners get turn variety over a locked round of actions for bit more strength.
A big YES from me. I'd rather my summoners get turn variety over a locked round of actions for bit more strength.
Does the answer change if Boost gets stronger with more damage (lets say +3 damage) vs a static die increase of a step, but still costs an action?
Does it change if Boost and Reinforce keep their current benefits, but become stances?
I'm seriously curious on this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Big Hypothetical Step Here - what if Boost Eidolon and Reinforce Eidolon were Focus Spells, stacked (but were limited by focus and action cost), and worked essentially like Evolution Surge (ie last for a minute), but for Attack and Defense essentially?
Boost Eidolon could add a status bonus to damage or weapon traits for a minute, and later heightenings added more damage, elemental damage, and better weapon traits.
Reinforce Eidolon could add its current benefits or a lump sum of temporary hp, and higher heightenings added the ability to do specific resistances that scaled way better than half spell level.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A big YES from me. I'd rather my summoners get turn variety over a locked round of actions for bit more strength.Does the answer change if Boost gets stronger with more damage (lets say +3 damage) vs a static die increase of a step, but still costs an action?
Does it change if Boost and Reinforce keep their current benefits, but become stances?
I'm seriously curious on this.
You make boost better but then I feel action locked again Wich is more unfun than the fun of doing more damage. I'd still rather it not be a thing.
Stances might be ok. As that's just a first round set-up similar to monk. Though I'd love a similar feat line that would eventually allow me to change between the stances as a free action at higher levels.
Big Hypothetical Step Here - what if Boost Eidolon and Reinforce Eidolon were Focus Spells, stacked (but were limited by focus and action cost), and worked essentially like Evolution Surge (ie last for a minute), but for Attack and Defense essentially?
Boost Eidolon could add a status bonus to damage or weapon traits for a minute, and later heightenings added more damage, elemental damage, and better weapon traits.
Reinforce Eidolon could add its current benefits or a lump sum of temporary hp, and higher heightenings added the ability to do specific resistances that scaled way better than half spell level.
I actually don't like that unless you changed the base summoner progression experience to that of a Oracle where you get automatic focus point and refocus feat progression. Wich I don't expect.
I think evolution surge is an example of a good focus power. As it's not one you rely on every round but when the occasion calls for it it's indispensable. Like how I view cackle.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A big YES from me. I'd rather my summoners get turn variety over a locked round of actions for bit more strength.Does the answer change if Boost gets stronger with more damage (lets say +3 damage) vs a static die increase of a step, but still costs an action?
Does it change if Boost and Reinforce keep their current benefits, but become stances?
I'm seriously curious on this.
You make boost better but then I feel action locked again Wich is more unfun than the fun of doing more damage. I'd still rather it not be a thing.
Stances might be ok. As that's just a first round set-up similar to monk. Though I'd love a similar feat line that would eventually allow me to change between the stances as a free action at higher levels.
100% agree. I'll take a hit in damage to get an interesting class to play. I'd be ok with a stance-like ability you spend an action to start up.
what if Boost Eidolon and Reinforce Eidolon were Focus Spells, stacked (but were limited by focus and action cost), and worked essentially like Evolution Surge (ie last for a minute), but for Attack and Defense essentially?
like it better than it is now but I like it less than a stance like option. I'd likely like it even less if we get better and/or more fun/interesting focus spells to use. I'd hate to pick between math fixer focus and the fun option I want to use my focus on.
Stances might be ok. As that's just a first round set-up similar to monk. Though I'd love a similar feat line that would eventually allow me to change between the stances as a free action at higher levels.
The stance change as a free action thing could essentially just be an alternative to the "extra action for sustaining" feat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The stance change as a free action thing could essentially just be an alternative to the "extra action for sustaining" feat.
Stances might be ok. As that's just a first round set-up similar to monk. Though I'd love a similar feat line that would eventually allow me to change between the stances as a free action at higher levels.
maybe, not against it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Big Brain Stance to increase the spellcasting capability if you chose that route :P
You say that with a ":P" but a potent, short range Status penalty to saves is consistent with Frightened/Bon Mot etc and could easily be tied to a reasonable range to your Eidolon. And status penalty would prevent stacking.
Destabilize Eidolon - Conduit Cantrip
You create a resonance with your Eidolon through your bond, destabilizing magical defenses near your eidolon. Enemies within reach of your eidolon suffer a -1 status penalty on saves against your spells.
Could also make it a circumstance penalty if it was determined that level of stacking was acceptable.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I appreciate the constructive turn
|
Question, what's the line between what counts as the same "effect" for the Summoner's shared life pool?
Some examples about what I mean by this:
-AoE Saving Throws: Definitely the same effect, example given for how it works.
-Sweep Monster Ability: 2Action effect, target two foes, roll the Attack and Damage once and compare against both foes. Presumeably, I would take the worse Attack result for the Summoner or Eidolon if the attack would happen to crit one of them, for instance, and apply damage once. Seems simple enough, but then there's...
Skittering Assault [two-action] The gogiteth Strides three times. Once per Stride, it can attempt a leg Strike against a creature in its reach at any point during the Stride; it must make each attack against a different creature, but it doesn’t apply its multiple attack penalty until after making all its Strikes. If any of the Strikes result in a critical failure, Skittering Assault ends.
If the Gogiteth struck both the Summoner and the Eidolon as a part of Skittering Strike, does that count as being hit by the Same Effect for the purposes of the shared Life Link? Or, does the fact that the ability calls a new action as part of the effect somehow break it up, allowing the creature to stack damage on both the Summoner and the Eidolon at once?
Seemed like a relevant question to ask during a playtest, so here I am asking it.
Good question! The Core Rulebook defines an effect as the result of an ability. Even though there is a check in between (Strike), the result of the Skittering Assault ability is damage to the characters it targets. If both a Summoner and her eidolon are targeted, they are more likely to take some damage, but should not take double if both Strikes suceed, imo.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Question, what's the line between what counts as the same "effect" for the Summoner's shared life pool?
Some examples about what I mean by this:
-AoE Saving Throws: Definitely the same effect, example given for how it works.
-Sweep Monster Ability: 2Action effect, target two foes, roll the Attack and Damage once and compare against both foes. Presumeably, I would take the worse Attack result for the Summoner or Eidolon if the attack would happen to crit one of them, for instance, and apply damage once. Seems simple enough, but then there's...
Skittering Assault [two-action] The gogiteth Strides three times. Once per Stride, it can attempt a leg Strike against a creature in its reach at any point during the Stride; it must make each attack against a different creature, but it doesn’t apply its multiple attack penalty until after making all its Strikes. If any of the Strikes result in a critical failure, Skittering Assault ends.If the Gogiteth struck both the Summoner and the Eidolon as a part of Skittering Strike, does that count as being hit by the Same Effect for the purposes of the shared Life Link? Or, does the fact that the ability calls a new action as part of the effect somehow break it up, allowing the creature to stack damage on both the Summoner and the Eidolon at once?
Seemed like a relevant question to ask during a playtest, so here I am asking it.
I would count is at separate strikes against separate targets otherwise it just gets goofy in the mind's eye and on a grid. Summoner's are weak when attacked at two points. I wouldn't circumvent it except for AoE attacks like fireball, breath weapons,and similar attacks.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My idea is that if the ability could target the same target twice (like a Monk's flurry), it counts separately; in the other cases, the worse result rule is applied.
So, for Skittering Assault, I'd rule that the Summoner only takes the worse of the two attacks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My idea is that if the ability could target the same target twice (like a Monk's flurry), it counts separately; in the other cases, the worse result rule is applied.
So, for Skittering Assault, I'd rule that the Summoner only takes the worse of the two attacks.
I think this is a good rule of thumb.
The idea behind the Eidolon damage rule is not to punish a Summoner for having two bodies- its to limit the potential incoming damage while still increasing their general vulnerability to multi targeting attacks.
This rule of thumb is consistent with that.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My idea is that if the ability could target the same target twice (like a Monk's flurry), it counts separately; in the other cases, the worse result rule is applied.
So, for Skittering Assault, I'd rule that the Summoner only takes the worse of the two attacks.I think this is a good rule of thumb.
The idea behind the Eidolon damage rule is not to punish a Summoner for having two bodies- its to limit the potential incoming damage while still increasing their general vulnerability to multi targeting attacks.
This rule of thumb is consistent with that.
I won't run it this way. Two bodies is two bodies. If the creature gets to attack both, both bodies take hits. Otherwise, it's not a different creature. Period.
I already know in advance you will justify what you want. So I'll leave it there.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I already know in advance you will justify what you want. So I'll leave it there.
I'm just justifying it with the actual rules which tell you that a Summoner and Eidolon subjected to the same effect only suffer damage once.
Resolving things twice against the Summoner/Eidolon is straight houserule-nerfing them.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Summoner and Eidolon would take damage that each body received, that's not nerfing them through house-rule; that's literally how the class plays.
Both the Summoner and Eidolon are being attacked separately.
"it can attempt a leg Strike against a creature in its reach at any point during the Stride; it must make each attack against a different creature, but it doesn’t apply its multiple attack penalty until after making all its Strikes."
It's easy to see that this is not an AoE-type situation like a fireball to the face, these are just strikes. It's not 1 strike being applied to both the Summoner and the Eidolon's bodies, they are separate strikes being applied to each.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It would just be silly if that was not two instances of damage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah it's multiple strikes not an area attack. 2 targets is 2 hits as each strike is a single target attack.
Yeah it's multiple strikes not an area attack. 2 targets is 2 hits as each strike is a single target attack.
Then you’d have a summoner and eidolon both take damage from chin lightening as well?
The rulebook is pretty clear, the effects of Skittering Strike should not be doubled against a summoner.