Antipaladins and the Unsanctioned Knowledge feat

[Strife2002]

Could an antipaladin take the Unsanctioned Knowledge feat from Ultimate Combat?

[Mirrel the Marvelous]

The feat is from Ultimate Magic. I would say yes, because it is a variant of the paladin class.

[Weables]

If this was a homegame? Sure.

RAW? No. The requirement is casting level 1 paladin spells.

Antipaladins get their own specific list, and cast level 1 anti-paladin spells.

Finicky as it is, its the raw. I'd trump it at home, because its no really big deal.

[Strife2002]

Mirrel the Marvelous wrote:

The feat is from Ultimate Magic

Whoops!

[Pikewolfgard]

I tried to add it in Hero lab and it said no..lol

[Xavier319]

Paizo has specifically said that ninja and anti-paladin are archetypes of the paladin and rogue class, just complex enough that they required their own leveling chart. That seems like that would make anti-paladin and ninja the names of archetypes, so they would quality.

[The Purity of Violence]

Xavier319,

PLease provide a reference to your claim,

thanks

[blackbloodtroll]

The fact that the Antipaladin, Ninja, and Samurai are indeed the still the Paladin, Rogue, and Cavalier, is noted in every single book that introduces them.

That's why they are known as Alternate Classes.

Basically, really extensive archetypes.

PRD wrote:

Alternate classes are standalone classes whose basic ideas are very close to established base classes, yet whose required alterations would be too expansive for an archetype. An alternate class operates exactly as a base class, save that a character who takes a level in an alternate class can never take a level in its associated class—a samurai cannot also be a cavalier, and vice versa.

[The Purity of Violence]

So using your PRD quote, the Anti-Paladin is "very close" to the paladin, and is cetainly a base class. How, pray tell, does this qualify anti-paladin to take paladin only options, considering it can, per the quote, never take levels in paladin?

[blackbloodtroll]

It is the same class.

Like the Ninja is the Rogue. Ninja can even take Rogue archetypes, like Scout.

Unfortunately, for the Antipaladin, there is not much out there designed for the Paladin, that the Antipaladin can use.

[The Purity of Violence]

How are they the same class? They gave different spell lists and and different alignment restrictions, agmonst other class features. They are very close in design philisophy, but they are fundimentally different in certain aspects.I'm happy to yield to your assertion, but, again, please provide a published ruling.

[MrSin]

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Unfortunately, for the Antipaladin, there is not much out there designed for the Paladin, that the Antipaladin can use.

Fortunately, its all easy to reverse engineer in some fashion for the anti-paladin. In a homegame it wouldn't be a bad idea to do so, if only to give more support to the classes. Options usually aren't a bad thing.

The Purity of Violence wrote:

How are they the same class? They gave different spell lists and and different alignment restrictions, agmonst other class features. They are very close in design philisophy, but they are fundimentally different in certain aspects. I'm happy to yield to your assertion, but, again, please provide a published ruling.

They are as much of the same class as invulnerable barbarian is to core barbarian. They share a core concept and many class features. Think of them as extensive archetypes(like everyone just said). He already provided a quote that stated they were the same. If you take levels in rogue you can't take levels in ninja, if you take levels in samurai you can't in cavalier.(like the quote said...)

[blackbloodtroll]

The Purity of Violence wrote:

How are they the same class? They gave different spell lists and and different alignment restrictions, agmonst other class features. They are very close in design philisophy, but they are fundimentally different in certain aspects.I'm happy to yield to your assertion, but, again, please provide a published ruling.

What you are saying is the same for two different Clerics, who are still both Clerics.

Look, an Alternate Class still counts as the core class it is an alternative of.

So, whilst different, they are the same class.

[Kazaan]

If the prereqs were "Int 13, Paladin able to cast 1st level spells" then you'd be a go because, in that case, Paladin is functionally equivalent to Anti-Paladin. It'd be the same if a feat had prerequisite "lvl 5 Rogue", you'd qualify for it with lvl 5 Ninja. But able to cast lvl 1 Paladin spells is an entirely different monster, the same as the difference between "arcane caster able to cast 1st level spells" and "able to cast 1st level Sorc/Wizard spells".

[master_marshmallow]

MrSin wrote:

In a homegame it wouldn't be a bad idea to do so

Where would you play an antipaladin that isn't in a homegame?

[MrSin]

master_marshmallow wrote:

MrSin wrote:

In a homegame it wouldn't be a bad idea to do so

Where would you play an antipaladin that isn't in a homegame?

No idea! But I've met plenty of 'homegames' that use PFS rules or only use RAW even if your allowed to play Evil. Drives me a little nuts.

[ShadowcatX]

The posts that say that it isn't allowed are correct, while they are the same class they do have different spell lists. Think about it like a feat that said "Rogue with trapfinding", a ninja wouldn't qualify for that.

That said, it is very likely that RAI would allow the anti-paladin access, heck it makes more sense for an anti-paladin than it does a paladin and I wouldn't even think twice before allowing it in a game I ran (if I allowed anti-paladins).

[blackbloodtroll]

Indeed.

Antipaladin cannot take the Unsanctioned Knowledge feat.

[Kazaan]

Anti-Pallys don't give a crap about "sanctions".