| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Both Pathfinder 1st Edition and Pathfinder 2nd Edition are good roleplaying systems, but they have different styles. PF1 is best for playing powerful characters. PF2 is best for using clever tactics. If you love the powerful characters--it really sounds like you do--then stick with PF1. Paizo wrote plenty of adventure paths and modules for PF1, so the material can last for many years of game sessions, despite Paizo not writing any more.
Currently, my wife and younger daughter are playing in both my PF2 Strength of Thousands campaign and another GM's PF1 Tyrant's Grasp campaign. They like both.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Summoning pretty much ruined in PF2 for combat. They made summoned creatures way too weak to be useful in even mook combats past the low levels.
Summons and eidolon are ok in PF2. You will have to accept the lower power level across the board.
If you want to power up the game a little, talk to your group about using dual class. Dual class gives a little bit of the power missing from PF2 while not breaking the game.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm someone who enjoyed the old broken casting of PF1. In PF2, I find I have a better time with classes like Thaumaturge or Commander - martials with a few interesting tricks.
The big exception is illusions. PF2 has great illusions that are generally much better than what I'm used to in PF1. Sustaining an illusion no longer eats up your whole turn, illusions all have built-in protections against low-ranl detection, there are specific illusion spells for faking creatures (although they do need a little work with the GM for various uncertain points), and turning things invisible is an incredibly versatile trick with a great duration off a low slot.
That said, I would definitely avoid converting characters. Whatever character you made was made to be as enjoyable as possible in a different system, so they'll almost always feel worse than a character made for this system.
And hey, if PF2 isn't for you, that's okay.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
A) While they share a lot of DNA, PF1e and PF2e are two fairly different games with different priorities. There's not going to be a 1-to-1 translation for some things.
2) Summoner, specifically, was one of the more busted PF1e classes. It had the absolute best pet in the game, 6th level spellcasting full of buffs, and additional free spells for further summoning. It snapped the action economy over its knee. If that's what you're looking for in PF2e, you're going to be disappointed as PF2e is considerably more balanced.
-) It's fine to bounce off PF2e, a lot of the old guard did and that's fine. That said, try some of the other classes. I bet the swashbuckler you mentioned is having a great time not being completely overshadowed in combat by spellcasters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just realized that I was giving my Eidilon 4 actions as well as 4 for my Bard each round. Not that it mattered because the Eidilon couldn't hit. But that makes the builds usefulness even less.
The best way to attack with an eidolon is for the eidolon to attack twice and the summoner to use a save cantrip like electric arc or frostbite.
MAP is not helpful.
Not sure how long you been playing PF2, but once you learn to min-max PF2 style you will find the game more enjoyable.
It's much, much easier to run. So your DM will like that aspect. Much less broken and more balanced.
It takes some getting used to. I know my group wasn't happy at first, but they eventually adapted.
I really hated casters at first until I played a druid. The six hit point casters in PF2 other than the sorcerer are not great. All these years later the 6 hit point casters still don't feel great other than the sorcerer.
The 8 hit point casters seem to have everything form more hit points, better casting stats, on top of equal spellcasting ability with often better feats.
Just be glad you don't love wizards. Summoner in PF2 is better than the wizard once you learn to min-max it and use that great action economy.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
... How are you playing an Eidolon while playing a Bard? Like, you're performing so many rules violations I can't tell if the problem is with the feel of the SUmmoner or whether nobody was following the rulesApparently I was taking double the amount of actions I was supposed to.
There is a build where a Bard can take an Eidilon.
You're playing the summoner archetype? that archetype is terrible. You don't even get act together. If you're playing the archetype, no wonder you are awful. The summoner archetype is one of the worst archetypes in the game. Get rid of it and take bard feats or rogue archetype. Do not ever take the Summoner Archetype. It is super terrible.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it is really challenging to convert to PF2 in the middle of a campaign that has hit 18th level. Is there a reason your GM decided to jump now and not finish the campaign and then start a new PF2 campaign at low level?
There are just so many things that are different about the games, especially at high level, that if you try to jump right into high level play it is very easy to miss stuff and not realize that certain spells that used to be good for certain things are not, while other types of spells, which used to feel underwhelming, are much better now. This is in addition to the fact that it seems you built a bard character who is dressed up as an summoner, but don't really want to play to support your allies, but rather boost your own summons/eidolons, which is really difficult to do action economy wise (the summons from spells act when you summon it and your songs don't kick in until you do them again, and your archetype eidolon is not a great combat ally, as it seems you have discovered).
It is kind of like wanting to play a high level damage-oriented gish in PF1 by putting half your levels into Fighter and half your levels into wizard instead of building a Magus or picking up prestige classes that advance spell casting and BAB.
Allies? You mean those non-Elven creatures that keep following me around? F those guys. ;)
Using pathbuilder, I built 5 summoners, 2 wizards, a sorcerer and 2 bards. On paper, the current bard has the best numbers.The bard seemed to have much more spell utility than the straight wizard. Doing the eidilon route was the only way to get a decent amount of hitpoints (222). My 1e summoner had almost that much as base.
We finished the campaign with this party years ago. The GM wants to bring those characters back but in PF2e.
As far as playing a straight summoner, you get 5 spells at 18th. Three 8 and two 9. The 9th level summons last until the end of your next turn. So you get 2 rounds with a 9th level summons? 10d10 being the most damage between the two. That's pretty weak for a 9th level spell. At best, I could summon 5 creatures for a total of 10 rounds of combat. Then be pretty useless after that with some 11d4 cantrips. Or, am I missing something?
Okay, yeah, it definitely sounds like you're missing some things.
- It's specifically incarnate spells that only last until the end of your next turn. Those are just a type of regular spell with summoning flavor.- Summons are sustained up to a minute. You spend three actions casting one, and it gets two actions that turn. Every turn after that, you need to spend one action to keep it around for another round- the sustain action. When you do, it gets its two actions for the round. One summon spell is supposed to last until the end of the fight, or until the enemy wastes enough damage to kill it. They're low accuracy, but they represent a bunch of health and body to get in the way and flank.
- If you really want to summon creatures, the Master Summoner feat lets you turn one top-rank slot into two summon or incarnate castings.
Also, your eidolon should be hitting more than 1/6 of the time if you're playing a Summoner. I think you'll need to post some specific build stats to clear that one up, but it seems like you might have missed another key piece.
Summons are sustained in PF2. If you spend an action sustaining one, it sticks around until the end of next round, when you can spend an action to sustain it again. Each time you sustain it, it gets to take 2 actions, and at high level you can take the feat effortlessly concentration that lets you sustain a spell as a free action.
But it is not easy to learn the rules of PF2 jumping in at high level is a challenge and gives you a lot of moving parts to try to work through and it becomes easy to blame one when another part might be the underlying issue.
The OP is playing a bard with a summoner archetype.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pulled up the 18 Summoner and don't see anywhere listed where they can summon other than spells. According to pathbuilder, there are 3 level 8 and 2 level 9 summons. All 5 have "Duration until the end of your next turn". All of the summons have pretty poor damage, especially the level 8 spells.
Is it possible to summon by not using spells?
If my math is correct, I could only keep three summoned critters up if I'm spending 1 action each to keep them here.
AH. There's the problem. You're missing heightened spells. All of the "summon a creature" spells are lower rank heightened spells. All of the summon spells are at the bottom of the page.
At low levels, you can usually only have one summon up, because the spells cost three actions to cast. At level 16, you can take Effortless Concentration to allow sustaining one of them as a free action. That leaves you with three actions to cast a second summoning spell, and you can have two summons active only spending one action per turn thanks to Effortless Concentration.
Now, it's definitely important to keep in mind that those summons are pretty weak- they're level 13 creatures in fights meant for level 18 characters. Finding useful special abilities, providing flanking, hoping for lucky twenties, blocking space- that's what they do.
The monsters the eidilon was trying to hit needed a roll of 14+. Pretty sure the the had around 300 hp.
Can't paste images so here goes:
Eidolon:
Fist: hit: d20+30 Damage: 3d8+7 +1d6 acid. (maybe his two hits were more than 10, but it was WAY below the Swashbuckler who was critting every round.
Wing: hit: d20+30 Damage: 3d6+7 +1d6 acid
Str +5, Dex +4, Con +5, Int +3, Wis +2, Cha +0
AC 40
HP 222 (shared)Is there something better to use than pathbuilder?
All right, let's see: 18 from level, 6 from master proficiency, 5 from stats, 3 from weapon bonus. Even before casting any status bonus buffs, you're missing +2 to your attack. You're missing the eidolon specialization damage, so the damage should be higher too. This is for playing an actual Summoner class, right, not Bard trying to fight with an eidolon from an archetype?
If you were trying to use Bard, then I can say that that's definitely the problem- the eidolon from an archetype is really only going to be useful outside of combat.
One issue could be that classes in PF2 have a shtick and if you are not interested in doing the class' thing, then you are leaving a lot of the given power to that class on the table.
@Jason Chapman 97, If you want to have your character's thing be to have powerful allies (that are your minions and not other players) on the table, and to mostly use your actions supporting those creatures while they do your fighting for you, it is probably better to consider a Summoner main class with potentially either a bard archetype (if helping that creature fight well is your main priority), or a Companion archetype, like Beast Master.
Lower rank spell slots are not what they used to be and you can easily use scrolls for most of the things that you would use the missing slots from summoner to cast as a bard. Scrolls of the low rank spells are dirt cheap at high level. With a bag of holding you can have tons of them in reserve and start combat with one in hand that you know you want to cast.
Since you don't want to help buff your allies, if you want to attack with minions, consider using spells that debuff your enemies instead. For example, Dirge of Doom is a good debuffing bard composition cantrip to use that technically benefits all your allies, but doesn't have to feed into your characters desire not to directly buff allies.
Prioritizing more spell slots to cast more summoning spells is very unlikely to fufill your desires to dominate encounters and do as much damage as your martial allies. The only ranks that matter at all for summoning spells are your top ranked slots really, which is why the summoner doesn't have lower rank ones. Doing little utility and exploration tricks with low ranked summons works very well, but not for combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The OP is playing a bard with a summoner archetype.Correct. Seemed like it had better spell options. The same amount of hp though.
Less HP with the same CON. Bard is an 8HP class and Summoner is 10HP. Better spell options, but Summoner is really Eidolon focused and a lot of its power comes from there. As someone else mentioned: Summoner Archetype is awful, the one you get as a Bard in no way compares to the one an actual Summoner has. No one should take Summoner Archetype, ever.
One of my Ruby Phoenix games (a level 11-20 campaign) had a Summoner in it. He was awesome. His Eidolon was large size (huge with Evolution Surge), flying around, tripping everything in sight and then taking an attack of opportunity when it tried to get up. As they share HP, the Summoner could stay in the back shooting cantrips and spells as needed, and healing himself to also heal the Eidolon. He was very effective. He never cast a summon spell at any point in the campaign.
You're running into the main issue trying to start PF2 at high level: there are a lot of details tripping you up that you aren't aware of because you didn't learn them as you were progressing. You'll need some help to catch those details with your GM or us. :)
An actual Summoner has 4 effective actions a turn base (more than anyone else), can split them up between caster and eidolon (so if the Eidolon is confused or dominated you just don't give it actions), can be in two places at once, gets two exploration activities at the same time (because the Eidolon also gets one), and can effectively take two strikes and a save based cantrip every turn. The damage is solid. Grab a staff and some wands/scrolls for extra spells, and focus your slots on things that are high impact (like Moment of Renewal, the best heal in the game if you're Divine/Primal).
Summoning as in "summoning spells" is actually better on other classes due to more slots. Those spells are all 1 round sustained duration, so you can spend an action to keep them going for 10 rounds. The ones that last 2 rounds are "Incarnate" spells and are not summons the way you're thinking of them.
Summoner and Eidolon share weapon and armor runes, so you'll want to get handwraps of mighty blows and get runes on them, or get runes on your staff and invest it so your Eidolon gets those attack bonuses. But with those, the Eidolon's to hit is in line with martial classes. If you're missing everything as a Summoner, you're doing something wrong. (Unlike Bard with Summoner Dedication, where your Eidolon lags far behind. As said: this is a trap, don't do it.)
Bard as a spellcaster is really good, but it's strength is in its buff and debuff magic. If you want to do lots of damage, Sorcerer and Oracle are better at it (and also have even more spells).
And yeah, converting a beloved character from PF1 is hard. I can't make my favorite character in PF2 (my bard Yulia Brightmoon) because the class just works so differently that it doesn't feel the same.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Years ago we finished up Kingmaker (Pathfinder 1st edition). We are a combat heavy group. I played an Elven Summoner named Harm that hated everyone except Elves. This included party members. He extra-hates gnomes. It was a really fun campaign.e and the gnome Oracle had a lot of fun. Ran him up to 18th mainly summoning devils and demons. My most favorite character in over 25 years of playing. Fast forward to now, our GM has a plan and wanted us to convert our characters to PF2e. Holy crap, summoners suck, a lot. Harm could summon pairs of demons at a time and then start blasting. I can't make anything close that is powerful enough to pull off "being Harm". All the spellcasters I've built are useless for combat. Trying a Bard because they have a lot of spell slots. Im sorry, but buffing/debuffing isn't fun. Being in a long hallway and dropping a megalodon on the bad guys and killing them is fun. We are a party of 4. The Swashbuckler was doing >200 damage per round. I was doing about 40. Felt useless. This was our second game using the new characters. I took a good bit of damage and didn't even care. If it had been old Harm he would have cast Dragon Form and bulked up. Even that spell is nerfed in 2e.
Sorry, just needed to rant. Sad what they did to spellcasters.
PF2 is balanced very different from PF1. in PF1 casters ruled/ruined everything with their high level magic. Magic in PF2 has been reigned in quite a bit. It is still very useful, but it doesn't out scale what non-magical characters can accomplish comparatively, for the betterment of the overall system.
You're not wrong for liking what you like, but plenty of people like the new balance of PF2, and it's a much better system to be a GM in than PF1.
From a practical standpoint, I like to tell people that they shouldn't think of PF2 as the same game...because although it has the "same" lore (mostly, some stuff has changed) and it is a D20 system....but beyond those very high level concepts practically nothing is the same.
If you enjoyed the crazy high power levels and especially the overwhelming dominance of magic in PF1, nothing in PF2 will satisfy you. It's that simple.
If you want a more balanced game where casters and non-casters are relative equals with niches that each excels at, and is a easier more consistent game to run then PF2 is a great game.
It personally took me a long time to adjust from PF1 being used to being a crazy powerhouse as an individual character to learning to work as a team and learning not to try to solo a boss enemy, because it would only lead to disappointment.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah you're just not getting pf1e levels of caster power in this system. It's kind of one of the goals of the system, to not have that.
That being said, it really sounds like your DM set you up for failure here. Learning to play the system at 18th level whilst trying to play a character that's radically changed between systems sounds like hell.
If you haven't been completely put off when you're going into a new campaign I would encourage you to keep an open mind. I personally find it a lot more rewarding than pf1e because it's not enough to blast something down with an absurd build, because absurd builds don't really exist. You have to work more with your party, and I really enjoy that.
If that doesn't sound appealing, it's probably not the system for you atm.
The OP is playing a bard with a summoner archetype.Correct. Seemed like it had better spell options. The same amount of hp though.
You're way whacked on the rules then. Summoner Archetype never gets Act Together and doesn't get to use Tandem actions which are the action economy boosters of the summoner. You can't get four actions. You don't get Boost Eidolon as an innate cantrip.
If your DM figures out how the rules actually work, you're going to hate the summoner even more because the archetype is absolutely terrible.
If you are the table of a DM that knows the rules, boy, you would be in for a horrible, horrible time playing the summoner archetype.
Base summoner is ok, but archetype is one of the worst in the game. I hope your DM doesn't read it and see how little you get from it since Tandem Actions improving action economy are the bread and butter of the summoner. You can't take them.
Due to your tenuous link, you can't gain or use tandem actions. Because you don't have Act Together, only you or your eidolon can perform an exploration activity at one time, so for instance you couldn't both be Searching or Investigating.
Min-maxing the bard is taking the Maestro muse for buffing and the Polymath must for the spellbook or extra spell.
Everyone, thank you for the comments! Y'all have verified my assumptions. If I have time before next Wednesday I'll try to roll up a sorcerer (again) and see if I can get anything fun out of it.
Is there anything better than pathbuilder2e? Character creation is really overwhelming, especially at 18th.
Sorc is better. Imperial Sorc is the Arcane King now since they nuked the wizard and witch into weakness.
The most powerful, easy to play classes are the fighter and rogue with maybe the barbarian next if you want do hammer damage.
If you want to use something overpowered for PF2, the Starlit Span magus with the psychic dedication and imaginary weapon is about as overpowered as PF2 gets. You do get to massacre enemies with a bow shot from range.
Everyone, thank you for the comments! Y'all have verified my assumptions. If I have time before next Wednesday I'll try to roll up a sorcerer (again) and see if I can get anything fun out of it.
If you want to blast stuff, Sorcerer is great. If you take Oracle archetype you can get some useful extra stuff like Foretell Harm, too.
Is there anything better than pathbuilder2e? Character creation is really overwhelming, especially at 18th.
Wanderer's Guide is the other free builder. I'm not sure it's better, but it's laid out differently and might suit you better.
Pathfinder Nexus and Hero Lab Online are both paid options, and given that you're not sure you are interested in the system right now, I really can't recommend spending a bunch of money on them. Pathbuilder is the go to because it's "good enough" for most folks and doesn't require spending a bunch of money to get going.
High level play has a lot going on, and you're playing on hard mode trying to start there. I'd really suggest something lower level. I had new players starting at 11 and that was a challenge, and 18 is even higher!
Personally, with how easy buffing is in PF2, I don’t think level -3 to 4 is bad, but it jumps to -4 to 5 so quickly that you really have to have the perfect creature to summon by rank 4 or 5 to have it be worth it.
I think the trick is that you don’t really want summons to be at the level of a fully invested in animal companion or else animal companions would be a complete waste of time.