More than one Archetype - Legal for PFS?


Pathfinder Society

Liberty's Edge 1/5

It may be my poor reading of the rules. But a player at a PFS game last night told me that you could apply more than one archetype to your class. (In this case Ranger Archetypes of Skirmisher and Falconer) provided they don't replace the same class abilities?

I checked it out, and it seemed to back up his thoughts on the matter. Saying that you could have more than one Archetype provided you met the requirements.

But - is this legal for PFS?

-Josh

4/5

The last I checked, yes, it is legal.

Dark Archive 4/5

Certainly, so long as the two archetypes don't replace the same thing. They must not even replace things that will never be reached in the course of the PFS campaign, ie., level 20 capstones.

Shadow Lodge 5/5

or Alter ... which is a big thing in it as well

Sovereign Court 4/5

Ranger with Freebooter, Shapeshifter, and Skirmisher archetypes!

I made one!

Grand Lodge 5/5

These multi-archetype builds can be iffy though and require a lot of time for the GM to process at the table.

If you do build one, be sure to have all the resources on hand and be able to explain the PC to the GM's satisfaction. You might need to play a backup PC if the GM feels the build is not valid.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Don Walker wrote:

These multi-archetype builds can be iffy though and require a lot of time for the GM to process at the table.

If you do build one, be sure to have all the resources on hand and be able to explain the PC to the GM's satisfaction. You might need to play a backup PC if the GM feels the build is not valid.

Most archetype builds, even multi-archetype builds, don't require much time from the GM.

X replaces Y

And a GM never has the right, at a public game, to kick a legal PC from the table as being not understood by the GM. Other reasons, don't be a jerk, sure. But because the GM doesn't understand a PC?

Not kosher.

And it is nowhere near the time to revisit the "discussion" generated by someone adding a postscript to their game invite on a public forum of "Summoners need not apply."

But there are plenty of "common" multi-archetype builds, like the Bladebound Kensai Magus build.

Grand Lodge 5/5

kinevon wrote:
Don Walker wrote:

These multi-archetype builds can be iffy though and require a lot of time for the GM to process at the table.

If you do build one, be sure to have all the resources on hand and be able to explain the PC to the GM's satisfaction. You might need to play a backup PC if the GM feels the build is not valid.

Most archetype builds, even multi-archetype builds, don't require much time from the GM.

X replaces Y

And a GM never has the right, at a public game, to kick a legal PC from the table as being not understood by the GM. Other reasons, don't be a jerk, sure. But because the GM doesn't understand a PC?

Not kosher.

And it is nowhere near the time to revisit the "discussion" generated by someone adding a postscript to their game invite on a public forum of "Summoners need not apply."

But there are plenty of "common" multi-archetype builds, like the Bladebound Kensai Magus build.

Not saying I 100% agree with you Kinevon, but I did not say here that a GM had the right to ban a build they did not understand. That is a discussion best left to another thread. Let's not have it bleed into this one. Please.

My exact words were:

You might need to play a backup PC if the GM feels the build is not valid.

Dark Archive RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

@Don "feels" is a a bad choice of words - I may ask a player to provide proof that their character is legal if I have a suspicion (such as pointing to the section under Archetypes that says you can stack them - it is there btw) but unless I can find a specific instance for why the character is NOT legal for play, then I have no right as a GM to say that character can't be played

Grand Lodge 5/5

Please stop implying that I said GMs have the right to ban a character they don't fully understand. There is another thread for that discussion where I am very clear on my opinions there.

For this thread all I am saying is that if the GM [pick any phrase from the following list] the build is not valid then the GM is obligated not to allow it at their table.

feels
believes
thinks
understands
is of the opinion
sees no proof

Liberty's Edge 1/5

So - Yes. That you all for your information. It was very helpful to me and the player.

Grand Lodge

I would still consider myself new to PFS, I recently hit lvl 3(monk). I just acquired the book: Ultimate Combat; in which there are a number of feats and archetypes that I had no knowledge of previously (and I would like to take advantage of).

Is it possible to add a new archetype to a character that is already built?

Currently I understand that once your character reaches level 2, it cannot be altered. However, based upon my recent discovery of archetypes, and the idea that multiple archetypes are legal. Is there any way I can apply one of these "newly discovered" archetypes to my current character? -for instance: the Master of Many Styles Archetype.

3/5 RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

For the Master of Many Styles, afraid not. You can't apply an archetype retroactively. But if the archetype doesn't alter anything until level 4 (such as the Qinggong archetype from Ultimate Magic, which I highly recommend), then you can still apply it.

4/5 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Tampere

You can only add an archetype to an existing character if the archetype replaces class features you have not yet received due to not being at the appropriate level yet to receive that feature. The Master of Many Styles archetype replaces features gained at level 1, such as flurry of blows, so it cannot be taken after level 1.

Shadow Lodge 5/5

I'll disallow any character that I believe to not be legal, even if the play emphatically believes it to be legal. Hasn't ever happened, but if a player wants to bring some crazy build to my table and the sources they provide with that character don't adequately make me believe its legal, them we'll have to come up with sort of compromise for the current session. Just to give a shout out to the other thread, "Not at MY table!" and bacon. :-)

Dark Archive 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Agent, Australia—QLD—Brisbane

I've seen thread necromancy before, but this is the first time I've seen thread-derailment necromancy..

5/5

YogoZuno wrote:
I've seen thread necromancy before, but this is the first time I've seen thread-derailment necromancy..

Welcome to the PFS boards.

Liberty's Edge 4/5

The D20 site has charts that compare what is replaced. There are some arch types that work together but it is a really small list. Also think I remember a thread awhile back inwhich people compared.

Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / More than one Archetype - Legal for PFS? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.