Hi everyone, I've looked around and people seem to say that an Investigator can be a Sleuth and an Empiricist for their archetypes, but I was hoping to get a clarification on something.
In the Empiricist Tree, Unfailing Logic says this:
An empiricist's grasp of facts and data teaches him to anchor himself in reality, granting resistance to even the most potent illusions. At 4th level, an empiricist gains a +2 insight bonus on all Will saving throws against illusion spells or spell-like abilities that allow a save to disbelieve their effects. In addition he can spend one point from his inspiration pool as an immediate action to use his Intelligence bonus instead of her Wisdom bonus on all such saves for one round. At 8th level, the empiricist's insight bonus increases to +4. At 16th level, he gains immunity to all illusion spells and spell-like abilities that allow a save to disbelieve the effects.
This ability replaces swift alchemy.
Then in the Sleuth Tree, one of the abilities says this:
Sleuth's Initiative (Ex): At 1st level, as long as the sleuth has at least 1 luck point, he gains a +2 bonus on initiative checks. Furthermore, if he has the Quick Draw feat, his hands are free and unrestrained, and the weapon is not hidden, he can draw a single light or one-handed melee weapon as part of the initiative check. (Unlike with swashbuckler deeds, this does not have to be a piercing weapon.) At 4th level, a sleuth gains the following deeds. These abilities replace swift alchemy.
Bold for emphasis.
So my question is, does this somehow override the rule? I feel like it shouldn't, all things considered, because I don't think any other class could get away with that. What does everyone think?