Conjurer vs. Constructor

[Eltern]

Which is better? Why? Or are they even Steven?

For those that have it, IMC we use the UA Conjurer variant specialist with the bonus feats replaced, etc.

I'm working on a Constructor prestige class for 3.5 based on the 3.0 one on WotC's website, but really I think I'd rather just go straight Psion.

Me, I think a constructor is better just for the versatility, but I haven't compared firepower between a Summon Monster II critter and a second level Astral Construct.

Eltern

 

[Dinkeldog]

Which is better? Why? Or are they even Steven?

For those that have it, IMC we use the UA Conjurer variant specialist with the bonus feats replaced, etc.

I'm working on a Constructor prestige class for 3.5 based on the 3.0 one on WotC's website, but really I think I'd rather just go straight Psion.

Me, I think a constructor is better just for the versatility, but I haven't compared firepower between a Summon Monster II critter and a second level Astral Construct.

Eltern

Constructs will have better AC and HP on average than summoned creatures. If you're choosing your summonings based on special abilities, you'll do better than the constructor now. Only 9th level constructs have 2 menu selections.

 

[DM_Matt]

Constructs will have better AC and HP on average than summoned creatures. If you're choosing your summonings based on special abilities, you'll do better than the constructor now. Only 9th level constructs have 2 menu selections.

Using all the Mind's Eye stuff, Constructers are too powerful. The one in my group voluntarily retired.

 

[Dinkeldog]

Using all the Mind's Eye stuff, Constructers are too powerful. The one in my group voluntarily retired.

Hmmm. I had Mindscapes Astral Zealot, and used the feats that gave one additional ability and the ability to combine abilities to go up to a new menu. My constructs were useful enough to summon most of the time, but they tended to die in droves.

I'm not sure if the added hit points and AC are going to make up for lost menu choices, at least at the low levels that we always seem to play through.

 

[James McMurray]

Boost Construct means that all of your constructs wil still have two menu choices. Not as nice as the 4+ available in 3.0, but still very useful. Last night was my first 3.5 game with my shaper, and his constructs tore stuff up left and right. I never had the option to really summon non-combat oriented creatures like a conjurer can though.

If the game is primarily combat oriented, I'd say go with a shaper.

Also, Shaper's get the ability to Overchannel and get constructs one-two levels sooner than a conjurer gets his next level of creatures. For a little daamge (soakable via Vigor or Talented) you can easily get some seriously beefy critters.

Not being restricted to spell slots also means that you can generate a lot more the bigger constructs than a conjurer can big summoned monsters. It chews through your power points in a hurry, but is a wonderul option in a pinch.

If the DM allows Extended Construction to increase the duration to one minute per level, then a Shaper is the only possible choice because you can create your guys before heading into the ancient temple, forgotten dungeon, enemy hideout, etc. Combined with menu B's Fast Healing, Damage Reduction, and/or Psionic Repair Damage you'll have creatures that stay around a long long time and just keep dishing out the beats.

 

[Scion]

Using all the Mind's Eye stuff, Constructers are too powerful. The one in my group voluntarily retired.

I would have to disagree strongly. I ran a constructor in a game, they are fun an interesting, but their power level is a very strange thing. Given several rounds to prepare they are a bit stronger than other characters (but of course with the feat and power prereqs, which are massive!, then they should be to some degree, when in their element), but without those several rounds I was nearly worthless. Most battles were nearly over by the time I could even bring things to bear. Unless we had warning ahead of time then the character was worthless.

Huge prereqs, that constantly scale with level, in order to specialize at one thing is fine. Like I said, I had fun, but I certainly wasnt the powerhouse of the group by any means, unless I was able to get all of my buddies with me. Even then there were a few powers and spells which simply destroyed the class when they appeared.

in the end, had a great time, but I was utterly destroyed in one battle because I didnt have my requisite 3 rounds to get really started. Plus, even when I was running on full throttle (burning through all of my pp's in one battle) I was still only so powerful. More powerful than any one other character? no doubt, but of course I had spent all of my resources on being so. Better than any two? nope. Good for the rest of the day? not so much.

It was an incredibly well made class, I hope that when it is remade they keep the same mix of powers and choices. The class was great, in its incredibly limited scope, which is how prc's should be.

 

[Piratecat]

And astral construct can't be avoided by a simple 1st lvl spell, like summoned creatures can. I think summoned monsters have the edge in magical flexibility at higher levels, but constructs are simply more effective at combat.

 

[Dinkeldog]

And astral construct can't be avoided by a simple 1st lvl spell, like summoned creatures can. I think summoned monsters have the edge in magical flexibility at higher levels, but constructs are simply more effective at combat.

I'm not sure I agree wholly. What happens when that dispel magic takes out the pro-evil? Or give the summoned monster something to do than just attack that one spellcaster.

I'm not saying that constructs are worse now than the summoned creatures, but they're definitely no better. That may have been the point, but when the former strengths of the psion: telepathy, constructs, and time powers have been stripped so that only the time powers are better than wizards. Well, eh. I'm likely to get to see a constructor in action in my group, and I'll form a more solid opinion. Until then, my instinct is to stick with the flexibility of the wizard. And that's the irony. The psion used to have the flexibility, and I'll always take that over brute strength.

 

[James McMurray]

Scion: WotC_Mark (the creator of the constructor) has said that it will be updated, but probably not hit Mind's Eye until June.

 

[erian_7]

Scion: WotC_Mark (the creator of the constructor) has said that it will be updated, but probably not hit Mind's Eye until June.

I've got a revision I've worked up for a fellow in my home game that I'm seeking feedback on at this time. This is just my second pass at the revision (first pass just cleaned it up to 3.5/XPH, second pass tweaked it to my goals for the class). No playtesting and balance/comparison work as yet. Any thoughts are welcome.


Eric

P.S. Of course, when WotC releases the new one I'll likely just use it, unlessI like mine better!