Paladin Archetype Question


Pathfinder Society

Silver Crusade 5/5 *

I have recently started playing in a local and weekly PFS game, the character i am building is lv 4 with GM credit from games i GMed last year. I have the following question, must be able to be played in the aforementioned game:

Am i able to stack the Oathbound - Oath of Vengeance (from Ultimate Combat) and the Warrior of Holy Light (from Advanced Player's Guide) Paladin Archetypes?


No. Oath of Vengeance modifies the paladin's spell-casting, and Warrior of Holy Light replaces it.

Silver Crusade 2/5

I happen to disagree. I think that you are perfectly fine to take that particular oath as well as the Warrior of Holy Light.


Quote:
A character can take more than one archetype and garner additional alternate class features, but none of the alternate class features can replace or alter the same class feature from the core class as another alternate class feature.

Doesn't the Oath's addition to the paladin's spell list count as altering "the paladin's spells class feature" which is replaced by Warrior of Holy Light?

Silver Crusade 2/5

Bearded Ben wrote:
Quote:
A character can take more than one archetype and garner additional alternate class features, but none of the alternate class features can replace or alter the same class feature from the core class as another alternate class feature.
Doesn't the Oath's addition to the paladin's spell list count as altering "the paladin's spells class feature" which is replaced by Warrior of Holy Light?

Because the paladin still casts spells, uses the same ability modifier, etc, it looks like the paladin is in the clear. Otherwise, all Oaths are out of play. I can see both points of view, but in this case, I think the Paladin is good to go.

Dark Archive 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It would technically not work, because they both edit the same class feature, similar to the reason crossblooded doesnt work with alot of other archtypes.

An obvious way to see the flaw in the two archtypes presented is below

Oath of Vengeance paladin adds spells and then warrior of holy light removes them (seems fine from this way)

Warrior of Holy light removes spellcasting and Oath of Vengeance Paladin tries to add spells (obviously doesnt work).

If the archtypes must be taken in a specific order to be legal, then obviously they arent legal as they must be modifing the same class feature.

Silver Crusade 5/5 *

That makes it a lot more sense that way.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Caderyn wrote:

It would technically not work, because they both edit the same class feature, similar to the reason crossblooded doesnt work with alot of other archtypes.

An obvious way to see the flaw in the two archtypes presented is below

Oath of Vengeance paladin adds spells and then warrior of holy light removes them (seems fine from this way)

Warrior of Holy light removes spellcasting and Oath of Vengeance Paladin tries to add spells (obviously doesnt work).

If the archtypes must be taken in a specific order to be legal, then obviously they arent legal as they must be modifing the same class feature.

That actually makes a lot of sense. Looks like Warrior of the Holy Light is a no-go with any oath. Bummer.

Grand Lodge 5/5 *

I disagree.

Warrior of the holy light removes your spellcasting ability.

Oathbound paladin modifies your spell list.

Your spell list can be modified just fine - you just can't access it.

Silver Crusade 4/5

Go re-read the quote in Bearded Ben's first post in this thread - "none of the alternate class features can replace or alter the same class feature" seems pretty clear. One of these replaces spells and the other alters them. Thus, they're both trying to touch the same class feature, which doesn't work.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alexander_Damocles wrote:
Caderyn wrote:

It would technically not work, because they both edit the same class feature, similar to the reason crossblooded doesnt work with alot of other archtypes.

An obvious way to see the flaw in the two archtypes presented is below

Oath of Vengeance paladin adds spells and then warrior of holy light removes them (seems fine from this way)

Warrior of Holy light removes spellcasting and Oath of Vengeance Paladin tries to add spells (obviously doesnt work).

If the archtypes must be taken in a specific order to be legal, then obviously they arent legal as they must be modifing the same class feature.

That actually makes a lot of sense. Looks like Warrior of the Holy Light is a no-go with any oath. Bummer.

After looking into it very quickly, looks like you are right. Warrior of Holy Light won't work with any oath.

Shadow Lodge 5/5

This also brings back up the issue of Crossblooded / Tatoo'd Sorcerer

Crossblooded says you gain a choice on everything ... Tatoo'd says in 3 instances to replace the "Choice" with X

I guess the question is ... does having a choice Constitute Altering


That didn't come up here,

So I'm wondering which is correct?

Also since the WotHL doesn't seem OP, would you allow the combination anyway?

Silver Crusade 2/5

Julix wrote:

That didn't come up here,

So I'm wondering which is correct?

Also since the WotHL doesn't seem OP, would you allow the combination anyway?

This is the Pathfinder Society Organized Play section of the boards. The thread is three years old, and the then Campaign Coordinator, Mike Brock, made a ruling. It is binding unless superseded.

Scarab Sages 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Oregon—Portland

Well crap, I just saw this and it ruins my tiefling Order of Fiends/WotHL character that i have been playing off and on since the month before this post was made! I know Mike Brock commented, but his comment about only taking a quick glance at the two archetypes makes me hope that after a longer look we might get an official ruling that won't ban this combination of any Oath and WotHL.

My opinion, biased as it may be, is that they are ok, as the "Oath" archetypes merely add to the Paladin's spell list, but don't actually change the base Paladin Spell list. WotHL just removes the spellcasting abilities, extra spells and all.

I would prefer that this combo be ok, as while the Oath archetype for my character is really more about fluff than any mechanical benefits, it is nice to have the extra oomph the Oath gives me, even if it is only of situational use. I am sure there are others for whom their character's Oath is more crucial to their build. I really can't see any way that having this combo allowed would hurt PFSOP either.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Even if two archetypes add options to a class ability, they are both technically changing it and cannot be stacked under strict RAW.

If ANYTHING about a class feature is changed by an archetype, you cannot stack it with another archetype that changes anything about that same feature.

Scarab Sages

Hrothdane wrote:

Even if two archetypes add options to a class ability, they are both technically changing it and cannot be stacked under strict RAW.

If ANYTHING about a class feature is changed by an archetype, you cannot stack it with another archetype that changes anything about that same feature.

Except for Qinggong Monk. Qinggong stacks with any other Monk Archetype. Though it is funny to hear someone say they are a Qinggong Martial Artist... "How can you be a Qinggong master? You have no ki!"

Grand Lodge 4/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento

Gornil wrote:


My opinion, biased as it may be, is that they are ok, as the "Oath" archetypes merely add to the Paladin's spell list, but don't actually change the base Paladin Spell list. WotHL just removes the spellcasting abilities, extra spells and all.

The FAQ disagrees with you

Quote:

Archetype Stacking and Altering: What exactly counts as altering a class feature for the purpose of stacking archetypes?

In general, if a class feature grants multiple subfeatures, it’s OK to take two archetypes that only change two separate subfeatures. This includes two bard archetypes that alter or replace different bardic performances (even though bardic performance is technically a single class feature) or two fighter archetypes that replace the weapon training gained at different levels (sometimes referred to as “weapon training I, II, III, or IV”) even though those all fall under the class feature weapon training. However, if something alters the way the parent class feature works, such as a mime archetype that makes all bardic performances completely silent, with only visual components instead of auditory, you can’t take that archetype with an archetype that alters or replaces any of the sub-features. This even applies for something as small as adding 1 extra round of bardic performance each day, adding an additional bonus feat to the list of bonus feats you can select, or adding an additional class skill to the class. As always, individual GMs should feel free to houserule to allow small overlaps on a case by case basis, but the underlying rule exists due to the unpredictability of combining these changes.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bearded Ben wrote:
Quote:
A character can take more than one archetype and garner additional alternate class features, but none of the alternate class features can replace or alter the same class feature from the core class as another alternate class feature.
Doesn't the Oath's addition to the paladin's spell list count as altering "the paladin's spells class feature" which is replaced by Warrior of Holy Light?

Not really. It does not make any changes to the spellcasting feature, just gives the Paladin additions to his spell list, which the other archetype disables.

5/5

LazarX wrote:
Bearded Ben wrote:
Quote:
A character can take more than one archetype and garner additional alternate class features, but none of the alternate class features can replace or alter the same class feature from the core class as another alternate class feature.
Doesn't the Oath's addition to the paladin's spell list count as altering "the paladin's spells class feature" which is replaced by Warrior of Holy Light?
Not really. It does not make any changes to the spellcasting feature, just gives the Paladin additions to his spell list, which the other archetype disables.

"Giving the Paladin additions to his spell list" alters the spell list, which is part of his spellcasting. The spell list is not the same as a typical paladin's, because it has extra spells on it.

4/5

The class feature Oath Spells does not modify anything.

Ultimate Magic wrote:

Oath Spells: A paladin's oath influences what magic she can perform. An oathbound paladin adds one spell to the paladin spell list at each paladin spell level she can cast (including spell levels for which she would only gain spells per day if her Charisma were high enough to grant bonus spells of that level). Her oath determines what spell is added to the spell list. If the paladin has multiple oaths, the spells from each oath are added to her spell list.

If an oathbound paladin has more than one oath, she may prepare any one of her oath's spells in that slot (similar to a cleric choosing one of her two domain spells to prepare in a domain spell slot).

There is no conflict here. Oathbound adds a class feature. It does not modify your spells class feature. If it did, it would say "this modifies the spells class feature." It doesn't say that, so we can infer that this does not modify the class feature.

There's a bit of editing issue in the paragraph, so that's obviously subject to change. As written, it sounds as though there were originally additional spell slots (like domains) that were cut later in development, but the text was not modified to match. That being the case, it's pretty clear why it wouldn't modify the spells class feature - it was intended to work like a domain, but they decided not to give additional spell slots, so they updated the first paragraph to add them to the spell list.

1/5

Serisan wrote:

The class feature Oath Spells does not modify anything.

Ultimate Magic wrote:

Oath Spells: A paladin's oath influences what magic she can perform. An oathbound paladin adds one spell to the paladin spell list at each paladin spell level she can cast (including spell levels for which she would only gain spells per day if her Charisma were high enough to grant bonus spells of that level). Her oath determines what spell is added to the spell list. If the paladin has multiple oaths, the spells from each oath are added to her spell list.

If an oathbound paladin has more than one oath, she may prepare any one of her oath's spells in that slot (similar to a cleric choosing one of her two domain spells to prepare in a domain spell slot).

There is no conflict here. Oathbound adds a class feature. It does not modify your spells class feature. If it did, it would say "this modifies the spells class feature." It doesn't say that, so we can infer that this does not modify the class feature.

There's a bit of editing issue in the paragraph, so that's obviously subject to change. As written, it sounds as though there were originally additional spell slots (like domains) that were cut later in development, but the text was not modified to match. That being the case, it's pretty clear why it wouldn't modify the spells class feature - it was intended to work like a domain, but they decided not to give additional spell slots, so they updated the first paragraph to add them to the spell list.

The developers have said that older material doesn't have the line "this modifies..." but it still modifies stuff. So since they are adding things to spell lists it's obviously adding to spell lists, which is modifying spell lists.

4/5

Chess Pwn wrote:
Serisan wrote:

The class feature Oath Spells does not modify anything.

Ultimate Magic wrote:

Oath Spells: A paladin's oath influences what magic she can perform. An oathbound paladin adds one spell to the paladin spell list at each paladin spell level she can cast (including spell levels for which she would only gain spells per day if her Charisma were high enough to grant bonus spells of that level). Her oath determines what spell is added to the spell list. If the paladin has multiple oaths, the spells from each oath are added to her spell list.

If an oathbound paladin has more than one oath, she may prepare any one of her oath's spells in that slot (similar to a cleric choosing one of her two domain spells to prepare in a domain spell slot).

There is no conflict here. Oathbound adds a class feature. It does not modify your spells class feature. If it did, it would say "this modifies the spells class feature." It doesn't say that, so we can infer that this does not modify the class feature.

There's a bit of editing issue in the paragraph, so that's obviously subject to change. As written, it sounds as though there were originally additional spell slots (like domains) that were cut later in development, but the text was not modified to match. That being the case, it's pretty clear why it wouldn't modify the spells class feature - it was intended to work like a domain, but they decided not to give additional spell slots, so they updated the first paragraph to add them to the spell list.

The developers have said that older material doesn't have the line "this modifies..." but it still modifies stuff. So since they are adding things to spell lists it's obviously adding to spell lists, which is modifying spell lists.

Link?

Grand Lodge 4/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento

Please reread the FAQ:

FAQ wrote:

Archetype Stacking and Altering: What exactly counts as altering a class feature for the purpose of stacking archetypes?

If something alters the way the parent class feature works you can’t take that archetype with an archetype that alters or replaces any of the sub-features. This even applies for something as small as adding 1 extra round of bardic performance each day, adding an additional bonus feat to the list of bonus feats you can select, or adding an additional class skill to the class.

Adding a spell alters the paladin spellcasting bonus spells subfeature. Thus you could take two archtypes that each add spells,

Removing spellcasting removes the paladin spellcasting parent feature.

Therefore, *BY THE FAQ* you cannot do both.

Silver Crusade 4/5 5/55/55/5 RPG Superstar 2013 Top 8

Serisan wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
The developers have said that older material doesn't have the line "this modifies..." but it still modifies stuff. So since they are adding things to spell lists it's obviously adding to spell lists, which is modifying spell lists.
Link?

I believe that Jason Bulmahn said it during a panel discussion at PaizoCon or Gen Con (or perhaps in a Know Direction interview).

Grand Lodge 4/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento

Michael Eshleman wrote:
Serisan wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
The developers have said that older material doesn't have the line "this modifies..." but it still modifies stuff. So since they are adding things to spell lists it's obviously adding to spell lists, which is modifying spell lists.
Link?
I believe that Jason Bulmahn said it during a panel discussion at PaizoCon or Gen Con (or perhaps in a Know Direction interview).

And it is essentially in the FAQ, posted above.

Scarab Sages 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Oregon—Portland

FLite wrote:
Gornil wrote:


My opinion, biased as it may be, is that they are ok, as the "Oath" archetypes merely add to the Paladin's spell list, but don't actually change the base Paladin Spell list. WotHL just removes the spellcasting abilities, extra spells and all.

The FAQ disagrees with you

Quote:

Archetype Stacking and Altering: What exactly counts as altering a class feature for the purpose of stacking archetypes?

In general, if a class feature grants multiple subfeatures, it’s OK to take two archetypes that only change two separate subfeatures. This includes two bard archetypes that alter or replace different bardic performances (even though bardic performance is technically a single class feature) or two fighter archetypes that replace the weapon training gained at different levels (sometimes referred to as “weapon training I, II, III, or IV”) even though those all fall under the class feature weapon training. However, if something alters the way the parent class feature works, such as a mime archetype that makes all bardic performances completely silent, with only visual components instead of auditory, you can’t take that archetype with an archetype that alters or replaces any of the sub-features. This even applies for something as small as adding 1 extra round of bardic performance each day, adding an additional bonus feat to the list of bonus feats you can select, or adding an additional class skill to the class. As always, individual GMs should feel free to houserule to allow small overlaps on a case by case basis, but the underlying rule exists due to the unpredictability of combining these changes.

The bolded portion of the FAQ seems to imply that John, or the next Campaign Coordinator, can make a PFSOP ruling allowing for such an overlap. This isn't a game changing archetype stack, simply one that doesn't really make sense to disallow.

Grand Lodge 5/5

Sorry, but I don't see how it makes sense to allow an archetype that adds spells to a spell list to stack with an archetype that has no spell list.

(Not saying it's game breaking, just doesn't make sense to me.)

As is it doesn't work in PFS (or Pathfinder without GM ruling) and I don't see an argument that should make it logical or work at this point. (Outside because I want it and it's not unbalanced)

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

I've been playing an Oathbound (Oath of Vengeance)/Sacred Servant Paladin for a while now. IMO, the two archetypes do not conflict, but I have encountered considerable table variation on it.

Oathbound adds spells to the Paladin Spell list, and thus is incompatible with archetypes that modify the Spells class feature of the base Paladin.

Sacred Servant grants you a Cleric Domain at 4th level. It says nothing about modifying the Spells class feature, and for Clerics their Domain and Spells class features are separate.

To me, I see no conflict, but d20pfsrd says they conflict, so GMs that rely on that website are often the ones that disagree with me on this.

What are others' thoughts?

Grand Lodge 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I see a conflict. Your spells ability gets changed by the Sacred Servant, even if it doesn't specify that in the description:

Advanced Player's Guide, pg. 117 wrote:
Spells: At 4th level, when a sacred servant gains the ability to cast spells, she also chooses one domain associated with her deity. Her effective cleric level for this domain is equal to her paladin level –3. In addition, she also gains one domain spell slot for each level of paladin spells she can cast. Every day she must prepare the domain spell from her chosen domain in that spell slot.

Which means the FAQ kicks in, because something "small" is added.

Silver Crusade

Yep. I would probably be fine allowing it in a home game, but I think it's not allowed in PFS under the strict reading of the rules D:

Sometimes that ruling annoys me.

Silver Crusade 3/5

In that case, a paladin cannot have two oaths, because they both add spells.

However...

Ultimate Magic wrote:
If an oathbound paladin has more than one oath, she may prepare any one of her oath's spells in that slot (similar to a cleric choosing one of her two domain spells to prepare in a domain spell slot).

Grand Lodge 4/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Except the FAQ says two "adds" do not conflict.

add + alter conflicts
alter + alter conflicts
add + add is fine.

Silver Crusade

You could also argue that the language in oathbound paladin about multiple oaths is a case of specific (you can have multiple oaths) overriding general (cant stack archetypes that modify the same thing).

2/5 *

Well the at the time Campaign Coordinator said no so why still argue?

Grand Lodge 4/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think we have drifted on to other, similar things, and are trying to figure out where the boundaries are.

Also, IIRC, the FAQ came out after the Campaign Coordinator's post.

Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Paladin Archetype Question All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.