| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Hey quick question
since the ninja class is basically a big archetype for rogue, can you put additional rogue archetypes onto the ninja? if so is it still allowed in PFS?
|
It's a bit unclear as far as PFS is concerned. Confusion began when Pathfinder Unchained was released:
First, John Compton stated that there are no Unchained Ninjas in PFS. Which was understandable. Core vs Unchained, and all.
Then, Mark Seifter added something to the effect that the Ninja was not an archetype of the Rogue (Edit: link below); it's an alternate class.
It caused a lot of head scratching. For 6+ years there have been Scout/Ninjas running around in PFS (I have one myself), and nobody batted an eye.
Now, we're kind of hanging in limbo until someone clarifies things.
|
|
Found it. HERE is where Mark says you can't take Archetypes of Alternate Classes, and that he's "marked it for errata".
Most people are hoping he was just mistaken.
Additionally, I believe there's an ancient quote from Jason Bulmahn even stating that Archetypes and Alternate Classes can be mixed. It's a bit of a mess.
|
|
And HERE is where Jason Bulmahn clarifies that the Ninja is just another Archetype of the Rogue.
(it's a slow day at work)
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
And HERE is where Jason Bulmahn clarifies that the Ninja is just another Archetype of the Rogue.
(it's a slow day at work)
Shame on you! Wasting company time by posting on...<minimizes screen while boss walks by>...the PF forums!!!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here is a thread that is hoping to FAQ this issue
|
Okay. Actually, reading through your linked FAQ request, Mark Seifter reverses his stance here.
That makes me more comfortable defaulting to the answer that, yes, Ninjas can take Rogue Archetypes (so long as they qualify, as usual).
Edit: switched to my Scout/Ninja alias so it'll be easier for me to find next time.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, I never took the stance that alternate classes can't take archetypes from their original class (that's something I'd like to see FAQed, and have wanted FAQed since before being a designer, since I've also ran into the ambiguity with my ninja in PFS). What I did say was that alternate classes have some functional differences to archetypes and are not in all ways of the same functionality. For instance, they can have their own archetypes that alter the same things as the alternate class itself altered, unlike archetypes, which wouldn't stack if they altered the same thing, and they don't stack with other alternate classes, the only example of which exists right now is ninja and Unchained rogue. The former we know because such archetypes exist, for the samurai and antipaladin, and the latter is the case because alt classes tell you exactly what they grant; they don't exist as a list of swap outs (this doesn't give us a negative on alt classes and the base class's archetypes, though). For what it's worth, Jason's linked comment came up at a meeting, and he also agrees that there are minor functional differences between altclasses and archetypes (as expressed by altclasses' ability to have their own archetypes that alter the same things), though he maintained that the most important thing for people learning the game is that they occupy the same conceptual niche (which is true).
|
|
I don't read that in your previous comment, and many other people still don't, but if we're just misinterpreting your comment then I'm 100% fine with that.
This caused quite a bit of confusion where there wasn't much initially.
So, since we have you here, it *is* possible for a Ninja to take the Scout archetype? Or not? Since that's the question on everyone's mind.
I don't read that in your previous comment, and many other people still don't, but if we're just misinterpreting your comment then I'm 100% fine with that.
This caused quite a bit of confusion where there wasn't much initially.
So, since we have you here, it *is* possible for a Ninja to take the Scout archetype? Or not? Since that's the question on everyone's mind.
I think there was plenty of confusion initially, and there still is until we have a FAQ. I've seen it both ways in PFS, and I can't just make a ruling on this; it's legitimately ambiguous and we need a FAQ. However, the earlier of my posts linked above is to indicate that alternate classes are not the same thing as archetypes (it does so by virtue of the fact that some alternate classes have their own archetypes, which by the rules of archetypes proves that they are distinct). It has no bearing on this thread's question, but rather on the separate question of alt class combination, specifically whether you could play an Unchained ninja without houseruling it (you can't, as shown above, though Unchained is all about houserules, so if you want to, go for it; though keep in mind that much like the original ninja was a blatant power increase that more-or-less obsoleted the rogue from a power perspective, if you make a straightforward Unchained ninja, it will do the same to Unchained rogue).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Specifically whether you could play an Unchained ninja without houseruling it (you can't, as shown above
I think its an unfair characterization to label the unchained ninja a house rule. While I agree that its a bad idea, the rules argument against it is far from perfect. This game gives us exposure to really weird rules arguments for and against almost anything, so when someone has an argument that something doesn't work vs a direct statement from the book that it does work, and confirmation that it does work, I think its unreasonable to expect people to go with one possible implication rather than a direct statement.
An unwritten rule that -the specific archetype on an archetype already knows what its altering and replacing is allowed to do that- drops out of the existance of antipaladin archetypes more readily than an unwritten rule directly contradictory to explicit statements in the book that they were just really big Archetypes. There's theoretically nothing stopping something from archetype an archetype if you wanted to. -This abilitiy alters the alteration of the deal. Pray another archtype does not alter it further- kind of thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Specifically whether you could play an Unchained ninja without houseruling it (you can't, as shown aboveI think its an unfair characterization to label the unchained ninja a house rule. While I agree that its a bad idea, the rules argument against it is far from perfect. This game gives us exposure to really weird rules arguments for and against almost anything, so when someone has an argument that something doesn't work vs a direct statement from the book that it does work, and confirmation that it does work, I think its unreasonable to expect people to go with one possible implication rather than a direct statement.
An unwritten rule that -the specific archetype on an archetype already knows what its altering and replacing is allowed to do that- drops out of the existance of antipaladin archetypes more readily than an unwritten rule directly contradictory to explicit statements in the book that they were just really big Archetypes. There's theoretically nothing stopping something from archetype an archetype if you wanted to. -This abilitiy alters the alteration of the deal. Pray another archtype does not alter it further- kind of thing.
The short version is that putting an alternate class onto another alternate class requires you to your own design work (even if sometimes it's easy design work) rather than just follow the instructions in an archetype. But as Unchained says, that's totally cool and groups should do their own design and mod the game to be best for them! Saying that something requires a house ruling is not in any way a problem; a group (or GM) acting as their own designers is a good thing, and it plays to one of the major strengths of the system, in my opinion. It's one reason I love Unchained/Unearthed Arcana style books so much.
In any case, this is orthogonal to the OP's actual question about alternate classes taking archetypes (rather than other alternate classes), as I mentioned in my last post, so I'd recommend moving it to its own thread rather than muddle up the OP's question.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey quick question
since the ninja class is basically a big archetype for rogue, can you put additional rogue archetypes onto the ninja? if so is it still allowed in PFS?
Its a slightly gray area in the rules. I believe that it is legal and we have a ninja scout in our local group .I would ask around locally to see how they would handle it.
40% chance Most likely, no one cares.
40% chance They're fine with a ninja scout
15% chance no, just ditch the scout archetype (its always the scout archtype) and ask your next dm. PFS just had a thread on what happens when your character is table variation without a definitive answer.
5% No, and you must ditch your scout archetype FOREVER if you play at my table !!!!!
*Numbers completely made up and I'm more than a little buzed atm.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Alternate Classes are, in every way, shape, and form, massive archetypes of a base or core class; no ifs, ands, or buts about it.
This is what I have always believed, as well as anyone I've ever spoken to, and the vast majority of online opinions, plus the words of at least one developer, and supportive text in a hardcover book, but apparently it needs to be added to the FAQ to be "official".
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In fact, it says in the ACG 2nd printing:Alternate Classes: Sometimes an archetype exchanges so many class features that it almost becomes a new class itself. In such cases, the class might warrant a representation of all of the class features, even those that it shares with its base class. While still technically an archetype, characters who play this class have all the tools they need to advance their character in one convenient location. The antipaladin, ninja, and samurai are all examples of an alternate class.
Sometimes an archetype exchanges so many class features that it almost becomes a new class itself. In such cases, the class might warrant a representation of all of the class features, even those that it shares with its base class. While alternate classes are similar to archetypes in many ways, players who use such classes have all the tools they need to advance their character in one convenient location. The antipaladin, ninja, and samurai are all examples of an alternate class.
Now, that section isn't rules text to begin with, but rather an explanation on class design. The relevant rules text is in Nefreet's first link of mine up the thread.
In fact, it saysAlternate Classes: Sometimes an archetype exchanges so many class features that it almost becomes a new class itself. In such cases, the class might warrant a representation of all of the class features, even those that it shares with its base class. While still technically an archetype, characters who play this class have all the tools they need to advance their character in one convenient location. The antipaladin, ninja, and samurai are all examples of an alternate class.Sometimes an archetype exchanges so many class features that it almost becomes a new class itself. In such cases, the class might warrant a representation of all of the class features, even those that it shares with its base class. While alternate classes are similar to archetypes in many ways, players who use such classes have all the tools they need to advance their character in one convenient location. The antipaladin, ninja, and samurai are all examples of an alternate class.
I feel I should point out that the PRD states "While still technically an archetype, characters who play this class have all the tools they need to advance their character in one convenient location." So I personally have no access to the quote you have. As such it's no surprise that others also have not seen what you are quoting either.
"9/30/2015 <snip>
•Added errata from second printing of Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Advanced Class Guide."
In fact, it saysAlternate Classes: Sometimes an archetype exchanges so many class features that it almost becomes a new class itself. In such cases, the class might warrant a representation of all of the class features, even those that it shares with its base class. While still technically an archetype, characters who play this class have all the tools they need to advance their character in one convenient location. The antipaladin, ninja, and samurai are all examples of an alternate class.Sometimes an archetype exchanges so many class features that it almost becomes a new class itself. In such cases, the class might warrant a representation of all of the class features, even those that it shares with its base class. While alternate classes are similar to archetypes in many ways, players who use such classes have all the tools they need to advance their character in one convenient location. The antipaladin, ninja, and samurai are all examples of an alternate class.I feel I should point out that the PRD states "While still technically an archetype, characters who play this class have all the tools they need to advance their character in one convenient location." So I personally have no access to the quote you have. As such it's no surprise that others also have not seen what you are quoting either.
"9/30/2015 <snip>
•Added errata from second printing of Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Advanced Class Guide."
Huh, weird. I can confirm my paper and pdf copies have it. I'll let the PRD team know. Thanks graystone!
No problem Mark. I checked the PRD when this debate started out so I was surprised by your second ACG quote. I'm personally stuck with the physical book [1st printing], it's errata PDF and the PRD and none of them had it. This may have gotten miss as it seems to be outside the errata PDF information.
No problem Mark. I checked the PRD when this debate started out so I was surprised by your second ACG quote. I'm personally stuck with the physical book [1st printing], it's errata PDF and the PRD and none of them had it. This may have gotten miss as it seems to be outside the errata PDF information.
Generally changes in non-rules text (or spelling fixes or commas or things like that in rules text) aren't included in the errata pdf as an ease-of-use thing so that you can find the substantive changes easily, so I'm not surprised it wasn't there, but the PRD should still have everything, so I'll investigate and see what turns up.
|
Alternate Classes are, in every way, shape, and form, massive archetypes of a base or core class; no ifs, ands, or buts about it.This is what I have always believed, as well as anyone I've ever spoken to, and the vast majority of online opinions, plus the words of at least one developer, and supportive text in a hardcover book, but apparently it needs to be added to the FAQ to be "official".
To voice the opposite opinion, the distinction between alternate classes and archetypes seems perfectly obvious to me.
I wonder if it would be best conveyed using UML diagrams...