|
If it's different in a more recent source, then it's errata unless someone from Paizo says otherwise.Except that this would not be the first time they've simply reused the same name for different things.
They just need one more version of this spell...that lets you use your companion as a shield. And then make a feat that allows you to use an animated shield as a bonded companion.
"Shield-companion." ;)
One is a second level spell, the other is a first level spell.
They are in different books - it isn't errata.
They are two different spells, the lower level one needing the rings, the higher level on does not need the rings.
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
Well, the spells kinda do exactly the same, pretty much shield other, but the low level version is available to pretty much all classes, the new version has a very restricted list of classes.
And if we follow that logic, the new Evil Eye hex from ACG, could replace the old one, thus removing the restriction.
|
If it's different in a more recent source, then it's errata unless someone from Paizo says otherwise.Except that this would not be the first time they've simply reused the same name for different things.
So you're claiming that a spell that is functionally the same, but has a different spell level and list of classes that it can be used by, is a completely different spell?
So you're claiming that a spell that is functionally the same, but has a different spell level and list of classes that it can be used by, is a completely different spell?
Some of the features of the spells are the same, but there are a few significant differences:
One requires an expensive focus (that may be a challenge for some creatures to wear), while the higher level one does not.One applies to animal companions and familiars, while the other has opened it up to include eidolons.
To say that the lower level spell from the Animal Archive (AA) is no longer valid due to there being a spell with the same name in the Advanced Class Guide (ACG) is doing a disservice to those that have purchased the AA in the past, thus can use the spell - it is telling them that a spell that they can cast as an owner of the AA is no longer valid because of a spell in the ACG, a book that they may not have and may have no plans on purchasing.
Also, I don't see what any harm in having both version available for use by PCs.
|
So you're claiming that a spell that is functionally the same, but has a different spell level and list of classes that it can be used by, is a completely different spell?If it's different in a more recent source, then it's errata unless someone from Paizo says otherwise.Except that this would not be the first time they've simply reused the same name for different things.
Does the Brawler class invalidate the Brawler Archetype? Or the Swashbuckler class force a replacement of the Swashbuckler archetype?
Pathfinder has never been overly strict in its naming conventions.
|
|
So you're claiming that a spell that is functionally the same, but has a different spell level and list of classes that it can be used by, is a completely different spell?Does the Brawler class invalidate the Brawler Archetype? Or the Swashbuckler class force a replacement of the Swashbuckler archetype?
Pathfinder has never been overly strict in its naming conventions.
Hmmm... I don't know. Are either of those functionally the same as the other? No... The Brawler class is a standalone class, while the Brawler is an archetype on one particular class. They don't have the same abilities. A Brawler could multiclass Fighter and take the Brawler archetype, putting a Brawler in his Brawler. Those clearly aren't the same thing. That goes for Swashbuckler class and archetype, as well.
This spell is more like the two different versions of the Ju-ju Oracle, or the two different Living Monoliths. In both of those cases, it was ruled that the more recent version was the correct one, even if the player didn't own the more recent book. What you describe is more like the two different "Dueling" weapon properties. The're both called "Dueling", they're both weapon properties, but there the similarities end. They are clearly mechanically dissimilar enough to know that they are separate abilities. You can have a +1 dueling dueling rapier but I would not thing you could have a companion under the effects of both Shield Companion spells at the same time, taking only 1/4 damage or whatever.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
Actually I wonder how PFS handles this, after all what happens in the rare situation, that a player has the animal archive but doesn't own the ACG... can't he use the old spell, can he use the new one - since the lacks the required source ?If he doesn't own the ACG, he can't be a Hunter AT ALL. As far as something being in multiple versions, the newer version of the spell is the ONLY one allowed to be used.
I really should create a thread on this, but this issue is a bit larger than just hunters. With the ACG spell a druid can't access it, the same is true for antipaladins and witches... a class that doesn't really rely on a living animal companion.
For those classes the new spell is simply not an option and I see no reason to exclude them, or to increase the level to level 3 especially for summoners.
|
Actually I wonder how PFS handles this, after all what happens in the rare situation, that a player has the animal archive but doesn't own the ACG... can't he use the old spell, can he use the new one - since the lacks the required source ?If he doesn't own the ACG, he can't be a Hunter AT ALL. As far as something being in multiple versions, the newer version of the spell is the ONLY one allowed to be used.
You do know that that statement, about the newer version of something being the ONLY one allowed to be used?
How about the Dueling weapon enhancement?
It has appeared in the APG, the PFSFG, and UE.
The version in the PFSFG is different than the earlier one in the APG. The version printed in UE is different than the one in the PFSFG, but basically just a reprint of the APG version.
So, how do you define that mess?
As to yet another definition of something that could be called a shield companion: How about an intelligent Dancing Shield, if there is a version of Arcane Bond, for example, which allows a shield to be the bonded item....