Welcome to the Summoner Class Playtest!

[MrTsFloatinghead]

BACE wrote:

Does this mean that your eidolon at level 1 can't look like it has armor or a tough hide? No. Of course not. It's flavor text. It's saying "Hey, here are some ways you might want to flavor this in-character." It's not saying "Your eidolon can't have armor or a tough hide without this feat."

It's flavor text.

The problem is that Verzen and others ARE saying that the flavor text "flavor" should be tied to the mechanics, and this has been my experience with how people use flavor text from first ed Pathfinder as well.

Heck, just look up thread when people were objecting to the flavor description of a barbarian rage because they felt that a different flavor description MUST have different mechanics to justify it.

Or even more recently when Verzen implied that there's something wrong with saying that a monk dwarf is wearing something that looks like studded leather armor even though he is not, in fact, wearing studded leather.

And, just so everyone is on the same page, the problem with the flavor text etc. is not that it limits the way in which you can describe your eidolon as looking extra tough. The problem is the idea that once that "extra tough" mechanic option exists, people will say that you cannot describe your eidolon as looking "extra tough" at all without taking that mechanical option to back up that flavor.

[Verzen]

shroudb wrote:

I feel like Evolutions shouldnt be numerical buffs.

no "take this evolution for +X to ac, and that evolution for +Y to attack"

That feels like the epitome of mathfixers and feat taxes that PF2 dont want to have anythig to do with.

Evolutions should provide additional options and actions for the Eidolon similarly as Class feats provide options and actions for the MArtials.

Grab evolution, Poison evolution (probably making it a 2 action activity for a poisonous attack), Constrict, Flyby, Rend, More magical stuff, More reactions (shield other as an example), and etc

You know, I could also go with that. But the issue I have was more, let's be able to design our own custom creature rather than pick from a list.

[KrispyXIV]

Verzen wrote:

It should be a new, unique, fantastic creature that's not found anywhere else.

Ah, so the player who wants to have a specific creature as a companion - such as a lillend azata, or a monavic deva - has no place in your vision of the class at all.

It seems as though we are unlikely to find common ground in the end. My goal is to make as many Player's concepts as possible viable, and that requires being willing to accept that some elements won't be reflected mechanically.

I'm willing to add more customization, but if you dont share my goal - and you just said you don't- we're looking at opposing visions of the class.

[Verzen]

BobROE wrote:

Verzen wrote:

I am suggesting that a lot of those ancestry feats and general feats are going to be useless because they benefit the summoner when it is the Eidolon that's going to be in combat most of the time. For example. Dwarves get an ability to throw their body weight around. How useful is that going to be for the summoner? Are there going to be any ancestry feats that are going to assist the Eidolon? Probably not. The only fix I can think of for this is that the Eidolon BENEFITS from any of the feats that the summoner has, but that still doesn't solve the issue of me feeling like I am controlling a monster. 90% of our class SHOULD be about that Eidolon and customizing it. It should all be about customization. I am not saying we should make it OP like in 1e. I am saying that I want a unique monster I can be able to create. A monster of my very own that is not found anywhere else. A unique being.

If you're view is that 90% of the class should be about the eidolon why even have that last 10%?

Why not just have a class that's built around giving weird mutations to some base chassis entity? And then make that the PC.

That other 10% is skill and social interactions.

[Verzen]

KrispyXIV wrote:

Verzen wrote:

It should be a new, unique, fantastic creature that's not found anywhere else.

Ah, so the player who wants to have a specific creature as a companion - such as a lillend azata, or a monavic deva - has no place in your vision of the class at all.

It seems as though we are unlikely to find common ground in the end. My goal is to make as many Player's concepts as possible viable, and that requires being willing to accept that some elements won't be reflected mechanically.

I'm willing to add more customization, but if you dont share my goal - and you just said you don't- we're looking at opposing visions of the class.

I didn't say that. I am saying this is how I picture MY Eidolons.

You can go ahead and MIMIC a lillend azata or a monavic deva if you want. Go ahead. No one is stopping you. But you ARE directly stopping ME from having my custom monster. See the difference here?

[Dubious Scholar]

KrispyXIV wrote:

Verzen wrote:

It should be a new, unique, fantastic creature that's not found anywhere else.

Ah, so the player who wants to have a specific creature as a companion - such as a lillend azata, or a monavic deva - has no place in your vision of the class at all.

It seems as though we are unlikely to find common ground in the end. My goal is to make as many Player's concepts as possible viable, and that requires being willing to accept that some elements won't be reflected mechanically.

I'm willing to add more customization, but if you dont share my goal - and you just said you don't- we're looking at opposing visions of the class.

He's already stated he hates UC Summoner too. He seems to think the only valid eidolon is the original blob of numbers that is defined only by what points are spent on it.

[Dubious Scholar]

Verzen wrote:

KrispyXIV wrote:

Verzen wrote:

It should be a new, unique, fantastic creature that's not found anywhere else.

Ah, so the player who wants to have a specific creature as a companion - such as a lillend azata, or a monavic deva - has no place in your vision of the class at all.

It seems as though we are unlikely to find common ground in the end. My goal is to make as many Player's concepts as possible viable, and that requires being willing to accept that some elements won't be reflected mechanically.

I'm willing to add more customization, but if you dont share my goal - and you just said you don't- we're looking at opposing visions of the class.

I didn't say that. I am saying this is how I picture MY Eidolons.

You can go ahead and MIMIC a lillend azata or a monavic deva if you want. Go ahead. No one is stopping you. But you ARE directly stopping ME from having my custom monster. See the difference here?

You do realize you just said it's not allowed to actually be an azata, it has to just look like one, right?

[MrTsFloatinghead]

Verzen wrote:

How exactly does it make sense to have a literal creature made of ice have zero resistance to ice and be vulnerable to fire? That's like saying an Ice Mephit isn't resistant to ice. It would make zero sense. Without these mechanical benefits, all the Eidolons will feel the same rather than unique manifestations.

Because despite the fact that it LOOKS like it is made of ice, what it actually is made out of is just a magical essence bound with some ectoplasm to replicate facsimile of a particular form? Like, that's actually the description of what an eidolon is, right?

As for them feeling the same, that's just not true. If I have an eidolon that LOOKS like it is made of ice, will people/enemies/players interact with it in the same way that they would if it LOOKS like it is a lion with an ant's head, or if it LOOKS like an animated pile of children's toys, or...?

[KrispyXIV]

Dubious Scholar wrote:

Verzen wrote:

KrispyXIV wrote:

Verzen wrote:

It should be a new, unique, fantastic creature that's not found anywhere else.

Ah, so the player who wants to have a specific creature as a companion - such as a lillend azata, or a monavic deva - has no place in your vision of the class at all.

It seems as though we are unlikely to find common ground in the end. My goal is to make as many Player's concepts as possible viable, and that requires being willing to accept that some elements won't be reflected mechanically.

I'm willing to add more customization, but if you dont share my goal - and you just said you don't- we're looking at opposing visions of the class.

I didn't say that. I am saying this is how I picture MY Eidolons.

You can go ahead and MIMIC a lillend azata or a monavic deva if you want. Go ahead. No one is stopping you. But you ARE directly stopping ME from having my custom monster. See the difference here?

You do realize you just said it's not allowed to actually be an azata, it has to just look like one, right?

I believe that to him, a lillend azata is defined by its stats.

Instead of being a creature that exists, and has a stat block in the bestiary that applies to most creatures of that type.

[Verzen]

Dubious Scholar wrote:

KrispyXIV wrote:

Verzen wrote:

It should be a new, unique, fantastic creature that's not found anywhere else.

Ah, so the player who wants to have a specific creature as a companion - such as a lillend azata, or a monavic deva - has no place in your vision of the class at all.

It seems as though we are unlikely to find common ground in the end. My goal is to make as many Player's concepts as possible viable, and that requires being willing to accept that some elements won't be reflected mechanically.

I'm willing to add more customization, but if you dont share my goal - and you just said you don't- we're looking at opposing visions of the class.

He's already stated he hates UC Summoner too. He seems to think the only valid eidolon is the original blob of numbers that is defined only by what points are spent on it.

Nice strawman, but okay. I already refuted that argument and said I do not want the "original blob of numbers"

I think that Eidolons should get evolution feats like everyone else gets feats. Except these feats define what the Eidolon is and the powers it gets.

It's interesting how you don't want to address what I am actually saying.

[RexAliquid]

Packages really help everyone else at the table react and role play with the summoner’s eidolon. Base forms give everyone a foundation to imagine from. In contrast, it’s a lot more difficult to get a consistent image of Verzen’s blob of chicken snake across to everyone playing that day.

[Verzen]

KrispyXIV wrote:

Dubious Scholar wrote:

Verzen wrote:

KrispyXIV wrote:

Verzen wrote:

It should be a new, unique, fantastic creature that's not found anywhere else.

Ah, so the player who wants to have a specific creature as a companion - such as a lillend azata, or a monavic deva - has no place in your vision of the class at all.

It seems as though we are unlikely to find common ground in the end. My goal is to make as many Player's concepts as possible viable, and that requires being willing to accept that some elements won't be reflected mechanically.

I'm willing to add more customization, but if you dont share my goal - and you just said you don't- we're looking at opposing visions of the class.

I didn't say that. I am saying this is how I picture MY Eidolons.

You can go ahead and MIMIC a lillend azata or a monavic deva if you want. Go ahead. No one is stopping you. But you ARE directly stopping ME from having my custom monster. See the difference here?

You do realize you just said it's not allowed to actually be an azata, it has to just look like one, right?

I believe that to him, a lillend azata is defined by its stats.

Instead of being a creature that exists, and has a stat block in the bestiary that applies to most creatures of that type.

EVERYTHING is defined by their stats in a mechanically focused TTRPG. I am absolutely baffled how you guys don't seem to understand this. Are monsters defined by their stats? If I gave you a stat block, would this make sense?

Quote:

Lillend Azata

NMediumAnimal
Source Bestiary pg. 182
Perception +6; low-light vision, scent (imprecise) 30 feet
Skills Athletics +6, Stealth +7
Str +3, Dex +2, Con +2, Int -4, Wis +1, Cha -1
AC 17; Fort +8, Ref +8, Will +5
HP 17
Buck Reaction DC 17
Irritating Dander A creature that hits the goblin dog with an unarmed attack, tries to Grapple it, or otherwise touches it is exposed to goblin pox.
Juke Reaction Requirement A creature must be mounted on the goblin dog. Trigger The rider issues a command to the goblin dog. Effect The goblin dog Steps before following the command.
Speed 40 feet
Melee Single Action jaws +9 [+4/-1], Damage 1d6+3 piercing plus goblin pox
Goblin Pox (disease) Goblins and goblin dogs are immune to goblin pox. Saving Throw DC 17 Fortitude; Stage 1 sickened 1 (1 round); Stage 2 sickened 1 and slowed 1 (1 round); Stage 3 sickened 2 and can't reduce its sickened value below 1 (1 day).
Scratch Two Actions (manipulate) The goblin dog vigorously scratches itself, exposing all adjacent creatures to goblin pox.

I just took a goblin dog and smacked "Lillend Azata" on top of it.

None of the stats correlate with what a Lillend Azata is. So why would I call it a lillend azata?

Here is what an ACTUAL lillend azata is

Quote:

Lillend CR 7

Source Pathfinder RPG Bestiary pg. 26
XP 3,200
CG Large outsider (azata, chaotic, extraplanar, good)
Init +3; Senses low-light vision, darkvision 60 ft.; Perception +13
Defense
AC 20, touch 12, flat-footed 17 (+3 Dex, +8 natural, –1 size)
hp 73 (7d10+35)
Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +10
Immune electricity, petrification, poison; Resist cold 10, fire 10
Offense
Speed 30 ft., fly 70 ft. (average)
Melee +1 longsword +12/+7 (2d6+8/19–20), tail slap +6 (2d6+2 plus grab)
Space 10 ft., Reach 10 ft.
Special Attacks bardic performance (20 rounds/day), constrict (2d6+5)
Spell-Like Abilities (CL 7th)
3/day—darkness, hallucinatory terrain (DC 18), knock, light
1/day—charm person (DC 15), speak with animals, speak with plants
Spells Known (CL 7th)
3rd (2/day)—charm monster (DC 17), cure serious wounds
2nd (4/day)—hold person (DC 16), invisibility, sound burst (DC 16), suggestion (DC 16)
1st (5/day)—charm person (DC 15), cure light wounds, identify, sleep (DC 15)
0 (at will)—dancing lights, daze (DC 14), detect magic, lullaby (DC 14), mage hand, read magic
Statistics
Str 20, Dex 17, Con 21, Int 14, Wis 16, Cha 19
Base Atk +7; CMB +13; CMD 26 (can’t be tripped)
Feats Combat Casting, Hover, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes
Skills Bluff +14, Diplomacy +14, Fly +11, Knowledge (nature) +9, Perception +13, Perform (stringed instruments) +16, Sense Motive +13, Survival +14; Racial Modifiers +4 Survival
Languages Celestial, Draconic, Infernal; truespeech

See how it is literally defined by their stats?

[Dubious Scholar]

I see that you have a particular view of what the game is that most of us do not share.

[Verzen]

RexAliquid wrote:

Packages really help everyone else at the table react and role play with the summoner’s eidolon. Base forms give everyone a foundation to imagine from. In contrast, it’s a lot more difficult to get a consistent image of Verzen’s blob of chicken snake across to everyone playing that day.

Really? Nice strawman.

My Eidolon idea

It has the icy resistance evolution (which gives vulnerability to fire), the ice breath attack, and 1 increase to AC.

It's icy breath chills the air around it, as it slithers past your body. This creature looks like a snake, but much larger, made of ice with jagged teeth.

or

It has the abberation trait, reach trait, darkvision

This monstrocity has two tentacles for arms, with a blackened squid like body. It only has one eye in the center of its forehead.

RexAliquid interprets both of those as, "Blob of chicken snake"

[Verzen]

Dubious Scholar wrote:

I see that you have a particular view of what the game is that most of us do not share.

Uh no. A lot of people have stated they want more customization with their eidolon. Most agree with me.

[KrispyXIV]

Verzen wrote:

See how it is literally defined by their stats?

Maybe my Eidolon is bound by the limits of her sunmoning, and lacks full access to the divine abilities she possesses on her home plane? And as my character grows, she will be able to tap into more and more of that power.

Its like I had a concept, looked at the constraints, and used that as a narrative spring board to help build my character.

My eidolon is a lillend because I said so, I described it as so, and I take the customization options to support that as they become available.

The fact that I can't reproduce that specific stat block is immaterial.

[Verzen]

Quote:

Its like I had a concept, looked at the constraints, and used that as a narrative spring board to help build my character.

My eidolon is a lillend because I said so, I described it as so, and I take the customization options to support that as they become available.

And what's so different about that and having a more open ended system where people can just design what THEY want to design?

[Charlesfire]

Verzen wrote:

Dubious Scholar wrote:

I see that you have a particular view of what the game is that most of us do not share.

Uh no. A lot of people have stated they want more customization with their eidolon. Most agree with me.

This is just a partial truth. A lot of people have stated they want more customization, but not that much actually stated that they like your proposition.

[KrispyXIV]

Verzen wrote:

Quote:

Its like I had a concept, looked at the constraints, and used that as a narrative spring board to help build my character.

My eidolon is a lillend because I said so, I described it as so, and I take the customization options to support that as they become available.

And what's so different about that and having a more open ended system where people can just design what THEY want to design?

We already have that system.

You seem to want to constrain them by adding mechanical constraints to what they want to build, by assigning resource costs (feats, points, whatever) to elements of their description - reducing their options.

I dont see anyone opposed to more eidolon options and customization. We just want that to be customization, and not related to functionality and base existence.

[Dubious Scholar]

Verzen wrote:

Dubious Scholar wrote:

I see that you have a particular view of what the game is that most of us do not share.

Uh no. A lot of people have stated they want more customization with their eidolon. Most agree with me.

No, you're stating that creatures are defined by their stats, rather than anything else. You're essentially stripping away the role-playing part entirely to be left with nothing but numbers.

[Verzen]

Dubious Scholar wrote:

Verzen wrote:

Dubious Scholar wrote:

I see that you have a particular view of what the game is that most of us do not share.

Uh no. A lot of people have stated they want more customization with their eidolon. Most agree with me.

No, you're stating that creatures are defined by their stats, rather than anything else. You're essentially stripping away the role-playing part entirely to be left with nothing but numbers.

In this particular TTRPG, I've already explained before, that all creatures in the game, PC and NPC alike, are all defined by their stats.

If you want a roleplay game where you aren't defined by your stats, perhaps 5th ed is more your speed, because it gives very limited options and people are asked to just "use your imagination" or "reskin"

That's not what I want for my Eidolon. If I have tentacles, I think I should at least have reach with them as if I was attacking with a spear. I shouldn't just imagine tentacles, but unable to gain any mechanical benefit at all from having them.

[shroudb]

Verzen wrote:

shroudb wrote:

I feel like Evolutions shouldnt be numerical buffs.

no "take this evolution for +X to ac, and that evolution for +Y to attack"

That feels like the epitome of mathfixers and feat taxes that PF2 dont want to have anythig to do with.

Evolutions should provide additional options and actions for the Eidolon similarly as Class feats provide options and actions for the MArtials.

Grab evolution, Poison evolution (probably making it a 2 action activity for a poisonous attack), Constrict, Flyby, Rend, More magical stuff, More reactions (shield other as an example), and etc

You know, I could also go with that. But the issue I have was more, let's be able to design our own custom creature rather than pick from a list.

Having the evolutions as options and abilities doesnt restrict designing your own Eidolon.

A summoner with a Beast Eidolon that's a Large Scorpion could take the Large evolution, a Poison evolution for a "sting attack", and maybe something like a Grab evolution to grab you with it's claws.

While a summoner, with Beast Eidolon again, could use the exact same evolutions to make a Large Spider that has a poisonous bite and spits close range "web" to Grab you.

A third one could even grab the same evolutions for a Constricting poisonous snake.

All 3 could have other options later on, like the spider actually throwing the web, or the snake actually doing contrict damage, and etc.

[KrispyXIV]

Verzen wrote:

If you want a roleplay game where you aren't defined by your stats, perhaps 5th ed is more your speed, because it gives very limited options and people are asked to just "use your imagination" or "reskin"

I'm concerned you may have missed all of the concessions to narrative roleplaying added in PF2E that as a whole made it a better game.

Maybe you should not try and drive people from the game, because your personal vision of what Pathfinder is doesnt match theres.

Reskinning things is perfectly in line with the inclusive and flexible nature of PF2e.

[BACE]

I'm just gonna put my full opinion out because I don't know that I've actually done so yet in this thread.

I want more customization for the eidolon. Does this mean that I agree with Verzen? Yes, technically. However, I don't think completely erasing the subtypes is the way to do it. That makes the class so ridiculously bloated and unwieldy. And taking evolutions to specifically give number bonuses? No thanks, I'm good. Maybe let people have some more customization with the ability scores of their eidolon. Has a similar effect to an extent.

Honestly, I think Krispy has proposed a fairly elegant system here that does what I, as a player, want from the class (at least, I believe it was Krispy that mentioned it first). Let me just absolutely devour evolutions. Let me give it a breath weapon, flight, swim speed, barbarian rage, cool two-action activities, whatever. And Krispy's proposed system (bonus class feats at odd levels for just Evolutions) does that wonderfully. I can take 20 evolutions if I want to throughout my career. 20! Or, I can take the baseline number of 10, and then also take class feats to help me work better with my eidolon, give me more focus spells, etc. Or anything in between.

I can take my Angel base, or Construct base, or dragon base, or whatever, and modify it from there. And I really like that.

And if you want tentacles? Fine! There should be a "Reach Evolution" that lets you slap on the reach trait to one of your attacks, and you can say that you get that from tentacles. And I can say my eidolon's reach comes from lightning-fast movements to quickly dart out of its space, strike, and then dart back in.

[Cydeth]

I want to be able to build Shiva, from the Final Fantasy series. PF1 wasn't good at this either, but it could get a heck of a lot closer than anything in the playtest. The only things that even approaches what I'd want is making Shiva would be making her a dragon (uh, NO), giving her cantrips to get ray of frost, or giving her 1/day spells to get snowball and resist energy. The only good option is the ranged attack at level 8.

It's too little. And the elemental eidolon that they haven't shared with us almost certainly won't do it, since those will be for the classic four elements, and we have the sorcerer to go off of for them.

I don't think we need point-based evolutions, or as many choices as Verzen suggests. I do find that the current version of the Summoner falls flat on every front except maybe damage, but based on the other threads I've seen of playtest results, even that isn't true.

I'm going to build my faux Yuna with her faux Shiva anyway, but looking at the summoner feats leaves me incredibly disappointed.

[Dubious Scholar]

BACE wrote:

I'm just gonna put my full opinion out because I don't know that I've actually done so yet in this thread.

I want more customization for the eidolon. Does this mean that I agree with Verzen? Yes, technically. However, I don't think completely erasing the subtypes is the way to do it. That makes the class so ridiculously bloated and unwieldy. And taking evolutions to specifically give number bonuses? No thanks, I'm good. Maybe let people have some more customization with the ability scores of their eidolon. Has a similar effect to an extent.

Honestly, I think Krispy has proposed a fairly elegant system here that does what I, as a player, want from the class (at least, I believe it was Krispy that mentioned it first). Let me just absolutely devour evolutions. Let me give it a breath weapon, flight, swim speed, barbarian rage, cool two-action activities, whatever. And Krispy's proposed system (bonus class feats at odd levels for just Evolutions) does that wonderfully. I can take 20 evolutions if I want to throughout my career. 20! Or, I can take the baseline number of 10, and then also take class feats to help me work better with my eidolon, give me more focus spells, etc. Or anything in between.

I can take my Angel base, or Construct base, or dragon base, or whatever, and modify it from there. And I really like that.

And if you want tentacles? Fine! There should be a "Reach Evolution" that lets you slap on the reach trait to one of your attacks, and you can say that you get that from tentacles. And I can say my eidolon's reach comes from lightning-fast movements to quickly dart out of its space, strike, and then dart back in.

That still runs into massive amounts of feat bloat to support it, I fear.

[KrispyXIV]

Cydeth wrote:

I want to be able to build Shiva, from the Final Fantasy series. PF1 wasn't good at this either, but it could get a heck of a lot closer than anything in the playtest. The only things that even approaches what I'd want is making Shiva would be making her a dragon (uh, NO), giving her cantrips to get ray of frost, or giving her 1/day spells to get snowball and resist energy. The only good option is the ranged attack at level 8.

It's too little. And the elemental eidolon that they haven't shared with us almost certainly won't do it, since those will be for the classic four elements, and we have the sorcerer to go off of for them.

I don't think we need point-based evolutions, or as many choices as Verzen suggests. I do find that the current version of the Summoner falls flat on every front except maybe damage, but based on the other threads I've seen of playtest results, even that isn't true.

I'm going to build my faux Yuna with her faux Shiva anyway, but looking at the summoner feats leaves me incredibly disappointed.

I mean, I'd bet money Elemental is a base Eidolon type in Secrets of Magic and it will do what you want here.

[KrispyXIV]

Dubious Scholar wrote:

BACE wrote:

I'm just gonna put my full opinion out because I don't know that I've actually done so yet in this thread.

I want more customization for the eidolon. Does this mean that I agree with Verzen? Yes, technically. However, I don't think completely erasing the subtypes is the way to do it. That makes the class so ridiculously bloated and unwieldy. And taking evolutions to specifically give number bonuses? No thanks, I'm good. Maybe let people have some more customization with the ability scores of their eidolon. Has a similar effect to an extent.

Honestly, I think Krispy has proposed a fairly elegant system here that does what I, as a player, want from the class (at least, I believe it was Krispy that mentioned it first). Let me just absolutely devour evolutions. Let me give it a breath weapon, flight, swim speed, barbarian rage, cool two-action activities, whatever. And Krispy's proposed system (bonus class feats at odd levels for just Evolutions) does that wonderfully. I can take 20 evolutions if I want to throughout my career. 20! Or, I can take the baseline number of 10, and then also take class feats to help me work better with my eidolon, give me more focus spells, etc. Or anything in between.

I can take my Angel base, or Construct base, or dragon base, or whatever, and modify it from there. And I really like that.

And if you want tentacles? Fine! There should be a "Reach Evolution" that lets you slap on the reach trait to one of your attacks, and you can say that you get that from tentacles. And I can say my eidolon's reach comes from lightning-fast movements to quickly dart out of its space, strike, and then dart back in.

That still runs into massive amounts of feat bloat to support it, I fear.

Probably. Massive may be an overstatement, I dont think we're going to satisfy most people looking for customization options though if we can't convince Mark and Co. that options are critically important for the enjoyment of summoner- and therefore for them to try and find a couple more pages to fill out those Evolution feats, relative to other classes.

[Samir Sardinha]

Dubious Scholar wrote:

Verzen wrote:

Dubious Scholar wrote:

I see that you have a particular view of what the game is that most of us do not share.

Uh no. A lot of people have stated they want more customization with their eidolon. Most agree with me.

No, you're stating that creatures are defined by their stats, rather than anything else. You're essentially stripping away the role-playing part entirely to be left with nothing but numbers.

At one end we have only numbers, at the other we have an imaginary "imaginary friend" that can looks like whatever you want, but can't do anything at all.

I think we must aim at a middle ground where you can have a fluffy beautiful wing that "levitates you above the ground" but dont do anything, and you can make it a usable and enable your eidolon to fly!
The "Ice Dragon" example could start without/thiner scales and as he grows up/evolve he start to gets ice resistance.
You want a Hecatoncheires eidolon, you have a hundred arms that cant hold anything but when you get evolutions they can start to hold some equipments.
I dont think anyone here wants to be constrained to describe the Eidolon based on anything. Its just be more than just a description.

[Dubious Scholar]

KrispyXIV wrote:

Cydeth wrote:

I want to be able to build Shiva, from the Final Fantasy series. PF1 wasn't good at this either, but it could get a heck of a lot closer than anything in the playtest. The only things that even approaches what I'd want is making Shiva would be making her a dragon (uh, NO), giving her cantrips to get ray of frost, or giving her 1/day spells to get snowball and resist energy. The only good option is the ranged attack at level 8.

It's too little. And the elemental eidolon that they haven't shared with us almost certainly won't do it, since those will be for the classic four elements, and we have the sorcerer to go off of for them.

I don't think we need point-based evolutions, or as many choices as Verzen suggests. I do find that the current version of the Summoner falls flat on every front except maybe damage, but based on the other threads I've seen of playtest results, even that isn't true.

I'm going to build my faux Yuna with her faux Shiva anyway, but looking at the summoner feats leaves me incredibly disappointed.

I mean, I'd bet money Elemental is a base Eidolon type in Secrets of Magic and it will do what you want here.

Beast, plant, fey, and elemental are called out in the playtest doc, so probably. If the elemental starts with the ranged attack, and then gets some better elemental blasty things, that covers most of what's needed I think.

Although I think we could also stand to broaden the ranged option a bit.

Level 1/2 feat: As current ranged, but 1d4 damage.
Level 8 feat: Upgrades to 1d6, add choice of propulsive or agile traits
Level 14/16: Wild Winds Gust, basically - area barrage activity for 2/3 actions.

[KrispyXIV]

Dubious Scholar wrote:

KrispyXIV wrote:

Cydeth wrote:

I want to be able to build Shiva, from the Final Fantasy series. PF1 wasn't good at this either, but it could get a heck of a lot closer than anything in the playtest. The only things that even approaches what I'd want is making Shiva would be making her a dragon (uh, NO), giving her cantrips to get ray of frost, or giving her 1/day spells to get snowball and resist energy. The only good option is the ranged attack at level 8.

It's too little. And the elemental eidolon that they haven't shared with us almost certainly won't do it, since those will be for the classic four elements, and we have the sorcerer to go off of for them.

I don't think we need point-based evolutions, or as many choices as Verzen suggests. I do find that the current version of the Summoner falls flat on every front except maybe damage, but based on the other threads I've seen of playtest results, even that isn't true.

I'm going to build my faux Yuna with her faux Shiva anyway, but looking at the summoner feats leaves me incredibly disappointed.

I mean, I'd bet money Elemental is a base Eidolon type in Secrets of Magic and it will do what you want here.

Beast, plant, fey, and elemental are called out in the playtest doc, so probably. If the elemental starts with the ranged attack, and then gets some better elemental blasty things, that covers most of what's needed I think.

Although I think we could also stand to broaden the ranged option a bit.

Level 1/2 feat: As current ranged, but 1d4 damage.
Level 8 feat: Upgrades to 1d6, add choice of propulsive or agile traits
Level 14/16: Wild Winds Gust, basically - area barrage activity for 2/3 actions.

Yes, there needs to be a ranged attack option at level 1 imo.

[Cydeth]

KrispyXIV wrote:

I mean, I'd bet money Elemental is a base Eidolon type in Secrets of Magic and it will do what you want here.

They mentioned it in the playtest as likely being primal. However, note what the water elemental type does with the sorcerer. It's bludgeoning damage, not cold. So no, unless they abandon all previous precedent for PF2, the elemental eidolon won't do what I want.

[Verzen]

Cydeth wrote:

KrispyXIV wrote:

I mean, I'd bet money Elemental is a base Eidolon type in Secrets of Magic and it will do what you want here.

They mentioned it in the playtest as likely being primal. However, note what the water elemental type does with the sorcerer. It's bludgeoning damage, not cold. So no, unless they abandon all previous precedent for PF2, the elemental eidolon won't do what I want.

Just use your imagination. Pretend the bludgeoning damage is cold damage.

[KrispyXIV]

Verzen wrote:

Cydeth wrote:

KrispyXIV wrote:

I mean, I'd bet money Elemental is a base Eidolon type in Secrets of Magic and it will do what you want here.

They mentioned it in the playtest as likely being primal. However, note what the water elemental type does with the sorcerer. It's bludgeoning damage, not cold. So no, unless they abandon all previous precedent for PF2, the elemental eidolon won't do what I want.

Just use your imagination. Pretend the bludgeoning damage is cold damage.

That, or wait for the Ice AOE we specifically know exists because Mark said so, and specifically referred to Final Fantasy Shiva in regards to.

[Cydeth]

KrispyXIV wrote:

That, or wait for the Ice AOE we specifically know exists because Mark said so, and specifically referred to Final Fantasy Shiva in regards to.

I'm going off what I have. Not a mythical ability that might make it into the final book.

If it's not in the playtest, it doesn't exist for the purposes of testing.

I'm really irate about the way the summoner has turned out thus far, which is why I waited four days before posting. I'm going to give it an honest chance, but only with what they gave us. And I'm not going to gimp a perfectly solid character by converting them into this for my ongoing campaign.

[BACE]

Dubious Scholar wrote:

That still runs into massive amounts of feat bloat to support it, I fear.

It might, but definitely less so than Verzen's system. The summoner is, effectively, closer to a martial than a caster. A lot of martials, baseline, have 50-60 feets just in the books they were printed in. Let's say we want, on average, 2 evolutions/level available that you can choose from. It'd probably be frontloaded a bit just to give more options at those low levels. Level 1 you have 4 evolutions to choose from. Level 2 you have 2. Level 3 you have 2. Etc. This leads to a total of 42 evolution feats needed. Okay, yeah, that's a lot. But not all of them need their own entry. You can get away with stuff like

Quote:

Lifesense

You have a limited ability to sense life force. You gain lifesense as an imprecise sense with a range of 10 feet. This allows you to sense the life force within living creatures and its counterforce that animates the undead, though you can't distinguish between the two.
Special You can select this evolution an additional time starting at 15th level. When you do, your eidolon instead gains Lifesense with a range of 60 feet.

This means you now need 41, since 1 evolution can have basically an "Improved X" version built-in. Or, hell, what if they gave us this as an evolution?

Quote:

Talented Evolution Feat 2

Your eidolon develops its own unique skillset, independent from your own. Your eidolon gains an archetype feat it qualifies for.
Special You can select this evolution an additional time starting at at levels 4, 6, 8, and every even levels thereafter. When you do, choose from archetype feats your eidolon has access to, granting your eidolon those feats. As usual, your eidolon can’t take additional dedications until it has taken enough archetype feats first.

This adds so many options, and all it takes is one feat with a nice little Special entry. It might be a bad idea, I don't know, but you can at least see what I'm going for here. All told, you could probably get the number of options required in maybe 30 feats. That still leaves at least 30 feats open for non-eidolon summoner stuff, or they could inflate the number of class feats by 10-20 and still have 40-50 normal class feats. I think it could work without being too much bloat.

[BobROE]

Verzen wrote:

That other 10% is skill and social interactions.

Ok.

Then what's wrong with just give the summoner 'evolution' feats that they can select as class feats that give the eidolon stuff? They don't need to be a special pool of feats that only the eidolon can select just ones with the right traits.

Cause not all players are going to want to focus on their eidolon the same way you do.

[graystone]

Verzen wrote:

Cydeth wrote:

KrispyXIV wrote:

I mean, I'd bet money Elemental is a base Eidolon type in Secrets of Magic and it will do what you want here.

They mentioned it in the playtest as likely being primal. However, note what the water elemental type does with the sorcerer. It's bludgeoning damage, not cold. So no, unless they abandon all previous precedent for PF2, the elemental eidolon won't do what I want.

Just use your imagination. Pretend the bludgeoning damage is cold damage.

LOL Well just take an angel and hand it a crossbow instead: Imagination is a wonderful thing to LARP. ;)

Seriously though: there IS a limit on 'just re-fluff it!!' before people just throw up their hands. Now that will vary, but for myself I too looked at 'all byt fire does bludgeoning and said 'nope, can't do it!'

KrispyXIV wrote:

That, or wait for the Ice AOE we specifically know exists because Mark said so, and specifically referred to Final Fantasy Shiva in regards to.

We don't KNOW it's going to be in the book: even Mark said the class might not turn out how he of anyone else wants and I don't think anything is guaranteed at this point.

[Mark Seifter]

graystone wrote:

We don't KNOW it's going to be in the book: even Mark said the class might not turn out how he or anyone else wants and I don't think anything is guaranteed at this point.

To clarify, and you probably meant this already with "he or anyone else", but obviously it is not going to be the case that "neither I, nor anyone else, wants the class" but instead "enough people want enough things that are mutually exclusive enough that there will for certain be a few people, possibly including myself because I'm going to go with what people want most, who don't see the version they would maximally prefer."

[Verzen]

BobROE wrote:

Verzen wrote:

That other 10% is skill and social interactions.

Ok.

Then what's wrong with just give the summoner 'evolution' feats that they can select as class feats that give the eidolon stuff? They don't need to be a special pool of feats that only the eidolon can select just ones with the right traits.

Cause not all players are going to want to focus on their eidolon the same way you do.

Again. Lack. Of. Customization.

[Verzen]

Mark Seifter wrote:

graystone wrote:

We don't KNOW it's going to be in the book: even Mark said the class might not turn out how he or anyone else wants and I don't think anything is guaranteed at this point.

To clarify, and you probably meant this already with "he or anyone else", but obviously it is not going to be the case that "neither I, nor anyone else, wants the class" but instead "enough people want enough things that are mutually exclusive enough that there will for certain be a few people, possibly including myself because I'm going to go with what people want most, who don't see the version they would maximally prefer."

Honestly the way I see Eidolons in my head aren't just "another monster"

I look at the summoners in Final Fantasy games and my idea of an Eidolon is based off of those. It's not based off of a "pre-existing creature as a base"

I just find that as being a bit boring.

[RexAliquid]

Verzen wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

graystone wrote:

We don't KNOW it's going to be in the book: even Mark said the class might not turn out how he or anyone else wants and I don't think anything is guaranteed at this point.

To clarify, and you probably meant this already with "he or anyone else", but obviously it is not going to be the case that "neither I, nor anyone else, wants the class" but instead "enough people want enough things that are mutually exclusive enough that there will for certain be a few people, possibly including myself because I'm going to go with what people want most, who don't see the version they would maximally prefer."

I look at the summoners in Final Fantasy games and my idea of an Eidolon is based off of those. It's not based off of a "pre-existing creature as a base"

Unfortunately, that doesn't jibe well with the existing Summoner lore of Golarion.

[Verzen]

RexAliquid wrote:

Verzen wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

graystone wrote:

We don't KNOW it's going to be in the book: even Mark said the class might not turn out how he or anyone else wants and I don't think anything is guaranteed at this point.

To clarify, and you probably meant this already with "he or anyone else", but obviously it is not going to be the case that "neither I, nor anyone else, wants the class" but instead "enough people want enough things that are mutually exclusive enough that there will for certain be a few people, possibly including myself because I'm going to go with what people want most, who don't see the version they would maximally prefer."

I look at the summoners in Final Fantasy games and my idea of an Eidolon is based off of those. It's not based off of a "pre-existing creature as a base"

Unfortunately, that doesn't jibe well with the existing Summoner lore of Golarion.

You keep saying that, but uh.. you're wrong.

https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/File:Balazar.png

This is part of the existing summoner lore of Golarion, is it not?

[Verzen]

Unless you don't think Padrig is part of the existing Summoner lore of Golarion.

[manbearscientist]

One way to look at it:

What class abilities should an Eidolon have access to (archetype spinoff)

What monster actions should an Eidolon have access to?

What advanced senses should an Eidolon have access to?

What advanced movement options should an Eidolon have access to?

What skill feats should an eidolon have access to?

What spells should an Eidolon have access to?

Each of these things could be a single feat, which could be taken multiple times to drastically expand an Eidolon's potential ways to interact with the world.

Because I think that is the important part. I don't think dealing +1 damage or having +1 AC is as necessary for the Eidolon as-is to be fun so much as having more ways to interact beyond Strike. It absolutely needs to get these, in addition to specific feats and focus spells.

For instance, I could the see the argument for:

Most level 1-6 class feats that grant an action (e.g. Intimidating Strike)

Most monster abilities (not those that have suffocation involved)

All-around vision, tremor/wavesense, life sense, blindsense/sight

Flying, burrowing (Earth Glide maybe only for Earth elementals)

Battle Medicine, Bon Mot, etc.

2-8 total spells, from its tradition, up to 8th level

Stuff not included in that list (expanding ranged attacks, weapon traits, or elemental damage) I feel could be part of a much more expansive level 1.

[Verzen]

manbearscientist wrote:

One way to look at it:

What class abilities should an Eidolon have access to (archetype spinoff)

What monster actions should an Eidolon have access to?

What advanced senses should an Eidolon have access to?

What advanced movement options should an Eidolon have access to?

What skill feats should an eidolon have access to?

What spells should an Eidolon have access to?

Each of these things could be a single feat, which could be taken multiple times to drastically expand an Eidolon's potential ways to interact with the world.

Because I think that is the important part. I don't think dealing +1 damage or having +1 AC is as necessary for the Eidolon as-is to be fun so much as having more ways to interact beyond Strike. It absolutely needs to get these, in addition to specific feats and focus spells.

For instance, I could the see the argument for:

Most level 1-6 class feats that grant an action (e.g. Intimidating Strike)

Most monster abilities (not those that have suffocation involved)

All-around vision, tremor/wavesense, life sense, blindsense/sight

Flying, burrowing (Earth Glide maybe only for Earth elementals)

Battle Medicine, Bon Mot, etc.

2-8 total spells, from its tradition, up to 8th level

Stuff not included in that list (expanding ranged attacks, weapon traits, or elemental damage) I feel could be part of a much more expansive level 1.

I could see a very high level evolution including suffocation. Like.. a water elemental drowning out the enemy OR fire elemental snuffing out the oxygen. Kineticist had these in PF1 but I am not sure if PF2 suffocation is way too strong compared to everything else at high enough level.

[Moppy]

Verzen wrote:

I honestly don't understand why you guys are not listening or reading what I am actually saying. I am absolutely baffled by it.

Sometimes people want a toy car, not a lego set. Certainly you can build the car from the legos but not everyone wants to.

Personally, I prefer Lego.

[RexAliquid]

Verzen wrote:

Unless you don't think Padrig is part of the existing Summoner lore of Golarion.

Is Balazar in the playtest document? He must have had a haircut.

[Verzen]

Moppy wrote:

Verzen wrote:

I honestly don't understand why you guys are not listening or reading what I am actually saying. I am absolutely baffled by it.

Sometimes people want a toy car, not a lego set. Certainly you can build the car from the legos but not everyone wants to.

Personally, I prefer Lego.

Same. I'd much rather have a lego set.