Ninja is a rogue, he can already take Extra Rogue Talent anyway.
If your DM says no, declare you wish to multiclass into Rogue in order to qualify for said feat. When he says no to that, ask him to show you where in ninja is says, "by taking a level in this class, you may never by any means take the extra rogue talent feat, unlike every other class ever printed."
I'll never get over the lengths of douchy rules lawyering some DMs and posters will go to in order to take out their hatred of the ninja on.
|
Wow, go out take some fresh air dude. Cool yourself, really.
The ninja is an alternate class, so, an archetype. So, a single class. By RAW, no multiclassing into a single class, even between several archetypes, that rule is crystal clear. In a reading contest, the DM would be right.
The "Ninja trick" ability basically replaces the "Rogue talent" ability. Each ability gives you respectively tricks or talents. You can select a rogue talent in place of a ninja trick ; but you don't get the ability itself, otherwise the writing would have been "You gain the Rogue Talent class feature, as a rogue. Choose one rogue talent, and add it to your list of ninja tricks."
That's like an oracle able to choose a wizard spell ; it doesn't mean she has the ability to cast arcane spells.
By RAW : Nope.
But is it overpowered, broken, is there any reason to refuse it ? Nope.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wait... so you're telling me that you can't take a level of Rogue, because you are an alternate class of rogue, but you can't take Extra Rogue Talent, because you aren't a Rogue.
Wait... so you're telling me that you can't take a level of Rogue, because you are an alternate class of rogue, but you can't take Extra Rogue Talent, because you aren't a Rogue.
Rogue Class =/= "Rogue Talent Class Feature," which is the prerequisite for Extra Rogue. Just as you couldn't take "Extra Ki" with a Monk archetype that trades out Ki Pool, you can't take Extra Rogue Talent with an archetype (or in this case, alternate class) that doesn't have that feature (in this case, replacing it with Ninja Trick). That you are a subtype of the Rogue class is pretty much irrelevant.
But as Maxximmilius said, there is little reason not to allow this as a house rule.
|
|
A ninja is a glorified rogue archetype that basically swaps "rogue talent" for "ninja trick". As such, by RAW you obviously can't multiclass into your own class, nor can you select Extra Rogue Talent since you don't have the required class feature.
But again, feel free to allow it, it's not broken and is most likely an oversight. I do believe that you simply aren't supposed to take more than one ninja trick if you are a rogue ; and more than one rogue talent as a ninja.
|
Is the lack of an "Extra Ninja Trick" feat a deliberate design decision, or is it something that will be put into another book at some point?It's probably due to the fact that the ninja was designed at the same time as the majority of the feats for the same book were designed, and thus the designers of the feats didn't know what was going on with the ninja.
And then, when we got everything together to work it all up into a book, there was just no real room to add any more feats.
So no... not a deliberate design decision, but certainly a place we can expand upon.
So, they just forgot/missed a feat and the general idea is that they plan on adding it later.
|
|
Note that even if Extra Ninja Trick is added, it wouldn't allow you to select the "rogue talent" ninja trick twice, as it isn't explicited as something you may select several times. (But yet again, houserule ftw.)
From the PRD:
Rogue Talent: The ninja can select a rogue talent in place of a ninja trick. The ninja cannot select a rogue talent that has the same name as a ninja trick. The ninja can select this talent multiple times.
:)
The ninja and rogue are two separate classes. If they weren't the ninja would be clearly marked as an archetype just like Paizo has done with dozens of archetypes that were released prior to Ultimate Combat and even within UC itself. Saying they're practically the same thing doesn't qualify it for an archetype either and makes no sense. If that's the case then I say cavalier is just an archetype of fighter, gunslinger is a type of ranger and samurai is a type of monk.
|
|
The ninja and rogue are two separate classes. If they weren't the ninja would be clearly marked as an archetype just like Paizo has done with dozens of archetypes that were released prior to Ultimate Combat and even within UC itself. Saying they're practically the same thing doesn't qualify it for an archetype either and makes no sense. If that's the case then I say cavalier is just an archetype of fighter, gunslinger is a type of ranger and samurai is a type of monk.
Well, close:
Ninja = Rogue
Samurai = cavalier
Anti-paladin = paladin
Gunslinger on the other hand is a new class.
Please check the Ultimate Combat book, around page 8, under Alternate Classes
Alternate Classes
These are standalone classes whose basic ideas are very close to established base classes, yet whose required alterations would be too expansive for an archetype. In this case, that’s the samurai and the ninja—specifically Asian-themed classes that have long and unique histories, as well as great cultural cachet, but which are similar in
concept to the established cavalier and rogue, respectively. 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 antipaladin from Advanced Player’s Guide is also an alternate class.
Just house-rule in a version of "Extra Rogue Talent" for the Ninja called "Extra Ninja Trick".
It's pretty common, and there is nothing unbalanced about it. Honestly, it seems like an oversight and one they will likely correct in future material.
|
|
The ninja and rogue are two separate classes. If they weren't the ninja would be clearly marked as an archetype just like Paizo has done with dozens of archetypes that were released prior to Ultimate Combat and even within UC itself. Saying they're practically the same thing doesn't qualify it for an archetype either and makes no sense. If that's the case then I say cavalier is just an archetype of fighter, gunslinger is a type of ranger and samurai is a type of monk.
It's been answered to death, and I'm not gonna search for my post quoting 4 times James Jacobs on the fact that alternate classes are "just glorified archetypes". Search it yourself.
Alternate classes are archetypes with their own table, description and picture. nothing less, nothing more.
just here to chime in and say that Maxximilius is right.
No you can't multiclass ninja and rogue,
yes you can take 2 archetypes (if they don't change the same thing),
yes an alternate class is the very same thing as an archetype,
yes you can be a ninja scout,
no a ninja doesn't get rogue talents,
no if you've got no rogue talents you can't take extra rogue talent,
yes you can houserule it,
yes it is sensible to houserule it
Maybe it's because I don't own Ultimate Combat and the PRD doesn't have the Alternate Class section that I haven't had time to parse through it. It still doesn't make sense why they just wouldn't mark them as archetypes instead of listing them as entirely separate classes and going through convoluted steps so that you can cherry pick certain features from each when overriding features is already built into archetypes. Bah!
Jason Bulmahn on Alternative classes
Jason Bulmahn again on alternative classes
tl;dr: they're basically archetypes.
Yeah, yeah, I get it. Yet Another Layer Of Complexity(TM). If I take someone new to the game, which, I've been encountering a lot lately as my group has been the one introducing Pathfinder to our game store, and explain them they can't multiclass according to the multiclass rules because those few classes are really archetypes and not classes when they're listed as classes, save for the scant paragraph that explains this, and see all the confused looks I'll get. Fun times are ahead!
Not to mention potential retcons within my group itself. I don't know if anyone has taken multiclasses, say a rogue and a ninja, but often someone will pick up a book in the store and if they like a class in it at the start of the campaign they'll buy the book and roll the class. I thought the books like Ultimate Combat, Magic etc were meant to be additions and optional rules and not recons/revisions on things such as multiclassing rules, which should be treated as errata and released/updated with new printings.
I get this has already probably been gone over. I'm just late to the game. Wee!
If you want to allow multiclassing between rogue/ninja as a houserule, go for it. I have myself, although in a different sort of way (my son started out as a rogue before I got UC, then he wanted to be a ninja, so we had him enter training in a sekrit ninja skool at the end of his rogue level 3, and at level 4 he became a rogue 2/ninja 2 -- at level 5 he'll be a rogue 2/ninja 3 and then at 6 he'll trade in those last 2 rogue levels and become a ninja 6, unless he wants to multiclass with something else such as ranger.)
There's also nothing stopping you from allowing an extra ninja trick feat to work exactly like the extra rogue talent feature. Really, though, how hard would it have been for them to add the line "Ninjas may take the feat Extra Rogue Talent to acquire an additional ninja trick as a rogue of their same level" to the Ninja Trick description?
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, yeah, I get it. Yet Another Layer Of Complexity(TM). If I take someone new to the game, which, I've been encountering a lot lately as my group has been the one introducing Pathfinder to our game store, and explain them they can't multiclass according to the multiclass rules because those few classes are really archetypes and not classes when they're listed as classes, save for the scant paragraph that explains this, and see all the confused looks I'll get. Fun times are ahead!
Technically, I wouldn't suggest to any new player to use rulebooks outside of Core. Even if I understand your concern about useless complexity and agree with it, it is a non-issue right now since the new books are aimed at players with more rules-fu, who would probably search on the messageboards if they got a problem with the rules.
Yeah, yeah, I get it. Yet Another Layer Of Complexity(TM). If I take someone new to the game, which, I've been encountering a lot lately as my group has been the one introducing Pathfinder to our game store, and explain them they can't multiclass according to the multiclass rules because those few classes are really archetypes and not classes when they're listed as classes, save for the scant paragraph that explains this, and see all the confused looks I'll get. Fun times are ahead!Technically, I wouldn't suggest to any new player to use rulebooks outside of Core. Even if I understand your concern about useless complexity and agree with it, it is a non-issue right now since the new books are aimed at players with more rules-fu, who would probably search on the messageboards if they got a problem with the rules.
Another issue is that some players don't own the books (or only the CRB) and use things like d20pfsrd as their main rules resource.
Unfortunately, d20pfsrd doesn't contain every line of text from the books, and is sometimes missing key ones. Also, the rules are sometimes scattered around different pages of the website when they are on the same page of the actual book.
Don't get me wrong... I LOVE the d20pfsrd and all the work they do. I use it a LOT, especially for quick rules look-ups during games and for cross referencing stuff... but it is no substitution for actually reading the print books or PDFs as you are supposed to.
|
|
If someone wants to be a ninja my own suggestion is to just choose Rogue class levels and Rogue Tricks that let you gather a few Ninja tricks
only choose Ninja class over Rogue if you want a proper ki pool or poison use ability
My own suggestion would be to play a ninja and write "rogue" on the sheet.
It solves a lot of balance issues.
I played a ninja and took the fact I couldn't qualify for this feat as part of the trade off between ninja and rogue. Seriously, swift action to use invisibility rocks. Improved invisibility at level 10 is awesome.