Synthetist is Shameful.

[tylermalan]

Re: My biggest gripe with the proposed advantage of the action economy of the summoner vs. synthesist is that even though there is double the actions of the summoner combo, there is also a significantly weaker target. One should consider if the vulnerability of the main character on the field is grounds to disqualify any advantage to proposed action economy. If you ask me I'd rather stay in my chopper than get outside in a fight. That's just me, but yeah, thanks for the word.

Cheers,

I don't know if you're trying to think of this in terms of real-world application or what, or maybe you haven't played a lot of 3.5/Pathfinder (can't remember if you mentioned your experience), but this point you make is essentially irrelevant. Just take a quick look at the Summoner spell list - among his level 3 spells are Dimension Door, Fly, Greater Invisibility, Displacement... and I'm not even halfway through the list. The point is, unless the player is totally clueless, the Summoner won't be dying. Then keep in mind that due to action economy the Summoner can cast one of these spells AND attack (via Eidolon) in the same turn.

 

[joah_from_Alberta]

heh heh, yeah or how "bad" the GM is. A bunch of (low-level) gunslingers flanking the summoner and needing only touch attack. That reminds me of a wicked GM I once had that plagued a hapless player with a dimensional spider, every session.

If played correctly, every other player should be *at least as powerful as the eidolon (if not then the subject should be up for review). So essentially the "weaker" summoner in the group becomes the weakest target on the field.

I am willing to bet that the greatest problem with a summoner is most prevalent at an idiosyncratic level within the group. The class is an aggressive build which precludes that the player will have balls. I am willing to bet that most often a detente is built up between the player summoner and the GM whereby the GM (and group) is based by the player into "allowing" this ridiculously overpowered character. It's a form of bullying, but because it remains unacknowledged by the group it continues to manifest itself like an evil spell.

This is shameful, and this is why I devised a formula that could show everyone by assigning one common number to every character in an attempt to unmask the true villains in D&D.

Cheers,

 

[tylermalan]

I feel like we're having two different discussions.

 

[Bacris]

Unfortunately, your formula is incomplete.

Take a look at the formula for the DPR Olympics. It takes into consideration a variety of things - number of attacks, attack modifier, crit range, crit multiplier - those are absolutely critical components that must be considered to have a true comparison.

Anything else is a guess.

Why? Because as mentioned, not all attacks are created equally. 15 attacks might sound amazing - but if 7 of them will miss 95% of the time, that's not that big a deal.

The synthesist is less powerful than the base summoner because of loss of actions. You might disagree with that, but experience would show otherwise. Hypotheticals are great for a discussion point, but actual practice is where things come out to be seen if they're REALLY a problem, or just a PERCEIVED problem. You'd be astounded at how often a PERCEIVED problem isn't as big as it's believed to be.

 

[BobROE]

I don't know if you're trying to think of this in terms of real-world application or what, or maybe you haven't played a lot of 3.5/Pathfinder (can't remember if you mentioned your experience), but this point you make is essentially irrelevant. Just take a quick look at the Summoner spell list - among his level 3 spells are Dimension Door, Fly, Greater Invisibility, Displacement... and I'm not even halfway through the list. The point is, unless the player is totally clueless, the Summoner won't be dying. Then keep in mind that due to action economy the Summoner can cast one of these spells AND attack (via Eidolon) in the same turn.

Also, because the Eidolon can be/is a large part of a party's damage output the other members of the party make an effort to protect the summoner so that they don't lose both the spell casting potential of the summoner (Haste in every encounter) and the Damage output of the Eidolon.

 

[joah_from_Alberta]

Also, because the Eidolon can be/is a large part of a party's damage output the other members of the party make an effort to protect the summoner so that they don't lose both the spell casting potential of the summoner (Haste in every encounter) and the Damage output of the Eidolon.

How bout instead of making an effort to protect another player character they make an effort to play their own characters.

Unfortunately, I have seemingly antagonized some members of this forum. I do not know of any normal character that has 15 attacks, so I don't understand the relevance of your argument. It is not my intention to introduce a new formula. I simply wish to share the fact that I have devised a new formula for calculating a characters melee power that can be used as a quick reference. It is not scientific, it is not absolute, it is just a quicky and just try it, you might be surprised.

Perhaps there has been an argument regardiung the summoner vs the synthesist before and it would seem that the term action economy is a championed term. Well let me introduce another term that is accepted within the community-- critical mass. I wonder if perhaps BobROE and Bacris actually play synthetists and are coming to it defense.

Well, regardless, I have played with a synthetist in my group and I have read from other peoples comments regarding the synthetist in their group and it is my conclusion that the synthetist is a class designed for power gamers who care little about the integrity and balance of the game and only about their own narcissistic values.

 

[Bacris]

I've played all sorts of classes, including the 3.5 core-only druid base class, which was grossly imbalanced yet all sorts of DMs argued "Core-Only" was balanced.

My argument is not for or against the overall level of the synthesist vs other classes, but against the argument that the synthesist is a level of power above the summoner, when the opposite is true.

The fact of that matter is that virtually any class can be played so as to break a game, especially in a party where only one player is optimizing, while the others are not. You can have a synthesist who is mediocre, while you have a monk who is devastating. That has always been true and is why DM adjudication is necessary.

Action Economy is not a term that was coined with the synthesist - I recall it being used in the times of 3.5 and was one of the reasons the druid was always brought up - action economy with the shapeshifted druid, the buffed animal companion, and the summoned natures allies could introduce a world of imbalance without the use of anything outside of the core rules.

I'm not antagonized - but you don't seem to actually be discussing the merits of other people's points, but instead minimally retorting and then going off on a different path of discussion.

The argument is that the synthesist is shameful. My argument is that the synthesist is actually weaker than the base summoner because it gives up quite a bit. Losing the ability for the summoner to do something while the eidolon engages the enemies is a HUGE tradeoff. Discounting it doesn't help your point.

Others have argued that your argument that the summoner is a "good target" is flawed, because the summoner has defensive capabilities, as well as the fact that he is not a Wizard - he's d8 / average BAB / with spellcasting. That's comparable to a bard, monk, or rogue in terms of the class skeleton and he has ways to get away from those who would try to squish him. You haven't really responded to that point and continue to go on about tangential points - the party protecting the summoner. In my games, the melee guys protect the caster guys - I assume that's pretty standard combat tactics - toughies protect squishies. I don't see how the summoner breaks that paradigm or is unique in any way.

My point boiled down is this: is it possible to introduce game imbalance with the Synthesist? Yes. Is it possible to introduce game imbalance with ANY of the other classes - core or otherwise? Yes. The synthesist / summoner is not unique in this regard and lampooning it as some sort of special case is unfair when a variety of other classes can be used to be decidedly overpowered.

 

[Systole]

My point boiled down is this: is it possible to introduce game imbalance with the Synthesist? Yes. Is it possible to introduce game imbalance with ANY of the other classes - core or otherwise? Yes. The synthesist / summoner is not unique in this regard and lampooning it as some sort of special case is unfair when a variety of other classes can be used to be decidedly overpowered.

While I 99% agree with your point, I double-dog dare you to introduce game imbalance with a rogue.

 

[Bacris]

While I 99% agree with your point, I double-dog dare you to introduce game imbalance with a rogue.

I'll see what I can come up with. I'll go with level 10 - the standard used in the DPR olympics - and I'll stick to Paizo-only material.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Systole, you probably mean that it's difficult if not impossible to break the game with rogue. But there's also the other meaning of "introduce game imbalance with a rogue." That is, buff the ever loving hell out of them via houserules to try and make them as powerful as a wizard. I can guarantee you, if anyone ever did that on any* messageboard, whether it be here, paizo, gleemax... they'd get eaten alive by the angry responses. People get virulently upset at the thought of a mundane having utterly godlike powers (you know, like casters do).


*Well, I could see minmaxboards / brilliantgameologists gleefully cheering it on...