|
| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Okay, so the first off, this question is regarding a PFS character. As as such, I have to go by RAW, even if the answer is something that can be house-ruled.
So, the formula Alembic is a cheap magic item that lets an ALCHEMIST learn a potion's formulae by futzing with it for an hour. But it was made before the advanced class guide came out. Can investigators make use of it? Seems like they should, right? But the item specifically calls out alchemists, and hasn't been errata'd.
Appolovies, I'm on my phone right now and can't like the item but you can find it on archives of nethys or the pfsrd, or the official srd super easy.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Formula Alembic, for reference.
Okay, so the first off, this question is regarding a PFS character. As as such, I have to go by RAW, even if the answer is something that can be house-ruled.
You know that this isn't true. The misnomer "rules-as-written" (aka "hyperliteralization") is just one method of interpreting written text. Often times in Pathfinder, it is not the correct way. Even so in PFS, where GMs are empowered to rule in ambiguous circumstances. Worst case scenario, you encounter table variation.
Luckily, in this case, there's a Blog that answers your question.
(the Blog mentions an upcoming update to the FAQ that still has yet to occur)
|
|
Formula Alembic, for reference.
Okay, so the first off, this question is regarding a PFS character. As as such, I have to go by RAW, even if the answer is something that can be house-ruled.
You know that this isn't true. The misnomer "rules-as-written" (aka "hyperliteralization") is just one method of interpreting written text. Often times in Pathfinder, it is not the correct way. Even so in PFS, where GMs are empowered to rule in ambiguous circumstances. Worst case scenario, you encounter table variation.
Luckily, in this case, there's a Blog that addresses your answer.
(the Blog mentions an upcoming update to the FAQ that still has yet to occur)
*sigh*
Okay, what I MEANT to say was:"Since I this character is a pathfinder society character, I cannot rely on a single GM houseruling that the item works for investigators as Rules as Written, it doesn't. As such, if a strict GM chooses to audit my character this could be a potential issue. I, wishing to avoid this fate, would like to have something concrete to point to to assuage their incredulity."
Now the blog you pointed to talks about investigators making mundane alchemical items. It's good to know, but doesn't address the formula alembic thing.
I realize that the official Faq has yet to occur, but I don't see anything there that says 'Investigators count as alchemists for the purposes of magic items that require alchemists'
Thank you for taking the time to look into my concerns though, it is appreciated
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, what I MEANT to say was:
"Since I this character is a pathfinder society character, I cannot rely on a single GM houseruling that the item works for investigators as Rules as Written, it doesn't. As such, if a strict GM chooses to audit my character this could be a potential issue. I, wishing to avoid this fate, would like to have something concrete to point to to assuage their incredulity."
Individual GMs are allowed to make reasonable interpretations of rules that are unclear. If the GM at your table initials the formulae you've scribed, the GM auditing your character should respect that.
If you are still worried about it, email your VC, and ask for their opinion.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
^ very much this.
If you were at my table, I would take into account:
1) the publication age of the item,
2) the similarities between the Investigator's Alchemy ability and the Alchemist's Alchemy ability,
3) the FAQ stating that Investigators cannot use wands, implying that the rest of their ability remains unchanged, and
4) the Blog stating that Investigators count as Alchemists for purposes of crafting,
And rule that the Alembic works for Investigators.
I'd happily acknowledge on your Chronicle that at my table, you were able to use the item as I ruled.
Note that your next GM may rule differently. This is an acceptable occurrence in PFS, endorsed by Campaign Leadership.
When people go by what they refer to as "RAW", they toss out all relevant evidence and make extreme rulings.
That's not how Pathfinder works. Society even less so.
|
|
^ very much this.
If you were at my table, I would take into account:
1) the publication age of the item,
2) the similarities between the Investigator's Alchemy ability and the Alchemist's Alchemy ability,
3) the FAQ stating that Investigators cannot use wands, implying that the rest of their ability remains unchanged, and
4) the Blog stating that Investigators count as Alchemists for purposes of crafting,And rule that the Alembic works for Investigators.
I'd happily acknowledge on your Chronicle that at my table, you were able to use the item as I ruled.
Note that your next GM may rule differently. This is an acceptable occurrence in PFS, endorsed by Campaign Leadership.
When people go by what they refer to as "RAW", they toss out all relevant evidence and make extreme rulings.
That's not how Pathfinder works. Society even less so.
Thank you King of Anything, and Nefreet. You both sound like sound, reasonable GMs. (And as a side note, I would rule the same). Unfortunately, I have had the bad luck to run afoul of an unreasonable GM or two in my time, and I was just wondering if there was an official ruling on that. I'm not here to start a war or anything, I'm just saying that there are some jerk GMs out there that like to punish players by pulling out RAW because they think it's funny or because they like dicking over players or because whatever reason. Having something to point to usually shuts this down.
Just wanted to know.
Since the investigator does not say it counts as an alchemist for magic items, (like the brawler does for his parent classes) you cannot. This was made clearer with the recent FAQ on if bloodragers can take the robe of arcane heritage and they said no, because it didn't have text like the brawler.
Any PFS GM that allowed this would be in the wrong, as they'd clearly be making up/ altering the rules of the game which is prohibited in PFS.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Any PFS GM that allowed this would be in the wrong, as they'd clearly be making up/ altering the rules of the game which is prohibited in PFS.
No, it isn't.
PFS GMs are bound by 'clear' (which is inherently subjective) rules in the books and campaign materials. Everything else they are not only allowed, but encouraged, to 'make up' on their own.
|
|
Yeah... bloodrager bloodline powers are not the same as sorcerer's and much closer to rage powers. Alchemy is Alchemy. That FAQ is not one you should generalize.
If it is an issue, let's make a FAQ page.
Thing is. Alchemy ISN'T alchemy, they have different rules. Alchemists can use wands and investigator's can't (not without UMD). The two alchemy class features are technically different, which is why I asked.
Anyway, FAQed it.
Several persons here have stated that an investigator can't use wands, short of using UMD. Where exactly is this stated, I just reviewed the alchemy rules for the investigator in UCG, and found no such specification.
Several persons here have stated that an investigator can't use wands, short of using UMD. Where exactly is this stated, I just reviewed the alchemy rules for the investigator in UCG, and found no such specification.
Alchemist's alchemy specifically states it can use spell-trigger items.
Although the alchemist doesn't actually cast spells, he does have a formulae list that determines what extracts he can create. An alchemist can utilize spell-trigger items if the spell appears on his formulae list, but not spell-completion items (unless he uses Use Magic Device to do so).
Investigators lack such text. And developers confirmed that such a case was intentional.
Ah, ok, alright, thanks.
Since the brawler specifically says it does, and the Bloodrager FAQ says it specifically would have to say it does like the brawler to count, it's pretty easy to see that the "rule" is that it doesn't. I asked a similar questions about barbarian items and the raging fighter/ranger/skald and Mark confirmed that unless it said it counted as such for items it doesn't.
The item says alchemist and an investigator isn't an alchemist. If you allow an investigator to use it what stops an GM from saying any class can use it using your same justification? You say you feel they should qualify, well I'll say I feel a barbarian or sorcerer should qualify. Since there's nothing saying you can, you can't. Basic rule of pathfinder.
|
Since the brawler specifically says it does, and the Bloodrager FAQ says it specifically would have to say it does like the brawler to count, it's pretty easy to see that the "rule" is that it doesn't. I asked a similar questions about barbarian items and the raging fighter/ranger/skald and Mark confirmed that unless it said it counted as such for items it doesn't.
The item says alchemist and an investigator isn't an alchemist. If you allow an investigator to use it what stops an GM from saying any class can use it using your same justification? You say you feel they should qualify, well I'll say I feel a barbarian or sorcerer should qualify. Since there's nothing saying you can, you can't. Basic rule of pathfinder.
interesting view.
So you feel that a sorcerer should be able to use a Formula Alembic to allow her to scribe a spells formula into her formula book. But wait, she doesn't have a formula book. How does this work then? I mean, if you said it would allow a wizard to scribe the spell to her SPELLBOOK (which is not a formula book) I could see that. But a Sorcerer or Barbarian? Doesn't strike me as useful. I mean, they don't have a formula book to start with, and even then the spell would have to be one that was on their list right? I mean, they couldn't scribe Mage Armor any more than an Alchemist could, right? Not on their list. So it couldn't go into their book.
Unless you just want them to spend the money to scribe it, and then tell them "Oppsy! you can't learn that formula after all. Too bad!" Seems silly to me. But sure. If a sorcerer had a formula book (which they don't) and could scribe formula into it (which only Alchemist and Investigators can), and had the spell on their class list (Sorcerer maybe do - barbarian not), then maybe.
This would be like a Sorcerer or Barbarian using a Pearl of Power. They can't. (well, I mean they don't have spells memorized to recall - so how could they use the PoP?) But a new type of prepared caster? More than likely they could. Unless there was an FAQ or rule against it.
interesting view.Since the brawler specifically says it does, and the Bloodrager FAQ says it specifically would have to say it does like the brawler to count, it's pretty easy to see that the "rule" is that it doesn't. I asked a similar questions about barbarian items and the raging fighter/ranger/skald and Mark confirmed that unless it said it counted as such for items it doesn't.
The item says alchemist and an investigator isn't an alchemist. If you allow an investigator to use it what stops an GM from saying any class can use it using your same justification? You say you feel they should qualify, well I'll say I feel a barbarian or sorcerer should qualify. Since there's nothing saying you can, you can't. Basic rule of pathfinder.
Well give me your reasoning of why the investigator can do it and I'll tell you how I'll reason them using it.
|
|
Well give me your reasoning of why the investigator can do it and I'll tell you how I'll reason them using it.interesting view.Since the brawler specifically says it does, and the Bloodrager FAQ says it specifically would have to say it does like the brawler to count, it's pretty easy to see that the "rule" is that it doesn't. I asked a similar questions about barbarian items and the raging fighter/ranger/skald and Mark confirmed that unless it said it counted as such for items it doesn't.
The item says alchemist and an investigator isn't an alchemist. If you allow an investigator to use it what stops an GM from saying any class can use it using your same justification? You say you feel they should qualify, well I'll say I feel a barbarian or sorcerer should qualify. Since there's nothing saying you can, you can't. Basic rule of pathfinder.
sorry - what? I do not understand your reply. Please expand on this...
If you allow an investigator to use it what stops an GM from saying any class can use it using your same justification?
If there's not a justification for the investigator there's no justification for for other classes.
If one says the investigator can then it's easy to say any class based on same principle.
|
|
If you allow an investigator to use it what stops an GM from saying any class can use it using your same justification?
If there's not a justification for the investigator there's no justification for for other classes.
If one says the investigator can then it's easy to say any class based on same principle.
I believe the reasoning goes:
The formula alembic is a way for people to take potions, and add those recopies to their FORMULAE BOOK. When it was first created, there was only one class that had a 'formulae book' and only one class with the 'alchemy' class feature: the alchemist.
Now there are two classes, and they work MOSTLY the same. They both are representative of people who use mundane alchemy and slight amounts of magical power to make extracts. Their 'spellcasting' is virtually identical, so it makes sense that they could both make use of the formula alembic.
The core assumption here is that the alembic should have been updated to work with both classes, but people just forgot about it.
Now there are two classes, sorcerer and bloodrager with bloodlines, and they work MOSTLY the same. Both are classes that get powers based off of their blood. Their bloodlines are virtually identical features. But bloodragers can't use the robe because the robe's say sorcerer and bloodragers aren't sorcerer nor count as sorcerers.
An investigator's alchemy is MOSTLY the same as an alchemist's, but the alchemist's specifically says it can use wands and the investigator's doesn't and that was intentionally done because the investigator can't.
We've been shown the core assumption is that if it doesn't say it can it can't. And that if an item calls out a specific class that you only count if you are that class or specifically have a line that you count as that class as per the brawler.
So that turns the argument there into
It was supposed to be updated to include the investigator but the authors/editors and the PDT have just forgotten about updating it and haven't gotten around to fixing it.
which makes my argument
It was supposed to be updated to include barbarians and sorcerers but the authors/editors and the PDT have just forgotten about updating it and haven't gotten around to fixing it.
|
|
Well give me your reasoning of why the investigator can do it and I'll tell you how I'll reason them using it.interesting view.Since the brawler specifically says it does, and the Bloodrager FAQ says it specifically would have to say it does like the brawler to count, it's pretty easy to see that the "rule" is that it doesn't. I asked a similar questions about barbarian items and the raging fighter/ranger/skald and Mark confirmed that unless it said it counted as such for items it doesn't.
The item says alchemist and an investigator isn't an alchemist. If you allow an investigator to use it what stops an GM from saying any class can use it using your same justification? You say you feel they should qualify, well I'll say I feel a barbarian or sorcerer should qualify. Since there's nothing saying you can, you can't. Basic rule of pathfinder.
Now, if you choose to ignore them, that's fine. You'd be among the GMs that don't believe the Alembic works for Investigators.
But recognize also that some GMs are fine with it.
And in PFS, that's perfectly acceptable.
In the absence of an official clarification, your ruling doesn't get to trump anyone else's.
Well give me your reasoning of why the investigator can do it and I'll tell you how I'll reason them using it.interesting view.Since the brawler specifically says it does, and the Bloodrager FAQ says it specifically would have to say it does like the brawler to count, it's pretty easy to see that the "rule" is that it doesn't. I asked a similar questions about barbarian items and the raging fighter/ranger/skald and Mark confirmed that unless it said it counted as such for items it doesn't.
The item says alchemist and an investigator isn't an alchemist. If you allow an investigator to use it what stops an GM from saying any class can use it using your same justification? You say you feel they should qualify, well I'll say I feel a barbarian or sorcerer should qualify. Since there's nothing saying you can, you can't. Basic rule of pathfinder.Now, if you choose to ignore them, that's fine. You'd be among the GMs that don't believe the Alembic works for Investigators.
But recognize also that some GMs are fine with it.
And in PFS, that's perfectly acceptable.
In the absence of an official clarification, your ruling doesn't get to trump anyone else's.
Okay, so then you can't trump me saying that the item works for barbarians and sorcerers then, right?
Whatever reasoning I give it doesn't matter, You'd be among the GMs that don't believe the Alembic works for Barbarians and Sorcerers.
But recognize also that some GMs are fine with it.
And in PFS, that's perfectly acceptable.
So in the absence of an official clarification, your ruling doesn't get to trump anyone else's that thinks this benefits Barbarians and Sorcerers.
Because as we've seen, having thing printed beforehand doesn't mean it works for other things that have the same class feature, aka robe of arcane heritage and Mark's comments that items that grant barbarians rage powers only works for barbarians and not classes that gain rage and rage powers as a barbarian.
The similarities don't matter. SLA are a lot like spellcasting. Bloodline is similar to bloodline. An evangelist cleric's bardic performance is similar to a bards, but the Banner of ancient kinds doesn't benefit it.
The FAQ clarified that the abilities were in deed different and intentionally different. If something doesn't say it counts as or work with then it doesn't.
A blog stating that investigators can craft as alchemists doesn't suddenly make them qualify for magic items as if they were an alchemist.
Of course there's another FAQ a few lines down that says that the bloorager bloodline works with the dragon disciple's Blood of Dragons, but that ability specifies a sorcerer bloodline in places.
So basically, FAQs are arbitrary and often specific to the given case.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Now there are two classes, sorcerer and bloodrager with bloodlines, and they work MOSTLY the same. Both are classes that get powers based off of their blood. Their bloodlines are virtually identical features. But bloodragers can't use the robe because the robe's say sorcerer and bloodragers aren't sorcerer nor count as sorcerers.
An investigator's alchemy is MOSTLY the same as an alchemist's, but the alchemist's specifically says it can use wands and the investigator's doesn't and that was intentionally done because the investigator can't.
We've been shown the core assumption is that if it doesn't say it can it can't. And that if an item calls out a specific class that you only count if you are that class or specifically have a line that you count as that class as per the brawler.
So that turns the argument there into
It was supposed to be updated to include the investigator but the authors/editors and the PDT have just forgotten about updating it and haven't gotten around to fixing it.which makes my argument
It was supposed to be updated to include barbarians and sorcerers but the authors/editors and the PDT have just forgotten about updating it and haven't gotten around to fixing it.
Listen, vocal tone doesn't transmit on the internet, but it certainly feels like you're being super snippy at me, when you just asked for a clarification and I gave it. Don't be that guy.
As for your quasi-factious sorcerer/bloodrager thing, first off, their spell lists are different, their bloodline powers are different, and their spell progressions are different. For investigators, their spellcasting is ALMOST the same (and the only thing that is different doesn't affect what the alembic does), their spell lists are the same, and their spell progressions are the same. Alchemist and investigators are much more similar to each other than bloodrager/sorcerer.
Let's look at it another way. Even then, I might have gone for it if there hadn't been a specific clarification saying it doesn't work. This was just me asking if there has been a clarification for the alembic.
Now you've made your point clear. Can you leave the rest of us to be civil?
Now there are two classes, sorcerer and bloodrager with bloodlines, and they work MOSTLY the same... poor parallel argument...If you don't understand what constitutes a bloodrager's brand new mechanics, maybe you should stick to the Core Rulebook.
"Like sorcerers, bloodragers' veins surge with arcane power. While sorcerers use this power for spellcasting, bloodragers enter an altered state in which their bloodline becomes manifest"
The book seems to say they are the same source just manifested differently. Plus they both pick a source of their bloodline, both abilities are called bloodline, both grant bloodline powers, bloodline spells, and bloodline feats.
Yeah that seem mostly the same as alchemist's alchemy and investigator's alchemy.
Both called the same. Both grant extracts, except the alchemist's also grant mutagen and bombs and lets them use wands. Both use a formulae list in a book.
yeah, bloodlines seem at least as similar as alchemy is seeming.
Or I can be like you, "If you don't understand what constitutes an investigator's brand new mechanics, maybe you should stick to the Core Rulebook."
Listen, vocal tone doesn't transmit on the internet, but it certainly feels like you're being super snippy at me, when you just asked for a clarification and I gave it. Don't be that guy.
As for your quasi-factious sorcerer/bloodrager thing, first off, their spell lists are different, their bloodline powers are different, and their spell progressions are different. For investigators, their spellcasting is ALMOST the same (and the only thing that is different doesn't affect what the alembic does), their spell lists are the same, and their spell progressions are the same. Alchemist and investigators are much more similar to each other than bloodrager/sorcerer.
Let's look at it another way. Even then, I might have gone for it if there hadn't been a specific clarification...
I was talking to Prof. Wat Sun when he asked what's the reasoning to allow barbarians and sorcerer to work with it. I said if I was given a reason for it working for investigators I could use the same reason to make it work for barbs and sorcerers. You then provided a reasoning for allowing it to work for investigators so I showed how it can work for barbarians, to illustrate just how arbitrary and groundless any arguments for allowing it are. Going back to the foundational, "it doesn't say I can't so therefore I can" argument.
As for your other parts I'm showing similar cases where it shows the general rule. Just because somethings are the same, or it would be easy to see how it can work, (like two archetypes that only alter skill list in non-conflicting ways but are illegal to put together). A bloodrager's bloodline is ALMOST the same (and the only things that are different don't affect what the robes do) as a sorcerers. But we've been told that since the magic item specifically calls out sorcerer it doesn't work for bloodragers or other classes that gain bloodlines.
And I'm curious as to what you see in my posts as being uncivil? I'm not calling anyone out, saying any ideas are stupid, or that anyone is stupid for having an idea. But PLEASE share why you think I'm being uncivil. Most people make such claims but then hardly ever can explain what I've said that is in error. I'm presenting my views to counter the yes sayers. If you weren't actually looking to see if it was legal or not and just wanted people to tell you yes then you shouldn't have asked for if it was legal but asked for people to chime in if they think it's allowed.
|
|
Chess Pwn: Like I said, tone of voice doesn't transmit over the internet, so I could be wrong, but starting off with stuff we already know and basically repeating what other people said can come off as mocking them. If you didn't mean it that way, fine, by bad, internet and all that. Just seems like you were being condecending. If you didn't mean it that way, I take it back.
The thing is, most items don't affect classes, because in the pathfinder world 'classes' aren't a tangible thing. Classes aren't 'real' in the pathfinder world, they are meant to represent a series of training regimes.
After all, to a commoner, what's the difference between, say, a 1st level (bloody knuckle brawler) bloodrager and a 1st level (brawler archetype) fighter? They are both dudes who punch people. They have different mechanics, but at the end of the day, they are just representations of two dudes who learned to punch really really hard.
Now, when items do call out classes specifically, it is usually because there is a unique feature to that class. It's a way of saving space and being a little more clear to the new guys who may not understand the rules too well. It also may be that at the time of publishing, there is no other class that gets that ability.
Let's take the Blessed spellbook as an example. The Blessed Spellbook specifically talks about wizards because, at the time of publication, they were the only class that had spellbooks. So they could have said:
"A character who has the spellbook class feature can fill the 1,000 pages of a blessed book with spells without paying the material cost,"
even though wizards are the only ones with spellbooks, or they could save some space and just say what it actually says:
"A wizard can fill the 1,000 pages of a blessed book with spells without paying the material cost."
I know of NO GM that wouldn't allow a magus or arcanist to use the blessed spellbook, but I guess, technically they can't because no one has bothered to update the item.
Classes aren't 'real,' they represent bloodlines, training regimes, and areas of focus. An investigator and alchemist do almost the same thing with their extracts, where as a bloodrager's bloodline and a sorcerer's bloodline manifest in phenomenally different ways. It makes sense that a bloodrager putting on a robe designed to boost blooded spellcasting doesn't make him better at tearing stuff apart with his bare hands.
That's just my two cents, and sorry about the misunderstanding.
Lots of items are class specific.
Banner of the Ancient Kings - bard
Headband of Havoc - barbaian (Mark has said it only works for barbs)
Helm of Fearsome Mien - barb
Horn of Battle Clarity - barb
Torc of Lionheart Fury - barb
tons of items only work or only owrk fully for certain classes.
|
|
Lots of items are class specific.
Banner of the Ancient Kings - bard
Headband of Havoc - barbaian (Mark has said it only works for barbs)
Helm of Fearsome Mien - barb
Horn of Battle Clarity - barb
Torc of Lionheart Fury - barbtons of items only work or only owrk fully for certain classes.
You're kinda proving my point here bud. The items only mention classes when the class has a unique ability all to its own.
Banner of ancient kings: Bards are (still) the only ones who can sing for the bard-bonuses. The only other one who comes close, skalds, sing for rage. So instead of saying "Anyone holding this banner that has the performance class ability such as a bard or similar character" they just said "bard."
Headband of Havoc? Barbarians are still the only ones who both 'actual' rage, and get rage powers (skald sing-raging works differently, and bloodragers don't get rage powers.) I guess there is the viking fighter archetype, but I would argue that the Headband should work for them.
Helm of the Fearsom Mein: Okay, that one I give you, seems to break the mold a bit.
Horn of Battle Clarity: Same as headband of havoc
Torc of battle Fury: Same as headband of Havoc
EDIT: What I'm trying to say here is that there are no items such as, say "Fighters who wear this helm gain a +3 to acrobatics checks, no other classes gain any other benefits." For the most part, (Helm of the Fearsom Mein notwithstanding), Items that mention specific classes do so because the item helps out a specific class ability in some way, and it's easier and clearer to say 'bard' than to say 'class with the ability to perform and give the following bonuses:' and then repeat the entire bard section of the book.
Now that there are a couple classes that can do what other classes can do, there are problems.
Lots of items are class specific.
Banner of the Ancient Kings - bard
Headband of Havoc - barbaian (Mark has said it only works for barbs)
Helm of Fearsome Mien - barb
Horn of Battle Clarity - barb
Torc of Lionheart Fury - barbtons of items only work or only owrk fully for certain classes.
You're kinda proving my point here bud. The items only mention classes when the class has a unique ability all to its own.
Banner of ancient kings: Bards are (still) the only ones who can sing for the bard-bonuses. The only other one who comes close, skalds, sing for rage. So instead of saying "Anyone holding this banner that has the performance class ability such as a bard or similar character" they just said "bard."
Storyteller medium : This ability is similar in all respects to bardic performance as used by a bard of the storyteller's medium level
Exemplar Brawler : At 3rd level, an exemplar gains the ability to use certain bardic performances.Martyr paladim: His stigmata assist his allies, duplicating the effect of the countersong, distraction, or inspire courage bardic performance of a bard of his paladin level
Evangelist Cleric: This ability is similar in all respects to bardic performance as used by a bard of the same level
But since none say they count as a bard for magic items none of them can use this banner for the inspire courage increase.
If they wanted the banner to be for other than bard it could have easily said, "If the wielder has inspire courage he treats his level as 4 higher for that ability." clear and simple AND allows for future material to fit in without needing the text, "counts as bard for magic items."
Headband of Havoc? Barbarians are still the only ones who both 'actual' rage, and get rage powers (skald sing-raging works differently, and bloodragers don't get rage powers.) I guess there is the viking fighter archetype, but I would argue that the Headband should work for them.
Wild Stalker Ranger as well as the viking fighter.
Helm of the Fearsom Mein: Okay, that one I give you, seems to break the mold a bit.
Horn of Battle Clarity: Same as headband of havoc
Torc of battle Fury: Same as headband of Havoc
So these are just the few Items I found quickly. There are lots of items that require a certain class, even though other classes could qualify.
Spell Mastery feat that requires wizard 1 and other classes that have books can't take this feat. There's even a FAQ confirming that. So while your world might not really have "wizard" and "fighter" the rules balance do.
|
|
So, just as an FYI, if you take that approach, here are some other things to consider:
Blessed books don't work for Magus/archanist
Boro beads don't work for investigators
Alchimests cannot copy formulas from other alchemists or investigators (read the text, it never says they can)
Any spell that specifically calls out a class doesn't work for any other class even if it appears on their spell list
boro beads work for investigators.
"Once per day on command, a boro bead enables the bearer to recharge any one extract that he had mixed and then consumed that day."
Investigators have extracts.
Alchimests can copy from alchemists
"An alchemist can also add formulae to his book just like a wizard adds spells to his spellbook"
This means look at the rules for wizard and adding spells in spellbook and replace wizard with alchemist and spellbook with formulae book. If it didn't have the line saying they can copy from wizards too then they couldn't do that.
But your other points are true, though I can't think of any spells that call out a class. Well, except for the ones that say this only works for oracles or can't be used by oracles.
|
|
boro beads work for investigators.
"Once per day on command, a boro bead enables the bearer to recharge any one extract that he had mixed and then consumed that day."
Investigators have extracts.
Alchimests can copy from alchemists
"An alchemist can also add formulae to his book just like a wizard adds spells to his spellbook"
This means look at the rules for wizard and adding spells in spellbook and replace wizard with alchemist and spellbook with formulae book. If it didn't have the line saying they can copy from wizards too then they couldn't do that.But your other points are true, though I can't think of any spells that call out a class. Well, except for the ones that say this only works for oracles or can't be used by oracles.
Both are wrong:
This multicolored, sturdy glass bead is an aid to members of the alchemist class. Once per day on command, a boro bead enables the bearer to recharge any one extract that he had mixed and then consumed that day. The extract is then reconstituted and usable again, just as if it had not been drank. The extract must be of a particular level, depending on the bead. Different beads exist for recalling one extract per day of each level from 1st through 6th. A bead works on an infusion, but not a potion, elixir, bomb, mutagen, or nonmagical alchemical material such as antitoxin.
Source: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateEquipment/wondrousItems/slotless .html#boro-bead
When using Craft (alchemy) to create an alchemical item, an alchemist gains a competence bonus equal to his class level on the Craft (alchemy) check. In addition, an alchemist can use Craft (alchemy) to identify potions as if using detect magic. He must hold the potion for 1 round to make such a check.
An alchemist can create three special types of magical items—extracts, bombs, and mutagens. Bombs are explosive splash weapons, and mutagens are transformative elixirs that the alchemist drinks to enhance his physical abilities—both of these are detailed in their own sections below.
Extracts are the most varied of the three. In many ways, they behave like spells in potion form, and as such their effects can be dispelled by effects like dispel magic using the alchemist's level as the caster level. Unlike potions, though, extracts can have powerful effects and duplicate spells that a potion normally could not.
An alchemist can create only a certain number of extracts of each level per day. His base daily allotment of extracts is given on Table 2–1. In addition, he receives bonus extracts per day if he has a high Intelligence score, in the same way a wizard receives bonus spells per day.
When an alchemist mixes an extract, he infuses the chemicals and reagents in the extract with magic siphoned from his own magical aura. An extract immediately becomes inert if it leaves the alchemist's possession, reactivating as soon as it returns to his keeping—an alchemist cannot normally pass out his extracts for allies to use (but see the “infusion” discovery below). An extract, once created, remains potent for 1 day before losing its magic, so an alchemist must re-prepare his extracts every day. Mixing an extract takes 1 minute of work—most alchemists prepare many extracts at the start of the day or just before going on an adventure, but it's not uncommon for an alchemist to keep some (or even all) of his daily extract slots open so that he can prepare extracts in the field as needed.
Although the alchemist doesn't actually cast spells, he does have a formulae list that determines what extracts he can create. An alchemist can utilize spell-trigger items if the spell appears on his formulae list, but not spell-completion items (unless he uses Use Magic Device to do so). An extract is “cast” by drinking it, as if imbibing a potion—the effects of an extract exactly duplicate the spell upon which its formula is based, save that the spell always affects only the drinking alchemist. An alchemist can draw and drink an extract as a standard action. The alchemist uses his level as the caster level to determine any effect based on caster level.
Creating extracts consumes raw materials, but the cost of these materials is insignificant—comparable to the valueless material components of most spells. If a spell normally has a costly material component, that component is expended during the consumption of that particular extract. Extracts cannot be made from spells that have focus requirements (alchemist extracts that duplicate divine spells never have a divine focus requirement).
An alchemist can prepare an extract of any formula he knows. To learn or use an extract, an alchemist must have an Intelligence score equal to at least 10 + the extract's level. The Difficulty Class for a saving throw against an alchemist's extract is 10 + the extract level + the alchemist's Intelligence modifier.
An alchemist may know any number of formulae. He stores his formulae in a special tome called a formula book. He must refer to this book whenever he prepares an extract but not when he consumes it. An alchemist begins play with two 1st-level formulae of his choice, plus a number of additional forumlae equal to his Intelligence modifier. At each new alchemist level, he gains one new formula of any level that he can create. An alchemist can also add formulae to his book just like a wizard adds spells to his spellbook, using the same costs, pages, and time requirements. An alchemist can study a wizard's spellbook to learn any formula that is equivalent to a spell the spellbook contains. A wizard, however, cannot learn spells from a formula book. An alchemist does not need to decipher arcane writings before copying them.
source: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advancedPlayersGuide/baseClasses/alchemi st.html
In other words, they use wizard's rules for copying spells except where noted. Wizards cannot copy from them. Therefore, they can copy from wizards but not other alchemists. This is in direct contrast to the Investigator who explicitly can.
When using Craft (alchemy) to create an alchemical item, an investigator gains a competence bonus equal to his class level on the skill check. In addition, an investigator can use Craft (alchemy) to identify potions as if using detect magic. He must hold the potion for 1 round to attempt such a check.
Like an alchemist, an investigator prepares his spells by mixing ingredients and a tiny fraction of his own magical power into a number of extracts, and then effectively casts the spell by drinking the extract. These extracts have powerful effects, but they are also bound to their creator. Extracts behave like spells in potion form, and as such their effects can be dispelled by dispel magic and similar effects, using the investigator's level as the caster level.
An investigator can create only a certain number of extracts of each level per day. His base daily allotment of extracts per day is given on the table above. In addition, he receives bonus extracts per day if he has a high Intelligence score, in the same way a wizard receives bonus spells per day.
When an investigator mixes an extract, he infuses the chemicals and reagents in the extract with magic siphoned from his own magical aura. An extract immediately become inert if it leaves the investigator's possession, then reactivates as soon as it returns to his keeping—an investigator cannot normally pass out his extracts for allies to use. An extract, once created, remains potent for 1 day before losing its magic, so an investigator must prepare his extracts anew every day. Mixing an extract takes 1 minute of work.
Creating extracts consumes raw material, but the cost of those materials is insignificant—comparable to the valueless material components of most spells. If a spell normally has a costly material component, that component is expended during the consumption of that particular extract. Extracts cannot be made from spells that have focus requirements; extracts that duplicate divine spells never have a divine focus requirement.
An investigator uses the alchemist formula list to determine the extracts that he can know. An investigator can prepare an extract of any formula he knows. To learn or use an extract, an investigator must have an Intelligence score equal to at least 10 + the extract's level. The saving throw DC of an investigator's extract is equal to 10 + the extract's level + the investigator's Intelligence modifier.
An investigator may know any number of formulae. He stores his formulae in a special tome called a formula book. He must refer to this book whenever he prepares an extract. At 1st level, an investigator starts with two 1st-level formulae of his choice, plus a number of additional formulae equal to his Intelligence modifier. At each new investigator level, he gains one new formula of any level that he can create. An investigator can also add formulae to his book just as a wizard adds spells to his spellbook, using the same costs, pages, and time requirements. A formula book costs as much as a spellbook. An investigator can study a wizard's spellbook to learn any formula that is equivalent to a spell the spellbook contains. A wizard, however, cannot learn spells from a formula book. An investigator can also learn formulae from another investigator's or an alchemist's formula book (and vice versa). An investigator does not need to decipher arcane writing before copying formulae.
source: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advancedClassGuide/classes/investigator. html
This is the danger of going super Rules and Written, that Nefreet pointed out at the beginning of this thread.
It says this bead is an aid to alchemists. NOT that you must be an alchemist to use it. Like I said the item does this. "Once per day on command, a boro bead enables the bearer to recharge any one extract that he had mixed and then consumed that day."
That is something that ANYONE with extracts can use.
If it said, "Once per day on command, a boro bead enables an alchemist to recharge any one extract that he had mixed and then consumed that day."
Then you'd be correct, but it doesn't say that.
And like I said. For the alchemist you read the wizard spellbook text and replace all wizards with alchemist and all spellbook with formulae book. So it'll say, an alchemist can copy a spell from a scroll or another alchemists formulae book. Then back in the alchemist text it says that they can also copy from wizards.
But even if they can't copy, who cares. If that's the rule it's the rule. It's like saying that a wizard only being able to cast 1 spell per day if they have no bonus spells is a danger of going super Rules as Written.
|
|
I'm not going to argue with you anymore. I've made my point, as has King of Anything and Nefreet. Some stuff was made before other classes/abilities were a thing, and not every item has been updated. That's why I asked the question. We have explained our side of the argument, you have explained yours. I see where you are coming from, I don't know about vice versa.
If you wanna follow the letter of the law, I can point to several things that get stupid really fast, but I doubt that would change your mind. This is the reason I FAQed this thread, let's let the devs weigh in and stop this back and forth that's getting us nowhere.