Does the Exploiter Wizard qualify for the Extra Arcanist Exploit feat?


Rules Questions

Scarab Sages

7 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite.

Question: Does the Exploiter Wizard qualify for the Extra Arcanist Exploit Feat?

Extra Arcanist Exploit wrote:

Your repertoire of arcanist exploits expands.

Prerequisite: Arcanist exploit† class feature.
Benefit: You gain one additional arcanist exploit. You
must meet the prerequisites for this arcanist exploit.
Special: You can take this feat multiple times. Each
time you do, you gain another arcanist exploit.
Exploiter Exploit wrote:

At 1st level and every 4 levels thereafter, the exploiter wizard gains a single arcanist exploit. The exploiter wizard uses his wizard level as his arcanist level for determining the effects and DCs of his arcanist exploits.

This ability replaces arcane school.

Traditionally, class features copied into another class have qualified for feats requiring the original class feature, even if the feature name is changed slightly.

Example: Life Oracles Channel revelation is generally accepted to qualify for the Extra Channel feat, which has the cleric Channel Energy class feature as a prerequisite. The feature names are similar, not identical.

This post was accepted as resolving the issue at the time, but has since been called out as not being an official FAQ.


Though this FAQ doesn't address archetypes of different classes gaining a particular class's class feature under a different name, I'm inclined to go with "yes" for the same reasoning that led to said FAQ.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
blahpers wrote:
Though this FAQ doesn't address archetypes of different classes gaining a particular class's class feature under a different name, I'm inclined to go with "yes" for the same reasoning that led to said FAQ.

I agree, but there have already been several argument that since the FAQ you linked explicitly addresses archetypes, it is non-applicable. In fact, I've already attempted used that FAQ in Conjunction with the one I linked and both were overwhelming shot down as not applying.

Given that response, I will have to start ruling Life Oracles are not permitted to take channeling feats at PFS games I GM. (It is essentially the same question, one build is just more widely accepted than the other.)

In the broader sense, the advent of hybrid classes means we will probably need a more general ruling.


My confusion: Why was there even a need to call it anything but "Arcanist's Exploit"?

Scarab Sages

Fearspect wrote:
My confusion: Why was there even a need to call it anything but "Arcanist's Exploit"?

No, but there are a great many editing errors and oversights in the ACG that will need FAQ's and Errata.

The product was very obviously rushed to make it out in time for Gencon.

Grand Lodge

Archetypes change your class features. You are getting what is normally a class feature of the Arcanist as a class feature for your Wizard.

If you read SKR's entire post, the only rational line of reasoning that I can see is that you can take extra exploits with that wizard archetype. Life oracles are explicitly mentioned as being able to take channel based feats in the post. It is explicitly called out that the names don't have to match exactly as long as the rules work the same way.

You have gained the Exploiter Exploits class feature which grants you access to the same features granted by the Arcanist Exploits class feature. The exploits work exactly the same way, save for substituting your Wizard level for your Arcanist level. If you take the feat Extra Arcanist Exploit feat as an Arcanist you gain one Exploit. Would taking the feat as a Wizard lead to a different outcome than taking it as an Arcanist? No. In both cases you would gain one Arcanist Exploit from the same list, that work exactly the same way.

It's a duck.


No. Whether this was intentional or not could be open to debate but RAW is no. Best practice, ask your gm. If its for PFS, I'd assume its a no or expect table variation and loosing access to exploits at certain tables.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Under A Bleeding Sun wrote:
No. Whether this was intentional or not could be open to debate but RAW is no. Best practice, ask your gm. If its for PFS, I'd assume its a no or expect table variation and loosing access to exploits at certain tables.

Wrong.

You need to read the links people have provided. They have made it clear that even if the name is slightly different, abilities which "function as" other abilities and duplicate them do count as the abilities they're based on.

Artanthos wrote:
Given that response, I will have to start ruling Life Oracles are not permitted to take channeling feats at PFS games I GM. (It is essentially the same question, one build is just more widely accepted than the other.)

Well, look forward to a talk with a VO if you choose to contradict the FAQ like this - Life Oracles can take channeling feats. You're not authorized to make this call - PFS GMs don't get to house rule things, and the FAQ flat-out contradicts you. FAQs are law in PFS.

The best example of this is the bazillion feats which require the "Animal Companion" class feature - there is no such class feature anywhere. Nature Bond, Bonded Mount, et cetera - all these things exist, and all these things qualify for said feats. Just because the ability is called "Channel" or "Super Duper Funtime Power Move" doesn't mean that channeling energy isn't channeling energy, particularly when said ability calls out that it works based on the rules of the original ability.

Please, please don't insist on bickering over silly semantics to the point where Paizo needs to go and update the word "Archetypes" from the FAQ to "Archetypes And All Other Classes Because Apparently No One Can Figure Out How To Extrapolate Obvious Rules Decisions From A FAQ That Was Incrementally More Specific Than It Should Have Been."


Artanthos wrote:
blahpers wrote:
Though this FAQ doesn't address archetypes of different classes gaining a particular class's class feature under a different name, I'm inclined to go with "yes" for the same reasoning that led to said FAQ.

I agree, but there have already been several argument that since the FAQ you linked explicitly addresses archetypes, it is non-applicable. In fact, I've already attempted used that FAQ in Conjunction with the one I linked and both were overwhelming shot down as not applying.

Given that response, I will have to start ruling Life Oracles are not permitted to take channeling feats at PFS games I GM. (It is essentially the same question, one build is just more widely accepted than the other.)

In the broader sense, the advent of hybrid classes means we will probably need a more general ruling.

I'm not sure how its non applicable.

Is the exploiter wizard an archetype. Yes.
Does the exploiter archetype "works like the standard ability," or "requires you to make a specific choice for the standard ability. . . "? Yes. Then "it counts as that ability."?

Since the exploiter wizard gets arcanist's exploits at a reduced rate by virtue of the archetype, according to the FAQ, it counts as the arcanist exploit class feature.

FAQ:
FAQ wrote:

Archetype: If an archetype replaces a class ability with a more specific version of that ability (or one that works similarly to the replaced ability), does the archetype's ability count as the original ability for the purpose of rules that improve the original ability?

It depends on how the archetype's ability is worded. If the archetype ability says it works like the standard ability, it counts as that ability. If the archetype's ability requires you to make a specific choice for the standard ability, it counts as that ability. Otherwise, the archetype ability doesn't count as the standard ability. (It doesn't matter if the archetype's ability name is different than the standard class ability it is replacing; it is the description and game mechanics of the archetype ability that matter.)

Example: The dragoon (fighter) archetype (Ultimate Combat) has an ability called "spear training," which requires the dragoon to select "spears" as his weapon training group, and refers to his weapon training bonus (even though this bonus follows a slightly different progression than standard weapon training). Therefore, this ability counts as weapon training for abilities that improve weapon training, such as gloves of dueling (Advanced Player's Guide), which increase the wearer's weapon training bonus.

Example: The archer (fighter) archetype gets several abilities (such as "expert archer") which replace weapon training and do not otherwise refer to the weapon training ability. Therefore, this ability does not count as weapon training for abilities that improve weapon training (such as gloves of dueling). This is the case even for the "expert archer," ability which has a bonus that improves every 4 fighter levels, exactly like weapon training.

posted July 2013

I'd say it looks more like the first example in the FAQ than the second. It's the same with life oracles. You get exploits or channels by virtue of the archetype. It works like the other class from which it was taken. Therefore the extra feats work to give them an extra something that they already have.

I'm with Kenji and Morphling. A duck is a duck, even if the color varies a bit, or even if someone has mistaken it for a mallard.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Actually, the Exploiter Wizard example does not match either of the examples in the FAQ, since both of them reference how archetypes interact with class features of their original class -- not how other classes might pick up features of other classes.

SKR's post about channeling really is all we have to go on for this issue.


I did read the links, and I still say RAW is no. In this instance the class feature is explicitly named in the feat. They could've given it the same name but they didn't. At the very least I wholly support my previous statement Ask your GM and if this is for PFS expect table variation (ie. don't do it)


Under A Bleeding Sun wrote:
I did read the links, and I still say RAW is no. In this instance the class feature is explicitly named in the feat. They could've given it the same name but they didn't. At the very least I wholly support my previous statement Ask your GM and if this is for PFS expect table variation (ie. don't do it)

We have already demonstrated, in this thread, that the bolded part does not matter. You are re-asserting your position in the face of counterargument without providing arguments of your own.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Does the Exploiter Wizard qualify for the Extra Arcanist Exploit feat? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.