Yeah I did not see Verzen say he wants them to be stronger than martials. I'm not sure where you got that.
Its the general historical disregard for "parity" in other posts across the board.
A general desire for Eidolons to have access to abilities taken straight out of the Bestiary, which players are generally denied, without concern for whether that causes balance issues between classes.
He may not have said that specifically, but theres been a general feeling to Verzens posts that what they want is something that is equivalent to a Martial, with all the benefits of having a second body.
Early on Verzen was also a proponent of abilities at low levels like unrestricted elemental damage and weaknesses, which are problematic for a variety of balance reasons.
I dont think Rysky was attempting to misrepresent anyone, so much as drawing a conclusion from a range of posts since the beginning of the playtest.
I dont think Verzen is out to make the class OP, but I do think that would be the result of a number of Verzens earlier proposals.
Lol ok... a general feeling
I can't speak for Verzen but if you look a couple posts up I have a post about how I think the class should be balanced without being OP
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I want to treat my summoner as powerless and my Eidolon as powerful. Where is the second body?
I don't think this is ever going to happen. They will always split the difference in terms of balance, that's just going to be what happens. And the Eidolon as such is likely not to be size up to a tried-and-true full fledged Martial.
And I highly doubt they'll drop spellcasting, anyway.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I want to treat my summoner as powerless and my Eidolon as powerful. Where is the second body?I don't think this is ever going to happen. They will always split the difference in terms of balance, that's just going to be what happens. And the Eidolon as such is likely not to be size up to a tried-and-true full fledged Martial.
And I highly doubt they'll drop spellcasting, anyway.
It was specifically on the table that they might drop slotted spellcasting for some alternate like a summoning font. I doubt they'll go that route either, but if it is even being considered, other options might also be considered.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
LinkTo you guys who are arguing about martial balance:
Leave the math up to the game designers. The game designers will be able to balance just about any concept, within reason. So I don't see the point of talking about the balance of a specific scenario.
If it is decided that the class should be spell based, the designers can balance it as such. If it is decided the class should be martial, the game designers will come up with some way to make it work well.
I think it is a bit silly to say any concept is unbalanced, because its a concept, not a game mechanic, and there is definitely some way to balance it.
Experience from playing with P1 Summoners, and the people on the playtest currently asking for a return to that form.
Also Verzen has outright stated they want the Eidolon to be stronger than martials.
No. I didn't. I never said that. YOU said I said that. I want them to BE martials. On par with them.
Stop with the dishonesty. Its unbecoming.
I would be 100% comfortable with the idea of my summoner just standing around and doing nothing while my Eidolon wrecked house. For me, anyway, the summoner isn't two PCs. Its one. Its the Eidolon and that's it. My summoner is the social persona. My Eidolon is the combat persona. And thats how I picture my Summoner.Link
But I do really want Synthesis to be on PAR with that of Fighter or Barbarian in terms of martial capabilities.Link
That's why our Eidolons should just be monsters with the actual traits of monsters and balance from there. Make sure they are on par with martials. Get rid of our spellcasting. Let us feel like we are a monster tamer.link
And the reason I am comparing an Eidolon to a class like fighter is solely because I think the Eidolon should be on that power level (equal) to fighter and barbarian while the summoner is more like the social persona. Think vigilante identities, except instead two bodies instead of 1.link
I never once stated "better" than other martials. I have repeatedly stated, "On par" with other martials. Even if they remove our spellcasting entirely (since it's not useful for a synth) I wouldn't mind it as long as they are on par with other martials. The Synthesis should be the MARTIAL version of the class.
It's been going on for awhile so I've obviously missed some, and they've shifted back and ofrth on removing spells as well, but asking for the Eidolon/Synthesist to be the same as other martials, in addition to their other sttuff, is asking to be stronger than any other martial.
That and everything else they've said and advocated for has shaped the conversations adn impressions to this point.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While a non-spellcasting variant of the Summoner would be neat and fun, and totally awesome, at this time I dont see it as a likely option for the core Summoner release.
Would a variant that traded Spellcasting for a load of bonus Evolution feats (or some other Eidolon benefit) be cool? Sure would - but that concept is likely to trap for the core target audience of new players who might not get the more advanced build needed to make the Summoner less of a "dead weight" if they don't have the significant personal power bump associated with spellcasting.
So... as a variant option? Sure.
As the core form of the class? Eh...
I'd love to see a subclass focus on summoning instead of the Eidolon. My preference would be one subclass for synthesis, one for Eidolon the class and one for a master summoner. I think you could make the most people happy that way.
For instance, synthesis could have a set of focus spells and/or abilities they can use in synthesis instead of slots they can't use in synthesis. Eidolon the class can be like it is now [but hopefully with some more core options to customize even if they stay with templates]. For The Master Summoner, drop the Eidolon to animal companion level [or even drop a template on normal animal companions] and buff spell casting and/or focus spells and/or summoning font.
It's unlikely, but I can dream.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's unlikely, but I can dream.
I think that if we get subclasses, the two scenarios (in general, if not specifics) you've outlined are by far the most likely.
Synthesist and Master Summoner were absolutely the big archetypes in 1E other than standard Summoner, and implementation of them is a relatively straightforward modification to the "standard" summoner archetype.
My concern is that feats would get too spread out covering all those concepts, unless Evolution feats applied to Summoned creatures, which might get weird. Though that would definitely make this the class you wanted if you want to be the best at using Summon spells.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
My concern is that feats would get too spread out covering all those concepts, unless Evolution feats applied to Summoned creatures, which might get weird. Though that would definitely make this the class you wanted if you want to be the best at using Summon spells.
I think that you really just need an iconic ability for the subclass, and a bonus feat and you're off to the races for each of these.
My personal take on how I'd go about it.
Evolutionist - You gain a bonus 1st level class feat, which must have the evolution or tandem trait. Each time you gain a level, you may choose a new feat to replace your previous choice, which must be at least one level lower than your current level.
Synthesist - You gain the Synthesis feat as a bonus feat. You gain ***some balanced ability to use your own abilities and feats while using Synthesis***.
Master Summoner - You gain the Summon Monster feat as a bonus feat. While your Eidolon is not manifested, you may sustain one spell with the Conjuration trait each round as a free action
***Summon Monster feat is either a summoning focus spell, or a feat that grants bonus slots for summoning - possibly able to be taken multiple times - and in either case is thematically tied to your Eidlon.***
And boom, all three supported with a defining ability that lets them excel in their area of expertise, without invalidating the others.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My concern is that feats would get too spread out covering all those concepts, unless Evolution feats applied to Summoned creatures, which might get weird. Though that would definitely make this the class you wanted if you want to be the best at using Summon spells.
That was why I was thinking it unlikely: Mark said pages are already allocated so if too much needs siloed to different subclasses it'd have to start eating into new spells and such. It'd be great if they already have the pages for it or can manage to wedge it in but worry that if it does end up in it might end up too homogenized to really satisfy Synthesist and Master Summoner enthusiasts. I know for myself, if they make subclasses that are just slightly different from each other I don't think I'd be happy: it'd be a very tough balancing act to walk to make it work with enough differences to make it satisfying but sharing enough to not eat though too many pages IMO.
EDIT: Not a bad start KrispyXIV. ;)
My concern is that feats would get too spread out covering all those concepts, unless Evolution feats applied to Summoned creatures, which might get weird. Though that would definitely make this the class you wanted if you want to be the best at using Summon spells.I think that you really just need an iconic ability for the subclass, and a bonus feat and you're off to the races for each of these.
My personal take on how I'd go about it.
Evolutionist - You gain a bonus 1st level class feat, which must have the evolution or tandem trait. Each time you gain a level, you may choose a new feat to replace your previous choice, which must be at least one level lower than your current level.
Synthesist - You gain the Synthesis feat as a bonus feat. You gain ***some balanced ability to use your own abilities and feats while using Synthesis***.
Master Summoner - You gain the Summon Monster feat as a bonus feat. While your Eidolon is not manifested, you may sustain one spell with the Conjuration trait each round as a free action
***Summon Monster feat is either a summoning focus spell, or a feat that grants bonus slots for summoning - possibly able to be taken multiple times - and in either case is thematically tied to your Eidlon.***
And boom, all three supported with a defining ability that lets them excel in their area of expertise, without invalidating the others.
From your fingers to the dev's ears...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My concern is that feats would get too spread out covering all those concepts, unless Evolution feats applied to Summoned creatures, which might get weird. Though that would definitely make this the class you wanted if you want to be the best at using Summon spells.That was why I was thinking it unlikely: Mark said pages are already allocated so if too much needs siloed to different subclasses it'd have to start eating into new spells and such. It'd be great if they already have the pages for it or can manage to wedge it in but worry that if it does end up in it might end up too homogenized to really satisfy Synthesist and Master Summoner enthusiasts. I know for myself, if they make subclasses that are just slightly different from each other I don't think I'd be happy: it'd be a very tough balancing act to walk to make it work with enough differences to make it satisfying but sharing enough to not eat though too many pages IMO.
EDIT: Not a bad start KrispyXIV. ;)
Yeah, I think the big obstacle that's going to kill a lot of good ideas - like a non-casting variant- is going to be page count.
Which is why going for asking for a lightweight, but potent, set of subclasses seems like the best approach to me.
I also favor having things such as the hypothetical Summon Monster and existing Synthesis as first level feats, so that all Summoners can diversify and do things like pick up more summoning if they want to - inspiration there is Order Explorer for Druifs (though I think the way it is set up is to make the iconic Focus spells harder to pick up via multiclassing or something? ).
Its a delicate balance, but I think its doable and I dont think the examples I listed are too heavy a lift for the current class power level, myself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In regards to pagecount, Summoner is already eating a lot due to Eidolon
That was the other thing that worried me as we have no idea how many there are: they go for something like bloodlines, 7 is taking up 5-6 pages easy by themselves.
SoM will only have 2, so there’s a bit more room to stretch
From the way Mark talked, it seemed like they had plenty of content to fill it up but could push off some spells/feats/ect if needed. At this point, if something expands, something else is going so it depends what's already allocated for the summoner.
Its a delicate balance, but I think its doable and I dont think the examples I listed are too heavy a lift for the current class power level, myself.
Your examples are great but it would be the follow up feats/abilities really. If you have subclass specific feats and maybe level based subclass abilities [like Research Fields] to make the subclasses more distinct, it becomes more difficult: I'm hoping for more than just a 1st level difference.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your examples are great but it would be the follow up feats/abilities really. If you have subclass specific feats and maybe level based subclass abilities [like Research Fields] to make the subclasses more distinct, it becomes more difficult: I'm hoping for more than just a 1st level difference.
I think the feats like ostentatious arrival, and hopefully the others its a conceptual test for, do a lot to support the master summoner "archetype" through their existence and will be uniquely usable by someone who has benefits that go along with using the Summon X style spells.
I think the big thing that ALL Summon-spell using summoners need is something that "fixes" the accuracy of summoned creatures - my preference for that is a feat that lets them sub your spell attack/dcs for their abilities.
As for the Synthesist, they'll already develop aggressively with any evolution feats that already exist, and if they have some sort of capability sharing they'll benefit MASSIVELY from archetypes. I think a level one change here could have massive implications for the characters entire career without much effort.
Or in other words, I think a first level change could have a huge impact on how such characters grow and develop - even without a lot of extra effort. I dont know that you'd really need more than 0-2 subclass specific feats, really.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the eidolon is equal to a fighter, but the spell-less summoner keeps their 18 charisma, then the combo is strictly better than a fighter and thus OP.I disagree. 1) Stats mean far less in PF2 than they do in PF1. 2) They might be good in social situations. 3) Fighters still have 2 more attack than anyone else in the game.
4) What we are asking for is for the Eidolon to be of martial strength (not necessarily as good as a fighter) but can keep up with barbarian, ranger, monk, etc. Having 18 charisma just means they get a little bit of a bonus during social encounters fighters dont get, but fighters still get +2 attack, full plate armor, any weapon combinations etc. There are ways to balance it so our Eidolon feels capable in combat than being extremely sub par.
You're massively discounting the relevance of out of combat power in most games, in ADDITION to discounting the relevance of an 18 charisma in addition to Martial-character level combat prowess in combat.
Demoralize (and its developed abilities, like Scare to Death) is a very powerful thing, and Summoners are extremely well set up for it with a high charisma Summoner in addition to a potent combatant.
An Eidolon that is a full martial character would be a complete, imbalanced non-starter even if all the Summoner contributed was a body with a Statline. The existence of archetypes means a Summoner will NEVER just be that, even if the Summoner class itself offered absolutely nothing... and it offers far from nothing.
An Eidolon that is "as good as" a Barbarian or other Martial character isn't going to happen. It is fundamentally imbalanced.
I get that you want an "un"summoner character, but that's clearly not in line with the design intent for the class, outside of possible support for Synethesis.
An important part of your OP point is also discussed in other threads.
I think the confusion comes from 2 things:
1)- The class is called "Summoner" (which using common language - especially seen from an non-native English speaker like me - immediately seems to imply magic usage), whether it should be called "Manifester" since the key signature ability of the class is indeed to Manifest a eidolon.
With the key difference that: a summoned/conjured creature has a Golarion existence independently of a specific character (and for that matter can be summoned in turn by different PC/NPC), whether an eidolon can't be summoned by anyone: only one character in the whole world can manifest it. it is totally linked with a unique being and cannot be in Golarion unless it is manifested by its specific summoner nearby.
2)- The PF1 class was indeed using Summon Monster spell-like ability and thus help gave the class its former name.
Where I see your point as interestning is that an Eidolon-Manifester doesn't need to be a Monster Summoner too to be a great intrestning class to play. Actually, trying to have both at the same time as some real drawbacks:
A) The #1 purpose of PF2 is to make things simpler and easier while keeping the fun. Having a class that tries to do 2 things when only one is needed to ensure the fun isn't going that way.
B) Many other spellcasting classes can already be specicialized in conjuration/Summoning. Adding Summoning capabilities to the Manifester doesn't fill a need. Especially if archetypes or specific feats can allow players who want to to add optional Summoning abilities to the Manifester.
C) If the class rules somehow forces you to invest feats/skills/focus splitted between both the manifest-eidolon and summon-monsters parts, you may end up having two half-interestning-classes rather than one amazingly fun one.
This said, the interestning part of the Manifester is to - sometimes - play two "bodies" of the same character during combat.
Since the eidolon part is clearly melee-oriented, having the other part being spellcasting-oriented (but not specificaly summoning-oriented) is freally more fun that playing a double-melee or melee-ranged character for example. Including for the other party members that could argue with a good case that a double-melee for example would be stealing some of there role fun in the battle.
Bottom-line, having the "Manifester" not being a "Summoner", but before all the eidolon-manifester, with limited additional spellcasting (so that the manifester itself (by opposition of the eidolon) doesn't feel useless (=not fun to play) in combat seems to me the way to go.
IMHO.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
So when you're level 15+, sure. Scare to death is pretty scary. But that end difference is like... 21 charisma vs 16 charisma. So the...If the eidolon is equal to a fighter, but the spell-less summoner keeps their 18 charisma, then the combo is strictly better than a fighter and thus OP.I disagree. 1) Stats mean far less in PF2 than they do in PF1. 2) They might be good in social situations. 3) Fighters still have 2 more attack than anyone else in the game.
4) What we are asking for is for the Eidolon to be of martial strength (not necessarily as good as a fighter) but can keep up with barbarian, ranger, monk, etc. Having 18 charisma just means they get a little bit of a bonus during social encounters fighters dont get, but fighters still get +2 attack, full plate armor, any weapon combinations etc. There are ways to balance it so our Eidolon feels capable in combat than being extremely sub par.
You're massively discounting the relevance of out of combat power in most games, in ADDITION to discounting the relevance of an 18 charisma in addition to Martial-character level combat prowess in combat.
Demoralize (and its developed abilities, like Scare to Death) is a very powerful thing, and Summoners are extremely well set up for it with a high charisma Summoner in addition to a potent combatant.
An Eidolon that is a full martial character would be a complete, imbalanced non-starter even if all the Summoner contributed was a body with a Statline. The existence of archetypes means a Summoner will NEVER just be that, even if the Summoner class itself offered absolutely nothing... and it offers far from nothing.
An Eidolon that is "as good as" a Barbarian or other Martial character isn't going to happen. It is fundamentally imbalanced.
I get that you want an "un"summoner character, but that's clearly not in line with the design intent for the class, outside of possible support for Synethesis.
whoosh
Scare to death is not the only benefit of Demoralize. It’s a valuable action from level 1.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Demoralize (and its developed abilities, like Scare to Death) is a very powerful thing, and Summoners are extremely well set up for it with a high charisma Summoner in addition to a potent combatant.
Haven't you been a strong advocate that the shared health pool isn't a problem, that the summoner being uniquely vulnerable is not a problem, because a smart summoner can park themselves in the next room and not even expose themselves to danger?
How are they going to do that and demoralize? And if the summoner is going to be in position to be targeted, shouldn't they get a bonus for that downside? A fighter might not get an 18 charisma Intimidate, but they also aren't going to be hit twice by 1 roll twice and take the worse effect from a fireball either. (edit: I misremembered that section)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Demoralize (and its developed abilities, like Scare to Death) is a very powerful thing, and Summoners are extremely well set up for it with a high charisma Summoner in addition to a potent combatant.Haven't you been a strong advocate that the shared health pool isn't a problem, that the summoner being uniquely vulnerable is not a problem, because a smart summoner can park themselves in the next room and not even expose themselves to danger?
How are they going to do that and demoralize? And if the summoner is going to be in position to be targeted, shouldn't they get a bonus for that downside? A fighter might not get an 18 charisma Intimidate, but they also aren't going to
be hit twice by 1roll twice and take the worse effect from a fireball either. (edit: I misremembered that section)
I'm an advocate of the Summoners shared hp and extra vulnerability being extremely manageable .
If you want to reduce the extra risk to near zero, you can, but this of course reduces the associated benefits (like getting the bonus of two stat lines).
In actual play, I've not been so cautious - I'm generally a move behind the front line, and its generally a PITA for anything to threaten me in any case. I've not had an issue benefitting from the two aspects element, and the additional risk has been reasonable to manage.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm an advocate for the Summoner side also being interesting and customizable. If I want to cast occult illusion spells instead of summoning fey that can't cast any of their own spells, that sounds like a more interesting character.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's funny that liking an aspect of a class means it can't also be a weakness of that class. You think wizards get angry because they get stuck in melee with creatures?
As for spell casting and Eidolon strength, I don't see why we can't have both. Right now the class is fairly under powered compared to full caster and martial, all your proficiency's are lower, your combat stats are lower and your spell slots are way lower. I think that's plenty of room to increase class power before getting close to being concerned about it being too much.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's funny that liking an aspect of a class means it can't also be a weakness of that class. You think wizards get angry because they get stuck in melee with creatures?
As for spell casting and Eidolon strength, I don't see why we can't have both. Right now the class is fairly under powered compared to full caster and martial, all your proficiency's are lower, your combat stats are lower and your spell slots are way lower. I think that's plenty of room to increase class power before getting close to being concerned about it being too much.
Based on my Summoners performance in a party designed with optimization as a secondary concern (free hand fighters, monks, and a divination wizard aren't exactly the basis of a combat powerhouse party - we've found a good rhythm, but its still not highly optimized), I dont think there's as much overhead room for increasing power level as you think. At least not at the current "peak" levels for summoner power.
Good play and strategic combat play makes my Summoner look like the hardest hitting and toughest brawler in the group, and good spell choice and timing on when to drop offensive spells have let me more dramatically end encounters with a well placed spell than the Wizard.
In that environment, underpowered isn't even on the table in my fellow players consideration of the class.
Top end, fully optimized play isn't the only arena to consider - that wasn't where the 1E summoner was a problem, either.
I'm not saying there's no room for growth, just that it's not some vast gulf between summoners and the next guy.
Summoner is already, as written, above the alchemist imo.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Summoner is already, as written, above the alchemist imo.
That bar is so low the witch tripped over it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Summoner is already, as written, above the alchemist imo.That bar is so low the witch tripped over it.
I'm not saying it isn't a low bar, I'm just saying that we're not exactly below where the scale starts.
I wouldn't expect the target power level to be in the upper echelons of class power, if the APG was any guide.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's funny that liking an aspect of a class means it can't also be a weakness of that class. You think wizards get angry because they get stuck in melee with creatures?
As for spell casting and Eidolon strength, I don't see why we can't have both. Right now the class is fairly under powered compared to full caster and martial, all your proficiency's are lower, your combat stats are lower and your spell slots are way lower. I think that's plenty of room to increase class power before getting close to being concerned about it being too much.Based on my Summoners performance in a party designed with optimization as a secondary concern (free hand fighters, monks, and a divination wizard aren't exactly the basis of a combat powerhouse party - we've found a good rhythm, but its still not highly optimized), I dont think there's as much overhead room for increasing power level as you think. At least not at the current "peak" levels for summoner power.
Good play and strategic combat play makes my Summoner look like the hardest hitting and toughest brawler in the group, and good spell choice and timing on when to drop offensive spells have let me more dramatically end encounters with a well placed spell than the Wizard.
In that environment, underpowered isn't even on the table in my fellow players consideration of the class.
Top end, fully optimized play isn't the only arena to consider - that wasn't where the 1E summoner was a problem, either.
I'm not saying there's no room for growth, just that it's not some vast gulf between summoners and the next guy.
Summoner is already, as written, above the alchemist imo.
When I started this thread, I was not really thinking about the power of the eidolon in combat. I think the eidolon might be weak in combat or it might not be. I haven't played enough to be sure. The thing I really don't like is how weak the Eidolon is outside combat, and how useless the summoner PC is for anything other than casting spells.
So it might be true that the Eidolon should have stronger combat ability, but what I really am asking for is more customization for familiar like abilities. I am also asking that these customizations primarily come outside of the class feat tree, because if they are class feats then that means that you have to chose between an interesting eidolon and an interesting PC, and I think it should be possible to have both.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
When I started this thread, I was not really thinking about the power of the eidolon in combat. I think the eidolon might be weak in combat or it might not be. I haven't played enough to be sure. The thing I really don't like is how weak the Eidolon is outside combat, and how useless the summoner PC is for anything other than casting spells.
So it might be true that the Eidolon should have stronger combat ability, but what I really am asking for is more customization for familiar like abilities. I am also asking that these customizations primarily come outside of the class feat tree, because if they are class feats then that means that you have to chose between an interesting eidolon and an interesting PC, and I think it should be possible to have both.
The Evolution Surge focus spell accomplishes most of what you're wanting here, for zero resource cost to the Summoner.
It provides movement modes to conquer obstacles on demand (including underwater breathing), extra senses on demand, and other miscellaneous utility on demand.
You arent required to choose between an interesting Eidolon and an interesting Summoner - you're just required to choose how much you're investing in abilities that are always on, and how much you want to leave as "accessible on demand".
I think Evolution surge is intended to do a LOT of heavy lifting for the class narratively for special abilities, and a lot of people are treating it like its a minor situational bonus.
I dont think its intended to be.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Summoner is already, as written, above the alchemist imo.That bar is so low the witch tripped over it.I'm not saying it isn't a low bar, I'm just saying that we're not exactly below where the scale starts.
I wouldn't expect the target power level to be in the upper echelons of class power, if the APG was any guide.
I don't think it would be. Even if Verzen got every proficiency he wants in his wildest fever dreams, the follow-on feat support just would not be there. Eidolons would be using feats to unlock sensory support, new movements, defenses, and possibly new attack types (Mark said they were planned, but he didn't promise they'd be freely available; they could be locked up by Eidolon type like breath weapon). Which isn't a bad thing; that carves out a new way of tanking and area denial and gives Summoners a decent niche even in a full martial party. Some lesser versions of other class's basic abilities are present, but a phantom isn't getting a champion's reactions, a dragon or beast isn't getting a ranger's multiattack, and angels aren't getting a bard's buffing.
Ultimately I think you're correct that the Eidolon is serviceable powerwise. Could be safely boosted, but probably doesn't need a lot, and I'd personally rather that boost come in the form of customization instead of raw proficiency or stat increases. Assuming they can figure out a way to do it without running into the min-maxing you've brought up, that might satisfy more summoner players without making martials feel redundant or that they have to reroll.
I think Evolution surge is intended to do a LOT of heavy lifting for the class narratively for special abilities, and a lot of people are treating it like its a minor situational bonus.
I dont think its intended to be.
100% agreed, I love that spell.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As you've said you play in a low damage group, while I play in a modest damage group, rogue and druid with a cleric heal bot. I hit less often and do far less damage when I hit. I also have average AC and use magic as survivability, 2 out of 3 of my big blasts have been crit resisted, so I in no way keep up with the two powerhouses in my group(neither does the battle cleric, missing and crit resists for him made him not show up to the last game).
I think all the lowered proficiency's count for a lot, on top of having sub par martial stats.
Alchemist is a feast or famine class, you either give out bonuses the group can't get and hit weaknesses or you do very little. That's not really something anyone should aspire to.
Being below all but the one class that's been rated the worst mechanically and for fun, is not a good place at all.
If we consider that a dual class (martial+caster) isn't leaps and bounds better then everyone else due to action economy, then I do think there's a lot of room to grow. I think far fewer spell slots limit your spell casting from being too powerful, and the shared HP from making your martial side being too powerful. You'll never be as good at social stuff as a bard or sorcerer, never outdo a swashbuckler or a rogue at the intensity or scope of skills they can do, never out do a fighter at accuracy.
What's the type of role you fill in a group, what are the sorts of play styles you can build? I think with the limitations we have now it wouldn't be too hard to make a proper hybrid that can do combat and non combat without over shadowing others.
100% agreed, I love that spell.I think Evolution surge is intended to do a LOT of heavy lifting for the class narratively for special abilities, and a lot of people are treating it like its a minor situational bonus.
I dont think its intended to be.
Yeah.
For example,, From a Build standpoint, even if I'm running a "Wolf" Eidolon, there's relatively little value in spending a feat to unlock scent.
It makes way more sense - from a budget standpoint - to wait until scent is needed and "turn it on" on demand.
Same with climbing, flight, etc.
I think a lot of people feel obligated to purchase Scent or Climbing or what have you, when the class is designed for you to be able to use these abilities on a limited basis via focus for free, as appropriate, without costing you class resources.
Getting these abilities permanently, on the other hand is an investment into an optional bonus.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
So when you're level 15+, sure.
Sorry but nah. Demoralize is a top tier action at all levels of the game period.
I find your value of penalties/bonuses weird and inconsistent with your own arguments.
You call the current iteration of Eidolon "unfunctional" for being a +1/2 behind at certain points of the game and then downplay the value of a 1 action ability that is extremely valuable for denying the same level of bonus
You can't have it both ways.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Evolution Surge focus spell accomplishes most of what you're wanting here, for zero resource cost to the Summoner.
It provides movement modes to conquer obstacles on demand (including underwater breathing), extra senses on demand, and other miscellaneous utility on demand.
You arent required to choose between an interesting Eidolon and an interesting Summoner - you're just required to choose how much you're investing in abilities that are always on, and how much you want to leave as "accessible on demand".
I think Evolution surge is intended to do a LOT of heavy lifting for the class narratively for special abilities, and a lot of people are treating it like its a minor situational bonus.
I dont think its intended to be.
It absolutely does not accomplish most of what I am wanting here. Certainly the abilities are a good start, but they last for one minute each. Also it is a focus spell, so you cannot use it without then spending 10 minutes of wasted time. Also, you still have to be 5th level before you can ride your Eidolon, and then it is only for 1 minute.
That is one of the things that I think is most incredibly dumb. Riding your Eidolon should probably be automatically available, or at least an option at first level. It is such an obvious trait, and right now you cant do it.
Also from a roleplay standpoint, that is such a lame solution. It would be way cooler to give Eidolons specific abilities than to just say all of them can do everything, but they are really bad at it.
I think Evolution surge is intended to do a LOT of heavy lifting for the class narratively for special abilities, and a lot of people are treating it like it somehow succeeds at that and is something more than a situational bonus.
I think it is intended to be, but isn't.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think a lot of people feel obligated to purchase Scent or Climbing or what have you, when the class is designed for you to be able to use these abilities on a limited basis via focus for free, as appropriate, without costing you class resources.
Getting these abilities permanently, on the other hand is an investment into an optional bonus.
I think part of that is some of what Jesse_Carl was getting at, that neither Eidolons nor summoners are great at exploration activities unless you drop feats into it. And while Evolution Boost is great for encounter support (why I love it) and even getting past some obstacles, it only lasts 1-3 minutes and then you wait 10 minutes to get it again, which renders its exploration utility limited. Hardly the end of the world, but I think a version that gave the lower buffs up to an hour might be something useful. Perhaps a feat at, say, 8th level that makes the spell last 1 hour, but at -3 spell level? Or even just at no focus cost, but limited to 1st level only.
Edit: Ninja'd by the Minotaur itself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It absolutely does not accomplish most of what I am wanting here. Certainly the abilities are a good start, but they last for one minute each. Also it is a focus spell, so you cannot use it without then spending 10 minutes of wasted time. Also, you still have to be 5th level before you can ride your Eidolon, and then it is only for 1 minute.
That is one of the things that I think is most incredibly dumb. Riding your Eidolon should probably be automatically available, or at least an option at first level. It is such an obvious trait, and right now you cant do it.
Also from a roleplay standpoint, that is such a lame solution. It would be way cooler to give Eidolons specific abilities than to just say all of them can do everything, but they are really bad at it.
I think Evolution surge is intended to do a LOT of heavy lifting for the class narratively for special abilities, and a lot of people are treating it like it somehow succeeds at that and is something more than a situational bonus.
I think it is intended to be, but isn't.
First, as to limits on usage, focus spells are definitely 2Es answer to "per encounter" or "per challenge" abilities, and the "minute duration" on evolution surge is also tuned specifically to the "per encounter" duration for spells and abilities.
You should not be having regular obstacles to having your focus spells available for each encounter or challenge on a regular basis, or your GM is rushing you forward too often without ample time to recuperate.
Second, I think you're seriously underestimating the number of problems out of combat Evolution Surge instantly solves - give the Eidolon a rope, and water based obstacles, height obstacles and physical barriers all become irrelevant the moment an eidolon can get to the other side and carry the party across. A minute is a long time when it comes to solving an obstacle out of combat.
As well, things like the ability to grant scent are massively underrated. Unless someone knows to account for it, strategies like remaining undetected are instantly countered with one spell.
Its a massive problem solver, constantly accessible, with a range of problems it can solve.
From a design standpoint, its an excellent vehicle for delivering massive flexibility to the class with minimal impact on the class power budget.
We aren't going to get significant abilities added onto Eidolons from where they stand now without giving up things elsewhere. Mark said he had significant room to shift things where they are within the current power budget, but has been relatively more coy about what can be added to it.
As cool as it would be, I dont see the class getting a ton of additional resources on top of what it gets now... and I'd hate to see its current, massive versatility get gutted to allow for being able to choose a couple extra highly situational, but permanent, bonuses.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I definitely don't see the Summoner as "weak" in the Exploration phase. You get to do twice the Exploration activities by default, that has to be offset somehow - being slightly less good at them is a extremely generous tradeoff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I definitely don't see the Summoner as "weak" in the Exploration phase. You get to do twice the Exploration activities by default, that has to be offset somehow - being slightly less good at them is a extremely generous tradeoff.
I'm not certain I'd allow that, or allow it at no penalty. You share actions with your Eidolon; you shouldn't be able to fully commit to an exploration activity without your Eidolon also helping with the same activity. Your bond is rather tighter than either a familiar or animal companion, so the "walking and chewing gum" adage starts to apply.
The harshest reading of that would imply that you can't even move at your full exploration speed. I rather doubt that it is intended that way, and I don't interpret it as such, but I wanted to acknowledge that as the logical conclusion of this interpretation even if I don't share it.
But as I said, I'm not sure. I'll have to think about how I want to handle it, because I don't think Paizo will weigh in.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
But as I said, I'm not sure. I'll have to think about how I want to handle it, because I don't think Paizo will weigh in.
Mark already weighed in on the thread focused on this specific item.
Act Together should essentially allow a Summoner and Eidolon to each perform a non-fatiguing Exploration activity, or one of them to perform a fatiguing exploration activity while the other performs a non-fatiguing one.
His less certain personal opinion was that Tandem Move would allow both to perform fatiguing Exploration activities.
So, as intended, both the Summoner and Eidolon absolutely can do something like use Search and Follow the Expert after level 3 to double up on Perception checks, with one of the pair rolling at +2.
Or the Eidolon could Scout while the Summoner avoids notice to roll Stealth on initiative.
Etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So it might be true that the Eidolon should have stronger combat ability, but what I really am asking for is more customization for familiar like abilities.
Okay, like what?
Accompanist - doesn't really fit an eidolon
Amphibious - available level 1 per evolution surge, level 4 feat
Burrower - not available (probably shouldn't be)
Climber - level 5 per evolution surge, level 6 feat
Damage Avoidance - built in to class progression
Darkvision - built in from level 1
Fast Movement - available level 1 per evolution surge, level 4 feat
Flier - level 9 per evolution surge
Focused Rejuvenation - doesn't make sense with shared HP
Independent - eidolons are naturally independent
Kinspeech - eidolons start with language(s) known.
Lab Assistant - doesn't make sense
Manual Dexterity - choice at character creation
Master's Form - doesn't make as much sense for an eidolon, maybe a phantom ability sometime
Partner in Crime - Eidolons can Aid normally
Plant Form - doesn't make sense for an eidolon
Poison Resevoir - homunculus only
Resistance - something I would like to see in the future
Scent - available level 1 per evolution surge or level 1 feat
Skilled - eidolons automatically share your proficiencies
Speech - eidolons can speak and understand all the languages you know.
Spellcasting - eidolons can have more spellcasting than familiars
Toolbearer - not as thematic for an eidolon
Touch telepathy - eidolons already have a telepathic bond with their summoner
Tough - summoners share their 10+Con hit die with eidolons already
Valet - doesn't make as much sense for an eidolon.
Going through the whole list of Familiar Abilities, the only thing that makes sense for an eidolon to have that it doesn't have already (or have access to), is energy resistance. That is something thematic enough (especially for elemental eidolons) that I can't imagine Mark omitting it for the the final class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But as I said, I'm not sure. I'll have to think about how I want to handle it, because I don't think Paizo will weigh in.
Mark already weighed in on the thread focused on this specific item.
Act Together should essentially allow a Summoner and Eidolon to each perform a non-fatiguing Exploration activity, or one of them to perform a fatiguing exploration activity while the other performs a non-fatiguing one.
His less certain personal opinion was that Tandem Move would allow both to perform fatiguing Exploration activities.
So, as intended, both the Summoner and Eidolon absolutely can do something like use Search and Follow the Expert after level 3 to double up on Perception checks, with one of the pair rolling at +2.
Or the Eidolon could Scout while the Summoner avoids notice to roll Stealth on initiative.
Etc.
Oh? I missed that, thank you. That gives me hope that will be in the final document then.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So it might be true that the Eidolon should have stronger combat ability, but what I really am asking for is more customization for familiar like abilities.Okay, like what?
** spoiler omitted **
Going through the whole list of Familiar Abilities, the only thing that makes sense for an eidolon to have that it doesn't have already, or have access to is energy resistance. That is something thematic enough (especially for elemental eidolons) that I can't imagine Mark omitting it for the the final class.
I'm like, 85% sure energy resistance in general is intended to be addressed through items.
I could see elemental eidolons getting it as part of their base package.
I personally doubt we see it as a evolution feat though.
Your point is dead on though.
Oh? I missed that, thank you. That gives me hope that will be in the final document then.
Its the sort of thing that I hope they can clarify in an "Eidolons and Exploration" sidebar in the final book, because while I find it intuitive its definitely something people have questioned... and it absolutely affects how people perceive their out of combat viability.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Going through the whole list of Familiar Abilities, the only thing that makes sense for an eidolon to have that it doesn't have already, or have access to is energy resistance. That is something thematic enough (especially for elemental eidolons) that I can't imagine Mark omitting it for the the final class.
I think Elemental resistance is a fair enough thing to hope for. There's like 30 different heritages that hand it out (yes I'm exaggerating), getting it for a class feat seems balanced.
Its the sort of thing that I hope they can clarify in an "Eidolons and Exploration" sidebar in the final book, because while I find it intuitive its definitely something people have questioned... and it absolutely affects how people perceive their out of combat viability.
Oh? I missed that, thank you. That gives me hope that will be in the final document then.
Or even just describe it in the initial "While Exploring..." section. That was part of what made me question you could do two things at once.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or even just describe it in the initial "While Exploring..." section. That was part of what made me question you could do two things at once.Its the sort of thing that I hope they can clarify in an "Eidolons and Exploration" sidebar in the final book, because while I find it intuitive its definitely something people have questioned... and it absolutely affects how people perceive their out of combat viability.
Oh? I missed that, thank you. That gives me hope that will be in the final document then.
That is the obvious place for it ;)
I feel like they try and avoid overloading that section with mechanics for some reason though.
It should definitely go somewhere, I think we agree on that.