Why the separate hit point pool is important

[Gortle]

Verzen wrote:

Honestly looking at the math, it's slightly below where it would be in P1...

I think most people agree that is the correct objective

[Verzen]

I also just realized I'm not calculating in the racial HD which is another boost..

[Creative Burst]

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Creative Burst wrote:

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Rysky wrote:

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

And that's where the agree to disagree begins. Life Link was a choice to sacrifice personal life force to have the Eidolon maintain its connection to the Material Plane. The Summoner was not bound to do so whatsoever other than because they wanted to (or were dominated to for some reason, who knows, but beside the point).

Compare that to "You share the same HP, and anything that affects one affects the other, which stacks," and you are talking about a completely different mechanic that does not even closely match the intent or capability of Life Link in PF1.

Again, saying you liked Lifelink more is valid.

Saying being able to share HP doesn't make sense but you were fine with Lifelink is not, it's hypocritical.

It's hardly hypocritical, any more than saying you like the Shield Cantrip, but not like wielding a Sturdy Shield.

You can have all kinds of different reasons to dislike things that have differences, such as not requiring a free hand (or speaking), liking the automatic scaling hardness that doesn't eat into your WBL, being straight-jacketed into one shield type and nothing else because they break too damn easy, and so on.

We're taking something too much at face value and not taking into account the significant differences they possess, and the ramifications and consequences behind those differences. You want shared HP? Fine. Now you're being nuked twice by the same higher-level Fireball. I really doubt players find that to be a fun or enjoyable mechanic unless they are on the dealing end of that exchange.

You don't get nuked twice you get once just like everyone else because you take the worse result and there is 10th lvl feat that makes you take the better.

Okay, so it's not unlike playing a game of Chess, except instead of having a King and a Queen, you now have 2 Kings. It's objectively twice as easy to Checkmate you, and...

Except your part of a party, it not just your eidolon but your fellow player to have your back. Playing each other strengths and covering weaknesses is part of the game. Summoner may have a lower ac but so does wizard and cloistered cleric and just like them they expect other character to help keep them from harms way.

[Katrixia]

Verzen wrote:

Honestly looking at the math, it's slightly below where it would be in P1...

d8 summoner with 14 con and an Eidolon. 1st level Eidolon would have what, 5 hp? I think?

So 15 hp total between the two.

You'd probably want 16 con as a summoner which puts you at 13 HP total that you two share.

And if you take the AOE damage rather than it hitting both you just take the highest amount which makes it slightly better in that regard, at least.

My main concern is things get wonky with status effects. If something petrifies your eidolon, are you petrified? Sure. But if you stoneskin yourself, why isn't your Eidolon also stoneskinned?

Maybe a d12 would work better since in P1 the Eidolon usually had 4 + 8 without calculating in con bonuses which equals 12.

The problem is balancing; in 2e the game is balanced differently, you don't take half or roll you just get 10HP if you're a Monk, or 12 if you're a Barbarian, or 6 if you're a Sorcerer.

So like in 2e at 1st level, your Eidolon would have 10 HP and you'd have like 8 HP for a total of 18 eHP, before CON. (If 1e Summoner was just straight-ported)

Although i think most people would be fine to see Summoner get 6HP if it meant getting separate HP pools that are grouped via LifeLink.

So it'd be more like 16HP that would be the goal or 6HP+10HP.

Right now the Summoner and Eidolon only get 10HP; that's a massive loss in survivability.

[Rysky]

Verzen wrote:

Honestly looking at the math, it's slightly below where it would be in P1...

d8 summoner with 14 con and an Eidolon. 1st level Eidolon would have what, 5 hp? I think?

So 15 hp total between the two.

You'd probably want 16 con as a summoner which puts you at 13 HP total that you two share.

And if you take the AOE damage rather than it hitting both you just take the highest amount which makes it slightly better in that regard, at least.

My main concern is things get wonky with status effects. If something petrifies your eidolon, are you petrified? Sure. But if you stoneskin yourself, why isn't your Eidolon also stoneskinned?

Maybe a d12 would work better since in P1 the Eidolon usually had 4 + 8 without calculating in con bonuses which equals 12.

I rather the Eidolon add their Con bonus to the mix as well, that way the Summoner isn't pressured as much to prioritize Con.

[Katrixia]

Verzen wrote:

I also just realized I'm not calculating in the racial HD which is another boost..

Every class adds it's racial HD, so the class HP are more important for the sake of how it's balanced.

[Mellored]

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Clearly, there is a difference. But the two also aren't mutually exclusive. You can not like shareable HP and also believe that it doesn't make sense for those two to have it.

it does not just the believe that is not mutually exclusive. There is 0 reason why the mechanics can also work for both. In the same class. The same way Synthesis lets you summon in a different manmer.

Litterally, it takes 1 feat to solve this in a way that everyone can play as they want.

[Christian Chaney]

Man, this was quite the read. I'm going to have to disagree on the hit point pool. My playtest, 1st, 4th, and 7th level consisted of a Magus, Fighter, Summoner, and Ranger. We took those classes so we could compare similar classes. At 1st level the Ranger and his animal companion was better than the summoner in HP. I played a primal summoner so with magic fang my beast eidolon had a +7 to hit and dealt 2d8+7 damage (with the boost eidolon), on a charge a +8 to hit. The summoner did some really awesome damage, but we did go down a few times where the ranger and his animal companion never went down and also dealt really good damage with his Precision Hunter's Edge.

By 4th level my summoner had shield block and armor proficiency and was not nearly so squishy. I took alacritous evolution (the increased move really helped out). I thought about tandem move but up to that point thought the greater movement would be better. Now armed with a +1 striking khopesh I had no need for magic fang. Enlarge was suiting me just fine. The reach was extremely helpful for assisting the party with flanking. Also at this point the rangers animal companion was taking crits more often and went down several times. The only time my summoner went down was when we were ambushed and I got nailed with a nat 20 and max damage, hahaha.

At 7th level I had up to medium armor and both my eidolon and myself had an AC of 27. Equal to both the fighter and the magus. I had a +13 to hit with my +1 khopesh and my eidolon was sitting on a +16 and dealt 2d8+9 (when boosted). I was still rocking enlarge because hulking evolution doesn't grant reach, and with a 3rd level jump my eidolon was all over the map. With my sturdy shield my summoner was up in the fight, but mostly to provide flanking. We even fought a group of 3 hill giants and my eidolon squared off against two of them for a round. Yes I took a bit of damage but was able to heal most of it. The rangers animal companion died in that fight, almost every hit on it was a crit and after the ranger healed it with his healing focus spell he got crit again and was dead.

Over all I loved the feel of the class! It's a pet class for sure, but has such a different feel than the druid or ranger. I enjoyed the 2 characters immensely, and I strongly suspect there will be additional feats or items that will increase the damage die of the eidolon. I do hope the make some changes and I'm sure they will. Overall this a very solid start to a really cool class concept. Sorry to those of you that are hung up on the "Summoning" aspect or wording, but animal companions already exist with the ranger, druid, animal tamer, and beastmaster. I really don't think we need a 5th at this point?

[Salamileg]

Verzen wrote:

Honestly looking at the math, it's slightly below where it would be in P1...

d8 summoner with 14 con and an Eidolon. 1st level Eidolon would have what, 5 hp? I think?

So 15 hp total between the two.

You'd probably want 16 con as a summoner which puts you at 13 HP total that you two share.

And if you take the AOE damage rather than it hitting both you just take the highest amount which makes it slightly better in that regard, at least.

My main concern is things get wonky with status effects. If something petrifies your eidolon, are you petrified? Sure. But if you stoneskin yourself, why isn't your Eidolon also stoneskinned?

Maybe a d12 would work better since in P1 the Eidolon usually had 4 + 8 without calculating in con bonuses which equals 12.

You're forgetting that the PF2 Summoner has an extra 6-10 HP from their ancestry. Assuming human and 16 con, that puts the PF2 Summoner+Eidolon at 21 HP at level 1.

[ruimpranick]

Just brainstorming here with the idea of making the summoner and the eidolon separate HP pools, don't take it to serious.

You could maintain the concept of sharing the same life force by making a conduit spell where you can transfer HP and maybe even conditions from one another, this way you keep then separate and still keep the ideia, which is pretty nice.

[PossibleCabbage]

Something that might work for to make the shared HP pool feel less painful is to make the Eidolon heal the summoner as a reaction if the Eidolon is reduced to 0 HP. Like "the Eidolon channels the energy that was keeping it corporeal back into the summoner and disappears".

Since it costs 3 actions to resummon your buddy, this isn't likely to be abused as a combat tactic.

[KrispyXIV]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

Something that might work for to make the shared HP pool feel less painful is to make the Eidolon heal the summoner as a reaction if the Eidolon is reduced to 0 HP. Like "the Eidolon channels the energy that was keeping it corporeal back into the summoner and disappears".

Since it costs 3 actions to resummon your buddy, this isn't likely to be abused as a combat tactic.

Doesn't this essentially remove the risk associated with your Eidolon Sharing hp?

I think this sounds like a cool concept, for a limited option (a feat that triggers once per day) though.

[RexAliquid]

KrispyXIV wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

Something that might work for to make the shared HP pool feel less painful is to make the Eidolon heal the summoner as a reaction if the Eidolon is reduced to 0 HP. Like "the Eidolon channels the energy that was keeping it corporeal back into the summoner and disappears".

Since it costs 3 actions to resummon your buddy, this isn't likely to be abused as a combat tactic.

Doesn't this essentially remove the risk associated with your Eidolon Sharing hp?

I think this sounds like a cool concept, for a limited option (a feat that triggers once per day) though.

Yeah, something comparable to Orc Ferocity.

[TheGentlemanDM]

KrispyXIV wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

Something that might work for to make the shared HP pool feel less painful is to make the Eidolon heal the summoner as a reaction if the Eidolon is reduced to 0 HP. Like "the Eidolon channels the energy that was keeping it corporeal back into the summoner and disappears".

Since it costs 3 actions to resummon your buddy, this isn't likely to be abused as a combat tactic.

Doesn't this essentially remove the risk associated with your Eidolon Sharing hp?

I think this sounds like a cool concept, for a limited option (a feat that triggers once per day) though.

Depends on how much it heals for.

If it's only a small amount of HP; just enough to keep the Summoner on their feet, it shouldn't be an issue. Or if it's still affected by overflow- if it only heals for 10 and you took damage to "negative" 20- it wouldn't save you from everything. I'd use the wording on hero's defiance as a starting point.

It could have some odd interactions if you both get fireballed, though.

[Mellored]

Another way to split it...

Split HP (or some better name) level 1 feat.
Reduce the number of hit points you get from the Summoner class to 5+your constitution modifier. When you summon your Eidilon it has hit points equal to 5 * it's level instead of sharing it with you.
If it is reduced to 0 HP, it unmanifest and you cannot manifest it again until it regains at least 1 hit points. It regains all it's hit points durring your daily preparation. You gain the heal Eidilon spell.

Heal Eidilon. 1 action
Your Eidilon regains 8 hit points. If this would take it over it's maximum, it gains temporary hit points equal to the remainder which last for 1 minute.
Heightened (+1): increase the hit points gained by 8.

[TheGentlemanDM]

The issue with this design is that it means that the eidolon, which most of the time should be in the front lines taking the brunt of the aggression, has about a third of the HP of an actual martial character.

[Uchuujin]

I'm certain I will be purchasing Secrets of Magic, no matter how the summoner turns out. I can't guarantee that I will ever play a 2E summoner all depending how things turn out, but I'm hardly going to boycott the product over it.

[Martialmasters]

for me it will depend what the non class information is, particular in regards to possible alternate spell casting systems or new spells.

i can ignore the classes if they do not turn out.

[Verzen]

Mellored wrote:

Another way to split it...

Split HP (or some better name) level 1 feat.
Reduce the number of hit points you get from the Summoner class to 5+your constitution modifier. When you summon your Eidilon it has hit points equal to 5 * it's level instead of sharing it with you.
If it is reduced to 0 HP, it unmanifest and you cannot manifest it again until it regains at least 1 hit points. It regains all it's hit points durring your daily preparation. You gain the heal Eidilon spell.

Heal Eidilon. 1 action
Your Eidilon regains 8 hit points. If this would take it over it's maximum, it gains temporary hit points equal to the remainder which last for 1 minute.
Heightened (+1): increase the hit points gained by 8.

5 wouldn't make sense. 6 would. Personally I think it should be..

6+con for summoner and 6+con for Eidolon. That way the Eidolons bonus comes into play as well. If i have +2 con, that would put me at 16 HP. 8 + 8 for human. Then my Eidolon would have 9 HP. And then I could have 25 HP ar level 1 with optional share then put disadvantage for aoe as a feat at 4 then advantage as a feat at 10.

Optional share life. If we were to do that. Barbarian would be 23 HP at lvl 1. So Summoner together would be higher. But then again we'd essentially take double dmg from aoe.

[Verzen]

honestly the more I do the math the more I'm preferring shared HP right from the start. Just add in the Eidolons con bonus and give us optional tweaks for customization purposes and I'd be happy.

[Gortle]

Temperans wrote:

I really dont want to play another 5e and the current Summoner to me just feels like a 5e class: Not the Pathfinder class I fell in love with.

Yep I want some consistency. I don't want everything becoming totally artificial because it might be a better game mechanic. While these sorts of games are not simulations, they do need to keep in touch with the source genre.

[Temperans]

Exactly, consistency is good. But there is no reason to make it single static choice, that is just boring. Specially for a class whose entire draw was having a customizable companion.

[sharkmanley84]

Can't believe i read all that! Christian Chaney said it best "animal companions already exist with the ranger, druid, animal tamer, and beastmaster. I really don't think we need a 5th at this point?" We already have a separate hit point pet owner(who also share action pool through the minion trait).
You can go caster(druid) or martial(ranger).

I did like someone's(?) idea of a pure summoner with spells coming from an archetype and a stronger eidolon but then what will the trained in simple weapons and unarmoured defense character do?

I agree that the 'if either(or both) summoner or eidolon are in range of the fireball you take the worst save of two' rule is pretty dodgy and stacks damage. This fear of heightened damage from multiple vectors made me want a separate hp pool but it also made me fight CLOSE to my eidolon, in TANDEM with her, so i could heal her and support her. It made me fight with my summoned entity as opposed to throwing meatshields, that I couldn't care less about, around corners or into traps.

I love the new eidolon although it needs a few buffs and some proper focus spells and more tandem feats.

Also is the lack of a 1st class feat a typo?

[Falgaia]

sharkmanley84 wrote:

Also is the lack of a 1st class feat a typo?

...smh I've built 4 summoners and never realized they were missing the Lv1 Feat.

Real answer is probably yes, there are a handful of classes who skip the level 1 class feat.

[Capn Cupcake]

Falgaia wrote:

sharkmanley84 wrote:

Also is the lack of a 1st class feat a typo?

...smh I've built 4 summoners and never realized they were missing the Lv1 Feat.

Real answer is probably yes, there are a handful of classes who skip the level 1 class feat.

I'm pretty sure it's only casters that skip it, so they didn't give it to the Magus or Summoner. Man they really piled on the drawbacks to these classes in this playtest huh?

[Temperans]

Yep drawback on top of drawback on top of drawback.

But hey spending all your actions you barely hit as well as a Rogue/Monk with no feats.

[KrispyXIV]

Temperans wrote:

Yep drawback on top of drawback on top of drawback.

But hey spending all your actions you barely hit as well as a Rogue/Monk with no feats.

I can fight better than any Cleric or Wizard.

I can cast better than any Monk or Rogue.

Its a hybrid class - if I can exceed or even keep up with any of the specialists, things are fundamentally out of balance.

So long as I can cover the roles sufficiently, the advantage of the Summoner is being able to cover multiple roles with a hybrid chassis.

There's no reason to be upset you aren't as good as a fullblooded Martial when you are also a competent caster...

[Darksol the Painbringer]

KrispyXIV wrote:

Temperans wrote:

Yep drawback on top of drawback on top of drawback.

But hey spending all your actions you barely hit as well as a Rogue/Monk with no feats.

I can fight better than any Cleric or Wizard.

I can cast better than any Monk or Rogue.

Its a hybrid class - if I can exceed or even keep up with any of the specialists, things are fundamentally out of balance.

So long as I can cover the roles sufficiently, the advantage of the Summoner is being able to cover multiple roles with a hybrid chassis.

There's no reason to be upset you aren't as good as a fullblooded Martial when you are also a competent caster...

You might have better proficiencies in actual weapons, but as far as being a better combatant, not so much. You can't really wave around Eclipse Bursts while being Improved Invisibility like a Wizard, and you can't outheal or outlast a Cleric, which means you'll be out of stuff well before a Cleric is. While you're plugging away with cantrips just to skate by, Cleric is still dropping major healing/damaging bombs onto enemies, as a lot of your damage is tied to your limited spells.

The spellcasting can be higher level, but it's extremely limited, and Monks/Rogues can still pick up Dedication spellcasting feats to have more spellcasting capabilities than you. As I've said before, with the Wizard being able to Eclipse Burst with Improved Invisibility? Yeah, imagine that plus some crazy Flurry of Blow shenanigans, or free Sneak Attack damage on each target that's being nuked.

While I can agree that the Magus shouldn't be Legendary Weapons or Spells, they shouldn't be so gimped to compensate for those benefits, as niche as they are.

Same with Summoner; being twice as vulnerable as any other character with no meaningful or significant benefit defeats what others viewed as a big draw to the class. Being able to conjure creatures to fight for you because you are squishy and vulnerable is a flavor that is antithetical to the idea being proposed here. Sure, it's interesting, but it's not really thematic (Life Link being used as an argument is in poor taste since Shield Other does a much better job of this), nor is it balanced (you're twice as likely to get screwed by bad dice than to be helped compared to any other class). Not to mention conditions and selective resistances/immunities interacting with you being separate-yet-not-really-separate entities, and I find it will be a much bigger hold-up in the game than if a Summoner has like 10 summoned creatures out.

[KrispyXIV]

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

You might have better proficiencies in actual weapons, but as far as being a better combatant, not so much. You can't really wave around Eclipse Bursts while being Improved Invisibility like a Wizard, and you can't outheal or outlast a Cleric, which means you'll be out of stuff well before a Cleric is. While you're plugging away with cantrips just to skate by, Cleric is still dropping major healing/damaging bombs onto enemies, as a lot of your damage is tied to your limited spells.

What? I'm not plugging away with Cantrips - I have a martial proficiency Eidolon for damage.

I have 2/3 the spell slots of relevant top levels spells of non-wizard/sorcerer casters for when I need to push things, but I'm almost never going to be plugging away with cantrips.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

and Monks/Rogues can still pick up Dedication spellcasting feats to have more spellcasting capabilities than you.

They can have more level irrelevant spells than me, assuming I don't take the exact same options and have the same spells they do, plus two max level spell slots. None native spellcasters will ALWAYS lose out to a Summoner at the same level of investment in casting... and I STILL have a full Martial proficiencied Eidolon.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Same with Summoner; being twice as vulnerable as any other character with no meaningful or significant benefit defeats what others viewed as a big draw to the class. Being able to conjure creatures to fight for you because you are squishy and vulnerable is a flavor that is antithetical to the...

The Twice as Vulnerable thing again. This is demonstrably untrue. You may have twice the bodies, but one of those bodies is the exact same durability of any caster and the other is the same as a Martial. Literally the only case you are more vulnerable at all to is AOE, and thats easy to mitigate with positioning.

I'm seriously not clear what the balance 'target' you're aiming for here is.

A Summoner can't fight as well as a Martial class, or you invalidate Martial classes because you also have top level spell slots.

You can't cast as well as a Wizard, because you also have Martial level fighting proficiencies.

So where is the target you're aiming for, knowing that the class has to come in behind all those specialists.

[ArchSage20]

is there any reason people should not be allowed to have multiple options? why not allow people to chose if their eidolon should be linked or not?

[ArchSage20]

i would rather be able to be a undead summoner and not have my life bound to the creature i'm summoning

imagine summoning a wraith to kill your enemies while you sneak they kill the wraith and you die

the whole fun of summoning is sending the pet to the fray over and over specially undead

as it stands this feel more like a jojo stand than a summon

not that i would mind having star platinum in pathfinder

[HumbleGamer]

ArchSage20 wrote:

is there any reason people should not be allowed to have multiple options? why not allow people to chose if their eidolon should be linked or not?

I guess because of the class itself.

It seems something like "Why can't a fighter be specialized in armor instead of weapon, in order to match the Champion AC?"

or "Why is the champion meant to just have high AC? Couldn't it swap with legendary attack like a fighter?"

They simply decided that the fighter is the more offensive oriented class, and the champion the most defensive oriented one.

Same goes for the summoner.

50% of the classes can summon creatures or get the benefits from an animal companion. The Summoner is the one who instead manifest a creature who with he shares its life essence.

[Sedoriku]

Hrmm would a 'Binder' type archetype ala beastmaster be a good option? Allow for people to choose a summoned creature or make an eidolon lite that has a separate hit point pool?
A
I could see it needing the character to expend a summon spell of the correct level in an hour long ritual to gain use of the creature for the day. Perhaps remove the minion trait, but remove any spells the creature may normally be able to cast. If it dies then it can't be summoned again for the day. Perhaps give it the uncommon or rare tag if that's a bit too powerful.

[Falgaia]

Sedoriku wrote:

Hrmm would a 'Binder' type archetype ala beastmaster be a good option? Allow for people to choose a summoned creature or make an eidolon lite that has a separate hit point pool?

A
I could see it needing the character to expend a summon spell of the correct level in an hour long ritual to gain use of the creature for the day. Perhaps remove the minion trait, but remove any spells the creature may normally be able to cast. If it dies then it can't be summoned again for the day. Perhaps give it the uncommon or rare tag if that's a bit too powerful.

I'd be down for it, not sure if this is what they have planned for the Summoner multi or not though.

[Martialmasters]

Magus can be tweaked to be effective

Summoner as is I don't know

It's all well and good to say they shouldn't match any one class designed for a specific job. It's quite another when in actual play you find that you have no real reason to be there.

In a party of 4, what room does it have for a summoner?

You can have a fighter or champion or barbarian in front with a ranger or rogue or monk.

Any spell caster,. Maybe two. One of them with access to some kind of healing.

Any of the 4 with medicine skill.

Wich party member can you remove and not feel like you got the raw end of the deal currently?

Either caster/ranged damage dealer? You do less damage, succeed at offensive spells less often, have little room for utilities in your spells, and get hit more often cuz eidolon.

Either main or skirmish martial? You do less damage, you have no way to really impede or inconvenience the enemy aside from existing Wich given your low damage and no positional control isn't exactly a huge threat.

In exchange for fulfilling both roles you are able to do neither to a satisfactory level.

While the build I have was conceptually fun, in actual play it was extremely boring and even when it's no longer as boring (level 20) it's power and therefore presence was so low that outside of being unable to justify it narratively the DM quickly started ignoring the summoner and it's eidolon saving it for last once the intelligent enemy realized it was all bark no bite.

[Martialmasters]

More I think about it, more builds I've made, the only remotely unique and possibly useful one is the one krispy built. And that's if the eidolon can battle medicine the martials while the summoner can battle medicine the ranged. Even then.

[KrispyXIV]

Martialmasters wrote:

More I think about it, more builds I've made, the only remotely unique and possibly useful one is the one krispy built. And that's if the eidolon can battle medicine the martials while the summoner can battle medicine the ranged. Even then.

No need for Battle Medicine on the Eidolon.

2 action heal can cover the Battle Line. I can battle medicine myself to heal the Eidolon.

Once I get Doctors visitation coverage and efficiency is even better.

[Katrixia]

I think we should be very careful to think of Summoner as a hybrid class in terms of everything; a class that's mediocre at everything doesn't shine and is unfun to play.

Summoner needs to do something better than anyone else and i believe a lot of criticisms in this thread are valid.

[Martialmasters]

KrispyXIV wrote:

Martialmasters wrote:

More I think about it, more builds I've made, the only remotely unique and possibly useful one is the one krispy built. And that's if the eidolon can battle medicine the martials while the summoner can battle medicine the ranged. Even then.

No need for Battle Medicine on the Eidolon.

2 action heal can cover the Battle Line. I can battle medicine myself to heal the Eidolon.

Once I get Doctors visitation coverage and efficiency is even better.

Yeah and that functionally saves actions for a healer. Especially with a staff of healing to help out. But that's kinda my point. You found a niche. It might not be massive but it's notable. I have yet to be able to figure out or find another one that has a chance at convincing me for the inclusion of the summoner in a 4 man party.

Right now I can see it being a 5th wheel type character due to its low power I'd barely have to make any adjustments to encounters most times, at least the combat ones.

[KrispyXIV]

Martialmasters wrote:

KrispyXIV wrote:

Martialmasters wrote:

More I think about it, more builds I've made, the only remotely unique and possibly useful one is the one krispy built. And that's if the eidolon can battle medicine the martials while the summoner can battle medicine the ranged. Even then.

No need for Battle Medicine on the Eidolon.

2 action heal can cover the Battle Line. I can battle medicine myself to heal the Eidolon.

Once I get Doctors visitation coverage and efficiency is even better.

Yeah and that functionally saves actions for a healer. Especially with a staff of healing to help out. But that's kinda my point. You found a niche. It might not be massive but it's notable. I have yet to be able to figure out or find another one that has a chance at convincing me for the inclusion of the summoner in a 4 man party.

Right now I can see it being a 5th wheel type character due to its low power I'd barely have to make any adjustments to encounters most times, at least the combat ones.

Summoner bard is also legit, as summoner actually has superior action economy for compositions.

... its debatable if it would be an issue if the best summoners all took archetypes.

[Gortle]

KrispyXIV wrote:

Martialmasters wrote:

More I think about it, more builds I've made, the only remotely unique and possibly useful one is the one krispy built. And that's if the eidolon can battle medicine the martials while the summoner can battle medicine the ranged. Even then.

No need for Battle Medicine on the Eidolon.

2 action heal can cover the Battle Line. I can battle medicine myself to heal the Eidolon.

Once I get Doctors visitation coverage and efficiency is even better.

and you still don't get why we don't like the separate hit point pool?

This is a good tactic, but its just wrong.

[KrispyXIV]

Gortle wrote:

KrispyXIV wrote:

Martialmasters wrote:

More I think about it, more builds I've made, the only remotely unique and possibly useful one is the one krispy built. And that's if the eidolon can battle medicine the martials while the summoner can battle medicine the ranged. Even then.

No need for Battle Medicine on the Eidolon.

2 action heal can cover the Battle Line. I can battle medicine myself to heal the Eidolon.

Once I get Doctors visitation coverage and efficiency is even better.

and you still don't get why we don't like the separate hit point pool?

This is a good tactic, but its just wrong.

"Just wrong " comes off extremely strong in this fantasy elf game.

Its new, and I think it's cool. You may dislike it. But there's no world where "wrong" applies here.