Two classes which grant trapfinding, do odd levels stack?

[Arkhios]

First of all, with a quick search I failed to locate another post about this, so my apologizes if I'm echo-posting here.

So, I have a Trapper Ranger 6/Zen Archer Monk 2, and about to advance to ninth level (class to be determined as of yet).

I considered retraining second level of monk to rogue, and take second level of rogue as my ninth level, so that I would get Trap Spotter talent, and evasion, among with sneak attack, trapfinding AND a insane load of skill points, and I came up with a question:

If I retrained the remaining monk level to ranger instead of rogue at some point, the character would have total levels of Ranger 7/rogue 5+ at level 12 and beyond. Trapper archetype gives Trapfinding which is exactly the same as Rogue's Trapfinding; as in wording it's an exact twin.

So, what would be the total bonus from Trapfinding at level 12?

a) raw sum-up: 7 (+3.5) and 5 (+2.5), hence 7+5=12 -> +6?

OR

b) bonus rounded down first and then summed: 7 (+3) and 5 (+2), hence 6+4=10 -> +5?

[ErrantPursuit]

There is no language saying the levels from these classes stack for the assessment of bonus. By principle we round down on fractions. You are getting the bonus from two different sources. Sadly, this means:

Arkhios wrote:

b) bonus rounded down first and then summed: 7 (+3) and 5 (+2), hence 6+4=10 -> +5?

Is the correct interpretation.

[dark78660]

Trapfinding
A trapper adds 1/2 her ranger level

Trapfinding
A rogue adds 1/2 her level

For the Rogue it dosn't state rogue levels specifically, but since unless other wise stated (such as it saying character levels) all classes and there abilitys are self referential only. Since sadly it dose not say they stack for the purposes of determining the bonuses you get.
So as you already already guessed the answer is B
1/2 Ranger lvl rounded down + 1/2 Rogue lvl Rounded down = total bonus.

Tho I would allow for a player to treat the Trapper/Rogue levels as stacking at my table since it not game breaking to get an extra point by using the formula because the situation of odd levels
(Ranger lvl + Rogue lvl)/ 2 = Bonus

[MrSin]

Arkhios wrote:

b) bonus rounded down first and then summed: 7 (+3) and 5 (+2), hence 6+4=10 -> +5?

As far as I can tell this is the correct answer. The wording for trapper and archeologist bard don't say they stack with levels in other classes, though seeker does(all of them give a version of trapfinding). There's really no reason not to give you the full bonus as per answer #A though.

Btw, careful on the multiclassing. Trapfinding/spotter are only really good if your DM loves traps, and 2 hits to BAB suck(if your not using fractional BAB anyway).

[blahpers]

Trapper, at least, doesn't lose BAB. I'm considering dipping a level with my gunslinger just to disarm magical traps. (The favored bonus mitigates some of the sting of losing a gunslinger level.)

[Arkhios]

That's what I thought, yet was not sure. Damn those round-downs to the abyss! ;(

The pro's for going ranger 7/rogue5 would be that, (also, I forgot to mention my character is in fact a Guide/Trapper) I'd get 3rd time per day to Ranger's focus at 7th level, and rogue's sneak attack would stand at an odd level increment, not half-way to next. Might as well call it "my little OCD" here :P

Then again, going even levels with both classes wouldn't be that bad either, considering this character is "The Pathfinder Extraordinaire" of our local Pathfinder Society. A true archaeologist (apart from the bard archetype, ofcourse!) if I may say. Therefore getting the most out of trapfinding is for the best. And I might even go for the 8th level of ranger as well, to be honest. There's not much, but it's something nevertheless: Swift tracker and 2nd favored terrain.

And since the character is an archer, getting sneak attacks often is not that certain to happen. Every now and then, especially on surprise rounds, that little 2d6 extra is great, but I guess it's not worth the hassle with the odd rogue levels.

EDIT: Aaaand here I misread things with my morning dizzyness. Yes, I would veer towards answer b) myself as well, but since it is PFS -character I'd like to know for sure. And since there's apparently no official source for the ruling, it might be best not to dabble with odd levels.

Also, I'm quite aware that the BAB isn't all that good since the monk level there (I'm planning of getting rid of it as soon as possible!)
But, frankly I'm reluctant to think of this character as the "Optimus Maximus" in any regard, instead going for what has the most flavor and fun in it :)

[Kazaan]

While it does work as the general concensus is indicating, Ranger 7 + Rogue 5 = 5 levels towards Trapfinder, this is a prime place to employ a similar houserule as to what some do with Bab, to keep the fraction in mind even though you truncate it for practical purposes. In other words, this would fit under the same houserule that says that mid-bab classes like Rogue or Cleric get 0.75 BAB per level rather than 0 bab at lvl 1 followed by 1 bab per level for the next 3 levels. So a Rogue 1/Cleric 1 nets you 1.5 BAB which is taken as +1 when you factor it into your attack bonus or in determining Power Attack or Combat Expertise effects and the Ranger/Rogue given above would have a total of 6 levels towards Trapfinding. Honestly, this should be the standard method used officially and hopefully would be changed in Pathfinder 2.

[Arkhios]

While it would be great if they put fractionals as default rule, it would make things a lot more complicated, yet more balanced - on that I agree.

Calculating bonuses is far more simple and easy as of what they are now, even though that adds major lift on breaking things from the beginning.

Fractional advancement could be implemented as a variant rule though, just like wounds/vigor system. For experimental use only. As much as I'd like to see them in official use as well; I have so many character ideas that involve multiclassing just for the sake of complete picture of the character, not for the sake of numbers (which turn against you if you multiclass too much)

[Seraphimpunk]

i did a fractional bab house rule for one campaign. i forgot about it more often than the players did. you forget it after a while.

[MrSin]

Arkhios wrote:

While it would be great if they put fractionals as default rule, it would make things a lot more complicated, yet more balanced - on that I agree.

Fractions are complicated?

Seraphimpunk wrote:

i did a fractional bab house rule for one campaign. i forgot about it more often than the players did. you forget it after a while.

I've been using it since I started. Hard for me to forget dontcha' know. Helps that in 3.0 and 3.5 you were far more likely to dip than pathfinder. Pathfinder really wants you to stick with one class and punishes you for multiclassing more often than not.

[Arkhios]

MrSin wrote:

Arkhios wrote:

While it would be great if they put fractionals as default rule, it would make things a lot more complicated, yet more balanced - on that I agree.

Fractions are complicated?

Well, yes and no. As you said yourself, if you've been using it from the beginning, ofcourse it comes easy for you. Yet not everyone is a mathematical genious, and not everyone understand the logic behind it. You just can't assume every one of us is at same level with each other with this. Or anything, really.

No, I don't have any problems with fractionals. I do use them whenever GM allows it, but the "complications" come when you have more than 3 or so classes and keeping track of them is far more bigger job than it is with the default system.

Now if you'd excuse us, this thread was not about fractionals vs. default saves&BAB, but about class level dependant sub-features and whether they stack with each other in certain situations or not. And if they stack, how do they stack.

[Ylandra]

What about the Seeker archetype for Oracle? It states:

Tinkering: ...In addition, at 1st level, a seeker adds half his oracle level on Perception checks made to locate traps and on all Disable Device skill checks (minimum +1). A seeker can use Disable Device to disarm magical traps. If the seeker also possesses levels in rogue or another class that provides the trapfinding ability, those levels stack with his oracle levels for determining his overall bonus on these skill checks.

Just to understand the mechanics, take a Rougue5/Ranger(Trapper)5/Oracle(Seeker)5 what bonus would I get for spotting traps and disable device as each class has half the classlevel as a bonus and only the oracle classlevel has a mechanisms of stacking classlevels, not bonuses?

[Bacon666]

Talk to your gm... I would allow it to stack even thoug it's not RAW...

[Ylandra]

Talking to GM is kind of difficult when playing PFS (different GMs each handling it differently).

My point being that we have two sets of RAW which actually contradict. Or don_'t they? At least they show a degree of inconsistency. Maybe Piazo could correct this in one errata or the other, either eliminating the stacking from the Seeker entry in PFSFG or state somewhere that the mechanics described in PFSFG superseeds the mechanics in other sources (Core Book, where ever all those Ranger Archetypes originate from, etc).

[blahpers]

In the seeker oracle's case, RAW would allow them to stack. The rogue and ranger levels stack with the oracle levels, and you would trapfind as a 15th-level seeker oracle (+7 to Perception checks made to find traps and +7 to Disable Device checks).

The seeker oracle text specifies how its specific ability interacts with the more general rogue and trapper abilities, so "specific trumps general" comes into play. Not allowing them to stack would be a clear RAW violation.