|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do the Snakebite Striker and Strangler archetypes stack for the purposes of PFS play? The Strangler adds Stealth as a class skill, while the Snakebite Striker adds Stealth and Bluff in place of Intimidate. I know that archetypes that replace the same class features cannot stack, but this is the first time I've run into this particular overlap.
|
I would say yes, since one of them just adds something, you can't replace the same class feature more than once, but I believe there is no rule about adding things to class skills.
But note, that there isn't really sneak attack stacking here, the strangler can deal sneak attack damage only in a ways that doesn't allow normal sneak attack damage to be applied.
EDIT:I was wrong they stack.
|
|
Strangler Archetype states:
Strangle (Ex): At 1st level, a strangler deals +1d6 sneak attack damage whenever she succeeds at a grapple check to damage or pin an opponent. The strangler is always considered flanking her target for the purpose of using this ability. This damage increases by +1d6 at 2nd, 8th and 15th levels. This ability replaces unarmed strike and brawler’s flurry.
So when I'm grappling to damage or pin an opponent, I'm considered flanking. Since I'm flanking, and the Snakebite Archetype states:
Sneak Attack (Ex): At 1st level, the snakebite striker can make a sneak attack. This is as the rogue ability of the same name. At 1st level, her sneak attack damage is +1d6. This increases by 1d6 at 6th, 10th, 12th, and 20th levels. If she gets a sneak attack bonus from another source, the bonuses on damage stack. This ability replaces martial flexibility.
Bolded text for emphasis. This means that once I've grappled, when I check to maintain to pin/damage, I'd deal 3d6 Sneak Attack at two levels of this. Am I reading this properly?
You already answered your own question.
I know that archetypes that replace the same class features cannot stack
I was going to go with something similar to this as well...but in looking at classes, the "Class Skills" listing is not actually part of the "Class Features" section. They come before the Class Features in presentation...
|
|
Strangler Archetype states:
Strangle (Ex): At 1st level, a strangler deals +1d6 sneak attack damage whenever she succeeds at a grapple check to damage or pin an opponent. The strangler is always considered flanking her target for the purpose of using this ability. This damage increases by +1d6 at 2nd, 8th and 15th levels. This ability replaces unarmed strike and brawler’s flurry.
So when I'm grappling to damage or pin an opponent, I'm considered flanking. Since I'm flanking, and the Snakebite Archetype states:
Sneak Attack (Ex): At 1st level, the snakebite striker can make a sneak attack. This is as the rogue ability of the same name. At 1st level, her sneak attack damage is +1d6. This increases by 1d6 at 6th, 10th, 12th, and 20th levels. If she gets a sneak attack bonus from another source, the bonuses on damage stack. This ability replaces martial flexibility.
Bolded text for emphasis. This means that once I've grappled, when I check to maintain to pin/damage, I'd deal 3d6 Sneak Attack at two levels of this. Am I reading this properly?
I agree, but note that the strange sneak attack won't allow you to qualify for things that require a specific number of sneak attack dice. And since you can only deal damage while grappling in the second round, if you maintain the grapple you wont be able to sneak attack in the first round (unless you somehow gain another attack or can grapple swifter than with a standard action, or somehow gain the grab monster ability).
|
|
I agree, but note that the strange sneak attack won't allow you to qualify for things that require a specific number of sneak attack dice. And since you can only deal damage while grappling in the second round, if you maintain the grapple you wont be able to sneak attack in the first round (unless you somehow gain another attack or can grapple swifter than with a standard action, or somehow gain the grab monster ability).
At later levels, with the build I have in mind, I'll have Greater and Rapid Grapple with Grab and Constrict ability.
|
Glancing through the APG (since it's the book I happen to have handy right now), and specifically the Beast Master archetype, if anyone's curious, the language seems to be "such-and-such has the following class features", and then begins with skills and goes from there.
I'd say that shows the assumption of the authors, at least, is that class skills are indeed features of that class.
|
|
I agree, but note that the strange sneak attack won't allow you to qualify for things that require a specific number of sneak attack dice. And since you can only deal damage while grappling in the second round, if you maintain the grapple you wont be able to sneak attack in the first round (unless you somehow gain another attack or can grapple swifter than with a standard action, or somehow gain the grab monster ability).At later levels, with the build I have in mind, I'll have Greater and Rapid Grapple with Grab and Constrict ability.
Sounds ... sexy ? Really nice concept for a martial contortionist.... and reminds me of Xenia Onatopp (Famke Janssens character from Goldeneye)^^
Glancing through the APG (since it's the book I happen to have handy right now), and specifically the Beast Master archetype, if anyone's curious, the language seems to be "such-and-such has the following class features", and then begins with skills and goes from there.
I'd say that shows the assumption of the authors, at least, is that class skills are indeed features of that class.
Possibly...
That said, each and every book (including APG), that has an actual base/core class write up has 3 sections as a standard format for every class. One, the class title and description section that's preceded by the class name. Two, the class skills section that spells out the class skills section. And, three, the class features section that spells out all the rest of the class.
I'm not saying it's not a pedantic reading of the rules. I'm just saying that the archetype rules only state they do not stack if they change the same Class Feature, which is a defined subsection of the classes. By a straight literal reading, skills are not class features of a base/core class.
Authors get little things incorrect when writing archetypes/feats/etc. all the time. It's part of the issue when you outsource to so many different authors to put together a line of intertwining books of options.
|
|
Yeah, at level 9 I should be doing Standard: Punch(Bleed, Grab & Constrict)(1d10+STR+1d4 bleed), Move: Maintain(Constrict & SA)(1d10+STR+3d6), Swift: Damage(Bleed, Constrict & SA) (1d10+STR+3d6+1d4 bleed). The following rounds would be 3 grapple checks to damage, all with Bleed, Constrict, and Sneak Attack. I know that only the last bleed will be applied per turn. As long as I don't fail a grapple check, I'll be doing 3d10+3xStr+9d6+1d4 bleed per turn.
What book are these Archetypes in? The ACG?
Yes. They are Brawler archetypes.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, at level 9 I should be doing Standard: Punch(Bleed, Grab & Constrict)(1d10+STR+1d4 bleed), Move: Maintain(Constrict & SA)(1d10+STR+3d6), Swift: Damage(Bleed, Constrict & SA) (1d10+STR+3d6+1d4 bleed). The following rounds would be 3 grapple checks to damage, all with Bleed, Constrict, and Sneak Attack. I know that only the last bleed will be applied per turn. As long as I don't fail a grapple check, I'll be doing 3d10+3xStr+9d6+1d4 bleed per turn.
Slightly off topic, but how are you getting the Grab & Constrict? Not questioning that you can, I'd just like to also try for that since I just started playing a grapple focused Lore Warden/Strangler in a home game.
|
|
Yeah, at level 9 I should be doing Standard: Punch(Bleed, Grab & Constrict)(1d10+STR+1d4 bleed), Move: Maintain(Constrict & SA)(1d10+STR+3d6), Swift: Damage(Bleed, Constrict & SA) (1d10+STR+3d6+1d4 bleed). The following rounds would be 3 grapple checks to damage, all with Bleed, Constrict, and Sneak Attack. I know that only the last bleed will be applied per turn. As long as I don't fail a grapple check, I'll be doing 3d10+3xStr+9d6+1d4 bleed per turn.
To add a horrible spin to this idea - what sort of damage is grappling damage and constrict? If it is Bludgeonng damage....
and you found a way to get Sap Mastery in there - you could double your sneak attack dice and do non-lethal damage - with a little lethal bleed at the end.
Anaconda Coils, 18,500GP belt and Final Embrace Feat because the belt gives you the prerequisite.
I don't think you can use an item to meet a feat's prerequisites.
Anaconda Coils, 18,500GP belt and Final Embrace Feat because the belt gives you the prerequisite.I don't think you can use an item to meet a feat's prerequisites.
Really? I'm sure I've seen that spoken about as being above board for years (of lurking) now.
|
Neither one replaces the same feature. You get Stealth as a skill twice, but nothing is taken from skills that the other class also replaces. You're 100% set on this.
Yes, items absolutely can qualify you for prerequisites.
No, you don't automatically get full sneak attack on every grapple check - just the special strangler grapple. Now, if you're actually flanking them when you grapple them... blam.
Neither one replaces the same feature. You get Stealth as a skill twice, but nothing is taken from skills that the other class also replaces. You're 100% set on this.
Note: it doesn't have to replace a class feature. It just has to alter the feature in some manner.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Neither one replaces the same feature. You get Stealth as a skill twice, but nothing is taken from skills that the other class also replaces. You're 100% set on this.
Note: it doesn't have to replace a class feature. It just has to alter the feature in some manner.
It's a good thing that skills aren't a feature then. ;)
Nice try. If class skills are not a class feature, how would you handle two archetypes that both replace the same class skills?
Nice try. If class skills are not a class feature, how would you handle two archetypes that both replace the same class skills?
Look at the actual class in the new book. You see skills are listed before the section on class skills. (Class Skills, then Table, then Class Features)
By strict reading of the archetype rules, two archetypes that both replace the same class skills would be perfectly fine. Myself I wouldn't allow it but the restriction says "none of the alternate class features can replace or alter the same class feature from the core class as another alternate class feature". Nothing is said about what happens when you "replace or alter" a non-class feature (skills).
Myself I've always had an issue with the alter point when you have archetypes just giving you more options (not taking them away) and for some reason they can't stack. Myself I don't equate add and alter. At least now I can ignore it for skills.
Do the Snakebite Striker and Strangler archetypes stack for the purposes of PFS play? The Strangler adds Stealth as a class skill, while the Snakebite Striker adds Stealth and Bluff in place of Intimidate. I know that archetypes that replace the same class features cannot stack, but this is the first time I've run into this particular overlap.It's an overlap, so the answer is no. The rules for archetype stacking give no exceptions to the restrictions of overlap.
So if I had an archetype that granted improved unarmed strike at 1st it wouldn't work with another that grants the same feat at 2nd? And if not, why aren't feats the same skills?
So if I had an archetype that granted improved unarmed strike at 1st it wouldn't work with another that grants the same feat at 2nd? And if not, why aren't feats the same skills?Do the Snakebite Striker and Strangler archetypes stack for the purposes of PFS play? The Strangler adds Stealth as a class skill, while the Snakebite Striker adds Stealth and Bluff in place of Intimidate. I know that archetypes that replace the same class features cannot stack, but this is the first time I've run into this particular overlap.It's an overlap, so the answer is no. The rules for archetype stacking give no exceptions to the restrictions of overlap.
What class features are being modified or replaced? If the original class does not grant Improved Unarmed Strike, then the fact that you are getting the same feat twice (with no added benefit beyond what you got with the first one) is not an issue. But if you are a monk (for example), you would not be able to take two archetypes that each modified your Unarmed Strike class feature in different ways.
One of the purposes of the rule against overlap is to avoid having to address issues of how to handle two different modifications to the same class feature. For class skills, such an issue would come up if two different archetypes eliminated the same class skill. In the course of preventing such cases, that rule also prohibits some combinations that you could easily figure out how to combine (such as two different archetypes that add skills to the class skill list without removing any).
In PFSociety you cannot combine these archetypes. Which is moronic. I could understand it if both archetypes changed the same thing, but adding skills while not actually changing the skill list? That should be allowed.
In a home game just ask the DM. Most humans are not unrelenting a-holes so it shouldn't be a problem.
|
re-reading this thread since the beginning, this combo *does* appear to be a bit too good to be true... I mean grapple damage + constrict damage (which is equal to grappling damage right?) + bleed THREE TIMES PER ROUND? I must be missing something... this is a bit insane considering your target is also neutralized in one spot not able to do much...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
James - did you really need to keep pushing it????
It's a brand new FAQ response - one that pathfinder designer, Mark Seifter, even said he had not thought had been the case prior to his time working at Paizo. It's a response that the design team had to fitter clarify - that these "base mechanics" are ONLG to be considered "class features" for the purpose of comparing archetypes... And that in and of themselves, NO - they are not actually class features.
So, Regardless of what your take on RAW had beenprior to the FAQ response, the issue had not been clear. So to come here and call those text-supported positions "FAQ breaking" is still condescending and disengenuous. It's assuming that Paizo put out a giant RED ALERT around the world making sure that every player in the world knew about a ruling that happened just a day before yesterday.... But you know that didn't happen. They simply added a link on a single post of a multi-page thread... A thread other than this one.
So back off the name calling and quote doctoring.
It is not adding anything to the thread to help the OP or anyone else who finds the thread as the search for things relating to their own needs.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
It is not adding anything to the thread to help the OP or anyone else who finds the thread as the search for things relating to their own needs.
I didn't intend to offend. But I strongly disagree. I think it should be clear to anyone reading this thread that the subject of this didn't come out of no where. These type of things have been repeatedly debated for as long as I can remember. I'd bet just about anything that the reason this FAQ was so broad is it could be used to answer many many FAQ posts in one fell swoop. I've personally been involved in a number of Sohei debates regarding what does or does not alter the Bonus Feat class feature and whether or not they stack.
I totally owe you an apology.
I misread a single word (two times) in your follow up post... I turned 'will' into 'we'll'
I thought you had written "One side, we'll call 'the new FAQ breaking'. The other side we'll call 'the new FAQ confirming/clarifying.'
I had gotten upset that you would call pre-ruling arguments to be 'ruling-breaking' as it attempted to negate the relevance and context of time (you don't call the arguments on one side of a decided trial to be "law breaking"...)
But all that is moot.
All you actually wrote was that the FAQ had simply confirmed your previously held beliefs on the subject (which definietly would have been a better initial post than the one you made, implying that glass was the only pathfinder player to whom the ruling mattered)
Nonetheless, I apologize for telling you to back off and that you had been calling people names. In fact, feel free to call me a dumbass.
Reading that FAQ , wouldn't each skill be a sub-feature and so if they dont replace or alter that skill then those that change skills are ok to stack?
|
Contributor
|
Reading that FAQ , wouldn't each skill be a sub-feature and so if they dont replace or alter that skill then those that change skills are ok to stack?
This thread contains a great deal of discussion on that very point. ^_^
In short - apparently not. It's slated for some sort of follow-up discussion, though, so there's a sliver of hope that things might change. It's happened before.
|
|
Thread Necro to ask another question...
Is Wild Child stackable with Snakebite Striker?
It also "modifies" Class Skills ... but only by adding the skill Heal. so would that bar it from combining with Snakebite? snakebite striker gains Bluff and Stealth as class skills, but does not gain Intimidate as a class skill - Wild Child gains Heal without modifying anything else in Class Skills...