Stop trying to reinvent the wheel with Magus and Summoner

[Exocist]

So what about - Each eidolon gets two unarmed attacks, pick two of these three as a base

1) 1d8 (Bludgeoning, Piercing or Slashing)

2) 1d6 Agile (Bludgeoning, Piercing or Slashing)

3) 1d6 (Cold, Fire, Acid, Sonic, Electricity, Positive, Negative or an alignment type that matches your eidolon)

From there, you get 3 points for each unarmed attack, which can be used to purchase traits from the following list (mostly using the weapon table as people have mathed out, without the option to increase dice size)

- 1 point: Versatile (Choose another type that the unarmed attack could have), can be selected multiple times
- 1 point: Trip, Grapple, Shove or Disarm, can be selected multiple times
- 1 point: Finesse (seems mostly pointless on an eidolon unless you want to boost a non-strength stat)
- 1 point: Sweep
- 1 point: Backstabber
- 1 point: Parry
- 2 points: Backswing
- 2 points: Reach
- 2 points: Forceful
- 2 points: Deadly (One dice size larger than the weapon's dice)
- 3 points: Fatal (One dice size larger than the weapon's dice)

[Midnightoker]

You'll want to allow Weapon attacks as well, I believe the Angel gets those and I think it's reasonable to allow Eidolons to use weapons.

And I think you're underestimating some of these.

For instance, as far as I know, there is no way to get a Finesse Grappling 1d8 Unarmed Attack (at least not a PC). That's probably by design. Weapons are a bit easier because they typically occupy a hand (or 2) and limit actions. Unarmed Attacks don't have the same types of restrictions.

So if you're going to allow trait choices, the weapon die (and in the case of the energy/alignment attacks) probably need to be restricted.

[Verzen]

Exocist wrote:

So what about - Each eidolon gets two unarmed attacks, pick two of these three as a base

1) 1d8 (Bludgeoning, Piercing or Slashing)

2) 1d6 Agile (Bludgeoning, Piercing or Slashing)

3) 1d6 (Cold, Fire, Acid, Sonic, Electricity, Positive, Negative or an alignment type that matches your eidolon)

From there, you get 3 points for each unarmed attack, which can be used to purchase traits from the following list (mostly using the weapon table as people have mathed out, without the option to increase dice size)

- 1 point: Versatile (Choose another type that the unarmed attack could have), can be selected multiple times
- 1 point: Trip, Grapple, Shove or Disarm, can be selected multiple times
- 1 point: Finesse (seems mostly pointless on an eidolon unless you want to boost a non-strength stat)
- 1 point: Sweep
- 1 point: Backstabber
- 1 point: Parry
- 2 points: Backswing
- 2 points: Reach
- 2 points: Forceful
- 2 points: Deadly (One dice size larger than the weapon's dice)
- 3 points: Fatal (One dice size larger than the weapon's dice)

I like this general concept.

[Midnightoker]

Kyrone wrote:

Midnightoker wrote:

WatersLethe wrote:

I don't feel like a 50-50 caster-martial as Magus. It feels closer to 25-75, which is about the same as a Fighter/wizard.

Getting top level slots is powerful, but it feels more like having a handful of 1/day magic items than being a good caster.

Where are my low level slots for random utlity spells? Why can a Fighter/Wizard cast more spells per day than me at mid levels?

It's certainly an interesting paradigm, likely better suited for PF1 half casters like Bloodrager, it's just not hitting the mark for me.

I wonder if the "wave" spell format was considered.

where you retain a single slot of each level, and then your max level is 1 at the odds and 2 at the evens and then your second highest is always 2.

That would feel really good and it would solve the Summoner "losing spells they know" as they level issue as well.

Like this?

Not to dig up the past, but I just realized this visual is slightly off.

At level 5, when you gain 3rd level spells (1 slot) your 1st level slots should read "1" and not "2".

Basically you'd have 2 of your second lowest, and 1 or 2 (odd and even) of your highest and then the rest are always a max of 1.

I was trying to keep the power relatively close while maintaining the original progression they had early, scaling it better, but not ultimately adding too much power.

It's a minor difference but I actually think it matters a lot.

[Exocist]

Midnightoker wrote:

You'll want to allow Weapon attacks as well, I believe the Angel gets those and I think it's reasonable to allow Eidolons to use weapons.

And I think you're underestimating some of these.

For instance, as far as I know, there is no way to get a Finesse Grappling 1d8 Unarmed Attack (at least not a PC). That's probably by design. Weapons are a bit easier because they typically occupy a hand (or 2) and limit actions. Unarmed Attacks don't have the same types of restrictions.

So if you're going to allow trait choices, the weapon die (and in the case of the energy/alignment attacks) probably need to be restricted.

Finesse grappling doesn't really mean much for the eidolon (as current), it's forced to start with the same strength and dex anyway... and you don't really have much reason to boost anything outside of con/wis/str/dex.

At the end of the day all it ends up getting is a couple of slightly overstatted weapons comparable to monk stances without the passive benefit. Not the end of the world and gives the summoner a bit of uniqueness and customisability without needing an entirely new system.

[Midnightoker]

Exocist wrote:

Midnightoker wrote:

You'll want to allow Weapon attacks as well, I believe the Angel gets those and I think it's reasonable to allow Eidolons to use weapons.

And I think you're underestimating some of these.

For instance, as far as I know, there is no way to get a Finesse Grappling 1d8 Unarmed Attack (at least not a PC). That's probably by design. Weapons are a bit easier because they typically occupy a hand (or 2) and limit actions. Unarmed Attacks don't have the same types of restrictions.

So if you're going to allow trait choices, the weapon die (and in the case of the energy/alignment attacks) probably need to be restricted.

Finesse grappling doesn't really mean much for the eidolon (as current), it's forced to start with the same strength and dex anyway... and you don't really have much reason to boost anything outside of con/wis/str/dex.

At the end of the day all it ends up getting is a couple of slightly overstatted weapons comparable to monk stances without the passive benefit. Not the end of the world and gives the summoner a bit of uniqueness and customisability without needing an entirely new system.

But what you're talking about is an entirely new system?

And Monk Stances generally cost an action, you can't be in multiple at once, and there are still no monk stances that allow that kind of trait matchups.

We also don't know that all Eidolons will have DEX/STR exactly the same, it is implied that Ability Scores vary, the fact that the four we have don't could be a coincidence.

[Verzen]

Midnightoker wrote:

Exocist wrote:

Midnightoker wrote:

You'll want to allow Weapon attacks as well, I believe the Angel gets those and I think it's reasonable to allow Eidolons to use weapons.

And I think you're underestimating some of these.

For instance, as far as I know, there is no way to get a Finesse Grappling 1d8 Unarmed Attack (at least not a PC). That's probably by design. Weapons are a bit easier because they typically occupy a hand (or 2) and limit actions. Unarmed Attacks don't have the same types of restrictions.

So if you're going to allow trait choices, the weapon die (and in the case of the energy/alignment attacks) probably need to be restricted.

Finesse grappling doesn't really mean much for the eidolon (as current), it's forced to start with the same strength and dex anyway... and you don't really have much reason to boost anything outside of con/wis/str/dex.

At the end of the day all it ends up getting is a couple of slightly overstatted weapons comparable to monk stances without the passive benefit. Not the end of the world and gives the summoner a bit of uniqueness and customisability without needing an entirely new system.

But what you're talking about is an entirely new system?

And Monk Stances generally cost an action, you can't be in multiple at once, and there are still no monk stances that allow that kind of trait matchups.

We also don't know that all Eidolons will have DEX/STR exactly the same, it is implied that Ability Scores vary, the fact that the four we have don't could be a coincidence.

You can be in multiple monk stances at once. Its called Fuse Stances.

[Cyouni]

Why are you pulling out a rare monk feat and a level 20 monk feat to justify your points?

[Midnightoker]

Verzen wrote:

You can be in multiple monk stances at once. Its called Fuse Stances.

Besides the fact that it's level 20, you can't combine stances with different Strikes as they are not compatible.

Which more or less furthers my point rather than disproves it.

[14 sided die]

As someone with no real horse in this race, a few thoughts. Firstly, some of the options being asked for might be intended for the full final classes, but they couldn't get it all in the playtest. Secondly, the issues of evolution points. While in general I think that having some built in customization that you could choose to invest feats into is a good idea, I honestly don't feel like evolution points are going to be a thing, by which I mean that I feel the entire system might be better off if evolutions were all roughly balanced against one another and you just picked x amount, prereqs allowing, without the whole 1 point, 2 point, etc. that feels out of place to me. Pretty much everything else in 2e is a choice of one from a menu. And the summoner was always kind of a problem class in 1e anyway, both in terms of power (synthesist) and taking up a lot of time, and I think Paizo is understandably wary of falling into the same issues again. It also bears mentioning that the Champion is vastly different from its original playtest when it was still only the LG paladin. As this is probably all the more I'm going to talk about the summoner I will also state that I am.... confused about why they changed the iconic away from Balazar, but I also really don't care about the iconics that much

[Temperans]

The reason they changed the Iconic from Balazar is because his Eidolon is impossible to make in PF2. PF2 gave the options of: Angel, Beast, Dragon, Phantom. But from what I found the Unchained version of Balazar would have had a Protean Eidolon.

Protean isn't even listed as a potential Eidolon in the future.

[Salamileg]

Temperans wrote:

The reason they changed the Iconic from Balazar is because his Eidolon is impossible to make in PF2.

I doubt this is the reason. It would probably be a lot easier to include whatever eidolon type he would have than to design a whole new iconic.

[Temperans]

They had to make space for Dragon, Beast, and Phantom which were not Eidolon subtypes before.

When Eidolons were you know, outsiders and not just random magical creatures.

[Rysky]

Temperans wrote:

Protean isn't even listed as a potential Eidolon in the future.

That hardly means there won’t be a Protean one eventually.

[Temperans]

Which still wont be as customizable as the Eidolon should be.

[TOZ]

For some people.

[Ruzza]

TOZ wrote:

For some people.

That's the vibe I'm getting from the playtest forums.

[Megistone]

From the playtest:

Quote:

Divine eidolons are always formed of spiritual essence, much like the divine servitors they resemble. They include representatives of the many families of divine servitors, such as angels, demons, and psychopomps.

I don't know if every kind of outsider will be represented, but it seems likely that we won't have just angels.

[manbearscientist]

Not to be pedantic, but proteans are represented as a type of monitors per the 2E bestiary, and monitors are one of the missing types mentioned in the playtest document.

Source:

Bestiary pg. 347 wrote:

Protean - A family of monitors spawned within the Maelstrom, these creatures are guardians of disorder and are chaotic neutral. They typically have darkvision, an amorphous anatomy, and a weakness to lawful damage.

Secrets of Magic Playtest pg. 23 wrote:

RANGED EVOLUTION

EVOLUTION SUMMONER
Your eidolon has developed a ranged attack. Your eidolon
gains a ranged unarmed attack with a range increment of
30 feet that deals 1d6 damage and has the magical trait.
When you select this feat, choose a damage type from
acid, bludgeoning, cold, electricity, fire, negative, piercing,
positive, or slashing. If your eidolon is a celestial, fiend,
or monitor [emphasis mine] with an alignment other than true neutral, you
can instead choose a damage type in their alignment (for
example, you could choose good or lawful if your lawful good
angel eidolon gained this attack).

[Temperans]

The problem of customization still stands. All the stats for all the eidolons are the same. All the attacks are the same. And the evolutions are feat locked and mostly lame.

[Themetricsystem]

Agreed, big time!

Even if they literally just ripped the Familiar/Master benefit Rules without changing anything else about them and bolted them onto the Eidolon at the cost of a Class-Path or perhaps a Class feat it would be an improvement.

[Midnightoker]

Themetricsystem wrote:

Temperans wrote:

The problem of customization still stands. All the stats for all the eidolons are the same. All the attacks are the same. And the evolutions are feat locked and mostly lame.

Agreed, big time!

Even if they literally just ripped the Familiar/Master benefit Rules without changing anything else about them and bolted them onto the Eidolon at the cost of a Class-Path or perhaps a Class feat it would be an improvement.

If you're going to do that, might as well throw on Support Benefits from ACs too. Not sure how that'd work though and probably too strong for Synthesist.

[The-Magic-Sword]

I think that the point system people are proposing feels clunky and unnecessary, and likely to imbalance the game, BUT I think the Eidolon could use some more customization. I think that can be handled through class feats, we just need the ones we have to be more meaningful in terms of flavoring the Summon.

Hulking and Amphibious, and eventually Winged, are great, but it'd be nice to see more options like that scattered throughout their leveling progression.

Maybe instead of the spell slots, we should get an extra couple of class feats that are somehow coded to involve eidolon customization? the fighter's combat flexibility is a precedent for adding extra class feats.

[Verzen]

The-Magic-Sword wrote:

I think that the point system people are proposing feels clunky and unnecessary, and likely to imbalance the game, BUT I think the Eidolon could use some more customization. I think that can be handled through class feats, we just need the ones we have to be more meaningful in terms of flavoring the Summon.

Hulking and Amphibious, and eventually Winged, are great, but it'd be nice to see more options like that scattered throughout their leveling progression.

Maybe instead of the spell slots, we should get an extra couple of class feats that are somehow coded to involve eidolon customization? the fighter's combat flexibility is a precedent for adding extra class feats.

There will NEVER be enough class feats to make customization feel good no matter how many interesting ones you create and put out there.

[Rysky]

Then Pathfinder probably isn’t the right system for you.

[Verzen]

Rysky wrote:

Then Pathfinder probably isn’t the right system for you.

Pathfinder is all about the crunch, Rysky. The customization.

You're saying that pathfinder isn't the right system for me is laughable considering the fact that 1) I've been playing pathfinder since 2010. 2) PF2 is all about customization and being able to do cool stuff.

3) There is zero reason why we can't have a balanced build-a-bear. I mean, it's really not hard to create a balanced system where we can choose what kind of attacks we have that deal what kind of element and get 1/2 level resistance to an element. Pretty much what EVERY CHARACTER GETS TO DO!

It's amazing how Eidolons are infinitely less customizable in PF2 than literally any other character and how you guys will fight tooth and nail to keep it that way.

[Rysky]

Pathfinder is about crunch AND flavor.

And yes I am saying that if you state that feats aren’t enough customization for you no matter how many when that’s its main mode of customization.

3) we can’t have that because it would NOT be balanced, the underlying system does not support it, nor did it in P1. If you want build-a-bear-pick-a-point it has to be made for the system as well, just not one specific class tossed into a system that doesn’t support it.

They’re also “less” customizable than other characters because they’re not the character, the Summoner is. You don’t like that but that doesn’t make the Summoner stop existing.

[The-Magic-Sword]

Verzen wrote:

The-Magic-Sword wrote:

I think that the point system people are proposing feels clunky and unnecessary, and likely to imbalance the game, BUT I think the Eidolon could use some more customization. I think that can be handled through class feats, we just need the ones we have to be more meaningful in terms of flavoring the Summon.

Hulking and Amphibious, and eventually Winged, are great, but it'd be nice to see more options like that scattered throughout their leveling progression.

Maybe instead of the spell slots, we should get an extra couple of class feats that are somehow coded to involve eidolon customization? the fighter's combat flexibility is a precedent for adding extra class feats.

There will NEVER be enough class feats to make customization feel good no matter how many interesting ones you create and put out there.

*For you

and I'm comfortable with that, since I think most other people would be reasonably content with it? My most ravenous-for-customization players were pretty much happy with the Summoner as is.

I'm open to other solutions as well, but what we have now is pretty good, and it doesn't need a completely unique, broken system layered on top.

[Verzen]

The-Magic-Sword wrote:

Verzen wrote:

The-Magic-Sword wrote:

I think that the point system people are proposing feels clunky and unnecessary, and likely to imbalance the game, BUT I think the Eidolon could use some more customization. I think that can be handled through class feats, we just need the ones we have to be more meaningful in terms of flavoring the Summon.

Hulking and Amphibious, and eventually Winged, are great, but it'd be nice to see more options like that scattered throughout their leveling progression.

Maybe instead of the spell slots, we should get an extra couple of class feats that are somehow coded to involve eidolon customization? the fighter's combat flexibility is a precedent for adding extra class feats.

There will NEVER be enough class feats to make customization feel good no matter how many interesting ones you create and put out there.

*For you

and I'm comfortable with that, since I think most other people would be reasonably content with it? My most ravenous-for-customization players were pretty much happy with the Summoner as is.

I'm open to other solutions as well, but what we have now is pretty good, and it doesn't need a completely unique, broken system layered on top.

Imagine, if you will, an Eidolon that..

You pick the creature type
Pick 2 attacks.
- 1d8 (B/P/S)
- 1d6 (B/P/S) (Ranged)
- 1d4 Agile (B/P/S/Energy)
So I can have a 1d8 bludgeoning and a 1d4 agile electricity attack
Pick a resistance 1/2 level (This emulates things like Arctic elf, charred goblin etc)

Pick one active ability from a list at 1/5/10/15/20
Pick one passive ability from a list at 1/7/14

This can, of course, be modified a bit. But this would offer a LOT of customization and still maintain being incredibly balanced.

[Donald]

Temperans wrote:

The problem of customization still stands. All the stats for all the eidolons are the same. All the attacks are the same. And the evolutions are feat locked and mostly lame.

Allow one physical stat to be reduced by two to increase another by two and add two to any one mental stat? This would be a given, not a feat or anything similar.

It's a small bump that allows for some customization without triggering "ermrgerd so much math!!!" people.

[Rysky]

Verzen wrote:

This can, of course, be modified a bit. But this would offer a LOT of customization and still maintain being incredibly balanced.

This is an assumption you are having about a hypothetical system that's not even able to be tested.

You saying it's balanced does not make it so.

[Verzen]

Rysky wrote:

Verzen wrote:

This can, of course, be modified a bit. But this would offer a LOT of customization and still maintain being incredibly balanced.

This is an assumption you are having about a hypothetical system that's not even able to be tested.

You saying it's balanced does not make it so.

I am saying it's balanced because I am looking at the numbers and comparing them.

Take a fighter, for example. They get +2 attack more than anyone else, ancestries, heritages, can wear heavy armor, start with AOO and get a fighter feat.

Now. With my system. Come up with any package that would be stronger than this..

Quote:

+9 attack 1d12 damage weapon

1 resistance to cold
20 AC
AOO
Power Attack

You can't. In fact, none of the options provided are really improvements and more so side grades.

[Rysky]

Again, you throwing something together without in-depth testing and claiming it's balanced and will work fine does not make it so.

[Verzen]

Rysky wrote:

Again, you throwing something together without in-depth testing and claiming it's balanced and will work fine does not make it so.

It's balanced mathematically is what I am saying.

You have a 16 AC vs 20 AC
1d8 vs 1d12
1 resist fire vs 1 resist cold
breath attack vs power attack

[Temperans]

Rysky they already have the basics for the system by just adapting familiar options.

Add in more special abilities while removing the master abilities and you would have a good system.

[Ruzza]

Want to pop in real fast and note that there have already been numerous explanations as to why this doesn't work and what sort of challenges it poses. Also that Verzen's method of testing is comparing two numbers with zero relation to the rest of the game.

I emphatically agree that the eidolon could use more customization. If it needs a new system for that, sure. Will that get tested by us? No. It's much more realistic to expect eidolon evolutions coming through class feats.

Please stop saying that you know how balance works when you constantly demonstrate the opposite.

[Cyouni]

Don't worry guys, as long as it's not better at fighting than the class that gives up everything to be better at fighting, while wielding the most damaging weapon, it's balanced!

[CrimsonKnight]

Cyouni wrote:

Don't worry guys, as long as it's not better at fighting than the class that gives up everything to be better at fighting, while wielding the most damaging weapon, it's balanced!

Should it be better than a Wizzard at fighting without using offensive magic (artic elf wizard level 1)

+6 to hit
AC 19
melee 1d8+3
ranged 1d6+1 deadly d10
1 resist cold
magic to boost like magic weapon (was not included in the math)

[Verzen]

Ruzza wrote:

Want to pop in real fast and note that there have already been numerous explanations as to why this doesn't work and what sort of challenges it poses. Also that Verzen's method of testing is comparing two numbers with zero relation to the rest of the game.

I emphatically agree that the eidolon could use more customization. If it needs a new system for that, sure. Will that get tested by us? No. It's much more realistic to expect eidolon evolutions coming through class feats.

Please stop saying that you know how balance works when you constantly demonstrate the opposite.

LOL I know how balance works, Ruzza. I also know that 1d4 cold damage per attack isn't going to be overbalanced. I also know that some classes get 1d4 fire damage if they can use Rain of Embers stance. There's already precedence for it. Also - no one - has demonstrated that my method does not work. They just said, "Well, it doesn't. Nyaah!"

[Midnightoker]

I think the lack of limitations on your proposed idea of elemental damage strikes kinda demonstrates that it’s not as clear cut as saying it wouldn’t be too strong since the only other example of getting it as a PC is a rare, 1 action stance feat that locks you out of using armor or other types of attacks..

[Rysky]

Temperans wrote:

Rysky they already have the basics for the system by just adapting familiar options.

Add in more special abilities while removing the master abilities and you would have a good system.

Completely different worlds.