Stop trying to reinvent the wheel with Magus and Summoner

[Verzen]

The ONLY thing oracle is missing imo are effective wind / water spells for a tempest blaster ala Storm from x-men

[graystone]

Verzen wrote:

I definitely think the penalties are worth the benefits and the benefits are thematically very cool. Oracle in PF2 is one of my favorite classes now.

No need to repost the abilities, I know them fine: I just don't agree EVEN A LITTLE.

It's cool you like it but i think it's not a cardinal sin that I hate it's curse mechanic with every fiber of my being.

But enough of this: I don't think anyone here is going to change my mind on the Burn or PF1 burn and I have no need to convince other to agree so it's pointless to continue.

[Temperans]

Burn is a very hit or miss ability.

But the at least PF1 Kineticist had ways to mitigate it if you really did not want to use burn.

Oracle has no such mechanic.

and now the Magus and Summoner are paying exorbitant costs to try and support weird systems that dont deliver on the fantasy.

[PossibleCabbage]

A lot of the appeal of classes is based on personal preferences. Things like "you have to prepare your spells" or "a risk/reward, pain for power" are going to attract some people and push others away. The solution to "well, this class just doesn't appeal to me on a fundamental level" is "play a different class."

But just because something really repels you doesn't mean it's bad, since someone else might like specifically what you dislike, and vice versa.

At the same time, what I didn't like about the Summoner in PF1 was that it involved managing two sets of actions, and two sets of various character currencies (HP, SLAs, etc.) PF2 making the Eidolon and Summoner share as much as possible is a great change from where I sit.

[Verzen]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

A lot of the appeal of classes is based on personal preferences. Things like "you have to prepare your spells" or "a risk/reward, pain for power" are going to attract some people and push others away. The solution to "well, this class just doesn't appeal to me on a fundamental level" is "play a different class."

But just because something really repels you doesn't mean it's bad, since someone else might like specifically what you dislike, and vice versa.

At the same time, what I didn't like about the Summoner in PF1 was that it involved managing two sets of actions, and two sets of various character currencies (HP, SLAs, etc.) PF2 making the Eidolon and Summoner share as much as possible is a great change from where I sit.

I dont mind the shared HP and actions. I just dislike lack of customization.

[graystone]

Temperans wrote:

But the at least PF1 Kineticist had ways to mitigate it if you really did not want to use burn.

Not really: it was built into the Elemental Overflow which was your math keep the class balanced. If you mitigated burn, you don't get Elemental Overflow. The class FORCED you to take burn to the Elemental Overflow max then discouraged you to take anymore.

PossibleCabbage wrote:

But just because something really repels you doesn't mean it's bad, since someone else might like specifically what you dislike, and vice versa.

Well, yes and no. You can design a class to not require a divisive feature. For instance, Oracle can function at a basic level without using the curse so I see that as good: I can build a fine oracle that doesn't use it. I see Kineticist with burn as bad as it's integral to the math that makes the basic class work: I can't really play the class without it.

[Verzen]

graystone wrote:

Temperans wrote:

But the at least PF1 Kineticist had ways to mitigate it if you really did not want to use burn.

Not really: it was built into the Elemental Overflow which was your math keep the class balanced. If you mitigated burn, you don't get Elemental Overflow. The class FORCED you to take burn to the Elemental Overflow max then discouraged you to take anymore.

PossibleCabbage wrote:

But just because something really repels you doesn't mean it's bad, since someone else might like specifically what you dislike, and vice versa.

Well, yes and no. You can design a class to not require a divisive feature. For instance, Oracle can function at a basic level without using the curse so I see that as good: I can build a fine oracle that doesn't use it. I see Kineticist with burn as bad as it's integral to the math that makes the basic class work: I can't really play the class without it.

ALL oracles had a curse feature in PF1 though that gave both negatives and benefits.

[Deriven Firelion]

I'm going to relax at this point and hope they make the right changes to turn the summoner into something I want to play. Now that I've found out Striking Spell works with cantrips, that class has it's core ability.

Now if they can decouple the eidolon from the summoner as a hybrid creature and reconfigure the casting into something more interesting now that it's absolutely clear the damage for both classes is pretty moderate, they can go somewhere.

In my opinion, it would be smart of them to make the summoner and magus on the more powerful end of the class scale in term's combat effectiveness. They already have the witch, investigator, and oracle on the lower end of the damage scale for additional classes.

At some point they have to start releasing some classes that hit hard like a fighter or barbarian as a caster type of class. Magus and Summoner are perfect candidates for higher end damage and capabilities versus trying to water them down into the lower tier of combat effectiveness.

Both the Magus and Summoner were always one of those higher tier hammers. Even if the hammer isn't as hard as it once was, it would still be great to see the Magus and Summoner on the higher tier of damage on the PF2 class scale.

I'll leave it there and come back when they make a substantial update hoping they make the necessary fixes to put these classes to the status they had in PF1 using the PF2 power scale.

[graystone]

Verzen wrote:

ALL oracles had a curse feature in PF1 though that gave both negatives and benefits.

And I LIKED it. It was a set ability you could pick and not an increasing punishment for daring to cast your spells... PF1 curse wasn't like the PF1 Kineticist's burn, but the PF2 sure IS and that's why I hate it.

I can deal with and plan to mitigate a PF1 curse very easily so that it was truly more benefit if you put some resources into it. You couldn't throw enough resources, IMO, to make the PF2 curses become a benefit.

IMO, curses are very different beasts between editions and really nothing alike.

[Verzen]

? All the increases after minor were pretty much strict buffs.

[graystone]

Verzen wrote:

? All the increases after minor were pretty much strict buffs.

I'm not getting a point from this statement. If it's about PF2 curses... I'm not sure what you're looking at but that is just not true. At all. Flat checks to lose spells, vulnerabilities, damaging people that touch [like allies healing, using skills, ect]+ difficult terrain around you, losing hp when you heal, burn everyone around you [including allies], enfeebled 4 and take a –4 penalty to saves and DCs against Grapple/Shove/forced movement, wounded 1, stupefied 2, random action every round and need a flat DC 8 to not do it...

[Apellosine]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

2. Summoner: The summoner is a specialized class that uses a summoned creature emulating some other creature like an elemental or demon that serves its summoner.

This creature should be independent similar to an animal companion with its own stats, hit point pool, independent actions, and the like. Modifiable as it grows in power. It should be backed up by a caster with strong casting ability buffing it, not four slots a day with...

I hard disagree with this take on the Summoner, what you have described in just a Druid with an animal companion. The Eidolon being a fused version with the Summoner character lets it be more proficient in martial combat while having two separate entities that can be in two different places.

At it's heart the Summoner is closer to the Magus as being a martial character with light magic rather than being a full on caster with a regular animal companion pet.

[Verzen]

Personally, I want my summoner to be Eidolon focused.. heavily Eidolon focused. Get rid of spellcasting imo.

[David knott 242]

Or reduce the spellcasting to focus spells. A summoner could get buy with a very limited unique list of spells.

[Verzen]

David knott 242 wrote:

Or reduce the spellcasting to focus spells. A summoner could get buy with a very limited unique list of spells.

This

[Temperans]

The eidolon is an independent creature. It should behave like an independent creature. The current system does not give the idea of an independent creature in any case what so ever.

You dont have an eidolon you have a marionette.

[Deriven Firelion]

Verzen wrote:

Personally, I want my summoner to be Eidolon focused.. heavily Eidolon focused. Get rid of spellcasting imo.

The idea behind a summoner is to create a caster who specializes in summoned creatures. It was a take on a wizard with a summoned creature because summoned creatures weren't great save in swarms.

I like the idea of a caster specializing in summoned creatures myself. You can't do it with wizards or any caster, so summoner is the only chance to do it.

Lessening the casting doesn't accomplish that end. We have enough martial characters. Why make yet another martial option of the 9 that exist?

Fighter, barbarian, ranger, monk, rogue, investigator, swashbuckler, champion, and now magus. 9 martials.

Alchemist is it's own thing, but more martial than caster in how it does damage.

Bard, Cleric, Druid, Oracle, Sorcerer, Witch, Wizard. 7 casters.

I'd rather the martial be the more martial of the hybrid caster.

I'd rather the summoner be the more caster of the hybrid caster.

[David knott 242]

How independent of each other can two creatures with a constant telepathic connection be?

And the only reason to assume that the summoner is the one in charge is that the summoner most likely has the higher charisma.

[The Gleeful Grognard]

I would be gutted if they made eidolons have a separate health pool. It is such an interesting idea and one I want to see expanded on to make work, not trashed because it is a vulnerability (characters need vulnerabilities and impactful differences imo).

Making de-summoning a free action and summoning a 3 action focus cantrip with a range of 100ft could be fun.
Give the Summoner the Synthesis as a base ability.

I do want to see some more summoning pathways though, focus spells (similar to how the druid handles transformations) and maybe a connection to the act together style actions with feats that let them be split between the summons, summoner and eidolon.
Not that the summoner needs to use summoning spells to fit the summoner concept, but it is something I would like see return to some degree.

Could even work as a master summoner archetype that could be applied to any class tbh, granting the act together ability to others and focus spell summons to the summoner as well as other feats relating to summons.

[Temperans]

Telepathy should not mean you lose your actions.

Does a Fighter lose their actions if they gain telepathy with a Wizard? No.

Then why is the eidolon losing his actions? The answer is there is no reason. There is 0 reasons why the eidolon and summoner should be sharing their actions. They are not 1 creature, they are 2 different creatures and should be treated as different creatures.

[Verzen]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Verzen wrote:

Personally, I want my summoner to be Eidolon focused.. heavily Eidolon focused. Get rid of spellcasting imo.

The idea behind a summoner is to create a caster who specializes in summoned creatures. It was a take on a wizard with a summoned creature because summoned creatures weren't great save in swarms.

I like the idea of a caster specializing in summoned creatures myself. You can't do it with wizards or any caster, so summoner is the only chance to do it.

Lessening the casting doesn't accomplish that end. We have enough martial characters. Why make yet another martial option of the 9 that exist?

Fighter, barbarian, ranger, monk, rogue, investigator, swashbuckler, champion, and now magus. 9 martials.

Alchemist is it's own thing, but more martial than caster in how it does damage.

Bard, Cleric, Druid, Oracle, Sorcerer, Witch, Wizard. 7 casters.

I'd rather the martial be the more martial of the hybrid caster.

I'd rather the summoner be the more caster of the hybrid caster.

IMO - Split Summoner into 3 options. Summon monster, synthesis, or Eidolon focused. For summon monster, give them a summ monster font.

[Temperans]

Gleeful Grognard they can make that mechanic for another pet class there is no reason why the Summoner should have it what so ever.

[Verzen]

Quote:

I'd rather the martial be the more martial of the hybrid caster.

I'd rather the summoner be the more caster of the hybrid caster.

I'd actually be the exact opposite. I hope summoner focuses on his Eidolon far more and the magus focus far more on casting.

[Capn Cupcake]

Honestly, I actually really like the Summoner. I think it's undertuned, and it needs some more bells and whistles to play with on its turns, but I think it's *almost* there. I'm really excited to play one in an upcoming campaign.

[Squiggit]

Temperans wrote:

Gleeful Grognard they can make that mechanic for another pet class there is no reason why the Summoner should have it what so ever.

Or they could not do that and focus on improving the Summoner's numbers and adding more customization and mechanical nuance. Stuff that matters significantly more to the overall playability of the class.

If you really want a regular spellcaster with a pet that has its own HP pool so badly, druids are literally right there.

[Verzen]

i dont mind sharing HP. Lets get our customization back.

[Squiggit]

Verzen wrote:

i dont mind sharing HP. Lets get our customization back.

Customization and improvements to the way its turns play out (both of which you can accomplish together even) are definitely the biggest areas the Summoner needs work on, for sure.

[TheGentlemanDM]

Verzen wrote:

IMO - Split Summoner into 3 options. Summon monster, synthesis, or Eidolon focused. For summon monster, give them a summ monster font.

Choose a subclass which grants a 1st level feat with another specialized bonus.

Evolutionist: You gain your choice of a 1st level evolution feat. Stating from 4th level, during your daily preparations, choose an evolution feat with a level no higher than half your level. Your eidolon gains that evolution feat until your next daily preparations.

Invoker: You gain the Invoke Summon 1st level summoner feat (which comes with the invoke summon focus spell for Summoning equivalent to the Wild Druid copying the Form spells). You gain an additional focus point. Whenever you summon a creature with invoke summon, it gains a +1 status bonus to its attacks and DCs. When you gain Expert proficiency in your Summoner spellcasting proficiency, the bonus increases to +2, and when you gain Master proficiency in your Summoner spellcasting proficiency, it increases to +3.

Synthesist: You gain the Synthesis 1st level summoner feat. While you are under the effects of Synthesis, you can cast cantrips and focus spells, but only targeting yourself/your Eidolon.

Those who want to focus on their eidolon get two extra evolutions. Those who want to focus on summoning get more powerful summons than anyone else. Those who want to focus on using Synthesis can still cast what they need to while transformed. Everyone's happy, and those who want to dabble in other abilities won't break them.

[Paul Watson]

TheGentlemanDM wrote:

Verzen wrote:

IMO - Split Summoner into 3 options. Summon monster, synthesis, or Eidolon focused. For summon monster, give them a summ monster font.

Choose a subclass which grants a 1st level feat with another specialized bonus.

Evolutionist: You gain your choice of a 1st level evolution feat. Stating from 4th level, during your daily preparations, choose an evolution feat with a level no higher than half your level. Your eidolon gains that evolution feat until your next daily preparations.

Invoker: You gain the Invoke Summon 1st level summoner feat (which comes with the invoke summon focus spell for Summoning equivalent to the Wild Druid copying the Form spells). You gain an additional focus point. Whenever you summon a creature with invoke summon, it gains a +1 status bonus to its attacks and DCs. When you gain Expert proficiency in your Summoner spellcasting proficiency, the bonus increases to +2, and when you gain Master proficiency in your Summoner spellcasting proficiency, it increases to +3.

Synthesist: You gain the Synthesis 1st level summoner feat. While you are under the effects of Synthesis, you can cast cantrips and focus spells, but only targeting yourself/your Eidolon.

Those who want to focus on their eidolon get two extra evolutions. Those who want to focus on summoning get more powerful summons than anyone else. Those who want to focus on using Synthesis can still cast what they need to while transformed. Everyone's happy, and those who want to dabble in other abilities won't break them.

I think adding a bonus summon spell tied to the Eidolon type, i.e. summon celestial for angel, to the repetoire would also go a long way to making Master Summoner fans happier.

Additonally, for making more mix and match eidolons adding a feat to allow the eidolong to take the base ability from another eidolon, probably around the level you get access to the symbiosis.

[TheGentlemanDM]

That's a *really* interesting idea. If we use the Alchemist's Perpetual Breadth feat as the precedent...

Esoteric Evolution 8
Choose a 1st level Eidolon ability from a different eidolon type. Your eidolon gains that feature.

Greater Esoteric Evolution 16
Prerequisite: Esoteric Evolution
Your eidolon gains the 7th level ability of the eidolon type you selected with Esoteric Evolution.

That opens up a LOT of different possible combinations.

[Deriven Firelion]

The Gleeful Grognard wrote:

I would be gutted if they made eidolons have a separate health pool. It is such an interesting idea and one I want to see expanded on to make work, not trashed because it is a vulnerability (characters need vulnerabilities and impactful differences imo).

Making de-summoning a free action and summoning a 3 action focus cantrip with a range of 100ft could be fun.
Give the Summoner the Synthesis as a base ability.

I do want to see some more summoning pathways though, focus spells (similar to how the druid handles transformations) and maybe a connection to the act together style actions with feats that let them be split between the summons, summoner and eidolon.
Not that the summoner needs to use summoning spells to fit the summoner concept, but it is something I would like see return to some degree.

Could even work as a master summoner archetype that could be applied to any class tbh, granting the act together ability to others and focus spell summons to the summoner as well as other feats relating to summons.

I would be gutted if they don't make it a separate health pool.

I'm not sure about you, but I'm guaranteed to play a summoner. I played them quite often after they came out. I played the base summoner with weapons, summoner with multiple arms that I built like an inevitable, unchained summoner with an elemental type creature, unchained summoner inevitable once Pathfinder Unchained came out, and synthesist summoner in PF1. My buddy played master summoner 3 or 4 times, which is why I didn't since that class was so annoying with the number of actions.

How often will you play a summoner if they make it with a joined health pool? I will play it never. I won't buy Secrets of Magic. That's for sure. Might even sour me to PF2 as the Summone is literally the class I played the most in PF1.

If they make the summoner the way I remember it as a separate creature with cool types as they put out more books, I'll buy Secrets of Magic and every book with cool summoner archetypes and play many of them.

I had an absolute blast playing summoners in PF1 because I like it conceptually. It was never about the power. It was about the fun. Summoner was so versatile in PF1.

I made a synthesist that looked like General Zod from Superman. His suit was a manifestation of his will.

I made a multiarm golem type summoner who I made like a construct that beat on things.

I made a cool golden-armored inevitable for a traveling judge that used him to apprehend criminals.

I made a cool elemental summoner wtih a big air elemental.

I had a greatsword wielding summoner that was powerful warrior from Gorum's realm.

Summoners allow for so many concepts. This action starved, simplistic, martial in two bodies is not what I remember as a summoner. If that's what Paizo provides, that will turn the summoner into a sad shadow of what it was with an extremely boring play-style.

[littlebattler]

yeah i really feel like the summoner is way too coupled with the eidolon. feels more like a spiritualist than a summoner.

a joined health pool and actions really doesn't suit the class fantasy for me.

[ExOichoThrow]

I for one, love the direction summoner has gone in, barring the lack of customization in the playtest.

I really think Paizo should listen to people who buy their products and support it, rather than people who throw tantrums over playtest not being what they want and then admitting they dont really play the game anyways and have just waited for it to "get better"

I'm really tired of 1e grogs expecting everything ever created to be catered to 1e players only.

[Angel Hunter D]

I'm digging the shared health pool and how it feels like the Spiritualist was rolled in as well. I'm not such a fan of all the negatives that happen when you hit 0 though - no eidolon, unconscious, dying. From the playing I've done that feels real bad, man. Maybe the eidolon should disappear before you hit 0? Or maybe you are unconscious but not dying unless the Summoner was the one Hit?

[ExOichoThrow]

Angel Hunter D wrote:

I'm digging the shared health pool and how it feels like the Spiritualist was rolled in as well. I'm not such a fan of all the negatives that happen when you hit 0 though - no eidolon, unconscious, dying. From the playing I've done that feels real bad, man. Maybe the eidolon should disappear before you hit 0? Or maybe you are unconscious but not dying unless the Summoner was the one Hit?

I think this is a good idea. Maybe if it would drop you to 0 hp you stay up with 1 and the eidolon disappears

[TheGentlemanDM]

Automatically stablizing if the Eidolon was the one that took the KO hit seems fair.

[Garang]

I think folding Summoner's evolution feats into Witch's ".... Lesson" chain will make the Eidolon easier to customize while opening spellcasting/metamagics feats open for the Summoner itself. I think getting the current Unarmed Evolution from "Basic Evolution" will be much more fulfilling than getting it from a 4th level feat.

[TheGentlemanDM]

The issue with a lesson-style structure for evolutions is that it limits you to only a handful of evolutions, since you can only take each lesson once.

Given that there's already a fairly, uh, devoted cadre of reviewers who are going to be hard to please even with the ability to spend all 10 feats on evolutions, I think this idea isn't going to work.

[TheGentlemanDM]

Personally, I think the class is going to want at least 25 evolution feats. Ideally a decent selection at 1st and 2nd level, and then one or two at each point thereafter. Adding onto the current options, I've got nearly 40, which is doable.

(Current Feats in italics, most of the rest should be intuitive, or can be found in the Evolution Feat Brainstorming threat. Assume that feats will be buffed or made available earlier where appropriate)

1st level
Leaping Evolution?
Sensory Evolution
Versatile Elemental Strikes Evolution?

2nd level
Elemental Resistance Evolution?
Magical Evolution
Tracking Evolution?

4th level
Alacritous Evolution
Amphibious Evolution
Backstabbing Evolution?
Raging Evolution?
Unarmed Evolution

6th level
Breath Weapon Evolution?
Burrowing Evolution?
Climbing Evolution
Frightening Presence Evolution?
Hulking Evolution
Summoner Shield Evolution

8th level
Ancestral Affinity Evolution?
Esoteric Evolution?
Flickering Evolution
Greater Unarmed Evolution?
Greater Magical Evolution
Ranged Evolution

10th level
Debilitating Evolution?
Reaction Attack Evolution?
Monstrous Unarmed Evolution?

12th level
Pouncing Evolution?
Shrouded Evolution?
Thrashing Evolution?

14th level
Constantly-adapting Evolution?
Greater Esoteric Evolution?
Resilient Evolution
Spellguard Evolution
Towering Evolution

16th level
Supersensory Evolution?
Winged Evolution

18th level
Elemental Immunity Evolution?
Eviscerating Evolution?

[Verzen]

TheGentlemanDM wrote:

Personally, I think the class is going to want at least 25 evolution feats. Ideally a decent selection at 1st and 2nd level, and then one or two at each point thereafter. Adding onto the current options, I've got nearly 40, which is doable.

(Current Feats in italics, most of the rest should be intuitive, or can be found in the Evolution Feat Brainstorming threat. Assume that feats will be buffed or made available earlier where appropriate)

1st level
Leaping Evolution?
Sensory Evolution
Versatile Elemental Strikes Evolution?

2nd level
Elemental Resistance Evolution?
Magical Evolution
Tracking Evolution?

4th level
Alacritous Evolution
Amphibious Evolution
Backstabbing Evolution?
Raging Evolution?
Unarmed Evolution

6th level
Breath Weapon Evolution?
Burrowing Evolution?
Climbing Evolution
Frightening Presence Evolution?
Hulking Evolution
Summoner Shield Evolution

8th level
Ancestral Affinity Evolution?
Esoteric Evolution?
Flickering Evolution
Greater Unarmed Evolution?
Greater Magical Evolution
Ranged Evolution

10th level
Debilitating Evolution?
Reaction Attack Evolution?
Monstrous Unarmed Evolution?

12th level
Pouncing Evolution?
Shrouded Evolution?
Thrashing Evolution?

14th level
Constantly-adapting Evolution?
Greater Esoteric Evolution?
Resilient Evolution
Spellguard Evolution
Towering Evolution

16th level
Supersensory Evolution?
Winged Evolution

18th level
Elemental Immunity Evolution?
Eviscerating Evolution?

Still too little customization. I'd prefer as much customization as I can do to make my Eidolon what I want it to be from a thematic element as early as possible.

[Garang]

I think it can be worded similiar to Witch's Major Lesson:

Major Lesson wrote:

Special You can select this feat a second time if you’re 14th level or higher, and a third time if you’re 18th level or higher. Choose a different lesson each time.

I'm entirely agree with you that evolution feats should have at least 25, but having the Summoner's feat page with that number will eclipses non Evolution feats. Structuring it to lesson-like will also made it easier for Paizo writing additional,thematic evolutions in supplemental sourcebook, e.g. the Animal Companion Elemental Specialization / Baba Yaga lessons from LO: Legends.

[TheGentlemanDM]

*bangs head on desk*

I've presented nearly 40 feats here. Nearly any concept imaginable can be constructed with this system.

This doesn't include the dozen eidolon types and the 36 abilities they bring to the table (many of which can be access through my proposed Esoteric Evolution).

Or the potential to choose an array of ability scores at 1st level.

You literally can't get more customization than this without completely overhauling how classes in PF2E work and/or breaking the power curve.

[TheGentlemanDM]

I concede that lesson system could work if they could be taken an indefinite number of times, though careful wording would be needed to ensure you couldn't, for example, pile all of the weapon traits onto one attack.

[PossibleCabbage]

I'm not saying that the Eidolon needs a separate track of class feats but maybe "splitting 10 class feats between two bodies" is too much of a bottleneck?

[TheGentlemanDM]

Eh, it's already the baseline for anyone who wants to have a properly functioning animal companion.

[Garang]

Yeah, weapon traits should be worded to only be able taken once to each attack.

To be honest, my only big concern with the playtest Summoner is that the Eidolon doesn't have much access to (combat) action variety as a "martial". I mean the current class chassis kinda allow you to have 16 score in all abilities at level one!

[PossibleCabbage]

TheGentlemanDM wrote:

Eh, it's already the baseline for anyone who wants to have a properly functioning animal companion.

It feels like the Eidolon is a larger part of the Summoner's class budget than an animal companion is for everyone, so you could build in "choose an evolution" into the level progression in a couple of places that aren't "choose a class feat."

Or alternately, class feats that unlock evolutions also give something to the Summoner chassis (like a skill feat, or something minor like that.)

[Verzen]

TheGentlemanDM wrote:

*bangs head on desk*

I've presented nearly 40 feats here. Nearly any concept imaginable can be constructed with this system.

This doesn't include the dozen eidolon types and the 36 abilities they bring to the table (many of which can be access through my proposed Esoteric Evolution).

Or the potential to choose an array of ability scores at 1st level.

You literally can't get more customization than this without completely overhauling how classes in PF2E work and/or breaking the power curve.

Uh no. I dont want "40 feats over the course of 20 levels" I want base line customization. Not simply "options spread out over the course of time"

By your own selection, that is, at most, 10 evolutions ever. That is 10 pieces of customization. At level 2 that is 1 piece of customization. I dont want to just select 1 option. Imagine being a PC and only being able to select your class feat at lvl 2. You can't select your background, stats, ancestry nor ancestry feat or anything except that 1 class feat.. and then calling it customization and options.

[Verzen]

TheGentlemanDM wrote:

Eh, it's already the baseline for anyone who wants to have a properly functioning animal companion.

You're deliberately forgetting that the summoner and Eidolon is not merely an animal companion. The summoner should have the Eidolon BE the class power while the animal companion isn't anywhere close to the main power of the class. Druids get full spell casting AND an animal companion. Eidolons should be what makes the class have power and the summoner itself should be the skill focus of the class or the PR diplomat etc of the class. Splitting up feats between both is kinda like creating a class but making them pick between skill feat or class feat at level 2 instead of allowing them to get both.

[Cyouni]

Some people would complain that you had to select 20 independent pieces of stuff in order to play a level 2 summoner, between ancestry, heritage, background, and a ton of class selections
And they'd be right.