| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
No one is arguing for less customization. Quite the opposite from what I've seen. It's the mode (evolution points), content (abilities out of line with current design), and quantity (doubling feats) that are the difficult points.
I would be shocked if we don't see more options for Eidolons and Summoners, but those big three seem to be the tricky ones to move without disrupting the system. Those aren't "15%" changes.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
That’s reasonable but I just feel like the emphasis on balance is making the class less unique. The reason I want all those juicy monster abilities is because no other class has them.
Great news! Mark did say that he has been toying with giving Eidolons exactly that/exactly more of that!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You might still be missing the grammatical portions of your post that lead to not comprehending them to begin with. I wasn't looking for a more floral vocabulary, just clarity.Its always wonderful speaking with such a fine patient and congenial fellow. In this day age a gentle person who keep their discourse free of ire is a truly a diamond in the rough.I've given up on trying to parse what you want your words to say, honestly.I feel my point has been successfully made that the summoner was among the many broken things in pathfinder 1e and didn't deserve all this special animosity.No, I literally had to read your post several times to find the meaning (pre-edits, it looks like) not that I didn't get your point.
Also, special animosity? Asking the PF2 summoner to not become what it was in terms of broken capabilities isn't a vendetta.
Sorry about that is probably the dyslexia you can practice the words all you want but they often come out jumbled.
Oh yeah, I get that. Back before several career changes, I worked with plenty of students with dyslexia.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I find the endless hand wringing about balance odd.
I mean say for the sake of argument that the summoner winds up being the strongest class in the game. So what?
One class has to be the strongest. People have been saying for decades that wizards op and fighters suck and I still see plenty of fighters.
Pathfinder is not chess, it’s not a symmetric game. Cowering in fear of min maxing seems to be missing the forest from the trees somewhat.
I do not find it odd at all. We have a well balanced game right now in PF2. Why ruin that for the sake of a few players who want to play an overpowered character class? You want min-maxing? Go play PF1. I rather like playing a game where building concept characters that are just as strong as any other character is routine.
I do not sit there with spreadsheets trying to calculate maximum dps for characters. I don't play a stat block. I play a character with a personality. I role play, not roll play. PF2 is excellent for role playing. Those who want to turn it into roll playing can go back to PF1.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The eidolon and its customsiation has always been the meat of the class.
I played the class for the summoning and the casting: my eidolon was a glorified mount that I dispelled to use the summon ability. I also liked the inquisitor [Monster Tactician] as it had the same summoning ability without the eidolon baggage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of the very obvious design goals seems to have been the implementation of a structure that prevents the over-the-top power levels while giving players the customization they're used to. I don't see people asking for the summoner to be weak or uninteresting, but to remain in these guidelines within reason.
If there truly must be a strongest class, what is it now and how is that good for the game?
For martials, the strongest class is probably the Fighter. It can be built for top-tier DPR (especially against bosses), top-tier endurance (with only Champions really coming out ahead), top-tier disruption (Combat Reflexes with trip/hammers is scary).
For casters, the strongest class is probably the Bard. They get a powerful disruptive spell list, flexible application through spontaneous casting, and cheap party-wide buffs.
That represents the top end. The Summoner shouldn't be stronger than a Fighter (they're currently nowhere near them), and shouldn't be stronger than a Bard (they're not even in the same league).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Adding more of the poweful ones to the list later via class feats would also be cool.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Call me silly but there design of a generic eidolon strike I find a bit disappointing.
Both the monk and the Animal Barbarian show they could have provided tailored strikes for each sort animal and animal style. I know there is a logic in having a generic strike you can call what you want but I would rather have something with some flavour in the mechanic like those style and barbarian animal strikes.
Maybe if the just let you pick 1 option from a list of none balance changing properties at first level (no deadly,reach). Like having a dragon tale lash with trip would make it feel much better than a dragon talelash without mechanic to represent an inherent property.
The weapon traits are the funnest part of weapon selection and most weapons have several traits so putting a few low powered ones for differentiation sake at first level wouldn't break anything.
I hear you. I understand for balance while they made all the attacks so generic, but damn, it's super boring. A dragon doing the same damage with its bite as an angel fist as a beast claw as a phantom attack is super boring.
Call me silly but there design of a generic eidolon strike I find a bit disappointing.
Both the monk and the Animal Barbarian show they could have provided tailored strikes for each sort animal and animal style. I know there is a logic in having a generic strike you can call what you want but I would rather have something with some flavour in the mechanic like those style and barbarian animal strikes.
Maybe if the just let you pick 1 option from a list of none balance changing properties at first level (no deadly,reach). Like having a dragon tale lash with trip would make it feel much better than a dragon talelash without mechanic to represent an inherent property.
The weapon traits are the funnest part of weapon selection and most weapons have several traits so putting a few low powered ones for differentiation sake at first level wouldn't break anything.
I feel like they really want to be careful here.
In a direct comparison to a monk on dealing damage, my level 6 Eidolon only looks worse if you actually track damage and plot it over time.
On a Strike by Strike basis, if I have the action to Boost and swing twice my Eidolon looks like it hits significantly harder than a monk.
It would feel very bad to be a monk at lower levels if the Eidolon had the same, interesting style of attack choice as you and similar/better per strike effectiveness.
I'd think that something like this might cost us Boost... and whether that's worth it is probably on a per-evaluator basis.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Boost isn't a great mechanic, in my opinion. I'd rather have the Summoner do something themselves than just boost/reinforce.
I mean, it's nice that you have the option of spending your actions to power up your eidolon, but it shouldn't so strong that it's the thing that makes it viable, and thus becomes mandatory almost every turn.
If the eidolon loses a bit of dpr in favor of cool mechanics, and at the same time this frees up an action by the Summoner, I see it as an improvement.
I also like having a bunch of attack options to choose from for each eidolon type. Evolution Surge could let you swap them temporarily, or a feat could give you one more. Nice.
Boost isn't a great mechanic, in my opinion. I'd rather have the Summoner do something themselves than just boost/reinforce.
I mean, it's nice that you have the option of spending your actions to power up your eidolon, but it shouldn't so strong that it's the thing that makes it viable, and thus becomes mandatory almost every turn.
If the eidolon loses a bit of dpr in favor of cool mechanics, and at the same time this frees up an action by the Summoner, I see it as an improvement.
I also like having a bunch of attack options to choose from for each eidolon type. Evolution Surge could let you swap them temporarily, or a feat could give you one more. Nice.
The only part I'd disagree with here is the part that boost 'becomes mandatory', but thats largely down to preference and personally not valuing any sort of damage contest. Its nice if I can fit it, but not mandatory to make a Strike by any means.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, if I'm going to cast an impactful spell I'll gladly avoid boosting for that round, but extra damage is always a very solid option.
I'd rather spend three actions casting a cantrip and attacking once without boost than do boost + double attack. But if the second option has a plain superior damage output, my Summoner will rarely cast except for their four slots, and becomes an eidolon-boosting machine. It's a bit dull.
Boosting eidolon, if it stays, should ideally compete closely with other ways of spending actions, leading to more variety. Maybe changing it to something more situational than extra damage would work, that's why I say less dpr and more cool mechanics.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even animal barbarian gets reach with a frog tongue I believe. I think I read that somewhere, right? What level does it activate?Call me silly but there design of a generic eidolon strike I find a bit disappointing.
Both the monk and the Animal Barbarian show they could have provided tailored strikes for each sort animal and animal style. I know there is a logic in having a generic strike you can call what you want but I would rather have something with some flavour in the mechanic like those style and barbarian animal strikes.
Maybe if the just let you pick 1 option from a list of none balance changing properties at first level (no deadly,reach). Like having a dragon tale lash with trip would make it feel much better than a dragon talelash without mechanic to represent an inherent property.
The weapon traits are the funnest part of weapon selection and most weapons have several traits so putting a few low powered ones for differentiation sake at first level wouldn't break anything.
Deer antlers as well and at level 7.
It's actually why I think letting the Eidolon have reach when you pick up Hulking Evolution would be an okay idea.At the moment, Hulking is more drawbacks then buffs.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think a big miscommunication in this thread is the idea of balance versus expression.
I fell in love with summoner because the eidolon (especially APG) was a blank canvas that let you design a unique character. Even when Unchained added restrictions based on subtype, you could still build your own version of that kind of outsider using feats, skills, and ever-changing evolution points.
The playtest eidolon is lacking on those fronts. It has no skills of its own. It doesn't get feats. Evolutions are far more permanent. The four subtypes have mirrored statlines. And maybe it's more balanced than ever before. But I can see why summoner players lament the significantly reduced agency and the fact that the eidolons feel very similar to one another in function.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Though descriptive lay, it's still a blank canvas. Maybe you want the mechanics to be one too, but personally it's actually more of a blank canvas than before, given you don't have to buy evolutions to have limbs, etc.
Also, when I looked at the Stat lines my first thought was 'oh these must be the same for the playtest' else having the line about Stat lines in each individual subcategory is a bloody waste of space in something that copy-editing is going to be strict on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Though descriptive lay, it's still a blank canvas. Maybe you want the mechanics to be one too, but personally it's actually more of a blank canvas than before, given you don't have to buy evolutions to have limbs, etc.
Also, when I looked at the Stat lines my first thought was 'oh these must be the same for the playtest' else having the line about Stat lines in each individual subcategory is a bloody waste of space in something that copy-editing is going to be strict on.
There is a lot of impact in the choice of base type though, too.
You may only get four spell slots, but they can be a big deal and your choice of spell list is going to be huge for how your character plays. Beyond that, not all of the Eidolon abilities they get at 1 and 7 (the 17th level one is... pretty late) are minor boons.
Against an enemy weak to Good, an Angel is going to essentially have an extra property rune. Beasts are much more mobile combatants due to their charge, Dragons have a very unique fighting style because of their access to breath and frenzy attack, and phantoms have a solid reaction.
There's more difference between each of these than some have let on, and we're adding at least (probably) 7 more variations to this?
Summoner is going to cover a lot of ground mechanically.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's entirely possible that not being able to mix and match to your heart's content is a deliberate choice, considering how that led to Summoner being banned from many tables and Society play. The Unchained version did not allow one to mix and match to their heart's content, as a base form was specified depending on what type of eidolon a player had. I would like some more customization options, but it should be far short of 1E version, there's a middle ground in there somewhere.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Summoners were not banned because of mix and matching.It was definitely a factor.
Society did not ban Summoners. They banned specific Summoner archetypes that: Gave too much action economy.Bring a new APG Summoner with no archetypes to a PFS table and see what happens.
Most GMs banned it because Summon Monster takes a lot of time to resolve and they didnt want to deal with it.That was a factor, not the only one.
Which gave people who dont know anything about the Summoner the wrong impression of its problems.*adds to the list of "Stuff you made up*
Most who had problem with its power complained about the tunning not the system.
No, plenty of people complained about the "system", not just your "tuning" buzzzword.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, plenty of people complained about the "system", not just your "tuning" buzzzword.
This, so many times this.
The Summoner had a really high floor for power, but ultimately it wasn't more powerful than the truly ridiculous gamebreaking builds.
But the class was setup as a playground for min-max powergaming, and its baseline power level was such as to make anyone not optimizing feel like their character was a waste of paper.
Worse than that, because the Summoner was essentially a full caster, it felt like the Summoner player got two PCs to everyone elses one.
Thats why it was banned - not because of Eidolon DPR.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Building in customization is difficult. Right now the Eidolons are super boring and barely feel like the creatures they represent other than telling us they are the creatures in the concept text with a few abilities of varying effectiveness.
As far as feeling like a dragon using a dragon bite and horns, an angel able to use a greatsword or bow or a huge primal beast summoned from planes of nature or an incorporeal phantom with that has bonded to you for some purpose, none of these creatures feel that way other than the concept text telling you this is what they are.
They all do exactly the same damage, have exactly the same physical stats, AC, and the like. I've been working on designing some customization to make them feel more like the creature they represent, but it is really difficult.
Changing things like attack damage die, stats, defenses, mobility, and the like takes some real thoughtful and careful balancing.
In PF1 they were able to make creatures according to what they were and weren't as concerned about perfect balance, in PF2 the balance is necessary or things get whacky. It's very hard to make a dragon balanced against an angel balanced against a beast versus a phantom.
This is going to take a bit to work out. I can see why they took the path they did in the design playtest. It's very hard to balance eidolons against each other with customization.
If I boost the damage die, it will probably be necessary to get rid of the boost eidolon or change it substantially. I was thinking of making boost eidolon work differently for each type of eidolon and including that in the eidolon stat blocks to add some more flavor in how boosting the eidolon works on an individual basis. We'll see how this idea goes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As far as feeling like a dragon using a dragon bite and horns,
This example in particular confuses me - the Dragon Eidolon gets, for free, both the iconic attack options associated with Dragons in PF2E (their melee attack frenzy, and their breath weapon).
I'm not sure how you make a Dragon Eidolon fight more like a dragon than that.
As far as feeling like a dragon using a dragon bite and horns,This example in particular confuses me - the Dragon Eidolon gets, for free, both the iconic attack options associated with Dragons in PF2E (their melee attack frenzy, and their breath weapon).
I'm not sure how you make a Dragon Eidolon fight more like a dragon than that.
Have you looked at dragons? They usually get a 1d8 or higher bite attack with an energy component. The Draconic Frenzy is usually a horn attack with a couple of claws that do 1d8 with a huge strength bonus.
1d8 and 1d4 feels like a baby dragon with no bite with energy damage.Some of us playing a dragon eidolon want it to hit like a dragon. And when we look at the actual dragon entry and what damage they do, the 1d8 and 1d4 with the +3 to +5 strength don't feel like dragon attacks.
This is the attacks of a young blue dragon. Eidolon attacks don't feel like this.
Melee Single Action jaws +21 [+16/+11] (electricity, reach 15 feet), Damage 2d8+11 piercing plus 1d12 electricity
Melee Single Action claw +21 [+17/+13] (agile), Damage 2d8+11 slashing
Melee Single Action tail +19 [+14/+9] (reach 15 feet), Damage 2d8+9 bludgeoning
Melee Single Action horns +19 [+14/+9] (reach 10 feet), Damage 1d8+9 piercing
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As far as feeling like a dragon using a dragon bite and horns,This example in particular confuses me - the Dragon Eidolon gets, for free, both the iconic attack options associated with Dragons in PF2E (their melee attack frenzy, and their breath weapon).
I'm not sure how you make a Dragon Eidolon fight more like a dragon than that.
Have you looked at dragons? They usually get a 1d8 or higher bite attack with an energy component. The Draconic Frenzy is usually a horn attack with a couple of claws that do 1d8 with a huge strength bonus.
1d8 and 1d4 feels like a baby dragon with no bite with energy damage.Some of us playing a dragon eidolon want it to hit like a dragon. And when we look at the actual dragon entry and what damage they do, the 1d8 and 1d4 with the +3 to +5 strength don't feel like dragon attacks.
Getting the same damage entry as an NPC/Monster isn't going to happen, because NPC/Monster damage per strike is tuned to a specific value based on level.
And elemental damage for your eidolon comes from your items, which was strongly implied to be "by design".
If your edilon can fight as well as a level x dragon overall, does it really matter that the profile doesn't match exactly?
As far as feeling like a dragon using a dragon bite and horns,This example in particular confuses me - the Dragon Eidolon gets, for free, both the iconic attack options associated with Dragons in PF2E (their melee attack frenzy, and their breath weapon).
I'm not sure how you make a Dragon Eidolon fight more like a dragon than that.
Have you looked at dragons? They usually get a 1d8 or higher bite attack with an energy component. The Draconic Frenzy is usually a horn attack with a couple of claws that do 1d8 with a huge strength bonus.
1d8 and 1d4 feels like a baby dragon with no bite with energy damage.Some of us playing a dragon eidolon want it to hit like a dragon. And when we look at the actual dragon entry and what damage they do, the 1d8 and 1d4 with the +3 to +5 strength don't feel like dragon attacks.
Getting the same damage entry as an NPC/Monster isn't going to happen, because NPC/Monster damage per strike is tuned to a specific value based on level.
And elemental damage for your eidolon comes from your items, which was strongly implied to be "by design".
If your edilon can fight as well as a level x dragon overall, does it really matter that the profile doesn't match exactly?
True. But I'm working on the same attacks with some differences. We will see how it goes.
I'm hoping a lot of this generic design is for the basic playtest as they can customize the eidolons behind the scenes balancing the math using tools rather than worry about that during the playtest.
Maybe they want to get a feel for the play-style right now and adjust as needed. We will see.
I think by playing around with boost eidolon you can make some adjustments. We will see.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
True. But I'm working on the same attacks with some differences. We will see how it goes.I'm hoping a lot of this generic design is for the basic playtest as they can customize the eidolons behind the scenes balancing the math using tools rather than worry about that during the playtest.
Maybe they want to get a feel for the play-style right now and adjust as needed. We will see.
I think by playing around with boost eidolon you can make some adjustments. We will see.
I dont think anyone would object to the "additional eidolon attack" evolution seeing significant expansion, potentially to the point of allowing adding a third (or fourth) attack option.
I really like the idea behind "Unarmed Evolution", but I think that it could be expanded to be significantly more robust and do a lot of heavy lifting for the class.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
That is not way near enough for a thing whose entire existence until this playtest was being able to mix and match to your heart's content. 11 options of static abilities by comparison is not enough to properly represent the variation that eidolons should have.
I'm going to point out that oracle had the exact same thing of being able to mix and match curse and mystery.
Notice how that went the way of the dodo.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
That is not way near enough for a thing whose entire existence until this playtest was being able to mix and match to your heart's content. 11 options of static abilities by comparison is not enough to properly represent the variation that eidolons should have.I'm going to point out that oracle had the exact same thing of being able to mix and match curse and mystery.
Notice how that went the way of the dodo.
They turned it into a static from a system where you could maximise advantage while minimising flaws? I'm sure someone will come up with a term for that...
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I call it a buzzword because you keep using it as a buzzword instead of its actual use, trying to fit it in to every conversation and hole in your argument no matter the situation like it’s a magical silver bullet that will fix everything and “prove” you’re correct.
You tune the system. Classes are part of the system. You can not tune things in a vacuum absent the system.
As for Blackened, okay, just wont use my hands for much. Which I wasn’t already, since I took Blackened. So much for “tuning”.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You have been using it previously to claim that the evolution point system from P1 could be “tuned” to work perfectly in P2, just cause.
P2 is not built to support a point but system in it, let alone on just one specific class.
My point was (while very flavorful and neat) the curse has pretty much no drawbacks in how easy it is to circumvent them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
the reason i am pushing for this is that my Summoner playtime is 100% Eidolon. I never use my Summoner. Hes useless 90% of the time. Its all about my Eidolon. So if you remove the summoner whats left? No skill feats, no general feats, having to share class feats, no dedications, ancient elf won't let me put a dedication on my Eidolon so thats useless.
You get what im saying?
I get what you are saying, but this just sounds like another PC to me. So, if your 100% eidolon is really good with skills, wouldn't you just create a Rogue? Or really good with martial, a fighter? Etc., etc.
At that point, it seems like you are trying to push a square peg into a round hole.
Just create the character aka "eidolon" want, and hire a NPC to fill in the 10% usefulness you are referring to for the "summoner." Or simply rely on your party for the other 10%.
Setting everything else aside, would it be possible to create your 90% eidolon simply as a PC?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Class isn't the Eidolon though, it's Summoner.
The Eidolon is a part of the Summoner Class.
It's closer to Eidolon the class than summoner the class. It's got a whole lot of Eidolon and no summoning.