|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Sparked by the whole bloodrager/Dragon disciple thing thats been going on since the dear ACG came out, I would like to ask who would allow the two to stack and who wouldnt.
My Gm's recommend against taking it due to the fact that by RAW they don't stack, but it seems common sense to me to allow them to stack.
But once again : Would you allow it or not? post your awnser and if you'd like to, explain why.
Nefreet, waiting? What is that? Besides, if you get in now, maybe you will get grandfathered... :)
Either that or you'll be marooned with a build that no longer makes any sense because you were building your character on a set of assumptions different from what the developers intended. It may be frustrating but staying away from builds that invite table variation isn't bad advice.
|
Until there is either an FAQ for the ACG detailing that the bloodrager's bloodline counts as a sorcerer's bloodline for purpose of dragon disciple or there comes a ruling from Mike based upon the guidelines in Advanced Class Origins that they are allowed to stack, the dragon disciple's blood of dragons does not increase the bloodragers bloodline because it's not a sorcerer's bloodline.
the other question to this is dose the bite attack gained from DD work with Bloodrage if you have the dragon blood line
|
Why are we still waiting on answers like this a year after the book was "finished"? It doesn't bode well for Occult Adventures. :-/
EDIT: And are we sure it hasn't been answered? I had a question about Hunter ACs using Skirmisher tricks, and finally found the answer in a PDT forum post but it was never added to the FAQ (despite being a very FAQ).
You would figure that the side bar in Adv Class Origins would be good enough since it recommends DD for Ragers.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then practice patience?Can we not just wait for the ACG to be fixed first?We have been waiting.
We've also been ignored.This is patently 100% false.
The only update we've had--literally in months--was because some other book came out and apparently the ACG FAQ was the best place to put it.
I've told you before about this thread. It's almost 700 posts long, and Mark Seifter alone has posted 31 times in it (and Erik Mona 14).
Please do not perpetuate the false image that "Paizo doesn't care". They do, as is apparent by their profuse apologies and multiple attempts to right wrongs.
The least helpful thing you can do in this instance is foster tension that doesn't need to exist.
(Edited to use nicer language)
|
|
Then practice patience?Can we not just wait for the ACG to be fixed first?We have been waiting.We've also been ignored.This is patently 100% false.The only update we've had--literally in months--was because some other book came out and apparently the ACG FAQ was the best place to put it.I've told you before about this thread. It's almost 700 posts long, and Mark Seifter alone has posted 31 times in it (and Erik Mona 14).
Please do not perpetuate the false image that "Paizo doesn't care". They do, as is apparent by their profuse apologies and multiple attempts to right wrongs.
The least helpful thing you can do in this instance is foster tension that doesn't need to exist.
(Edited to use nicer language)
None of the responses in there are anything that I can take to a PFS table and say this is how it works. There are dozens of questions with dozens of FAQ hits any one of which that could have been answered within the last seven months (only one has been addressed in that time and not even the biggest one). I can respect your opinion that you believe they're doing enough. Please respect mine when I say I don't think they are.
I can respect your opinion that you believe they're doing enough. Please respect mine when I say I don't think they are.
I don't see anywhere where Nefreet says they are doing enough.
I only see posts where you say they aren't doing anything.That's the point nefreet is disputing.
Luckily I think your last post has clarified your position to one that makes more sense and isn't factually inaccurate.
|
|
There was a post (somewhere?) where one of the Developers mentions that they do FAQs on an in office schedule, one FAQ a week, Starting with the most asked, as part of a weekly routine. It is done this way so that they a.) don't burn out, and b.) have an established routine that keeps them moving forward.
It was also mentioned (I think in the linked thread) that ACG had some of the worst copy editing in any of the product lines before or since.
So you have:
A relatively new book (compared to say, core)
With historically huge variety of FAQ requests
Of which people are probably only really focusing on the classes they or their players are interested in.
It probably means that each individual question on the book has relatively few numbers compared to some of the other things that have been faqed recently.
Thus it seems the best way to get something faqed is to focus all FAQ activity on a single thread on the question, and campaign to convince other players that it is in their interests to get this faqed.
that said, maybe there are enough FAQs pending that Paizo needs to consider doing two a week?
I have already given up hope for any errata, BR and DD is one of the most logical conclusion anyone playing a draconic BR will come to, and this question has already been asked for a long time.
Honestly, I feel quite cheated by ACO after buying it and found yet again, they sidestepped the ambiguity.
This is a game you play with your GM. If he recomend against it i suggest you dont go.
At it looks now you get sorcerer bloodline powers and there is no stacking issue.
But just go with a pure bloodrager, it is better anyway.
|
|
You would figure that the side bar in Adv Class Origins would be good enough since it recommends DD for Ragers.The debate is not really about whether BR can take DD levels, but whether the abilities will sync up and DD (specifically Blood of Dragons) will enhance your BR abilities.
Problem is, when Dragon Disciple came out, the only bloodlines were sorcerer ones. On top of that, the only way to get them was sorcerer levels. Now, Magus, Bloodrager and Arcanist all have bloodline access and there is the eldrith heritage feat line.
I do wish they would answer the question though I know they have a large to do list.
In the end, the trade off in DD is rather minimal, +1 HP per level, a bite attack, no more rounds of rage per level, further hampered spell casting, no rage improvements, slightly more Natural armor, a little more strength, 1 extra use of breath weapon and a slightly faster flight speed. You do not even gain the breath weapon or wings early like a normal sorcerer going DD, and you would get the form of the dragon anyway in rage mode.
In the end, and to answer your original question OP, I do allow it in home games, as the trade off is not great and in PFS, can not allow it as the rules stand now (while hoping for a clarification so I can build my raging dragon)
First, thank you for awnsering my question.
Second, I did not start this thread to have another stab at the whole debacle, I already accepted that I'm going to have to wait for errata.
And while I am slightly irritated that the book has been out for nearly a year and they are uable to just tell us, that's beside the point.
I started this thread because I was curious how many people would take the material as written and who would iterate on it.
And I do realize that a pure bloodrager is flatout better, but as it stands now, this doesn't only apply to DD but also items and possibly feats, such as the robe of arcane heritage for example.
I thank all of you for contributing to this thread so far but at least note my original question.
...
But once again : Would you allow it or not? post your awnser and if you'd like to, explain why.
I and every GM that I have personally spoken to (except 1) or that people I know have asked has agreed to let them stack.
The 1 that I know who didn't allow them to stack, didn't do so for power reasons. He has switched to using the PFS rules for his home games. (He has a group that argues, whines, and wheedles incessantly for changes and exception to whatever rule is currently in their way. he got tired of the arguments and just said "PFS across the board. If you can convince Mike to allow it, I will allow it.")
I don't think stacking is too powerful. I do think stacking was intended. I do think it will eventually be ruled as allowed (if clarified at all).
