Archetype question for hybrids


Class Discussion


At the top of the new class entries I note there's a section that lists what class(es) they're an alternate of (such as brawler being fighter/monk). I assume this is to prevent multiclassing into either of those parts, but can hybrid classes take archetypes of their base classes, provided they have the available class features to be replaced?

an already existing example of this would be a ninja (an alternate class for the rogue) being able to take the scout archetype.

if they are, this makes archetype creation for the dev team easier (instead of making two similar archetypes for the rogue and the slayer, you could simply make one that uses), and would allow the newer hybrids to be both forwards- and backwards-compatible, offering more support for them without needing entirely new books specifically for the hybrid classes.


Also, if they ARE able to take their base class archetypes, what archetypes would the new classes be able to take of the existing ones (i ask mostly because i wont have access to my books for about three days to check all of the archetypes and re-read the playtest document to see which are compatible)?

Liberty's Edge

I also would like to know this, and have been meaning to ask.


this thread was made before this one, has much the same line of questioning, and even has a small list of some archetypes the new hybrids would qualify for, so i suppose people should move there?

Designer, RPG Superstar Judge

For now, let's go with "you can't use an archetype of a class with a hybrid that uses that class." In most cases, you won't be able to swap out the pieces anyway, and even if you did, it could have unexpected consequences.


might i ask why this is ruled the opposite of the existing alternate classes, beyond "unexpected consequences"?

and i do note that these hybrids are still in their infancy, and likely to have their abilities changed (thus opening or closing archetype availability, even theoretically).

Designer, RPG Superstar Judge

Because a magus is a hybrid of a wizard and fighter, and a magus can't take fighter or archetypes. As we find the proper balance in these new classes between "just levels of X and levels of Y" and "something unique that blends the abilities of two classes," we're going to want to end up in a magus-like situation where it's more of the latter than the former, which means no using archetypes of the base class, as that would just confuse the issue for playtesting purposes.


so are we going to be getting an update/errata for the magus later, disallowing it from multiclassing into fighter or wizard as well (due to being a hybrid, with all the boons and banes that come with the territory)? if not, what makes it so special as a hybrid?

EDIT: this might be coming off as more confrontational than I'm trying, I'm simply curious and trying to get everything straight--it would be odd for there to be arbitrary exceptions to rules or existing precedents.

Designer, RPG Superstar Judge

We're not entirely convinced the multiclassing restriction is going to stay in the final version of the class, but for the purpose of this playtest we want to proceed with it in place.

Liberty's Edge

AndIMustMask wrote:

so are we going to be getting an update/errata for the magus later, disallowing it from multiclassing into fighter or wizard as well (due to being a hybrid, with all the boons and banes that come with the territory)? if not, what makes it so special as a hybrid?

EDIT: this might be coming off as more confrontational than I'm trying, I'm simply curious and trying to get everything straight--it would be odd for there to be arbitrary exceptions to rules or existing precedents.

I was wondering that too. Is it stated anywhere if you can multi-class between two hybrids that share a "parent" class?


@greywulfe: in the ninja/samurai/antipaladin sections for "alternate classes" says you cant, because you basically are the base class (like a ninja cant take rogue levels since they're pretty much a very in-depth archetype for the rogue). since the hybrids are listed as alternate classes of their base parts, those limitations would apply unless the terminology used were changed to 'hybrid' or something to differentiate them from the existing alternates, or if they're marked as exceptions to that rule.

@SKR: gotcha, i understand that things as they are need to be taken slowly since they're still liable to be changed or updated, like the arcanist revision going on. I just thought this was worht pointing out/considering.

Contributor

Sean K Reynolds wrote:
We're not entirely convinced the multiclassing restriction is going to stay in the final version of the class, but for the purpose of this playtest we want to proceed with it in place.

*uses best zombie voice*

Kill it .... kill it ....

*goes back to writing more swashbuckler builds*

Contributor

graywulfe wrote:
AndIMustMask wrote:

so are we going to be getting an update/errata for the magus later, disallowing it from multiclassing into fighter or wizard as well (due to being a hybrid, with all the boons and banes that come with the territory)? if not, what makes it so special as a hybrid?

EDIT: this might be coming off as more confrontational than I'm trying, I'm simply curious and trying to get everything straight--it would be odd for there to be arbitrary exceptions to rules or existing precedents.

I was wondering that too. Is it stated anywhere if you can multi-class between two hybrids that share a "parent" class?

That is an awesome question if the restriction stays in place. This would affect a surprising number of classes, considering three of them use Rogue, two of them use Sorcerer, and two of them use Fighter.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Advanced Class Guide Playtest / Class Discussion / Archetype question for hybrids All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Class Discussion