PRPG Advanced Player's Guide Playtest: Summoner and Witch

[Scott DeWar]

[encouragement]
Ancient vaults,
You are right. You are cruel. But, I do like the idea!

fuindordm ,
I am with the others in saying : Kudos to you!
If you can, please post that idea on Piazo. You too Ancient vaults!
[/encouragement]

 

[Celtavian]

The Summoner looks powerful on paper. I'm wondering if it will be powerful during play. The lack of magical items will make it a bit player at high level in many of the most important battles. It's damage will fall far behind player characters making the summoner fall behind as an asset to the group.

Will most groups allow the summoner to take his share of nice magic items to boost his eidolon in power enough to be a useful group asset? I wonder.

The summoner won't be able to use many offensive powered arcane items such as wands and staves due to their limited spell list. Their primary form of damage will be physical from the eidolon. So they will probably need access to the same type of magic items a melee character will need, though they can provide some of the boost through spell enhancements.

It'll be interesting to see how an eidolon does past level 12 or so. Will it become a minor nuisance during battles or will it still be a solid contributer as the ACs of enemies rise with the help of magic items and you start fighting creatures with potent damage resistance and attacks.

The summoner seems like a wizard that does melee damage through his creature. Thus competing with the melee classes in the group for shine time with some additional arcane assets that may help now and then. Not sure if he will be as useful as a wizard or sorcerer, but will be interesting to see how the class plays out. I hope we get some solid playtesting for this hybrid type arcane class. D&D has always lacked a highly effective summoner, though such figures are fun fantasy characters.

 

[Starbuck_II]

The summoner won't be able to use many offensive powered arcane items such as wands and staves due to their limited spell list. Their primary form of damage will be physical from the eidolon. So they will probably need access to the same type of magic items a melee character will need, though they can provide some of the boost through spell enhancements.

They can get some damage output from their summons. A couple Lantern Archons adds up (each has 2 rays/rd, touch attacks).

 

[Celtavian]

re

Still not much damage compared to a constant stream of offensive spells such as fireball, horrid wilting and direct killing spells like wail of the banshee or disintegrate. You'll get a small number of attacks per round from a creature that can be killed fairly easily if focused on if it isn't properly buffed and equipped.

Most heal spells will be targeted on the player characters. The class can't heal its own summoned eidolon, which leaves him at the mercy of the PC cleric. The fighter will do more damage. The rogue will probably do more as well.

I get the feeling the summoner will become a less effective part of the group as the party gets higher level unless he is allowed to collect magic items like a melee character that enhance his eidolon. Even then he may well lag in damage and the ability to effect a combat outcome with the lack of potent, encounter changing spells.

I would have rather seen the base abilities of the summoner such as hit points, BAB, and the like lessened to make the eidolon into a creature just less powerful than a fighter in melee combat. I would rather see the summoner as pure wizard type with very powerful and focused summoning abilities than this strange hybrid summoner that is expected to enter melee. That combination rarely works effectively, especially at high level unless they have access to the same type of magic items the melee classes are vying for.

The BAB of such hybrids is usually too low to land blows as often as a fighter. And they hit for less damage even when they do hit than the fighter or rogue, substantially less damage which makes them less and less effective as they rise in level.

 

[Xendria]

I would rather see the summoner as pure wizard type with very powerful and focused summoning abilities than this strange hybrid summoner that is expected to enter melee.

As said a billion times. This isn't another wizard, and that's not what they want it to be. They want something unique and different. If you want a pure spell caster play a sorcerer or wizard.

Most heal spells will be targeted on the player characters. The class can't heal its own summoned eidolon, which leaves him at the mercy of the PC cleric.

This depends on how bad your party's cleric is. My group healed the Eidolon just as much as the fighter, if not more so. It all depended on who seemed to need it more at the time. They treated it just as if it was a front line party member. And I beg to differ that you can't heal your Eidolon, the class has Use Magic Device as a class skill.

I get the feeling the summoner will become a less effective part of the group as the party gets higher level unless he is allowed to collect magic items like a melee character that enhance his eidolon.

Honestly, our summoner put more into his Eidolon's weapon than anything for himself. I really don't see how this is a problem at all. Especially when the cleric had the craft feats to make the weapons for it. I don't get why he wouldn't be able to collect magic weapons and such for his Eidolon.

Even then he may well lag in damage and the ability to effect a combat outcome with the lack of potent, encounter changing spells.

Enlarge Person, Mage Armor, Shield, Magic Fang, Protection from Chaos/etc., Barkskin, Bull's Strength, Haste, Protection from Arrows, Spider Climb, Fire Shield, Greater Invisibility, Nondetection, Protection from Energy, Stoneskin ... Now that's just up through 3rd level. Those are all spells that can be cast on the Eidolon to make it quite formidable in combat. Our fighter on the other hand, did not have his own wizard casting these on him. As for offensive, that's what the Eidolon is there for. If you wanna cast fireball that bad, again, Use Magic Device is a class skill. The Summoner cast Nondetection and Greater Invisibility on himself and just enjoyed the fight while healing his Eidolon.

The BAB of such hybrids is usually too low to land blows as often as a fighter. And they hit for less damage even when they do hit than the fighter or rogue, substantially less damage which makes them less and less effective as they rise in level.

Tell that to all the monks out there. BAB is not everything. Yes, a fighter will be better at straight melee damage. Paizo got it perfect because that's how it should be, HE'S THE FIGHTER. Just because your not the hardest hitting member of a party doesn't mean your worthless. Otherwise no one would print bards, monks, paladins, or druids.

Overall, I think the class is well done. Yes it needs some tweaking, but honestly, its in a niche of its own and fits that niche perfect.

 

[Celtavian]

As said a billion times. This isn't another wizard, and that's not what they want it to be. They want something unique and different. If you want a pure spell caster play a sorcerer or wizard.

I didn't ask for a sorcerer or wizard. I would like a summoner designed around the wizard model or should I say arcane caster for BAB and saves. A summoner that enters battle is fairly useless.

This depends on how bad your party's cleric is. My group healed the Eidolon just as much as the fighter, if not more so. It all depended on who seemed to need it more at the time. They treated it just as if it was a front line party member. And I beg to differ that you can't heal your Eidolon, the class has Use Magic Device as a class skill.

Sure, Use Magic Device and take all the scrolls and healing items from the cleric. Maybe your group runs in encounters where heal spells aren't spread like they are in ours. That is a matter of different play styles. But our DM usually designs main encounters where the fighter can die in a round or two and once he is low it requires focused healing by the cleric to keep the party alive. Maybe in most cases the cleric will be able to heal the eidolon, but that won't work real well in my group. Maybe our group runs against more difficult opposition than standard.

Honestly, our summoner put more into his Eidolon's weapon than anything for himself. I really don't see how this is a problem at all. Especially when the cleric had the craft feats to make the weapons for it. I don't get why he wouldn't be able to collect magic weapons and such for his Eidolon.

This is probably more of a problem with our playstyle. We play in a magic somewhat light campaign. We're level 6 and our paladin doesn't have a magic sword yet. We have three +1 magic weapons spread throughout the group. So trying to equip an eidolon might no fly in my group. Not sure how other groups run.

Enlarge Person, Mage Armor, Shield, Magic Fang, Protection from Chaos/etc., Barkskin, Bull's Strength, Haste, Protection from Arrows, Spider Climb, Fire Shield, Greater Invisibility, Nondetection, Protection from Energy, Stoneskin ... Now that's just up through 3rd level. Those are all spells that can be cast on the Eidolon to make it quite formidable in combat. Our fighter on the other hand, did not have his own wizard casting these on him. As for offensive, that's what the Eidolon is there for. If you wanna cast fireball that bad, again, Use Magic Device is a class skill. The Summoner cast Nondetection and Greater Invisibility on himself and just enjoyed the fight while healing his Eidolon.

I'm not much concerned about up to 10th or so level. It's once the party starts fighting high end demons and creatures that can see through invisibility and have high ACs where the eidolon will start coming up short.

Tell that to all the monks out there. BAB is not everything. Yes, a fighter will be better at straight melee damage. Paizo got it perfect because that's how it should be, HE'S THE FIGHTER. Just because your not the hardest hitting member of a party doesn't mean your worthless. Otherwise no one would print bards, monks, paladins, or druids.

Notice that monks received a BAB enhancement for their best attacks and for combat maneuvers. Otherwise they would be as unattractive as before at high level. Just like rogues still are and druids using wild shape. No one in my group likes playing druids or rogues because they are lacking compared to other classes against the types of encounters we face. From a DMs perspective it's very hard to balance an encounter so that it will be challenging for an paladin or fighter and still allow a druid or rogue to be very effective. They are far outshadowed by the fighter, ranger, and paladin in ability to hit. If you want a monster to last against a paladin, ranger, and fighter, you have to make it's armor class so high that a rogue or druid will have trouble hitting it with their standard BAB.

Bards in my group are generally utility focused and rarely enter combat.

Overall, I think the class is well done. Yes it needs some tweaking, but honestly, its in a niche of its own and fits that niche perfect.

My concerns may primarily be because of the type of encounters my DM designs and the lower number of magic items filtering in. Maybe in a standard campaign the summoner is fine.

I think it will be weak in the campaigns I play in. Fighter, ranger, paladin, and monk will far outstrip it in damage. And if your primary power source is melee damage from a summoned outsider, that isn't going to be fun. Now rogue will at least have a stronger role in the group.

I'll give this a test run to see how it works. But I was really hoping for a class designed more like a sorcerer save that summoned creatures constitute the progression path.

Like it would have been great to have a summoner specialized in summoning elementals, one specialized in summoning devils, one specialized in summoning azatas, one specialized in summoning creatures from the edge of space and time, etc, etc. I think that would have been much cooler. Maybe that will be covered with Prcs or something.

 

[Xendria]

Well, Paizo built the class with an average or standard game in mind. If your going on slow experience as well as slow treasure progression you should be fine. But from what you said it doesn't sound like you are. Granted you guys can play your game the way you want (hence the beauty of D&D) but I just see it as sorely limiting your campaign by removing these support classes.

To help out, just do what I did for our conjurer we had, create your own prestige class with your DM. I had no problems with my player doing it with me, but yet again, not every DM is the same. Give it a shot, because the idea you have there is a good one, just maybe not unique enough to warrant a base class.

 

[Nyeshet]

A lot has been said about Eidolon imbalance. What if the Eidolon started out as small, could become medium at level 6 for 3 pts (currently where large is located), large at level 11 for 4 pts (currently where huge is located), and perhaps huge at level 16 for 5 pts (currently a non-existent option)? Or perhaps huge can be removed altogether as an option. Or some other system might be set up with 2, 3, & 4 pts for increased size from small (to medium, large, huge), but with higher levels required to access such (say lvs 5, 10, 15)?

The decrease in size should noticeably affect the creature's effectiveness in combat - especially at lower levels, and if what I've read in a few posts is correct, it is more the over-effectiveness of the Eidolon that proves problematic for balance.

As for the SLAs, I think having only one active at a time is limit enough. Personally, though, I like the idea of allowing more - but requiring a will save or spellcraft check that increases in difficulty as the number of summoned creatures increases. If they fail - the creature is summoned, but it is not under the control of the summoner. Perhaps it is even antagonistic to the summoner who just called it away from whatever it was doing on the other plane. Not under the control of the summoner, the summoner cannot directly dismiss or banish it without the appropriate spells to accomplish such. This would discourage summoners from summoning too many at once while allowing for the option - and tempting them to occasionally consider or attempt multiple summons, perhaps to their detriment.

The idea stated on the prior page - that of the Eidolon itself perhaps gaining freedom each time it is enhanced or its characteristics altered - is interesting, but what if it were instead this:

Each time the eidolon is summoned for 24 hours a will save or spellcraft check is made by the DM for the player. If it fails by 10 or more the ritual fails and the creature is not summoned. However, if it fails by 5 or less the creature is summoned - but the binding is weak. At any time during the next 24 hours the DM can make a will save for the creature - gaining a bonus equal to the degree by which the summoner failed their save / check. Should the DM succeed the creature breaks free and is able to act on its own initiative for a few rounds before automatically returning to its native plane.

 

[Celtavian]

re

Overeffective at lower levels? I I can see that. But at high levels I can't see the eidolon being more effective than a PC save for perhaps a few very specific builds backed up with a nice amount of magic items. I hope we get some high level play test results soon.