|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Birds get flight.. at level 1. Soooo....Honestly, that kinda sounds like a you problem.
The game balance shouldn't be upheaved just because you specifically don't get to play at high levels.
And it's also incredibly disingenuous to say the eidolon "doesn't get flight" just because it doesn't get it at the levels you play. It does get permanent flight, at 16th level, when it's a balanced option.
I don't think a majority of my character concepts work before 6th level. But I'd never blame the game for that, or demand all classes get frontloaded to fix it. A fighter doesn't start at level 1 with 3 or 4 feats just for the sake of it, so summoner shouldn't either.
Go to the Bestiary and look at the differences between a bird and a dragon.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
This arguing is getting people nowhere. If you have a plan for customization, create it and show the designers it can be balanced.
Balance is very tricky with the summoner. You know where the math has to be. Work back from that math to create balanced customization.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay. Now compare a level 1 dragon EIDOLON with a level 1 bird AC.Go to the Bestiary and look at the differences between a bird and a dragon.Birds get flight.. at level 1. Soooo....Honestly, that kinda sounds like a you problem.
The game balance shouldn't be upheaved just because you specifically don't get to play at high levels.
And it's also incredibly disingenuous to say the eidolon "doesn't get flight" just because it doesn't get it at the levels you play. It does get permanent flight, at 16th level, when it's a balanced option.
I don't think a majority of my character concepts work before 6th level. But I'd never blame the game for that, or demand all classes get frontloaded to fix it. A fighter doesn't start at level 1 with 3 or 4 feats just for the sake of it, so summoner shouldn't either.
The bird can fly and peck and scratch. That's what it gets. That's all it EVER gets.
The Dragon get's 5 different attacks it can pull from and it's breath weapon. At 7th Draconic Frenzy. And then Wyrm's Breath at 17th
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Work back from that math to create balanced customization.
There's also the challenge of creating meaningful customization without taking away things from the Eidolon, and giving it back less than it currently gets.
AS AN EXAMPLE, For comparison to Familiar abilities, an Eidolon gets built in (for all intents) for free -
Accompanist (essentially, it can aid you if you're Trained or better in Performance)
Darkvision (currently)
Independent (because of how Act Together Works)
Kinspeech (Eidolons get their native language)
Manual Dexterity
Skilled (essentially, many times over - and the Eidolon actually gets the benefits of being trained or better in its Summoners skills, which is a significant improvement)
Speech
Toolbearer (sortof)
Touch Telepathy (Eidolon gets a WAY better version for free)
Lifelink (essentially)
Share Senses (Eidolon version is way better)
Many of the remaining familiar abilities, like all the movement modes, the damage avoidance and resistance, focus and healing effects, and special senses and abilities are all pretty clearly things that should cost a Summoner character resources or focus to obtain because they indirectly effect combat (if not combat math).
You could technically create 'false' customization by crippling what an Eidolon is currently capable of, and letting them have bits and pieces of it back - but ultimately, that's a really terrible trade.
If a player doesn't want their Eidolon to be able to open doors, they can just not have it open doors.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
^Here we goSo just to make sure I understand. The whole of Summoner needs to fit in something like 10-13 pages if it follows the same as other classes?Nope, we have a little more extra space for it than that. But the one in the playtest is already almost 13 pages long (I'm not counting the focus spells because they go in the spells section).
Yeah, that doesn't make me hopeful we'll get a total of 11 to 12 base forms in Secrets of Magic. Eventually, probably, but not at first.
As Mark points out, the playtest version is almost 13 pages long. Adding 7-8 base forms is an additional 4, maybe 5 pages. Another 10-15 feats, which would be on the low end for a class, is at least 1-3 pages. Plus the normal artwork, sidebars with example builds, and any new base mechanics, we're talking almost double that normal 10-13 page.
The book hasn't gone to the printers, so I'm not making any bets here, but that's an awful lot of real estate for a single class.
Go to the Bestiary and look at the differences between a bird and a dragon.
Wouldn't the difference between the dragon and bird animal companion be more relevant to this discussion? The stats for an AC is not as far off as I had assumed at first.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wouldn't the difference between the dragon and bird animal companion be more relevant to this discussion? The stats for an AC is not as far off as I had assumed at first.
Animal Companions actually start off pretty strong, relatively.
They suffer in how they grow, and their inability to benefit from items and their associated benefits toward combat math.
It doesn't take too long until an Animal Companions main attack is essentially a Martial characters 'second MAP' quality attack, and their AC suffers in a big way unless you take a Dex Companion and continuously invest feats in developing it.
The big issue with AC's that in order to keep them relevant in combat, you need to invest a LOT of feats in them. And even then, they're eventually not anywhere near PC levels of combat proficiency.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wouldn't the difference between the dragon and bird animal companion be more relevant to this discussion? The stats for an AC is not as far off as I had assumed at first.Animal Companions actually start off pretty strong, relatively.
They suffer in how they grow, and their inability to benefit from items and their associated benefits toward combat math.
It doesn't take too long until an Animal Companions main attack is essentially a Martial characters 'second MAP' quality attack, and their AC suffers in a big way unless you take a Dex Companion and continuously invest feats in developing it.
The big issue with AC's that in order to keep them relevant in combat, you need to invest a LOT of feats in them. And even then, they're eventually not anywhere near PC levels of combat proficiency.
I don't want to come off too harsh, but all of that is besides the point that I was making.
My point was that ACs start off close enough to Eidolons in stats that comparing a Bird AC against the Dragon AC would be a useful comparison at level 1, which happens to be the level Venzen and Rysky were talking about.
I am well aware that ACs taper off in efficiency at later levels. What else would you expect from a feat/feat equivalent?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't want to come off too harsh, but all of that is besides the point that I was making.My point was that ACs start off close enough to Eidolons in stats that comparing a Bird AC against the Dragon AC would be a useful comparison at level 1, which happens to be the level Venzen and Rysky were talking about.
I am well aware that ACs taper off in efficiency at later levels. What else would you expect from a feat/feat equivalent?
The point I was making was that Level 1 is not the only relevant Level. Making the comparison at that level gives skewed results, because its essentially the single most favorable point to be comparing the Animal Companion and the Eidolon.
As you progress beyond that point, not only do the numbers rapidly cease to be effectively close, the cost associated with the Animal Companion increases as well.
I didn't make that explicit, so much as lay out the underlying information to make that determination.
So yeah, you can compare them at level 1 - but any such comparison deserves an extremely bolded asterisk for 'relevance', since that comparison is rapidly going to become obsolete.
Like the fact that when I say how much I enjoyed my Summoner, I always disclose the fact that my experience is at level 6-7, when the classes relative power has peaked. It doesn't invalidate the point, but its important enough to disclose so that anyone on the outside can be sure to keep it in mind.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The point I was making was that Level 1 is not the only relevant Level. Making the comparison at that level gives skewed results, because its essentially the single most favorable point to be comparing the Animal Companion and the Eidolon.
Cool, but that is a totally separate discussion, and not one that I was participating in. So chiming in with "you're wrong, here's why" is a little weird when you're basically talking to yourself.
To be more clear, I'm not comparing the Eidolon and the Animal companion. I am comparing the two animal companions, and asking if that comparison is more relevant when comparing two proposed Eidolons than comparing a random bird in the bestiary against a random dragon.
Edit: The only point of comparison between Eidolons and ACs that I made, their level 1 stats, was only to illustrate how apt the contrast would translate from ACs to Eidolons. Notice I didn't suggest comparing a dragon and bird familiar; those are both far too different from each other and to the Eidolon for such a comparison to be useful.
Also, I am not telling you what you are or are not allowed to talk about. I'm simply pointing out that I am not talking about that, and quote tagging me into the discussion I'm not having feels like trolling.
The point I was making was that Level 1 is not the only relevant Level. Making the comparison at that level gives skewed results, because its essentially the single most favorable point to be comparing the Animal Companion and the Eidolon.Cool, but that is a totally separate discussion, and not one that I was participating in. So chiming in with "you're wrong, here's why" is a little weird when you're basically talking to yourself.
To be more clear, I'm not comparing the Eidolon and the Animal companion. I am comparing the two animal companions, and asking if that comparison is more relevant when comparing two proposed Eidolons than comparing a random bird in the bestiary against a random dragon.
Edit: The only point of comparison between Eidolons and ACs that I made, their level 1 stats, was only to illustrate how apt the contrast would translate from ACs to Eidolons. Notice I didn't suggest comparing a dragon and bird familiar; those are both far too different from each other and to the Eidolon for such a comparison to be useful.
Also, I am not telling you what you are or are not allowed to talk about. I'm simply pointing out that I am not talking about that, and quote tagging me into the discussion I'm not having feels like trolling.
Its more clear now.
Your statement "Wouldn't the difference between the dragon and bird animal companion be more relevant to this discussion? The stats for an AC is not as far off as I had assumed at first." leaves it kindof unclear what you meant by the bolded 'the dragon', and my mind jumped to 'the dragon eidolon'. So I read it as comparing an Eidolon and Animal Companion. Essentially Pronoun Confusion, if 'dragon' is a pronoun :)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I see. Okay then.
But yeah, there’s only 1 dragon animal companion, while there are multiple fliers, which is why I said “the dragon” instead “a”.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really think it'd be better if we had an Eidolon dummy template we could build from.
It'd save on page space, significantly, and allow more space for sub-classes.
Right now the Eidolons as your sub-class is not really selling it, i think changing how the Summoner plays vs your Eidolon sub-type would make for a more significant choice for subclass.
As well as, of course, allow for more pages for feat options.
Allow the template to choose their own abilities; that'd be a great addition to customization, to be able to choose your own Eidolon abilities.
Want an Undead green spectral fire breathing skeleton?
Pick up the breath weapon ability at lv.7 and slap that on your Eidolon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think they should add more customization to the advancement levels for the eidolons.
7th: Base monster ability like aura.
Upgrade to mobility or add something like a weakness to evil for angel.
17th level: Full angel level mobility. Upgrade weapon die. Along with ability to use remove spells.
Like they did with Unchained Eidlons.
For the dragon:
1st: Resistance 5 to same energy as breath weapon.
7th: Gains flight. Resistance 10 to energy type of dragon.
Draconic Frenzy.
17th: Fully immunity to energy of breath weapon. Bite attack increases by die. Add 2d6 of damage type of breath weapon to bite attack.
Increase fly speed.
That would be a better way to focus on customization and make the creatures feel more like the type of creature they are. That's probably what I'll do for creatures once it's released.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that last bit is important. Because it's entirely true that classes are not the same as they were in previous editions and that should be ok. Class should still be good however.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I agree. And summoner definitely needs to be a bit stronger, and definitely needs more feats, including monster abilities.
I just don't think a system akin to evolution points is the right way to go about it in 2e, is all.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I agree. And summoner definitely needs to be a bit stronger, and definitely needs more feats, including monster abilities.
I just don't think a system akin to evolution points is the right way to go about it in 2e, is all.
That's fair. I'm pretty neutral on this front. As I don't really mind things like evolution surge or not having flying at low level.
But that's because I value mechanical balance. Flight isn't available until the levels it is, for a valid reason, that reason is balance. 2e is a bold attempt to create a system that in it's bones, helps keep balance. To the point where they have created mechanics that don't match up with the narrative of the mechanic itself because balance was more important than narrative cohesion with said mechanics. There are examples within the crb and APG but the obvious one in the playtest is striking spell with Magus. It doesn't function as it's narration implies. Because they were worried about balance.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, there's no chance of getting flight any earlier than it already does, simply because it wouldn't really be balanced.
I think that's actually a big proponent of this debate. I feel that a lot of people that value the 1e evolution system seem to misunderstand the balance issues that would bring.
To use Temperans' proposed system as an example, having an eidolon with a fly speed, burrow speed, and elemental resistance at level 1 seems a bit much, especially considering how difficult it is to get those on other characters.
The only ancestry that I know gets a burrow speed off the top of my head is shoony at level 9, but that costs 2 ancestry feats, and only works through loose dirt. Imagine the shoony player finally getting their limited burrow speed, then realising that the eidolon has already been doing that, but better, for 9 levels. Not only is that a feelbad moment, it's probably unbalanced in the eidolons favour.
And energy resistance for free from first level seems a bit much as well. Yeah, there are a few ancestries that do that, but summoner already gets one. A summoner getting a second ancestry essentially for free doesn't seem balanced. And I get the feeling that issues like these would keep coming up in a point based system, making it very hard to balance.
Like I said I'm a bit neutral on that matter specifically.
I'm sure you could create a balanced system version of that. But it's very possible it still wouldn't satisfy the players asking for it. If it didn't, it would then imply their issue with summoner is more an issue with a limitation of the game due to its balance and mechanics forward build.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just because the ancestry gets it doesnt mean the Eidolon gets it. They also share HP so resistance to energy is much less useful for summoner than it would be for other classes, especially since the Eidolon will be in the front line and the summoner will be far in the back.
Have you proposed an example of a 2e balanced version of this system you desire?
If so may I have a link.
But do note, permanent flight before level 16 and temporary flight before access to the flight spell itself... Is basically a hard pass. As the eidolon is being treated as another player in terms of game balance as opposed to a animal companion. Hence the limitations.
Just because the ancestry gets it doesnt mean the Eidolon gets it. They also share HP so resistance to energy is much less useful for summoner than it would be for other classes, especially since the Eidolon will be in the front line and the summoner will be far in the back.
Yes, those are all correct statements.
But if energy resistance from first level costs a heritage feat, and the eidolon can get 3 different energy resistances at first level, that amounts to the equivalent of 3 more heritages than any other character can get ever. That's the imbalanced part.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have you proposed an example of a 2e balanced version of this system you desire?If so may I have a link.
Yes, very much this.
If it can be done well, and be made balanced, I'll be the first to admit I was wrong. Heck, I loved the evolution system in 1e. It's only downside was that it wasn't really balanced.
If it could be made to work in 2e, I'd be more than happy with that. Yeah, it'd be a weird change is design paradigm compared to all the other classes, but hey, I'm not gonna look a gift eidolon in the mouth.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just because the ancestry gets it doesnt mean the Eidolon gets it. They also share HP so resistance to energy is much less useful for summoner than it would be for other classes, especially since the Eidolon will be in the front line and the summoner will be far in the back.Yes, those are all correct statements.
But if energy resistance from first level costs a heritage feat, and the eidolon can get 3 different energy resistances at first level, that amounts to the equivalent of 3 more heritages than any other character can get ever. That's the imbalanced part.
Orrr its just a perk of the class.
Fighter gets Attack of opportunity at level 1, expert attack, etc. Barbarian gets pretty devastating attacks (+2-6 dmg per hit) at level 1. Ranger is the most efficient MAP user.
I want to do something with my Eidolon no other class can do. And no. Having two bodies and having misfortune on aoe attacks feels very much like a liability than a perk.
Being wildly OP shouldn't be a "perk of the class", though.
Frankly, if the thing you want to do that no other class can is just "be stronger than them", then I don't know what to tell you. You can keep wanting that, I guess, but it's not gonna happen.
Also, if the aoe thing is so bad, just take the feat that mitigates it. Or just use synthesis. It's not as bad as you make it out to be.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
For the record: People do play alchemist and while it's slightly undertuned, it's... just fine? Like I'm fine with stating that and seeing who comes out to refute it, but pointing at alchemist as a failure of design is not a good play, I feel.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean.. it's all right in front of you...
but no game designer can be expected to remember every possible rules interaction.both of these are mutually exclusive. You realize that, right?
Oof. I don't even always remember how code that I wrote works along down the line always, sometimes I have to refresh myself. Surely we can understand that Devs aren't writing the entire game together right? They understand paradigms of the systems and most of the rules, but every interaction?
I don't think that's a reasonable standard. Not everyone has eidetic memory and its hardly a requirement for making a good game.
NGL that made me laugh.
If all of your code is "right in front of you", then you're writing a "Hello World!" application LOL.
_________________________
I would expect Game Design to work very much in the same parameters as software development, in that individual pieces are compartmentalized for different people to work on.
And you build those pieces using the standards set in the particular "area" you are working on based on the other pieces as a model and some specific rules for that particular portion.
For instance, I can look at a monster stat block, evaluate base monster statistics for a level of creature, and probably draft a Creature as a result without looking at quite a bit of the CRB (why do I care what a Sorcerer's Bloodline does when making a new type of Ogre? I don't).
Now working in that isolated area, would it be helpful to know "every interaction" of the rules? Without a doubt. Should it be required? Absolutely not.
Maybe I don't remember what the Critical Specialization effect of Polearms are and in order for me to decide what kind of effect I want to give this creature on a critical hit I go and reference that rule to make sure I'm getting it right.
_______________________
In general, I find comments that are this disconnected from the actual reality of how things are built and distributed need to be called out. Your expectations that these people be perfect in order to uphold your standards is just really unfair and honestly a bit hypocritical.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The feat that negates it is level 10.
Synthesis is level 1, but its a straight downgrade in power. Compare an Eidolon to a martial. Less strength, far less AC, oh I get breath attacks .. but so does a kobold anything and they will out compete me every time. Id be essentially sacrificing half my class for protection. Imagine, if you will, being a druid with an AC and someone suggesting to only use your AC. No druid powers...
Yes, it is at level 10. That doesn't discredit it's existance.
And I never said synthesis was good. It's really quite bad, actually. I simply said it solved the issue with aoe damage you were having, which is a fact.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
For the record: People do play alchemist and while it's slightly undertuned, it's... just fine? Like I'm fine with stating that and seeing who comes out to refute it, but pointing at alchemist as a failure of design is not a good play, I feel.
Alchemist is weak and I hope it gets some kind of errata.
Swashbuckler has my eye for poor design personally. Having your main shtick be inconsistent is not fun. Having to roll twice to go your one thing is not fun unless that roll is with advantage and that's very niche in pf2e for good reason.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Verzen, baby, have you made a balanced 2e iteration of this point system yet?
Do you refute where the 2e balance line is?
I admit at times I get annoyed by the new classes and how they have a fluffy narrative niche that results in making more rolls to perform at the level of a core class making less rolls. It's not good imo.
But I also view that as seperate from say... The level you get access to flight. It's pretty obvious where the levels you are expected access to it.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
13 pages of game design is a LITTLE less complicated than 10,000 lines of code.
At least a missing ; won't just prevent it from running.
Funny, you say the latter line as if that's a feature for Game Design.
I can assure you that compilers catch 90% of what we do is the Feature.
And I can assure you that "missing a ;" is literally a non-issue in the programming world in terms of actual bugs/errors that are likely to occur for real world applications.
Now my data stream not communicating exactly as expected due to some interaction with a network device or proxy? That's something that takes time.
You also didn't say "13 pages of game design" in your original post. It was my understanding that you were implying all game designers of the game should know the entire game well enough to recount it on memory.
The CRB is huge and in order to properly build a Summoner you have to have at least some considerable eyes on the following:
- Natural proficiency expectations
- Wealth usage
- Minimum level for flight/ancillary abilities
- Minimum amount of damage
- Control for extraneous bonus not expected
.....
In almost perpetuity. The way to cut some corners on that is use something else as a base, and model it around that to get close, then make adjustments in a few places to see where things align.
_____________________
Either way, identifying problems is what the playtest is for, but solving them ourselves isn't. I think the big issue many people have with your "solutions" is they sound/act a lot like the PF1 Summoner (which was extremely problematic), and the majority of the Class paradigm did make it over to PF2 (the action economy changes at least).
Do I hope they add a little more definition to Eidolons? Absolutely.
Do I think they need a build-a-bear setup to do that? No.
And if you're going to say "anything less than the latter is not satisfactory" and others don't, that doesn't mean they fall into the "we like the current summoner" it just means they don't like that implementation. Not embracing an idea does not mean embracing the opposite.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh and here comes more strawman. I did NOT say break the balance of the game than get exactly what I want. I said RISK being slightly OP than be literally irrelevant. The alchemist, sad to say, is a waste of page space. Which is disappointing because it was my favorite 1e class. If no one plays summoner because its 1) boring 2) underpowered 3) uninteresting then whats the point? Might as well not print a class at all. Maths, not customization, makes a class more or less powerful. Maths do. And atm our summoner has far more customization than our Eidolon.So you'd rathe break the balance of the game than not get exactly what you want? Telling.
Also, customisation is itself powerful. There's a good reason why you can't freely change every single little facet of your character, and that's because of balance.
That binary between op and useless is itself a strawman of your own making.
Also, you've made it evident that your idea of "useless and boring" amounts to "doesn't use evolution points". Therefore, you saying that you'd rather risk being op than be useless and boring is essentially saying "I'd rather potentially be stronger than every other class than not get the system I want". It's not a strawman, it's using logic and reasoning.
You also seem dead set on the idea that the eidolon is doomed to be terrible and useless if it doesn't get evolution points, which is weird. No other class gets that, so why is it a must-have on summoner? And you can't say "because 1e did it", because that argument doesn't hold for any other class either.
Customisation begets versatility, which itself is powerful.
Also, of course the summoner gets more customisation, it's the pc. The eidolon is a class feature.