| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The entire point of the Eidolon is to play a monster and get that monster feeling. You cant do that with just another PC.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?
Ahh I see. Thanks for the additional point! Sort of like a class built off of Wild Shape, or something like that.
I can see where that would fit the bill, I'm just not sure Summoner can do that. But perhaps there will be a archetype or class path that caters to the 90/10 split you refer to.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's closer to Eidolon the class than summoner the class. It's got a whole lot of Eidolon and no summoning.The Class isn't the Eidolon though, it's Summoner.
The Eidolon is a part of the Summoner Class.
You summon the eidolon and have Summoning spells.
Which is what you had in P1, Eidolon and spells.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You summon the eidolon and have Summoning spells.
You MANIFEST an eidolon which is specifically defined as not being a summoning and you have NO requirement to slot summoning spells... SO no, no summoning here. At all. Not even a little... If we're counting slot numbers an evoker is much more of a summoner than the summoner.
Which is what you had in P1, Eidolon and spells.
NO, not even a little like it. You actually summoned your Eidolon [it SPECIFICALLY stated it as such] and you SPECIFICALLY had a SLA that granted summoning spells for free every day outside of your spells. As far as spells, you in NO way had to allocate summoning spells to your slots: you could easily fill every slot with non-summoning spells. So... If we're comparing it to PF1 like you did, I don't see it as hitting ANY of the same marks as the playtest version is missing ANY form of summoning.
|
|
you have NO requirement to slot summoning spells... SO no, no summoning here. At all.You not being forced to pick Summoning spells does not mean you don't have any SUmmoning spells, that's outright lying at this point.
Not even a little... If we're counting slot numbers an evoker is much more of a summoner than the summoner.
And you know who's a better summoner than both? A Conjurer.
Which is what you had in P1, Eidolon and spells.NO, not even a little like it. You actually summoned your Eidolon [it SPECIFICALLY stated it as such] and you SPECIFICALLY had a SLA that granted summoning spells for free every day outside of your spells. As far as spells, you in NO way had to allocate summoning spells to your slots: you could easily fill every slot with non-summoning spells. So... If we're comparing it to PF1 like you did, I don't see it as hitting ANY of the same marks as the playtest version is missing ANY form of summoning.
Yeah, continuing to lie isn't helping your position.
It doesn't have the free summoning spells that P1 had, but it certainly has access to its Eidolon and Summon Spells. Saying it doesn't have any summoning is just outright lying.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You not being forced to pick Summoning spells does not mean you don't have any SUmmoning spells, that's outright lying at this point.
It makes you less of a summoner than any other caster as they have many more slots: as such, it is no lie. The class doesn't have any summoning abilities. The fact that you could slot some summoning is besides the point.
And you know who's a better summoner than both? A Conjurer.
Sure is. It has ACTUAL summoning abilities [school spell]... Why are we calling the summoner a summoner again? I'm not seeing your statement as being in your favor...
Yeah, continuing to lie isn't helping your position.
It doesn't have the free summoning spells that P1 had, but it certainly has access to its Eidolon and Summon Spells. Saying it doesn't have any summoning is just outright lying.
Point out factual lie. The Eidolon i specifically NOT a summoning ability. The class doesn't have a summoning ability. You only have the option to take summoning spells in your slots like ANY OTHER CASTER except with much more limited slots. I'm not seeing the summoning: My character with Trick Magic Item could use a Wand with a summoning spell on it too but that doesn't mean the class has summoning abilities.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For what it's worth, summoner is one of, if not the only class with class feats that directly benefit summoning. Not many, unfortunately, but certainly more than a wizard, or a character with trick magic item. So yes, it is most certainly better at summoning than a majority of other classes. The lack of spell slots isn't great, however. More slots, or a summoning font, or more preferably a focus spell, would greatly benefit the class in this respect.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For what it's worth, summoner is one of, if not the only class with class feats that directly benefit summoning. Not many, unfortunately, but certainly more than a wizard, or a character with trick magic item. So yes, it is most certainly better at summoning than a majority of other classes. The lack of spell slots isn't great, however.
Instead of a feat, the conjurer has an ability that grants a focus spell that far exceeds that utility of the one 10th level feat and there is only one other feat that boosts the summoning itself is OSTENTATIOUS ARRIVAL which is interesting but not works against itself if you want to tag team with your Eidolon [the blast doesn't hit you but says nothing about your Eidolon so if you summon a creature to flank a medium creature with your Eidolon, the 10' burst hits it...]. DISTRACTING SUMMON SPELL buffs your Eidolon, not a summoning.
As such... the few feats aren't selling me on "better at summoning" than... well any casting class. By 4th level any caster could snag a Conjurers school spell and have a superior focus spell and more slots to summon with.
More slots, or a summoning font, or more preferably a focus spell, would greatly benefit the class in this respect.
Heck, you could toss in all three and I wouldn't mind: give me an Eidolon-less subclass if need be to be an actual summoner with cool summoning goodies. No matter what, if the Eidolon is part of your budget I'm worried summoning is going to take a distant back seat.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It makes you less of a summoner than any other caster as they have many more slots: as such, it is no lie. The class doesn't have any summoning abilities. The fact that you could slot some summoning is besides the point.No it isn't. You are flat out lying.
Sure is. It has ACTUAL summoning abilities [school spell]... Why are we calling the summoner a summoner again? I'm not seeing your statement as being in your favor...Conjurer, the absolutely master of conjuration magic, existed in P1 and we still called Summoner Summoner.
Point out factual lie.You repeatedly saying the Summoner has no summoning.
The Eidolon i specifically NOT a summoning ability.If you say so.
The class doesn't have a summoning ability.This is a lie.
You only have the option to take summoning spells in your slots like ANY OTHER CASTER except with much more limited slots.You not liking the summoning doesn't mean they have no summoning.
I'm not seeing the summoning: My character with Trick Magic Item could use a Wand with a summoning spell on it too but that doesn't mean the class has summoning abilities.
Because you're not getting it from your class, a wand isn't a class feature.
Eidolon is a class feature.
Spells are a class feature.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
give me an Eidolon-less subclass if need be to be an actual summoner with cool summoning goodies. No matter what, if the Eidolon is part of your budget I'm worried summoning is going to take a distant back seat.
If you want to play a caster that summons that doesn't want anything to do with the Eidolon then play a Conjurer.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You are flat out lying.
I don't think you understand what that means... If you aren't going to be truthful, I don't see the point of debating you.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel your being a little disengenious, it's pretty clear that when people are talking about summoning they are talking about dedicated summoning rather than summoning through diminished spellcasting.
I think what is being illustrated though is relevant - when people are saying "the class has no summoning" what they really mean is "the class isn't the Summoning powerhouse from 1E".
The class can summon, and even in playtest has some unique interactions for it (and even a custom version of a Summon Animal spell, just to support it).
Pointing out that the class can summon is important because it throws into relief the fact that this isnt the "thematic" issue some want to present it as, but is instead a "power/balance" issue.
Am I saying the class shouldn't get more Power in the summoning arena? I am not.
But using the 1E summoners plethora of free slots as a benchmark may be... optimistic.
The class' overall power level is being scaled back dramatically, and whatever we end up with, I would be shocked if "extremely powerful" like 4-5 additional top level spell slots was the case.
Its why I favor something sustainable myself, like a Focus spell available as a low level feat.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think what is being illustrated though is relevant - when people are saying "the class has no summoning" what they really mean is "the class isn't the Summoning powerhouse from 1E".
No, that is incorrect. If it had a summoning focus spell I'd say 'it has summoning'. If it had a summoning font, I'd say 'it has summoning'. If it actually summoned it's Eidolon, I'd say 'it has summoning'. NOTHING in that has a single thing to do with power or PF1 but the fact that there IS NO SUMMONING.
Pointing out that the class can summon is important because it throws into relief the fact that this isnt the "thematic" issue some want to present it as, but is instead a "power/balance" issue.
Point out where I mentioned anything related to power? I'm asking for ANYTHING in the summoning arena. 2 summoning related feats isn't what I'd consider summoning support [not actual summoning] when the conjurers starting focus spell blows them out of the water. As I said before in this thread, I don't care if they had to dump the Eidolon but I'd like some actual summoning: does that sound like I'm in it for the power grab? I just want my summoner to actually focus on summoning more than a conjurer and I don't think I'm a power hunger power gamer for that. The only PF1 benchmark I'm using is that it actually uses summoning class abilities: that's pretty much it.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Graystone, the class has both access to Summoning Spells and unique summoning support. It even has a special blurb ensuring all Summoners have access to some sort of Summon Spell at level 1.
It undeniably has Summoning - therefore the only context in which your position makes any sense at all is that it doesnt have enough Summoning to meet some personal threshold of yours.
And that's a power based argument, not a thematic one.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The summoner can absolutely summon if you choose to. I am very glad that the class isn’t forced to rely on summoning, though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am very glad that the class isn’t forced to rely on summoning, though.
I agree, I was never interested in the summoning stuff from 1e, and any summon stuff in 2e would've gone unused.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Graystone, the class has both access to Summoning Spells and unique summoning support.
Never said it didn't have access: EVERY character has access to summoning and unique summoning support [everyone can spend feats to get slots, other classes feats or magic item use]. Slots aren't unique. Only one feat is unique and isn't summoning itself.
It even has a special blurb ensuring all Summoners have access to some sort of Summon Spell at level 1.
Your Eidolon can use a summoning spell and I wouldn't call it the summoner...
It undeniably has Summoning - therefore the only context in which your position makes any sense at all is that it doesnt have enough Summoning to meet some personal threshold of yours.
Access or the option to take it isn't the same as having it. A cleric HAS healing/harm always. A druid or alchemist MIGHT have healing. There is a difference. So it isn't "undeniably": it's optional. I can build an rogue as a healer but it isn't one by default and it's the same with the summoner: You can build a summoner to summon but it isn't one by default. Some dude with a wand is as much of a summoner as the summoner.
And that's a power based argument, not a thematic one.
It's both. It fails in both IMO. You aren't summoning anything as a theme or as a mechanic. As it stands it teleports it's Eidolon and has slots to use ANY kind of spell equally well. For me, it's not even adjacent to a summoner in power usage or theme.
The summoner can absolutely summon if you choose to. I am very glad that the class isn’t forced to rely on summoning, though.
And I would be happy not to have to rely on an Eidolon and *looks at class name* actually summon things.