Summoner Shield Evolution

[shroudb]

I don't get this evolution.

Actions between the Summoner and the Eidolon are interchangable, there's no practical difference is an Eidolon Action and a Summoner Action barring a very very niche occasion that you literally have nothing to do with your Eidolon actions and you want to capitalize on Act together.

So, "spend an action to get +2 circumstantial AC" with positional requirements that are generally hazardous to you.
Costs a 6th level Class Feat.

vs
"spend an action to get +2 circumstantial AC" without positional requirements, requires an empty hand (but really would you be holding twohanded weapons as a summoner?)
Costs 5sp to buy a steel shield.

[KrispyXIV]

shroudb wrote:

I don't get this evolution.

Actions between the Summoner and the Eidolon are interchangable, there's no practical difference is an Eidolon Action and a Summoner Action barring a very very niche occasion that you literally have nothing to do with your Eidolon actions and you want to capitalize on Act together.

So, "spend an action to get +2 circumstantial AC" with positional requirements that are generally hazardous to you.
Costs a 6th level Class Feat.

vs
"spend an action to get +2 circumstantial AC" without positional requirements, requires an empty hand (but really would you be holding twohanded weapons as a summoner?)
Costs 5sp to buy a steel shield.

I think its a very flavorful ability and a callback to a 1E summoner ability - but you've identified a very real fundamental flaw with it: it doesn't really help.

What if it were a reaction? At that point, its a bad, conditional version of a first level fighter feat but thats better than 'why not just Raise a Shield'.

What if it were always on, so long as your Eidolon was adjacent? That sounds better.

What if it were a Stance, and your Eidolon could pick someone who gained this AC while within their reach for the duration of the stance? That one sounds pretty interesting to me...

[shroudb]

KrispyXIV wrote:

shroudb wrote:

I don't get this evolution.

Actions between the Summoner and the Eidolon are interchangable, there's no practical difference is an Eidolon Action and a Summoner Action barring a very very niche occasion that you literally have nothing to do with your Eidolon actions and you want to capitalize on Act together.

So, "spend an action to get +2 circumstantial AC" with positional requirements that are generally hazardous to you.
Costs a 6th level Class Feat.

vs
"spend an action to get +2 circumstantial AC" without positional requirements, requires an empty hand (but really would you be holding twohanded weapons as a summoner?)
Costs 5sp to buy a steel shield.

I think its a very flavorful ability and a callback to a 1E summoner ability - but you've identified a very real fundamental flaw with it: it doesn't really help.

What if it were a reaction? At that point, its a bad, conditional version of a first level fighter feat but thats better than 'why not just Raise a Shield'.

What if it were always on, so long as your Eidolon was adjacent? That sounds better.

What if it were a Stance, and your Eidolon could pick someone who gained this AC while within their reach for the duration of the stance? That one sounds pretty interesting to me...

yeah, on my sample build i took it just because my eidlon is a Armored Dark Knight.

But if it's just for flavor, i could just say that he has a shield as part of his normal appearence and a level 6 feat would have absolutely almost no mechanical benefit.

An aura or even something like a modified Shield Warden Feat (allowing it with a reaction to give +2 circumstantial to *any* adjucent ally) could work

[PossibleCabbage]

On my latest read through the class I also came to the conclusion "what is the point of this?". Since if the summoner wanted a +2 circumstance bonus to AC, they could always just raise a shield with one of their shared actions (and not have to spend a 6th level feat on it).

So this feat absolutely needs to do more. If it gave the +2 to both the summoner and the eidolon would that be too much?

[graystone]

shroudb wrote:

I don't get this evolution.

It could be worse: it could be Raise a Tome...

[Falgaia]

graystone wrote:

shroudb wrote:

I don't get this evolution.

It could be worse: it could be Raise a Tome...

Okay but seriously which of the magus archetypes was Raise a Tome even supposed to be designed for? The one that has to hold a weapon and nothing in the other hand, the one holding a great weapon, or the ranged dude that hopefully will never need a shield in ideal play?

I know this is the summoner playtest thread but I just can't even begin to fathom why it was designed that way.

Back to the topic at hand.

For Shield evolution to work as intended, aka with the Eidolon protectively hovering near the Summoner to block attacks, I think it'd be more interesting and flavorful to just have the Eidolon try to counteract the attack roll as a reaction. E,g, have the Eidolon attempt an Attack Roll against the result of the strike; if they exceed the result, they successfully block the attack. Having a shield from your Eidolon doesn't make sense atm since its not like your Eidolon taking the hit in your stead would do anything to benefit you, making shield functionally a superior option just due to the Block reaction even without the positioning advantage. At least this version of the feat would be functional (not to mention much cooler conceptually).