Katrixia |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...
Actually it's an average estimation that's very conservative, that's why i bolded the at least portion of my post.
It's not about situations where the Champion takes 5 Goblins on at once in some cave.
Yes, you'll go games where nobody will hit you and go games where almost everybody will always hit you.
The Summoner is both a caster that faces caster problems and, with the Eidolon, a martial that faces martial problems.
They are not a Magus, a Warpriest, a Barbarian, or a Wizard; they are more vulnerable than those classes and that's something you have to understand when the topic of the class having 2 targets comes up.
AoEs do not balance it out, AoEs raise the 20% number higher, we just don't know by how much more because now you have to get into a little more advanced probability and logarithmic mathematical functions; AoEs and rolling at disadvantage wouldn't calculate the same way as standard multi-enemy encounters do.
Gortle |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pronate11 wrote:...Actually it's an average estimation that's very conservative, that's why i bolded the at least portion of my post.
It's not about situations where the Champion takes 5 Goblins on at once in some cave.
Yes, you'll go games where nobody will hit you and go games where almost everybody will always hit you.The Summoner is both a caster that faces caster problems and, with the Eidolon, a martial that faces martial problems.
They are not a Magus, a Warpriest, a Barbarian, or a Wizard; they are more vulnerable than those classes and that's something you have to understand when the topic of the class having 2 targets comes up.
AoEs do not balance it out, AoEs raise the 20% number higher, we just don't know by how much more because now you have to get into a little more advanced probability and logarithmic mathematical functions; AoEs and rolling at disadvantage wouldn't calculate the same way as standard multi-enemy encounters do.
More importantly we have to make some assumptions about what a typical encounter looks like, and what typical treats the character is facing. That is a hard problem.
What happens in the situations where the party gets attacked from behind or the Summoner can't easily hide behind his allies?graystone |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What happens in the situations where the party gets attacked from behind or the Summoner can't easily hide behind his allies?
Some people are saying they are in another room or around a corner so their summoner never get hit so there is a clear difference in how people are running encounters.
RexAliquid |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As an aside, does anyone have a link to where that 1.2/20% more statistic comes from?
I'm having trouble wrapping my head around, how if the number of attackers and number of attacks are the same, the summoner is taking more damage than anyone else in the party. (Aside from AOE, obviously.)
But I'm definitely not one to argue with cold hard math, so I'd love to see the post where this comes from.
It is a rough estimate of the maximum amount of extra damage a summoner takes by having two bodies. It really only comes up in the rare cases of the party outnumbered by enemies and area effects.
Sagiam |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's a number people have seemed to independently calculated that keeps coming up, when i first saw it i had to check the math too. I can't remember which thread i first saw it on.
Me and some guide authors are creating a review guide for Summoner with data tables (proficiency, progression, etc.) and one of them is a tableset with this x1.2/20% number being tracked.
I look forward to seeing that!
It is a rough estimate of the maximum amount of extra damage a summoner takes by having two bodies. It really only comes up in the rare cases of the party outnumbered by enemies and area effects.
Thank you all for the responses!
Katrixia |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is a rough estimate of the maximum amount of extra damage a summoner takes by having two bodies. It really only comes up in the rare cases of the party outnumbered by enemies and area effects.
*the average minimum amount
The 20% figure does not account for AoEs and disadvantage rolls. It aggregates and helps quantify the vulnerability Summoner has in regards to having 2 targets in single/multi-enemy encounters.Ravingdork |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Uh, yeah, about that...
"Your eidolon is a celestial messenger, a member of the angelic host with a unique link to you, allowing them to carry a special message to the mortal world at your side. ...Though a true angel,..."
Explicitly in the case of the Angel eidolon, you are incorrect. Its a real, honest to goodness (and sentient and independent) intelligent creature - and Angel! We know all of that because Angels are independent beings who are sentient with their own wants and desires.
I am so going to make an Angel Summoner now, with his angry sidekick, the Barbarian Bandit!
Darksol the Painbringer |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:So I'm wrong. Fine. It's merely a technicality, though, as this actually poses a major problem with how the creatures can be ran, especially if these creatures with their own wants and desires have disagreements with the Summoner's methods. Can it act against the Summoner if that's the case? Are there ways for an Eidolon manifested in such a way to "unbind" itself from the Summoner and strike them down for their heresy? Are there some "Asimov's Laws of Robotics" shenanigans going on here, where an Eidolon cannot act against the Summoner's wishes by the metaphysics of the universe? Or does a Summoner have complete and utter control over them and their desires to the point that they aren't any more "sentient" or "independent" than the Summoner themselves?That's fully for the Summoner's character to work out, since the Eidolon is their character too.Darksol the Painbringer wrote:In short, it's very easy to claim it to flavor text if it's scrutinized enough, as above.This isn't arguing in good faith.
Eidolons aren't characters, though. They're a class feature. It's like saying Animal Companions or Familiars are characters. Again, not really. They're a class feature like the Eidolon, just a little different. When it has levels and a class with maybe some feats and features they can acquire on their own, I'll agree with you. Until then? Class feature.
I still find it silly that we can have Evil Summoners with Angel Eidolons and people don't see, from a GM/worldbuilding perspective, how big of a problem this might pose in campaigns. "Don't worry, Tim the Terrible is making Angelica the Amiable murder an innocent child because it's bound to do so with no repercussions of being condemned to a circle of Hell to be turned into a Devil, it's fine, Tim's just a jerk, Angelica can't help it that she was forcefully tethered against her will to this cretin through a botched summoning spell."
And the worst part is I can totally flavor it as an Evil Summoner torturing an Angel for its own amusement, and get away with it because of the same shenanigans we're allowing to fly here, something I'm very certain no sane GM would allow.
Ravingdork |
5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Barbarians and Sorcerers are just bundled class features too, but no one's going to argue that they are not characters.
A familiar, animal companion, or eidolon is every bit as much a character within the story as any other--just maybe without quite as much of the spotlight. To say otherwise is being disingenuous.
Sagiam |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Don't worry, Tim the Terrible is making Angelica the Amiable murder an innocent child because it's bound to do so with no repercussions of being condemned to a circle of Hell to be turned into a Devil, it's fine, Tim's just a jerk, Angelica can't help it that she was forcefully tethered against her will to this cretin through a botched summoning spell."
And the worst part is I can totally flavor it as an Evil Summoner torturing an Angel for its own amusement, and get away with it because of the same shenanigans we're allowing to fly here, something I'm very certain no sane GM would allow.
Seeing as how most sane GMs don't allow evil characters at all, except as NPCs, I'm not sure of the problem.
Sagiam |
5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:Seeing as how most sane GMs don't allow evil characters at all, except as NPCs, I'm not sure of the problem."Don't worry, Tim the Terrible is making Angelica the Amiable murder an innocent child because it's bound to do so with no repercussions of being condemned to a circle of Hell to be turned into a Devil, it's fine, Tim's just a jerk, Angelica can't help it that she was forcefully tethered against her will to this cretin through a botched summoning spell."
And the worst part is I can totally flavor it as an Evil Summoner torturing an Angel for its own amusement, and get away with it because of the same shenanigans we're allowing to fly here, something I'm very certain no sane GM would allow.
I also just see this as a flip of the ever popular "I've bound this demon to work for me, so that way I can turn his evil powers and tendencies to a good/constructive purpose." Ala WoW Warlock.... and also every protagonist demon summoner in media/literature.
RexAliquid |
6 people marked this as a favorite. |
A familiar, animal companion, or eidolon is every bit as much a character within the story as any other--just maybe without quite as much of the spotlight. To say otherwise is being disingenuous.
Yeah, players may vary in how much personality they give their companions, but they are still characters. And you know it's gonna be an interesting night when the Ranger hasn't said a word, but his raccoon familiar is alternately goofing on the bear animal companion and conspiring to get more food.
Rysky |
Rysky wrote:Summoners still have summon spells and still summon their EidolonThat is factually incorrect: Eidolon are manifested, not summoned a specifically different thing as summoned is a specific trait Eidolon lack. As to summoning spells, they are uniquely the worse caster at them: they have less spells to use on them that other casters and must forgo their action granting ability to cast them. So calling them summoners is a really bad joke.
Distinction without a difference.
Summon. Manifest. Call. Summoner still has summon spells and their Eidolon.
Rysky |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Eidolons aren't characters, though.Aaaand you’re wrong.
They're a class feature. It's like saying Animal Companions or Familiars are characters.They are.
When it has levels and a class with maybe some feats and features they can acquire on their own, I'll agree with you.You’re confusing class and character.
I still find it silly that we can have Evil Summoners with Angel Eidolons and people don't see, from a GM/worldbuilding perspective, how big of a problem this might pose in campaigns.They might limit that in the final in regards to alignments, since right now we only have Angels for the Extraplanar/Divine category. Or they could leave it open for role playing opportunity. Why is an Angel and an Evil Summoner bound together? Plenty of plot potential there.
And the worst part is I can totally flavor it as an Evil Summoner torturing an Angel for its own amusement, and get away with it because of the same shenanigans we're allowing to fly here, something I'm very certain no sane GM would allow.
You just ended your argument.
Temperans |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Summon, Manifest, and Call are entirely different mechanics with different purposes.
* Summon: You bring a creature from some place until it gets killed/dismissed.
* Manifest: You make a physical body for an entity.
* Call: You bring a creature from some place permanently (unless the spell says otherwise).
As it stands the PF2 Summoner can be called a Spiritualist and the Eidolon a Phantom and the mechanics would still be worse than PF1 Spiritualist. I dont want Summoner to be a worse Spiritualist, that is not what I enjoyed about the Summoner.
graystone |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Distinction without a difference.
There IS a real mechanical difference: I has real meaning. Things that work off of summoning DO NOT work on an Eidolon. Manifesting an Eidolon is in no way, shape or form a summoning and the only way you can say they summon things is through their VERY limited slots.
At best you could say it's similar or related to summoning but it's very, super clear it's not summoning and unless a summoner is currently casting a summoning spell they aren't really a summoner: at best they are a manifester. It's like having an evoker that isn't using evocation spells.
Temperans |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It does make it not a Summoner.
The Eidolon was specifically a "Summoned Monster". Now it is a "Manifested Monster".
The only "Summoning" the "Summoner" has, is 4 spells a day and all of them are worse than any other class doing "Summoning". They have exactly 2 feats that deal with Summoned monsters, and 1 of them requires the Eidolon to be active. Even then Ostentatious Arrival, the only feat that does not require the Summoner says:
When you summon creatures or manifest your eidolon...You can't even use a Calling spell to bring your Eidolon to the material plane after all:
You have a connection with a powerful and otherworldly entity called an eidolon, and you can use your life force as a conduit to manifest the eidolon into the mortal world. An eidolon is a being formed of ephemeral essences—typically mind, life, or spirit—that needs your body and connection to this world to manifestCompare it with the PF1 unchained Summoner:
A summoner begins play with the ability to summon to his side a powerful outsider called an eidolon. The eidolon forms a link with the summoner, who forever after summons an aspect of the same creature.
Do you notice the difference? Do you notice how now the Eidolon is not even a real creature anymore? How the Eidolon cannot be called using a Calling spell anymore. How it cannot be Summoned using a Summoning spell anymore. I can say the Eidolon is a Figment familiar and be 100% correct, except Figment familiar actually get evolution points unlike PF2 Eidolons.
Gortle |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gortle wrote:Some people are saying they are in another room or around a corner so their summoner never get hit so there is a clear difference in how people are running encounters.What happens in the situations where the party gets attacked from behind or the Summoner can't easily hide behind his allies?
Are they using Shared Senses? I guess its reasonable but it does leave them vulnerable. I wonder how the Eidolon is directed with out clear line of sight in normal situations
Falgaia |
5 people marked this as a favorite. |
graystone wrote:Are they using Shared Senses? I guess its reasonable but it does leave them vulnerable. I wonder how the Eidolon is directed with out clear line of sight in normal situationsGortle wrote:Some people are saying they are in another room or around a corner so their summoner never get hit so there is a clear difference in how people are running encounters.What happens in the situations where the party gets attacked from behind or the Summoner can't easily hide behind his allies?
Pretty sure Eidolons have two-way telepathy built in, so combining that with Share Senses, you can basically just talk your Eidolon through a mission as if you were on Solid Snake's codec. Heck, you can even likely use Exploration Activities through your Eidolon's senses, like searching for traps or Investigating with Recall Knowledge.
KrispyXIV |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
graystone wrote:Are they using Shared Senses? I guess its reasonable but it does leave them vulnerable. I wonder how the Eidolon is directed with out clear line of sight in normal situationsGortle wrote:Some people are saying they are in another room or around a corner so their summoner never get hit so there is a clear difference in how people are running encounters.What happens in the situations where the party gets attacked from behind or the Summoner can't easily hide behind his allies?
You have perfect mental communication, and the Eidolon is an independent intelligent being.
You don't need to share senses while it checks the next room and says "Yeah, its safe/full of monsters."
Remember, the Player may be directing its actions in detail - that doesnt mean the Summoner is treating it like a puppet.
Pronate11 |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pronate11 wrote:...Actually it's an average estimation that's very conservative, that's why i bolded the at least portion of my post.
It's not about situations where the Champion takes 5 Goblins on at once in some cave.
Yes, you'll go games where nobody will hit you and go games where almost everybody will always hit you.The Summoner is both a caster that faces caster problems and, with the Eidolon, a martial that faces martial problems.
They are not a Magus, a Warpriest, a Barbarian, or a Wizard; they are more vulnerable than those classes and that's something you have to understand when the topic of the class having 2 targets comes up.
AoEs do not balance it out, AoEs raise the 20% number higher, we just don't know by how much more because now you have to get into a little more advanced probability and logarithmic mathematical functions; AoEs and rolling at disadvantage wouldn't calculate the same way as standard multi-enemy encounters do.
So, lets look at the math. The 20% comes from the assumption that party of a summoner and 3 other player, and that of the five combatants (eidolon, summoner, and the 3 others) are hit an equal amount, or each takes 1/5 of the hits. Now, with that said, players are going to want to limit this number, and have those with more hp, or the front line, take more hits. Now, the GM's tactics vary between encounters. Sometimes they'll try to hit them all evenly, sometimes they'll fail to do that as the players use clever tactics to keep the backline safe, sometimes the GM will go in revers and attack the backline more, and sometimes the Gm will actually Do what the tanks invested in and focus from the front. Note, that only in the first case would the 1.2 number be true, in all other cases the eidolon and the summoner will be hit a very different amount. While the summoner does take some additional damage from both being hit when the GM targets the front or back line, Gm's target the backline much less then the front, because the wizard drooping to 0 on the first turn all the time is really bad GMing, and is how you get people to stop playing wizards or tanks.
Gortle |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Eidolons, Familiars, and Animal Companions not being actual characters is certainly not a take I thought I'd read this morning.
True. But that is not really what he was saying. The semantics are slipping a bit there due to over use of certains terms in the game. He means "full character" or "player character" the game terms, not "character in the sense of personality".
Which really should have been obvious to everyone.
Rysky |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
GameDesignerDM wrote:Eidolons, Familiars, and Animal Companions not being actual characters is certainly not a take I thought I'd read this morning.True. But that is not really what he was saying. The semantics are slipping a bit there due to over use of certains terms in the game. He means "full character" or "player character" the game terms, not "character in the sense of personality".
Which really should have been obvious to everyone.
That’s needling, and an assumption. They flat out said they aren’t characters.
KrispyXIV |
5 people marked this as a favorite. |
GameDesignerDM wrote:Eidolons, Familiars, and Animal Companions not being actual characters is certainly not a take I thought I'd read this morning.True. But that is not really what he was saying. The semantics are slipping a bit there due to over use of certains terms in the game. He means "full character" or "player character" the game terms, not "character in the sense of personality".
Which really should have been obvious to everyone.
Actually, thats not what Temperans said.
Temperans went into extreme detail to try and dis-establish them as indepedent creatures by implying they can't be called by a calling spell or similar any more to try and establish that an Angel Eidolon isn't a 'real' or independent creature.
Which again, isn't true. The playtest is quite clear that an Angel Eidolon is in fact a real Angel, and that a Dragon Eidolon is formed from the mind/spirit of a real Dragon.
MAYBE the text he quoted could be interpreted as implying the Eidolon isn't that creatures 'true form'... but yeah, so what? Thats also common in summoning mythology and media that what you get is just a lesser form or aspect.
Interaction with specific player available spells is irrelevant.
Gortle |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Summon, Manifest, and Call are entirely different mechanics with different purposes.
* Summon: You bring a creature from some place until it gets killed/dismissed.
* Manifest: You make a physical body for an entity.
* Call: You bring a creature from some place permanently (unless the spell says otherwise).
As it stands the PF2 Summoner can be called a Spiritualist and the Eidolon a Phantom and the mechanics would still be worse than PF1 Spiritualist. I dont want Summoner to be a worse Spiritualist, that is not what I enjoyed about the Summoner.
I think you could support these definitions from language, but I'm not seeing that this distinction is officailly made in the PF2 game.
Summon is clear.Manifest only shown in these playtest rules and could easily be a related term just to denote the Eidolon separate from normal summons. But the class is not called Manifester. Perhaps because the name Summoner has broader meaning.
Call - where?
Any reference for these?
manbearscientist |
6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Megistone wrote:In PF1 it comes back the next day with half HP.
Do you really want that?More so than what is being offered now?
YesAt least a 10 minute cool down after the Eidolon dies is required.
I think I'd prefer it to come back on 1 HP
Out of combat healing has been made cheap in PF2 and that has consequences. I don't disagree with that from a gameplay point of view. But it has an impact on this.
The next day portion of that is the important part, not the half HP part. I don't think any such delay would work well in a game where most classes can get back up to their adventuring day in a few minute.
Gortle |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gortle wrote:GameDesignerDM wrote:Eidolons, Familiars, and Animal Companions not being actual characters is certainly not a take I thought I'd read this morning.True. But that is not really what he was saying. The semantics are slipping a bit there due to over use of certains terms in the game. He means "full character" or "player character" the game terms, not "character in the sense of personality".
Which really should have been obvious to everyone.
Actually, thats not what Temperans said.
Temperans went into extreme detail to try and dis-establish them as indepedent creatures by implying they can't be called by a calling spell or similar any more to try and establish that an Angel Eidolon isn't a 'real' or independent creature.
Which again, isn't true. The playtest is quite clear that an Angel Eidolon is in fact a real Angel, and that a Dragon Eidolon is formed from the mind/spirit of a real Dragon.
MAYBE the text he quoted could be interpreted as implying the Eidolon isn't that creatures 'true form'... but yeah, so what? Thats also common in summoning mythology and media that what you get is just a lesser form or aspect.
Interaction with specific player available spells is irrelevant.
What made you think I was referring to Temperans? I wasn't. I don't recall the post you are talking to either.
graystone |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Again, distinction without a difference.
I'm beginning to think you don't understand what that phrase means as there ARE very clear and distinct differences between the two specifically put in place to make an eidolon NOT a summoned creature. An eidolon can, for instance, "summon other creatures, create things of value, or cast spells that require a cost" where a summoned can't. They can't be banished or targeted but effects that work on summoned. THEY ARE NOT SUMMONED CREATURES and act and react differently to the game world: as such it isn't semantics and far from irrelevant to point out that they and summoned are NOT the same. Do you think Circle of Protection, Antimagic Field, Protection works on them like a summoned creature? If not, it's NOT summoned. Do you think Final Sacrifice works on them? If not, they are not a summoned creature.
Summoned
Source Core Rulebook pg. 637
A creature called by a conjuration spell or effect gains the summoned trait.
Manifest eidolon
Playtest
Your eidolon doesn’t have the summoned or minion trait
Creative Burst |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Rysky wrote:Again, distinction without a difference.I'm beginning to think you don't understand what that phrase means as there ARE very clear and distinct differences between the two specifically put in place to make an eidolon NOT a summoned creature. An eidolon can, for instance, "summon other creatures, create things of value, or cast spells that require a cost" where a summoned can't. They can't be banished or targeted but effects that work on summoned. THEY ARE NOT SUMMONED CREATURES and act and react differently to the game world: as such it isn't semantics and far from irrelevant to point out that they and summoned are NOT the same. Do you think Circle of Protection, Antimagic Field, Protection works on them like a summoned creature? If not, it's NOT summoned. Do you think Final Sacrifice works on them? If not, they are not a summoned creature.
Summoned
Source Core Rulebook pg. 637
A creature called by a conjuration spell or effect gains the summoned trait.Manifest eidolon
Playtest
Your eidolon doesn’t have the summoned or minion trait
I think this a yes but no situation. Mechanically speaking it not a summon as it does have the tag or limitation of a summon. But thematically it is a creature that is summoned making it a summon in that since.
Sagiam |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
An eidolon can, for instance, "summon other creatures, create things of value, or cast spells that require a cost" where a summoned can't. They can't be banished or targeted but effects that work on summoned. THEY ARE NOT SUMMONED CREATURES and act and react differently to the game world: as such it isn't semantics and far from irrelevant to point out that they and summoned are NOT the same. Do you think Circle of Protection, Antimagic Field, Protection works on them like a summoned creature? If not, it's NOT summoned. Do you think Final Sacrifice works on them? If not, they are not a summoned creature.
Summoned
Source Core Rulebook pg. 637
A creature called by a conjuration spell or effect gains the summoned trait.Manifest eidolon
Playtest
Your eidolon doesn’t have the summoned or minion trait
So.... you want your eidolon to be effected by circles of protection and antimagic fields?
Wasn't really expecting anyone to think this needs a nerf.More seriously the eidolon wasn't effected by that stuff in the first edition either. Why? Because It isn't like other summoned creatures. Because eidolons are special. In this edition instead of listing everything your eidolon isn't effected by, they just slimmed down the word count by removing the summoned trait.
Classically speaking the mere fact that you can make your eidolon appear and disappear means that it's "summoned".
KrispyXIV |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Rysky wrote:Again, distinction without a difference.I'm beginning to think you don't understand what that phrase means as there ARE very clear and distinct differences between the two specifically put in place to make an eidolon NOT a summoned creature. An eidolon can, for instance, "summon other creatures, create things of value, or cast spells that require a cost" where a summoned can't. They can't be banished or targeted but effects that work on summoned. THEY ARE NOT SUMMONED CREATURES and act and react differently to the game world: as such it isn't semantics and far from irrelevant to point out that they and summoned are NOT the same. Do you think Circle of Protection, Antimagic Field, Protection works on them like a summoned creature? If not, it's NOT summoned. Do you think Final Sacrifice works on them? If not, they are not a summoned creature.
Summoned
Source Core Rulebook pg. 637
A creature called by a conjuration spell or effect gains the summoned trait.Manifest eidolon
Playtest
Your eidolon doesn’t have the summoned or minion trait
Yeah... not having a mechanical trait doesn't mean a thing isn't a 'thing'.
An Eidolon is still something you summon (or manifest) in the context of the setting, it just lacks the mechanical trait associated with Summoned creatures.
In this case, it lacks the limitations associated with that mechanic which is almost entirely a good thing...
Katrixia |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, lets look at the math. The 20% comes from the assumption that party of a summoner and 3 other player, and that of the five combatants (eidolon, summoner, and the 3 others) are hit an equal amount, or each takes 1/5 of the hits. Now, with that said, players are going to want to limit this number, and have those with more hp, or the front line, take more hits. Now, the GM's tactics vary between encounters. Sometimes they'll try to hit them all evenly, sometimes they'll fail to do that as the players use clever tactics to keep the backline safe, sometimes the GM will go in revers and attack the backline more, and sometimes the Gm will actually Do what the tanks invested in and focus from the front. Note, that only in the first case would the 1.2 number be true, in all other cases the eidolon and the summoner will be hit a very different amount. While the summoner does take some additional damage from both being hit when the GM targets the front or back line, Gm's target the backline much less then the front,...
Yes; the variables are a 4-man party within a number of 2e encounters Paizo has released in APs since 2e's release. It's not based on them being hit an equal amount, otherwise that 20% number would go higher; the Eidolon is a martial, the Summoner is a caster and so you have to factor by how often are casters hit on average. Which comes to about ~30% less than most martials, on average (factor in things such as armor class), which would leave us at the conservative estimation of 20%.
GM tactics are variable, yes; some GMs will be too hostile and others complete pushovers. The idea is not to account for every scenario individually, it is to try and aggregate the average in those scenarios in what is fair and regular play.Note that all of the data i've read through has been based on mid-to-high level encounters and not low-level or simply high-level encounters.
If you're interested more, i recommend simply playtesting the class and leaving feedback on your experience after several playtest sessions by running through one of Paizo's released APs for 2e.
Take note of your own behavior as a Summoner compared to any other caster and as an Eidolon compared to any other martial and record how you play the class as well.
graystone |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think this a yes but no situation. Mechanically speaking it not a summon as it does have the tag or limitation of a summon. But thematically it is a creature that is summoned making it a summon in that since.
I don't think it even works thematically as you can swap places with it and vanish: it's more a piece of you than what a summons is. IMO, it's more of a bonding with another creature you teleport to you than grabbing another creature and forcing them to do what you want as is the case with summoning.
So.... you want your eidolon to be effected by circles of protection and antimagic fields?
Of course not: I have no problem with them not being a summoned. I have a problem with summoners sucking at summoning.
Wasn't really expecting anyone to think this needs a nerf.
Nope, I think it's a plus.
More seriously the eidolon wasn't effected by that stuff in the first edition either. Why? Because It isn't like other summoned creatures. Because eidolons are special.
The PF1 summoner had Summon Monster as a spell-like ability as a base ability. It was actually GOOD at summoning. It was never about the eidolon: others where trying to point it out as a reason to call it a summoner. the PF2 summoner is actually worse at summoning with limited slots and losing access to Act Together because of the 3 round action cost of summoning spells: it's few summoning feats don't really do much to improve things.
Yeah... not having a mechanical trait doesn't mean a thing isn't a 'thing'.
It actually DOES when it acts differently. A cat isn't a dog because they both have fur, tails and ears. Differences and distinctions matter.
An Eidolon is still something you summon (or manifest) in the context of the setting, it just lacks the mechanical trait associated with Summoned creatures.
Not so much. You aren't grabbing some random creature from elsewhere but you bond with a specific creature, linking yourself to it: it works in a fundamentally different way where you can swap yourself both in space and existence. It's just not the same thing. It's closer to a familiar bond that a summoning.
In this case, it lacks the limitations associated with that mechanic which is almost entirely a good thing...
It being a completely different thing IS a good thing. That doesn't change the fact that it IS indeed a different thing. When you start going 'it's like this BUT is doesn't do this and that and oh that is different too' it stops being the same thing.
Pronate11 |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pronate11 wrote:
So, lets look at the math. The 20% comes from the assumption that party of a summoner and 3 other player, and that of the five combatants (eidolon, summoner, and the 3 others) are hit an equal amount, or each takes 1/5 of the hits. Now, with that said, players are going to want to limit this number, and have those with more hp, or the front line, take more hits. Now, the GM's tactics vary between encounters. Sometimes they'll try to hit them all evenly, sometimes they'll fail to do that as the players use clever tactics to keep the backline safe, sometimes the GM will go in revers and attack the backline more, and sometimes the Gm will actually Do what the tanks invested in and focus from the front. Note, that only in the first case would the 1.2 number be true, in all other cases the eidolon and the summoner will be hit a very different amount. While the summoner does take some additional damage from both being hit when the GM targets the front or back line, Gm's target the backline much less then the front,...
Yes; the variables are a 4-man party within a number of 2e encounters Paizo has released in APs since 2e's release. It's not based on them being hit an equal amount, otherwise that 20% number would go higher; the Eidolon is a martial, the Summoner is a caster and so you have to factor by how often are casters hit on average. Which comes to about ~30% less than most martials, on average (factor in things such as armor class), which would leave us at the conservative estimation of 20%.
GM tactics are variable, yes; some GMs will be too hostile and others complete pushovers. The idea is not to account for every scenario individually, it is to try and aggregate the average in those scenarios in what is fair and regular play.
Note that all of the data i've read through has been based on mid-to-high level encounters and not low-level or simply high-level encounters.If you're interested more, i recommend simply playtesting the class and leaving feedback on your...
So this was based on playtest data, and not just some formulae. in that case, if the data shows it's about 20% more, then the 20% more hp would be warranted.
Also, my math was based on everyone in the party being "hit" and damaged equally, not attacked equally, as that adds so many more variables I'd have to start charging by the hour if you want me to do them. I would also really that data, as while data doesn't lie, it can be easily misinterpreted, intentionally or otherwise.
KrispyXIV |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So this was based on playtest data, and not just some formulae. in that case, if the data shows it's about 20% more, then the 20% more hp would be warranted.
That is not, necessarily, the correct conclusion to draw from that.
A Summoner only needs more HP if the Summoner class is more likely than it should be to be incapacitated or killed in any given combat. If the current level of HP is sufficient to ensure that the class is in no more danger of death or incapacitation than anyone else in most circumstances, its irrelevant how much more damage the Summoner takes.
If an amount of damage (20% or otherwise) is insufficient to cause that, then there's not an issue.
The intent of tuning the summoner may not be aimed at making them quite so survivable as a Champion or Barbarian.
I'm not saying this sort of testing is irrelevant - I'm just saying that it doesn't necessarily follow that taking X% more damage needs to result in X% more hitpoints, unless Summoners are spending more time unconscious than anyone else.
Katrixia |
...
It's sorta both, really.
All encounters during playtest were from Paizo APs but we had to actually develop a formula with the raw data given from those encounters, otherwise you would just say "yeah, Summoner needs 50% more HP than it currently has" and it's not that simple.We definitely plan to release our review guide and create a thread here on the forums before the playtest is up, we already have a lot of tables up. Some tables are an updated and modified version of GingerGiant's class proficiency tables to include data from the playtest Summoner:
( Ginger Giant's tables unmodified)
Note: We did not include Magus' data for the tables because we really only care for how Summoner performs.
Uchuujin |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While I personally like the feel of separate HP pools better, as a legacy of playing many such characters in MMOs, I might be able to make do with a shared pool. The idea I really don't like though is if my bodyguard goes down, I drop too.
So, I had one thought, that what if when you eidolon takes enough damage to drop to 0 HP, it is dismissed/banished/whatever, but you remain with 1 HP? Can still absorb some of the damage for you, and give you a second chance that way, but also it's still going to hurt?
Not an idea I'm super invested in, just throwing ideas to see what might stick.
Pronate11 |
Pronate11 wrote:...It's sorta both, really.
All encounters during playtest were from Paizo APs but we had to actually develop a formula with the raw data given from those encounters, otherwise you would just say "yeah, Summoner needs 50% more HP than it currently has" and it's not that simple.We definitely plan to release our review guide and create a thread here on the forums before the playtest is up, we already have a lot of tables up. Some tables are an updated and modified version of GingerGiant's class proficiency tables to include data from the playtest Summoner:
( Ginger Giant's tables unmodified)
Note: We did not include Magus' data for the tables because we really only care for how Summoner performs.
Just out of curiosity, what's the sample size? how many times did you run the same encounter with the same party? how many encounters did you run? Are the encounters from different aps? (I know plague stone and AoA have some rough encounter designs due to them partially being created before the rules where finalized)
graystone |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Graystone wrote:it's more of a bonding with another creature you teleport to youWhen you teleport another creature to you.
There’s a term for that.
Sure, but your argument is that exact terms and traits are 100% meaningless as long as you get the right 'feel'. Seem VERY disingenuous to turn around now and rely on exact terms now.
Falgaia |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I fail to see what this semantics argument is trying to accomplish. If you just want them to be more viable for casting Summon Keyword X Spells then you can just say that. Manifest is functionally just a weird and unique form of summon for generating a unique entity. If you really want the class to be called the Manifester instead, I don't see the point of that, as the current class gets the general idea across better with simpler, common terms, IMO. I don't think anyone here disagrees with the idea of a Master Summoner route for the class, if that's all you're campaigning for here.
Sagiam |
Creative Burst wrote:I think this a yes but no situation. Mechanically speaking it not a summon as it does have the tag or limitation of a summon. But thematically it is a creature that is summoned making it a summon in that since.I don't think it even works thematically as you can swap places with it and vanish: it's more a piece of you than what a summons is. IMO, it's more of a bonding with another creature you teleport to you than grabbing another creature and forcing them to do what you want as is the case with summoning.
Sagiam wrote:So.... you want your eidolon to be effected by circles of protection and antimagic fields?Of course not: I have no problem with them not being a summoned. I have a problem with summoners sucking at summoning.
Don't get me wrong, I definitely think the summoner needs a buff to it's summoning spells. I've quite liked the idea of the summoning font being thrown around.
Rysky |
Rysky wrote:Sure, but your argument is that exact terms and traits are 100% meaningless as long as you get the right 'feel'. Seem VERY disingenuous to turn around now and rely on exact terms now.Graystone wrote:it's more of a bonding with another creature you teleport to youWhen you teleport another creature to you.
There’s a term for that.
Traits aren't meaningless, but being pedantic is.
A Summoner summons their Eidolon, just because they don't use the Summon spell to do so and have the same restrictions as normal summoned creatures doesn't change that.
graystone |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A Summoner summons their Eidolon, just because they don't use the Summon spell to do so and have the same restrictions as normal summoned creatures doesn't change that.
Sure, so your argument is 'traits aren't meaningless... So here is why traits are meaningless here... Just because it in no way functions like a summoning spell, it's just like a summoning spell..."
Sure, makes total sense... :P
I fail to see what this semantics argument is trying to accomplish. If you just want them to be more viable for casting Summon Keyword X Spells then you can just say that.
I did. :P
When I did, people told me they already summoned their Eidolon. My point is that calling something a summoner that is bad at summoning to me feels BAD. It's false advertising IMO to have a primarily pet based class called something related to a class of spells they aren't good at using.
And for me, it's not semantics as it's tied to casting expectations: it a particular class of spells much like a school for wizards. For me, it's like an illusionist being bad at casting illusions or a necromancer losing use of abilities for casting necromancy spells.
graystone |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
graystone wrote:Sure, makes total sense... :PJust as much as the P1 Summoner.
It's not even close: they came with a built in class feature to summon and a much greater range and number of slots to cast summons from along with spells to summon a huge variety of creatures [not just a small subset of creatures]. I've played summoners that only used their Eidolon as a mount and only use summoning for combat: that's not really something even close to possible with the PF2 version as it's bad at both spells and summoning in particular.
In addition, the PF1 Eidolon was specifically summoned.
"A summoner begins play with the ability to summon to his side a powerful outsider called an eidolon."
"Eidolons are treated as summoned creatures."
"A summoner can summon his eidolon in a ritual that takes 1 minute to perform."
So we REALLY are talking about 2 completely different situations and abilities.
Rysky |
Rysky wrote:graystone wrote:Sure, makes total sense... :PJust as much as the P1 Summoner.It's not even close: they came with a built in class feature to summon and a much greater range and number of slots to cast summons from along with spells to summon a huge variety of creatures [not just a small subset of creatures]. I've played summoners that only used their Eidolon as a mount and only use summoning for combat: that's not really something even close to possible with the PF2 version as it's bad at both spells and summoning in particular.
In addition, the PF1 Eidolon was specifically summoned.
"A summoner begins play with the ability to summon to his side a powerful outsider called an eidolon."
"Eidolons are treated as summoned creatures."
"A summoner can summon his eidolon in a ritual that takes 1 minute to perform."So we REALLY are talking about 2 completely different situations and abilities.
Not really, there was different means of calling your Eidolon in P1 (ritual) than normal summoning, just like now. Doesn’t make it not be a summoning.