| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But the changes are compatible, so there's absolutely no reason your GM shouldn't allow it.
The Skirnir description, under Arcane Bond, does mention the character cannot bond with other items (or familiars), which would rule out both Bladebound and the "Arcane" bloodline Eldritch Heritage. It *might* leave open a level 5+ paladin multiclass, but that's something to talk over with your GM I would say.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But the changes are compatible, so there's absolutely no reason your GM shouldn't allow it.Compatibility is irrelevant. If both archetypes change/modify/delete or do ANYTHING to the same class feature, they can not be combined. Both modify the arcane pool, the fact that it's the same modification, does not change anything.
I know what the rules say. I also have a strong opinion on what a reasonable GM should say. If you're not spending the same coin twice, and if the incompatibility only happens for high levels you're never going to see, there's really no good reason.
So you're saying that GMs who follow rules are unreasonable? Or GM's who don't allow munchkin combinations are unreasonable? The Bladebound archetype is a pretty powerful archetype. Combining it with the Skirinir with no real loss is a rather severe power boost to an already powerful archetype.But the changes are compatible, so there's absolutely no reason your GM shouldn't allow it.Compatibility is irrelevant. If both archetypes change/modify/delete or do ANYTHING to the same class feature, they can not be combined. Both modify the arcane pool, the fact that it's the same modification, does not change anything.I know what the rules say. I also have a strong opinion on what a reasonable GM should say. If you're not spending the same coin twice, and if the incompatibility only happens for high levels you're never going to see, there's really no good reason.
What's being said is that it would be within reason to allow it as a GM.
I would allow it myself, since the skirnir isn't a very powerful archetype. What's making an issue is the probation against having another bound object/familier, that's the one closing the concept down.
So you're saying that GMs who follow rules are unreasonable? Or GM's who don't allow munchkin combinations are unreasonable? The Bladebound archetype is a pretty powerful archetype. Combining it with the Skirinir with no real loss is a rather severe power boost to an already powerful archetype.I know what the rules say. I also have a strong opinion on what a reasonable GM should say. If you're not spending the same coin twice, and if the incompatibility only happens for high levels you're never going to see, there's really no good reason.
Now hang on, saying "x is what a reasonable person would do" doesn't preclude that y is unreasonable. Plus, I rather struggle to see at what point saying "these are mutally exclusive by RAW but I don't see them interacting when you look at what they do to class features" is munchkinning - I'd agree, Black blade is fairly strong but I would refute that Skirnir actually adds anything of value to it.
As to the bonded object issue - what is the concept the OP has in mind? I wouldn't think it's a huge power leap to omit the arcane bond of Skirnir
As mentioned, skirnir and bladebound aren't compatible. However, I would consider it an acceptable houserule to allow it. Skirnir loses some of the magus's best abilities for abilities that require arcane pool points, which isn't good for a bladebound due to a decreased pool.
The problem remains that there is the direct call-out in the archetype that forbids binding with other objects or familiars. Even if you rule that the "ability replacements" don't interact, and thus the archetypes should stack, that's still a hindrance to overcome. I'd personally not allow it, and I'm not a massive stickler for RAW.
In this case, it's both against the rules-as-written and (judging by the binding note) strongly against the intend.
As an aside, Chelish Diva bards make better arcane powerturtles. Just saying.
Somewhat of a necro, but I don't think the Skirnir is preventing the Magus from bonding with another weapon, so much as it is restricting the choice for his Arcane Bond ability to be a shield. This is because it calls out the wizard ability of the same name, which gives you a choice between the two.
At 1st level, a skirnir gains a shield (except for a tower shield) as an arcane bond item. This is identical to the wizard class ability, but the skirnir may only bond with a shield, not a familiar or other item.
Nowhere does it say that the Skirnir cannot procure a familiar or other arcane bond from another class feature. As for the Black Blade, it specifically on restricts the magus from procuring a familiar, saying nothing about obtaining other bonded items.
Black Blade (Ex)
At 3rd level, the bladebound magus’ gains a powerful sentient weapon called a black blade, whose weapon type is chosen by the magus (see sidebar). A magus with this class feature cannot take the familiar magus arcana, and cannot have a familiar of any kind, even from another class.
So note, a Bladebound magus could in fact get another bonded item, just not a familiar.
Of course I just realized that none of this does anything for the rather annoying Arcane Pool issue... >.>
Can you make your black blade a Klar?
ISSUE = RESOLVED
has boring7 exercised the demon?