Alternate Eidolon


Summoner Class


1 person marked this as a favorite.

People are comparing the Animal Companion with the Eidolon, people are also comparing the Familiar with the Eidelon.

For those of you who dislike the current form of the Eidelon, would it be better if the Eidelon rule just combined Animal Companions and Familiars?

Imagine if the rule was just: pick an Animal Companion. This Animal Companion gets four Familiar/Master abilities. They would get more Familiar/Master abilities on par with the Witch.

Add to that the ability for the Eidelon to have armor/weapon runes and have some random feats that can add special abilities.

Now they are just as balanced as a Witch who has a familiar riding on the back of an animal companion (easily picked up by level 2.) It would also give a whole slew of options.

Now the Eidelon is weaker, but does not share MAP. What would people think of that?

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I like it in principle but I think they need new lists.. like copy ACs, increase stats by +2, allow varied stats, give it its own HP, provide abilities in the way familiars get abilities, 3 at level 1, give 1 more at level 5, 10, 15, 20 for free. (Dedication only ever gets 3 rather than 7 at level 20) and that would feel pretty good.

Make actions cost 1 for 2 like AC and give a free action as well. Then I think it would be pretty decent imo.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Verzen wrote:

I like it in principle but I think they need new lists.. like copy ACs, increase stats by +2, allow varied stats, give it its own HP, provide abilities in the way familiars get abilities, 3 at level 1, give 1 more at level 5, 10, 15, 20 for free. (Dedication only ever gets 3 rather than 7 at level 20) and that would feel pretty good.

Make actions cost 1 for 2 like AC and give a free action as well. Then I think it would be pretty decent imo.

Once you start adding that many things the balance starts to get skewed.

On the other hand the Summoner is not a full caster, so being a bit more powerful would not be that bad.

Sczarni

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
inshal chenet wrote:
Verzen wrote:

I like it in principle but I think they need new lists.. like copy ACs, increase stats by +2, allow varied stats, give it its own HP, provide abilities in the way familiars get abilities, 3 at level 1, give 1 more at level 5, 10, 15, 20 for free. (Dedication only ever gets 3 rather than 7 at level 20) and that would feel pretty good.

Make actions cost 1 for 2 like AC and give a free action as well. Then I think it would be pretty decent imo.

Once you start adding that many things the balance starts to get skewed.

On the other hand the Summoner is not a full caster, so being a bit more powerful would not be that bad.

Druids have an AC and a full caster list and some devastating spells. So...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have spent time trying to customize the eidolon while keeping it balanced. It is extremely hard. The nice thing about PF1 is balance was a secondary concern versus rendering an eidolon interesting and making them feel authentic. In PF2 I'm not sure how you keep the eidolon balanced and make it feel authentic.

I've toyed with getting rid of boost and giving the eidolons higher damage dice, but the phantom and beast are harder to justify larger damage dice innately compared to a greatsword angel or a dragon using appropriate damage dice for bite, horns, claws, and tail.

I was thinking to boost the strength and stats to a fantastical level without needing item bonuses to hit. That leaves the strength the same. Phanton was I thinking of making finesse, then it gets higher AC by a good margin.

Everything is built to reach +34 to hit. 4d8+6 mastery +5 strength +8 boost eidolon for about 37 damage without energy runes a hit at lvl 20. This is very inferior to most other martial classes and about monk level damage. If you use the agile attack, the damage is even lower.

A giant barbarian for example wielding a maul does 4d12+7+6+18 which comes to 57 a hit or 20 points higher.

Fighter wielding a maul does 41 a hit, but has plenty of feats to boost damage and higher accuracy.

So this is all very locked in damage. They seem to have built an eidolon to do the lowest martial damage when using boost eidolon. Not sure how they intend to make the eidolon attractive to use over another martial class, but the 4 slots is unlikely to do the job.

Unless they have some surprises for us in the next iteration or behind the scenes, it looks like the summoner is going to be one of the weaker classes in the game once again paying a heavy price for versatility, which I think Paizo greatly overvalues in their builds as evidenced by the weak damage of the monk.

As an example, my giant barbarian was able to obtain personal flight via wings feat from a versatile heritage that he has used one time in combat. The need for flight in combat is extremely rare. The vast majority of the time the giant barbarian can stand and swing heavy hits on foes obliterating them without needing to fly or use reach. He kills the enemy very quickly because raw damage is more important than mobility or flight or special abilities. Raw damage is highly valuable in nearly every encounter, whereas versatility is situational and often so wide and varied that someone in the group will always have a skill or ability to answer in those times where versatility is important.

Now if they add something like a summon font or a means to boost accuracy for summoned creatures, then that strategy in conjunction with the eidolon will make it a very powerful damage dealer with useful versatility. There are elements of the class that indicate this may be a direction they are moving in. We will see.

But as it sits right now, the eidolon is going to be a weak martial damage dealer with some versatility. It's best analogue is a monk. That seems to be the balance mark they are trying to hit.

Some people really like monks. The summoner may appeal to that player type. But as far as straight up killing power goes, the summoner in its current form will not match classes like the barbarian, fighter, ranger, druid, or rogue. I would even argue the swashbuckler will perform better than the summoner. It is likely to be superior to the wizard and sorcerer at lower level, but might start to lag at higher level as the casters get better spells. But martial damage combined with casting seems to be more ideal as evidenced by druid power, so the eidolon with a little casting combination might still have some good nova moments.


I do think that Eidolons base power should start about the same as an Animal Companion. Then have list of evolutions that work like familiar abilities that let it become better up to a martial (but weaker than a Fighter).

I dont care if some evolutions deal better damage then others, as long as those other abilities have more utility. It should be the Summoner who chooses what type of Eidolon they want: Offense or Support.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Secrets of Magic Playtest / Summoner Class / Alternate Eidolon All Messageboards