[3.P] The Summoner's Handbook: A Guide to the Pathfinder Summoner

[Harlon]

And a shadowcaller enters from stage right. Started because of homecooked campaign my gm is making atm, though we later decided a shadow dragon disciple would be easier to rp. However, this idea has found a little home and isn't leaving anytime soon. Need some help double checking to make sure it all works right. Also i'm not certain of the status of those tentacles that would currently be grappling enemies and their ability to continue dealing damage.

In trying to keep in fluff of being shadowcaller who has spent most of thier life on the plane of shadow and not being an a-typical umbral dragon devotee i decided to give my best shot at mimicking what a nihiloi would be judging from http://pathfinder.wikia.com/wiki/Nihiloi.

Bipedal and @lvl 14 would have:
Evolutions (22points)-Slam, Huge, Shadow Blend, Tentacle x4, grab(tentacle), and Improved Damage(slam), Ability Increase(str)
Feats- Power Attack, Cleave, Greater Cleave, Cleaving Finish, Improved Natural attack(slam), Improved Cleaving Finish

The rest of the way to 20 would probably be flavor defensive evolutions while picking up 2 more tentacles. Though reach would end up being the most prominent of the practical choices. The final 2 feats would likely end up being vital strike and improved vital strike to make the most of those cleaving finish slams.

[Voyd211]

Hi there! It's been a while.

So, I noticed that the author doesn't mention the alternate summons from the Adventure Paths. My 2nd-level summoner, for instance, projectile-vomited bloody skeletons last night.

Here's a full list, including the alternate monsters. Just in case the author comes back and reads these posts.

EDIT: There's also the various heritages you can have for tieflings, aasimars and dhampirs. Should those be factored in?

[grarrrg]

EDIT: There's also the various heritages you can have for tieflings, aasimars and dhampirs. Should those be factored in?

Aasimar stays about the same, as do Dhamphir.

Tieflings would be the ones to gain the most, as they could actually get a CHA bonus (or at the very least remove the penalty).

[Vortenger]

I don't see it mentioned in the evolutions section so I thought it might bear mentioning:

The Shadow Form evolution (2 pt) grants constant concealment. Concealment is one of the requirements to stealth. A skill-dolon can grab this and Skilled: stealth at level 1 and hide-in-plain-sight all day, every day. The 20% miss chance is just gravy. Not to be used by combat eidolons...

[nategar05]

I was just browsing this thread and noticed that someone recommended Heavy Armor for Inquisitors. For high level Inquisitors, I have a one word refutation of that idea: Stalwart. Losing Evasion for Fort and Will saves seems like a high price to pay for spending a feat for a little higher AC.

Carry on then.

Of course, disregard that if you plan on making your Heavy Armor Mithril.

[findingpaths]

Hi,

I am new to pathfinder and I wanted some help making a synthesist summoner whose eidolon is basically a yuan-ti and fighting people that way (preferably with some sweet snake-like attacks and a 2 handed scimitar).

Thanks for any help!

[grarrrg]

Hi,

I am new to pathfinder and I wanted some help making a synthesist summoner whose eidolon is basically a yuan-ti and fighting people that way (preferably with some sweet snake-like attacks and a 2 handed scimitar).

Thanks for any help!

If you don't mind the 20ft. land speed, then Serpentine base is the best for flavor.
If you/your DM don't mind some re-flavoring, then Biped and Quad are better from a mechanical point of view.

Assuming Serpentine, your STR will be quite poor to start. Recommend getting Large asap. You can also spend Evo-points to get STR boosts, but these are restricted by class level.

Optimizing the Bite attack is quite easy. It already comes with Reach, which is nice, you can 'take Bite a 2nd time' to get an extra +1/2 STR to attacks, I'd wait on this, but once you have some levels it can be a solid damage boost. Improved Damage is always nice on an attack, boosting the damage die up a notch.

Half-Elf is usually the go-to for Summoner races, due to the extra 1/4 Evo point favored class bonus.

[vlysses]

Hi Saph - extremely useful guide for a beginner Summoner...

I'm looking at your Killer Centaur build as inspiration for my Eidolon, and there is one thing I don't understand re its ability scores on LvL 10.

DEX: Why only 16? Don't you add +4 Bonus (just as for STR above) to DEX on LvL 10? That would give KC DEX of 18 not 16.

CON: Where do the additional +4 points coming from compared to base value of 13 for quadruped.

Also:
STR 28: 14 +8 (Large) +4 Bonus +2 (ability increases at LvLs 5 and 10). Thank you for confirming that my maths is correct...

Again thanks for the v cool guide!

PS: Do I understand the STR/DEX bonus correctly: you simply add the number in the Eidolon table corresponding to your level to the base value of the Eidolon? So ignoring any other potential increases, e.g. in LvL 5 (+2) both STR and DEX will have increased from 14 to 16 respectively, or, in LvL 15 the bonus goes to +6, so basically I have to add 6 points on top of their base values (instead of 2...)

Thank you for clarifying!

[Snowbluff]

Just a thought: Tiefling Synthethist with Maw or Claw (Maw) and the alternate feature for claws (Presumably 2, and they are primaries by default). The alternate Heritages can give a Cha boost as well.

Also, it seem Synths can cast spells if they are quadrupeds. It says limbs.

[Andvare]

Hi Saph - extremely useful guide for a beginner Summoner...

I'm looking at your Killer Centaur build as inspiration for my Eidolon, and there is one thing I don't understand re its ability scores on LvL 10.

DEX: Why only 16? Don't you add +4 Bonus (just as for STR above) to DEX on LvL 10? That would give KC DEX of 18 not 16.

CON: Where do the additional +4 points coming from compared to base value of 13 for quadruped.

Also:
STR 28: 14 +8 (Large) +4 Bonus +2 (ability increases at LvLs 5 and 10). Thank you for confirming that my maths is correct...

Again thanks for the v cool guide!

PS: Do I understand the STR/DEX bonus correctly: you simply add the number in the Eidolon table corresponding to your level to the base value of the Eidolon? So ignoring any other potential increases, e.g. in LvL 5 (+2) both STR and DEX will have increased from 14 to 16 respectively, or, in LvL 15 the bonus goes to +6, so basically I have to add 6 points on top of their base values (instead of 2...)

Thank you for clarifying!

Saph is too busy with a career to come around these parts anymore.

You forget that being large, asides from granting you more strength, also gets you more con (+4), and less dex (-2).

[Andvare]

Just a thought: Tiefling Synthethist with Maw or Claw (Maw) and the alternate feature for claws (Presumably 2, and they are primaries by default). The alternate Heritages can give a Cha boost as well.

Also, it seem Synths can cast spells if they are quadrupeds. It says limbs.

No, you need Limbs (arms), not just limbs, for spellcasting.

Edit: But nothing that a small evolution for an extra set of limbs (arms) can't fix.

[vlysses]

@ Andvare - your're right. Thanks man, sometimes the PF system feels like a giant puzzle, with many pieces pretty well hidden...

[Andvare]

@ Andvare - your're right. Thanks man, sometimes the PF system feels like a giant puzzle, with many pieces pretty well hidden...

Yup. Not the clearest of rule-system.

[Karoht]

I'm doing the Killer Centaur build with an Aasimar Synthesist right now, who is at 10th level.
You get Dimension Door as a SLA at level 6. So starting at 7th level, feats are Dimensional Agility/Assault/Dervish/Savant. So far so good, tele-pounce several times a day is pretty awesome.

I'm not sure if I'm doing primary and secondary attacks properly though.
Factoring in Multi-attack, without buffs the attack chain looks like this.
26 STR = +8 bonus
8(BAB) + 8(STR) -1(Large) -2(Multiattack)
Primary: Longspear 13/8
Secondary: Bite +4 Claws, 8/8/8/8/8
If we skip the spear attacks, the natural attacks remain primary and therefore are all at 13? I think?
So the spear is currently just for reach and AoO's at the moment. He's got spare arms for casting so I figured he might as well have something.
Unless of course I have all this backwards. I read that if there are weapons involved doing iterative attacks, then all the natural weapons become secondary and take a -5.

[Snowbluff]

No, you need Limbs (arms), not just limbs, for spellcasting.

Edit: But nothing that a small evolution for an extra set of limbs (arms) can't fix.

Really, because all my entry says is

The eidolon must have limbs for the synthesist to cast spells with somatic components.

You probably still have arms, too. The only actually change to your form is you gain limbs, since you now have evolutions.

[Andvare]

Really, because all my entry says is


You probably still have arms, too. The only actually change to your form is you gain limbs, since you now have evolutions.

ANd in D&D, drowning can heal you.

Seriously, the eidolon functions as a suit, an exeskeleton. If you do not have the correct limbs, you cannot use your hands.

[Snowbluff]

ANd in D&D, drowning can heal you.

Yes. It's RAW. There's no real point in arguing with me if you're going to recognize that.

Seriously, the eidolon functions as a suit, an exeskeleton. If you do not have the correct limbs, you cannot use your hands.

It says:

The eidolon must have limbs for the synthesist to cast spells with somatic components.

It's very clear. Limbs is a defined term for eidolons, as is having arms.

The synthesist wears the eidolon like translucent, living armor.

Besides, I don't own any armor that doesn't leave my hands free. Do you?

If we're arguing RAI, some all Druids can cast spells while wildshaped. It's very likely they meant for quadrupeds to be able to cast spells.

[grarrrg]

I'm not sure if I'm doing primary and secondary attacks properly though.
Factoring in Multi-attack, without buffs the attack chain looks like this.
26 STR = +8 bonus
8(BAB) + 8(STR) -1(Large) -2(Multiattack)
Primary: Longspear 13/8
Secondary: Bite +4 Claws, 8/8/8/8/8
If we skip the spear attacks, the natural attacks remain primary and therefore are all at 13? I think?
So the spear is currently just for reach and AoO's at the moment. He's got spare arms for casting so I figured he might as well have something.
Unless of course I have all this backwards. I read that if there are weapons involved doing iterative attacks, then all the natural weapons become secondary and take a -5.

If using Manufactured Weapon AND Natural attacks, the Manufactured takes no penalties, and ALL Naturals are considered Secondary and take the -5 Penalty.
Multiattack reduces the Secondary penalty to only -2.
So with 8 Bab, 8 STR, and -1 Size penalty your base Accuracy is at 15.

You have enough Bab for one iterative attack with a Manufactured weapon.
So the Spear is 15/10

All Natural Weapons are Secondary, so they get base Accuracy -2 (reduced from -5 thanks to Multiattack), so all get 13.
So a full attack will be Spear/Bite/Clawsx4/Spear
At 15/13/13x4/10

If you do NOT use the Spear, then all Naturals revert to their 'normal' type (Primary/Secondary). Bite and Claws are all Primary.
So with no Spear, you'd do Bite/Clawsx4
At 15/15x4

[Karoht]

If using Manufactured Weapon AND Natural attacks, the Manufactured takes no penalties, and ALL Naturals are considered Secondary and take the -5 Penalty.
Multiattack reduces the Secondary penalty to only -2.
So with 8 Bab, 8 STR, and -1 Size penalty your base Accuracy is at 15.

You have enough Bab for one iterative attack with a Manufactured weapon.
So the Spear is 15/10

All Natural Weapons are Secondary, so they get base Accuracy -2 (reduced from -5 thanks to Multiattack), so all get 13.
So a full attack will be Spear/Bite/Clawsx4/Spear
At 15/13/13x4/10

If you do NOT use the Spear, then all Naturals revert to their 'normal' type (Primary/Secondary). Bite and Claws are all Primary.
So with no Spear, you'd do Bite/Clawsx4
At 15/15x4

Curses. This is probably the 3rd time I've misread multiattack now.
Thanks!

[upho]

I find the flight evo confusing - it says that a medium eidolon gets good maneuverability (+4 to fly checks), a large one average (+/-0) and so on, while the rules for sizes (including the large evo) says a creature receives a -2 penalty to fly checks per increase in size category, but does not change the creature's maneuverability rating per se. AFAICT, maneuverability only affects the fly skill by adding +/-4 per "step" above/below average, but I can't find anything on how these two rules are combined. So the alternatives for a large eidolon are:

1. Only count the -4 from moving to "average" maneuverability, as per the fly evo rules
2. Only count the -2 size penalty as per the size and large evo rules
3. Add both changes for a total -2 to the eidolon's fly skill, i.e. 6 less than a medium eidolon's +4 "good" maneuverability

Does anyone know which is the correct alternative and why? Personally, I can see reasonable arguments for each of these, although I find alternative no. 2 the least confusing and most in line with the general rules for fly and sizes.

Any input would be appreciated.

[Lord Vukodlak]

I find the flight evo confusing - it says that a medium eidolon gets good maneuverability (+4 to fly checks), a large one average (+/-0) and so on, while the rules for sizes (including the large evo) says a creature receives a -2 penalty to fly checks per increase in size category, but does not change the creature's maneuverability rating per se. AFAICT, maneuverability only affects the fly skill by adding +/-4 per "step" above/below average, but I can't find anything on how these two rules are combined. So the alternatives for a large eidolon are:

1. Only count the -4 from moving to "average" maneuverability, as per the fly evo rules
2. Only count the -2 size penalty as per the size and large evo rules
3. Add both changes for a total -2 to the eidolon's fly skill, i.e. 6 less than a medium eidolon's +4 "good" maneuverability

Does anyone know which is the correct alternative and why? Personally, I can see reasonable arguments for each of these, although I find alternative no. 2 the least confusing and most in line with the general rules for fly and sizes.

Any input would be appreciated.

Here's what it says in the srd An Eidolon's maneuverability is based on its size. Medium and under have good, large have average while huge have poor. This is fairly standard, larger creatures tend to have poorer maneuverability it can most commonly be seen in dragons

The Large Evolution isn't using any special rules for fly checks, a creatures larger then medium take the same penalty to fly checks. That's found under the fly skill. The evolution is simply reprinting the relevant information for rather then directing you to monster advancement rules for size changes.

So to answer your question they stack,

[upho]

Here's what it says in the srd An Eidolon's maneuverability is based on its size. Medium and under have good, large have average while huge have poor. This is fairly standard, larger creatures tend to have poorer maneuverability it can most commonly be seen in dragons

The Large Evolution isn't using any special rules for fly checks, a creatures larger then medium take the same penalty to fly checks. That's found under the fly skill. The evolution is simply reprinting the relevant information for rather then directing you to monster advancement rules for size changes.

So to answer your question they stack,

My alternative #3 then, meaning when a medium flying eidolon becomes large, its flight skill decreases by 6 (-4 from moving to worse maneuverability category and -2 from size increase). Thanks.

The reason it's sorta confusing is that both the flight evo and the large evo as well as the flight rules detail flight skill penalties related to size, instead of both evos simply saying, for example, "the eidolon's flight skill is reduced by 6 points per size category increase above medium". Why even bother with the maneuverability categories when that's only a convoluted way of saying "+/-4 to fly checks" in PF (as opposed to 3.5)?

And what fly bonus/penalty does a large eidolon with the magic flight evo receive? The flight evo rules (and magic flight breaking the laws of physics anyway), can easily be interpreted as if saying the magic flight evo always grants the eidolon +8 to fly (perfect), regardless of the eidolon's size. Would that be true?

[Lord Vukodlak]

Why even bother with the maneuverability categories when that's only a convoluted way of saying "+/-4 to fly checks" in PF (as opposed to 3.5)?

Because its a handy way to categorize monsters. You have to give a reason such a creature takes a bonus or penalty to its fly checks this is best done by keeping maneuverability categories. Additionally there are also spells and magic items that directly effect maneuverability.

It also makes converting 3.5 material a lot easier.

evo and the large evo as well as the flight rules detail flight skill penalties related to size, instead of both evos simply saying, for example, "the eidolon's flight skill is reduced by 6 points per size category increase above medium".

It can't say that because THAT would be confusing. One penalty is from size, one is from maneuverability. People would ask "is that on top of size?" While the Eidolon's maneuverability is changed depending on how big you make it. That rule doesn't always apply to other creatures or magical means of flight. No matter how much you grow or shrink the humanoid under a fly spell his maneuverability doesn't change. A half-celestial maneuverability is fixed it doesn't matter if he's small or huge. Dragons on the other hand due drop maneuverability as they get bigger. SO you can't say -6 per size category above medium
Using magic to increase a huge eidolon up a size category wouldn't drop his maneuverability to clumsy so it only be another -2. Not -6, its also debatable if changing an eidolon's size category via spell casting at all could affect maneuverability..

And what fly bonus/penalty does a large eidolon with the magic flight evo receive? The flight evo rules (and magic flight breaking the laws of physics anyway), can easily be interpreted as if saying the magic flight evo always grants the eidolon +8 to fly (perfect), regardless of the eidolon's size. Would that be true?

The actual text says "its maneuverability increases to perfect." which is a +8 to fly. So a large eidolon with magical flight would get a +6 bonus to fly checks on top of any skill ranks its been given.

[upho]

Because its a handy way to categorize monsters. You have to give a reason such a creature takes a bonus or penalty to its fly checks this is best done by keeping maneuverability categories. Additionally there are also spells and magic items that directly effect maneuverability.

It also makes converting 3.5 material a lot easier.

Slightly OT rant:
More easily converting 3.5 stuff I get, but the rest?

1. I'd say it's more of a hassle both in terms of the text required for the rules of anything fly skill related, and in terms of player user friendliness (having to look up the maneuverability table).
2. The categorization of monsters isn't affected by removing maneuverability (there's nothing making "+/-0/4/8 to fly" monster categories inherently less handy).
3. A creature having "good maneuverability" isn't a better explanation of it's +4 bonus than the other way around - this isn't any different from saying "it has good maneuverability because it gets a +4 bonus". Fluff reasons for a creature's fly skill value can (should) be mentioned in its fluff description when appropriate.

I suspect the categories are basically an outdated tool that got stuck in the system in the days when PF was new and relied more on 3.5 conversions. When/if the designers noticed the categories had actually turned redundant and confusing rather than helpful, removing them was simply not deemed worth the required errata/update work.

/rant
Sorry.

It can't say that because THAT would be confusing. One penalty is from size, one is from maneuverability. People would ask "is that on top of size?"

Naturally this would have to be cross referenced in both the flight and size evo rules as "the total effect" or similar to avoid such confusion. The main reason for it being much less confusing than the current rules is that you quickly get the total net effect size increases has on your eidolon's flight. Since that net effect on the eidolon's basic unmodified fly skill cannot be altered by other sources and is exclusively for eidolons anyway, there's nothing to be gained from mixing in the general rules for flight and sizes or maneuverability on top of the specific ones.

[Edit] Or to put it in another way: since there's no way for a flying eidolon to take the large evo and avoid the -4 penalty stated in the flight evo, the large evo should of course mention that penalty (and vice versa). Why keep the effects separate when one never can apply without the other? [/edit]

While the Eidolon's maneuverability is changed depending on how big you make it. That rule doesn't always apply to other creatures or magical means of flight. No matter how much you grow or shrink the humanoid under a fly spell his maneuverability doesn't change. A half-celestial maneuverability is fixed it doesn't matter if he's small or huge. Dragons on the other hand due drop maneuverability as they get bigger. SO you can't say -6 per size category above medium
Using magic to increase a huge eidolon up a size category wouldn't drop his maneuverability to clumsy so it only be another -2. Not -6, its also debatable if changing an eidolon's size category via spell casting at all could affect maneuverability..

Exactly. Changing an eidolon's unmodified size has specific independent effects on its unmodified fly skill, ie effects that only applies in the very specific case of an eidolon with both the large and the flight evo and has absolutely no mechanical effect on any temporary modifiers to the eidolon's fly skill (through magic means or whatever). The eidolon's starting bonus (the +4 from good maneuverability) and size penalties might be based on and inspired by the general rules for flight and other creatures, but these numbers don't apply to any other case. And as you said, it's even debatable wether the -2 bonus/penalty currently mentioned in the large evo even is a "general rule". Therefore these eidolon-specific net effects should be clearly stated in both related evos instead of being "half-mentioned" in more than three different places using redundant terminology.

Actually, the only thing I guess might follow something resembling general rules for flight and unmodified size are the monster modification guidelines/templates adding flight.

The actual text says "its maneuverability increases to perfect." which is a +8 to fly. So a large eidolon with magical flight would get a +6 bonus to fly checks on top of any skill ranks its been given.

Yeah, imagine a less experienced player casting Evolution Surge so his huge eidolon gains magic flight, or his medium flying eidolon becomes large... You think he'll get this right, without halting the game for more than an hour? I seriously doubt it.

[Delenot]

In the 'Killer Centaur' Eidolon build example. How does it's rend ability gain a +21 damage bonus?

(If this has been asked/answered my apologies. please link me the explanation)

[Lord Vukodlak]

In the 'Killer Centaur' Eidolon build example. How does it's rend ability gain a +21 damage bonus?

(If this has been asked/answered my apologies. please link me the explanation)

That's a very good question, I can't tell how, the rend should be the damage of one claw plus 1-1/2 the strength bonus. So it should be 2d6+16, maybe eighteen if you included greater magic fang. But I can't decipher the 21.

[Barstro]

In the 'Killer Centaur' Eidolon build example. How does it's rend ability gain a +21 damage bonus?

(If this has been asked/answered my apologies. please link me the explanation)

1.5 STR damage of with STR of 30 is 1.5*10=15

The claw attack is listed as 2d6+6
so, 2d6+6+15 = 2d6+21

I don't know if the answer is correct, but I'm willing to be that's where the answer came from.

[Delenot]

I've Compared Rend With Other Eidolon Attacks And It Does Appear The Explanation Of +21 Is Sound. Has Anyone Found Otherwise?

[Lord Vukodlak]

I've Compared Rend With Other Eidolon Attacks And It Does Appear The Explanation Of +21 Is Sound. Has Anyone Found Otherwise?

Well the rend is wrong, I don't know how the original claw is getting that +6 it should be +10(for the full strength modifier) and the rend should be +15.

[Delenot]

Well the rend is wrong, I don't know how the original claw is getting that +6 it should be +10(for the full strength modifier) and the rend should be +15.

The claw attack is 2 d6+6 as it is a secondary attack in this case. That is the + 6 (half strength + magic Fang)

The + 21 is from adding + 15 (1. 5 str) to the + 6 of the secondary attack.

The way the eidolon version is written it seems to add both together. Is that the correct interpretation of the rule? If not, why?