| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you!I will also say that the best class for summoning is a Polymath Bard with Wizard dedication. They have access to all Summon spells, access to augmented summons, plenty of buffs and support abilities to make the summons actually do something. And most importantly of all.... they actually "summon" things.
The "Summoner" despite the name is not actually very good at summoning. Unless you fall in the camp of "manifesting == summon despite not counting as such for anything". When people say it has the "most feats", they fail to mention that only 2 feats actually deal with summons. The other 2 feats, gives you a few more slots for summoning, but still way less than all other casters outside Magus. (The feats also don't give you access to actual 10th lv summon spells).
Just to say, I highly disagree with Temperan's point, but I don't particularly want to rehash it here.
I will also say that the best class for summoning is a Polymath Bard with Wizard dedication. They have access to all Summon spells, access to augmented summons, plenty of buffs and support abilities to make the summons actually do something. And most importantly of all.... they actually "summon" things.
The "Summoner" despite the name is not actually very good at summoning. Unless you fall in the camp of "manifesting == summon despite not counting as such for anything".
You are arguing about semantics here. But with Summoner's Precaution and cheap out of combat healing, the Summoner does have a strong disposable minion that can take on very risky assignments. Yes there are lots of limitations, But that is a role is can fufill. Its the only character with a "summon" that strong.
When people say it has the "most feats", they fail to mention that only 2 feats actually deal with summons.
Yes there is not much summoning support in the game. As you say the bard has the best support for a summoner and its cantrips are arguably the most useful.
The other 2 feats, gives you a few more slots for summoning, but still way less than all other casters outside Magus. (The feats also don't give you access to actual 10th lv summon spells).
All the other level 10 slot rules are botched. A wave caster not getting real level 10 summon spells only heightened ones seems fine. There is only one anyway and its primal Summon Kaiju. Most regular summoning is done out of the same spells from level 1 or level 5 and scaled up. Yes most summons are at those two levels only. The higher level spells with Summon in the text are mostly incarnate spells. There are some good level 10 options like summon a gold dragon. So in practice its not a big problem.
I'd argue a Summoner with a Bard dedication to pick up a bard cantrip or two is a better Summoner.
What is your goal here? Is it to build a gimmick Pokemon trainer that can summon all the things, or do want a functional PFS character who happens to focus on summons? I ask because summons are always the best spell to use, and a lot of the advice in this thread is focused on just using as many summons as possible. A wizard who prepares nothing but summoning spells is in for a bad time, for example.
I'd probably make a summoner if I wanted to be a summoner so I could have an eidelon as well as a summon from a summon spell. Boost summon would also be welcome.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Isn't better a Wizard with bard dedication? This will allow to cast more top level summons and in midgame will buy some composition spells allowing to buff the summons and party.
If you do bard with wizard dedication the number of top spellslots to summon falls to half. And once the char are focusing in summon it can keep the maximum distance away from opponent once it only needs to sent it's summons.
Other good MC option is have a Witch dedication to take cackle and allow to have one more summon. This way the wizard doubles it's "firepower" without worry too much about the number of spellslot this consumes compared to a pure witch.
Something like this:
Wizard LvL 2 (or ancient elf) - Bard Dedication
Wizard LvL 4 - Basic Muse's Whispers: Lingering Composition
Wizard LvL 8 - Inspirational Performance
Wizard LvL 10 (or lvl 9 if use Multitalented) - Witch Dedication
Wizard LvL 12 (or lvl 10 if used Multitalented) - Basic Witchcraft: Cackle
Maybe interesting too add Inspire Heroics in lvl 10/12 or 14 depending if you prefer to don't have cackle or delay the witch MC.
An alternative is having an Animal Companion using Beast Master Archetype but this will require a large number of feats. I still prefer Cackle
Isn't better a Wizard with bard dedication? This will allow to cast more top level summons and in midgame will buy some composition spells allowing to buff the summons and party.
If you do bard with wizard dedication the number of top spellslots to summon falls to half. And once the char are focusing in summon it can keep the maximum distance away from opponent once it only needs to sent it's summons.
Other good MC option is have a Witch dedication to take cackle and allow to have one more summon. This way the wizard doubles it's "firepower" without worry too much about the number of spellslot this consumes compared to a pure witch.
Something like this:
Wizard LvL 2 (or ancient elf) - Bard Dedication
Wizard LvL 4 - Basic Muse's Whispers: Lingering Composition
Wizard LvL 8 - Inspirational Performance
Wizard LvL 10 (or lvl 9 if use Multitalented) - Witch Dedication
Wizard LvL 12 (or lvl 10 if used Multitalented) - Basic Witchcraft: CackleMaybe interesting too add Inspire Heroics in lvl 10/12 or 14 depending if you prefer to don't have cackle or delay the witch MC.
An alternative is having an Animal Companion using Beast Master Archetype but this will require a large number of feats. I still prefer Cackle
The difficulty is affording the 14 CHA for the bard .
You are missing of course the Level 16 Effortless concentration.To my mind what is most stark about this build is how many really important wizard feats it is not taking. Which apart from the one I brought up is none. To me it is stunning that you can calmly afford a level 10 and 12 class feat to just get cackle. But is that more of a comment on wizards in this edition. I guess I'm just used to them being power levels with really strong feats for sorcerers and barbarians and rogues... ie almost ever other class.
No I think I prefer a plain Summoner with Bard on the side. Doing normal encounters just with the Eidolon. Then bringing out one of 3 top level summons when its needed. Plus a lot of buffing options. Enjoy your build.
Would you get a divine witch or nature witch patron?
Do you have less spells than the Wizard? Yeah. But you can cast the summons at the level you want, instead of just at the level you prepared.
Sorry but cast summon in lower level is ineffective.
To make more clear I will put bellow the HP/AC/Hit rate of a summoned creature per level and a comparison with Animal Companion and with the classes.
If you see the AC tab you will notice how low are the Summons AC. If you summon a low level you risk not only to have a low hit rate but also to loose too fast the summon because how easier is to critic it.
Sorry but cast summon in lower level is ineffective.
There are uses other than combat. You can use them for spells not on your repertoire or even list for instance or it access area you can't or even as trap fodder.
Now for combat, it's even questionable if top slot summons are that effective from a straight combat stat analysis: It all depends on your definition of effective and what your opposition is.
Use celestial as healer is very subpar.
Summon Lesser Servitor can summon a Cassisian, Lantern Archon and Lyrakien when heightened to lvl 2. But these creatures can only cast lvl 1 heal spell. The main benefit is the versatility (ex.: the Lyrakien could also cast a illusory object too as other innate spell) they could be used to attack too but if you cast it at low level they will probably don't survive to do more than cast a just 1 even lowest level spell.
Same happen to Summon Celestial you can summon a Gancanagh but is subpar since the beginning once there's currently no lvl 5 celestial so you have to summon Gancanagh a lvl 4 creature using a lvl 5 spell...Maybe if your GM is permissive he/she could allow you to summon a Elite version (I would allow). But independently this creature can only cast one lvl 2 heal the good thing is he can also cast heroism so if it survive during 2 turns it maybe cast both.
In resume theses spellcaster summons are useful if you pretend to use many of their spells but if you can only because of 1 specific is way better to summon this spell. But to allow a minimal condition to they survive to cast many spells you cannot cast using a low level spellslot.
A higher level summon doesn't always matter - sometimes all summoning a level 1 creature to block a corridor instead of a level -1 creature gets you is a small chance that it eats an extra enemy action. All you need to eat three enemy actions on a troll that is 30 feet away from you is a blocker with 1 ac and 1 hp (as they still have to stride up to the blocker, strike, then stride to you) - having the summon be a giant scorpion instead just gives you a small to moderate chance that the troll has to waste an extra attack to kill it.
Against a party level +2 enemy, its a decision where you are making a gamble (I guess like a 45% chance*?) that the extra AC/HP will matter to the creature you are blocking. Against a party level +3 enemy, it's probably better to just use the lowest level slot possible to conserve resources (it is still worth summoning something because it eats enemy actions that are worth a lot more than your actions in this case, it just doesn't matter what you summon)
Similar stuff goes for setting up flanking or just distracting enemies that aren't smart enough to pick better targets.
*I looked at a troll vs a cave scorpion - the troll has to roll a 1 to miss, and only has to roll a 12 to crit - if it hits, it needs to roll a 7 and an 8 for damage on 2d10+5, and on a crit, it only needs to roll a 2 and a 3) - all the level 1 cave scorpion gets you over a level -1 giant centipede gets you is a chance at eating 1 extra action on the troll, which is a diminishing return on the initial 3 actions that either option is guaranteed to eat from the troll.
The best blockers are those that have ways to give attackers a flat miss chance. This is due to the chance of the enemy needing multiple strikes to finish it. Of course its meaningless if the enemy is smart enough to know the blocker is not a threat.
I mean, in the best places to use blockers (generally in dungeons with corridors) the enemy being smart doesn't always help because often there isn't any way for them to go around the blocker. They can try to tumble through if they have a decent acrobatics score, or burrow/teleport if that is something they have access to without using more actions, but otherwise they have to remove the nuisance in their way and the blocker has done its job.
That is assuming the enemy or your creature is large enough to fill out the corridor* of course (or the doorway, doorways are often narrow enough for even a small creature to block).
*you don't always need to fill out the corridor though - a small creature can block a large creature even in a 15 feet wide corridor, just by standing in the middle
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The best blockers are those that have ways to give attackers a flat miss chance. This is due to the chance of the enemy needing multiple strikes to finish it. Of course its meaningless if the enemy is smart enough to know the blocker is not a threat.I mean, in the best places to use blockers (generally in dungeons with corridors) the enemy being smart doesn't always help because often there isn't any way for them to go around the blocker. They can try to tumble through if they have a decent acrobatics score, or burrow/teleport if that is something they have access to without using more actions, but otherwise they have to remove the nuisance in their way and the blocker has done its job.
That is assuming the enemy or your creature is large enough to fill out the corridor* of course (or the doorway, doorways are often narrow enough for even a small creature to block).
*you don't always need to fill out the corridor though - a small creature can block a large creature even in a 15 feet wide corridor, just by standing in the middle
You can squeeze right by with a square open for a large creature or shove the small creature back. Not sure why a large creature would let a small creature impede it.
I personally still allow overrun as well. Not sure why that option was removed from the game. A big creature should be able to charge right through a bunch of smaller creatures.
I have actually found a few uses for summons lately.
Mud dretch was nice slowing an enemy down and setting up AOOs with its aura.
Air elementals are great for flanking in three dimensions if you need that type of flanking. Very mobile and when you send your party flying, can flank much better than another party member moving around the battle field.
The best blockers are those that have ways to give attackers a flat miss chance. This is due to the chance of the enemy needing multiple strikes to finish it. Of course its meaningless if the enemy is smart enough to know the blocker is not a threat.I mean, in the best places to use blockers (generally in dungeons with corridors) the enemy being smart doesn't always help because often there isn't any way for them to go around the blocker. They can try to tumble through if they have a decent acrobatics score, or burrow/teleport if that is something they have access to without using more actions, but otherwise they have to remove the nuisance in their way and the blocker has done its job.
That is assuming the enemy or your creature is large enough to fill out the corridor* of course (or the doorway, doorways are often narrow enough for even a small creature to block).
*you don't always need to fill out the corridor though - a small creature can block a large creature even in a 15 feet wide corridor, just by standing in the middle
You can squeeze right by with a square open for a large creature or shove the small creature back. Not sure why a large creature would let a small creature impede it.
I personally still allow overrun as well. Not sure why that option was removed from the game. A big creature should be able to charge right through a bunch of smaller creatures.
Both of which require an action, the same action that would have been taken by the strike in my example, and still carry the cost of having to stride two separate times because you have to do an action halfway to your enemy.
Also, once again, what you think should happen/houserules you implement/rules you ignore has no bearing on whether summoned creatures are useful for the rest of us.
The best blockers are those that have ways to give attackers a flat miss chance. This is due to the chance of the enemy needing multiple strikes to finish it. Of course its meaningless if the enemy is smart enough to know the blocker is not a threat.I mean, in the best places to use blockers (generally in dungeons with corridors) the enemy being smart doesn't always help because often there isn't any way for them to go around the blocker. They can try to tumble through if they have a decent acrobatics score, or burrow/teleport if that is something they have access to without using more actions, but otherwise they have to remove the nuisance in their way and the blocker has done its job.
That is assuming the enemy or your creature is large enough to fill out the corridor* of course (or the doorway, doorways are often narrow enough for even a small creature to block).
*you don't always need to fill out the corridor though - a small creature can block a large creature even in a 15 feet wide corridor, just by standing in the middle
You can squeeze right by with a square open for a large creature or shove the small creature back. Not sure why a large creature would let a small creature impede it.
I personally still allow overrun as well. Not sure why that option was removed from the game. A big creature should be able to charge right through a bunch of smaller creatures.
Both of which require an action, the same action that would have been taken by the strike in my example, and still carry the cost of having to stride two separate times because you have to do an action halfway to your enemy.
Also, once again, what you think should happen/houserules you implement/rules you ignore has no bearing on whether summoned creatures are useful for the rest of us.
It's not a house rule. You seem to be thinking like PF1. In PF2 a player or the DM can state what they want to do with an action which is not specifically listed in the book with a skill roll. I can very much make a ruling that with an Athletics check a monster can overrun another creature and it is not a house rule, but a DM ruling on a use of the Athletics skill.
If something is not specifically spelled out in PF2, then it is under the purview of the DM.
Having a written rule making something clear is nice, but not necessary. This idea you have in PF2 that anything not specifically written down as a rule is somehow not allowed is a false one.
I can very much rule that a large creature using athletics can push a smaller creature out of the way with an Athletics check against their Fortitude save as part of a stride action and it isn't a house rule, it's my GM ruling.
PF2 has definitively restored the GM as arbiter of how skills and abilities work much like 5E did.
I have seen Paizo designers throw in other uses for skills other than those outlined in the book. It isn't a house rule. It's a Paizo designer method of applying a skill.
So this idea you have that you can place a small creature nonsensically in the center square to impede a large creature while arguing with the DM that the rules don't allow the creature to overrun them is not how PF2 works. A DM very much can say this is nonsensical and this large creature can use its athletics skill to push by them as part of its stride action without it being a house ruling.
It's not a house rule. You seem to be thinking like PF1. In PF2 a player or the DM can state what they want to do with an action which is not specifically listed in the book with a skill roll. I can very much make a ruling that with an Athletics check a monster can overrun another creature and it is not a house rule, but a DM ruling on a use of the Athletics skill.
If something is not specifically spelled out in PF2, then it is under the purview of the DM.
Having a written rule making something clear is nice, but not necessary. This idea you have in PF2 that anything not specifically written down as a rule is somehow not allowed is a false one.
You are definitely misrepresenting what I wrote. Yes, the rules say that GMs can make stuff up and improvise other actions. But it isn't constructive to use some hypothetical GM improvisation to prove a point.
I could just as easily make a GM ruling that an arcane summoner can make a arcana skill check to give their summoned creature 1000 hp and an AC of 50, and it would be a patently ridiculous argument to say that because I can technically do that, summons are overpowered.
You could make a GM ruling that a creature gets to overrun as part of a Stride action, but for the same reasons as the above example, it is patently ridiculous to use it as an argument for why blockers aren't any good in the game in general, because that ruling is only being made at your table, and we are trying to discuss the game in general, not the game at one person's table. I will concede that at your table specifically, blockers aren't as good. But this thread isn't about you and your table, it is about the game in general.
But I am going to withdraw from this discussion, because you repeatedly use your own GM rulings to argue points about the game in general (you have done this in other threads), and you tend to misrepresent/misunderstand people, both of which makes it very difficult to have a constructive discussion.
I could just as easily make a GM ruling that an arcane summoner can make a arcana skill check to give their summoned creature 1000 hp and an AC of 50, and it would be a patently ridiculous argument to say that because I can technically do that, summons are overpowered.
No. You could not as the rules are clearly spelled out on what a summon does. All uses of the Athletic skill such as a large creature ramming his body into a smaller creature is not clearly spelled out and is a possible use of the Athletics skill.
You are definitely misrepresenting what I wrote. Yes, the rules say that GMs can make stuff up and improvise other actions. But it isn't constructive to use some hypothetical GM improvisation to prove a point.
I think most reasonable GMs would engage in a similar ruling. My point is you keeping calling this house rulings and a GM improvising an action not provided as an option is not a house rule.
You could make a GM ruling that a creature gets to overrun as part of a Stride action, but for the same reasons as the above example, it is patently ridiculous to use it as an argument for why blockers aren't any good in the game in general, because that ruling is only being made at your table, and we are trying to discuss the game in general, not the game at one person's table. I will concede that at your table specifically, blockers aren't as good. But this thread isn't about you and your table, it is about the game in general.
Why would that ruling only be made at my table? I think most GMs would make a similar ruling rather than let a player manipulate a rule by placing a small or medium summoned creature in the middle of a 15 foot hallway in the path of a large creature to basically act like the equivalent of a wall of stone or a wall of force?
I don't think a player should count on this working at any given table.
Use celestial as healer is very subpar.
Summon Lesser Servitor can summon a Cassisian, Lantern Archon and Lyrakien when heightened to lvl 2. But these creatures can only cast lvl 1 heal spell. The main benefit is the versatility (ex.: the Lyrakien could also cast a illusory object too as other innate spell) they could be used to attack too but if you cast it at low level they will probably don't survive to do more than cast a just 1 even lowest level spell.
Same happen to Summon Celestial you can summon a Gancanagh but is subpar since the beginning once there's currently no lvl 5 celestial so you have to summon Gancanagh a lvl 4 creature using a lvl 5 spell...Maybe if your GM is permissive he/she could allow you to summon a Elite version (I would allow). But independently this creature can only cast one lvl 2 heal the good thing is he can also cast heroism so if it survive during 2 turns it maybe cast both.
In resume theses spellcaster summons are useful if you pretend to use many of their spells but if you can only because of 1 specific is way better to summon this spell. But to allow a minimal condition to they survive to cast many spells you cannot cast using a low level spellslot.
They are ok when it comes to use you effortless concentration to command them.
For example, by lvl 19/20 you could summon a Trumpet Archon, which is ok:
- 2x lvl 7 heals
- 1x lvl 6 Heroism
- 1x Zealous Conviction
- 2x circle of protection
- Kin Word ( single target emotion counteract )In addition to using the creature to attack.
By lvl 19/20 the caster may also use a lvl 9 slot rather than a lvl 10 ( he's going to have 2 lvl 10 by lvl 19 and, eventually, 3 by lvl 20...
The celestial list is a very good support list. I'm building a summoner healer around the use of celestials for additional support spells.
I don't think that Witch would be a strong base class for a summoning focused character, but the Witch dedication would be a good option.
People have already mentioned Cackle as a way to get an extra action for a round when needed. This is good for any summoning caster. Or any caster in general actually, but especially summoning casters.
Not sure if this has been mentioned already, but I would also submit Rites of Convocation so that you don't have to fill your spell slots with summoning spells in the morning. You can prepare one or two. Then once those have been used, choose other spell slots to prepare summoning spells in. This is not useful for spontaneous casters, so mostly for Cleric or Wizard. Druid already has Call of the Wild which does similar.
And there are the other Lesson Hexes. When summoning elementals, throwing out Elemental Betrayal could be quite nice. Needle of Vengeance is also nice for disincentivizing attacking something other than the summoned creature.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People have already mentioned Cackle as a way to get an extra action for a round when needed. This is good for any summoning caster. Or any caster in general actually, but especially summoning casters.
Yes I agree. It is an action win. An extra action once per combat for the right caster style. Which when you think about it always has to be one of the power options.
Not sure if this has been mentioned already, but I would also submit Rites of Convocation so that you don't have to fill your spell slots with summoning spells in the morning. You can prepare one or two. Then once those have been used, choose other spell slots to prepare summoning spells in. This is not useful for spontaneous casters, so mostly for Cleric or Wizard. Druid already has Call of the Wild which does similar.
The ability has some value but 10 minutes is a long time. I find it too weak compared to other feats that actually give you a spell slot or a useful focus spell. It only has value in a long adventuring day. I think I'd rather just prepare some summoning spells and get something else with this feat slot. Certainly for Druids who have better options.
And there are the other Lesson Hexes. When summoning elementals, throwing out Elemental Betrayal could be quite nice. Needle of Vengeance is also nice for disincentivizing attacking something other than the summoned creature.
Elemental Betrayal needs some thought for it to be worthwhile. I start to like it if you have several characters with elemental options so you can really stack up the damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The ability has some value but 10 minutes is a long time. I find it too weak compared to other feats that actually give you a spell slot or a useful focus spell. It only has value in a long adventuring day. I think I'd rather just prepare some summoning spells and get something else with this feat slot. Certainly for Druids who have better options.
Not sure if this has been mentioned already, but I would also submit Rites of Convocation so that you don't have to fill your spell slots with summoning spells in the morning. You can prepare one or two. Then once those have been used, choose other spell slots to prepare summoning spells in. This is not useful for spontaneous casters, so mostly for Cleric or Wizard. Druid already has Call of the Wild which does similar.
Long days or uncertain days. Would suck to prepare 4 summoning spells in your top two spell levels and then find out that the dungeon is mostly skill encounters. Or there is a group of people living in there and now you need to social encounter your way through it.
And there are the other Lesson Hexes. When summoning elementals, throwing out Elemental Betrayal could be quite nice. Needle of Vengeance is also nice for disincentivizing attacking something other than the summoned creature.Elemental Betrayal needs some thought for it to be worthwhile. I start to like it if you have several characters with elemental options so you can really stack up the damage.
That is always the case with Elemental Betrayal. The more people piling in with the same elemental effect the better.
Needle of Vengeance would pair nicely with a summoned creature that has some variation of Grab (such as a Giant Toad) since escape has the attack trait and would likely be considered a hostile action.
The Magabayaan classes seem to be pretty tough in terms of pooling from different traditions.