| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Evolution Surge is critical because the Eidolons are boring with no differentiation besides 3 barely useable lame abilities. Abilities that all Eidolons should have access to, not be gated.
Its easy for something to be critical a creature is missing its core ability. Which again already exists in PF2.
Design a balanced eidolon with options. Let us all take a look at it. Maybe you can do better than I can. I'd like to see it myself. Maybe some ideas will interest the designers if you can do it.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I respectfully disagree. It is a temporary surge to use the link between you to manifest a latent ability and adds more flavor in my opinion. It also enhances the idea of your connection as the Eidolon depends on its link to the Summoner to manifest these extraordinary, yet fleeting, abilities.
Honestly my thought was that there should be more things in here (especially at low/mid levels) like grab, constrict, knock back, etc.
I personally wouldn't like the animal companion power level/base flavor as much, but I wouldn't hate it, and I appreciate the effort you put in. :o
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The above are ideas, not a balanced concept. Animal companions would not be good enough with a weak character like the base summoner class. It has insufficient capabilities to work well with a base AC.
You have to show that the options are mathematically balanced using PF2 math, not toss a bunch of ideas out there based on the PF1 summoner class.
That's why this is so difficult. The eidolon has to be balanced and the summoner has to be balanced. So the variation has to be of a kind that doesn't provide a substantial mechanical advantage in any particular area.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's cool to be able to make my giant rabbit eidolon grow wings by using magic. If you don't think it's cool to make your eidolon grow wings, or otherwise gain flight via using magic on it... maybe don't do that?
I honestly think the hardest part of the summoner is keeping it in line with other classes. Temper your expectations guys, and eidolon is a class feature. A big part of the class, definitely, but still just a class feature. Summoners themselves have a bunch of feat options, an eidolon isn't going to have as much customization as a full character. And for everyone comparing to 1e - remember that every class had more options and were more frontloaded with class features and race powers. Just try to keep all that in mind when typing out giant lists of possible features your eidolon could pick from.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The above are ideas, not a balanced concept. Animal companions would not be good enough with a weak character like the base summoner class. It has insufficient capabilities to work well with a base AC.
You have to show that the options are mathematically balanced using PF2 math, not toss a bunch of ideas out there based on the PF1 summoner class.
That's why this is so difficult. The eidolon has to be balanced and the summoner has to be balanced. So the variation has to be of a kind that doesn't provide a substantial mechanical advantage in any particular area.
Do you feel it's possible to have the Summoner be a balanced and satisfying class to play in 2e?
I keep thinking back to Animal and Wildshape Druid, at the very least it's fair to say the current playtest version is severely under-powered in comparison.
I wonder if you're in the same place i am; i've said it before but i have no idea how the devs must be feeling reading the feedback and seeing the playtest results unfold.
Summoner seems like a real challenge to balance and be satisfying, i have no idea how the devs are really going to do it, there's a number of small changes they could make but there are also some bigger issues that would need to be addressed and depending on how they're addressed, that may also create bigger issues. It's a sensitive class in 2e.
I'll admit, this isn't too bad. It would need a lot more tuning; tough is far too weak, while burrower (of all things) is broken.
But this is the first point-buy-style build I've seen that I think could be balanced properly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The above are ideas, not a balanced concept. Animal companions would not be good enough with a weak character like the base summoner class. It has insufficient capabilities to work well with a base AC.
You have to show that the options are mathematically balanced using PF2 math, not toss a bunch of ideas out there based on the PF1 summoner class.
That's why this is so difficult. The eidolon has to be balanced and the summoner has to be balanced. So the variation has to be of a kind that doesn't provide a substantial mechanical advantage in any particular area.
Do you feel it's possible to have the Summoner be a balanced and satisfying class to play in 2e?
I keep thinking back to Animal and Wildshape Druid, at the very least it's fair to say the current playtest version is severely under-powered in comparison.
I wonder if you're in the same place i am; i've said it before but i have no idea how the devs must be feeling reading the feedback and seeing the playtest results unfold.
Summoner seems like a real challenge to balance and be satisfying, i have no idea how the devs are really going to do it, there's a number of small changes they could make but there are also some bigger issues that would need to be addressed and depending on how they're addressed, that may also create bigger issues. It's a sensitive class in 2e.
Yes. As long as you accept that any variation will be much like most of PF2: variation in cosmetics and not power.
The reality is the eidolon needs a few tweaks, but regardless every eidolon has to end up with the following:
+36 to hit at most like any other martial.
Roughly 37 damage per hit with no energy runes.
AC of 44.
Every eidolon has to mechanically end up about there with a similar number of attacks and customization.
You could make some kind of 2-hander equivalent eidolon that gives up AC for damage and vice versa, but it would take some balance work. Even then the eidolon wouldn't feel much like the creature it is emulating. It would feel more like a different type of martial class.
I think customization should be focused on defensive and trait abilities like the Unchained Eidolon. Give the dragon flight and energy resistance. Give the angel wings and vulnerability to evil. Give the beast a faster base move. I think customizations that focus on adding a bit more to each level of advancement would be good.
The reality is flight, energy resistance, and the like are situational and won't provide a substantial advantage in all battle situations. It would be ok to adjust in these areas over combat options.
I think most players would be happy with a few more authentic abilities that emulate the creature with each level of advancement.
Deriven I used only PF2 material for that 1 post giving a quick outline on how, I would make it. I was on a phone so I could not go into much detail and a more detailed system needs more time than a few hours. Don't you agree? Not to mention that my forte is not in the design aspect, but in finding the parts that dont make sense.
Now I am on a computer so lets try to get some more detail.
Base forms:
- * Biped
Size: Medium. Speed: 25 ft. Ability modifiers: +3, +1, +2, -1, +0, +1. It gains the Manual Dexterity evolution.- * Quadruped
Size: Medium. Speed: 35 ft. Ability modifiers: +2, +2, +2, -1, +0, +1. It gains the Fast Movement evolution.- * Serpentine
Size: Medium. Speed: 25 ft. Climb 15 ft. Ability modifiers: +1, +3, +2, -1, +1, +0. It gains the climber evolution.- * Aquatic
Size: Medium. Speed: 25 ft. Swim 25 ft. Ability modifiers: +3, +1, +2, -1, +0, +1. It gains the Amphibious evolution.- * Avian
Size: Small. Speed: 25 ft. Fly 15 ft. Ability modifiers: +1, +3, +1, -1, +0, +1. It gains the Flier evolution.Evolutions:
...
- * Fast Movement- Increase one of its movement speeds by 10 ft. Special: This can be taken more than once.
- * Flier- Requirement: level 7. It gets 15 ft fly speed, the eidolon cannot carry any creature or more than 5 bulk while flying.
- * Burrower- Requirement: level 5. You get 5 ft burrow speed, and can dig hole of its same size category.
- * Climber- It gets 15 ft. climb speed.
- * Manual Dexterity- It can use use 2 limbs as if they were hands.
- * Resistance- Choose one of the following: acid, cold, electricity, fire, poison, or sonic. Your eidolon gains resistance equal to half your level against the chosen damage type. Special: This may be taken more than once.
- * Scent- It gains scent (imprecise, 30 ft).
- Skilled- Increase the proficiency of one of the Eidolons skills by 1. Up to the highest proficiency the Summoner has access to. Special: This can be taken once every 3 levels.
- * Tough- The eidolon's max HP increases by
Keep working on something like that. Make sure it falls into the numbers I posted for attack, AC, and damage with customizations that deal with mobility, resistance, and such, maybe the designers will see something worth doing.
Given that evolution surge is, imo, one of the most fun and unique tools the summoner has for solving challenges, seeing it go would be a massive loss.
Even at 1 minute, so many of those abilities are incredibly useful, especially when you dont have to invest a class feat into it. 1 minute of climbing will still get you over an encampment wall in exploration mode, or let you climb the tree where the sniper is hiding in during combat. +20 speed will let you catch up to the train the big bad is riding away on, and pays itself off after 3 strides on a large battle map. 1 minute of swimming let's you help negate the swamp monster's mobility edge. 1 minute of scent will still let you find the square the invisible wizard is hiding in so you can light them up with your magic.
Like, I can't possibly comprehend how someone would think these abilities are useless. Evolution surge was already my favorite summoner spell in 1e due to just how fun and flexible it was, and having it be a focus spell now is just absolutely amazing.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
The whole "it can't be balanced", was given mostly by Krispy who is clearly more focused on narrative than what the mechanics actually do. And they actively treat slots as "min/max". When min/max is just an artifact of people having choices, and devs not being omniscient gods. The only way to remove min/max from any game is by not making a game, even then there is always min/max as long as there is choice, and consequences for them.
Actual balance is achieved by taking nearly all combat math progression out of player hands, and making it part of class feature progression - like all classes in 2E. The only thing you have to do to be on target for most classes is take an 18 accuracy stat and "max" your choice of armor, and off you go. The rest is tactics.
The problem with your suggestion is that you've undone that by assigning ability scores (part of combat math) based on "logic" as opposed to math progression, taken away what should be core abilities of all eidolons and made them choices, and added things that should cost class resources into the list of available "free" evolutions. And you've made required math progression (ability boosts) part of evolutions as well!
The issue appears to be you are continuing to try and force the class back into a 1E shape, instead of allowing it to be compliant with 2e design. Familiar s aren't a valid comparison because they don't function in combat. Animal Companions aren't a valid comparison because they arent intended to be at all independent.
I understand what you're wanting here, but its ignoring several considerations inherent to 2e. Eidolons are balanced like a PC because they are - and were in 1e too - closer to a PC than a familiar or Animal Companion.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Damage wise, just provide a list of natural attacks with some traits, and lets Eidolons with Manual Dexterity hold weapons. That will allow a lot more customization.
No, I actually agree with Paizo on this. Allowing weapon choice by granting the eidolon the ability to wield weapons is a huge problem. You can already have your eidolon have "any" weapon you want, it just does a fixed amount of damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Very well said post Krispy. I've been trying to work out how to say something very similar but couldn't put it into to words. 100% agree.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Damage wise, just provide a list of natural attacks with some traits, and lets Eidolons with Manual Dexterity hold weapons. That will allow a lot more customization.No, I actually agree with Paizo on this. Allowing weapon choice by granting the eidolon the ability to wield weapons is a huge problem. You can already have your eidolon have "any" weapon you want, it just does a fixed amount of damage.
But... is it though? I mean if those "weapons" were treated as Unarmed Attacks for Handwraps and they got the weapon traits then it might be at least something, but right now without either of those it hardly matters.
I mean if they offered weapons and it didn't work with Handwraps, I don't see how it would really be any different from any other Martial, since you'd still need to support the Eidolon's weapon with magical investment to keep up.
I do think traits can't be given out like candy and there probably needs to be "clusters" of options. Preferably a list of unarmed attacks plucked straight from the AC's and/or a Simple Weapon. Make the choice permanent for at least the level.
Then give the Humanoid Base Eidolons the "Martial Eidolon Feat" or something so they can up their Simple Weapon to a single One-handed Martial Weapon".
I would call traits really good, but generally, the clusters of traits we have now are reasonable with what you get and the current unarmed attack options are pretty uninteresting. Much more so than any other melee combatant IMO. (I love the weapon trait system a LOT though).
It can't be "pick any two traits" or anything like that, but "you gain antlers with the Shove and Versatile (P) traits that deal 1d8 Bludgeoning Damage" would be pretty reasonable and add a LOT of depth to how an Eidolon fights IMO.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let me get this straight.
You say "The Eidolons are too strong they cant get monster abilities".
I lower their math to AC level (give or take) and made it a choice of "power" or "utility". But that is too bad? "because players have choices?"Sound like you dont want players to have any choice. When the Eidolons are all about choice and making them how you want. All I used in the post were PF2 abilities and systems. The only thing I got from PF1 were the base form types and the eidolon subtype names.
I am 100%, absolutely saying that players should be utterly locked out of choices that affect the basic combat viability of Eidolons - ie, their combat math.
Just so I'm clear.
If you dont do that, then you create winners and losers by making progression paths for Eidolons which are better in combat than others, and will actually reduce variance in Eidolons by creating alpha/superior builds.
Certain body types/shapes/forms become superior to others, and those others never see use because theyre suboptimal, etc.
It is far better for Eidolons if both a humanoid Angel and a Burning Wheel angel use the same mechanics, so that the difference is which type of angel the player wants - and not which is mechanically superior.
Your system makes players have to choose between an Eidolon they want and an Eidolon that is better, and that is not a win for the 2E system.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Are we talking about the same PF2e?
The system where Wizards who multiclass Fighter can never reach Master in weapons. But a Fight who multiclasses Wizard can get Master is spells? The same PF2e that is "supposed" to be very balanced so that even a low Social Wizard is able to play and still be fine.
The same PF2 that lets players choose between: A dagger and A sword, and both are 100% legitimate weapons.
Are you even playing PF2. The more I hear your opinions the more I think that you only want is this game to be a 5e clone. Because choices are what makes PF2. Not the lack of them.
1st, basic observation will tell you that ultimately, spellcaster proficiencies end up a full tier ahead of Martial - where Legendary Weapons are single class exclusive, Legendary casting is the "baseline" for casting.
Master spellcasting via multiclassing is identical to Expert weapons.
So... I'm not sure what your point is with that comparison.
As well, a dagger and a sword are balanced by virtue of d4 agile and a d8 damage being weighed as roughly similar and... Eidolons get both of those? So, also confused what your point is.
2E is set up such that a Fighter with 18 Strength who makes basic strikes is only behind one who uses the Power Attack feat in specific situations - all of the POWER of the class is built into the class, and unrelated to the choices the player makes. The Fighter can make any choice they want, and its only minorly impacts power/balance.
Its the same for Wizards, who get very little from their choices outside of class features.
Summoners should not be different. Baseline math should be part of base class abilities, and not able to be interacted with. Situational bonuses - like movement modes - should cost class resources like feats.
The 5e comparisons are ludicrous, as well. I can't stand 5e, because the system is incredibly shallow which has little to do with a lack of mechanical choices, and everything to do with not giving meaning to any of the choices you make during encounters.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Giving the Eidolon access to actual weapons does not break the balance. It keeps them the same as every other character who has to choose between a weapons and an amulet of mighty fist.
Also, its much easier and simpler for Paizo to just let Eidolons use weapons than to create a weird system trying to replicate them. It also means they can take more liverties with natural attack choices given to the eidolon.
It does. Because people who want an eidolon that doesn't have the ability to have weapons shouldn't be mechanically inferior.
I do agree that the lack of traits on the eidolon's attacks is a problem, but its not nearly as egregious as trying to compare a dragon with two 1d6 claws and an angel with a 2-handed greataxe.
The two-handed weapon will always win because the eidolon cannot get access to the class features that make "two weapon" fighting viable in 2E (double slice, twin takedown, etc).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have to point out that multiclassing caster is in no way "more casting" than the Magus or the Summoner has, unless you are only counting the number of slots in the high levels.
For a lot of levels, the 4-slots caster is way, way better than a multiclass caster; later on, if you give a lot of value low-level utility spells, then maybe you can say that the multiclasser is ahead.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For a lot of levels, the 4-slots caster is way, way better than a multiclass caster; later on, if you give a lot of value low-level utility spells, then maybe you can say that the multiclasser is ahead.
Its also an impossible/invalid comparison, as they arent exclusive options. A 4 slot caster can make the exact same investment in multiclass casting, and ends up with the same returns as the multiclass caster and is still ahead by 4 relevant slots.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have to point out that multiclassing caster is in no way "more casting" than the Magus or the Summoner has, unless you are only counting the number of slots in the high levels.
For a lot of levels, the 4-slots caster is way, way better than a multiclass caster; later on, if you give a lot of value low-level utility spells, then maybe you can say that the multiclasser is ahead.
I know for myself, I DO count number of slots and the keeping of lower level slots. I find multiclass spell progression far superior to the 4 slot system. Not increasing the number of slots you have after 4th just feels really, really bad to me. Losing the ability to cast a non-maxed featherfall, invisibility, jump, glitterdust, water walking, ect. for a handful of top slots seems upside-down.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Total customization, no.
Bundles of customization? That's exactly what this game is, bundles of customization.
The Eidolon right now the "bundles" all look very much the same except the wrapping is slightly different (in fact, the biggest effect of the choice is actually the spell list, not the creature itself).
Animal Companions are also "bundles", but when you compare bundle to bundle in AC, they vary significantly more than from Eidolon to Eidolon, which seems like a miss conceptually to me (especially with a 1E comparison, which was basically the opposite).
The current Eidolons probably need a little more differentiation on the actual creature side. I don't think stats are the way to do it personally, but that's me.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Animal Companions are also "bundles", but when you compare bundle to bundle in AC, they vary significantly more than from Eidolon to Eidolon, which seems like a miss conceptually to me (especially with a 1E comparison, which was basically the opposite).
Eidolon abilities are a lot more interesting to me than the different animal companions.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Eidolon abilities are a lot more interesting to me than the different animal companions.
Beast's Charge is not really that interesting at all if we're being honest.
Now Dragon's abilities are a little better, but then they have 3 abilities over 17 levels (and one of those abilities is really just "improved" first ability).
Mean while we've got Animal Companions with multiple types of movement, sensory abilities, support abilities, and eventually an Advanced Maneuver.
Not to mention some of the animals are Mounts at level 1, some have Finesse attacks, all of them have at least somewhat unique stat arrays and variations of attack dice.
There's incentives on choosing your AC to compliment your style of play.
I don't really know there are great incentives for the Eidolon as is when all of the Stat arrays are identical, all the attacks are identical, and one of the 4 base choices literally gets "move 50ft and attack", which to me is a pretty uninteresting choice.
Even by technicality, Riding Drake is an AC and they get Breath Weapon.
I like what Eidolon's have so far, but as far as what I would consider "interesting/unique", not sure I'd say they are in a great spot.
Both of my Summoner's Eidolons haven't really been able to do many interesting things in combat so far (one at 4th and one at 7th). One ran Beast and this new one is Angel.
Even in the first encounter where the Angel had both the Aura and good damage come into play (lower level undead), I still wouldn't call it "interesting" since both of those abilities amounted to literal numerical changes and no actual playstyle changes (no flanking was nice and damage is good, but it didn't change how the Eidolon would have played that much, it changed how I played against it).
There's incentives on choosing your AC to compliment your style of play.
I think its worth keeping in mind that while Animal Companions are designed to go along with a variety of characters and support a range of playstyles with their support abilities, Eidolons are designed as a companion for a specific class of character - and their design is to the be Martial Component of a Spellcaster Summoner, to create a class that is a Martial/Spellcaster Hybrid.
I think thats naturally going to result in the Eidolon being more of a 'Martial' Character, with a bit less flexibility in that role since its part of a predictable set and not something anyone can add to their kit.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think thats naturally going to result in the Eidolon being more of a 'Martial' Character, with a bit less flexibility in that role since its part of a predictable set and not something anyone can add to their kit.
I would agree with you if it were possible to create complimentary circumstances using that casting, which I'm not sure really is something that works all that well right now.
And even then, a Magus is the same thing is it not?
I had a Sustaining Steel Meteor Hammer Magus and a Sustaining Steel Scythe Magus.
The two played A LOT differently if only just on the weapon selections.
And I think that's ultimately the point I'm trying to make.
It isn't "Whatever Spellcaster Flavor you are just add Martial!" It should be "Combine a unique choice of spellcasting and a unique choice in Martial aspects and create a complement that works for you).
And if we're being honest, not to keep bring back up the Druid, but the Druid has full casting, and their customization on the Martial side still blows Summoners out of the water.
I would expect a decrease in spell slots/casting power to the magnitude the Summoner has be more than enough to buy back a little power on the Eidolon without stripping the bundles of customization down to a generic shaped sugar cookie with a different color frosting.
It's not a disaster, I'm just saying the customization aspects of the Eidolon as of current are not just "poor when compared to PF1 Summoner", they are poor by any customization "bundle" the game currently offers (IMO).
If for instance each Eidolon had incentives to cast spells in order to accentuate them ("Whenever you cast a Divine spell with a target of yourself or an Ally, the Angel...." or "Whenever you cast a spell with the Mental descriptor against a target the Ghost....") then it could work, but currently there just isn't really a lot of cohesion between the casting and the Eidolon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think thats naturally going to result in the Eidolon being more of a 'Martial' Character, with a bit less flexibility in that role since its part of a predictable set and not something anyone can add to their kit.I would agree with you if it were possible to create complimentary circumstances using that casting, which I'm not sure really is something that works all that well right now.
I think that's intended to be reflected in how each Eidolon comes with a different spell list.
As well, I think things like Evolution Surge (specifically Evolution Surge) is intended to push Summoner Spellcasting well past the limits of 4 slots... Evolution Surge can replace a number of buff spells all on its own.
That said, your point about Eidolons haven't more synergy with spellcasting is a good one - sortof a Eidolon 'Arcana' along the lines of a bloodline arcana. That seems like something that could be explored without causing issues, and which would be pretty cool.
Especially if you can make it stronger because you know that it can only be triggered 4 times a day.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The different spell lists certainly helps, but again, I feel like that accentuates the choice of the spell list more than it does the Eidolon.
There's some cool ways they could go about a "Eidolon Charge" or whatever, if only just allowing certain spells to use the Eidolon's position for delivery purposes (using Angel as the Summoner if the Spell has the "Healing" trait or something to that effect) would be a huge difference.
To me, you really want to accentuate the "two peas in a pod", make them actually live in the same pod for purposes outside of negativity.
Like Beast's Charge sounds pretty uninteresting, until the Summoner casts Burning Hands on his turn and uses the Beast Eidolon as the point of casting.
Is that too strong? yeah maybe, but at least now we've created a new style of play by allowing the Summoner this weird Bola of positional power with their very limited spells.
I'd also be fine with the generic "Eidolon gains X when you cast a spell Y", but I'd be curious how the above would work too.
At least then your spellcasting choices and Eidolon actions would foster each other.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like Beast's Charge sounds pretty uninteresting, until the Summoner casts Burning Hands on his turn and uses the Beast Eidolon as the point of casting.Is that too strong? yeah maybe, but at least now we've created a new style of play by allowing the Summoner this weird Bola of positional power with their very limited spells.
I don't know about too strong, but its a definite example of something that is fine as a base familiar ability but should definitely cost a class feat on a Summoner.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know about too strong, but its a definite example of something that is fine as a base familiar ability but should definitely cost a class feat on a Summoner.
If it cost a Class Feat it would just end up being mandatory IMO, as it's a pretty defining ability.
That said, I suppose I'd take it in that form if it were the only way to see it.
The trick would be defining what spells were allowed in tandem, which at first, should probably be a specific type of spell (maybe even a specific spell for each Eidolon).
And then you have Class Feats expand it from "Heal" for the Angel to include "Any spell with the Light trait" or something to that effect.
It is a bit exponential if you do traits though, so perhaps I'm getting a bit out of bounds.