|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Hello fellow forum-goers!
How cheesy would you say it would be if someone were to pop up at the table with a Bloodrager/Dragon Disciple who had a bloodline such as Arcane, Aberrant, or Abyssal? Asking for both a character I am making that might make sense for the backstory, and for a guy who is planning on getting it for the STR bonuses.
I don't see where the cheese is.
|
Hello fellow forum-goers!
How cheesy would you say it would be if someone were to pop up at the table with a Bloodrager/Dragon Disciple who had a bloodline such as Arcane, Aberrant, or Abyssal? Asking for both a character I am making that might make sense for the backstory, and for a guy who is planning on getting it for the STR bonuses.
The requirement in DD is for Sorcerer. Bloodrager is not Sorcerer; the rule does not apply.
That said, once the book comes out, that may change, and you could get screwed.
No, well, yes, for PFS, a Dragon Disciple who is also a sorcerer must have the draconic bloodline.
Outside of society play, I guess it's DM fiat, but
If the character has sorcerer levels, he must have the draconic bloodline. If the character gains levels of sorcerer after taking this class, he must take the draconic bloodline.
So I guess in PFS you must take the draconic bloodline since who's to stop me from allowing the Celestial Sorcerer from being a DD in my own game?
who's to stop me from allowing the Celestial Sorcerer from being a DD in my own game?
No one! Probably won't end the world either. Could you imagine if sorcerers could have two bloodlines?
|
|
The requirement in DD is for Sorcerer. Bloodrager is not Sorcerer; the rule does not apply.
That said, once the book comes out, that may change, and you could get screwed.
Yeah, I get that. But I will probably have died/lost the character/gotten bored with the character/reached retirement by August. I'm just curious if anyone thinks that it would be a 'cheesy exploit' if I were to do this.
who's to stop me from allowing the Celestial Sorcerer from being a DD in my own game?No one! Probably won't end the world either. Could you imagine if sorcerers could have two bloodlines?
Now don't be hasty! And, wow, that's a lot of blood; maybe those classes/archetypes have like, twice as much blood as a normal person of their races?
But to the OP, no, it wouldn't be cheesy. It least, it wouldn't be worse than a l5 barbarian with an SLA going the DD route. You don't continue to progress as a blood rager (who wouldn't have that many spells anyway), and you'd pick up the draconic bloodline, so I guess go for it.
Be sorry you lose a BAB when entering that PrC.
Now don't be hasty! And, wow, that's a lot of blood; maybe those classes/archetypes have like, twice as much blood as a normal person of their races?
I be more worried about what happened in your family to give you abyssal, draconic, and celestial bloodlines... Especially since your an Ifrit Sorcerer.
Now don't be hasty! And, wow, that's a lot of blood; maybe those classes/archetypes have like, twice as much blood as a normal person of their races?I be more worried about what happened in your family to give you abyssal, draconic, and celestial bloodlines... Especially since your an Ifrit Sorcerer.
I'm dealing with the whole multiple bloodlines bizarreness by using that as the explanation for my Pitborn(devil)/Abyssal(demonic)speaking(oracle curse)/Dragon Disciple only having a 5 intelligence. So many bloodlines have taken a toll on his mind.
I would have given him the abyssal eldritch heritage feats but it would have made such a sub-optimal build even worse. Level 6 front-liner with a BAB of 3?!
|
So this is a topic of great interest to me as well. Here are my findings/thoughts:
1). I have not been able to find any wording that states that the ACG classes count as their alternate classes for any purpose whatsoever except where specifically noted via class features. Examples:
Brawler, Swashbuckler, and Warpriest all have Fighter as one of their alternate classes. If they counted as their alt classes for all purposes/requirements, then they should all qualify for Weapon Specialization. If this is the default, then they should not need class features that specifically say that they qualify for these feats.
Martial Training (Ex): At 1st level, a brawler counts her
total brawler level as fighter levels and monk levels for the purpose of qualifying for feats. She counts as a fighter and monk for feats and magic items that have different effects based on whether the character has levels in those classes (such as Stunning Fist and a monk’s robe).
Bonus Feats: At 4th level and at every four levels
thereafter, a swashbuckler gains a bonus feat in addition to those gained from normal advancement (meaning that the swashbuckler gains a feat at every level). These bonus feats must be selected from those listed as combat feats.Upon reaching 4th level and every four levels thereafter, a swashbuckler can choose to learn a new bonus feat in place of a bonus feat she has already learned. In effect, the swashbuckler loses the bonus feat in exchange for the new one. The old feat cannot be one that was used as a prerequisite for another feat, prestige class, or other ability. A swashbuckler can only change one feat at any given level and must choose whether or not to swap the feat at the time she gains a new bonus feat for the level.
Swashbuckler levels are considered fighter levels for the purpose of meeting combat feat prerequisites.
Now, I have not scoured Warpriest as closely as Brawler and Swashbuckler, but I have thus far been unable to locate any such class feature for Warpriest. Unless I have missed it, I would say that RAW, Warpriest's cannot take feats that require fighter levels.
If this is true, how can Bloodrager count as Sorcerer for requirements of a prestige class?
2). The multiclass restriction specifically calls out multiclassing with the ACG class's alternate classes. It doesn't mention anything specific beyond that.
3). There may be a dev post or other official clarification I am unaware of. I tried to stay on top of all that, but there was a lot of material to be aware of.
So unless someone has a post or insight on wording I have missed, I am inclined to say that it is RAW legal for the time being. I imagine it is something that will be addressed at some point, however.
|
|
I wouldn't do it. Its raw legal but very, very much against intent. PFS rules tend to come down heavily in favor of intent with regards to restrictions.
It's funny, because the general consensus seems to be going with intent for restrictions, but "as written" for allowances. Which always seems really bizare to me. :P
|
|
It is not RAW legal. If the Bloodrager acts like a sorcerer in allowing you to qualify for things, then it acts like a sorcerer in restricted requirements as well. For requirent, a bloodrager, is for all intents and purposes a sorcerer. Therefore your bloodline choice must be draconic.
That's not RAW. That might be a reasonable interpretation, but it is not RAW. The only blanket reference to an ACG class counting as the classes it is based on is in reference to multiclassing. That is why the Brawler and Swashbuckler have specific language saying that they count as a Fighter for bonus feat purposes in their individual class feature entries.
The final book should make it less ambiguous, but I suspect that this will need to be solved with errata to properly future-proof the DD class itself.
|
I wouldn't do it. Its raw legal but very, very much against intent. PFS rules tend to come down heavily in favor of intent with regards to restrictions.It's funny, because the general consensus seems to be going with intent for restrictions, but "as written" for allowances. Which always seems really bizare to me. :P
Besides nuking it from orbit its the only way to make sure that something in the containment field doesn't slip through the cracks.
|
This sounds like something that we won't know if it's legal until the book comes out. :/As written, right now, it is legal. And as gets pointed out a few dozen times a day, PFS is about RAW.
In your opinion, yes, you are correct. However there is at least one person in this thread already who has stated they feel otherwise.
The answer, OP, is unfortunately that until the book comes out, you should expect table variation. The GM may allow you to use something else, or they may tell you its not legal for play and not allow you to play it, even if its just at their table.
|
|
This sounds like something that we won't know if it's legal until the book comes out. :/As written, right now, it is legal. And as gets pointed out a few dozen times a day, PFS is about RAW.In your opinion, yes, you are correct. However there is at least one person in this thread already who has stated they feel otherwise.
The answer, OP, is unfortunately that until the book comes out, you should expect table variation. The GM may allow you to use something else, or they may tell you its not legal for play and not allow you to play it, even if its just at their table.
Stating that "the word sorcerer means 'sorcerer'" is not a matter of opinion. As written, the rule is very straightforward. If other people want to argue RAI, they are free to do so, but RAW in this case is distinctly unambiguous.
OP, should you find someone who refuses to honor RAW and tries to ban your perfectly legal character, I encourage you to complain to them, their coordinator, their VC, and so on, until they acknowledge that RAW, which so often screws people who are trying to be creative, is for once on the side of that same creativity, and will remain so until there is a clarification by campaign staff, errata on the original PrC, or note made in the ACG on how these new classes interact with established PrCs.
|
|
Let me put this another way: does Studied Strike meet PrC requirements for Sneak Attack? No, even though it's almost the same.
Does Bloodrager fall under the DD requirements? No, even though it's almost the same.
You can't call for literal interpretations of one without calling for a literal interpretation of the other. Nor is it reasonable to call for literal interpretations only when it limits the choices rather than expanding them. Either it's a RAW campaign or it isn't. (Hint: I'm told it is.)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I dont particularly care if you think its RAW or not. Im not trying to argue one way or the other. I know how I think it should work, but Im not confident that it currently does work that way right now.
I am merely trying to point out to the OP that the design may or may not be legal, and playing it now while it is vague could be a bad idea. Not only in the long run, but in the here and now. If he runs into someone like Andrew who wont allow it, he is going to have to complain to Andy's VC and possibly Mike Brock about it. The result from that will likely be Andy getting a wag of the finger, a clarification made, and the OP apparently being far more upset than the situation probably warranted, since he (at your advice) intentionally played something that was vague.
Edit: Rephrased for clarity.
|
I like what Seth said. I dont know all this new stuff. you may be right, but from what I can tell I dont think so. Should I stop the game for 30 minutes and look it up or should we just avoid these confusing issues until they are resolved. Dont mean avoid talking about them, but playing them. I know one guy who loved finding corner cases and playing them. reason can only guess at, but was quit annoying having to research his characters.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Relooked over the playtest document. You are correct there are only a few specific instances where the advanced class acts as the two for prereqs.
But personally I find it reprehensible to argue RAW to exploit a likely loophole in what is an essentially generic playtest document that has not been fully developed yet.
If folks are going to set the precedent that they are going to fully exploit an unfinished product like this, it may happen that more strict restrictions on how playtest stuff can be used at best and maybe a full hiatus if playtest stuff between play test and release at worst.
I urge you, when dealing with the unfinished olaytest stuff, please do not try to find loopholes to exploit just because its technically RAW.
These loopholes are likely to get closed upon publication, at the very least in an FAQ. And while you will be required to fix your character for the published rules (in this case changing bloodline to draconic) you likely will be required to pay for any ancillary retrains that become obsolete because of tge required shift.
Let's not exploit olaytest stuff please!
|
|
If for no other reason then to avoid the looks that people might give you, I would advise against it. Some will accept it as legal, and in my opinion it currently is, but others will see it as a loophole and may focus on your character more as a result.
I wouldn't call it cheesy, as I don't see a lot of gain to be gotten from it truthfully, and its no where near the level of a certain gunslinger archetype loophole, but I still would advise against it, it will leave a lot of sour tastes in peoples mouths, as has been expressed in this very thread.
Personally, however I would not build any Bloodrager/Dragon Disciples, because of the weirdness of bloodlines, and I really hope that they call the bloodrager's bloodline something entirely different, since I would be unsure as to if I should add the Bloodrager draconic bloodline, or the sorcerer one, obviously gaining the bloodrager draconic bloodline would have its advantages for a bloodrager/Dragon Disciple, but I just wouldn't want to do it personally because its so confusing. Heck I'm avoiding a good half of the playtest classes because I want to see the finished book before I make a mistake I cannot rebuild out of easily.
I don't understand what it would get you. The second sentence of Blood of Dragons means whatever bloodline you'd bring in would stop advancing and then you'd start getting draconic bloodline powers at level 1, right? So, you'd get an additional Arcana and get lower level bloodline powers at the expense of higher level ones?
|
|
I don't understand what it would get you. The second sentence of Blood of Dragons means whatever bloodline you'd bring in would stop advancing and then you'd start getting draconic bloodline powers at level 1, right? So, you'd get an additional Arcana and get lower level bloodline powers at the expense of higher level ones?
More or less. I cant imagine that trade off being particularly helpful in the long run. it may not hurt either, but I just cant imagine how it would help. *shrug*
|
|
I don't understand what it would get you. The second sentence of Blood of Dragons means whatever bloodline you'd bring in would stop advancing and then you'd start getting draconic bloodline powers at level 1, right? So, you'd get an additional Arcana and get lower level bloodline powers at the expense of higher level ones?
Yes. That is what would happen according to RAW right now, but the Dragon Disciple needs some serious errata now that there is the unforeseen case of non-sorcerers with bloodlines running around.
I think that they should errata the PrC to make anyone with the draconic bloodline work the same, regardless of the class that it comes from. It is pretty obviously what is intended and while it would make the Bloodrager/DD not quite so great the combination would be still good enough and just as flavorful and fun. I'd still play one.
|
|
I don't understand what it would get you. The second sentence of Blood of Dragons means whatever bloodline you'd bring in would stop advancing and then you'd start getting draconic bloodline powers at level 1, right? So, you'd get an additional Arcana and get lower level bloodline powers at the expense of higher level ones?Yes. That is what would happen according to RAW right now, but the Dragon Disciple needs some serious errata now that there is the unforeseen case of non-sorcerers with bloodlines running around.
I think that they should errata the PrC to make anyone with the draconic bloodline work the same, regardless of the class that it comes from. It is pretty obviously what is intended and while it would make the Bloodrager/DD not quite so great the combination would be still good enough and just as flavorful and fun. I'd still play one.
The biggest problem that I see there is that the Sorcerer and the bloodrager versions of bloodlines are so different, they even gain abilities at different levels, but they are both called bloodlines, and furthermore they are both referred to as the same bloodline.
Imagine for a moment that a Draconic bloodlined Bloodrager did go into Dragon Disciple, does he continue progression in his bloodrager draconic bloodline, or does he start progressing in the sorcerer bloodline, or for some reason does he gain the sorcerer bloodline and begin progressing in both?
|
|
As currently written he gains the sorcerer draconic bloodline powers and advances just those. His bloodrager bloodline does not advance.
That is my understanding as well. Not exactly an optimized choice in most instances, but a legal one currently, which is the point of the topic. It could also be fun for some concepts.
|
|
As currently written he gains the sorcerer draconic bloodline powers and advances just those. His bloodrager bloodline does not advance.That is my understanding as well. Not exactly an optimized choice in most instances, but a legal one currently, which is the point of the topic. It could also be fun for some concepts.
Wouldn't be much fun for a Draconic Bloodrager, due to overlap of abilities.
The level 5 Draconic Bloodrager would have access to the following abilitites:
Draconic Resistance (Ex): At 4th level, you gain resist 5 against your energy type and a +1 natural armor bonus. At 8th level, your energy resistance increases to 10 and natural armor bonus increases to +2. At 16th level, your natural armor bonus increases to +4.
And then when entering into Dragon Disciple, he gains the first level bloodline ability, which is fairly similar to the bloodrager first level bloodline ability, but deals less damage.
Actually, this causes a question to arise in my mind, if a Draconic Bloodrager5/Dragon Disciple 2 enters bloodrage and activates their claws from the sorcerer bloodline, (thus gaining a bite attack in addition to the claws.) does he decrease his claw damage to 1d4 as expressed in the sorcerer bloodline, or use the 1d6 claws he always has while raging or would he suddenly have 4 claws, not losing his bloodrager bloodline claws, but gaining both.
the Dragon Disciple needs some serious errata
I know right? It doesn't allow you to enter with another bloodline even though you can have multiple bloodlines. What does the world have against me being part dragon and part celestial anyways.
now that there is the unforeseen case of non-sorcerers with bloodlines running around.
Oh... I get the feeling you think differently than me about it.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
G-Zeus, there is a sense in which the hybrid classes act as alternate classes for each parent class. So Bloodrager is to Sorcerer as Samurai is to Cavalier. In lieu of the Core rulebook being prescient enough to predict the Bloodrager alternate class, or even alternate classes in the first place, I'm going to extrapolate the rules as I understand them to apply to this new situation.
You say, "the class counts as Sorcerer." I'm inclined to agree.
If you sit at my table with a Bloodrager / Dragon Disciple, I'll expect that the bloodrager bloodline is Draconic. If not, I'll ask you whether you want to play a different character (perhaps one of the lovely 7th-level pre-gens we have available) or change the bloodline (permanently).
-- Larger Issue --
Whenever I make a ruling that is not deferential to a player's reading of the game, I am accused of all manner of things. Bullying. Arrogance. Just wanting to wreck somebody's fun. When I enforce explicit rule limitations, I'm told off for using legalisms or trying to "play 'gotcha'.".
In fact, I try to run a game that's responsible to all my players, and to the PFS community at large. If there's a gray area of the rules -- and the Advanced Class Guide is an enormous gray area, as all we have is the Beta-test versions of the classes, which we know are reduced in scope, and none of the "Chapter One" material that will address global issues like this -- I am inclined to rule conservatively. This addresses my responsibility to the other players at the table. (You say that "the reach [powers of the Abberant bloodline are] just too good," and I'm inclined to agree with you.) It also addresses my responsibility to the rest of the PFS community.
So, you'll allow an Abberant-bloodline Bloodrager / Dragon Disciple at your table. So will Patrick. I won't, and neither will Andrew. A player should understand, going into a convention, that the character is borderline, and that some GMs will not allow it.
If we're all lucky, a player with such a character will sit down and immediately explain his character, show us all the relevant paperwork, and ask for a decision. What's hard is when we're already in the second fight of the scenario, and the character starts to use something that the GM doesn't think is legal. (I once ran a table where one player was playing a monk with both the Maneuver Master and Master of Many Styles archetypes, and another was playing a fighter with two extra feats. We were already well into the game when I realized this.) That's a mess, and is miserable for everybody involved.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OP, should you find someone who refuses to honor RAW and tries to ban your perfectly legal character, I encourage you to complain to them, their coordinator, their VC, and so on, until they acknowledge that RAW, which so often screws people who are trying to be creative, is for once on the side of that same creativity, and will remain so until there is a clarification by campaign staff, errata on the original PrC, or note made in the ACG on how these new classes interact with established PrCs.
I agree with this up to a point. And that point is when you're using beta material like the ACG.
I was considering making an Arcanist who takes the School Understanding Exploit and makes use of the
I've decided to table that until August. Partly because I know that the published ACG could break whatever character I make, but mostly because bringing that character to a table puts a huge burden on the GM:
GM: What's everyone playing?
Me: I've got an Arcanist.
GM: Okay, that's one of the ACG classes, right? How does it work?
Me: Here's the Playtest document.
GM: (scans document) Okay. Anything else I should know?
Me: Yeah, I've got the School Understanding Exploit with <redacted>
GM: I thought that wasn't legal.
Me: I've got a boon.
GM: (stifles a sigh) Can I see the boon?
Me: Sure! Here you go.
GM: (Reads the boon. Re-reads the Arcanist class description. Scratches his head) I'm not sure about this.
Me: Well, it's all RAW legal as far as I can tell. It's your call, of course.
GM: Can't you just play a Gunslinger or a Slumber witch or something?
Sure, I'm within my rights to make whatever PFS-legal character I want. But I think it's kind of crossing the "don't be a jerk" line when every time you sit down with a new GM you blindside them with a potential rules debate.
|
|
Whenever I make a ruling that is not deferential to a player's reading of the game, I am accused of all manner of things. Bullying. Arrogance. Just wanting to wreck somebody's fun. When I enforce explicit rule limitations, I'm told off for using legalisms or trying to "play 'gotcha'.".
I think that the problem is that people are too unwilling to play a different character or if necessary walk from the table and find another when they disagree with the DM over something like the workings of a character.
If people in PFS became more willing to do this, then I think a lot more of these DM problems and necromancer v. paladin problems would go away for the most part. Not that I think you are wrong necessarily. Going with obvious RAI while waiting for final RAW to come out is completely reasonable.
|
|
G-Zeus, there is a sense in which the hybrid classes act as alternate classes for each parent class. So Bloodrager is to Sorcerer as Samurai is to Cavalier. In lieu of the Core rulebook being prescient enough to predict the Bloodrager alternate class, or even alternate classes in the first place, I'm going to extrapolate the rules as I understand them to apply to this new situation.
Before commenting further, I would like to echo my agreement that this is certainly a grey area at the moment. That said, I'd like to hear the steps you took to reach this conclusion if you would be so kind, Chris. I personally believed it is a reasonable conclusion to draw, up until I realized this particular point of contradiction:
If it is true that each alternate class acts as their parent classes, then why is Brawler and Swashbuckler eligible for fighter specific feats (such as Weapon Specialization) while the Warpriest is not?
If a Bloodrager counts as a Sorcerer, would you rule that wearing a robe of arcane heritage would increase his bloodline powers by 4 levels?
Just a few thoughts and conversation points.
|
|
OP, should you find someone who refuses to honor RAW and tries to ban your perfectly legal character, I encourage you to complain to them, their coordinator, their VC, and so on, until they acknowledge that RAW, which so often screws people who are trying to be creative, is for once on the side of that same creativity, and will remain so until there is a clarification by campaign staff, errata on the original PrC, or note made in the ACG on how these new classes interact with established PrCs.I agree with this up to a point. And that point is when you're using beta material like the ACG.
I was considering making an Arcanist who takes the School Understanding Exploit and makes use of the
** spoiler omitted **I've decided to table that until August. Partly because I know that the published ACG could break whatever character I make, but mostly because bringing that character to a table puts a huge burden on the GM:
GM: What's everyone playing?
Me: I've got an Arcanist.
GM: Okay, that's one of the ACG classes, right? How does it work?
Me: Here's the Playtest document.
GM: (scans document) Okay. Anything else I should know?
Me: Yeah, I've got the School Understanding Exploit with <redacted>
GM: I thought that wasn't legal.
Me: I've got a boon.
GM: (stifles a sigh) Can I see the boon?
Me: Sure! Here you go.
GM: (Reads the boon. Re-reads the Arcanist class description. Scratches his head) I'm not sure about this.
Me: Well, it's all RAW legal as far as I can tell. It's your call, of course.
GM: Can't you just play a Gunslinger or a Slumber witch or something?Sure, I'm within my rights to make whatever PFS-legal character I want. But I think it's kind of crossing the "don't be a jerk" line when every time you sit down with a new GM you blindside them with a potential rules debate.
had same idea, but came to same conclusion. We should wait before dealing with the border areas of these classes and see what happens in August
|
|
I think that the problem is that people are too unwilling to play a different character
If they have one.
or if necessary walk from the table and find another
If there is another table. Thats not usually the case. Also usually the DMs will be part of the same group who know each other, so if you walk from a table you've just become "that guy" to them.
Its also usually too late by the time you know there's a problem. The mission briefing has started, tables have been shuffled, people are seated at both tables, the minis are out on the table etc.
|
|
If they have one.
I think that the problem is that people are too unwilling to play a different character
You have an excellent point, but one of the If I were in that situation with only one character in tier I would recognize that there is a slightly elevated possibility that I might have to walk from the table in a disagreement since I am not going to waste my time playing a pregen.
or if necessary walk from the table and find anotherIf there is another table. Thats not usually the case. Also usually the DMs will be part of the same group who know each other, so if you walk from a table you've just become "that guy" to them.
I will admit that I play primarily online so there is very little opportunity cost to leaving the table. At a prescheduled event you might have to just accept that your alternatives will be losing the effort it took to come or wasting a scenario on a less than fun experience. That is the risk that you take attending any con or event.
Its also usually too late by the time you know there's a problem. The mission briefing has started, tables have been shuffled, people are seated at both tables, the minis are out on the table etc.
That is why it is important to go over additional resources, or at least those which have historically been contentious, at the beginning of the slot. Players should ideally also have at leas some idea of what they are signing up for based on the scenario blurb.
With the excessive number of things that are left up to table variation around here it is completely impossible for PFS to be a truly universal experience, so what it comes down to is to accept that it is not possible to play certain characters with certain DMs and be on the lookout for those conflict spots. It is possible that Bloodrager/DD will be one of those character concepts that you can't take everywhere until they errata either the Bloodrager or DD.
It would be cool if DD works for bloodrager only if bloodrager take draconic bloodline. But then I wonder how would Wings works. I hope it will fly faster because If there are a build for a high speed flying melee class, it will be DD bloodrager. But then you lose 3 BAB, which is a shame... DD would be far more awesome if they have full BAB...
|
|
It would be cool if DD works for bloodrager only if bloodrager take draconic bloodline. But then I wonder how would Wings works. I hope it will fly faster because If there are a build for a high speed flying melee class, it will be DD bloodrager. But then you lose 3 BAB, which is a shame... DD would be far more awesome if they have full BAB...
If DD was full Bab then it would be too powerful, I mean just compare it to Eldritch Knight.
Dragon Disciple vs Eldritch Knight
HD 1d12 HD 1d10
BAB 3/4 BAB Full
Spellcasting 3/4 Spellcasting Full -1
Saves Good Fort/Will Saves Good Fort only
Class abilities Many Class abilities few
If Dragon Disciple was full BAB then the only reasons to take Eldritch Knight would be early entry and better spellcasting.
|
|
It's not possible for a bloodrager / dragon disciple to have two bloodlines.
If the bloodrager takes levels in another class that grants a bloodline, the bloodlines must be the same type, even if that means that the bloodline of one of the classes must change. Subject to GM discretion, the bloodrager can change his former bloodline to make them conform.
I read that as either:
1. If you don't have the draconic bloodline as a bloodrager you simply cannot take levels in dragon disciple2. As soon as you take a level dragon disciple your bloodline adapts itself and you're now no longer an abbarant/abyssal/infernal/celestial/arcane bloodline carrier but a draconic bloodline carrier.
|
|
It's not possible for a bloodrager / dragon disciple to have two bloodlines.
If the bloodrager takes levels in another class that grants a bloodline, the bloodlines must be the same type, even if that means that the bloodline of one of the classes must change. Subject to GM discretion, the bloodrager can change his former bloodline to make them conform.
I read that as either:
1. If you don't have the draconic bloodline as a bloodrager you simply cannot take levels in dragon disciple
2. As soon as you take a level dragon disciple your bloodline adapts itself and you're now no longer an abbarant/abyssal/infernal/celestial/arcane bloodline carrier but a draconic bloodline carrier.
please note that this was a necromancy and originally posted back in April and that this language didn't exist in the playtest.