|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's say we use Batle medicine on the Summoner. The shared HP pool gets healed by X and Summoner is now immune to battle medicine for a day.
But can you use then Battle medicine on the Eidolon, and heal the same pool again?
Same with stuff that grant immunity for a period of time, like a Hex and etc.
I don't see why not. Especially if people in the header thread are correct, and Summoners and Eidolons can be both individually hit by subsidiary strikes from the same activity (e,g, Chain Lightning dealing them damage twice due to its unique wording, or an ability that says you have to target two different targets with a set of attacks)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see why not. Especially if people in the header thread are correct, and Summoners and Eidolons can be both individually hit by subsidiary strikes from the same activity (e,g, Chain Lightning dealing them damage twice due to its unique wording, or an ability that says you have to target two different targets with a set of attacks)Let's say we use Batle medicine on the Summoner. The shared HP pool gets healed by X and Summoner is now immune to battle medicine for a day.
But can you use then Battle medicine on the Eidolon, and heal the same pool again?
Same with stuff that grant immunity for a period of time, like a Hex and etc.
Yeah i'm pretty sure with the current playtest rules, it should be no problem to battle medicine yourself and then your Eidolon.
I don't see why not. Especially if people in the header thread are correct, and Summoners and Eidolons can be both individually hit by subsidiary strikes from the same activity (e,g, Chain Lightning dealing them damage twice due to its unique wording, or an ability that says you have to target two different targets with a set of attacks)Let's say we use Batle medicine on the Summoner. The shared HP pool gets healed by X and Summoner is now immune to battle medicine for a day.
But can you use then Battle medicine on the Eidolon, and heal the same pool again?
Same with stuff that grant immunity for a period of time, like a Hex and etc.
Nah, Chain Lightning clearly doesn't, as it's a single effect and the rule is explicit that a single effect only inflicts the worse damage outcome.
Discreet strikes are the tricky one, which is why I'd just use "Can you do this much damage to a non-summoner" as the rule of thumb.
I'm pretty sure the section for 'Subordinate Actions' indicates that Strikes generated by activities are not the same as individual strikes, in any case.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let's say we use Batle medicine on the Summoner. The shared HP pool gets healed by X and Summoner is now immune to battle medicine for a day.
But can you use then Battle medicine on the Eidolon, and heal the same pool again?
Same with stuff that grant immunity for a period of time, like a Hex and etc.
Since Battle Medicine calls for an "ally" and "target," and a Summoner and Eidolon are distinct "allies" or "targets," yes, they are both eligible, and the combined health pool can be healed twice in this way, but only if you target each one individually with the feat.
That being said, since damage between the two is simultaneous, and healing is likewise simultaneous, this may be a potential oversight for the dev team to know about before the final print.
I imagine that if both an Eidolon and Summoner are in a 3-action Heal effect, they are only healed once, and if an Eidolon and Summoner are both targeted for Treat Wounds via Ward Medic, they only receive one set of healing, in the same way that if they are both in a Fireball they only take one set of damage (though they take the worse roll if it has an impact).
In short, one effect for one target should be fine if it has a limit, if the resources are combined then it affects it both times, but if it is distinctly separate (such as proficiencies, bonuses to hit, flanking benefits), then only the one that is targeted/eligible gets it.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yet another needlessly complicated mechanic causing issues with other mechanics. This is going to be a headache I don't think I want as a DM.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yet another needlessly complicated mechanic causing issues with other mechanics. This is going to be a headache I don't think I want as a DM.
Its not causing issues. "A Summoner can neither benefit nor be harmed by a given action or activity more than once." is a pretty easy concept.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yet another needlessly complicated mechanic causing issues with other mechanics. This is going to be a headache I don't think I want as a DM.Its not causing issues. "A Summoner can neither benefit nor be harmed by a given action or activity more than once." is a pretty easy concept.
Not easy enough if questions like these keep constantly popping up.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yet another needlessly complicated mechanic causing issues with other mechanics. This is going to be a headache I don't think I want as a DM.Its not causing issues. "A Summoner can neither benefit nor be harmed by a given action or activity more than once." is a pretty easy concept.
That's not at all the line that's found in the rules Krispy.
Clearly the shared HP pool mechanic is causing issues in play, this is what people meant when they said the simplicity of the shared HP pool actually over-complicated everything else.Here is the rule:
"Damage taken by either you or the eidolon reduces your
Hit Points, while healing either of you restores your Hit
Points. If you or your eidolon is affected by anything that
would change a creature’s actions, it affects your shared
actions. In any case, if you are both subject to the same
effect, you take the effects only once (applying the worse
effect, if applicable).
Something like the strikes from Skittering Assault would not be the same effect, thus the Summoner and Eidolon are both hurt since they are separate strikes and instances of damage.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not easy enough if questions like these keep constantly popping up.Yet another needlessly complicated mechanic causing issues with other mechanics. This is going to be a headache I don't think I want as a DM.Its not causing issues. "A Summoner can neither benefit nor be harmed by a given action or activity more than once." is a pretty easy concept.
That's assuming the people asking the questions are acting in good faith.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's assuming the people asking the questions are acting in good faith.Not easy enough if questions like these keep constantly popping up.Yet another needlessly complicated mechanic causing issues with other mechanics. This is going to be a headache I don't think I want as a DM.Its not causing issues. "A Summoner can neither benefit nor be harmed by a given action or activity more than once." is a pretty easy concept.
Asking in good faith? What does that even mean?
They're asking questions about rules that are known to work a certain way with every other class, but suddenly work a different way for this one class. A vastly different way that requires a different kind of tracking, more save rolls, and the like. It's literally becoming a headache.
Soon we'll be asking about what if an eidolon drinks a potion of haste, but the summoner does not? How does that work? It's getting strange and heading in a direction that is raising more questions.
Then DMs will be having to decide what abilities get to hit both the eidolon and the summoner, but count as only one attack. The Gogiteth as the example does a skittering strike and can hit the eidolon and summoner up to 50 feet apart, but some players want only the worse hit to count. That doesn't make any sense and basically means the Gogiteth wasted an attack. So should the DM act as though they know that and only attack either the eidolon or summoner once knowing it was wasting the attack? Would that be a known mythology with the summoner?
Then you're weakening attacks like Whirlwind Attack and the multitude of other abilities that allow multiple attacks against single targets that are suddenly rendered as one attack on the eidolon and summoner? That's another rule that for some reason the summoner doesn't seem like two different creatures and gets some strange advantage that is a completely different mechanic.
All I see as a DM is headaches at my table and arguments with players and lots of questions with a huge rules section write up covering as many situations as possible.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's assuming the people asking the questions are acting in good faith.Not easy enough if questions like these keep constantly popping up.Yet another needlessly complicated mechanic causing issues with other mechanics. This is going to be a headache I don't think I want as a DM.Its not causing issues. "A Summoner can neither benefit nor be harmed by a given action or activity more than once." is a pretty easy concept.Asking in good faith? What does that even mean?
They're asking questions about rules that are known to work a certain way with every other class, but suddenly work a different way for this one class. A vastly different way that requires a different kind of tracking, more save rolls, and the like. It's literally becoming a headache.
Soon we'll be asking about what if an eidolon drinks a potion of haste, but the summoner does not? How does that work? It's getting strange and heading in a direction that is raising more questions.
Then DMs will be having to decide what abilities get to hit both the eidolon and the summoner, but count as only one attack. The Gogiteth as the example does a skittering strike and can hit the eidolon and summoner up to 50 feet apart, but some players want only the worse hit to count. That doesn't make any sense and basically means the Gogiteth wasted an attack. So should the DM act as though they know that and only attack either the eidolon or summoner once knowing it was wasting the attack? Would that be a known mythology with the summoner?
Then you're weakening attacks like Whirlwind Attack and the multitude of other abilities that allow multiple attacks against single targets that are suddenly rendered as one attack on the eidolon and summoner? That's another rule that for some reason the summoner doesn't seem like two different creatures and gets some strange advantage that is a completely different mechanic....
To answer the Potion of Haste question: They would benefit from the Quickened condition as normal, since both share actions and state effects which alter actions likewise applies to both entities. Basically, Eidolon drinks potion, both get Quickened.
Looks like you found one of the boons of the Summoner and Eidolon. An activity which targets both only applies once, taking the worse result (or better result with a feat and reaction). As for whether the creature knows better, depends on the creature's intelligence and experience with Summoners. Most encounters will be able to determine that the two are linked in some fashion. To what extent that is, is unknown until either they experiment in combat, or make Recall Knowledge checks. Or, if they have faced Summoners before, should be able to make that distinction for themselves.
Keep in mind that this also works both ways. A Summoner and Eidolon both in a 3-Action Heal only heal once, of the worse result if it applies. In fact, if an Eidolon is Evil-aligned and a 3-Action Heal deals damage to it via a feat, the Summoner would actually take damage instead of heal, in this case, as corner and fringe as it is.
Regardless, I will agree that, for players who are less rules-savvy or have problems with the rules, this can dredge up a lot of arguments and complaints, as well as drag the focus away from the encounter to "Summoner/Eidolon does/doesn't get affected by this" arguments, with books coming out and page references and debating, where a GM has to make a gut call and tell the players to move on or pack up and head out.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Then DMs will be having to decide what abilities get to hit both the eidolon and the summoner, but count as only one attack. The Gogiteth as the example does a skittering strike and can hit the eidolon and summoner up to 50 feet apart, but some players want only the worse hit to count. That doesn't make any sense and basically means the Gogiteth wasted an attack. So should the DM act as though they know that and only attack either the eidolon or summoner once knowing it was wasting the attack? Would that be a known mythology with the summoner?
Then you're weakening attacks like Whirlwind Attack and the multitude of other abilities that allow multiple attacks against single targets that are suddenly rendered as one attack on the eidolon and summoner? That's another rule that for some reason the summoner doesn't seem like two different creatures and gets some strange advantage that is a completely different mechanic....
Personally, I'd rule that creatures with abilities like Skittering Strike (or similar things like a Hydra's Storm of Jaws or a Marilith's Bladestorm) can hit both the Summonner and the Eidolon separately because the damage comes from two different entirely different Strikes. I can't justify counting both Strikes as the same effect.
As it is, the current version definitely has some obscure spots in it that rely on GM arbitration.