I wanted something like this. The pet needs to interact more with the summoner you are meant to be a team. When I talk to scholars they say they feel like a team with their fairy I don't get that with summoner. I feel like a dot spellcaster I tend to even forget the summoner is there.
Yes I think they should be re worked slightly the pets need to interact more with the summoner.
Trayes wrote this in a topic. I think square should of went with something like this IMO.
I am sure no one cares what I think but I do not enjoy the dot summoner with lame pets. If i had to change the playstyle away from dots into something else it would look like this.
Ruin: 80 potency. Grants you and your pet a buff depending on what pet you have out.
(Ifrit: Grants the user and pet stacking buff that increases damage by 5%, stacks 2 times)
(Titan: Lowers damage taken by the user and the pet by 5% for 4 seconds. Does not stack)
(Garuda: Grants the user and the pet 3% spell speed. Stacks 4 times. Garuda gains double from this effect)
Ruin II: 80 potency. This spell and the pet do a special bonus attack.
(Ifrit: Apply a 15 potency dot for 18 seconds.) Both the player and the pet apply this dot.
(Titan: Gain health equal to damage dealt.) Both the player and the pet heal based on the damage of thier attack.
(Garuda: Deal half damage to all enemies near the target) Both the player and the pet do the aoe damage.)
Now these are just ideas of how I would have made the summoner feel closer to their pets while adding some depth to the overall playstyle of the summoner. Also this is me only changing 2 skills. I am sure I could give a huge list of ideas.
Like an aether flow spell that grants a party buff based on the summon out.
Garuda would buff move speed and spell speed
Titan would give everyone a small stone skin
Ifrit would add "Enfire" to all melee attacks
Or it could just pass whatever the Ruin 1 buff is to the party for a short time. Like 5 seconds. Everyone gains 10% damage or everyone takes 5% less damage or everyone casts faster. Who knows. But I would have tried to make more of a connection.

Reply With Quote

