Welcome to the Summoner Class Playtest!

[Verzen]

RexAliquid wrote:

The preset packages are what really sold the unchained summoner for me. I wasn't interested in the chained version at all, really. So, I really like that I can have a phantom of the paladin that died trying to stop a demonic plot and won't rest until she's helped me succeed. Or if I prefer, an angel sent by Heaven to help me achieve the same goals. Alternatively, I could play a god-caller and summon a beast eidolon. Each of the options provide excellent narrative hooks to fuel roleplay, way more than the amorphous blob of points that was the chained summoner.

With my system, you could literally have a phantom paladin that died trying to stop a demonic plot and won't rest.

At level 1, take the armored evolution and take the manifest trait (undead) evolution. Now you can roleplay it to your hearts content.

Or you could have an angel. Same concept except celestial trait and armored at level 1. Then roleplay it to your hearts content.

These evolutions would be so 'light' at level 1, that they are more for flavor than anything, with some slight buffs depending.

I mean, if I wanted an ice dragon at level 1, get the resilient (ice) evolution and the ice breath attack. My Eidolon is now resilient to ice attacks and it has a breath attack and I can then say my guy looks like an ice dragon.

My system won't create an "amorphous blob" like 1e did by the very nature of how my system is controlled in how many evolutions you can take at what level along with MAP. Plus no evolutions would add any weapons at all. Plus MAP really limits that concept that people gravitated to in 1e.

[Charlesfire]

Verzen wrote:

Here is an example of what I mean.

Assume there is NOT a specific package that you pick. Evolutions are all you get. So we are assuming we get rid of Angel, Dragon, etc.

Evolutions
Each Eidolon is unique in its own manifestion and they gain powers to compensate their differences. At level 1, the Eidolon starts with 2 evolutions. They follow the evolution progression chart on page XX.
Evolution level
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 2 - - - - - - - -
2 3 -
3 3 2
4 3 3
5 3 3 2
6 3 3 3
7 3 3 3 2
8 3 3 3 3
9 3 3 3 3
10
11
12
(Essentially the wizard spell progression but instead, evolutions)

Evolutions can only ever be picked once. They do not stack with themselves.

Level 1 evolutions
Armored
The Eidolon has tougher scales, is wearing armor, or some other form of protection. Your Eidolon gains +1 status bonus to AC.

Water Resilience
Your Eidolon is capable of swimming in water. It gains a swim speed of 20 feet. They can breath twice as long while under water.

Resistance
Choose a resistance. This resistance can be to physical or energy damage. (Bludgeoning, slashing, piercing, acid, fire, cold, etc) Your Eidolon gains resistance equal to half your level in that element. (This is to simulate if I want a ice dragon, I can get resistant cold right from the get go.)

Breath Weapon
Your Eidolon gains a breath weapon that deals 1d4 dmg and increases by 1d4 additional damage every other level. 1d4 cooldown. (Kobolds get this at level 1. The dragon gets this. Precedence is set)

Enrage
The Eidolon gains the rage action.

Manifest Trait
The Eidolon gains the traits of a single monster type. Can only be chosen at level 1. This will allow me to create a construct, or an undead, or a fey and gain the traits associated with them, both strengths and weaknesses.

Elemental Attacks
Your Eidolons attacks become the element of your choice. (Acid, Fire, Ice etc)

(These are all fairly not on par with what a level 1 would be able to get power wise AND they add a bit of Eidolon...

Way too complex for a class that tends to appeal to new players. I'm more in favor of familiar-style minor abilities.

[Moppy]

Compared to 1e, the 2e eidolon has very little flavor - the creature itself is dull, and shouldn't be as it's a fundamental part of the PC.

[Verzen]

KrispyXIV wrote:

Verzen wrote:

Enlarge Eidolon
Your Eidolon becomes large. He gains +4 strength (Essentially +2 damage, +2 attack). His reach increases by 5 feet. (Downside and upside. He's large. More difficult to maneuver in dungeons)

And here's where we reveal the issue with this concept - you've included an option here that either makes the current Eidolon progression a better fighter because you've given out +2 to hit, or you've created an option that is not an option because +2 to hit isn't optional.

For that matter, neither is a permanent, unrestricted +1 status bonus to AC.

Abilities on this scale are either completely unbalanced, or you have to dial the base stats of the class back and then they're no longer optional - you need them not to fall behind.

The math in PF2E doesn't really support these sorts of things when you're concerned with maintaining balance.

And then things like Resistance and Elemental traits are perfectly functional as feat selections, or weapon property runes. Heck, resistance is functional as armor property runes.

The system as it stands allows for the balanced version of this - I feel like you're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

Except in my version of the Eidolon, they don't go past trained in literally ANYTHING except unarmored defense. The rest would be in evolution enhancements. They get trained unarmed attacks for example. That's it.

At level 8, a fighter has master weapon, right? Because they get it at level 5. They are already +4 attack ahead of the Eidolon. How is it broken to give the Eidolon an option to get +2 attack, +2 damage at level 8? Plus, what's so different between that and incredible animal companion at level 8? Rather than increasing their abilities from trained to expert, expert to master, etc, they can get increases to their strength or dex if they are an agile/finesse type of Eidolon.

Quote:

To advance a mature animal companion to a savage animal companion, increase its Strength modifier by 2 and its Dexterity, Constitution, and Wisdom modifiers by 1. It deals 3 additional damage with its unarmed attacks. Increase its proficiency rank in Athletics to expert. It also learns the advanced maneuver for its type. If your companion is Medium or smaller, it grows by one size. Its attacks become magical for the purpose of ignoring resistances.

This is where I took precedence from in increasing its stats a little bit.

Quote:

For that matter, neither is a permanent, unrestricted +1 status bonus to AC.

Why not? There are monk feats that give a +1 circumstance or status bonus to AC. But those aren't all a must have. Like I said. I am taking precedence from other sources.

Quote:

The math in PF2E doesn't really support these sorts of things when you're concerned with maintaining balance.

Weird since I am literally looking at when other classes get these similar abilities and I am modifying them for my example. It's odd that other classes can get these abilities, but when the Eidolon has it, all of a sudden the math doesn't support it...

Quote:

The system as it stands allows for the balanced version of this - I feel like you're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

You mean the very real problem of a lack of customization and a hell of a lot of homogenization? I want to be able to make five different summoners and have them all FEEL like they have a different Eidolon from a mechanics stance. I don't want five different summoners who each have different packages, but ultimately they all feel like the same thing.

[Verzen]

Charlesfire wrote:

Verzen wrote:

Here is an example of what I mean.

Assume there is NOT a specific package that you pick. Evolutions are all you get. So we are assuming we get rid of Angel, Dragon, etc.

Evolutions
Each Eidolon is unique in its own manifestion and they gain powers to compensate their differences. At level 1, the Eidolon starts with 2 evolutions. They follow the evolution progression chart on page XX.
Evolution level
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 2 - - - - - - - -
2 3 -
3 3 2
4 3 3
5 3 3 2
6 3 3 3
7 3 3 3 2
8 3 3 3 3
9 3 3 3 3
10
11
12
(Essentially the wizard spell progression but instead, evolutions)

Evolutions can only ever be picked once. They do not stack with themselves.

Level 1 evolutions
Armored
The Eidolon has tougher scales, is wearing armor, or some other form of protection. Your Eidolon gains +1 status bonus to AC.

Water Resilience
Your Eidolon is capable of swimming in water. It gains a swim speed of 20 feet. They can breath twice as long while under water.

Resistance
Choose a resistance. This resistance can be to physical or energy damage. (Bludgeoning, slashing, piercing, acid, fire, cold, etc) Your Eidolon gains resistance equal to half your level in that element. (This is to simulate if I want a ice dragon, I can get resistant cold right from the get go.)

Breath Weapon
Your Eidolon gains a breath weapon that deals 1d4 dmg and increases by 1d4 additional damage every other level. 1d4 cooldown. (Kobolds get this at level 1. The dragon gets this. Precedence is set)

Enrage
The Eidolon gains the rage action.

Manifest Trait
The Eidolon gains the traits of a single monster type. Can only be chosen at level 1. This will allow me to create a construct, or an undead, or a fey and gain the traits associated with them, both strengths and weaknesses.

Elemental Attacks
Your Eidolons attacks become the element of your choice. (Acid, Fire, Ice etc)

(These are all fairly not on par with what a level 1 would be able to get power wise AND they add

...

... it's not complex at all. It's exactly like the familiar abilities except you get more of them over time.

"pick two from this level 1 list" isn't complicated at all. Not any more than "pick two spells from this level 1 list" is complicated. If a new player can pick up a wizard and play a wizard without being confused (hell, if wizards are in PF at all, it sets the precedence that how they work must not be too complicated)...

[Temperans]

Even the Unchained Summoner version trimmed down to remove most of those resistance and immunities would work well.

Changed some of the evolutions to fit the PF2 balance points and it would be a perfectly serviceable system.

Heck Eidolons are not even getting feats like in PF1.

[Verzen]

Temperans wrote:

Even the Unchained Summoner version trimmed down to remove most of those resistance and immunities would work well.

Changed some of the evolutions to fit the PF2 balance points and it would be a perfectly serviceable system.

Heck Eidolons are not even getting feats like in PF1.

Right? In this edition it seems like the summoner and Eidolon both share the feat load. Like I said. By the nature of this system and the math, it's already restricting the strength that an Eidolon can get to. The SYSTEM ITSELF prevents the 1e summoner from being a problem again in 2e even IF we use a system similar to the 1e chained evolutions (which I ultimately prefer a modified version of that system but far more balanced.)

[Verzen]

And I will be quite frank. The Eidolons I want to summon will most likely NEVER be something that Paizo will ever release simply because what I picture in my head as an option wouldn't make sense to place down as a package. For example, I want my Eidolon to be the demogorgon from Stranger Things. Kinda a horror themed Eidolon. Is there going to be a particular package for that? Probably not, since I want to try to emulate it as best as I can. Looks like I won't be able to create that as an Eidolon under the current idea of what paizo wants the summoner to be.. and that feels kinda bad. I want to be able to have not that strong options that can really flesh out and customize the feel of my Eidolon.

Like, resistance 1 to fire as a fire based Eidolon. That's not OP at all.

All my Eidolons attacks deal fire damage as well. Still not OP and there is precedence. (Rain of Ember stance changes the monks attacks to fire damage)

Flaming Body evolution
Requirement: Must have resistance (fire)
Whenever someone attacks my Eidolon, it deals fire damage. There are already abilities like this out there. The precedence has been set.

Now I basically have an ifrit style character.

Being able to mix and match the options like this and truly create something unique but NOT OP is what I'd like and the mechanics to be able to do that.

Otherwise, if we just go by what you want, I can never have say my ice dragon by picking dragon. Since the dragon has no resistance or immunity to ice. But I want my Eidolon to be made out of ice, it should be able to have resistance or immunity to ice eventually. Right now you are directly restricting what I want my Eidolon to be and killing my fantasy of what I feel a summoner ought to be.

[TheGentlemanDM]

I'm pretty sure that Elemental Eidolons are coming, and I could see them getting elemental damage strikes as part of their Level 1 features.

[Verzen]

TheGentlemanDM wrote:

I'm pretty sure that Elemental Eidolons are coming, and I could see them getting elemental damage strikes as part of their Level 1 features.

The point I am trying to make is that with having minor adjustments, I can truly create the custom monster I want to make rather than just choosing a premade.

I think that's why I ultimately didn't like unchained summoner. My Eidolons felt like a bunch of premades rather than my own design and I am not a fan of premade characters. (I never play PF1 or 2 premades) and that's why I am pushing for more of an evolution system for Eidolons.

[Charlesfire]

Verzen wrote:

... it's not complex at all. It's exactly like the familiar abilities except you get more of them over time.

"pick two from this level 1 list" isn't complicated at all. Not any more than "pick two spells from this level 1 list" is complicated. If a new player can pick up a wizard and play a wizard without being confused (hell, if wizards are in PF at all, it sets the precedence that how they work must not be too complicated)...

I disagree with this. Getting to pick a few familiar-like abilities at level 1, then having feats that gives more of them and/or give more options seems way simpler and doesn't eat the power budget of the class for something that is useless for some build (ie master summoner build). That would allow us to still have feats for some really strong evolutions.

Here's a few example of basics evolutions:
Darkvision
Melee attack (1d8)
Range attack (1d6)
Fast eidolon
Your eidolon's speed increase to 30ft.
Luminescent eidolon
Your eidolon shine bright light in a 20-foot radius (and dim light for the next 20 feet).

And here's a few example of feats:
Plentiful evolutions
Your eidolon gets two more basic evolutions.
Special : you may select this feat multiple times.

Mutating eidolon
Your eidolon gets one more basic evolutions. After you refocus, you may change the basic evolution given by this feat for another one.

Dragon evolutions
Your eidolon gets one more basic evolutions and can now select basic evolutions from this list : [insert here a few thematic basic evolutions]

[Deriven Firelion]

Kyrone wrote:

Deadmanwalking wrote:

manbearscientist wrote:

As a counterpoint, checking it as a measuring stick can be useful. It is a good way to make sure it where it is supposed to be.

Yeah, it needs to outperform Animal Companions significantly to be viable.

Luckily, it seems to do precisely that, though perhaps not as well as would be ideal in some ways.

I made a table to compare.

Here

On the damage the Eidolon caps at 4d8 + 3d6 + 11 damage, the 3d6 is from property runes btw that they can have.

The dex Animal Companion caps at 3d8 + 8 damage.

Nice table. Thanks for building it.

Only other thing I would like to see is martial viability of summoner comparatively, since both the ranger and druid get full class abilities with an animal companion.

[Verzen]

Charlesfire wrote:

Verzen wrote:

... it's not complex at all. It's exactly like the familiar abilities except you get more of them over time.

"pick two from this level 1 list" isn't complicated at all. Not any more than "pick two spells from this level 1 list" is complicated. If a new player can pick up a wizard and play a wizard without being confused (hell, if wizards are in PF at all, it sets the precedence that how they work must not be too complicated)...

I disagree with this. Getting to pick a few familiar-like abilities at level 1, then having feats that gives more of them and/or give more options seems way simpler and doesn't eat the power budget of the class for something that is useless for some build (ie master summoner build). That would allow us to still have feats for some really strong evolutions.

Here's a few example of basics evolutions:
Darkvision
Melee attack (1d8)
Range attack (1d6)
Fast eidolon
Your eidolon's speed increase to 30ft.
Luminescent eidolon
Your eidolon shine bright light in a 20-foot radius (and dim light for the next 20 feet).

And here's a few example of feats:
Plentiful evolutions
Your eidolon gets two more basic evolutions.
Special : you may select this feat multiple times.

Mutating eidolon
Your eidolon gets one more basic evolutions. After you refocus, you may change the basic evolution given by this feat for another one.

Dragon evolutions
Your eidolon gets one more basic evolutions and can now select basic evolutions from this list : [insert here a few thematic basic evolutions]

If you include certain functions like allowing me to resist physical or elemental attacks by 1/2 my level, add in an aquatic form, add in allowing me to deal elemental damage with my attacks, so on and so forth, I could go for something like that. But it would have to be options that would allow me to truly customize my Eidolon in meaningful ways. Doesn't have to just make him more powerful, but just different from other Eidolons.

[demon321x2]

My initial impression of the Summoner is that I like the concept, but it's subpar mechanically with it pulling in so many directions.

The Eidolon is the centerpiece of the class and in combat is supposed to take the leading role with the Summoner supporting it in combat. They get 4 actions between them sort of which is the same as other pet classes but they split 2 2 action actions which is a disadvantage.

But the Eidolon is behind on all fronts compared to a martial. Its Str is behind and it doesn't get class features to boost its damage and it's stuck with a d8 weapon at best. Looking further no class feats really help the Eidolon much with combat. The ranged weapon evolution gives it another option but not a better one. Getting to Towering Evolution gets 10 ft reach, but with no AoO it just helps avoid AoOs in exchange for not fitting anywhere. The 14th level feats for resistance and saves don't stack with the level 2 cantrip that the summoner will be using a lot. With the Eidolon behind on all fronts that means the Summoner part has to make up for it right?

Not really. The Summoner half gets sorcerer proficiencies for weapons and armor. That's not a big deal, it's one general feat to fix the armor and the Eidolon was handling the attack part anyway. I feel the Summoner should get light armor to at least. They aren't casters and they are already a weak point when it comes to AoE effects, they don't need lower AC than the Eidolon without investment as well.

Spellwise the Summoner gets cantrips and 4 spells per day. I don't think 2/2 spells per day even at top level slots offsets just how behind the Eidolon is. The lower proficiency makes the key stat being Chr actually hurt since with an innate -2 and the class flavor pushing the Summoner towards picking summon and support spells which don't run off Chr. Summon X being effectively 4 actions since you can't use Act Together stings as well though there are feats to offset that.

Looking at Conduit spells,

Evolution Surge I like. It gives access to the niche evolutions when they are needed.

Boost Eidolon would be a good buff, but it doesn't even let the Eidolon keep up with other martial damage boosters like rage or sneak attack. It ends up more like a band-aid that is required to keep the Eidolon competitive which also eats the extra action the Summoner gets. +2 damage per die is the average difference between a d8 and a d12. A barbarian even not raging deals more damage with their greataxe and is more accurate than a buffed Eidolon since he has higher str. An Eidolon should be much closer to a raging barbarian when buffed.

Unfetter has a 1 minute duration. Should be 10 at least. Even moving at full speed an Eidolon couldn't even get 1/2 a mile before vanishing even moving at full speed. With a longer duration it's a good 1st level feat.

Reinforce Eidolon is good. +1 status bonus to AC and Saves and resistance to damage. Since Eidolon saves and AC are on par or better after 3rd level this is just nice and resistance to all damage is nice. Not stacking with Boost is somewhat moot when the Eidolon can't get attacks off reactions so Boost-Attack-Reinforce doesn't have a drawback.

So while I like what the Summoner does, none of it feels quite impactful enough to offset the inherent weakness of the Eidolon. Either the Summoner needs a fleshed out spell list or the Eidolon needs to get more martial abilities. With more spells the Summoner could actually afford to cast spells like haste and heroism consistently. Or it could ditch the spells entirely so that the Eidolon can shine. I prefer if it got some spells but if no casting means getting a good Eidolon I'd take it.

One last complaint: Why wait till 3rd to give the Eidolon Expert unarmored? Just having it be 2 AC behind the curve for two levels doesn't make much sense.

[Deriven Firelion]

Summoner is hard pass for me as it is currently. It is weaker than the overall combination of an animal companion and a character with full class abilities.

The limited spellcasting is far too limited. Makes the druid like a wizard with an MC archetype fully developed. Pretty big price to pay for a weak martial eidolon.

The action economy may on paper be the same as the animal companion and character, but in play you pretty much have to use boost eidolon every round using up 1 action to do damage on par with a monk and less than nearly every other martial class.

The summoner itself is weak and ineffective. Not much you can do with it as the class itself doesn't offer many interesting options.

Variability should only be costly if it is meaningful variability. The summoner doesn't have meaningful variability. The designers greatly overvalue evolution surge and boost eidolon as well as the innate abilities of the eidolons, which don't keep up with other classes at all.

[Squiggit]

Doing some light playtesting with friends one thing that really struck me I think as a major issue with the Summoner:

They don't have any kind of attack routine to speak of.

Look at how Swashbucklers play: You move around, setting up finishers and building and expending panache to make big damage strikes with unique riders.

Monks dart around the battlefield with their unparalleled mobility and unique stances and focus spells. Investigators Devise a Stratagem and can alter their attack routines or plans based on that check. Rangers combine hunt with action economy exploits and special third actions like animal companions.

A Summoner? Your 'ideal' attack routine is casting Boost and then Striking a bunch.

That's kind of a problem, because it's really boring and probably contributes to some of the weakness being described upthread, because those individual options all add power, even if sometimes only slightly.
PF2 has tried really hard to give martial characters cool, interesting ways to interact with the 3-action system via various unique combat activities. Everyone gets a little bit of it and the Investigator and Swashbuckler in particular are built entirely around that concept.

The Summoner by contrast has nothing like that in the Eidolon's attack routine, despite essentially being a martial character, which creates a really underdeveloped core gameplay loop that just feels kind of unfinished when you compare it to something like the Swashbuckler.

[shroudb]

an "optimal" attack routine for a Dragon Eidolon is Boost, stride 3 Strikes.

And Dragon Eidolon *at least* has the option to do a breath attack here and there to spice things up.

When a class is about controlling a weird creature, we want to do more stuff than simply *strike, strike, strike, strike, etc" or at least have the option to do so.

Where is the options of Large constricting Eidolons, Poisonous Stings, Elemental forms, etc

And those are from the cobmat side of things.

From the exploration side, while sharing skills in nice, a single Expert skill of it's own isn't reflecting the phantom of a lingering Expert, adding "smell" (because already everything has darkvision) isn't enough to make a scout, not being able to have skill feats, etc

We need more Evolutions. And we need those to be distinct thematic things, not simple mathfixers.

The power balance, if it needs a bit more HP, or if summoner needs a bit more spells or summons, is imo secondary. From raw perspective of damage they are behind, but not by a margin that's not fixable between playtest and release.

What's missing is the flavour of playing a fantastical creature.

[PrinceOfPurple]

Guys the negativity in the subforum for playtesting is oppressive right now. Also we need to give feedbacks on how we feel paizo design on new classes is effective or need to be bettered, not on how we want them to function because super optimized other classes have a little niche on current playtest without having the flavour or core mechanics.
right now the eidolon (from only a mechanicals standpoint) is a stornger version of animal companion, even without factoring in the bonus it gets from your proficiencies(inside and outside combat) or items he can equip (not added to the playtest but cited on page 15).
That is the place i think they should be, and the place i think paizo wanted them to be, since they MUST not be as strong as another martial class that would feel stupid playing that instead of a summoner.
The restricted casting is fine, summoner can't be as strong and versatile as full caster with that kind of "companion", even if other caster classes have their own additional niche.
I agree their ideal turn can get improved, but if you think about it they just need some more options, maybe a few conduit cantrips that would give niche advantages and come in in batches with different feats.
Synthesis is cool but should make you (your eidolon when you use it) a bit stronger since like i said you are still weaker than a normal martial class.
In Exploration and social activities right now the Summoner has an edge to any other class, since it can be aided (aid action) by his eidolon that will always have high proficiencies on the ones shared with the summoner. The eidolon can constantly scout around dungeons or the wilds and freely comunicate with eachother (telepatically even when not summoned) about dangers and ambush and if in need quickly getting unsummoned or even when getting 0 hp it simply do not die and the summoner don't get the dying condition but just unconscious (correct me here if im wrong) and some healer can get him up since the enemy will probably be at a distance of 100 feet (or more with unfettered).
The good thing is all the objection i read untill now can easily be fixed with more feats or a "racket/thesis/edge" choice containing one or more feats.
I'll expain, many of you want to make a more specialized summoner, the ones that want it to summon more monster (with cast a spell not eidolons) already have a few feats, and i can see myself taking them if i want that kind of flavour.
We still miss some alternative for other "archetipes" of summoner like the "eidolon-booster summoner" which will need more conduit counter that will surely be added since there are only 2 of them right now, and some options for the "fight-togheter summoner" which should still be weaker than a "fight-togheter ranger" since the summoner will have focus and limited casting options.
Eidolon customizing feat should probably be added to give them moster ability or something like that.
I'd also like to see some eidolons with a bit of casting among the ones that will be added, cool features could be implemented like casting something togheter or using 3 action to use 2 2-component spells.

Looking forward to what will come out of the class, the balancing work along with the class identity, flavour and customization is one of the strongest point of 2e in my opinion, and i like the place this class is going to fit inside the already exisit ones.

[Deriven Firelion]

I want the summoner to be good. I played multiple summoners in PF1. A few synthesists and a few different summoner types. I really liked the Unchained Summoner. I usually enjoy elemental summoners myself, but almost any type of summoner is cool. In Everquest I played a mage. In World of Warcraft I play a demonology warlock and an elemental summoning shaman and an unholy death knight for the undead army. Suffice it to say, I really like summoning.

I was really disappointed conjuration summoning spells in PF2 were so terrible. I was looking over ACs of monsters, especially boss encounters in APs like Age of Ashes and Extinction Curse and it literally takes a 20 for a max level summoned creature to hit these bosses even once. I am still not sure why PF2 game designers wanted to make summoned creatures so weak that they were not effective at all in the toughest fights in the game making a conjurer pretty much a non-starter. Even against relatively equal level foes, a creature roughly 4 levels behind provides little extra power for the high level spell slot used. That is an immense disappointment.

Now I build a summoner and find his damage about on par with a monk when using boost eidolon. For some people the monk does acceptable damage and those same folks will probably find the summoner adequate. In a party of almost any other martials, I would feel weak and overshadowed playing the summoner as I did playing the monk. I have no real niche as a summoner in my opinion.

Basically, the summoner is a stripped down monk with some spellcasting. If that is what you enjoy, you might like it.

[KrispyXIV]

PrinceOfPurple wrote:

That is the place i think they should be, and the place i think paizo wanted them to be, since they MUST not be as strong as another martial class that would feel stupid playing that instead of a summoner.

So many times this. The advantage of a Summoner needs to be in having double the presence, not in having a pet that can outfight a Barbarian (or Rogue, or Swashbuckler, or...). Making Martial players feel like they're worse than a pet is a one way ticket to unplayables-ville, as everyone who doesn't like Summoner will hate and resent them.

As is any system that looks like it can be gamed, manipulated, or extensively abused for player power - even if the end result isn't actually that great - because in many cases perception is as powerful as reality. Also, any such system is also not new player friendly.

I'm not sitting here saying that the class is perfect, but I don't think solutions that add costs and mechanics to things that don't need them are a good idea.

I absolutely think that there's room to add 'Evolutions' for attack routines for the Eidolon - think variations on Draconic Fury, two actions with some sort of bonus.

Guarded Strike - Strike, then Raise Shield (effectively)

Furious Assault - Large Strike, little strike x2

Multi-Strike - 2x Big Strike (at -2) or 3x little Strike (at -2)

Grab and Constrict - Strike and Grapple (separate, but no MAP), if succeed deal bonus damage = 2x strength bonus

Toppling Assault - Strike and Trip (separate, no MAP)

Crush - Power Attack (low level version only, so counts as 2 attacks)

Eidolon Trample - Stride, attack multiple targets (no MAP for 2 targets, -2 cumulative for each addtional)

Lunging Strikes - As per fighter, more balanced version of reach

Does anyone think that sort of thing would help with boring?

I'd much rather focus on figuring out how to get the Summoner access to more and more diverse Evolution feats inside their class build than to create an entirely new subsystem.

For example, does it break anything if an Eidolon focused Summoner gets a bonus Evolution feat on every odd level? At that point, it would free such a character from having to invest in these with their proper class feats - OR allow them to go absolutely all in on them.

[Cyder]

Playtesting the summoner I am just finding it kind of unfun. Act Together feels like an overly complex solution for a simply problem. If the aim is for the Summoner to be easy to pick up for a new player Act Together destroys this illusion. Its not intuitive, its highly restrictive and most of the time will just be used to cast a conduit cantrip and either move or attack with the eidolon but its a super clunky way to achieve that.

The Summoner itself doesn't do enough as it feel mandatory to use a conduit cantrip every round which is pretty much the only contribution the 'summoner' makes. I would rather the conduit cantrip be a conduit spell and last a minute. The summoner doesn't really have the action economy in the combats I have been in to use its summons it needs to spend too much getting the eidolon in position and attacking... and then getting the eidolon out because its suicide for the less defensive Eidolon to stay in combat.

The summoners stats other than constitution may as well not matter most of the time. It needs stats for saves. It can effectively dump charisma as it won't have the action economy to cast offensive spells anyway and charisma does nothing for the eidolon.

There is no skill tie ins for summoner either. Sure I can focus on recall knowledge to call out weakness etc for the rest of my party... if I had the actions to use anything but buff conduit cantrip 90% of the time.

Spells are ok but mostly I am just going to want something like haste or maybe fire shield but ultimately there is very little connection between my spells and my eidolon and I don't have enough spells or actions to use them in combat. I mean summoning another monster is great but then I am even more action starved.

I don't get a reaction that helps me or my eidolon and I don't MC well other archetypes as I don't have enough actions on my summoner anyway mostly my spells when I do cast them are likely to be heals to keep myself (and eidolon up). An animal companion is a little weaker but at least if it dies or gets knocked out the main character is still up an animal companion in that regard is a superior option as there is a lot less risk. Also the character is still super useful even if the animal companion is taken out or for some reason unavailable.

I find I want better action economy given I need to spend one my shared action to buff my eidolon and move it into position and then the other 2 to attack and/or move out again if required. Really again I am left with the point where the summoner itself may as well just disappear into the either when the eidolon appears and the eidolon picks a self buff each round. That isn't fun, I want the summoner to feel like more than a vehicle to add a weak buff so my eidolon can be almost as good as a martial each round.

I have faith there will be a lot that can be done with evolutions ultimately. I am sad about the Hulking Evolution a summoner I kind of feel like because M or L makes no difference in PF2 in combat effectiveness and you can get a horse you can ride from level 1 there is no need to gate the summoner being able to ride their eidolon. Keep the 'won't let others ride it' if necessary but seriously why gate this behind a feat and level 6? Its not like the eidolon can fly until higher levels. I feel like a lot of the evolutions could just be an option when the eidolon reaches a certain level not things that are feats. The feat could be to change the evolution you got once per day otherwise things like aquatic evolution are mandatory for an aquatic campaign and a waste of page space for any other campaign. Its not a compelling choice.

With all the action limitations, Mandatory use of 'Act together' and a conduit each turn I don't feel like Summoner is either fun or intuitive. I don't feel like the summoner itself is enough of the class. I won't even get into that if you are in a chase seen the summoner and eidolon will fall behind the party pretty quickly in most cases.

TLDR
- Summoner needs to feel more like an equal partner in the class not a 1 action buff bot in combat.
- Act Together is an overly complex solution to a non-problem. It would matter if the summoner got 3 actions baseline and the eidolon 2 with the summoner able to give up upto 2 action to the eidolon. Or give them both 2 actions with the option of giving up one action to the other. Right now Act together is clunky and further messes and makes any 2 action ability by either the summoner or eidolon difficult.
- Conduit Cantrips should just be a 1 focus spell that lasts 1 minute, this will free up the Summoner to do more than just stand and cast it every round.
- There is little to no point in having 4 spell slots per day if you don't have the action economy to every really be able to use them.

[PrinceOfPurple]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

I want the summoner to be good.

I was really disappointed conjuration summoning spells in PF2 were so terrible. I was looking over ACs of monsters, especially boss encounters in APs like Age of Ashes and Extinction Curse and it literally takes a 20 for a max level summoned creature to hit these bosses even once. I am still not sure why PF2 game designers wanted to make summoned creatures so weak that they were not effective at all in the toughest fights in the game making a conjurer pretty much a non-starter. Even against relatively equal level foes, a creature roughly 4 levels behind provides little extra power for the high level spell slot used. That is an immense disappointment.

Now I build a summoner and find his damage about on par with a monk when using boost eidolon. For some people the monk does acceptable damage and those same folks will probably find the summoner adequate. In a party of almost any other martials, I would feel weak and overshadowed playing the summoner as I did playing the monk. I have no real niche as a summoner in my opinion.

Using debuff and flanking makes a normal summon viable (30% 40% hit on a boss) for a spell i can get prepared multiple time or have many slot to cast on many casters.

I also see you think like an overoprimizer not because you want to be usefull, everyone does and its not fun when you are not contributing anything, but because 1 you do not accept to be a class "as bad" as a monk and 2 you dont event talk about the other bonus an eidolon takes to the table outside of raw stats

Cyder wrote:

TLDR

- Summoner needs to feel more like an equal partner in the class not a 1 action buff bot in combat.
- Conduit Cantrips should just be a 1 focus spell that lasts 1 minute, this will free up the Summoner to do more than just stand and cast it every round.

i like the option for conduit cantrips to last more than one turn, especially if there are going to be more focus cantrips :D

[shroudb]

If i had to boil it down:

The main problem of the Eidolon is that it doesnt feel like an Eidolon.

If all it does accomplish is "stride and strike" then it's no different than a generic martial.

The class severely lacks the "monster" abilities that turn your eidolon from "generic martial" to a "monster".

To make matters worse, for the majority of any encounter the Summoner is just a Boost-stick.

Again:

It's not about the math issues, those can easily be resolved, nor is it about making the eidolon a "better fighter", it's all about making the Summoner a class about controlling a monstrous(Angelic/draconic/beast/whatever) Entity wth everything this entails.

[KrispyXIV]

shroudb wrote:

If i had to boil it down:

The main problem of the Eidolon is that it doesnt feel like an Eidolon.

If all it does accomplish is "stride and strike" then it's no different than a generic martial.

The class severely lacks the "monster" abilities that turn your eidolon from "generic martial" to a "monster".

To make matters worse, for the majority of any encounter the Summoner is just a Boost-stick.

Again:

It's not about the math issues, those can easily be resolved, nor is it about making the eidolon a "better fighter", it's all about making the Summoner a class about controlling a monstrous(Angelic/draconic/beast/whatever) Entity wth everything this entails.

I suspect the decision to withhold Eidolon Focus spells was a mistake.

I think people might feel better if the angel could lay on hands or the dragon had a big bad elemental attack.

[BACE]

shroudb wrote:

If i had to boil it down:

The main problem of the Eidolon is that it doesnt feel like an Eidolon.

If all it does accomplish is "stride and strike" then it's no different than a generic martial.

The class severely lacks the "monster" abilities that turn your eidolon from "generic martial" to a "monster".

To make matters worse, for the majority of any encounter the Summoner is just a Boost-stick.

Again:

It's not about the math issues, those can easily be resolved, nor is it about making the eidolon a "better fighter", it's all about making the Summoner a class about controlling a monstrous(Angelic/draconic/beast/whatever) Entity wth everything this entails.

This, a million times. The issue, for me at least, isn't that the eidolon has bad damage. The issue is that the only thing it can do in combat is damage, so why is it bad on top of that? The attack routine for a lot of classes is interesting, at least. Monk can use Flurry to be super flexible, working in stances, intimidates, etc. Fighters get lots of interesting two-action activites. The summoner just doesn't. If my eidolon could do something cool like Intimidate, Rage, Boost/Strike? Yeah, I'd be down for that. But currently the routine will almost always be Boost/Stride, Strike, Strike or Boost/Strike, Strike, Strike.

"PrinceOfPurple wrote:

the "fight-togheter summoner" which should still be weaker than a "fight-togheter ranger" since the summoner will have focus and limited casting options.

I just kind of want to look at this a little bit more. Ranger is a full martial, and will pretty much always be more useful in combat than the eidolon, right? So that means you're saying some focus spells + 4 spell slots per day is equivalent to the animal companion plus the lost martial power from the ranger to the eidolon. Am I correct in saying this?

Because if so, I don't know if I agree. At least not with what we have right now. 4 spells per day is just so abysmal. I would much rather see the slot casting stripped out. Give the class better focus spells and a better eidolon.

Especially a better/more interesting eidolon. The eidolon having more flexibility in combat with evolutions could at least make up that power, in my mind.

[Dubious Scholar]

KrispyXIV wrote:

shroudb wrote:

If i had to boil it down:

The main problem of the Eidolon is that it doesnt feel like an Eidolon.

If all it does accomplish is "stride and strike" then it's no different than a generic martial.

The class severely lacks the "monster" abilities that turn your eidolon from "generic martial" to a "monster".

To make matters worse, for the majority of any encounter the Summoner is just a Boost-stick.

Again:

It's not about the math issues, those can easily be resolved, nor is it about making the eidolon a "better fighter", it's all about making the Summoner a class about controlling a monstrous(Angelic/draconic/beast/whatever) Entity wth everything this entails.

I suspect the decision to withhold Eidolon Focus spells was a mistake.

I think people might feel better if the angel could lay on hands or the dragon had a big bad elemental attack.

I think the lack of evolution options is the single most universal complaint right now. Some people are thinking to solve this by going back to the 1e system and oh god no, for reasons you've already gone over.

We do need to see more things like other special attacks via evolutions, or sidegrades to allow different tactics. A combat reaction would be valuable to have available (all the core martials except Rogue have an AoO variant available, and Rogue gets Opportune Backstab). I'd want to be able to add more traits to the unarmed attacks (grapple is the big missing one). But for the most part, evolutions should be limited strictly to things like combat activities and special attacks (Sudden Charge, breath weapons, etc) or major sidegrades to base functionality (amphibious, flight, major senses like tremorsense, etc). They absolutely should not affect statistics (because that would become mandatory-ish under 2e math) or physical form (having to buy arms to then buy claws and s*+* can stay in 1e).

I think the idea of bonus evolution feats every so often may be valuable to consider, depending on how many there are and how choices break down, but we can't really test that with the current selection of feats. But in general, class feats for martials are primarily about combat power. For a summoner, that means enhancing your eidolon or your spellcasting. Which the current class feats do handle, being mostly evolutions and buffs to summon spells.

[Charlesfire]

The lack of sidegrade/interesting combat options might be related to the fact that we don't have access to all feats in the playtest...

[shroudb]

Charlesfire wrote:

The lack of sidegrade/interesting combat options might be related to the fact that we don't have access to all feats in the playtest...

yes, but if we're lacking the feats that make the Eidolon an Eidolon, what's the purpose of a playtest?

[KrispyXIV]

shroudb wrote:

Charlesfire wrote:

The lack of sidegrade/interesting combat options might be related to the fact that we don't have access to all feats in the playtest...

yes, but if we're lacking the feats that make the Eidolon an Eidolon, what's the purpose of a playtest?

"Wow, Eidolons REALLY suffer from not having an extra big list of options and feats to play with!" Is an extremely valid playtest finding :)

It may be less an issue of the Summoners power budget being out of whack, than the Summoners page budget in their book needing adjusted.

[RexAliquid]

Squiggit wrote:

Doing some light playtesting with friends one thing that really struck me I think as a major issue with the Summoner:

They don't have any kind of attack routine to speak of.

...

A Summoner? Your 'ideal' attack routine is casting Boost and then Striking a bunch.

That's kind of a problem, because it's really boring and probably contributes to some of the weakness being described upthread, because those individual options all add power, even if sometimes only slightly.

A summoner's default routine is more likely Cast a Spell for a damage cantrip, Boost Eidolon, then Strike. You can mix it up from there if you need to move position or get more value from Strikes.

[KrispyXIV]

RexAliquid wrote:

Squiggit wrote:

Doing some light playtesting with friends one thing that really struck me I think as a major issue with the Summoner:

They don't have any kind of attack routine to speak of.

...

A Summoner? Your 'ideal' attack routine is casting Boost and then Striking a bunch.

That's kind of a problem, because it's really boring and probably contributes to some of the weakness being described upthread, because those individual options all add power, even if sometimes only slightly.

A summoner's default routine is more likely Cast a Spell for a damage cantrip, Boost Eidolon, then Strike. You can mix it up from there if you need to move position or get more value from Strikes.

For one thing, not all spell lists are equal for damage cantrips. For another, damage cantrips are only even really valid while you're not "behind" on spellcasting progression.

I suspect leaving damage dealing to the eidolon, outside of some levels when big juicy nukes are "on level", is going to be the way to go.

[Dubious Scholar]

RexAliquid wrote:

Squiggit wrote:

Doing some light playtesting with friends one thing that really struck me I think as a major issue with the Summoner:

They don't have any kind of attack routine to speak of.

...

A Summoner? Your 'ideal' attack routine is casting Boost and then Striking a bunch.

That's kind of a problem, because it's really boring and probably contributes to some of the weakness being described upthread, because those individual options all add power, even if sometimes only slightly.

A summoner's default routine is more likely Cast a Spell for a damage cantrip, Boost Eidolon, then Strike. You can mix it up from there if you need to move position or get more value from Strikes.

They're 4 levels behind full casters on getting expert on spells, and 2 levels behind Monk/Champion. And they share MAP, so unless it's Electric Arc...

[Verzen]

Quote:

I think the lack of evolution options is the single most universal complaint right now. Some people are thinking to solve this by going back to the 1e system and oh god no, for reasons you've already gone over.

Give me ONE reason why not.

Don't you agree the only reason the 1e system didn't work was because of the design flaw of 1) having X points to distribute as you wish and 2) having unequal power in evolutions?

Why wouldn't it be balanced and more interesting if they could pick X from a 1st level list, X from a 2nd level list etc like spellcasters do and to make sure that the 1st level list is all relatively balanced? What's so wrong with that idea? No one has refuted it. You guys sound like you have nightmares about the original system and then rather revisiting the base concept and seeing if we can balance it, you guys just want to throw it out, which is not a good reason.

[Verzen]

Quote:

Guys the negativity in the subforum for playtesting is oppressive right now.

I entirely disagree. We are essentially giving Mark "peer review" atm to take a scientific context and peer review is often brutal with its criticisms...

[Verzen]

Quote:

It may be less an issue of the Summoners power budget being out of whack, than the Summoners page budget in their book needing adjusted.

We do NOT want summoners to be overly powerful Gods like in PF1. But we do want a lot of say in the customization of how our Eidolon looks and behaves. I do not want to go back to a "pick this package" feel like in PF1 unchained. I found that to be boring. I also do not want to be as overpowered as the PF1 feel as that was no fun either. But I DO like the customization PF1 APG gave us. I LOVE that customization option. Just give us that, but pay very close attention to the power levels of various combinations of options and make sure they are all balanced and I would LOVE the summoner.

An Eidolon should never be stronger than a martial in a straight 1 to 1 fight. But we should EXCEL at our one niche, which is using monster tactics and monster abilities effectively. THAT should be our niche.

[KrispyXIV]

Verzen wrote:

Give me ONE reason why not.

It was overly complicated, subject to gameism, exploitation and overoptimization, and doesnt fit with the already existing paradigm for class customization in PF2E for class customization via feats.

[BACE]

Verzen wrote:

Quote:

I think the lack of evolution options is the single most universal complaint right now. Some people are thinking to solve this by going back to the 1e system and oh god no, for reasons you've already gone over.

Give me ONE reason why not.

Don't you agree the only reason the 1e system didn't work was because of the design flaw of 1) having X points to distribute as you wish and 2) having unequal power in evolutions?

Why wouldn't it be balanced and more interesting if they could pick X from a 1st level list, X from a 2nd level list etc like spellcasters do and to make sure that the 1st level list is all relatively balanced? What's so wrong with that idea? No one has refuted it. You guys sound like you have nightmares about the original system and then rather revisiting the base concept and seeing if we can balance it, you guys just want to throw it out, which is not a good reason.

Honestly, if we take slotted spells away from summoner, I wonder if they could give class feats on even levels, and evolutions on odd levels. And then they work basically like class feats that only affect your eidolon. Give class feats for tandem activities, focus spells, etc. Give evolutions that do cool evolution/monster things. This system gets you 10 evolutions total, and perhaps most importantly, you'd get one at level 1 to make your eidolon feel unique. Of course, this is mostly a bit of spit-balling, and I don't know exactly how you would work out the power budget on such a system. But your eidolon is currently a weaker martial, and with no slotted spellcasting, I think there's definitely room.

[Grankless]

Verzen, why wouldn't you be able to make the Demogorgon? Aberration is almost certainly going to be an occult option.

In my mind, chained Summoner was one of the worst-designed classes in 1e, and I Have absolutely no interest in "vast menu of options where you need to pick and choose the ones required for basic functionality".

If I want my eidolon to have something as simple as legs, I shouldn't need to spend resources on cosmetics. That's insane, and 1e-style evolutions completely go against 2E design principles.

[Verzen]

Quote:

It was overly complicated, subject to gameism, exploitation and overoptimization, and doesnt fit with the already existing paradigm for class customization in PF2E for class customization via feats.

That is criticizing the implementation. Not the base system itself.

Let me explain the difference.

The implementation. Here's a bunch of evolution points. Go wild. Pick what you want. Oh you want 8 tentacles? Cool. You get 8 attacks.

THAT is the implementation

So what's the difference between a base concept and a base implementation?

Oh well, here's the base concept.

You get a choice of how your Eidolon looks and behaves.

THAT is the base concept.

Does the base concept innately mean the Eidolon will be, "overly complicated, subject to gameism, exploitation and overoptimization"? No.

Your other point of "doesnt fit with the already existing paradigm for class customization in PF2E for class customization via feats." doesn't work either, as seeing that each class "breaks the mold" in one area or another. You could argue that rangers don't work due to the already existing paradigm of Multi attack penalty. But they violate that as their niche. Like I said previously. Classes exist based on game theory and the exclusionary principle. Classes get what other classes don't. Classes break the already existing paradigm because if they didn't, every class would be the same.

Now, to go back to the idea of, "overly complicated, subject to gameism, exploitation and overoptimization"

I agree giving evolution POINTS and then saying, "Go wild" is a terrible idea. BUT if we gave them evolution options that they NEED TO TAKE or select at specific level intervals, it would be EXACTLY like taking class feats but for your Eidolon and separating the Eidolon class feats from the summoner class feats. My idea is literally no different.

Have you even read or analyzed my idea? Oh right. You did and claimed that the Eidolon got way too buff even though I was taking abilities straight from when other classes got those abilities and even toned them down a little. "Savage companion gave more benefit than my large eidolon evolution at the same level" and you complained about how that broke the system, when it actually didn't because the math still put it behind a fighter in attack and damage.

[Verzen]

Grankless wrote:

Verzen, why wouldn't you be able to make the Demogorgon? Aberration is almost certainly going to be an occult option.

In my mind, chained Summoner was one of the worst-designed classes in 1e, and I Have absolutely no interest in "vast menu of options where you need to pick and choose the ones required for basic functionality".

If I want my eidolon to have something as simple as legs, I shouldn't need to spend resources on cosmetics. That's insane, and 1e-style evolutions completely go against 2E design principles.

Again. You guys are looking at the implementation of the system and not the actual base system. NO ONE IS SAYING THE IMPLEMENTATION WAS GOOD. We are saying that the base system was good, the implementation was terrible.

I don't know how many other ways I can make this point so it comes across to you guys.

[Verzen]

Quote:

That's insane, and 1e-style evolutions completely go against 2E design principles.

Not if they are treated as extra feats your Eidolon gets which is precisely what my system would be about.

Have any of you actually analyzed the math in my system or have you guys just outright ignored my posts on it? Because I am getting awfully frustrated that none of you are arguing against what I am actually saying and instead saying, "NOPE! IT RESEMBLES BAD SYSTEM. MUST BE BAD!" rather than truly looking at it.

[Grankless]

I think your system provides very little benefit over what we have currently and reduces customization for nothing, especially with Mark's indication that Eidolons will also have their own focus spells.

You're stressing out over nothing, basically.

[Verzen]

Grankless wrote:

I think your system provides very little benefit over what we have currently and reduces customization for nothing, especially with Mark's indication that Eidolons will also have their own focus spells.

You're stressing out over nothing, basically.

Incorrect. let's say they release a whole bunch of Eidolon packages I must pick from.

Construct, Dragon, Angel, Phantom, Beast etc

Well, my Eidolon can't be left up to my imagination now. The Eidolon is automatically whatever paizo decided it can be in a preset boring package of generic concepts.

[KrispyXIV]

Grankless wrote:

I think your system provides very little benefit over what we have currently and reduces customization for nothing, especially with Mark's indication that Eidolons will also have their own focus spells.

You're stressing out over nothing, basically.

This.

We dont need to rebuild the wheel here - Extra Evolution feats "Like an Investigator/Rogue gets extra Skill Feats" is an established paradigm inside how the rules already work.

[Charlesfire]

Verzen wrote:

Quote:

It was overly complicated, subject to gameism, exploitation and overoptimization, and doesnt fit with the already existing paradigm for class customization in PF2E for class customization via feats.

That is criticizing the implementation. Not the base system itself.

The thing is, I don't think your implementation really solve the problem of "this is too complex for newbies" and introduce something powerful that some build won't really need. Getting only a few choice from a limited list at level 1 and having a few feats to expend both your options and the list from which you can pick looks to me like a better implementation of what you're suggesting.

[manbearscientist]

I made a long winded post on my criticisms of the magus, so I'll do one for the summoner as well. My focus is how a class feels to play, more than necessarily the numbers.

First, I think the class is complex enough to be hard to grok. The Hit Points sharing is the easiest part of it, but other aspects aren't as obvious:

Sharing actions = sharing the 3-action limit. Not sharing the ability to use actions from feats. This also has perhaps unseen consequences in exploration mode, discussed below.

Disadvantage in AoE (I've seen people think they take damage twice)

Sharing skill proficiency

Eidolon getting ability boosts

Act Together - Initial impression for some people was that the Eidolon and Summoner had to do the same action. And I'm still not certain how it interacts with activities.

I've seen people the fact that runes are shared, but I even missed that armor property runes apparently aren't

Eidolon stats are weird. More below.

On exploration mode: the summoner works oddly in exploration mode. The basic rules for exploration mode are that one action per round is fine (moving half-speed), while two actions per round is fatiguing and three actions isn't possible. Sure, the summoner can Act Together to at least move the Eidolon and Summoner, but they can't have both characters participate in Exploration activities (Searching, Scout, etc.) without Tandem Move as well. That seems unintuitive, and likely isn't the intention.

4-slot casting is its own debate. However, for the summoner in particular, it feels like casting is hard to justify in combat. Your Eidolon is melee focused. Melee Strikes don't take a single action. You can't afford to cast a spell and do anything with your Eidolon unless they are already lucky enough to be in melee. Even cantrips fall under this issue. This is way more awkward than an Animal Companion, as you can easily Cast a Spell and Command for that Stride + Strike.

Conduit Cantrips feel like an action economy tax. Consider that most martials either have a small action cost to get extra damage with their main abilities, or somehow cheat action economy, this is a major challenge. Fighters don't spend an action every turn getting proficiency, Barbarians don't have to reapply Rage.

This leads to the greatest current issue: Act Together (Boost, Stride), Strike, Strike. Repeat. This is a very generic combo that boils down to a martial character using basic actions. The summoner doesn't move or do anything interesting, they are just an added weakness for the martial trying to use its class features. It doesn't really change from 1 to 20, and there are no feats that really interact with this except Tandem Move.

With one exception, the proficiency boosts seem fine. The Eidolon does feel like it needs Expert unarmored defense at level 1. Repeated many times, but I'll repeat it again.

Onto Eidolons themselves. The blurb for Eidolons gives us an idea to the starting assortment. Arcane gets dragons, constructs, and amalagams. Divine gets angels, demons, and psychopomps. Occult gets phantoms, aberrations, and something else. Primal gets beasts, plants, and fey. That seems like a fine assortment to me, though it is notably missing undead and fiends.

Not being able to wear items is fine, but it is odd that to mention specific companion items for Eidolon and not include at least a few to test. Most notably, an Eidolon seems like it almost needs an Apex item slot of its own or to share the Summoners, but I have an alternative suggestion below in its place.

Eidolons don't really have an Intelligence modifier, which is odd. They don't use it for any of their features, they don't gain extra languages from it, they don't get extra trained skills from it, they can't use it in combat, and they don't boost any of their saves with it. It is only used in skill checks, many of which the Eidolon won't be able to participate in because they are limited in languages. This sort of means that any Eidolon is almost strictly better if gets an 8 in Intelligence and and a 12 elsewhere.

Charisma and Constitution don't fair that much better. Charisma is at least lets the Eidolon better utilize proficiency in Charisma related skills (which the Summoner likely will invest in for their own use), like Intimidate. Constitution not applying to Hit Points is also odd. It feels like they should get more out of investments in stats that aren't Strength or Dexterity.

On that note, Eidolons can't by default communicate with the summoner. Angels for instance get only Celestial, and can't get another language. Well, not many ancestries get Celestial as a bonus language. This seems incongruent with the idea the Eidolon and Summoner are in sync.

It also feels like the suggested attacks are little too bland. I'm fine with the dice sizes, but it would be nice to have some weapon trait flexibility as well. That would at least change up the action routine, making it more worthwhile to utilize Trip, for instance. Even simple weapons get some traits.

Last bit before talking about unique Eidolons. It feels a little awkward that these don't have an 18 in either Strength or Dexterity. I'd even be okay with both getting an 18, and not getting an Apex item. This is mainly to make both finesse and non-finesse equally viable (if that is a weapon trait available). In comparison to a player, they will still won't match up to an Apex-item wielder's main stat so I don't think it is a high level balance issue. Low levels, I'm not as sure. It might alleviate needing Expert Defenses at 1 to some degree.

I'm not sure the Angel matches up at early levels with the rest of the Eidolons. Good damage isn't great until fiends pop up in large numbers at higher levels, and it is even more locked into its default attack routine than the others. They don't get an action at 7, furthering this issue. And while casting a chunk of 9th-level spells is useful and arguably powerful, they aren't really combat spells. It feels like at least one of features needs swapped with some sort of combat action it can use.

It is odd to have a blurb on not having a 1st level divine summoning spell. I get that Distracting Summons would be useless otherwise, but this really seems to say "You should be summoning!" I'm not sure that you really get enough out of using your precious slots that way, and the class has no real benefits for it. As others have mentioned, I'm all for a subclass with a focus on summon spells (summon font) but it doesn't mesh with this base class.

Beast seems fine. However, Primal Roar is weak on two fronts: The lack of Charisma, and not changing the linguistic requirement. This means you are rolling a bunch of heavily penalized Intimidates unless you happen to go against Sylvan speakers.

Devotion Phantom has the same issue as Angel: being locked into an attack routine. At least they throw in a reaction on top of that, and their upgrades do have significant combat benefits.

Dragon's seem to be the most varied of all combat routines, and are probably above the rest of the Eidolon's because of it.

FEATS

Dual Studies seems odd. It almost feels like this is intended to show that the Eidolon gets skills, but the earlier language in the class suggested that all proficiencies are shared. It would be nice if the procifiency went to master at 15 as well.

Sensory Evolution seems a little low-key for a level 1 feat. It seems like this should be something that comes as part of the Eidolon package normally as an option, and sensory evolutions should focus on the more interesting senses and be a higher level feat.

Synthesis. I'm on the side of this being better served as a subclass. More on that below.

I'd rather have Unfetter Eidolon be a 10 minutes focus spell, letting you keep it up indefinitely. Otherwise, it will be hard to use the Eidolon as scout, even though it gets a lot of features to help with that style of gameplay. 1 minute doesn't really let you do much in an Exploration time frame.

Reinforce Eidolon - See comments on Boost Eidolon.

Distracting Summons is solid. It is nice that you don't need positioning to get the equivalent of flanking, but it is still better to position the someone on the opposite side for its actions.

Magical Evolution - I love adding spells as a way to diversify Eidolons. My suggestion here, however, is to allow the Eidolon to breathe a little more. This is equivalent to a dedication feat for an archetype, granting two cantrips. Why push getting further spells out to 8 and limit it? I think it would be fine to make this more like the Eldritch Trickster dedication for the Eidolon (restricting the archetype to something that grants its tradition). The Eidolon wouldn't be able to get another archetype until it got two more archetype feats from the archetype. Alternatively, keep it 'in-house' by forcing the Eidolon to go further into magical feats before picking another archetype evolution, and have the additional feats grant the equivalent of basic/expert/master/breadth benefits but with innate spells.

Alacritous Evolution - This could be a level 1 evolution feat IMHO.

Amphibious Evolution - See above. I'd even argue that swimming/climbing evolutions should be options at Eidolon creation.

Tandem Move - This seems important. It feels like this is an almost necessary pick, which is awkward. I'd rather this be moved earlier, and made an option even at level 1 for a subclass that focused on tandem actions.

Unarmed Evolution - Good idea. Too limited. This arguably should be another thing you can decide at Eidolon creation, and this should convert the attack into something closer to a martial weapon. And it should be repurchaseable for your other attacks. I'd like to see backstabber, backswing, forceful, grapple, reach, and sweep added as options.

Climbing evolution - Again, this has no business being at 6. This should be an Eidolon creation option.

Hulking Evolution - Some Eidolons aren't long. This treats them like they all are. Give additional reach so this has combat feasibility. Also, small Summoners are left in limbo regarding how using their Eidolon as a mount is supposed to work. That has to be fixed.

Ostenatious Arrival doesn't have a basic Reflex save. Intended?

Summoner Shield Evolution - This seems a little weak. You can get this benefit for using a shield (even without Shield Block), with less restrictions. I'm not sure how to make it better though.

Flickering Evolution - It would be nice to see similar evolution feats for all bases. It really feels like this wants to grant incorporeal, and I don't really see a problem with it if it did. This already takes sitting around for a turn doing nothing (not even using Act Together if it can't be used as a part of an activity), and the main advantage of incorporeal would be passing through walls. Maybe put this at a higher level, it'd be worth it.

Greater Magical Evolution - See above, and my archetype comments below.

Ranged Evolution - Far too late. This feels like a level 1 feat.

Boost Summons - This seems fine, and at an appropriate level.

Protective Bond - I like this reaction. Little weird in how it flips the disadvantage straight to advantage though.

Transpose - Great effect.

Conduit feats - Boring, but fine.

Summoner's Call - Great effect.

Transmorgify - Would be more interesting if you could do more evolution feats. As is, my biggest question is how this works with the innate spells granted by magical evolution. It feels like you can shift your innate spells and use the new spells, and this can't be intended.

Resilient Evolution - This seems a little to 'must have'. It is a good feat, but maybe a little bit of a math fixer.

Spellguard Evolution - Same thing here.

Towering Evolution - See Hulking. I feel like this deserves longer reach.

Effortless Concentration - I always like this. It seems good for a more summon focused summoner.

Winged Evolution - As with earlier movement options, this seems to come on far too late. However, with flight I understand this. I still think this should be something available early for an Eidolon, but perhaps not at level 1.

True Transmogrifcation - Same as before.

Twin Eidolon - Interesting. Held back by still sharing MAP, otherwise this would clearly be too strong.

Eidolon's Avatar - Seems neat and fluffy, but it has an issue. You can't plane shift back. I don't think it is supposed to be a one-way trip.

Eternal Boost - This wouldn't be necessary if these had longer durations, so I think something more interesting should be a capstone in place of this.

FOCUS SPELLS

Boost Eidolon / Reinforce Eidolon - I feel like these are too much of an action economy tax. I'd rather they be stances, or last a minute. These are also unintuitive, as in a lot of situations it will be correct to Boost, Strike with Eidolon, and then Reinforce and players may not realize that is possible. Making them longer lasting makes this a lot less optimal and eliminates this bit of needed system mastery.

Evolution Surge seems like a stopgap for limited options right now. My biggest issue here is that it won't update to include new evolutions down the road. It also sort of shares the same thematic space as Transmorgrify. It also seems like its duration is too short to do what it wants to do. Swimming for 1 minute is a good way to drown, flying for one minute is a good way to fall to death, scent for 1 minute isn't long enough to track, etc. It does bring up the question of what happens when an Eidolon suffocates (and I guess what happens if they get disintegrated; does the summoner go poof?).

WANTED OPTIONS

I'd like to see some archetype style feat chains for Eidolons. The three basic chains I see are magical, martial, and bestial.

Magical makes the most sense giving the equivalent benefits to a spellcasting archetype, but with innate spells.

Martial could get give access to a low level feat (Power Attack, Sudden Charge, Double Slice equivalents), then a higher level feat (Swipe, Double Shot, Reactive Pursuit), and finally a class-style damage fixer (AoO, Rage, Sneak Attack, Champion Reaction, Devise a Stratagem, Panache/Precise Strike).

Bestial gets you monster abilities. First basic stuff like Rend, Constrict, Grab, Knockdown, Push, a basic poison. Then more exotic stuff like All-Around Vision, Greater Darkvision, Tremorsense, Trample, auras like Frightful Presence. And then stuff like Change Shape, debilitating poison, maybe even stuff like fast healing, swallow whole, or engulf.

I'd like to see more focus options, like the elemental aura mentioned before. Specifically, focus options to let the Eidolon do cool things. This is a general theme: the Eidolon needs more actions. Heck, the summoner needs more ways to be a character as well.

As others have mentioned, subclasses seem like a good fit for this class. Summoner, Tandem, and Synthesis are those being thrown around. I'll make no new suggestions here. Summon should get a summon focus, Tandem should have more ways to exploit the action economy of two characters, and Synthesis should get extra evolution feats to build-a-monster and some way to do boost actions from inside.

I'm not sure whether the current HP is "enough". I could see justifying a move to 12 HP, or adding the Eidolon's Constitution modifier to the total for non-Synthesis summoners.

My preferred level 1 Eidolon creation is bases + familiar style pool to pick abilities from, specifically movement (+10 speed, climb, swim), perception (low-light, darkvision), and weapon traits. I also think it is perfectly fine to let an Eidolon switch its attacks to elemental damage. A level 1 can give more of these basic traits if necessary.

I think there should be a feat to get something from another Eidolon base. This would go a long ways to differentiating Eidolons of the same base.

[Verzen]

Quote:

We dont need to rebuild the wheel here - Extra Evolution feats "Like an Investigator/Rogue gets extra Skill Feats" is an established paradigm inside how the rules already work.

Except the way that the playtest works is that there can be no extra evolution feats unless you make it into a general feat and it cannot be compared to skill feats.

Here is why. Investigator/rogue have actual class feats. Skill feats aren't obtained in place of class feats ever.. unless you have a class feat that can instead switch your class feat to a skill feat.

We don't have a separate group of 'evolution feats' since the summoner and Eidolon use the same exact feats. It's in the same pool. Why would we have an extra evolution feat?

[Verzen]

Charlesfire wrote:

Verzen wrote:

Quote:

It was overly complicated, subject to gameism, exploitation and overoptimization, and doesnt fit with the already existing paradigm for class customization in PF2E for class customization via feats.

That is criticizing the implementation. Not the base system itself.

The thing is, I don't think your implementation really solve the problem of "this is too complex for newbies" and introduce something powerful that some build won't really need. Getting only a few choice from a limited list at level 1 and having a few feats to expend both your options and the list from which you can pick looks to me like a better implementation of what you're suggesting.

My idea is exactly like picking feats. So if you feel like picking feats is too complicated for a newbie, maybe PF isn't the game for them solely because picking feats is pathfinders main schtick. We have ancestry feats, class feats, general feats, skill feats, and you draw the line at giving Eidolons their own evolution feats because it's too complicated for newbies?

[RexAliquid]

Verzen wrote:

Grankless wrote:

I think your system provides very little benefit over what we have currently and reduces customization for nothing, especially with Mark's indication that Eidolons will also have their own focus spells.

You're stressing out over nothing, basically.

Incorrect. let's say they release a whole bunch of Eidolon packages I must pick from.

Construct, Dragon, Angel, Phantom, Beast etc

Well, my Eidolon can't be left up to my imagination now. The Eidolon is automatically whatever paizo decided it can be in a preset boring package of generic concepts.

The eidolon preset packages are seeds to jump start your imagination. Each package presents a wide variety of exciting concepts within.

Look up creative limitation. Constraints drive creativity.

[KingOfAnything]

Verzen wrote:

That is criticizing the implementation. Not the base system itself.

Let me explain the difference.

The implementation. Here's a bunch of evolution points. Go wild. Pick what you want. Oh you want 8 tentacles? Cool. You get 8 attacks.

THAT is the implementation

That is so boring in comparison to what we have in the playtest. I'd much rather have something to build on and make my own than a generic blob of evolution points.