Yeah I guess that does. Just a little debate I had going with some friends. My dad played 1E and he was telling me about his old character who had multiclassed between generalist wizard and illusionist, makes sense now hahaEven in 1st edition, the only demi-humans that could be illusionists were gnomes, and Illusionist/Magic-User wasn't a legal multi-class combination.
Arguably, a human could dual-class it, but... ugh. That would be a rather horrid dual class.
Yeah my dad played a human woman named Iris. Infact my dad and his friends came up with the idea for the Demi-lich long before that ever went to print, Iris "Damned Queen" had supposedly split her soul 9 times. She was a level fourty four magic user. level 22 illusionist level 22 magic user.
The stories about Iris were quite impressive actually lol
It wasnt a terrible build because my dad had fun playing it... after all that is the point of a game.. plus she was an evil bad ass lol
So, she levelled to 22 as an Illusionist, and then dual-classed into Magic-User, gave up all Illusionist Spell casting for 22 levels (unless she wanted to get no XP for an adventure), and then at level 44 was finally able to use the features of both classes freely? But stopped playing at that point?
Dual-classing was workable for low-level human builds, but for high-level builds it was demonstrably bad, assuming you actually had to *play* those levels, and not just create a character at that level. What was the character doing, exactly, when the party was 22nd level, and she said 'I'm giving up all my spell casting and going back to 1st level. I'll have MAGIC MISSILE!' (Note: if the character went MU first and then Ill., swap that out for 'I'll have COLOR SPRAY!')
I'm guessing that there was some house-ruling involved that made it playable. Although one wonders, even under 1st edition, how long you'd have to play to generate the what, 8, 9 million XP to do that?
Actually, I'm just being snarky at this point. Feel free to ignore me. I'm sure it was a fun character to play.
Yeah I guess that does. Just a little debate I had going with some friends. My dad played 1E and he was telling me about his old character who had multiclassed between generalist wizard and illusionist, makes sense now hahaEven in 1st edition, the only demi-humans that could be illusionists were gnomes, and Illusionist/Magic-User wasn't a legal multi-class combination.
Arguably, a human could dual-class it, but... ugh. That would be a rather horrid dual class.
Yeah my dad played a human woman named Iris. Infact my dad and his friends came up with the idea for the Demi-lich long before that ever went to print, Iris "Damned Queen" had supposedly split her soul 9 times. She was a level fourty four magic user. level 22 illusionist level 22 magic user.
The stories about Iris were quite impressive actually lol
It wasnt a terrible build because my dad had fun playing it... after all that is the point of a game.. plus she was an evil bad ass lol
So, she levelled to 22 as an Illusionist, and then dual-classed into Magic-User, gave up all Illusionist Spell casting for 22 levels (unless she wanted to get no XP for an adventure), and then at level 44 was finally able to use the features of both classes freely? But stopped playing at that point?
Dual-classing was workable for low-level human builds, but for high-level builds it was demonstrably bad, assuming you actually had to *play* those levels, and not just create a character at that level. What was the character doing, exactly, when the party was 22nd level, and she said 'I'm giving up all my spell casting and going back to 1st level. I'll have MAGIC MISSILE!' (Note: if the character went MU first and then Ill., swap that out for 'I'll have COLOR SPRAY!')
I'm guessing that there was some house-ruling involved that made it playable. Although one wonders, even under 1st edition, how long you'd have to play to generate the what, 8, 9 million XP to do...
haha all in good fun.
yeah they house ruled it to where basically she started over as a magic user but used her illusionist powers in the mean time.
Dual-classing was workable for low-level human builds, but for high-level builds it was demonstrably bad, assuming you actually had to *play* those levels, and not just create a character at that level. What was the character doing, exactly, when the party was 22nd level, and she said 'I'm giving up all my spell casting and going back to 1st level. I'll have MAGIC MISSILE!' (Note: if the character went MU first and then Ill., swap that out for 'I'll have COLOR SPRAY!')I'm guessing that there was some house-ruling involved that made it playable. Although one wonders, even under 1st edition, how long you'd have to play to generate the what, 8, 9 million XP to do...
I had people Dual Class in 1st and 2nd Edition. It's actually easier to do it at higher level. This is because while you are at 1st you level up extremely fast. The first encounter you are practically useless but the XP from it usually boosted you up like 4 levels. Then the next few you are bit better and you go up another 4 levels. By the end of the first gaming session you usually end up around 9th. After that it slowed greatly. Going to Level 20 would be slow though. In our games it usually happened around 13th for the fighter as there is nothing for the fighter after 13th when they got the 5/2 attacks.
with that said I dont see why you couldnt.
Because it's specifically prohibited by the rules.
(In other words, use your judgement.)
As it always should be.
To your point on the hierarchy, however, I'd say the proposed mod has a good chance of violating Rule #2. YMMV.
|
(In other words, use your judgement.)As it always should be.
To your point on the hierarchy, however, I'd say the proposed mod has a good chance of violating Rule #2. YMMV.
Yes, but not always. Hence rule 5. I doubt a Sorcerer (Draconic)/Sorcerer (Elemental) in even mix would be broken. Or that a Weapon Master 8/Two-Handed Fighter 12 would be broken, etc. I would veto really stupid things like 1/1/1/1/1/1/1.
(Btw, I'm basically saying this would be a "case-by-case approval" thing, but totally possible and even cool in some cases)
(In other words, use your judgement.)As it always should be.
To your point on the hierarchy, however, I'd say the proposed mod has a good chance of violating Rule #2. YMMV.
Yes, but not always. Hence rule 5. I doubt a Sorcerer (Draconic)/Sorcerer (Elemental) in even mix would be broken. Or that a Weapon Master 8/Two-Handed Fighter 12 would be broken, etc. I would veto really stupid things like 1/1/1/1/1/1/1.
(Btw, I'm basically saying this would be a "case-by-case approval" thing, but totally possible and even cool in some cases)
I agree.
I think if you treat it as a seperate class and you approve it that should work fine.
After all if you were to multiclass from a wizard to an Arcane Heritage sorceror you would almost essentially be taking the same class twice, it is allowed and you get slightly more versatility and power without being OP.
Nothing wrong with it as long as you scale the powers with the totals levels in the class for the untouched class abilities and treat the ones tied to the seperate levels seperate
So I'll be honest and say I didn't read everything here but I've seen this discussed else where and believed that James even chimed in on it. The basic guidelines were along the track of: if you are replacing the same class feature, then you can't stack archetypes. So Weapon Master and Polearm can't double up but there are a few archetypes that can. Officially, you are a fighter (archetype) so no multiclassing applies. House rules: do what you feel like.
Edit: Found the thread: "Fighter + APG: Is This Legal?" and it was Jason:
That's kinda what I figured.
So a Fighter has basically two options - core or a fighting-theme, like Polearm Master - because all of the variant use the same class features to some degree.
It's true. There are a handful of archetypes for various classes that swap out different class abilities and that let you take two archetypes, but those are much more the exception than the rule.
For fighters, they don't have all that many class abilities, so I pretty much had to swap out the same suite of class abilities for most of em (although some do keep the baseline abilities, in particular armor training for a couple of the archetypes).
So I'll be honest and say I didn't read everything here but I've seen this discussed else where and believed that James even chimed in on it. The basic guidelines were along the track of: if you are replacing the same class feature, then you can't stack archetypes. So Weapon Master and Polearm can't double up but there are a few archetypes that can. Officially, you are a fighter (archetype) so no multiclassing applies. House rules: do what you feel like.
Edit: Found the thread: "Fighter + APG: Is This Legal?" and it was Jason:
That's kinda what I figured.
So a Fighter has basically two options - core or a fighting-theme, like Polearm Master - because all of the variant use the same class features to some degree.
It's true. There are a handful of archetypes for various classes that swap out different class abilities and that let you take two archetypes, but those are much more the exception than the rule.
For fighters, they don't have all that many class abilities, so I pretty much had to swap out the same suite of class abilities for most of em (although some do keep the baseline abilities, in particular armor training for a couple of the archetypes).
thanks haha we have come to that conclusion
I had people Dual Class in 1st and 2nd Edition. It's actually easier to do it at higher level. This is because while you are at 1st you level up extremely fast. The first encounter you are practically useless but the XP from it usually boosted you up like 4 levels. Then the next few you are bit better and you go up another 4 levels. By the end of the first gaming session you usually end up around 9th. After that it slowed greatly. Going to Level 20 would be slow though. In our games it usually happened around 13th for the fighter as there is nothing for the fighter after 13th when they got the 5/2 attacks.
But... every time they got enough XP to level, they had to go back to town, spend gold and 1d4 weeks to level up... for every level gained. So unless you handwave all that, the time spent becomes pretty huge.
Agreed, once a fighter had hit name level, and maxxed their attacks, not much was left for them to do... Although I have to say that all of the reasonable 1st edition campaigns I played in tended to wrap up around 14-15th level, as seventh level spells were really the beginning of stupidly broken effects.
I had people Dual Class in 1st and 2nd Edition. It's actually easier to do it at higher level. This is because while you are at 1st you level up extremely fast. The first encounter you are practically useless but the XP from it usually boosted you up like 4 levels. Then the next few you are bit better and you go up another 4 levels. By the end of the first gaming session you usually end up around 9th. After that it slowed greatly. Going to Level 20 would be slow though. In our games it usually happened around 13th for the fighter as there is nothing for the fighter after 13th when they got the 5/2 attacks.But... every time they got enough XP to level, they had to go back to town, spend gold and 1d4 weeks to level up... for every level gained. So unless you handwave all that, the time spent becomes pretty huge.
Agreed, once a fighter had hit name level, and maxxed their attacks, not much was left for them to do... Although I have to say that all of the reasonable 1st edition campaigns I played in tended to wrap up around 14-15th level, as seventh level spells were really the beginning of stupidly broken effects.
We did wave the training part, we never did like it. We only did the dual classing twice as like you most of our game ended shortly after the last person hit 12th.
|
...The basic guidelines were along the track of: if you are replacing the same class feature, then you can't stack archetypes. So Weapon Master and Polearm can't double up but there are a few archetypes that can. Officially, you are a fighter (archetype) so no multiclassing applies...
I'm pretty sure it says that right at the start of the chapter on archetypes. You can have as many archetypes as you want providing they are all swapping out different class features, but you have to swap ALL the class features for each archetype.
If archetype #1 & #2 both swap out trapfinding and evasion then you can't have both. You can't pick the trapfinding ability of #1 and the evasion ability of #2. But if #1 only swaps trapfinding and #2 only swaps evasion then you can have both.
Either way, archetypes aren't classes. They're closer mechanically to templates than they are to a true class variant.
Your home campaign can work it however you want, obviously.
There is a chart for all the classes on d20pfsrd.
You just have to go to each class and the entry is at the bottom.
|
|
The archetype (or archetypes if you can find a combination that doesn't overlap) for a class are something you set when you take your first level in the class. Once done... you've forever committed yourself to a fixed progression when you take levels in that class. This also includes not taking any archetypes at all. Start as a straight magus, a straight magus you shall forever be.Hey everyone,
so this is my first thread so whats up?
back on track here:
Are you allowed to multiclass between several archetypes for a single class? and if so how would that work? would I gain the benefits of the first level of say burgalur and than the first level benefits of a normal rogue if that was my first multiclass?
If it is true that you can in turn take a new level in each specialty archetype that can lead to some abusive sneak attack damage (fifth level stacking up 5d6 sneak), and that is just for the rogue.
Just a little food for thought.
Points?
This thread has changed from "is it allowed?" to "should you allow it?" It is no longer a discussion of RAW.
The logic via verisimilitude is simple: If you take Fighter [Two-Handed] for a few levels, it is now impossible, by RAW, to gain even a low-level ability granted by Fighter [Weapon Master]. This doesn't make sense, as it essentially means that some people are literally *incapable* of learning techniques directly tied to their type of training for no reason other than "the rules say so."
So with 2 levels of Fighter [Two-Handed Fighter], you can no longer ever, in any form, get the Reliable Strike ability, because that's in a different archetype. It doesn't matter if you were willing to invest 18 levels into that sole thing, the rules say you can't because you already dabbled in two-handed fighting.
Now, obviously we can't let people switch archetypes part way through the class progression, because that gets really strange really fast. However, the suggestion offered here is to let them take a class a second time under a different archetype.
Obviously, this is not RAW, but I see no thematic or balance problem with a Fighter [Two-Handed Fighter] 10/Fighter [Weapon Master] 10.
Also fairly obvious is that you can't allow this in the general sense, or you end up with patently stupid things like a 20th level character that has 20 instances of Monk 1 (even though they would likely suck outside of their saving throws).
This is an old thread, but since it has been necroed, and I did not see this mentioned, by RAW you have to choose any archetypes for a class at the first level for that class, even if the first replaced ability happens at a higher level. Though Pathfinder Society uses a house rule that allows that, so long as your character is not past the level of the first replaced ability.
|
|
This is an old thread, but since it has been necroed, and I did not see this mentioned, by RAW you have to choose any archetypes for a class at the first level for that class, even if the first replaced ability happens at a higher level. Though Pathfinder Society uses a house rule that allows that, so long as your character is not past the level of the first replaced ability.
This is not necessarily true in practice. I'm pretty sure that it's been stated that in actuality you're allowed to pick whether to apply an archetype when you first hit an affected level, though a quick search was unsuccessful in finding a citation.
By RAW you do pick before the archetype is even relevant, but I don't think I've seen people doing that (and it is certainly okay to wait when playing with my group).
Either way, this isn't really relevant to the discussion because this discussion is if you DO already have that archetype, would it be considered fair to start taking the class progression a second time for the purposes of getting abilities from another archetype? (Things such as Fighter [Two-Handed] and Fighter [Weapon Master] mixing by taking an equal number of levels in each.) Obviously we're outside of RAW here, but this is for the sake of cool.
lemme add something random that might have already been pointed out. You chose poisoner as a lvl 1 rogue. It serves you quite well for a few levels, but then around level 5 you start running into dungeons with your party and dont have any reliable and safe way to find or disable magical traps. You still have a multiclass path to pick up that ever so handy trapfinding ability. Urban ranger gets it at level 1 the same as rogue, along with full martial proficiency and whatnot. Thats one of the nice things about a bunch of archtypes available for all the classes, theres multiple paths available to get abilities that used to be limited to 1 or very few classes.
Asta
PSY
Hey all :) Im a long time player but recent convert to Pathfinder itself. Im working on a storyline based character and as always have run all aspects past the GM. But I have an additional question to ask...
Character concept is a ranger who follows the Battle Scout path. (mainly because of lack of animal companion and army style play)
But my Ranger also does not cast spells, and so far I have only come across the one variant (another Archetype... Skirmisher)and my question is thus.Can I use both archetypes on my Ranger as they fulfill both charcter design aspects and dont seem to overlap?
Yes