| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the trick to buffing the shared HP is to have temporary hit points only on the Eidolon. It takes it roughly to one-and-a-half HP bars to track, means the Summoner still has a healthy HP supply, but still keeps the Eidolon as the really durable half.
A bit odd. A little bit more complex. I guess that could work. Though it is still simpler if the Summoners and Eildons have separate hit point totals.
What I would like to see is an ability for the Summoner to be left with one hitpoint when the Eidolon goes down.
I need a disconnect between the lifeforce of the two creatures. For story purposes. But it would also help with balance.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A question. How long should the cool down be if the Eidolon is “killed” in the two hp pool scenario? What hp should it return with? Returning too soon at too much health just increases the power, while too long means the summoner is vastly underpowered. A Druid with his animal companion is still 90% effective. A summoner without their Eidolon is not going to get over 50% even if they were equally important.
I agree there could, probably should, be a feat to prevent the Summoner going down when the Eidolon does, but being left on very limited health, but multiple hp pools seems very problematic for a central class feature.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We’re gonna disagree that absolutely everyone in the world knows what Summoner/Eidolon are and the Sigils and the mechanics involved therein.Seems right up there with 'wizards cast spells'. Big glowing symbols seem like an obvious thing to hear about as EVERY summoner has one. Do you make people roll to figure out wizards have spellbooks?
As to mechanics involved, I'd agree they might not know the specifics of the class but I'm not talking about any of that: I'm just talking about the very clear and obvious glowing symbol that each and every one of them has. I wouldn't have people roll for elves having pointed ears either.
Also Classes don’t have Rarity Traits, that’s doesn’t mean everything about them is something everyone knows.They don't yet. Core didn't have it for race or background either but now they do so I'd posit classes don't have rarity until they do too: we will not know if summoner has a rarity until we see.
How do they know automatically the spellcaster is a Wizard a not a Witch? Or a Sorcerer? Or a Magus? Or a Summoner? Automatically knowing they’re a Wizard just because they cast magic missile would be metagaming.
The glowy Sigil is the same, it implies a link, but it doesn’t automatically tel everyone game mechanics. That’s metagaming.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
But complicated for no real reason is no good. Things should only be as complicated as they need to be.Sharing a single HP pool is about as simple as you can get.
Evolutions I can see as being complicated because its meant to provide many options and be able to fit many eidolons. But weird HP rules? There really isn't much reason to make those unless you have a deep system that interacts with it.It’s a single HP Pool, not a gimmick like Resonance or Evolution Points.
Krispy, the idea is simple, I wont deny that. But the actual execution and require exceptions are too complicated for too little gain. Even in this thread people were saying about fixing the bad math by adding even more rules and even more exceptions. That type of rule creation was something that was supposed to be gone, but here it is being use to try to justify keeping the mechanic. Even when there are simpler ways of doing it.It’s the Playtest, everyone is suggesting more rules and exceptions for absolutely everything.
A single line: When the Eidolon would be banished or the Summoner would be knocked unconscious, the Summoner may choose to transfer HP until the target is at 1 HP. Now you have a virtual shared HP, but non of the weird rule interactions of actual shared HP. Because the HP is separate, it then becomes much easier to design for the Eidolon and Summoner without causing the whole thing to break apart.
Don’t like it. It relegates the Eidolon back to a feeling of expendable while also encouraging ways for the Summoner to be untouchable and thus never have any threat or consequence. Meh.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If people weren't attacking it, thered be no perception that it doesnt "work".Please don't pretend that some folks not liking it - which you are absolutely entitled to do - is equivalent to the mechnanic "not working".
"Boy it sure is weird that all these people are saying it's not working; if only they weren't saying it wasn't working, there'd be no discussion on it not working"
Clearly the playtest is gonna have some mistakes and pain points that will need to be rectified in final, we shouldn't put down others' feedback on the viability and functionality of newly introduced game mechanics into 2e's system.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sharing a single HP pool is about as simple as you can get.
It’s a single HP Pool, not a gimmick like Resonance or Evolution Points.
Don’t like it. It relegates the Eidolon back to a feeling of expendable while also encouraging ways for the Summoner to be untouchable and thus never have any threat or consequence. Meh.
Sharing an HP pool is simple, the issue others keep bringing up and that i also see is that it's a simple concept that now complicates everything else; that's where the extra complexity comes in.
Personally, this isn't a core class; i don't see a problem with a little extra complexity either with a shared HP pool or separate HP pool, but certainly in overall complexity the separate HP pool is much easier because it doesn't screw with the math as much.I wouldn't call Evolution Points a gimmick, it was very functional and people loved it; the overwhelming majority of Summoner players and DMs played Summoner because of the evolution system.
I can understand you wanting the Eidolon to not feel as expendable, that's very valid friend.
How would you feel about more limitations regarding summoning back your Eidolon beyond the 3-action manifest?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If people weren't attacking it, thered be no perception that it doesnt "work".Please don't pretend that some folks not liking it - which you are absolutely entitled to do - is equivalent to the mechnanic "not working".
"Boy it sure is weird that all these people are saying it's not working; if only they weren't saying it wasn't working, there'd be no discussion on it not working"
Clearly the playtest is gonna have some mistakes and pain points that will need to be rectified in final, we shouldn't put down others' feedback on the viability and functionality of newly introduced game mechanics into 2e's system.
Some people are saying its not working, and most of those positions come down to it being "not good enough for survival" to the perceived tastes of the person complaining about it.
There are about zero legitimate rules issues with it that arent addressed already.
Its simple, its elegantly implemented, and it means that a Summoner isn't drastically more durable than other classes in the game.
Its exactly the sort of limitation we should want if we want an Eidolon that isn't a wet noodle or slightly better Animal Companion.
Theres essentially no way the power budget of the class is likely to support an Eidolon that has Martial attack modifiers, Martial AC, and an action advantage AND Martial hitpoints all on its own (im assuming the first three items are "fixed"). Its simply fundamentally unsound for all those things to be true, AND have the Summoner on top.
You can have the potent Eidolon if it has a serious limitation and vulnerability - like shared hitpoints.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some people are saying its not working, and most of those positions come down to it being "not good enough for survival" to the perceived tastes of the person complaining about it.
There are about zero legitimate rules issues with it that arent addressed already.
Its simple, its elegantly implemented, and it means that a Summoner isn't drastically more durable than other classes in the game.
Its exactly the sort of limitation we should want if we want an Eidolon that isn't a wet noodle or slightly better Animal Companion.
Theres essentially no way the power budget of the class is likely to support an Eidolon that has Martial attack modifiers, Martial AC, and an action advantage AND Martial hitpoints all on its own (im assuming the first three items are "fixed"). Its simply fundamentally unsound for all those things to be true, AND have the Summoner on top.
You can have the potent Eidolon if it has a serious limitation and vulnerability - like shared hitpoints.
Who are you to say what criticism is valid and not?
You see many people commenting on the same issue and you seem to relegate only a portion of that group as being acceptable.There's a very simple solution to make the summoner not much more durable than another class and it's having separate HP pools with lifelink, a very simple and elegant solution that would rectify the problem with survivability and keep the Summoner vulnerable without impeding on the Eidolon's martial prowess.
There is plenty of room in the power budget, this is baseline to what a Summoner and Eidolon should be; otherwise it comes out to be mediocre, unfun, or a dull class that doesn't excel in anything. Without separate HP pools you'd need to increase the Summoner's HP Pool to be larger than any other class and that's obviously not something people want to see because it's off-putting to dethrone any sacred cow but people also want to see sincere issues with the Summoner fixed so it can't stay as it is.
The simple concept of shared HP now complicates everything else, you can fix it and keep shared HP but you don't like hearing the solutions.
I haven't heard a real solution from you on what to do to fix Summoner's survivability problem AND keep shared HP, but like the rest of the folks who have spoken in this thread, i am very willing to hear you out if you have ideas you feel strongly would help friend.
Which i am hoping is not to simply ignore the problem so many people keep bringing up is a problem.
A question. How long should the cool down be if the Eidolon is “killed” in the two hp pool scenario? What hp should it return with? Returning too soon at too much health just increases the power, while too long means the summoner is vastly underpowered. A Druid with his animal companion is still 90% effective. A summoner without their Eidolon is not going to get over 50% even if they were equally important.
I agree there could, probably should, be a feat to prevent the Summoner going down when the Eidolon does, but being left on very limited health, but multiple hp pools seems very problematic for a central class feature.
This is a very cool question you have Paul!
I also brought this up to Rysky.I think the Eidolon should return at full health, but i'd like to see a limitation on either how often or how long an Eidolon can return. Right now there is no limitation on how often or how long an Eidolon can be summoned.
Although, you could make it like 1e and have it return at half-health but 1e had more limitations as well.
I'd be very happy with any limitations Paizo comes up with to make the Eidolon feel less expendable, outside of shared HP of course.
In the separate HP pool scenario, i'd like to see a 6HP+CON Summoner with an 8HP+CON Eidolon.
You bring up a great point about the Druid, the Eidolon though is stronger than an animal companion and thus takes up more of the class' power.
IF you feel the Eidolon's power is not sufficient to what the class loses in power when it is gone, that is understandable friend. Plenty of people feel the Summoner should not simply be relegated to a buffbot for the Eidolon every turn.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
In PF1 it comes back the next day with half HP.
Do you really want that?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A question. How long should the cool down be if the Eidolon is “killed” in the two hp pool scenario? What hp should it return with? Returning too soon at too much health just increases the power, while too long means the summoner is vastly underpowered. A Druid with his animal companion is still 90% effective. A summoner without their Eidolon is not going to get over 50% even if they were equally important.
I agree there could, probably should, be a feat to prevent the Summoner going down when the Eidolon does, but being left on very limited health, but multiple hp pools seems very problematic for a central class feature.
This is a very cool question you have Paul!
I also brought this up to Rysky.I think the Eidolon should return at full health, but i'd like to see a limitation on either how often or how long an Eidolon can return. Right now there is no limitation on how often or how long an Eidolon can be summoned.
Although, you could make it like 1e and have it return at half-health but 1e had more limitations as well.
I'd be very happy with any limitations Paizo comes up with to make the Eidolon feel less expendable, outside of shared HP of course.In the separate HP pool scenario, i'd like to see a 6HP+CON Summoner with an 8HP+CON Eidolon.
You bring up a great point about the Druid, the Eidolon though is stronger than an animal companion and thus takes up more of the class' power.
IF you feel the Eidolon's power is not sufficient to what the class loses in power when it is gone, that is understandable friend. Plenty of people feel the Summoner should not simply be relegated to a buffbot for the Eidolon every turn.
I misstyped. It should be “a Druid withOUT his companion”. As we all want an eidolon more significant than an animal companion, its loss hits proportionally harder. At present it can be resummoned at will because its hp is pooled so there’s not a benefit. So if it has its own hp, it would have to be limited in how often/how healed to return which makes the summoner much less useful and ironically makes the more fragile.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How do they know automatically the spellcaster is a Wizard a not a Witch? Or a Sorcerer? Or a Magus? Or a Summoner? Automatically knowing they’re a Wizard just because they cast magic missile would be metagaming.
Well, I never said any of that: knowing a wizard casts spells isn't the same as knowing that someone that cast a spell is a wizard. Honestly, from a tactical standpoint knowing someone is a spellcaster is more important than knowing which kind with the exception of visible healing.
The glowy Sigil is the same, it implies a link, but it doesn’t automatically tel everyone game mechanics. That’s metagaming.
Not even the smallest, most infinitesimal bit of metagaming from my perspective: they have a 100% unique [and can't be obscured] feature combined with an identifiable link that is "readily apparent to an intelligent observer". IMO, it's bending intent pretty far it ignore this and treat them like other classes for identification: there really isn't anything else like them. If you can understand the concept of classes, it'd be pretty hard NOT to know this. Now if they want to know what exactly a summoner can do, sure have them roll but being a summoner with a magic friend is super, super obvious.
In PF1 it comes back the next day with half HP.
Do you really want that?
I mean, the Eidolon coming back at half-HP isn't really a problem considering how good out-of-encounter healing is. Although, that really just winds up making half-HP unnecessary and redundant with how good out-of-encounter healing is. You're gonna get your Eidolon at full health for the next fight, no matter what. So i'd like to see a different restriction that actually matters.
The limitation to be brought back the next day may be a bit strict though as what tools does a regular Summoner have to play with without the Eidolon?
I think i brought up the idea before that summoning the Eidolon cost you a focus point (10 minutes to refocus; too much time to use in a fight but no problem outside of a fight) but i remember it being countered with a very good reason why that'd be a bad idea, i can't remember what it was though.
I think the big issue is you don't just want the Eidolon able to come back the next round of a fight after it drops, in the same token you still want the Eidolon for other encounters in a day.
What kind of restrictions would you place or do you see as being good Megistone?
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That was precisely my point, you’re pushing that seeing the sigils gives absolutely everyone knowledge about mechanics and meta game constructs such as HP and how they share it. That’s metagaming.How do they know automatically the spellcaster is a Wizard a not a Witch? Or a Sorcerer? Or a Magus? Or a Summoner? Automatically knowing they’re a Wizard just because they cast magic missile would be metagaming.Well, I never said any of that: knowing a wizard casts spells isn't the same as knowing that someone that cast a spell is a wizard.
The glowy Sigil is the same, it implies a link, but it doesn’t automatically tel everyone game mechanics. That’s metagaming.Not even the smallest, most infinitesimal bit of metagaming from my perspective:
From your perspective.
Anything involving people knowing about mechanics or metagame constructs such as HP (which isn’t a thing in-world), is metagaming.
They have a link, that’s apparent from them having the same Sigil. Knowing what it means, mechanics involved, would require a roll.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sharing a single HP pool is about as simple as you can get.
It’s a single HP Pool, not a gimmick like Resonance or Evolution Points.
Don’t like it. It relegates the Eidolon back to a feeling of expendable while also encouraging ways for the Summoner to be untouchable and thus never have any threat or consequence. Meh.
Sharing an HP pool is simple, the issue others keep bringing up and that i also see is that it's a simple concept that now complicates everything else; that's where the extra complexity comes in.
Personally, this isn't a core class; i don't see a problem with a little extra complexity either with a shared HP pool or separate HP pool, but certainly in overall complexity the separate HP pool is much easier because it doesn't screw with the math as much.I wouldn't call Evolution Points a gimmick, it was very functional and people loved it; the overwhelming majority of Summoner players and DMs played Summoner because of the evolution system.
I can understand you wanting the Eidolon to not feel as expendable, that's very valid friend.
How would you feel about more limitations regarding summoning back your Eidolon beyond the 3-action manifest?
Where is this extra complexity?
I’ve seen people complaining about the Summoner getting hurt damages the Eidolon as well aka the entire concept of Lifelink, but I’ve not seen any complaints about complexity regarding it.
“ I wouldn't call Evolution Points a gimmick, it was very functional and people loved it”
It was “functional” and “loved” because it broke the game six different ways from Sunday. So not functional in a good way, nor loved in a good way.
“ the overwhelming majority of Summoner players and DMs played Summoner because of the evolution system”
That’s an assumption you are having. The majority probably played for having the Eidolon buddy, the build-a-bear-pick-a-point system was irrelevant. If people just liked it cause they describe their eidolon however, guess what, still works that way in P2.
“ How would you feel about more limitations regarding summoning back your Eidolon beyond the 3-action manifest?”
Dislike. Even if we went into a different HP method that above basically falls into “okay you messed up so you’re not allowed to play the rest of the day”.
Remember Playtest Oracle? Remember knowing yourself out for the rest of the day and not being able to play any. Remember how fun that was?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Where is this extra complexity?
I’ve seen people complaining about the Summoner getting hurt damages the Eidolon as well aka the entire concept of Lifelink, but I’ve not seen any complaints about complexity regarding it.
“ I wouldn't call Evolution Points a gimmick, it was very functional and people loved it”
It was “functional” and “loved” because it broke the game six different ways from Sunday. So not functional in a good way, nor loved in a good way.
“ the overwhelming majority of Summoner players and DMs played Summoner because of the evolution system”
That’s an assumption you are having. The majority probably played for having the Eidolon buddy, the build-a-bear-pick-a-point system was irrelevant. If people just liked it cause they describe their eidolon however,...
The extra complexity has been outlined by many people in this thread. The shared HP pool now creates problems with summoner's survivability, vulnerabilities, and limits what solutions can fix those problems to where any acceptable solutions now seem redundant or overly-complex.
Again, Summoner does not have Lifelink; 2e's shared HP Pool does not at all function like Lifelink in 1e. There is nothing mechanically there that resembles how Lifelink functioned. There is no contribution of the Eidolon to HP, there is no consensual exchange, there is no opportunity to be effective as a Summoner if the Eidolon falls.
You knockout like playtest Oracle.
The Evolution system was not broken, the only things that were "broken" about Summoner were the spell list, the minion-mancy, and natural attacks; that's it. It literally was not anything else. Again, idk if you never played 1e Summoner but that simply wasn't the case and in fact the evolution system got a minor buff in Unchained.
It was very functional and beloved by the overwhelming majority of people who played Summoner, there was never anyone who was like "Gee, i sure would like it if i had less options to customize my Eidolon and make them unique" No, practically everybody loved that they could make the Eidolon their own.
I'm not asking if you'd like for the Eidolon to be only summonable once a day, i'm asking how would you feel about more limitations beyond the 3-action manifest?
This could be where you can only summon once an hour or where you as a Summoner have to be at full-health or something.
I'm asking if you think it is good that the Eidolon be permanent and only take 3 actions to manifest, as it currently is in playtest.
I am not asking you for playtest Oracle because literally nobody has suggested a playtest Oracle playstyle aside from you
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Gee, i sure would like it if i had less options to customize my Eidolon and make them unique"
You realize that this is exactly what the evolution system did, right?
It said, "Your eidolon can be whatever you want, so long as you can afford to pay for it with this resource."
With certain evolutions being superior, it resulted in lots of identical eidolons.
As opposed to the new system, which is actually "describe your eidolon however you like!" And makes abilities and capabilities seperate.
Which is not on topic, but whatever.
Pretending like the new life link mechanic has nothing in common with the old is claiming that the intent of old life link was not to link the health of the summoner and eidolon - which was absolutely the intent.
2Es version of lifelink is just way more clear about that link. And its way less fiddly, abusable and is easier to use, as well...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That was precisely my point, you’re pushing that seeing the sigils gives absolutely everyone knowledge about mechanics and meta game constructs such as HP and how they share it. That’s metagaming.
I NEVER, EVER said mechanics are known. Please point that out where I did: I said that you can identify a summoner BECAUSE there is a VERY CLEAR AND OBVIOUS PHYSICAL MANIFISTATION. THEY FRAKING GLOW!
Anything involving people knowing about mechanics or metagame constructs such as HP (which isn’t a thing in-world), is metagaming.
NEVER SAID THIS AT ALL!!! Knowing wizards cast spells doesn't let you know the nuts and bolts of the mechanics of how it works: Just like big glowing lights on your on your forehead makes you a summoner but that by itself doesn't tell you what they do.
They have a link, that’s apparent from them having the same Sigil. Knowing what it means, mechanics involved, would require a roll.
ONCE MORE, never said ANYTHING about mechanics. Not once. Ever. You asked how a summoner can be detected: I answered. Can we please move away from the mechanics as it was never a part of what I was talking about? I was 100% talking about IDing a summoner: 1000% full stop, no pass go, do not collect $100, nothing else past that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It said, "Your eidolon can be whatever you want, so long as you can afford to pay for it with this resource."
With certain evolutions being superior, it resulted in lots of identical eidolons.
As opposed to the new system, which is actually "describe your eidolon however you like!" And makes abilities and capabilities seperate.
Which is not on topic, but whatever.
Pretending like the new life link mechanic has nothing in common with the old is claiming that the intent of old life link was not to link the health of the summoner and eidolon - which was absolutely the intent.
2Es version of lifelink is just way more clear about that link. And its way less fiddly, abusable and is easier to use, as well...
I'm not arguing that, that's not my point; i like that you can just flavor your Eidolon to be what you want in 2e, i think that's great.
I was arguing about 1e Evolutions and what made people love that, which clearly the devs noticed and decided to keep evolutions and the core to what made 1e Eidolon so good.It's not actually, you're displaying a false dichotomy Krispy. Lifelink in 1e can be a mechanically superior, a more elegant solution, AND the same to 2e's intended implementation. Nobody is talking about intent or cares about intent, people care about and have only been talking about the fact 1e Lifelink functions completely differently to 2e's shared HP pool. I really don't know how you can look at both and pretend they are the same or simplify 1e Lifelink to "Well they both link the Summoner and Eidolon's HP" while ignoring what 1e Lifelink did better or what's present in Lifelink that is not in 2e, which is about the overwhelming majority of what 1e Lifelink actually did.
Again, you've not offered any real possible solution to the problems introduced with the shared HP pool mechanic in 2e. It seems like you'd rather they be ignored.
ONCE MORE, never said ANYTHING about mechanics. Not once. Ever. You asked how a summoner can be detected: I answered. Can we please move away from the mechanics as it was never a part of what I was talking about?
Then shouldn't this discussion be moved off of a thread talking about the mechanics of the hit point pool?
We can start a new thread about identifying summoner and eidolon connections.|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The extra complexity has been outlined by many people in this thread. The shared HP pool now creates problems with summoner's survivability, vulnerabilities, and limits what solutions can fix those problems to where any acceptable solutions now seem redundant or overly-complex.
What's limited?
I'm seeing a bunch of "I don't like this" but not "this is too complex". I am seeing a bunch of hypothetical rule tweaks that add complexity, but I'm not seeing them in the system as is.
Again, Summoner does not have Lifelink
It's literally called Life Link, and it involves sharing HP between Summoner and Eidolon. Seems more worthy of the name than P1's I can siphon my HP into my Eidolon if I feel like it.
There is nothing mechanically there that resembles how Lifelink functioned.
Lifelink in p1: share HP with Eidolon
Lifelink in P2: share HP with Eidolon
there is no consensual exchange
The consent was given when you became a Summoner and when you bonded with your Eidolon. The exchange seems more even now since it's equal rather than "you're only alive by my will and I can revoke that at any time".
there is no opportunity to be effective as a Summoner if the Eidolon falls.
A Diehard style feat for Summoner or Eidolon would be interesting.
You knockout like playtest Oracle.
No, no, no. Playtest Oracle got knocked out for using their class features, you were penalized for actually playing that class. Summoner you get knocked out if your HP hits 0.... the same as every other class.
The Evolution system was not broken,
It was.
the only things that were "broken" about Summoner were the spell list, the minion-mancy, and natural attacks;
Those were broken too.
It literally was not anything else.
… that's literally the entire class.
It was very functional and beloved by the overwhelming majority of people who played Summoner
Yeah, turns out not a lot of people who play broken things tend to complain about it being broken, to their perception everything is working as intended.
No, practically everybody loved that they could make the Eidolon their own.
And you can outright do that with the Playtest Eidolon, and even better, with no mechanical strings attached or having to wait a couple of levels to have your Eidolon look the way you want.
I'm not asking if you'd like for the Eidolon to be only summonable once a day, i'm asking how would you feel about more limitations beyond the 3-action manifest?
This could be where you can only summon once an hour or where you as a Summoner have to be at full-health or something.
I'm asking if you think it is good that the Eidolon be permanent and only take 3 actions to manifest, as it currently is in playtest.
I do think the current paradigm is good.
I am not asking you for playtest Oracle because literally nobody has suggested a playtest Oracle playstyle aside from you
*sigh* I brought it up as an example of being punished for playing your class. You're asking for separate HP pools and ways to punish the Summoner in a supposed attempt at "balancing" that option so it's not abused.
That's literally what the Oracle playtest was, being punished in an attempt at "balance". That's bad.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Again, you've not offered any real possible solution to the problems introduced with the shared HP pool mechanic in 2e. It seems like you'd rather they be ignored.
The "problem" that seems to be most commonly stated (and not based on descriptive changes between editions) is that the ability makes the combination of the Summoner and Eidolon less durable than two seperate creatures with seperate hp pools.
Thats not a "problem", thats 99% of the entire point. By having shared hp, you limit the survivability of the Summoner and Eidolon in absolute terms to that of any other players character at the table, before considering any additional considerations such as Animal Companions (available to everyone, including Summoners).
That. Is. The Point.
Its a level playing field - and that is both beautiful, and presumably what they intended.
Whether its slightly undertuned is of course not yet thoroughly tested and should be. But regardless of tuning, the end result for a Summoner + Eidolon should still be in the ball park of "Same as any other player at the table with zero feats spent" and not greater than that.
As it would be if there were seperate hp pools.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That was precisely my point, you’re pushing that seeing the sigils gives absolutely everyone knowledge about mechanics and meta game constructs such as HP and how they share it. That’s metagaming.I NEVER, EVER said mechanics are known. Please point that out where I did: I said that you can identify a summoner BECAUSE there is a VERY CLEAR AND OBVIOUS PHYSICAL MANIFISTATION. THEY FRAKING GLOW!
Knowing they are summoners means you know they are summoners: you know they are linked. To me, that's plenty to build a tactic with. The particulars of the mechanics doesn't really matter when it's not hard to figure out master vs controlled.
Anything involving people knowing about mechanics or metagame constructs such as HP (which isn’t a thing in-world), is metagaming.NEVER SAID THIS AT ALL!!! Knowing wizards cast spells doesn't let you know the nuts and bolts of the mechanics of how it works: Just like big glowing lights on your on your forehead makes you a summoner but that by itself doesn't tell you what they do.
*points above*
Saying the sigil immediately tells people it's a Summoner, the class (which is a mechanic, all classes are are) and that they're linked (Lifelink) to their Eidolon (class feature instead of a normal summon) is metagaming.
They have a link, that’s apparent from them having the same Sigil. Knowing what it means, mechanics involved, would require a roll.ONCE MORE, never said ANYTHING about mechanics. Not once. Ever. You asked how a summoner can be detected: I answered. Can we please move away from the mechanics as it was never a part of what I was talking about? I was 100% talking about IDing a summoner: 1000% full stop, no pass go, do not collect $100, nothing else past that.
We’re gonna disagree that absolutely everyone in the world knows what Summoner/Eidolon are and the Sigils and the mechanics involved therein.Seems right up there with 'wizards cast spells'. Big glowing symbols seem like an obvious thing to hear about as EVERY summoner has one. Do you make people roll to figure out wizards have spellbooks?
As to mechanics involved, I'd agree they might not know the specifics of the class but I'm not talking about any of that: I'm just talking about the very clear and obvious glowing symbol that each and every one of them has. I wouldn't have people roll for elves having pointed ears either.
You can say over and over you're not talking about mechanics but when all your posts go back to how Summoners and Eidolons are linked and how intelligent opponents will go after them because of the link, you're talking mechanics.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thats not a "problem", thats 99% of the entire point. By having shared hp, you limit the survivability of the Summoner and Eidolon in absolute terms to that of any other players character at the table, before considering any additional considerations such as Animal Companions (available to everyone, including Summoners).
That. Is. The Point.
Its a level playing field - and that is both beautiful, and presumably what they intended.
Whether its slightly undertuned is of course not yet thoroughly tested and should be. But regardless of tuning, the end result for a Summoner + Eidolon should still be in the ball park of "Same as any other player at the table with zero feats spent" and not greater than that.
As it would be if there were seperate hp pools.
Summoner is the most vulnerable class to play, it has a survivability problem, it takes more damage on average than any other class without the support for that type of playstyle. This is indisputable from 2e Summoner.
That's not the entire point and the Summoner has much worse survivability than other classes at the table. You've not offered any solutions for this problem.
Any real solutions anybody else has offered have been shot down because "Well we don't want the Summoner to have more HP than a Barbarian without Rage so it can function well, that makes it look bad." or "Yeah that solution would work, keep things simple, and fix most problems Summoner currently has but i don't like that Summoner has to keep track of 1 extra HP bar :/"
It is not a level-playing field and we've repeatedly been over this but again, you seem to consider me or any number of the other people who have spoken about their playtest experience being adverse to yours as "unacceptable" or "unjustified criticism" simply because you want to relegate those people to not matter.
Summoner has a survivability problem, it's mainly caused by the shared HP Pool mechanic of 2e.
There are ways to fix it and keep shared HP but it would require solutions you wouldn't like.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll not support another "tacked-on" framework like an evolution point system. 1E was built on those patched-together rule sets, and it wasn't long before it became an unruly mess of a junkyard in which people mined for hours to find their broken combos.
I'd much rather evolutions worked WITHIN the current streamlined framework of 2E (class feats, class abilities, etc). It works well, and as long as developers don't go too far outside the amazingly efficient modular nature of it, the game will continue to work pretty well I think.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
ONCE MORE, never said ANYTHING about mechanics. Not once. Ever. You asked how a summoner can be detected: I answered. Can we please move away from the mechanics as it was never a part of what I was talking about?Then shouldn't this discussion be moved off of a thread talking about the mechanics of the hit point pool?
We can start a new thread about identifying summoner and eidolon connections.
It factors into whether or not the summoner might be attacked more: knowing they are a 'team' can factor into tactics without specific knowledge of shared hp. For instance, someone might target a master commanding an animal if they look weaker as knocking them out might confuse the animal: you don't need to know the specifics like if it's a normal animal or an animal companion or a summoned animal. Same thing with the summoner and the Eidolon: you don't need to know the specifics to know they are a team and which one looks weaker [like the dude hiding in the back not doing anything].
Saying the sigil immediately tells people it's a Summoner, the class (which is a mechanic, all classes are are) and that they're linked (Lifelink) to their Eidolon (class feature instead of a normal summon) is metagaming.
The class says any intelligent creature can tell they are linked so that can't be meta: the GAME actually tells you it obvious ["the two of you clearly act in tandem, makes it readily apparent to an intelligent observer that the two of you have some connection with each other]. I NEVER made mention of a life link, shared hp or anything else other than the "connection" mentioned IN THE CLASS that every intelligent creature can see. As to the sigil it your physical description like elves have pointy ears: if you want to call it mechanics, fine but that is fluff to me but in this case it very identifiable fluff that is singularly unique.
You can say over and over you're not talking about mechanics but when all your posts go back to how Summoners and Eidolons are linked and how intelligent opponents will go after them because of the link, you're talking mechanics.
It isn't specific mechanics though: knowing they are a tag team is more than enough. And I never said intelligent enemies WILL go after them just that that might be a viable tactic. I've mainly been talking about how easy it is to identify than being more likely to be attacked.
Now I DO think they are attacked more often, but it's more of a numbers game than tactics most times IMO: combat is fluid and 'being in the back row' can easily change unless you're always fighting in constrained areas and enemies only attack from one direction. Just being 2 creatures means you'll see more attacks [at least in the games I've been playing].
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Summoner has a survivability problem, it's mainly caused by the shared HP Pool mechanic of 2e.
Do you have data to back this up?
I only have limited actual play experience, and a whole lot of simulation to go on myself.
But, having run Age of Ashes, I did go back and do a quick read through of the encounters in the entire AP to determine how hard it would be to protect a Summoner - and do you know what i found?
The number of encounters where it wasnt viable for the summoner to be one room back and out of LOS or around the last corner and out of LOS at the start of the encounter was miniscule. There are a couple notable exceptions, but in general there is almost no need, for the entire AP, to expose yourself to danger to contribute. Generally, once combat is engaged you can walk around the corner and the badguys will have blown their big cool downs and have committed to other engagements.
By the time you do arrive at some trickier encounters where waiting around the corner isn't viable, you have a ton of tools to keep yourself safe and entirely out of danger via magic that is cheap at the time.
Thats all if youre really, really worried about it.
In reality, you have access to the same defensive strategies as every caster for the summoner, and the same as for martials essentially for the eidolon.
You're not particularly more exposed than anyone else unless you choose to be.
And that's the issue - you keep acting like the Summoner is defensively weak, but im not seeing it. I'm seeing a concern to be addressed, but not a liability. If there IS ultimately determined to be an issue after testing, then by all means we can explore adding Eidolon con or something... but for now, all I'm seeing that doing is making the Summoner the highest hp class in the game without sufficient cause to warrant that.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Summoner has a survivability problem, it's mainly caused by the shared HP Pool mechanic of 2e.
Making the Eidolon Disposable doesn't fix that in a good way.
There are ways to fix it and keep shared HP but it would require solutions you wouldn't like
There's more solutions than simply "give them more HP" that most people have been pushing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If it has a mechanical effect and consequence it's very much not just "flavor".
There is nothing wrong with fluff having consequences. If you decide to play an aristocrat and an NPC hates aristocrats and you might get a penalty to Make an Impression.
And I never said intelligent enemies WILL go after them just that that might be a viable tactic.-_-
*shrug* You can ask 'what target does your party attack first' and you might hear 'the healer', 'the most dangerous target' or 'the easiest'. There is NO reason an NPCs might not have varied tactics too: if they think disrupting the cooperation between you and your Eidolon is worth it tactically, the summoner is an easier target than the Eidolon.
It's also possible foes attack the first target they see or target 'dangerous' targets first or target whatever 'soft' target they see. That's why I said "might" as there is no one right tactic.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The shared HP pool is not the cause of the survivability problem. The existence of the pool and the amount of life in it are separate things.I could make the summoner a 100 HP per level class (no type); it would still have a shared HP pool but now it is virtually unkillable.
If the plural of anecdotes show that the summoner does have a general survivability problem, then logically we can assume that there is a 'healthy' range of HP for the Shared HP pool to work. I.E., if the current HP is too low and 100 HP is too high, there must be some value in between that is 'just right'.
Given that the mechanic can be decoupled from values prescribed to it, is it not more beneficial to talk about the qualitative issues with Shared HP if those were an issue rather than this...
Yes, that is literally what i am talking about.
You can have the shared HP Pool and it can function well, but nobody seems to like the idea of giving the Summoner more support in order to compensate and allow for it to function.
The healthy range obviously isn't throwing a d10 at the Summoner.
People don't like giving the Summoner a d12, Eidolon CON, CON as a key ability, or any of the other proposed solutions to try and rectify the current problem with Summoner in the 2e playtest which is it's survivability problem that a number of us have experienced.
I only highlight the shared hp as the problem because that is the foundation for the new problems introduced to Summoner in 2e. People do not like the solutions offered or the proposed solutions that are accepted over-complicate things to where it'd be simpler and more elegant to simply have separate HP pools, which then we go back to square 1.
There is an undeniable tilt in balance with the fact you share this 1 resource with 2 targets, you have to compensate for all the problems that now introduces so the class can function well.
Everybody's feedback is anecdotal, but some of us have actually calculated real subsets of data to further support how vulnerable Summoner is. That's why you'll see posts illustrating that Summoner takes roughly 20% more damage or x1.2 more damage than other classes on average before factoring in disadvantage rolls to help visualize how Summoner's vulnerabilities manifest in real play.
It's not about specific builds like a Mountain/Crane Monk having great AC, hostile or pushover GMs, or encounters that are unrealistic/hold no value.
Yes, i plan to submit my feedback, history of play, and data for the playtest at the end of the month. Right now i'm working with a few others on a playtest review guide that will help articulate all the pleasure and pain points of the Summoner which will be posted in it's own thread.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The healthy range obviously isn't throwing a d10 at the Summoner.
People don't like giving the Summoner a d12, Eidolon CON, CON as a key ability, or any of the other proposed solutions to try and rectify the current problem with Summoner in the 2e playtest which is it's survivability problem that a number of us have experienced.
Just so we are clear...
I am not philosophically opposed to giving the summoner enhanced survivability if the testing supports it. If Paizo finds Summoners actually die more easily than intended? Sure, let's discuss a reasonable bump to bring them in line with expectations.
In concept, once per day temp hp = eidolon con x level seems best to me, as its easily calculated and non-renewable... a unique bonus you get once per day.
That said, I'm not convinced its needed. And I am convinced something like that looks extremely powerful to another player, so I'd really like to actually believe its necessary when I go to sell such a mechabic to my group as a fair character bonus.
And so far, my testing does not show an issue. My party hasn't seen an issue. So its a hard sell where I'm standing now, where my summoner looks plenty durable as is...
|
|
There is nothing wrong with fluff having consequences. If you decide to play an aristocrat and an NPC hates aristocrats and you might get a penalty to Make an Impression.Someone automatically knowing you’re an Aristocrat and knowing you’re a Summoner carries two completely different implications, moreso if said knowing affects their tactics.
*shrug* You can ask 'what target does your party attack first' and you might hear 'the healer', 'the most dangerous target' or 'the easiest'. There is NO reason an NPCs might not have varied tactics too: if they think disrupting the cooperation between you and your Eidolon is worth it tactically, the summoner is an easier target than the Eidolon.
It's also possible foes attack the first target they see or target 'dangerous' targets first or target whatever 'soft' target they see. That's why I said "might" as there is no one right tactic.
The issue is the implication of how said enemies arrive at said tactics and conclusions.
Do you have data to back this up?I only have limited actual play experience, and a whole lot of simulation to go on myself.
But, having run Age of Ashes, I did go back and do a quick read through of the encounters in the entire AP to determine how hard it would be to protect a Summoner - and do you know what i found?
The number of encounters where it wasnt viable for the summoner to be one room back and out of LOS or around the last corner and out of LOS at the start of the encounter was miniscule. There are a couple notable exceptions, but in general there is almost no need, for the entire AP, to expose yourself to danger to contribute. Generally, once combat is engaged you can walk around the corner and the badguys will have blown their big cool downs and have committed to other engagements.
By the time you do arrive at some trickier encounters where waiting around the corner isn't viable, you have a ton of tools to keep yourself safe and entirely out of danger via magic that is cheap at the time.
Thats all if youre really, really worried about it.
In reality, you have access to the same defensive strategies as every caster for the summoner, and the same as for martials essentially for the eidolon.
You're not particularly more exposed than anyone else unless you choose to be.
And that's the issue - you keep acting like the Summoner is defensively weak, but im not seeing it. I'm seeing a concern to be addressed, but not a liability. If there IS ultimately determined to be an issue after testing, then by all means we can explore adding Eidolon con or something... but for now, all I'm seeing that doing is making the Summoner the highest hp class in the game without sufficient cause to warrant that.
Yes, we have data tables to help quantify the problem with Summoner's present survivability problems so it'll be easier for people to share and articulate how much more vulnerable Summoner really is to other classes on average.
I've got about 8 playtest sessions so far ranging from lv.8-15 as a Phantom Eidolon Summoner and 4 playtest sessions so far in that same range as a Dragon Synthesist Summoner.
Obviously, the pain points quite a few of us experience in regards to Summoner's survivability is more exclusive to a Summoner that is not a Synthesist.
Most of my playtest experience is not playing through AoA; it's been in a few different APs and my overwhelming experience has been that, no, staying in the back does not make the Summoner invulnerable to damage sources or encounters that would normally affect regular casters.
Again, idk where this idea keeps coming from.
We'll just have to wait to see what the survey says i guess, i'm always urging people to playtest and sincerely give feedback from their experience. It's undeniable and we all hope it will be addressed.
Not to dispute the damage numbers, but I do think it is important to note that they have more opportunities to benefit from in-combat healing. This alone can lend to radically different playtest experiences, as a party with a Champion, a healing font Cleric, and a Battle Medicine Monk might benefit more from the multiple bodies than be hurt by it. The opposite might be true of a Wizard, Rogue, Barbarian, Summoner party.
That's actually a great point to bring up and you're right, it is easier to heal because there are 2 targets a Cleric or Champion can heal.
You don't get more healing on average, unlike how you do get more damage on average but it's important to bring up how if your champion is right next to your Eidolon who's been eating dirt for the past couple of rounds; they don't need to run back to where you are as a Summoner, they can just Lay on Hands the Eidolon that's right next to them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just so we are clear...I am not philosophically opposed to giving the summoner enhanced survivability if the testing supports it. If Paizo finds Summoners actually die more easily than intended? Sure, let's discuss a reasonable bump to bring them in line with expectations.
In concept, once per day temp hp = eidolon con x level seems best to me, as its easily calculated and non-renewable... a unique bonus you get once per day.
That said, I'm not convinced its needed. And I am convinced something like that looks extremely powerful to another player, so I'd really like to actually believe its necessary when I go to sell such a mechabic to my group as a fair character bonus.
And so far, my testing does not show an issue. My party hasn't seen an issue. So its a hard sell where I'm standing now, where my summoner looks plenty durable as is...
If Paizo finds it to be an issue, that's all that anybody can ask for; yeah.
This is a playtest, all of us who are experiencing these issues and are making threads and leaving comments about how Summoner has a survivability problem, we're just giving feedback and of course will fill out the surveys.Nobody is wanting Summoner to be the Highest HP class of 2e just because they want to dethrone the Barbarian, it's because there are sincere issues that have arisen in playtest.
I don't believe a once-per-day amount of temp hp would work, mostly because i sincerely doubt it'd be anything substantial to help actually alleviate the issue past the first encounter of the day.
Eidolon CON x level, like you've suggested; at lv.10 that's like 40 extra HP. Not bad for the first encounter but after the first encounter because it is non-renewable, you're stuck below the healthy range of HP needed to actually help alleviate the issue for any other encounter.
Again, all i can say is that you keep playtesting and sincerely record your feedback of all pleasure and pain points you found in the surveys Paizo has offered.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Eidolon CON x level, like you've suggested; at lv.10 that's like 40 extra HP. Not bad for the first encounter but after the first encounter because it is non-renewable, you're stuck below the healthy range of HP needed to actually help alleviate the issue for any other encounter.
At 6th level, my Summoner is tied with our fighter for most HP in the party. My Eidolons AC is also tied with our monks.
Eidolon Con x Level even once per day would make me by far the toughest party member we have.
That makes me extremely uncomfortable.
And that's before the fact that 3 of the 4 spell lists a Summoner can take have a strong Heal spell, and Medic is a shockingly good Dedication for a Summoner (action economy issues discussed earlier aside) - I can, at least twice per day, heal myself on the backline for significant hp as a single action. Plus investment in Medicine is something every party really wants anyway.
Thus far, I've yet to feel in danger even while being intentionally reckless to stress test things...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Someone automatically knowing you’re an Aristocrat and knowing you’re a Summoner carries two completely different implications, moreso if said knowing affects their tactics.
Well, it's true it's harder to tell someone is an aristocrat... I'm not sure why being a different type of implication matters as they both have implications and that was the point: implications doesn't make something a mechanic.
The issue is the implication of how said enemies arrive at said tactics and conclusions.
They arrived at it from what the class itself says every intelligent creature that sees them knows. It's as simple as that. "This sigil, combined with the way that the two of you clearly act in tandem, makes it readily apparent to an intelligent observer that the two of you have some connection with each other, even if that onlooker doesn’t know what a summoner or an eidolon is." EVERYONE [intelligent] KNOWS they are a team and it seems reasonable some foes might want to be disrupt that. It's not really different than knowing disrupting someone commanding an animal might be more effective than chewing through the animal.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's not really different than knowing disrupting someone commanding an animal might be more effective than chewing through the animal.
But would you be willing to agree that the number of foes who will actually act on that is a subset of the subset of foes with the intelligence to actually perceive that significance?
I think the core point is that while you're correct that some foes might make the choice to act on that, not all will. And the foes that will get that far are already a small subset of potential foes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At 6th level, my Summoner is tied with our fighter for most HP in the party. My Eidolons AC is also tied with our monks.
Eidolon Con x Level even once per day would make me by far the toughest party member we have.
That makes me extremely uncomfortable.
And that's before the fact that 3 of the 4 spell lists a Summoner can take have a strong Heal spell, and Medic is a shockingly good Dedication for a Summoner (action economy issues discussed earlier aside) - I can, at least twice per day, heal myself on the backline for significant hp as a single action. Plus investment in Medicine is something every party really wants anyway.
Thus far, I've yet to feel in danger even while being intentionally reckless to stress test things...
Ok so let me explain what you don't consider.
Lv.5 is around summoner's peak.
The Eidolon's AC is tied with the Monk because it gets Expert at lv.3. It does not have access to armor and it's proficiency will not raise until lv.19 when it finally gets Master. For about 8 levels in it's life, it is literally no tankier than you are.
For lv.6? That's ok, it works out at lv.6.
You have more HP than your Fighter (I'm guessing they have 16 and you have 18 in CON) but unlike a Fighter you have 2 targets that can deplete that resource, unlike a fighter you cannot wear armor, and unlike a Fighter you roll disadvantage in a large number of scenarios.
Again, unless you want to relegate the Summoner to requiring Heal (which you only get 4 a day), to spend actions to do so, or burden another party member, just to be viable and not have survivability issues. That's such an over-complicated and unfun way to play.
The Fighter does not need to carry heal to be viable and fun.
The Barbarian does not need to carry heal to be viable and fun.
The Druid does not need to carry heal to be viable and fun.
As a Summoner you are both a caster and a frontliner.
I understand that you enjoy your Angel Healer build a lot, that's cool.
I liked reading your feedback in the thread you posted, cool concept friend.
But that shouldn't be required or the only viable option for Summoners is what we are trying to say.
It makes perfect sense why you at Summoner's peak around lv.5 (lv.6), in a healer support build, are not experiencing the same issues a lot of us are.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In playtesting, I've found the shared hit point pool easy to manage. The problem I have not tried to exploit yet is attacking at both points of vulnerability. So far the summoner himself doesn't really do anything to attract attention. It in essence plays like a ranged melee class as funny as that sounds.
I've been testing specifically the summoner monster supporting the eidolon. So far you send in the eidolon, summon a creature, and then spend your actions supporting both summoned creatures. I don't have a problem with this myself given the class is called the summoner.
So far fighting with a druid and a barbarian, the summoner has been a low priority target as he isn't as much of a threat as the druid or barbarian.
I'm more concerned that summoned creatures are too weak to be a viable threat against Boss Monster encounters of Challenge +1 or +2. Boost Summons needs an attack bonus component to make summoned creatures viable combatants against those boss monster creatures, otherwise it is a bad strategy without much of a viable backup plan given saving throws for a slow progression caster are very bad for boss encounters as well.
If someone wants to test how bad the shared hit point pool is, they should test it against intelligent creatures who look to exploit the summoner weakness attacking at two points. See how badly it goes or if it leads to stretched healing resources keeping both the summoner and eidolon alive.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Again, unless you want to relegate the Summoner to requiring Heal (which you only get 4 a day), to spend actions to do so, or burden another party member, just to be viable and not have survivability issues. That's such an over-complicated and unfun way to play.
I've got Heal because I'm also the party healer. If I weren't, its still a potent back pocket trick thats probably worth one of your 4 spell picks.
Even if not, I'm not doing much with my characters hands... so carrying a potion in hand to drink is also viable.
I dont think its a problem if Summoners have to think hard and strategise to protect their personal safety.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But would you be willing to agree that the number of foes who will actually act on that is a subset of the subset of foes with the intelligence to actually perceive that significance?
There is NO way to quantify how many foes react to it in that way as that is up to individual DM's: it's like asking how many DM's rule one way or another for an 'ask your DM' situation. And, to be clear, this was never really my point: it was that they can be identified. I believe someone else was saying they would be specifically attacked.
I think the core point is that while you're correct that some foes might make the choice to act on that, not all will.
Oh, I totally agree and I've been trying to be clear that that was the case.
And the foes that will get that far are already a small subset of potential foes.
Again, that's not something I can't quantify. Different Dm, different settings, different locals skew things wildly. That's why I'm not trying to say it in terms of likelihood. I've played games where 'gank the caster' was the norm and anyone on cloth had bullseyes on themselves.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The healthy range obviously isn't throwing a d10 at the Summoner.
People don't like giving the Summoner a d12, Eidolon CON, CON as a key ability, or any of the other proposed solutions to try and rectify the current problem with Summoner in the 2e playtest which is it's survivability problem that a number of us have experienced.
Just so we are clear...
I am not philosophically opposed to giving the summoner enhanced survivability if the testing supports it. If Paizo finds Summoners actually die more easily than intended? Sure, let's discuss a reasonable bump to bring them in line with expectations.
In concept, once per day temp hp = eidolon con x level seems best to me, as its easily calculated and non-renewable... a unique bonus you get once per day.
That said, I'm not convinced its needed. And I am convinced something like that looks extremely powerful to another player, so I'd really like to actually believe its necessary when I go to sell such a mechabic to my group as a fair character bonus.
And so far, my testing does not show an issue. My party hasn't seen an issue. So its a hard sell where I'm standing now, where my summoner looks plenty durable as is...
I am curious as to how that is, considering that you are at Fighter HP at best with absolutely atrocious AC that is on par with Wizards and worse than Barbarians or Monks, not able to be shored up outside of multiclassing.