| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do not see anything in the PFS FAQ answering the question. There is an older post (circa 2011) that asked this question in a general sense, and that is marked 'Answered in FAQ' but as far as I can tell it actually wasn't answered.
Therefore, it might be nice to FAQ the question again (unless someone sees the answer elsewhere).
I presume you could if the alternate poseessed ALL of the class features that are being replaced.
|
The links you cited are great, but don't answer my question. Neither one clarifies if the Alternate Classes can take Core Class Archetypes. It does lend some support to the idea that Archetypes are allowed, but the wording is vague.
This is a question I've been looking into for a while and I've found no consensus or official answer on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What the links say is that they are basically just archetypes.
Your question then becomes: Can you stack multiple archetypes that don't touch the same things?
And the answer is "yes, you can".
|
|
What the links say is that they are basically just archetypes.
Your question then becomes: Can you stack multiple archetypes that don't touch the same things?
And the answer is "yes, you can".
I just feel like this wouldn't be enough to necessarily convince a Pathfinder Society GM, which would lead to disagreements over whether the character is legal.
Then don't do it :)
|
Having just written an alternate class for (potential) publication, I can say that they are very different from a simple archetype.
The point of writing the class as an alternate, is that it couldn't be represented easily or effectively by an archetype.
Both change features of the base class, but the archetypes do so with straight swaps (X3 at level 3 is replaced by Y3 at level 3), with the intent that these swaps be roughly equivalent in power and utility.
In an alternate class, not only are the base class' features changed, but they are done so in an assymetrical way, that doesn't easily lend itself to further swaps.
For example, you have base class X, alternate class Y, and archetype Z.
Ability X3 is dropped from base class level 3, but compensated for with Y2 at level 2 and Y4 at level 4. Both those abilities may be minor, adding up to the overall effectiveness of original ability X3, but are they equally weighted? It may be that (Y2+Y4)>X3, in compensation for delaying part of the benefit for a level.
If archetype Z offers ability Z3 in exchange for base class ability X3, how does that mesh with the alternate class Y? Having it replace only Y2 or Y4 means that the PC has made a net gain, it would have to replace both Y2 and Y4, to have the same equivalent sacrifice as replacing X3.
|
|
However, advanced classes are just highly specialized archetypes (see Cheapy's links) so if they have left the abilities that another archetype alters untouched, there's no reason you can't take them. Now, if they've altered the base ability in some way, (like if Sneak attack were to be gained at even levels instead of odd levels for example) than that would count as an altered ability and prevent taking it.
It comes down to "Are the abilities being replaced by the archetype exactly the same in the advanced class as in the base class?" If the answer is yes, than you can take the archetype. A Ninja is still a Rogue after all (that's why you can't be a Ninja/Rogue).
