Some disagreement at my table I would like a ruling from the faceless masses.
Can you legally make a Wild Stalker/Shapeshifter Ranger?
I was under the impression that this was not allowed, although the synergy would be fantastic.
They both replace the Ranger's first Combat Style feat, so they're not compatible.
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 base class as another alternate class feature.
Since Shapeshifter alters the second level combat feat and Wildstalker replaces the second level combat feat, technically, no, they do not stack.
That being said, I've observed it as a common house rule for the altered class feature to be ignored since it is replaced anyway. So, make sure to ask your GM but the default answer is, no, they don't stack, b/c of the bolded section above.
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 base class as another alternate class feature.Since Shapeshifter alters the second level combat feat and Wildstalker replaces the second level combat feat, technically, no, they do not stack.
This is what I thought. Thanks.
No... one requires you to select a certain style, but does not replace the feat. The other does replace the feat.
I should have said "one replaces and one alters", but in either case, they're not legal together.
Personally, it's a combination I would allow by house rule.
Out of curiosity... does requiring a certain style actually alter the feats? A normal non-shapeshifter ranger could have selected Natural Weapon style, and shapeshifter doesn't change the feat selection or replace it or delay it or anything. It just affects the -style- selected.
It seems like the quingong monk, which says that it replaces certain options, but if you have an archetype that uses that option you just can't take it there, but they don't conflict.
If a GM is a real stickler for the rules, then they will call the need to choose a particular style an alteration and not allow it. I've heard people say the same thing about the Quingong Monk.
Personally, I see no problem w/ deciding such things on a case-by-case basis and allowing it as a house rule, but you should never assume your GM will do the same.