| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So many people have mentioned the balance problems of having an eidolon fly. Suppose the eidolon had the same rule about flight as the Animal Companion, where is cannot carry someone and fly. This seems like it would make things balanced, but some think it would not due to out of combat things and the like. Here is my question:
At low levels, what would a flying eidolon (that cannot carry people) be able to do that a Wizards Familiar being carried by a bird animal companion not do. (Build is Wizard Familiar Thesis, Beastmaster as level 2 archetype. Familiar has Speech, Manual Dexterity, and Skilled for either diplomacy or lockpicking depending on the situation.)
Remember that Skilled Familiars don't actually have any level of proficiency, meaning they can't do anything that can't be done Untrained.
...which probably should be errataed, but currently it has not been.
Not to mention, that an Eidolon is capable of instant mental communication anywhere in its 'leash' range, meaning that an Eidolon can actually relate what it finds anywhere it can get to - and the party can adapt to what it finds, as the Summoner can just relate it instantly.
Beyond that? Anything a player character can do without feats... which is a lot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remember that Skilled Familiars don't actually have any level of proficiency, meaning they can't do anything that can't be done Untrained.
...which probably should be errataed, but currently it has not been.
Not to mention, that an Eidolon is capable of instant mental communication anywhere in its 'leash' range, meaning that an Eidolon can actually relate what it finds anywhere it can get to - and the party can adapt to what it finds, as the Summoner can just relate it instantly.
Beyond that? Anything a player character can do without feats... which is a lot.
What levels do you feel would be the earliest you could see the Eidolon getting both temporary and permanent flight?
Are you satisfied with the current playtest flight access?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Uncommon tag can't fix anything for this. Eidolons can fly eventually, and that's definitely not going to be uncommon if the iconic has a dragon eidolon. Rarity doesn't tie to power, so you can't just say something like, "permanent flight is 16th as common, 12th as uncommon, 10th as rare".
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Remember that Skilled Familiars don't actually have any level of proficiency, meaning they can't do anything that can't be done Untrained.
...which probably should be errataed, but currently it has not been.
Not to mention, that an Eidolon is capable of instant mental communication anywhere in its 'leash' range, meaning that an Eidolon can actually relate what it finds anywhere it can get to - and the party can adapt to what it finds, as the Summoner can just relate it instantly.
Beyond that? Anything a player character can do without feats... which is a lot.
What levels do you feel would be the earliest you could see the Eidolon getting both temporary and permanent flight?
Are you satisfied with the current playtest flight access?
I am. You get temporary flight as a focus like a Storm druid at around the same level and you get Perma-flight a level before anyone. And unlike a storm druid you get your temporary for free.
Any attempt at an earlier "Lesser Flight Evolution" feat or similar will either break core design limits or made redundant by free focus flight.| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Remember that Skilled Familiars don't actually have any level of proficiency, meaning they can't do anything that can't be done Untrained.
...which probably should be errataed, but currently it has not been.
Not to mention, that an Eidolon is capable of instant mental communication anywhere in its 'leash' range, meaning that an Eidolon can actually relate what it finds anywhere it can get to - and the party can adapt to what it finds, as the Summoner can just relate it instantly.
Beyond that? Anything a player character can do without feats... which is a lot.
What levels do you feel would be the earliest you could see the Eidolon getting both temporary and permanent flight?
Are you satisfied with the current playtest flight access?
Not only am I satisfied, I can demonstrate (again) that the current playtest Flight access is objectively good when compared to when other Players and Player Character tier resources get it.
Most players get access to Flight at level 7, via spell slot. This is ALSO true for Summoners if they have the right spell list, or can stomach calling Air Walk a variation of Flight. At this level, Flight is limited absolutely by Spell Slots with the single exception that I'm aware of with Rangers getting a Focus version, if they take prerequisite feats (making this option more expensive than others, but Rangers also don't have spells as an alternative).
At level 9, feat based options for Limited Flight (IE, once per day fly for x minutes) go online, and at level 10 item based limited flight comes online.
But also at level 9, every single Summoner gets access to Flight as a focus spell, meaning that Summoners have both cheap and unlimited access to Fly at level 9. That is, so far as I am aware, absolutely the "best" access to the mechanic in the game as it exists currently, considering overall cost to the character and reusability.
Then at level 16, for a single feat, Summoners can gain access to non-restricted and non-limited perma flight at the first level it becomes available, so far as I'm aware. Other options for this, via feat and item, kick in at this level or 17(!) for other players.
So yeah, people complaining about this sound to me like they're failing to consider the situation other Players are in, or don't care that they're essentially asking to be elevated above other Players in access to this ability.
Access to Fly for player character tier entities is already well established in the 2E system, and Summoners are absolutely on schedule for that access. Asking for more is being greedy.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, but the eidolon doesn't (and shouldn't) interact with the game in the same role as a monster. It should be treated as a character option with all the strengths and weaknesses that go with it.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Its not being greedy to ask for a creature who can fly to not depend on a focus spells until level 16.
When that creature is essentially a PC surrogate? It is absolutely being greedy.
I'm not asking you to narrate your bird as flightless until level 7/9/16, I'm asking you as a Player to be considerate of the limitations on your fellow players and not elevate yourself above them - and to make minor concessions to facilitate that.
If that means not claiming mechanical benefits for flight... well, to me that's barely a sacrifice.
After all, its not like I'm waiting longer than they are for the ability, and when I get it I get the premium version.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you want a low level (pre-5) flying eidolon, however, you would have to take the current design of PF2 and hurl it as hard as you can into the wood chipper.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
From day one I have asked for more customization. That by defintion involves cutting down power to allow for different options to exist and players to chose.
No it doesn't? Lot of people (everyone here?) is asking for more customization. I'm willing to bet we're going to see a ton more in the full release. But customization doesn't mean cutting down from other places to allow other options to exist. That's... that's straight up just min-maxing.
In case you were looking for the definition of customization: "The action of modifying something to suit a particular individual or task."
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am not elevating my self above anyone. Other players are able to get flying companions at level 1 while having full magic or martial power. Meanwhile, the Summoner has practically no magic or martial power, but his eidolon cannot get low level flight?
...
Ranger, Druid, Witch, Wizard, Sorcerer, etc. All get flying companion at level 1. All have their full class abilities. The Full casters can summon various flying creatures multiple times a day without spending a single feat.
None of those classes get companions that are Eidolons, or which have the capabilities of Eidolons.
If you prefer their companions, they are available to play - and to add to your Summoner!
I'm here for a potent companion that is as impactful as my PC - not another familiar or Animal companion in a monster costume. That, not coincidently, is a description of the 1E Eidolon as well (the impactful as a pc clmpanion)!
You accuse me of trying to "drag the summoner/eidolon through the mud" so they're a husk of the original class? Thats hyperbolic as all get out, but it also ignores the fact that the "original class" was the most banned Base/core class of any mainstream RPG im aware of, even after it was nerfed in unchained.
Everyone here should have an interest in putting as much distance as is reasonable between that version and this one if they want the class to be playable and well-liked at a majority of tables.
And as noted elsewhere, theres going to be more customization in the full release - but you're probably going to have to deal with it using the already established and proven class feat system that is the basis of 2E.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you want a low level (pre-5) flying eidolon, however, you would have to take the current design of PF2 and hurl it as hard as you can into the wood chipper.The current design of PF2 allows animal companions can fly from level 1 with a full spellcaster or full martial. And there are plenty of creatures with low level flight.
The Summoner right now has neither full casting nor full martial its the worst of both worlds. But it getting level 1 flying companion will break things?
Temperans, I don't know how to explain this to you, but if you want an animal companion, there are classes that can do that. However, if you want a full class feature like the eidolon that shares actions (and can have up to three actions a turn) with the summoner, then you can't have flying.
We get it, you're advocating for a complete overhaul of the design. Admittedly that overhaul is regressive and generally incredibly uninteresting to more than a handful of people. Also the ideas pitched have been demonstrably easy to break, just as their PF1 counterpart.
If you want a flying creature with the strength of an animal companion, the action economy of the animal companion, and the the hit points of the animal companion, you absolutely cannot have any of the feats that buff it further than you would an animal companion. PF2 has set strict design limits for characters. They've given nods to playing around those, but to completely ignore them is not going to happen.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
At what point do we invoke the Colette rule and just stop engaging?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Customization is not minmax. Its having options.
You do know that many players directly associate extreme customization, like point buy systems, with min-maxing right?
Its one of the most frequently leveled criticisms against open character creation rules sets like Shadowrun 4e and 5e?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You do know that I ak saying to literally just use a modified version of familiar options?
You know that creature that Wizards and Witches can get and modify at will however they want every day.
Are you saying that is minmaxing? Are you saying that feats are minmaxing because I can pick which feats I want? How about magic items, are those minmaxing? There a lot of items that I can pick and choose. What about skill and skill increases, are those minmaxing?
The eidolon having customization is no more minmaxing than any other aspect of pathfinder. The idea that Eidolons should not have a wide array of customization because "minmaxing" is preposterous.
Yeah, that's not what I said.
I said extreme customization, like point buy.
Or the ability to give your eidolon only the abilities you want, leaving off all the dead weight you don't... which is literal min maxing.
Everyone wants reasonable customization.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Point buy, feats, slots, all of them are effectively the same thing with different names. The difference is how Paizo choses to implement each one.
Do you think familiar options are min maxing?
What if there were 3 tiers of familiar options: level 1, 7, 15?
What if there were 5 tiers: 1, 5, 9, 13, 17?
What if there were 10 tiers: Every odd level?At what point does it become extreme? And at what point is it reasonable?
I think that 5 choices is a good middle ground with feats letting you get more. Would you say thats fair?
It becomes min maxing when you are able to deemphasize one aspect (reduce combat ability - min) to boost another (gain flight earlier than normally allowed - maxing).
The design of 2E is such that you generally only get access to the "max" side of the equation, where there is a baseline you cant modify and feats will add utility or situational power. It is extremely rare that you are effectively allowed to "minimize" something for any benefit.
Familiars have base capabilities, and you can add to those from a list of non-gamebreaking abilities that are generally all balanced out the gate, in large part because Familiars are heavily limited in what actions they are allowed to take and by having extremely few proficiencies.
Point buy for Eidolons became outdated when the made all the combat prowess part of the base summoner/eidolon package (also a 2E signature feature). There are no longer enough mechanical options - especially since many of those are now expected to be provided by items, such as elemental attacks and resistances - that such a system is needed over feats.
You can already significantly customize your eidolon via base type (expect 12-16 options), attack types (AT LEAST 9 variations, and more variation here is pretty well something that most people support), and by choosing its skills. In fact, two mechanically identical Eidolons is a pretty far fetched idea - as removing combat optimization options removed any alpha or optimal paths, meaning you arent encouraged to follow the "best" path.
Part of the issue with your position is that its so easily demonstrated as essentially untrue, when you dont simply dismiss the existing customization options because they aren't exactly what you want.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Point buy, feats, slots, all of them are effectively the same thing with different names. The difference is how Paizo choses to implement each one.
You can’t bank Feat slots to get a super feat, or neglect certain ones to get the combat effective ones in P2 (thank f%@~ for separating feats so we don’t have to give up cool stuff for power attack).
Feats is what Paizo has chosen, not point buy. Any customization given has to play with the feat slot system. Point Buy does not.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My only question for Paizo is how impactful they view individual flight. I can completely see them making it imposable for the whole party to fly, that would be problematic. But with the eidolon, not just the whole party but the whole player can't fly, just part of it.
I mean, Mark more or less addresses this in the main thread for the Summoner subforum, where he notes that Flight is restricted to ensure that certain strategies are in limited use.
The reason theyre restricted is to ensure GMs have a predictable and manageable range of player capabilities when running their games, especially since a significant number of PF2E GMs are running published adventures which make assumptions about when certain abilities - like Flight - are available, and when they become omnipresent.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, in combat, which may have already addressed solutions. The out of combat things that you claim are broken have yet to be addressed.My only question for Paizo is how impactful they view individual flight. I can completely see them making it imposable for the whole party to fly, that would be problematic. But with the eidolon, not just the whole party but the whole player can't fly, just part of it.I mean, Mark more or less addresses this in the main thread for the Summoner subforum, where he notes that Flight is restricted to ensure that certain strategies are in limited use.
The reason theyre restricted is to ensure GMs have a predictable and manageable range of player capabilities when running their games, especially since a significant number of PF2E GMs are running published adventures which make assumptions about when certain abilities - like Flight - are available, and when they become omnipresent.
That's because they tend to be subjective, and adventure dependent.
Generally though, Flight negates physical barriers and obstacles pretty solidly - and unlike Animal Companions and Familiars, Eidolons don't have meaningful limitations on what they can do on the other side of that obstacle (and they're far more reliable as transport far sooner).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, in combat, which may have already addressed solutions. The out of combat things that you claim are broken have yet to be addressed.My only question for Paizo is how impactful they view individual flight. I can completely see them making it imposable for the whole party to fly, that would be problematic. But with the eidolon, not just the whole party but the whole player can't fly, just part of it.I mean, Mark more or less addresses this in the main thread for the Summoner subforum, where he notes that Flight is restricted to ensure that certain strategies are in limited use.
The reason theyre restricted is to ensure GMs have a predictable and manageable range of player capabilities when running their games, especially since a significant number of PF2E GMs are running published adventures which make assumptions about when certain abilities - like Flight - are available, and when they become omnipresent.
I'm assuming (and it is just an assumption, I don't know for sure) that the question of "When should players receive temporary and perma-flight?" would have been addressed and answered during the design and playtest stages of the original PF2 core book.
Edit: Regardless we know when Paizo considers it appropriate now. 7th with spells, 8th with focus, 17th all the time.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Eschew Material vs any other level 1 feat. Steady Spellcasting. Form Retention. Spell Mastery.
90% of the Summoner feats.
60-80% of the Magus feats.
A large chunk of Alchemist feats.
Etc. The game is full of potential trap feat options. A lot of feats also do very little but the numbers are such that its hard to notice.
None of those make a character anywhere near unplayable.
Suboptimal is fine when the vast majority of your combat effectiveness is tied up in your core class features.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thats how you sound being so certain. Some thought attacking with int or rolling then deciding if you want to attack was imposable right up until the APG and the investigator came out. Do not assume that X=Y just because XZ=2Y, there are many factors without president, and to say they will follow a pattern for Y just because they used it for Z is at best a guess.
You're right, it is a guess. An educated guess based off what came before, but they can certainly break this paradigm.
Which they did. Nobody gets flight as a focus spell without spending a feat on it. And no class gets perma-flight before level 18.
Except for the Summoner.
You're already ahead of everyone else on this and you expect to get more?
I just don't see it happening.
Do you know what makes people think eidolons should have elevated access to flight. Well its on the front of the playtest document showing the iconic summoner with his dragon and those wings. None of the other iconics characters have wings. If you don't want flight to be major part of your class don't spend your art budget on those majestic wings it sends completely the wrong message.Its not being greedy to ask for a creature who can fly to not depend on a focus spells until level 16.
When that creature is essentially a PC surrogate? It is absolutely being greedy.
I'm not asking you to narrate your bird as flightless until level 7/9/16, I'm asking you as a Player to be considerate of the limitations on your fellow players and not elevate yourself above them - and to make minor concessions to facilitate that.
If that means not claiming mechanical benefits for flight... well, to me that's barely a sacrifice.
After all, its not like I'm waiting longer than they are for the ability, and when I get it I get the premium version.
I'd agree. With reservations.
(Also am I the only one who thinks the iconic looks just like the Kinetist iconic? They even have the same stance and carrying curved sticks.)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do you know what makes people think eidolons should have elevated access to flight. Well its on the front of the playtest document showing the iconic summoner with his dragon and those wings. None of the other iconics characters have wings. If you don't want flight to be major part of your class don't spend your art budget on those majestic wings it sends completely the wrong message.Its not being greedy to ask for a creature who can fly to not depend on a focus spells until level 16.
When that creature is essentially a PC surrogate? It is absolutely being greedy.
I'm not asking you to narrate your bird as flightless until level 7/9/16, I'm asking you as a Player to be considerate of the limitations on your fellow players and not elevate yourself above them - and to make minor concessions to facilitate that.
If that means not claiming mechanical benefits for flight... well, to me that's barely a sacrifice.
After all, its not like I'm waiting longer than they are for the ability, and when I get it I get the premium version.
Seeing as how not every Summoner will pick Dragon it's kinda a moot point.
Also we don't know the gender of the Summoner yet.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Disintegrate at level one is also a power fantasy, but I would still be greatly against it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
They do get flight, they just don't get it when people are asking for.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Disintegrate at level one is also a power fantasy, but I would still be greatly against it.Except for its one that has a legacy I have played a level 1 character with flight in 5e (akrocka) 4e (pixie, hengiyokai), 3.5 (pixie) and pathfinder 1e(syrinx). Whereas I have never played someone with disintegrate at level 1.
Oh, man, we've got to get you into those dark, dark splatbooks of 3.5 then. But seriously, a racial buy in is very different from a class feature. You're also comparing vastly different systems here. Yes, my 3.5 wizard could punch a man in the face and make his head explode, but I'm not going to ask for that continue for the sake of legacy.
If SoM ends up with the ability to fly at level 1 with your eidolon expect that it to come at such a steep cost as to make the eidolon akin to a bird animal companion. The problem with that is you can't exactly print a feat (feasibly) that reads, "Eidolon gains a flight speed and also all of these penalties." So you would need to scrap the current eidolon system, start with significantly weaker base models, and build in a system that would allow that. Almost like the build a bear evolution system people have proposed and has been shown time and time again why it doesn't work in 2e.
EDIT: I wasn never big into the CharOP of PF1, but weren't strix a huge problem because of their innate flight?
EDIT: I wasn never big into the CharOP of PF1, but weren't strix a huge problem because of their innate flight?
That is my understanding.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is harder to railroad the PCs if they all fly. one unlikely they all agree and two if they agree and fly over the hazard they also miss out on the opportunity, three if more PCs fly so can more NPCs.
But nobodies suggesting to bring down the levels of when Champion or Druid or Monk get flight. Just Summoner. Are you suggesting that every party will consist solely of Summoners?
Because otherwise more than half the party is going to be grounded for many, many levels before they catch up with the Summoner. Which will obviously feel bad.