It's been a while since the summoner was released. How is the class performing? How does it compare in damage to other classes?
I was thinking of a dual class summoner concept, but I'm still not sure how well the summoner performs. It's one of my favorite classes, but the PF2 version seems incredibly underwhelming and didn't seem to perform very well in play against many other classes. It wasn't low level wizard bad, but more on the lower end of optimization.
I'm wondering if anyone else has tried to optimize a summoner and made it standout as one of the stronger classes in a group in terms of damage and overall effectiveness. If anyone has come up with optimized summoner builds that do well against boss monsters (CR+3 or +4).
If you were doing a summoner dual class, what would you make for an optimal combination?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The summoner has a lot of advantages in actual play that don't show up in white room math and don't necessarily manifest as straight damage.
-Unmanifesting eidolons is an incredible escape button. Our eidolon was used as the front line character in the marching order. The Eidolon got impaled on a velstac evangelist's chain, immobilizing them. If a normal level 4 martial took that hit, they would have had a hard time hitting the DC 25 escape check. As is, the summoner just unmanifested the Eidolon and the party hoofed it to come back better prepared.
-Similarly, we had a battle that took place across two elevations. Being able to send the Eidolon down into the fray while the summoner rained down spells from above was super helpful, including when a fighting retreat was needed.
-The Eidolon lets the summoner player roll twice on any out of combat group checks. It has become a running joke that the spirit wolf is the real brains of the party because he keeps succeeding on knowledge checks where everyone else fails, including the party wizard.
-The summoner can leverage ANY magic weapon the party finds, which means you have decent odds of being the first one to get a rune. A rogue and barbarian might pass on that +1 mace, but the summoner gets to use it just fine.
-Evolution Surge is an incredible tool for environmental challenges, and getting it as a focus spell is amazing. When my oracle casts air walk I'm giving up a valuable spell slot. The summoner gets that spell again with 10 minutes of belly rubs.
-The economy boost of Act Together makes you great at using Sustained spells, particularly summons.
-With boost eidolon, you hit respectably hard. Not top tier, but you can basically swing a d12 with a d10 agile, and with better minimum damage than most.
-Not strictly a summoner advantage, but abilities like scent and tremorsense can be game changers. They can alert you to the presence of enemies on the other side of a door, and potentially even allow you to roll knowledge checks in advance or pull other monster specific prep. Whiff of brimstone? Get out the silver weapons and holy water.
Overall the class plays more like a monk than a fighter and you should keep that in mind. It is extremely flexible, so turning it into a raw damage machine is the wrong approach.
If I was going to dual class, I'd either go rogue, investigator, or a caster. The extra skills being shared with the Eidolon would be clutch, and extra spell slots help on the utility side. Picking up a focus spell blast wouldn't hurt either. Generally I'd skip a martial as I'd want to keep the summoner out of the fray anyway and rely on spells... But I could see a Tandem Strike Champion build working well.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The summoner is considered on par with your typical non-fighter CRB martial. What they lose in durability (AoE disadvantage, non-plate AC) they make up for with spell utility, a solid default rotation, skill usage, double exploration and a decent focus AoE option.
The current best eidolon is the plant for its crazy reach together with trip and eidolon's opportunity.
If the summoner has a flaw, it is how unfriendly it is to archetypes. You're almost obligated to get advanced weaponry (grapple or trip), glider form (airborn prereq), tandem movement, eidolon's opportunity, weighty impact or grasping limbs, and airborn form. For your dual-class concept you'll probably need tandem strike as well if the other half is martial as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A common grievance I still hear about is how being two targets is a huge liability for the class. I think too often that weakness is overexaggerated while the benefits that come with it are largely undersold.
In actual play, the advantage in the large area you threaten on the battlefield by being two separate bodies has been quite impressive. The ability to impact two completely different points on the field, often possible in a single turn, is huge. Being two target points for healing makes range limitations a rare issue and surprisingly comes up more than I expected. Being two bodies also bypasses key immunities to allow double-dipping with things like being healed by Battle Medicine or using Demoralize on the same target.
The summoner performs well. It is very flexible. It has very some great class feats. eg Eidolons Wrath, Weighty Impact. It has got utility movement and senses. It has a second attribute array it can use for skills. Plus some good magic. It has self healing. It can be tough, it can be defensive, it can reasonably contribute to damage.
You just can't do everything all in the same build, or all at once. It sucks up actions - which makes a Tandem power or two essential - but it is still not enough. Some times you feel like you are spending all you actions just to be as good as another in a particular role and maybe you would have been better as a specialist.
Bottom line is it works. It has a lot of different options. It can be very cool. It has got some unanswered rules questions (check with your GM). But it doesn't overshadow normal characters.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's pretty much the strongest non-core class,
with decent damage and great action economy courtesy of Act Together.
Optimization wise you only need the Attack of Opportunity and the Weighty Impact leaving you pretty free to pick anything else with the other 8 feat slots.
I have only seen 2 summoners in games I have run. Both tried to go a mounted character route and hated the class as a whole, feeling like they ended 90% of encounters unconscious.
I think the class loses a lot of its advantages captain Morgan mentions when you try to keep the two halves of your character combined into one unit. 2 characters isn’t a huge sample size, but I cannot stress how unhappy the players were. Solo monsters just shredded the summoners, and I think a lot of people think the summoner makes for a good healer, because of their action economy advantages, but you will need the vast majority of the party healing and so it washes out or you go unconscious and the party is down a healer.
PF2 healers generally that also want to tank or be dual role melee strikers have generally disappointed players in play, in my experience. The party often doesn’t have enough back up healing resources to cope with a healer who is often getting knocked out.
The summoner healer has almost double this problem because smart enemies will quickly be able to be attacking the weakest defense between your two characters, sometimes even without trying (thanks to AoE).
I think playing the summoner as two separate characters with a focus on utility could be a counter to the player frustration and disappointment I have seen.
Overall, it feels like it might be easier to build yourself into a trap with the summoner than any other class.
I built a summoner a while back and my experience was similar to Unicore's players.
The class was ok. But I was brought down a few times because you're always at risk with your eidolon in physical battle. I was trying to maintain my distance to avoid being attacked at two points and when my eidolon went down and I was knocked unconscious, it was a pain to get healed and once healed get back into battle. I stayed far enough away that the healer had to move to me and once I was healed, I had to manifest my eidolon then move the eidolon back into position to fight. It was a pain.
I only played the summoner to 3rd or 4th level. I had one memorable nova moment with a magic missile and hit from my eidolon.
Act together was pretty clunky to use and did not feel like a net action improvement.
It feels much like the wizard where Paizo over-corrected with the summoner making it a very inferior class comparatively in terms of damage and combat effectiveness.
I can see why non-combat focused players enjoy it. It gives some flexibility to non-combat actions. Non-combat is not that important to me. I'm seeing distinct lack of mention of combat effectiveness save in niche situations. I guess I will figure out another combination.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean in my experience the summoner does just fine in combat, but if you want nothing but damage you're barking up the wrong tree. You can probably get respectable output with the summoner plus something like flaming sphere, but a summoner themselves being in melee range is not going to end well.
I mean in my experience the summoner does just fine in combat, but if you want nothing but damage you're barking up the wrong tree. You can probably get respectable output with the summoner plus something like flaming sphere, but a summoner themselves being in melee range is not going to end well.
It seems that classes that were powerful in 1E were purposefully reduced in power to lower tier power because Paizo had certain classes noted as problems in 1E so they were severely limited during their design leading to a very underpowered, clunky class that optimizers won't want to play.
It seems to happen in every generation of design. I even remember back when two-weapon fighting was king in D&D 1E and 2E, then in 3E they made two-handed weapons king. And now in D&D 5E archery is king.
Archery and two-handed weapons were king in PF 1E, now everything is relative with maybe two-handed weapons holding a slight edge still while archery has been reduced to the least effective general form of attack.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
The summoner isn't really underpowered or clunky though. The class works very well.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also disagree with archery being the least effective form of attack. It is the least damaging per hit but it is extremely effective at dealing out the most attacks while staying at a safe range. White room math always seems to undersell the value of range increments.
I also disagree with archery being the least effective form of attack. It is the least damaging per hit but it is extremely effective at dealing out the most attacks while staying at a safe range. White room math always seems to undersell the value of range increments.
I'm talking about from an optimizers standpoint. Archery can still be effective. The half-strength, lower damage dice, and volley penalty for the most effective bow add up to a lower effectiveness than a fighter or barbarian wielding a d12 weapon once the battle is engaged.
When I'm responding, I'm speaking as person interested in optimized numbers. For general play with a group that just wants to have fun, everything can have moments of satisfying play.
Sitting around a table with a group of players looking for every edge, calculating numbers in common attack scenarios, and building as powerful and effective combinations as possible within the game system, you really don't feel great if you're the one bringing the pea shooter while someone else is using a cannon.
The summoner isn't really underpowered or clunky though. The class works very well.
I'm not real sure how you prove this in combat.
Combat effectiveness of a given class is all I care about. If you can prove in standard combat encounters that a summoner is equally effective to a fighter or barbarian or druid with animal companion in bringing the hammer across most levels, then I'm willing to read the evidence.
As it stands now, my experience in play is the summoner is clunky and underpowered compared to other more optimal classes in combat.
I want to make clear that I am only concerned about combat effectiveness in standard battles, not niche situations and when compared to classes like the rogue, fighter, and other classes optimally built for combat.
To be more clear, I'm looking for play experience of the summoner by players who optimize for combat experience. How well does the summoner perform in combat? What kind of optimal tactics are you using? I'm not interested in tripping or setting up others in combat, just doing competitive damage with other classes during the long-term play experience.
My early attempts at summoning optimization included:
1. Taking Energy Heart sonic for their d6 Fatal d10 attack to bypass damage resistance.
2. I took Tandem Movement at level 4 because I found movement to be tedious even with Act Together supposed action economy bonus. Tandem Movement seemed like a feat tax rather than a good feat choice because movement with the eidolon and summoner was suboptimal.
I tried to use save spells with the eidolon because of the shared MAP which made attack cantrips or spells very suboptimal when the eidolon attacked.
My plan was to get Master Summoner and try to used summoned creatures in conjunction with the eidolon because summoned creatures do not use shared MAP. Even with a much lower attack roll, may have been decent against all but the CR+2 or higher enemies.
It was real hard to see an optimal combat path for the summoner.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
It was real hard to see an optimal combat path for the summoner.
The First Order Optimal strategy has to be the "I'm going to have a plant Eidolon, I'm going to have as much reach as I can, and I'm going to do trip/grapple" character, doesn't it? You're not going to end up with a DPS monster that way, but basically every party will love having the tree that controls space hanging around.
First thing's first. Nothing in this game matches fighter or thief (with dirge of doom ally) in combat except maybe starlit span magus with psychic dedication. There is no mechanical reason to play anything else as far as martials go. If you're looking for ways to make other classes match them, you can stop looking until they accidentally release a big power booster in a future book.
Past that, summoners are considered acceptable in that they're no worse than the CRB martials. They're certainly better than swashbucklers or inventors.
The summoner should only feel clunky until you take the mandatory tandem movement feat unless you're trying to force some kind of melee or rider summoner. Those just don't function well enough to hang with any competently built martial. Stick to your cookie cutter rotation of move, act together (arc+strike), knockdown with your flying plant monster you've evolution surged to huge for 25-30 feet of reach with eidolons reaction to punish the wakeup.
First thing's first. Nothing in this game matches fighter or thief (with dirge of doom ally) in combat except maybe starlit span magus with psychic dedication. There is no mechanical reason to play anything else as far as martials go. If you're looking for ways to make other classes match them, you can stop looking until they accidentally release a big power booster in a future book.
Past that, summoners are considered acceptable in that they're no worse than the CRB martials. They're certainly better than swashbucklers or inventors.
The summoner should only feel clunky until you take the mandatory tandem movement feat unless you're trying to force some kind of melee or rider summoner. Those just don't function well enough to hang with any competently built martial. Stick to your cookie cutter rotation of move, act together (arc+strike), knockdown with your flying plant monster you've evolution surged to huge for 25-30 feet of reach with eidolons reaction to punish the wakeup.
What is this Starlit Span Magus with Psychic dedication? I have not done much reading on the psychic yet.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be more clear, I'm looking for play experience of the summoner by players who optimize for combat experience. How well does the summoner perform in combat? What kind of optimal tactics are you using? I'm not interested in tripping or setting up others in combat, just doing competitive damage with other classes during the long-term play experience.
But working together to set up others is how my players keep winning in combat. How can I separate that from combat effectiveness when it's their key to combat effectiveness?
None of my players have played summoners since my playtest summoner Cirieo Thesaddin. When Secrets of Magic came out, I updated Cirieo to the new summoner rules and the PCs called him back to service as another NPC defender of Longshadow in Assault on Longshadow. As a 7th-level NPC aiding a 10th-level party, he had to play support, but the versatility between Cirieo casting support and healing spells and his beast eidolon Fluffy Goat head-butting enemy soldiers off the walls of Longshadow was useful. The class is about having many ways to serve.
Later, when I ported the CR 11 paladin Colga of Trudd in Siege of Stone to PF2 rules, I made her a 12th-level paladin champion with summoner multiclass archetype and a devotion phantom eidolon. She was built by the creature rules from the Gamemastery Guide, so a lot of details were fudged, but her summoner archetype let me mimic the spellcasting of a PF1 paladin. Colga's eidolon Rathan was not useful in combat; instead, Rathan went incorporeal to scout. Nevertheless, Colga's paladin abilities were at full power, lacking only feats, so Colga herself was fine in combat beside the 13th-level party after the PCs persuaded her to ally with them instead of opposing them.
What is this Starlit Span Magus with Psychic dedication? I have not done much reading on the psychic yet.
The (relatively) new hotness among optimizers. Archer magus throwing out true strike amped imaginary object to have the strongest opening attack and powerful followup spellstrikes with the unamped version. Ranged means str and cha get dumped to 8 for a bonus boost. 4 high level arcane slots for buffs, debuffs (16 starting int makes getting crit saved against not as likely as your typical 12 int melee magus) or wall/saveless control. Optional occult slots for extra illusions or true strike.
Start with distant grasp conscious mind at 2 for amped telekinetic projectile spellstrikes and retrain into tangible dream before taking the psi cantrip feat at 6 for imaginary weapon.
Is considered by some optimizers to be the best ranged combatant in the system. If nothing else, it competes evenly with archery fighter's +2 and no-save slow and switch-hit thief's dread striker sneak attacks.
To be more clear, I'm looking for play experience of the summoner by players who optimize for combat experience. How well does the summoner perform in combat? What kind of optimal tactics are you using? I'm not interested in tripping or setting up others in combat, just doing competitive damage with other classes during the long-term play experience.But working together to set up others is how my players keep winning in combat. How can I separate that from combat effectiveness when their key to combat effectiveness?
None of my players have played summoners since my playtest summoner Cirieo Thesaddin. When Secrets of Magic came out, I updated Cirieo to the new summoner rules and the PCs called him back to service as another NPC defender of Longshadow in Assault on Longshadow. As a 7th-level NPC aiding a 10th-level party, he had to play support, but the versatility between Cirieo casting support and healing spells and his beast eidolon Fluffy Goat head-butting enemy soldiers off the walls of Longshadow was useful. The class is about having many ways to serve.
Later, when I ported the CR 11 paladin Colga of Trudd in Siege of Stone to PF2 rules, I made her a 12th-level paladin champion with summoner multiclass archetype and a devotion phantom eidolon. She was built by the creature rules from the Gamemastery Guide, so a lot of details were fudged, but her summoner archetype let me mimic the spellcasting of a PF1 paladin. Colga's eidolon Rathan was not useful in combat; instead, Rathan went incorporeal to scout. Nevertheless, Colga's paladin abilities were at full power, lacking only feats, so Colga herself was fine in combat beside the 13th-level party after the PCs persuaded her to ally with them instead of opposing them.
Your game sounds like a lot of fun. If I were playing with your group, I wouldn't worry about it too much.
I'm around a table of people who look at their comparative numbers. They really care if they are doing 50% less damage. Or even 20% less damage. They build in knocking down targets into the general build like a maul fighter or a wolf drag monk.
They get sour and change characters if their numbers are far behind another character in damage if building a damage dealer or get unhappy if their getting hit too often if playing an AC guy like a Champion where it feels like the optimized AC isn't doing much for them.
Sure, they roleplay. They write backgrounds. But a lot of the game is an outlet for competition and power gaming. It's not fun to be the guy sitting at that table and being way behind everyone else on the damage rolls. If you hit the target and it takes 10 damage and the barbarian hits the target and he's doing 20, my group don't like that. They'll change their character to do more damage.
That's how we like to play. Sure, you can win in cooperative combat with players who don't care the person next to them does more damage. And likely you'll even have more fun. But that isn't my group. And I'm not the guy to play the sidekick doing crap damage while people are looking at me like I'm useless like when I played the wizard when we first picked up the game. That's not fun in my group.
What is this Starlit Span Magus with Psychic dedication? I have not done much reading on the psychic yet.The (relatively) new hotness among optimizers. Archer magus throwing out true strike amped imaginary object to have the strongest opening attack and powerful followup spellstrikes with the unamped version. Ranged means str and cha get dumped to 8 for a bonus boost. 4 high level arcane slots for buffs, debuffs (16 starting int makes getting crit saved against not as likely as your typical 12 int melee magus) or wall/saveless control. Optional occult slots for extra illusions or true strike.
Start with distant grasp conscious mind at 2 for amped telekinetic projectile spellstrikes and retrain into tangible dream before taking the psi cantrip feat at 6 for imaginary weapon.
Is considered by some optimizers to be the best ranged combatant in the system. If nothing else, it competes evenly with archery fighter's +2 and no-save slow and switch-hit thief's dread striker sneak attacks.
Thanks. This is the kind of information I'm looking for. You understand the optimizing mentality.
So there is no real way to optimize the summoner. You play it if you enjoy the play-style, but it's behind the damage curve for standard play.
I'll take a look at Starlit Span. No one is playing a magus yet, though we do have a psychic/witch dual class.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also disagree with archery being the least effective form of attack. It is the least damaging per hit but it is extremely effective at dealing out the most attacks while staying at a safe range. White room math always seems to undersell the value of range increments.I'm talking about from an optimizers standpoint. Archery can still be effective. The half-strength, lower damage dice, and volley penalty for the most effective bow add up to a lower effectiveness than a fighter or barbarian wielding a d12 weapon once the battle is engaged.
This is a weird outlook. You know what's actually optimal? Killing an enemy without giving it a chance to hurt you or your allies. A raging barbarian only does that if it one rounds a monster. Ranged builds, switch hitters, or even just melee builds with a ranged backup option can abuse the lack of ranged attacks in the bestiary to rain down damage while enemies waste precious rounds closing. Your archer also isn't going to drain party actions and resources by needing to be healed when the boss crits them twice in the same round.
Melee builds deal optimal damage, but use suboptimal tactics to do so. If you've got an ally who refuses to use ranged options and just offers their flesh up to the monster, then the archer won't be the optimal counterpart... But that ally has a desire to get big number power fantasy going over actually winning the fight as efficiently as possible.
I also disagree with archery being the least effective form of attack. It is the least damaging per hit but it is extremely effective at dealing out the most attacks while staying at a safe range. White room math always seems to undersell the value of range increments.I'm talking about from an optimizers standpoint. Archery can still be effective. The half-strength, lower damage dice, and volley penalty for the most effective bow add up to a lower effectiveness than a fighter or barbarian wielding a d12 weapon once the battle is engaged.This is a weird outlook. You know what's actually optimal? Killing an enemy without giving it a chance to hurt you or your allies. A raging barbarian only does that if it one rounds a monster. Ranged builds, switch hitters, or even just melee builds with a ranged backup option can abuse the lack of ranged attacks in the bestiary to rain down damage while enemies waste precious rounds closing. Your archer also isn't going to drain party actions and resources by needing to be healed when the boss crits them twice in the same round.
Melee builds deal optimal damage, but use suboptimal tactics to do so. If you've got an ally who refuses to use ranged options and just offers their flesh up to the monster, then the archer won't be the optimal counterpart... But that ally has a desire to get big number power fantasy going over actually winning the fight as efficiently as possible.
Yes. Individual character optimization is the goal. Beating monsters is just going to happen whether the party is optimized or not. They want to stand out individually from a mechanical perspective doing relatively equal damage to everyone in the group. They don't care about being the trip guy that sets everyone else up. They care about being the guy doing the damage.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with Gesalt. If what you are looking for is a high damage build that your party doesn't know about, go for Starlit Span Magus and Psychic Dedication. Summoner is interesting for its versatility and skill monkeyness, 2 things you don't seem to care about.
But please don't call that optimization. 4 players who only care about "standing out individually" are not an optimized party in PF2. Optimization is a complex process that can't be measured only with numbers (even if numbers are important). I've played competitive video games enough to know that focusing only on numbers ends up detrimental to optimization.
I agree with Gesalt. If what you are looking for is a high damage build that your party doesn't know about, go for Starlit Span Magus and Psychic Dedication. Summoner is interesting for its versatility and skill monkeyness, 2 things you don't seem to care about.
But please don't call that optimization. 4 players who only care about "standing out individually" are not an optimized party in PF2. Optimization is a complex process that can't be measured only with numbers (even if numbers are important). I've played competitive video games enough to know that focusing only on numbers ends up detrimental to optimization.
Individual optimization works very well. It is extremely common in video games.
I understand this doesn't fit your play-style. But it works and works really, really well for destroying whatever we're fighting. It has for over three decades in tabletop and video games.
If you played video games as you state, then you would understand how individual optimization works. If you are a healer, you optimize for healing. If you are a damage dealer, you optimize for damage dealing. If you are a tank, you optimize for tanking. You take the best possible class for each, the best possible gear, and the best possible skills and abilities regardless of what others are doing. And you watch the damage, healing, or aggro meters to make sure you're meeting the expected metric.
If you're suboptimal in a video game in a competitive guild, they kick you out. Competitive guilds don't tolerate players who don't optimize their individual characters to do whatever it is they do to the absolute max whether tanking, healing, or damage.
We also optimize for healing and tanking. But in PF2 the best way to optimize for healing is multiple casters with some kind of heal spell. And the best way to optimize for tanking is kill the enemy as fast as possible or not be where they will be able to hit you. AC optimization is not real effective save for a champion.
If you don't want to discuss optimization of individual characters, that's ok. I want a discussion from players that optimize their individual characters for combat, not a debate about PF2.
I know individual character optimization works. I've been doing it for over three decades. It appears the summoner is suboptimal in combat. I will look into the Starlit Span magus.
Thanks for information.
Just to make this clear, I'm not interested in a debate about how others play PF2.
I want information on how to optimize a summoner for combat and damage regardless of what the rest of the party is doing.
So anyone who has managed to optimize a summoner, that's who I want to hear from. And not for knocking people down, but dealing damage and hammering in combat meeting competitive damage metrics with other classes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just to make this clear, I'm not interested in a debate about how others play PF2.
Please, are we down to that again?
You already gave me such patronizing sentences when we were speaking about martials vs casters and then you got an epiphany that casters can do good in a party. Don't repeat the same mistake.Anyway, what I'm telling you is that DPR is just a facet of the game, and not the end-all and be-all, so stop calling it "optimization" as it's only optimized for some classes. As a matter of fact, your entire DPR/healing/tanking visualization of character optimization misses the Bard entirely, Bard that is considered the best class in the game.
You have your answer anyway, you won't make a great damage dealer out of a Summoner, or at least not a simple damage dealer like you'd do with a Fighter or a Barbarian. There are very few classes that will satisfy your desire for damage: Fighter, Barbarian, Thief Rogue and Magus, roughly. Go for one of them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
4 individually optimized characters will actually take you pretty far, so long as you optimize for the correct things and cover certain roles. You do get more out of an optimized party as a cohesive whole, but party optimization strategies is its own thread (and likely a bloody one).
A summoner is not an over the top super effective physical striker.
You can build a nice Trip machine that is effective with the Plant Eidolon. At level 17 it gets an OK multi attack power but other classes got better earlier. You can't get the extra reaction a Fighter/Champion/Swashbuckler does to go crazy there.
There are some fun grab builds you can do - note that the eidolon can get the bestiary auto grab ability.
You can work on the Dragon Eidolons Breath weapon or Eidolons Wrath
There are a few moderate offensive melee options, but nothing that would really interest a damage optimiser.
You talk about Dual Class. The problem is the Eidolon is a separate creature so much of what the Summoner would gain doesn't apply to the eidolon.
Admittedly Dual Class Fighter would get you an extra reaction at level 10 that either the eidolon or the summoner could use.
I'd be tempted to go for Dual Class Sorcerer because of the Ostentatious Arrival and Master Summoner feats I think I could do a fairly effective summoner with a huge number of summons and I'd like to have a full suite of spells to back the summoner up. Its the closet you would get to the old PF1 Master Summoner.
The answer to your question is no, there are no super powerful summoner builds. You can just do OK.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You talk about Dual Class.
Actually, talking about Dual Class, I think there are unique possibilities given to the Summoner.
Double Class Casters tend to work badly as you don't have the ability to use both spellcasting abilities simultaneously unlike Double Class Martials. And grabbing a caster and a martial class still leaves you in a tough situation if you want to use both as they have very different way of being played.
But Summoner + Caster Archetype from the same tradition should work really well. You have 4 actions per round, even 5 once you have Tandem Move so you have an Eidolon which is performing as expected while you are playing a full caster. And you have a few extra high level spell slots, which are the most important for combat purposes.
Considering Deriven's focus on damage dealing, I don't think it's what he is looking for, but I think that can make a pretty daunting combat build.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The appeal of Dual Class+Summoner is not that you can do anything to make the Eidolon better, but you can make the Summoner half of the two-platform character much more effective.
That's specifically why I suggested (in a different thread) a curated list of classes for a dual class campaign which inclueded the Summoner, since the Summoner class chassis is pretty solid, but doesn't allow you to double down on anything another class does nor do other classes let you double down on summoner stuff.
A summoner is not an over the top super effective physical striker.
You can build a nice Trip machine that is effective with the Plant Eidolon. At level 17 it gets an OK multi attack power but other classes got better earlier. You can't get the extra reaction a Fighter/Champion/Swashbuckler does to go crazy there.
There are some fun grab builds you can do - note that the eidolon can get the bestiary auto grab ability.
You can work on the Dragon Eidolons Breath weapon or Eidolons Wrath
There are a few moderate offensive melee options, but nothing that would really interest a damage optimiser.You talk about Dual Class. The problem is the Eidolon is a separate creature so much of what the Summoner would gain doesn't apply to the eidolon.
Admittedly Dual Class Fighter would get you an extra reaction at level 10 that either the eidolon or the summoner could use.
I'd be tempted to go for Dual Class Sorcerer because of the Ostentatious Arrival and Master Summoner feats I think I could do a fairly effective summoner with a huge number of summons and I'd like to have a full suite of spells to back the summoner up. Its the closet you would get to the old PF1 Master Summoner.The answer to your question is no, there are no super powerful summoner builds. You can just do OK.
Thanks for the clear answer.
I'll probably stick with the druid/fighter archer build I'm doing. I'm going to check out this Starlit Span Magus path. See how it looks.
I was looking over the Magus, but the Magus feats feel lacking.
Individual optimization works very well. It is extremely common in video games.
Even if so, you shouldn't force that specific approach on a board game which is clearly meant for cooperation.
In addition to this, combats are meant to be winnable by different setups, resulting in min maxing characters ( as well as party composition) to drastically lower the difficulty, making a lot of combats trivial, and severe/extreme combats just barely challenging.
The suggestion that was given before about getting fighter or thief for maximum damage purposes is imo pretty valid, mostly because what you are looking for.
A summoner would probably excel in versatility, though.
Back to the summoner,
Divine str based eidolon
Summoner will cast 1/2/3 eidolon wrath ( if out of fp, electric arc) + boost eidolon
Eidolon 2x strikes ( requires potion of quickeness or rune of quickness).
Eventially, AoO if triggered.
It's not forced. It's what we all like to do and have found it to be highly effective over years of play.
We wouldn't keep doing it if it didn't work. Even worked in 5E, but you can optimize to the point the game isn't even challenging in 5E.
I like that PF2 has some optimization, but not enough to break the game. Downside is Paizo missed optimization paths for certain classes while allowing other classes really strong optimization paths with the fighter being the one that stands out the most.
At least people like playing fighters again.
The appeal of Dual Class+Summoner is not that you can do anything to make the Eidolon better, but you can make the Summoner half of the two-platform character much more effective.
That's specifically why I suggested (in a different thread) a curated list of classes for a dual class campaign which inclueded the Summoner, since the Summoner class chassis is pretty solid, but doesn't allow you to double down on anything another class does nor do other classes let you double down on summoner stuff.
You have a thread with some good dual class combos?
You have a thread with some good dual class combos?
It wasn't a thread - just a single post... but that's not to say that there shouldn't be a thread.
You have a thread with some good dual class combos?
My concern with dual classing was from a DM perspective, since some combinations are problematic (e.g. a fighter's accuracy with a barbarian's damage). So if you're running a dual class campaign you can either just let some combinations be stronger than others, you can run each potential combination past the GM, or the GM can curate a list of choices for one's second class. "Everyone's a Witch" or "Everyone's a Sorcerer" or "Everyone's a Summoner" provide a lot of room for customization for different characters without problematic doubling down.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love it when people talk about optimization in 2e.
I love it even more when said veteran optimizers fall on their face during actual play in this edition while more casual (and often new) players win the day.
If you're not working with your party in this game, you're holding them back, in spite of any successes so far.
This game is not like 1e. Not at all. If you're focused on you, or just DPR, you are going to end up very far from what this game's new paradigm considers optimized.
Like all those players that think the main benefit of an Eidolon or a Familiar is to Aid you for extra bonuses. You are in a party, if a roll is critical, another PC can help.
Regarding dual-classed summoner (theory-cafting): druid (Wild Order) + summoner (divine casting?) dual class might have some synergies with the summoner tandem feats for action economy and Magical Understudy/Magical Adept/Magical Master to allow the eidolon to cast healing spells while the character is in combat form. Possibly taking multiclass archetype feats in barbarian, fighter, or monk to boost combat a bit.
It's probably not going to outshine a tricked out martial/martial (although the mobility and other options of some of the battle forms can be pretty nice), but it helps fix some shortcomings with druid (can't cast in battle form) and summoner (limited spell slots).
Regarding individual vs. group optimization: PF2 system mechanics make it really hard for individual characters to perform outside of a fairly narrow range of effectiveness. There are a few cases where some "build" choices are noticeably superior, but not to the point where making the "most optimal" choice is a "must have." Instead, because of the way PF2's action economy and MAP work, most of the boosts to effectiveness are realized by tactics and teamwork during play to help other characters in the party rather than yourself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love it when people talk about optimization in 2e.
I love it even more when said veteran optimizers fall on their face during actual play in this edition while more casual (and often new) players win the day.
If you're not working with your party in this game, you're holding them back, in spite of any successes so far.
This game is not like 1e. Not at all. If you're focused on you, or just DPR, you are going to end up very far from what this game's new paradigm considers optimized.
I love it when someone makes unfounded claims about a player he's never even played with.
This is why when I ask for information on something I don't already know about, I want that information. Not a discussion on a topic my group and I are already well aware of. We have three campaigns now to level 15 plus. A few more to level 10 plus. Multiple others to level 6 to 8 or so. We've played almost every class and combination.
We have already found all the optimal combinations for killing the enemy in PF2. It's not that complex a game. It doesn't require this intense amount of group coordination to win.
Certain spells are high value spells like slow, synesthesia, and invisibility. The fighter +2 is one of the best abilities in the game. The Champion, Fighter, and Rogue have some of the best reaction based martial abilities. The bard is great because it buffs the entire group and can use abilities like slow and synesthesia with caster action economy. Toss in a true target at high level and you can end a lot of creatures fast. AoE damage is amazing against CR equal or lower creatures. We already know all these tactics. We've used them in play as needed as well as the lower level tactics like knocking someone prone.
I'm sure any other optimizer groups on this forum can tell you PF2 isn't some super difficult game. It's just different. The optimization is a little different, but some classes are still clearly better than others as are some spells and abilities. You take those and you're more likely to win faster.
All I wanted to know if any other optimizer player had figured out a way to optimize the summoner for combat.
I've already optimized a bard, fighter, sorcerer, rogue, druid, and barbarian for combat. I haven't been able to optimize the summoner to operate as anything other than a sort of inferior martial with occasional caster nova ability. Since I liked the class fantasy a whole lot, it's disappointing that it is a weak class in combat compared to many others that do superior damage and are nearly superior in every other way.
Regarding dual-classed summoner (theory-cafting): druid (Wild Order) + summoner (divine casting?) dual class might have some synergies with the summoner tandem feats for action economy and Magical Understudy/Magical Adept/Magical Master to allow the eidolon to cast healing spells while the character is in combat form. Possibly taking multiclass archetype feats in barbarian, fighter, or monk to boost combat a bit.
It's probably not going to outshine a tricked out martial/martial (although the mobility and other options of some of the battle forms can be pretty nice), but it helps fix some shortcomings with druid (can't cast in battle form) and summoner (limited spell slots).
Regarding individual vs. group optimization: PF2 system mechanics make it really hard for individual characters to perform outside of a fairly narrow range of effectiveness. There are a few cases where some "build" choices are noticeably superior, but not to the point where making the "most optimal" choice is a "must have." Instead, because of the way PF2's action economy and MAP work, most of the boosts to effectiveness are realized by tactics and teamwork during play to help other characters in the party rather than yourself.
Hmmm. Druid/Summoner.
If it wasn't for the lack of a maxed out casting stat for a maxed out casting DC, this might be interesting. If you made a caster eidolon to cast a cantrip while you attacked, that could be interesting.
We've found the three point DC difference between a master and legendary caster at higher level can be a real weak point that is difficult to overcome in the most important fights.
As you get higher level, the lack of legendary casting in the boss fight battles becomes a real issue causing you to underperform in the most important fights. You have to build for maximum power within a narrow spectrum if you want to carry your weight in a boss fight which can be the biggest slog fights at higher level.
Individual optimization works very well. It is extremely common in video games.
Even if so, you shouldn't force that specific approach on a board game which is clearly meant for cooperation.
In addition to this, combats are meant to be winnable by different setups, resulting in min maxing characters ( as well as party composition) to drastically lower the difficulty, making a lot of combats trivial, and severe/extreme combats just barely challenging.
The suggestion that was given before about getting fighter or thief for maximum damage purposes is imo pretty valid, mostly because what you are looking for.
A summoner would probably excel in versatility, though.
Back to the summoner,
Divine str based eidolon
Summoner will cast 1/2/3 eidolon wrath ( if out of fp, electric arc) + boost eidolon
Eidolon 2x strikes ( requires potion of quickeness or rune of quickness).
Eventially, AoO if triggered.
It's not forced. It's what we all like to do and have found it to be highly effective over years of play.
We wouldn't keep doing it if it didn't work. Even worked in 5E, but you can optimize to the point the game isn't even challenging in 5E.
I like that PF2 has some optimization, but not enough to break the game. Downside is Paizo missed optimization paths for certain classes while allowing other classes really strong optimization paths with the fighter being the one that stands out the most.
At least people like playing fighters again.
I am not saying a player can't push towards power creep with every single character they make even within this 2e, but rather that cooperation pays off in this 2e.
Reason why you'd prefer a bard and 3 fighters rather than 4 fighters, because of inspire courage, heroics, Synesthesia, heroism, haste, heals, etc....
and a bard, a blaster sorcerer and two fighter rather than 4 fighters, because of battlefield control and a huge...
Mostly true. Someone has to be top dog. PF1 it was wizards. PF2 it is fighters at least for pure damage, though they are very well-rounded if boring.
Casters are still king at high level. I stopped worrying about them when I saw casters operate at high level. They are pretty much the reason the game is easier. Any martial would get destroyed at high level against the powerful monsters you fight, but casters trivialize the encounters.
AoE slow. Synesthesia. AoE damage. Haste. Heroism. Some of the sustained spells doing damage that when cast with a spell and a weapon strike adds up over rounds to insane damage. The highest damage character I've played to date is a Storm Druid who wrecked battlefields.
Casters like the summoner are sort of in this weird place of not being a good enough caster or martial to stand out doing either. It's disappointing when this is the class you were most looking forward to being added to PF2.