I totally agree with OP.
Trash number of Spell Slots for EXTREMELY weak casting a total of 4-6 times a day depending what Magic Items you invested or if you choose Arcane is totally brain dead.
Remove non-cantrip spell casting altogether, give them a splash more Focus Spells as they level up based on their Tradition and add 4 full pages (no art) of Evolutions to customize and kit out your Eidolon and Summons you cast from your new Focus Spell versions of them.
You make it sound so simple, as if 4 full pages of evolutions can just be conjured out of the aether.
What sort of evolutions would you propose that aren't trap options, are interesting, and aren't replacements for things that should have been base functions?
Manifest trait (1)
Evolution feat
Pick a creature type or element. Your Eidolon becomes the creature type of your choice and gain those creature traits. If you pick an element, the Eidolon becomes resistant to that element and weak to its opposite element.
Fire/Cold
Acid/Electricity
Good/Evil
Positive/Negative (for Void based or light based eidolons)
Maybe it's just me that don't know where to look, but I didn't find where it's stated that all creatures sharing a Creature Type Traits share x or y abilities. Therefore I think a feat like that would requires way too much work, takes too much space and it wouldn't be futur-proof...
Right NOW the eidolon is weaker than any other martial class and the expectation is for the Eidolon to be in martial situations.
Yes. A few points off. But mostly missing a good reaction or two on the Eidolon. That's the bit I feel most. I always optimise it on my martials and its just not here.
Even if we get the rest of the balance right it needs this.
Why can't the Eidolon trade all of those feats for an equal number of evolution feats?Because making enough Evolution Feats at level 1 for their to be three meaningful choices is too much work - plus, the only way to do it would be to break out basic functionality and make such things faux optional.
As in, it looks like its optional but it isnt because its basic functionality.
If it is not worth doing right, it should not be done at all.
I would rather see summoner dropped than have a half-assed implementation.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why can't the Eidolon trade all of those feats for an equal number of evolution feats?Because making enough Evolution Feats at level 1 for their to be three meaningful choices is too much work - plus, the only way to do it would be to break out basic functionality and make such things faux optional.
As in, it looks like its optional but it isnt because its basic functionality.
If it is not worth doing right, it should not be done at all.
I would rather see summoner dropped than have a half-assed implementation.
Well that's... not happening, so probably better to focus on options that are on the table. :)
Well that's... not happening, so probably better to focus on options that are on the table. :)Why can't the Eidolon trade all of those feats for an equal number of evolution feats?Because making enough Evolution Feats at level 1 for their to be three meaningful choices is too much work - plus, the only way to do it would be to break out basic functionality and make such things faux optional.
As in, it looks like its optional but it isnt because its basic functionality.
If it is not worth doing right, it should not be done at all.
I would rather see summoner dropped than have a half-assed implementation.
A half-assed implementations is going to result in a class almost nobody is going to play and, even if it does eventually get fixed, it will take years of complaints and far more effort than doing it right the first time.
If the excuse now is “it takes too much effort,” then the entire class needs to re-evaluated. Instead of splitting effort between two new classes and failing at both, they should focus their effort on one really polished class.
When people ask “Why should I play this class” or “What does this class bring to the table that another class is not better at” people should not struggle to find an answer.
Right now, that is what is happening with both the magus and the summoner. They bring nothing to the table that existing classes are not better at.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A half-assed implementations is going to result in a class almost nobody is going to play and, even if it does eventually get fixed, it will take years of complaints and far more effort than doing it right the first time.
If the excuse now is “it takes too much effort,” then the entire class needs to re-evaluated. Instead of splitting effort between two new classes and failing at both, they should focus their effort on one really polished class.
When people ask “Why should I play this class” or “What does this class bring to the table that another class is not better at” people should not struggle to find an answer.
Right now, that is what is happening with both the magus and the summoner. They bring nothing to the table that existing classes are not better at.
Even if I agreed with you, Paizo really can't do this. They already announced that Magus and Summoner will be appearing in Secrets of Magic. To say "oops, nevermind" would be a far bigger PR hit than releasing a class that isn't quite perfect.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I totally agree with OP.
Trash number of Spell Slots for EXTREMELY weak casting a total of 4-6 times a day depending what Magic Items you invested or if you choose Arcane is totally brain dead.
Remove non-cantrip spell casting altogether, give them a splash more Focus Spells as they level up based on their Tradition and add 4 full pages (no art) of Evolutions to customize and kit out your Eidolon and Summons you cast from your new Focus Spell versions of them.
I do want those pages of options that you are talking about. I don't see that the right way to go about it is to remove spells.
The spell casting is interesting - there is a huge amount of variety there. Its not weak. The spell DCs are reasonable unless you choose to sack your Charisma.
It would be a massive loss to do away with spell casting all together. Whats the summoner going do then? Ping with a bow, and use a very limited set of focus spells ?!?!
The summoner has to have at least a few spell options. PF1 Summoner was a great caster.
I totally agree with OP.
Trash number of Spell Slots for EXTREMELY weak casting a total of 4-6 times a day depending what Magic Items you invested or if you choose Arcane is totally brain dead.
Remove non-cantrip spell casting altogether, give them a splash more Focus Spells as they level up based on their Tradition and add 4 full pages (no art) of Evolutions to customize and kit out your Eidolon and Summons you cast from your new Focus Spell versions of them.
I do want those pages of options that you are talking about. I don't see that the right way to go about it is to remove spells.
The spell casting is interesting - there is a huge amount of variety there. Its not weak. The spell DCs are reasonable unless you choose to sack your Charisma.
It would be a massive loss to do away with spell casting all together. Whats the summoner going do then? Ping with a bow, and use a very limited set of focus spells ?!?!
The summoner has to have at least a few spell options. PF1 Summoner was a great caster.
If something has to be lost to make a more interesting and effective eidolon what else can you take away? Currently spell casting is a very large part of the summoner's power, but I think a more interesting eidolon would be more of what it seems like most people want from the summoner.
I really like having the different casting traditions based on the eidolon type. I hope that can be preserved even with a reduction in casting capability.
Even if I agreed with you, Paizo really can't do this. They already announced that Magus and Summoner will be appearing in Secrets of Magic. To say "oops, nevermind" would be a far bigger PR hit than releasing a class that isn't quite perfect.A half-assed implementations is going to result in a class almost nobody is going to play and, even if it does eventually get fixed, it will take years of complaints and far more effort than doing it right the first time.
If the excuse now is “it takes too much effort,” then the entire class needs to re-evaluated. Instead of splitting effort between two new classes and failing at both, they should focus their effort on one really polished class.
When people ask “Why should I play this class” or “What does this class bring to the table that another class is not better at” people should not struggle to find an answer.
Right now, that is what is happening with both the magus and the summoner. They bring nothing to the table that existing classes are not better at.
You would rather see two classes that don’t function than have Paulo admit they only have the room or effort to fully flesh out one class?
Personally, I would rather have one interesting and useful class than two broken classes that see little usage.
Not that I would mind having both the magus and the summoner. Just not in their current states. Neither class seems well thought out and both are failing in what should be their strong points.
It doesn't really matter what I'd rather, Volkard.
I mean personally I don't find Magus or Summoner to be the abject failures you seem to find them, but even if I did - Paizo isn't in the habit of promising one thing and delivering another.
If they thought they didn't have time to do both classes right, their response would be to delay the book entirely - as they've done with other projects - rather than cut a major selling point that has already been promised from the book.
That's just kinda the business reality.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm sorry you're stuck at low levels, that is a shame because one of the best things about 2e is that it functions well all the way to 20.Don't be condescending. I've probably been tabletop gaming longer than you've been alive.
80-90% of home games run at low level due to attrition. They never make it to high levels. In PFS, PFS maxes out at level 8 atm.
First time looking through this thread, just wanted to chime in on this comment to say that the way things are going, I do think Paizo probably has plans to roll out at least up to mid-teens PFS. The current level chokepoint feels like it will just take awhile to pass due to concerns about rolling out level 10+ scenarios to a bunch of characters that can't play them. Best case scenario if you minmaxed chronicle credits for highest level PC possible is, iirc, a level 8 PC with 5XP towards their next level. (Only 3 7-8 scenarios+ Special means just PFS can only get you to 7.4XP, then apply Plaguestone and BTLA. Might be able to get higher with AP credit but I haven't personally looked into those certs yet)
All that said, the fact that School Items and Treasure Bundle tables are built out to Lv20 does imply thag Paizo is, at least, future-proofing Society play for the potential of high level, so hopefully we'll see the highest level play jump up a few levels with each passing season as EXP chokepoints get passed. IIRC, there was a recent Paizo blog that stealth-confirmed Lv 10 play in PFS is planned to roll out around May or June, so that's something to look forward to.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Totally on board with you on this, in my opinion if paizo had the intention of making halfcasters they should have done it with champions or rangers as well. The rulebook already set the standard, or you´re a caster hitting 10th level spells and all the progression or you´re a martial character, you could have a lot of fun tricks and focus spells, but you work mechanically as martial.
If you want to play as a summoner caster, take a caster archetype, you'll get 6th level spells just like 1e.