Is this going to change combinations, such as Scout/Ninja?
Will Ninjas no longer be able to count as Rogues, for the purposes of feats, and abilities?
Likely, but maybe not. We'll see.
This is a huge pain in the @ss.
Maybe the other way to think about it is that the Ninja drops Trap Finding, Evasion, Danger Sense, Finesse Training, Rogue's Edge, and Master Strike for more Weapons Proficiencies, Ki Pool, Poison Use, No Trace, Light Steps, and Hidden Master.
Since they never said EXACTLY what the Ninja trades out from the Rogue to be a Ninja, then it's pretty easy to retroactively apply those changes like that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Will Samurai still be able to choose Cavalier Orders?
Who the hell thinks this is a good idea?
The Samurai already calls out that it can choose Cavalier Orders in its description, so I don't see much of a problem there.
Anyway, there aren't any Archetypes that actually work with the Samurai, so saying it's an Alternate Class that chooses from Cavalier Orders isn't that big a deal.
It's like any class that chooses Domains, which are a Cleric thing.
----
So, yeah, maybe the Ninja will get ganked and lose out on the Scout.
And then maybe it'll gain a whole arseton of kickass archetypes in Occult Adventures, 'cause the Ninja seems a lot more inclined towards Occult and Psychic nonsense than the Rogue.
Therefore, I say to thee - thine teats, madam; calm them!
Sure it's only been four years of the ninja getting absolutely nothing so I suppose it doesn't hurt to be optimistic. The next book will be the one where they give ninjas the attention they've been lacking I'm sure.
Sure it's only been four years of the ninja getting absolutely nothing so I suppose it doesn't hurt to be optimistic. The next book will be the one where they give ninjas the attention they've been lacking I'm sure.
Except now there's a major difference: the Unchained Rogue has made the base Rogue a viable, liked class.
With the Rogue now "fixed", they can maybe focus love on the Ninja, since it's no longer "just plain better" than the Rogue.
The ninja is better than the base rogue but once its ki pool runs out ninjas are arguably worse. In my opinion a class that's awesome for one fight a day isn't the huge step up from the rogue that a lot of people make it out to be.
The ninja is better than the base rogue but once its ki pool runs out ninjas are arguably worse.
Because then its a rogue without... uncanny dodge?
In my opinion a class that's awesome for one fight a day isn't the huge step up from the rogue that a lot of people make it out to be.
There's a lot of ways to get extra ki, and a little goes a long way. It lets you get into flanking position so you don't have to burn ki EVERY round, just when you can't flank normally.
The ninja is better than the base rogue but once its ki pool runs out ninjas are arguably worse.Because then its a rogue without... uncanny dodge?
Man I wish that was true. Unfortunately evasion comes in pretty handy when you're invisible and your enemy is spamming area effects to flush you out.
And I get your point on ki pool use but it takes a fair bit to get a ninja with the strength, dex and con to be a front liner and then additional charisma so you have a decent ki pool. Obviously it varies from outing to outing but I tend to keep my ninja sniping more than flanking for his own safety.
Ironic as it is you can dump dex on a ninja. Stealth doesn't work , and when invisibility is going your +6 dex is kinda useless next to the +20 from the spell.
alternatively you can dump str and get an agile weapon/amulet.
My problem with the ruling that "There is no unchained ninjas" is not that I want an unchained ninja. Ninja's suposedly count as core rogues for purposes of Multiclassing and Archetypes. If that is the case then all I ask is the free rebuild from Ninja to Unchained Rogue. However people keep YELLING at me cause I am "Beating a Dead Horse." I am just trying to clarify why they won't give me the same rebuild that everyone else has who made a "Roguish" character.
In other words I am asking for a totally different thing the the guy who wants an "Unchained Ninja"
My problem with the ruling that "There is no unchained ninjas" is not that I want an unchained ninja. Ninja's supposedly count as core rogues for purposes of Multiclassing and Archetypes. If that is the case then all I ask is the free rebuild from Ninja to Unchained Rogue. However people keep YELLING at me cause I am "Beating a Dead Horse." I am just trying to clarify why they won't give me the same rebuild that everyone else has who made a "Roguish" character.
In other words I am asking for a totally different thing the the guy who wants an "Unchained Ninja"
I feel the only way your retraining from ninja to unchained rogue would be if it's official that ninja is an archetype for rogue. Otherwise what you're asking for is the same as saying you should get a rebuild if you had a slayer, or maybe any class that could get rogue talents. All of them are "Roguish" characters, so if the ninja is separate then it falls under the same rules they do. Also this is bringing to the forefront the issue of if Ninja's can take rogue archetypes and rogue FCB. It's been assumed yes, but now, I feel, even that is in question.
There is difference between Alternate class and Hybrid class. A Ninja has always been considered an Alternate class for Rogues but still a rogue. Now they are saying it is not. A Hybrid class is a combination of two class. Core Rogue and Ninja are Granny Smith Apples compared to Fuji. Hunter and the like are another fruit all together
There is difference between Alternate class and Hybrid class. A Ninja has always been considered an Alternate class for Rogues but still a rogue. Now they are saying it is not. A Hybrid class is a combination of two class. Core Rogue and Ninja are Granny Smith Apples compared to Fuji. Hunter and the like are another fruit all together
What rule do you have that "A Ninja has always been considered an Alternate class for Rogues but still a rogue."?
Mark is saying that the rules never supported this idea, that a ninja is a ninja and nothing to do with the rogue other than not being able to multiclass with it. The other alternate classes have their own archetypes that their base class can't be, so why should you be able to access their stuff.
We've assumed that's how it works but apparently we have nothing "Official" to go off of other than the ACG which says that alternate classes are archetypes, and Mark is saying that that's an error for it to say that.
Apparently there's a difference between core class and alternate class that we've been unaware of.
| 5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mark is saying that the rules never supported this idea, that a ninja is a ninja and nothing to do with the rogue other than not being able to multiclass with it. The other alternate classes have their own archetypes that their base class can't be, so why should you be able to access their stuff.
That is, in fact, not what I said. If this is another case of "expresses the point by using an exaggerated fictitious example," then I would strongly recommend not using those in a rules forum thread discussing a rules question.
I said that alternate classes play by slightly different rules than archetypes. I did not say that alternate classes can't use things like FCB or archetypes from their base class. To my knowledge, there has never been an official clarification one way or the other about FCB or archetypes.
Mark is saying that the rules never supported this idea, that a ninja is a ninja and nothing to do with the rogue other than not being able to multiclass with it. The other alternate classes have their own archetypes that their base class can't be, so why should you be able to access their stuff.That is, in fact, not what I said. If this is another case of "expresses the point by using an exaggerated fictitious example," then I would strongly recommend not using those in a rules forum thread discussing a rules question.
I said that alternate classes play by slightly different rules than archetypes. I did not say that alternate classes can't use things like FCB or archetypes from their base class. To my knowledge, there has never been an official clarification one way or the other about FCB or archetypes.
I'm sorry, if you feel I'm making an attack on you or purposefully misrepresenting you. That is not the case.
Now to this post. I'm sorry if I misrepresented you. What I said you said is what I thought you were saying. Your later post where you quoted the APG and the UC to me indicated that they should be viewed as their own class. Especially these lines in your quoted material, "an alternate class operates exactly as a base class" and, "alternate class can be used just as any of the other base classes found in the first part of this chapter." and "Alternate classes are standalone classes". Because to my understanding a "base class" is a cavalier, inquisitor, alchemist, gunslinger, and the like. None of those classes are able to take archetypes or FCB for any core class. And being a standalone class would also indicate that it doesn't have any actual ties to the rogue other than the restriction of multiclassing. Everything of the alternate classes say what they can use of their inspiration class, and if any of their stuff can be used by their inspiration class, further emphasizing that nothing would cross over unless specified. So all of this comes together to support the idea that the rules never supported a ninja counting as a rogue. So with what has been said, and as you just confirmed, there is nothing official allowing FCB or rogue archetypes to apply to ninja. And as the precedent of pathfinder is "that you can't do something *rulesy* unless it says you can" then the rule would be that you can't.
Now you did say that alternate classes follow different rules as archetypes. Thus I looked for the rules that they followed. If the rules I inferred you meant to imply by your quotes are not correct then I apologize, but do ask that you try and be more clear in the future to what you're trying to convey. As you left much to infer from your quoting them. So while what I said you said might not have been what you meant, from what you have posted I feel that it is a valid assessment of what you actually said.
If you have recommendations for how I could have better phrased what I said that you're have a problem with, or if you feel I am still using an "exaggerated fictitious example", or how better to infer your meaning, or anything of use, please, feel free to post or PM me with it.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Mark is saying that the rules never supported this idea, that a ninja is a ninja and nothing to do with the rogue other than not being able to multiclass with it. The other alternate classes have their own archetypes that their base class can't be, so why should you be able to access their stuff.That is, in fact, not what I said. If this is another case of "expresses the point by using an exaggerated fictitious example," then I would strongly recommend not using those in a rules forum thread discussing a rules question.
I said that alternate classes play by slightly different rules than archetypes. I did not say that alternate classes can't use things like FCB or archetypes from their base class. To my knowledge, there has never been an official clarification one way or the other about FCB or archetypes.
I'm sorry, if you feel I'm making an attack on you or purposefully misrepresenting you. That is not the case.
** spoiler omitted **Now to this post. I'm sorry if I misrepresented you. What I said you said is what I thought you were saying. Your later post where you...
Hey no worries Chess Pwn! I actually figured you had misremembered when I first posted in the monk thread, which was why I was surprised when you seemed like you were saying it was intentional hyperbole (it was framed as being fact, so I posted there because I didn't want people who don't have the rules yet to receive incorrect facts, if possible).
On to the rules text I quoted. That's what the rules about alternate classes say on the matter right now, the only ones I could find in rules sections (from talking to the other PDT members, the ACG class creation thing is trying to explain how to build 'em, so it wasn't precise rules language). I'm personally hoping we can get out a FAQ that explains this, and I'm currently on the side that I think it should allow archetypes when we do. But as always, when we reach a time that the FAQ is going out, we'll discuss it and come to a consensus agreement.
Ironic as it is you can dump dex on a ninja. Stealth doesn't work , and when invisibility is going your +6 dex is kinda useless next to the +20 from the spell.
alternatively you can dump str and get an agile weapon/amulet.
Personal preference but I personally hate playing a martial character with low strength.
A low dex ninja could be a fun idea, though spending a feat on medium armor proficiency is a little annoying. If only there was an archetype for an armored ninja...
Ironic as it is you can dump dex on a ninja. Stealth doesn't work , and when invisibility is going your +6 dex is kinda useless next to the +20 from the spell.
alternatively you can dump str and get an agile weapon/amulet.
Personal preference but I personally hate playing a martial character with low strength.
A low dex ninja could be a fun idea, though spending a feat on medium armor proficiency is a little annoying. If only there was an archetype for an armored ninja...
If only there was any archetype for ninja ;)
I said that alternate classes play by slightly different rules than archetypes. I did not say that alternate classes can't use things like FCB or archetypes from their base class.
I'm a little lost as to what those other rules would be then, since that just about covers everything that archetypes and alternate classes do.
To my knowledge, there has never been an official clarification one way or the other about FCB or archetypes.
The section in the advanced class guide specifically calling alternate classes archtypes that have the math done for you is pretty official. I know you think its not in the right spot to matter, but a LOT of rules are scattered all over the place in weird spots.
Combine that with Jasons post on the matter and its really as official a clarification ever got until recently.
Thats what people were worried about. We don't like building characters on what looks like solid rock only to have it start shifting around.
Ironic as it is you can dump dex on a ninja. Stealth doesn't work , and when invisibility is going your +6 dex is kinda useless next to the +20 from the spell.
alternatively you can dump str and get an agile weapon/amulet.
Personal preference but I personally hate playing a martial character with low strength.
A low dex ninja could be a fun idea, though spending a feat on medium armor proficiency is a little annoying. If only there was an archetype for an armored ninja...
Mirror image is better than armor anyway
Mirror image is better than armor anyway
Generally lasts longer when you have a decent AC though and with only 1d4 images as opposed to 1d4 plus one for every three caster levels it seems like a good way to burn through a lot of ki very quickly.
Don't get me wrong, I agree that ninja is a fairly decent class which doesn't need much in the way of help, my frustration stems mostly from the fact that it's the most rigid of any class without much room for variation unless you go to the effort of creative multiclassing.
Bump hoping for more FAQs.
If the ninja is in Mithral armor can it count as a rogue?
Bump?
I'm surprised I actually clicked this for faq since my expectation is that Paizo's ruling on this will be one I disagree with. I do appreciate seeing this thread bumped though, it was nice to revisit my old tirade. It eased the desire to add to the renewed tirade in the more recent iteration of this discussion.
I suppose the ninja can't properly be called abadonware until Paizo stops enforcing it's copyright on Ultimate Combat but I can't think of a more appropriate term for the class right now.
link where Mark says his talk about the unchained ninja should have been PDT since it was official.
