|
Pretty simple question here. Can a cleric take both the Divine Strategist and Undead Lord archetypes and still use 'Command Undead' as the feat? Note: the cleric in question does not have the 'channel energy' class feature due to the 'Master Tactician' class feature of the Divine strategist archetype which replaces it.
Some important things to note: Using the feat, Command Undead, which the cleric gains regardless of his/her prereqs (given via archetype), costs 1 charge of the clerics channel negative energy. My argument is that having no 'channel energy' class feature prevents the cleric from having any charges of channel energy (positive or negative), and thus preventing the cleric from utilizing the feat.
Friend and I have been arguing about this for a while...and I figured I'd just make a post here to see where the consensus lies.
Thanks
Just following the written rules, I would say you are right that you could not utilize the feat, since you have no uses of the channel energy class ability.
I would say that it is a bit of an oversight that the undead lord archetype does not make sure that your cleric still has the channel energy ability.
It won't work (without GM permission) because they both modify the domain class feature.
I'm not sure if it'd work without that issue. Even if it did, Command Undead would be 100% useless, as you do not have channel energy and there is no general rules for getting Command Undead without Channel Energy. Every instance of that is specific.
|
|
It won't work (without GM permission) because they both modify the domain class feature.
I'm not sure if it'd work without that issue. Even if it did, Command Undead would be 100% useless, as you do not have channel energy and there is no general rules for getting Command Undead without Channel Energy. Every instance of that is specific.
I think the domain part of the archetypes is fine actually. Divine Strategist gives the cleric one domain only while Undead Lord gives them their specific one domain.
The part where they don't work is that they both modify the domain class feature. It's a technicality, but a strong one ;)
|
|
Ha well that's pretty interesting. So the rule is that the archetypes can't be taken because they both modify the same class feature...even if the modifications jive with each other? That's a technicality that I'd be willing to overlook. It's the 'commanding undead' part that irks me to no end haha.
Technically, yea. If they modify the same thing, no dice. A hard rule that ends much speculation and probably stops arguments.
Command Undead:
Imagine the combination of an archetype that gives up spell casting and an archetype that gives a feat that says "when you cast a spell, you can do X".
What would happen then? Would they be able to use that feat? Even though they don't cast spells?
The answer is no.
Although one could also argue that since they get the feat, it's a class feature, and since it requires channeling, which was given up, they wouldn't stack.
|
Just thought I'd pop in and share the quote from the PRD Cheapy is referencing with the ruling:
"A character can take more than one archetype and garner additional alternate class features, but none of the alternate class features can replace or alter the same class feature from the core class as another alternate class feature. For example, a paladin could not be both a hospitaler and an undead scourge since they both modify the smite evil class feature and both replace the aura of justice class feature."
So no archetypes that both affect the same class feature, even if they wouldn't necessarily conflict with the other archetype.
Cheapy has you well in hand here though.