Roll20 uses cookies to improve your experience on our site. Cookies enable you to enjoy certain features, social sharing functionality, and tailor message and display ads to your interests on our site and others. They also help us understand how our site is being used. By continuing to use our site, you consent to our use of cookies. Update your cookie preferences .
×
D&D 2024 has arrived! Pre-order the new core rulebooks now and get an exclusive pre-order bonus for free!
Create a free account

About Playing a Summoner

They are always banned, will anyone let me play on in their game? I promise not to do the things that make them banned. :) Im a dependable player who has fun playing the game as well as role play. expierenced and quick with turns.
If you cool with playing 5e & tonight at 6pm mst (In six hours from now) you can certainly play a Conjurer in my Two-Shot campaign i'm running. I currently have one in my static campaign, and his utility is annoying as hell, but compared to a Transmutation Wizard who can turn wood to gold and then go on a shopping spree, i'd much rather deal with a Conjurer. This is the post for my game: <a href="https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/983338/d-and-d-n" rel="nofollow">https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/983338/d-and-d-n</a>... If any of that interests you, feel free to PM me and i can help set you up. *wink*
1405111510

Edited 1405112291
John H..... it's its own class, not a wizard school..... Their main concept is that they have a highly customizable creature that they can summon, called an "Eidolon", which they add assorted "evolutions" to, allowing them to vary its abilities. Edit: in pathfinder
Rin Shinta said: I promise not to do the things that make them banned. :) So you promise not to play a summoner? Because the things that make them banned are their innate ability to break action economy, early access to relatively powerful buffs, the fact that they end up boring for the rest of the group to watch you play with your menagerie rather than taking their own turns, and provide the utility of other classes (Fighters, Rogues come to mind) or have access to useful features that other classes don't (i.e., Pounce). It's probably not a case of "Hey, I can just not do the things that make most GMs ban summoners" because the things that make them banned are intrinsic to playing the class, sorry to say.
1405121135

Edited 1405147283
Animus, I think that the problem with summoners is that they min/max too much. If he were to instead say "I'll be focusing my eidolon on becoming an X kind of creature" and all the evolutions he picks are for that, that adds more to the uniqueness of it, instead of the usual powerhouse eidolon. Regarding the action economy, playing as a synthesist should fix that.
If you can give me an honest to good character concept, I would probably allow it.
Ezequiel E. said: Animus, I think that the problem with summoners is that they min/max too much. If her were to instead say "I'll be focusing my eidolon on becoming an X kind of creature" and all the evolutions he picks are for that, that adds more to the uniqueness of it, instead of the usual powerhouse eidolon. Regarding the action economy, playing as a synthesist should fix that. Negative. Summoners get access to 3rd level spells at level 4, given their crunched spell-list, giving them a relatively significant power curve ahead of other casters. This continues upwards in that they regularly beat out other buff-based casters (Wizards, Sorc and Bard alike) by getting access to their useful spells 1-2 levels earlier than they would otherwise. This is one of the more serious problems with the Summoner. "Min/Maxed Eidolons are the problem" is a fallacy. Pathfinder, like 3.5 before it, is Ivory Tower Design. If you choose to make bad choices for the sake of the game, you're instead going to make the game harder for your fellow players who have to pick up your slack. "Optimization" is not a matter of choice or IC vs OOC. Any character who intends to adventure and contribute to their party would be optimized - that's just how it works. Slackers are not adventurers, and if you choose to play one as such, you probably deserve what you get. Ontop of that, you're playing a summoner. After level 3 or so, you're looking at people carrying scrolls of dispel, prepping banish, or anything else if you're following any sort of connected storyline. The Eidolon is not a concern, it's the horde that they can summon otherwise. (Recall, in-combat summoning Eidolons is effectively impossible until level 5+ as it takes a minute. Summon Monster takes a round, and you have a ton of uses of that, plus it can be prepped in spell slots for even more creatures.) Finally, Synthesist doesn't resolve the action economy problem, instead it reintroduces the 3.5 issue of class dipping, in that it is useful as a splash to benefit other classes (Synth 2-3/Barbarian X is very strong, for example). Using your Eidolon is reserved for when you cannot effectively utilize your Summon Monster feature, which will always provide more power to you. The Eidolon is not the problem. The Summoner class -is-. He has access to too many spells early, has the ability to easily build a menagerie that eats up play time from the rest of the party having any sort of fun and its archetypes only serve to showcase why it's a failure of design in Pathfinder. It's not a case of "Hurr, let's be unrealistic." It's a matter of reality - he probably won't find a game that will let him play a summoner, because the reason the summoner is banned is innately a problem with the class itself. To play it in a manner that doesn't break the game, you'd have to play it like a bard and ignore a good portion of your class features, or play an even worse Monk via pure Synth.
I don't really think this is the place to discuss class balance, nor do I think it's doing the OP any favors in doing so.
"make bad choices for the sake of the game" You got that wrong, it's not about making bad choices, it's about making a unique character instead of always seeing the exact same "optimal" builds for the sake of "winning" the game. You may find "winning" fun, I find making my characters unique and different from the rest fun. And as Monstercloud said, this is not the place to discuss class balance.
I could like to clarify things since it may be misunderstood. First off, I am no novice to the Summoner, I've already done the things that make them banned and I have a few things to say and remember, I am saying these things to clarify what it is im promising not to do. Animus said: " Negative. Summoners get access to 3rd level spells at level 4," and "The Summoner class -is-. He has access to too many spells early, has the ability to easily build a menagerie that eats up play time from the rest of the party having any sort of fun and its archetypes only serve to showcase why it's a failure of design in Pathfinder." #1 The Summoner is not the problem. What makes them banned isnt their their spells. They receive 2nd level spells at 4th level, not 3rd level spells. The thing your thinking of is haste, which is a 3rd level wizard spell but only a 2nd level summoner spell. Why do they get it sooner than "buff-based casters" is because those casters ARE NOT BUFF BASSED CASTERS. The summoner is the ONLY buff bassed caster, why? BECAUSE THEY HAVE LITTLE TO NOT ATTACK SPELLS! Things like fireball, flame strike or any sonic bard spell can tell you that those other classes CAN fill the roll of buff mage, where as summoner can only buff/debuff/summon. (An honestly, its a very powerful combination. Its teamwork built into a single class) #2 The Eidolon IS the problem. The eidolon follows compeatly different creation guidelines for what abilities it has. Because they are different, they can be much worse than characters, OR they can be much better. The Eidolon can overshadow others people perceived "Jobs" (like being more sneaky level 1 than the halfling rogue) is an easy thing to accomplish, even if the eidolon is 7 foot tall hulking monstrosity of muscle. On that note, they have access to things characters strait up dont (like pounce) multiclassing is a problem for this reason. #3, Not only dose it mechanically have access to different options, but it itself dosent have solid enough rules to govern all the "WHAT IF'S" Its possible to walk up to +5 sword of you shouldn't have this yet, grab it and phase out of existence. The next time you summon your eidolon it will have it with it. It is abuses like this which got it primarily banned in Pathfinder Society pay. They also had an abuse with their armor before paizo changed it pre release. EDIT. "You did get one thing right the fact that they end up boring for the rest of the group to watch you play with your menagerie rather than taking their own turns, and provide the utility of other classes (Fighters, Rogues come to mind) or have access to useful features that other classes don't (i.e., Pounce)." This "CAN" happen, but just because it can, dosent mean it should or will.
This is the message I sent a dm a inquiring about his campain. it is copy/pasted to show my intentions as a summoner "I've been playing d20 games longer than I would like to admit and I know my way around pathfinder. I like to role play the charactrers I play but I do it in a half serious way unless someone is roleplaying back. As for what I want to play its pretty open. I love almost all the classes in pathfinder (cept like alchemist and chavilere ect) and would have fun playing any class or role. my preference? I love the summoner class when I actualy get to play it. Most of the time I ask to play just the eidolon. In my last campain I asked the dm if my character can be from the perspective of the eidolon. I have a master who is a summoner, one day, for whatever reason I thought that if I ate my master it would give me his power, but all it did was stablise my form when I use him as a vessle. The bastard fought me for a long time, but i finaly broke his will. I cant access the part of his mind where he could cast spells, but I dont need it, being able to take my true form is good enough for me (and true form is based off a theme. Spider, dragon, ghost bear ect. (dosent use hundred hand slap) if I could be concidered at all I would be greatful :)" Edit TLDR: I asked to play a legal synth summoner who didnt use his spell list or summon monster sp unless he cooperated with the summoner's concious (controled by the dm) Also who spent 99% of his time in Synthesis Summoner transformed mode. That is just one example of how I play them, and enjoy them.
1405176833
Karl V.
Plus
Translator
Sadly banning kenders and summoners is required to keep your sanity when DMing an open table. The problem resides not primarily with the class or race, but with the people that chose to play them and the impact they have on the expertience for everyone at the table.
True, I find people in any class that can just ruin my fun as a player for many reasons. I would say it happens most often with Summoner though, as it is the easiest to accomplish just because of what the class gives you access to if you cant show self restraint.