From the playtest document:
Does that last sentence mean you only take the damage once, rather than twice? I'm thinking that's the intent, but it's not as clear cut as I'd like.
Furthermore, if you take damage only once, what do you do about rider effects, such as ongoing damage, poison, status conditions (that don't effect actions), and the like?
EDIT: Just found the Protective Bond feat, which makes it pretty clear that you take the damage only once. My second question about rider effects still stands though.
Let's say that the Eidolon made the save and took 11 damage and the Summoner failed and took 23, the 23 damage that is used.
Ongoing damage is the same, if the summoner is taking 4 persistent fire damage and the Eidolen then is affected by an effect that causes 3 persistent fire damage, you keep the worst that is 4.
If both are frightened but one is frightened 2 and another 1, both are actually frightened 2 because is the worst effect.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't understand how "if you are both subject to the same effect, you take the effects only once" could be more clear cut.
Is an effect hitting you both? If the answer is yes, only apply it once.
|
So if your Eidelon is immune to fire and rolls a nat 20 on his save vs a fireball, but you riding on his back rolls a nat 1, you are both taking double damage? Thanks, I hate it.
Also, I'm a bit confused why they would include "healing" in the description, too? You don't save for healing spells and resistance doesn't apply.
Also, I'm a bit confused why they would include "healing" in the description, too? You don't save for healing spells and resistance doesn't apply.
. It’s weird, but a table could roll separately for each creature hit by a three action heal.
There are some things like diseases that can halve the amount of healing you receive (do you share diseases with your eidolon?).
If the summoner has negative healing (due to being a dhampir, for example) and someone casts a one-action heal on the eidolon, what happens?
I don't understand how "if you are both subject to the same effect, you take the effects only once" could be more clear cut.
Is an effect hitting you both? If the answer is yes, only apply it once.
Yeah, that's what I get for studying the new classes late at night on too little sleep. I found my answers a little bit further down in the PDF.
So if your Eidelon is immune to fire and rolls a nat 20 on his save vs a fireball, but you riding on his back rolls a nat 1, you are both taking double damage? Thanks, I hate it.
No, the summoner and the eidolon share a common pool of hit points, so the damage applied to that common pool in this case is whatever the summoner would take since it is more damage than the zero hit points that the summoner would take. It is the exact same damage that would be inflicted if the area of the fireball included the summoner but not the eidolon.
This has a few interesting implications.
If you are playing a summoner, you want to shore up the defenses of the weaker member of the pair so as to reduce any area of effect damage that you suffer.
If you are attacking a summoner and his eidolon, you want to find a way to attack them separately rather than catching them in the same area of effect since the damage inflicted on one does not stack with the damage inflicted on the other.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My first interpretation was that the roll itself only happened once, and both members took that result and modified it as appropriate (and then the “take the worst” part would kick in). I can’t help but wonder if that would be preferable, because what amounts to 5E disadvantage on all AOE saves feels baaad.
My first interpretation was that the roll itself only happened once, and both members took that result and modified it as appropriate (and then the “take the worst” part would kick in). I can’t help but wonder if that would be preferable, because what amounts to 5E disadvantage on all AOE saves feels baaad.
Except that because of the shared HP pool... it's sorta not.
Enemy AOEs will generally be aimed at the most bodies to maximise the targets and thus damage.
Let's look at a typical combat scenario. The Fighter and the Cleric get tagged with a fireball which rolls 30 damage.
The Fighter succeeds on his save, taking 15 damage, and the Cleric fails, taking 30. One fireball, 45 damage in total.
Compare that to the same scenario where Summoner and their Eidolon get tagged by that same fireball. The Eidolon succeeds on the save and the Summoner fails. The Eidolon would take 15, and the Summoner 30... and then the damage the Eidolon would have taken becomes ZERO. The same fireball, the same saves, no Evasive style avoidance, 30 damage.
And if we pick up a feat later on so that we take the better of the two saves, we'd be shaving 30 damage off.
Except the Fighter and Cleric are two separate party members. The Summoner and Eidolon aren't. The Summoner and the Eidolon both being tagged is comparable to the Fighter just getting hit by themselves, because they're both one character.
If both you and your eidolon are getting tagged with an AOE instead of two other party members, it's still a win.
If both you and your eidolon are getting tagged with an AOE instead of two other party members, it's still a win.
Tell that to the summoner player.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hello Summoner player.
Due to you having an eidolon, the enemy has made the error of considering you a better target for their AOEs.
As a result, you're passively preventing damage and supporting the team just by existing.
Keep up the good work!
The Fighter succeeds on his save, taking 15 damage, and the Cleric fails, taking 30. One fireball, 45 damage in total.
Compare that to the same scenario where Summoner and their Eidolon get tagged by that same fireball. The Eidolon succeeds on the save and the Summoner fails. The Eidolon would take 15, and the Summoner 30... and then the damage the Eidolon would have taken becomes ZERO. The same fireball, the same saves, no Evasive style avoidance, 30 damage.
Just to continue the analogy, we'll assume everyone is level 6.
The fighter has ~80 HP (only 14 con)The cleric has ~62 HP (only 12 con)
The summoner+eidolon have ~86 (16 con beasty!)
Save your complaints that their con would be higher than that for a moment.
That 45 damage to the fighter and cleric combine accounts for 31.7% of their combined HP pool. That 30 damage to the summoner/eidolon? 34.9%
And as soon as you go "that's actually pretty close" I'll remind you that I gimped the fighter and clerics' con pretty hard and they still took a lower percentage.
And don't forget that the "roll twice" effect applies to ALL saves, not just damage. Slow, Disease, everything.
Fighter: ~80 HP
Cleric: ~70 HP
Summoner: ~80 HP
Wizard: ~60 HP.
Total party HP: A little under 300.
If the Cleric and the Fighter both got hit, that's ~15% of the party's total HP.
If the Summoner and the Eidolon get hit, that's ~10% of the party's total HP.
You compared 31% damage to two players against 35% to a single player.
In this situation, it's better for the Summoner and the Eidolon to get fireballed.
The Fighter succeeds on his save, taking 15 damage, and the Cleric fails, taking 30. One fireball, 45 damage in total.
Compare that to the same scenario where Summoner and their Eidolon get tagged by that same fireball. The Eidolon succeeds on the save and the Summoner fails. The Eidolon would take 15, and the Summoner 30... and then the damage the Eidolon would have taken becomes ZERO. The same fireball, the same saves, no Evasive style avoidance, 30 damage.
Just to continue the analogy, we'll assume everyone is level 6.
The fighter has ~80 HP (only 14 con)
The cleric has ~62 HP (only 12 con)
The summoner+eidolon have ~86 (16 con beasty!)
Aside here: the beast's CON score has no effect on the HP total. The HP pool is the Summmoner's and uses the Summoner's Con modifier. The eidolon shares _your_ HP, and has none of its own.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Aside here: the beast's CON score has no effect on the HP total. The HP pool is the Summmoner's and uses the Summoner's Con modifier. The eidolon shares _your_ HP, and has none of its own.
I am aware. I used the 16 con because the summoner will probably WANT a 16 con because of that effect not because the eidolon has its own stats. It was merely a comment as to the value I chose.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's revisit this at 6th level with a more realistic ability composition.
Four man party, all humans.
The Fighter probably started with 14 CON, has 16 CON at 6th level, and thus represents 86 HP.
We'll assume that the Summoner has done the same, and is also bringing 86 HP.
The Cloistered Cleric started with 12 CON so they could boost WIS/CHA, currently has 14, and therefore brings 68 HP to the fight.
The Wizard wanted to invest in their mental stats, started with 12 CON, currently have 14 CON, and therefore have 56 HP.
Total party HP: 296.
Scenario 1: The Cleric and the Fighter get fireballed for 30. The Fighter's Expert Reflex and Bulwark means they succeed for half, while the Cleric takes the full brunt of it. The Fighter loses 15/86 (17%), the Cleric takes 30/68 (44%). Between them, the Cleric and Fighter have lost 45/154 (29%), and the party as a whole has lost 45/296 (15%).
Scenario 2: The Summoner and their Eidolon get fireballed for 30. The eidolon's high DEX means they make the save, while the Summoner fails. Normally, the eidolon would take 15 and the Summoner 30, but the damage to the eidolon is ignored because the summoner's result was worse. They take 30/86 (35%), and the party as a whole loses 30/296 (10%).
So yes, having the make the save twice is worse for the summoner, but they have the HP to take a bit of a beating compared to the squishier members, and the result was better for the party as a whole. The party has taken less damage and is in a better position in Scenario 2 than in Scenario 1.
I wonder how things would fair if the party cleric cast shield other on the summoner or eidolon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The party has taken less damage and is in a better position in Scenario 2 than in Scenario 1.
Yes, it's better for the party if only one person gets hit by a fireball than if two people get hit by the fireball.
That's kind of an obvious statement though, isn't it?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
RAW, seems that since the eidolon doesn't have negative healing, it gets healed normally, which means you get healed normally. The eidolon's being targeted after all.
If you both get hit by a three action heal and one of you has negative healing, you'll take the damage since it's the worst of the two effects.
RAW, seems that since the eidolon doesn't have negative healing, it gets healed normally, which means you get healed normally. The eidolon's being targeted after all.
If you both get hit by a three action heal and one of you has negative healing, you'll take the damage since it's the worst of the two effects.
You sure about that? It also says the following:
Seems to me the dividing line is on when something hurts you or heals you. I think the one with negative healing gets damaged and the one without gets healed, which generally means it cancels out (assuming one roll was used for both).
Though it's true you take an effect only once, being healed or being harmed are two distinct effects, even if they are from the same spell.
Maybe it would be better if both just used the lower save value. Like if the Eidolon have +10 in Reflex and and the Summoner +8, you roll once but have to use +8 from the Summoner modifier because it's the lower one.
Maybe it would be better if both just used the lower save value. Like if the Eidolon have +10 in Reflex and and the Summoner +8, you roll once but have to use +8 from the Summoner modifier because it's the lower one.
Still bad, but better.
I don't like how it might influence people's builds though. Feels kinda' meta.