I think an FAQ on this says you must wait until you have access to the ability. My search fu is failing me though. If I find the link I will post it later.
I would be interested to see that FAQ if you find it.
Otherwise, I see no reason why you couldn't take a favoured class bonus that modifies a class feature that you don't have access to yet. It simply wouldn't provide any benefit until you can use the feature.
It would seem to me that so long as you don't take an archetype that trades out an ability, you have that as a class ability, you only lack access to it until the appropriate level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I found it.
Related Point: Can I apply the aasimar or elf oracle's favored class bonus to a revelation I do not yet have? Can I do so for the aasimar bard’s favored class bonus?
No, when choosing which class feature’s effective level to increase, you can only select a feature that you already have. For example, an aasimar flame oracle cannot choose to improve the wings of fire revelation with her favored class bonus until she actually gains the revelation at 7th level or beyond; she could not start augmenting it at 1st level.This isn’t actually a new rule. It’s just a clarification that I confirmed with the design team because it seemed that some folks were assuming otherwise.
I found it.
click meRelated Point: Can I apply the aasimar or elf oracle's favored class bonus to a revelation I do not yet have? Can I do so for the aasimar bard’s favored class bonus?
No, when choosing which class feature’s effective level to increase, you can only select a feature that you already have. For example, an aasimar flame oracle cannot choose to improve the wings of fire revelation with her favored class bonus until she actually gains the revelation at 7th level or beyond; she could not start augmenting it at 1st level.This isn’t actually a new rule. It’s just a clarification that I confirmed with the design team because it seemed that some folks were assuming otherwise.
That seems to apply to a class option chosen from a list of available choices, not a locked-in always happens option.
Still, I guess that's as close to an official stance as there is. Handily ignored for my games.
I found it.
click meRelated Point: Can I apply the aasimar or elf oracle's favored class bonus to a revelation I do not yet have? Can I do so for the aasimar bard’s favored class bonus?
No, when choosing which class feature’s effective level to increase, you can only select a feature that you already have. For example, an aasimar flame oracle cannot choose to improve the wings of fire revelation with her favored class bonus until she actually gains the revelation at 7th level or beyond; she could not start augmenting it at 1st level.This isn’t actually a new rule. It’s just a clarification that I confirmed with the design team because it seemed that some folks were assuming otherwise.
That seems to apply to a class option chosen from a list of available choices, not a locked-in always happens option.
Still, I guess that's as close to an official stance as there is. Handily ignored for my games.
I guess someone could ask for another explanation. I don't play PFS, but if I did I would like an answer to what you ask because it is a valid point.
However I am 99% sure the intent is that "you can not improve what you do not have".
|
I found it.
click meRelated Point: Can I apply the aasimar or elf oracle's favored class bonus to a revelation I do not yet have? Can I do so for the aasimar bard’s favored class bonus?
No, when choosing which class feature’s effective level to increase, you can only select a feature that you already have. For example, an aasimar flame oracle cannot choose to improve the wings of fire revelation with her favored class bonus until she actually gains the revelation at 7th level or beyond; she could not start augmenting it at 1st level.This isn’t actually a new rule. It’s just a clarification that I confirmed with the design team because it seemed that some folks were assuming otherwise.
That seems to apply to a class option chosen from a list of available choices, not a locked-in always happens option.
Still, I guess that's as close to an official stance as there is. Handily ignored for my games.
So, Scythia, does that mean that my Ranger or Paladin PC can take Boon Companion as his third level feat?
So, Scythia, does that mean that my Ranger or Paladin PC can take Boon Companion as his third level feat?I found it.
click meThat seems to apply to a class option chosen from a list of available choices, not a locked-in always happens option.
Still, I guess that's as close to an official stance as there is. Handily ignored for my games.
I don't have the book that feat is in, but it increases your effective level for the purposes of your animal companion, right? In my game, so long as you're not using an archetype that trades out the companion or requires you to choose party bond, sure you could. You just wouldn't benefit until you reach the level to have a companion (and I would probably limit your effective level to a max of your actual level).
It doesn't bother me if you want to use a feat (or favoured class bonus) for something that is of no immediate benefit. Likewise, I'm fine with a ranger taking the + energy resist (or +skill ranks) for animal companion favoured class bonuses at 1-3, in my games.
So, Scythia, does that mean that my Ranger or Paladin PC can take Boon Companion as his third level feat?I found it.
click meThat seems to apply to a class option chosen from a list of available choices, not a locked-in always happens option.
Still, I guess that's as close to an official stance as there is. Handily ignored for my games.
I don't have the book that feat is in, but it increases your effective level for the purposes of your animal companion, right? In my game, so long as you're not using an archetype that trades out the companion or requires you to choose party bond, sure you could. You just wouldn't benefit until you reach the level to have a companion (and I would probably limit your effective level to a max of your actual level).
It doesn't bother me if you want to use a feat (or favoured class bonus) for something that is of no immediate benefit. Likewise, I'm fine with a ranger taking the + energy resist (or +skill ranks) for animal companion favoured class bonuses at 1-3, in my games.
He asked because the feat says you must have an animal companion, but they dont get it until level 4. Now he will likely question your stance on the FCB vs the feat.
He asked because the feat says you must have an animal companion, but they dont get it until level 4. Now he will likely question your stance on the FCB vs the feat.
So, Scythia, does that mean that my Ranger or Paladin PC can take Boon Companion as his third level feat?I don't have the book that feat is in, but it increases your effective level for the purposes of your animal companion, right? In my game, so long as you're not using an archetype that trades out the companion or requires you to choose party bond, sure you could. You just wouldn't benefit until you reach the level to have a companion (and I would probably limit your effective level to a max of your actual level).
It doesn't bother me if you want to use a feat (or favoured class bonus) for something that is of no immediate benefit. Likewise, I'm fine with a ranger taking the + energy resist (or +skill ranks) for animal companion favoured class bonuses at 1-3, in my games.
I knew that those classes didn't get the animal companion (or mount) until 4.
My stance is consistent. In my games (as I keep pointing out), I would allow both FC bonus or class feature modifying feats to be taken, so long as they modify a class feature that the character will eventually possess. So long as there is no explicit level requirement for a feat, only a "must have X feature", I'm fine with a player taking it before they have reached the level where the feature is unlocked. The player would be choosing to dedicate a resource to something which will have no effect until that point, but if they're willing to do that, I'm okay with it.
Which seems to be different than the official rules stance on the matter, which Wraithstrike pointed out above.