As the subject states.
How could it not though?
"A dual-cursed oracle gains no additional class skills from her mystery."
If she doesn't get additional skills, how could it be considered an alteration of the skills she gets from Ancient Lorekeeper?
It doesn't even say "This replaces the bonus skills the oracle gains from her mystery." at the end.
|
How could it not though?
"A dual-cursed oracle gains no additional class skills from her mystery."
If she doesn't get additional skills, how could it be considered an alteration of the skills she gets from Ancient Lorekeeper?
It doesn't even say "This replaces the bonus skills the oracle gains from her mystery." at the end.
First off, it doesn't have to say it alters it to actually have altered the class feature. Plenty of archetypes are missing that text yet clearly do.
Additionally, the archetype stacking FAQ calls out that class skills are considered a single thing for whether archetypes alter them. It alters it by taking away your mystery class skills. Thus class skills is altered by the archetype and it doesn't stack with any other archetypes that touches class skills.
And that's without even touching the fact that both replace 3 of your spells gained.
Could you present me that archetype stacking FAQ please.
Lol. The writing in this is so ambiguous. This doesn't explain anything, if only just making matters worse.
What constitutes the differentiation of a class feature with a subfeature?
"In general, if a class feature grants multiple subfeatures, it’s OK to take two archetypes that only change two separate subfeatures. "
My rationality says that since Ancient Lorekeeper replaces the skills she gets from her mystery, and Dual-Cursed Oracle adds no additional skills, it doesn't conflict with the skills, unless otherwise stated.
"She selects one spell from the sorcerer/wizard spell list that is at least one level lower than the highest-level oracle spell she can cast. The ancient lorekeeper gains this as a bonus spell known. The spell is treated as one level higher than its true level for all purposes."
So, Ancient Lorekeeper gets *one* spell that is one level lower than the highest level as a bonus spell known. At level 4 I get a 1st level wizard spell as a bonus spell known that counts as a 2nd level spell regardless of what I've written bellow.
"The ancient lorekeeper *may* choose an *additional* spell at 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, and 18th levels. This ability replaces the bonus spells she would normally gain at these levels from her chosen mystery."
So now it's giving me an option to choose an additional spells, but since the 4th and 6th level spells are taken by the bonus spells of the Dual-Cursed Oracle, I can't replace them. But I still have "ill omen" granted at 2nd level, and I get to choose additional wizard/sorcerer spells at 8th level and so on.
|
|
Goodluck convincing your GM of that. Considering the FAQ says that even adding a single class skill would count as altering the class skills feature as a whole, it certainly seems to be saying that any change to class skills is altering them.
But like I said, convince your GM if you truly think you're correct and we're wrong. Telling us isn't going to help at this point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The dual-cursed oracle says you don't gain bonus class skills.
The ancient lorekeeper gives you bonus class skills.
Any casuistry to create confusion and claim the two archetypes don't affect the same class feature is disingenuous.
It says you don't gain *additional* from her mystery. Additional meaning as an extra factor or circumstance.
The ancient lorekeeper replaces bonus skills gained from her mystery.
Oracle with the heavens mystery class skills is replaced by the ancient lorekeeper.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It says you don't gain *additional* from her mystery. Additional meaning as an extra factor or circumstance...
...which is an instance of alteration.
Removing, adding or swapping a class skill are all alterations to the Oracle's class feature: Class Skills.
Two archetypes altering the same class feature do not stack. End of the story.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
You're in Advice, not Rules Questions, so I'm going to say, "Ask Your GM". Our group does allow archetypes to stack, provided they don't "interfere" (as Sean K Reynolds and some other devs do in their home games), so we'd allow this, though we're aware that it's very clearly against RAW.
Arguing that it isn't and trying to browbeat helpful forum users into agreeing with you is not going to help your argument.
A better question might be to ask something along the lines of, "Would this be too powerful?" or "Do you think it's fair to ask if I can do this?".
As to whether it's too powerful? Maybe/Probably. Depends on your group, really. They are each top-tier archetypes *already*, without any need for stacking them. If you're combining two top-tier archetypes, it's probably too strong.
I'm going to agree with "ask your GM". These are probably the two best oracle archetypes (and the oracle is already a strong class) so you probably don't need both, but maybe it would be appropriate for the game you're in.
But the person who needs to be sold on the idea is not on the forums, most likely.
Anyone play Dungeon World yet?