Are Ninjas Rogues?

[KunoichiSong]

Would you say that a Ninja is a Rogue?

[CBDunkerson]

Yes. Ninja is a Rogue archetype.

[Secret Wizard]

Yes and no. It counts as the Rogue for several things, but not for others.

[Bill Dunn]

I'd say it's close enough - it is designated as an alternate class for the rogue. What's the context? Why would it be important for a ninja to either be or not be a rogue?

[Rysky]

For multiclassing I presume.

[Protoman]

GM-Senses are tingling. What are you trying to do with this rather non-specific, kinda overgeneralized question?

[GM Rednal]

For multiclassing purposes, a Ninja counts as a Rogue (i.e. you can't take levels in both).

[Cavall]

It is an alternative class for rogue. That simply meant an archtype that was so extensive as to deserve it's own "class". But it's an archtype nonetheless.

So no stacking.

[Avoron]

Ninjas are an archetype of the rogue class, and they function just like any other archetype in almost every conceivable way. The only difference is that for ease of reading their abilities were written up in the format of a separate class, rather than being listed out as a string of alterations and replacements.

So yes, ninjas are rogues.

[KunoichiSong]

Just an argument between my friend and I.

[Doragon Feiku]

PFS made a specific ruling saying that a Ninja could not retrain into an Unchained Rogue for free, when Pathfinder Unchained was released, and that restriction is presumably still in place for Ninjas that have not since been played, but in all other aspects the Ninja is just an elaborate Archetype of Rogue.

Ninjas with the Scout Archetype are especially fun ^^.

[Cevah]

I thought that the Ninja was NOT an archetype of the Unchained Rogue, so that you could not make an Unchained Ninja by calculating the exact set of requirements to make Rogue -> Ninja an apply to the Unchained Rogue.

So if it is an archetype, then you can make an Unchained Ninja, and if not, you can multiclass with Unchained Rogue. :-)

But PF seems to not want to allow either.

/cevah

[TriOmegaZero]

It is an alternate class, which is like an archetype but more involved.

[Doragon Feiku]

Cevah wrote:

I thought that the Ninja was NOT an archetype of the Unchained Rogue

That, too (in PFS).

[p-sto]

The official stance on ninjas is frustrating to say the least. They can't get access to any of the new options for rogues, can't multiclass with rogue and get almost no new unique character options to speak of. It's very much a case of speak to your GM about house rules because for the moment at least it's strongly implied that Paizo will do nothing to make this very restrictive archetype any deeper.

[David knott 242]

You can combine archetypes because they are in the format of altered and replaced figures -- so you can simply check each archetype over to verify that they do not alter or replace the same figure and then apply them both to the original class.

The problem with alternate classes like the Ninja and the Unchained Rogue is that you have to pick one of them as your starting point, but then you have no clear guidance from the other alternate class as to what to alter or replace from the other alternate class.

In order to make an "Unchained Ninja", you basically need to make a new alternate class, as Alex Augunas did in "Unchained Cunning".

[Cevah]

To make an Unchained Ninja, start with a Rogue.
For each class feature, check if the ninja removes, alters, or retains it.
Look at the Unchained Rogue.
For each feature that is named in common with the Rogue, apply the same change the ninja made.
Done.

/cevah

[p-sto]

Cevah wrote:

To make an Unchained Ninja, start with a Rogue.

For each class feature, check if the ninja removes, alters, or retains it.
Look at the Unchained Rogue.
For each feature that is named in common with the Rogue, apply the same change the ninja made.
Done.

/cevah

For sure. I allowed an unchained ninja in my home game. It was in no manner game breaking. More or less remained a rogue with slightly higher survival chance.

[Chess Pwn]

No a ninja is not a rogue. It has it's item archetypes and it's item feats. We used to think it was just a big archetype but that has been officially said to be false. We'd need a faq to explain if a ninja can take rogue archetypes or rogue fcb since a ninja is not a rogue.

[Doragon Feiku]

^ this is only true in PFS, and only for the already stated reasons.

There is no FAQ or Errata outside of PFS that affects the rest of Pathfinder.

[Chess Pwn]

Mark had said that officially it is that way. That he should have been using the pdt account

[Avoron]

Chess Pwn wrote:

No a ninja is not a rogue. It has it's item archetypes and it's item feats. We used to think it was just a big archetype but that has been officially said to be false. We'd need a faq to explain if a ninja can take rogue archetypes or rogue fcb since a ninja is not a rogue.

This is completely untrue. A ninja is an archetype of the rogue class, and it is explicitly stated as such in the rules. No "official" statement has invalidated the entire mechanic of alternate classes from the APG. No such FAQ is necessary, because a ninja is a rogue.

Mark Seifter did not say anything to the contrary in the posts you linked. Unchained rogues cannot be ninjas for the simple reason that their altered class features are in direct conflict. He even corrected your mistake and restated that his assertion was directed specifically toward unchained ninjas and does not in any way invalidate the preexisting rule that ninjas are rogues and are subject to the standard rules of the rogue class.

Mark Seifter wrote:

Also, again, alternate classes being unable to take other alternate classes of the same base class does not mean they can't take FCB or archetypes.

[Chess Pwn]

Where in the rules does it explicitly state that a ninja is an archetype of rogue? I'd love to have that for PFS to be able to support the view that ninja's can take rogue stuff.

[ShieldLawrence]

Chess Pwn wrote:

Where in the rules does it explicitly state that a ninja is an archetype of rogue? I'd love to have that for PFS to be able to support the view that ninja's can take rogue stuff.

This is the closest I get to an explicit statement.

Advanced Class Guide p. 249 wrote:

Alternate Classes: Sometimes an archetype exchanges so many class features that it almost becomes a new class itself. In such cases, the class might warrant a representation of all of the class features, even those that it shares with its base class. While still technically an archetype, characters who play this class have all the tools they need to advance their character in one convenient location. The antipaladin, ninja, and samurai are all examples of an alternate class.

Edit: After reading some other threads I get the impression this may have been taken out of the ACG or something to that effect.

[Chess Pwn]

that line was removed in the errata

[CBDunkerson]

Chess Pwn wrote:

that line was removed in the errata

Umm... no, it wasn't.

There is nothing about that section in the errata and the PRD still shows that text.

Alternate classes are archetypes. They can be combined with other archetypes of the same base class (provided the archetype modifies other features). However, since they also have their own archetypes, FCBs, and other options they are not always compatible with some of their base class options. Most notably... the Ninja archetype/alternate class cannot be applied to the Unchained Rogue alternate class.

[Avoron]

ShieldLawrence and CBDunkerson have it right.

Alternate Classes wrote:

Sometimes an archetype exchanges so many class features that it almost becomes a new class itself. In such cases, the class might warrant a representation of all of the class features, even those that it shares with its base class. While still technically an archetype, characters who play this class have all the tools they need to advance their character in one convenient location. The antipaladin, ninja, and samurai are all examples of an alternate class.

[Mark Seifter]

Chess Pwn is correct that the ACG second printing says "Though similar to an archetype in many ways" not "While still technically an archetype".

[Scavion]

KunoichiSong wrote:

Would you say that a Ninja is a Rogue?

Not in a meaningful way.

[Cevah]

Mark Seifter wrote:

Chess Pwn is correct that the ACG second printing says "Though similar to an archetype in many ways" not "While still technically an archetype".

While the second printing may physically have the altered text, the PRD does not, and the errata document does not include a reference to p249 where that text occurs. [See CBDunkerson's links.]

---

I looked into what a Unchained Ninja would be.
It would add Finesse Training, Debilitating Injury, and Rogue's Edge.
Everything else would remain the same.
The remaining Rogue class features that change are for features that the Ninja trades away, or alters.
Of note, I notice the Unchained Rouge upgrades Sneak Attack by allowing concealed (but not totally concealed) creatures to be sneak attacked.

/cevah

[Doragon Feiku]

Mark Seifter wrote:

Chess Pwn is correct that the ACG second printing says "Though similar to an archetype in many ways" not "While still technically an archetype".

Can a Ninja take the Scout archetype?

Quite a few PFS players (and GMs) would like to know.

[Chess Pwn]

Doragon Feiku wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Chess Pwn is correct that the ACG second printing says "Though similar to an archetype in many ways" not "While still technically an archetype".

Can a Ninja take the Scout archetype?

Quite a few PFS players (and GMs) would like to know.

That is what my FAQ thread hopes to have answered. We currently have zero support to say they can take anything of the rogue as much as the slayer can take anything from the rogue.

The understanding was yes because it was said that alternate classes were just fleshed out archetypes. Being a big archetype it interacted with rogue as an archetype. Well now it's officially not an archetype. So now officially it would seem like it has nothing. Now, Marks comments make it seem like (at least to him, no word if that was his idea or the voice of the PDT through Mark) FCB and archetypes might still be kosher for the ninja. But the best course of action would be to get a FAQ covering alternate classes.

[Harleequin]

Ahhh the ninja.... such an iconic and yet ironically under-supported class! :((

[GM 1990]

Cevah wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Chess Pwn is correct that the ACG second printing says "Though similar to an archetype in many ways" not "While still technically an archetype".

While the second printing may physically have the altered text, the PRD does not, and the errata document does not include a reference to p249 where that text occurs. [See CBDunkerson's links.]

---

I looked into what a Unchained Ninja would be.
It would add Finesse Training, Debilitating Injury, and Rogue's Edge.
Everything else would remain the same.
The remaining Rogue class features that change are for features that the Ninja trades away, or alters.
Of note, I notice the Unchained Rouge upgrades Sneak Attack by allowing concealed (but not totally concealed) creatures to be sneak attacked.

/cevah

This is what we're doing with the Ninja in our RotRL game.

[Doragon Feiku]

Chess Pwn wrote:

Well now it's officially not an archetype.

I still don't see that written in any FAQ, Errata, or book. And I disagree that Mark's vague statement quoted earlier means what you claim it does.

If Mark answers my question directly, here, then I'll happily retrain my Ninja, along with the (hundreds?) of other PFS Ninja/Scouts out there (that have existed for years).

But until something actually "official" (or at the very basest, "clear") is released, I will continue to operate Ninjas as just another archetype of Rogue.

Anything else would be a retcon, not an errata.

[Cavall]

Same here.

[David knott 242]

I think at least three different questions are being confused here:

1) Is the Ninja a Rogue archetype?

2) Can a Ninja take Rogue archetypes?

3) Does a Ninja qualify as a Rogue other purposes?

An answer of "No" to the first question does not necessarily imply that the answerw to the other questions are also no -- in fact, the available evidence seems to be strongly in favor of the answers being No, Yes, and Yes. I think that a Ninja is a Rogue in the same way that a Drow is an Elf.

[Doragon Feiku]

The main problem with this implication is that it's a direct reversal of statements made by Jason Bulmahn like 6 years ago, where he clarified that the Ninja indeed could take archetypes and favored class bonuses for Rogues.

Since that's what we've been operating off of, to just arbitrarily claim it no longer works that way is a huge upset (and for no discernible reason, as far as I can see).

[Ninja-Assassin]

Due to needing a high charisma and such, I'd consider us more "rakes" than "rogues"...

EDIT: if you know what I mean.
EDIT 2: Wink-wink.
EDIT 3: It's a suggestive bit of word-play that isn't really as funny upon reflection.
EDIT: Anyway, there's a reason I took assassin...

[non-dyslexic Valeros]

I hate that I'm stuck in here with you all.

Also, I'm pretty sure, I'm the rake...

[Vlaeros]

Hah! No, we're not stuck in here with you; it's you stuck in here with u-... wait.

[non-dyslexic Valeros]

:I

[Chess Pwn]

The problem is Mark saying that the entire team talked about and decided that the "ninja archetype" wasn't an archetype and thus couldn't be placed on unchained. If ninja was just an archetype then you should be able to have an unchained ninja easy. But since it's been said the ninja is not an archetype of rogue then there's nothing in the rules (yet) to support it taking rogue archetypes or rogue FCB.

And Yes, Jason said alternate classes were archetypes, ACG said it was, then ACG was errata'd to say it's not, because the PDT talked and Mark conveyed that they weren't. Mark mentions that he probably should have used the PDT account to post the stuff about ninja's as it was supposed to be official.

Mark is hopeful that if there was a FAQ it'd agree with David knott 242. But Mark isn't going to give anything more "official" about it because of the mess it caused last time of people thinking it was just him posting. And the only official thing is that it's not a ninja archetype.

But my question to you is, what lets the ninja take rogue archetypes in the rules if the ninja is not an archetype?

[Doragon Feiku]

Chess Pwn wrote:

But my question to you is, what lets the ninja take rogue archetypes in the rules if the ninja is not an archetype?

Ninja was not released in ACG. It was released in UC. No alternate classes were released in ACG.

So, the easiest way to ignore Mark's comments are to claim that I only own UC, and can't use any rules or options from the ACG (including any 2nd printing errata).

The main reason being that I will just flat out ignore it, because it's a bit of a slap in the face, and it's another piece of straw being added to the camel's back.

[KingOfAnything]

Doragon Feiku wrote:

The main problem with this implication is that it's a direct reversal of statements made by Jason Bulmahn like 6 years ago, where he clarified that the Ninja indeed could take archetypes and favored class bonuses for Rogues.

Since that's what we've been operating off of, to just arbitrarily claim it no longer works that way is a huge upset (and for no discernible reason, as far as I can see).

It was simple when there was only one alternate class for the rogue. It is an easy simplification to say "it's just like an archetype!" But, it is a simplification. The difference between an alternate class and an archetype is that archetypes can stack with each other and alternate classes, but alternate can not stack with each other - only with archetypes. Many people miss that alternate class is a third designation between a class and an archetype, and try to lump it in as one or the other.

[Doragon Feiku]

If (or when) Mark's comments become official, they had better be accompanied by an explanation for the reversal. Apologies to the players that lose their character concepts would be appreciated as well.

[swoosh]

KingOfAnything wrote:

It was simple when there was only one alternate class for the rogue.

As opposed to now when there's?

Quote:

Many people miss that alternate class is a third designation between a class and an archetype, and try to lump it in as one or the other.

It's not really a miss when it's based on developer comments though.

[Doragon Feiku]

Samurais with Cavalier archetypes and favored class bonuses would also obviously be impacted by this "ruling" as well.

[Murdock Mudeater]

Doragon Feiku wrote:

Samurais with Cavalier archetypes and favored class bonuses would also obviously be impacted by this "ruling" as well.

+1

[Chess Pwn]

Yup, this is what I feel the implications of the PDT deciding that you can't put the ninja on the unchained rogue and having alternate classes not just be archetypes. I think it's a poor decision to have made without clarifying what an alternate class was then.