So I was thinking about archetypes, and how you can apply more than one they don't coincide, and I started to wonder how many is the most you could possibly add to a single class? I kind of want to say the monk just for the free one they get that gives them magic abilities, but what's the most you could put onto a single class legally?
Are you wanting the class that can have the most archetypes currently published at once or the class that could have the most possible archetypes that stack?
here is a monk archetype thread that shows you can have 4 at the same time.
As many as you can stagger, I think. It looks like Alchemist can have upwards of 3, which is likely the most stacking around. Unless I'm missing something, which is very possible.
It's hard to get more than two without overlapping on a class feature, especially when the class in question has very few features to trade out.
I meant the most stacking, and wow, 6 archetypes at once? That's amazing! That's almost a new class. I always thought the idea of archetype stacking was kind of funny, but 6 at once is just goofy.
Magus:
1) Bladebound (Arcane Pool)
2) Hexcrafter (Spells and Spell Recall)
3) Spellblade (Spellstrike)
4) Staff Magus (Weapon Proficiency, Medium/Heavy Armor, Fighter Training)
5) Fiend Flayer (replaces and alters nothing)
I believe Fiend Flayer modifies both Magus Arcana and Arcane Pool, based on the archetype stacking FAQ. Though I consider Mark Seifter the most knowledgeable in the subject of archetype stacking.
Something doesn't need a line "this alter/replaces" to have the ability alter or replace.
So yes, he's altering magus arcana and arcane pool abilities.
|
Something doesn't need a line "this alter/replaces" to have the ability alter or replace.
So yes, he's altering magus arcana and arcane pool abilities.
...so why have that line then if something doesn't need it to alter an ability? I'm not blaming you here, it's just that decision is so beyond me. I haven't seen any archetype that would be 'broken' because of allowing that kind of stacking myself, I just dislike that there's 'hidden alterations' in archetypes.
Barb:
Totem Warrior (Changes nothing)
Raging Drunk (Changes Fast Movement)
Elemental Kin (Trapsense)
Liberator (Skill, Uncanny +Improved, Indomitable Will)
Pack Rager (Rage Power 2-6-10-14-18, DR)
So 5 for Barbarian.
...so why have that line then if something doesn't need it to alter an ability? I'm not blaming you here, it's just that decision is so beyond me. I haven't seen any archetype that would be 'broken' because of allowing that kind of stacking myself, I just dislike that there's 'hidden alterations' in archetypes.Something doesn't need a line "this alter/replaces" to have the ability alter or replace.
So yes, he's altering magus arcana and arcane pool abilities.
Mark has confirmed/clarified that the explicit wording saying "this alter/replaces" is a newer thing that they are trying to do. And it's something they tack onto the freelancer's work. So older archetypes and archetypes that slip through them remembering to add that wont have it. And my impression is that some of the devs care more about having that line than others, so that also contributes to them not getting the line.
...so why have that line then if something doesn't need it to alter an ability? I'm not blaming you here, it's just that decision is so beyond me. I haven't seen any archetype that would be 'broken' because of allowing that kind of stacking myself, I just dislike that there's 'hidden alterations' in archetypes.Something doesn't need a line "this alter/replaces" to have the ability alter or replace.
So yes, he's altering magus arcana and arcane pool abilities.
I wouldn't mind there being more lenient archetype stacking that would be allowed if things had to be more explicit. Like adding a new way to regain grit or adding new options for Rogue Talents shouldn't modify that feature unless it is removing/altering the base ability! But I understand why it is is that way.
I can't argue that much. I already pointed out that a class that adds heal and another archtype adds knowledge Nobility aren't exactly conflicting. But like you, I get why consistency is important....so why have that line then if something doesn't need it to alter an ability? I'm not blaming you here, it's just that decision is so beyond me. I haven't seen any archetype that would be 'broken' because of allowing that kind of stacking myself, I just dislike that there's 'hidden alterations' in archetypes.Something doesn't need a line "this alter/replaces" to have the ability alter or replace.
So yes, he's altering magus arcana and arcane pool abilities.** spoiler omitted **
I wouldn't mind there being more lenient archetype stacking that would be allowed if things had to be more explicit. Like adding a new way to regain grit or adding new options for Rogue Talents shouldn't modify that feature unless it is removing/altering the base ability! But I understand why it is is that way.
Random thought, but they could have special "expand" wording.
"This ability expands but does not otherwise alter <class feature>." There would need to be rules saying archetypes can expand the same class feature. Or one archetype could expand a class feature and another archetype alter/replace it.
They would shy away from it for the same reason for the FAQ they made. Because it's hard to track all the moving parts.