Venture-Agent, Australia—NSW—Bondi Junction
|
Hi all,
just putting some ideas together and I was wondering if taking Scalykind as the domain for Natures Bond on a Nagaji Aspirant (Druid archetype)be allowed.
It is a domain offered by the Godess Nalinivati who is an ascended Naga (and now the patron of Naga and Nagaji) and it is said was the one who gave free will to the Nagaji.
Seeing also that it appears that the Nagaji Aspirant is not so much a nature based as Naga based worship this would be a good fit.
The domain is PFS legal but it is not one under the Animal/Terrain Druids list.
Thoughts?
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow. That sure is thematic.
"absolute devotion to nagas and naga gods... acting as a herald to the naga deities... spiritual connection to the serpentine deities worshiped by the nagas..."
I'd have no problem allowing it in a homegame, but you may run into crippling table variation in PFS. Here's why:
Any of those responses from a GM could cripple your character, since the Nature Bond class feature is so integral to Druids.
I wouldn't recommend it. Save it for a homegame.
|
|
Wow. That sure is thematic.
"absolute devotion to nagas and naga gods... acting as a herald to the naga deities... spiritual connection to the serpentine deities worshiped by the nagas..."I'd have no problem allowing it in a homegame, but you may run into crippling table variation in PFS. Here's why:
The Naga Aspirant archetype doesn't add options to, replace or otherwise alter the Druid's Nature Bond class feature.
The Druid's Nature Bond class feature only gives you access to a handful of Domain options.
Nalinivati is only 1 of 11 deities that grants access to the Scalykind Domain. If it was more exclusive to her, your case would be stronger.
If you chose a subdomain (Scalykind surprisingly has 3) your risk of a "No" response increases.
The Scalykind Domain existed for years in print before the Naga Aspirant archetype was created. It may have been intentionally left out. Any of those responses from a GM could cripple your character, since the Nature Bond class feature is so integral to Druids.
I wouldn't recommend it. Save it for a homegame.
Hmmm, good points actually.
I can't find the Archetype text to see what it does to Venom immunity. Also like Gamerskum said you can take a domain that changes a class feature that your archetype also modifies unless the only way to get the domain is through an archetype.
Edit: took out some incorrect info.
|
I can't find the Archetype text to see what it does to Venom immunity. Also like Gamerskum said you can take a domain that changes a class feature that your archetype also modifies unless the only way to get the domain is through an archetype.
Edit: took out some incorrect info.
Naga Aspirant does not alter Venom Immunity, it removes it entirely, and gives you a completely different ability.
Serpent Domain also "replaces" Venom Immunity, although it gives you a different ability back which is also called Venom Immunity.
So in this case, you can't take the Domain because there is no Venom Immunity left for the Domain to alter.
That's not a standard rule is it one for PFS? I understand it's an odd situation, but the rules would still allow it you just lose one of the abilities.
Can you site that. I know that 2 Archetypes can't affect the same feature. But an archetype and a class option don't have a rule stating that. I'm not sure if there is even another instance of this happening and I guess it could be argued that the lack of the class feature would be enough to say no to the archetype. But the new feature in this case is still venom immunity which could still be replaced by the archetype.
|
|
Can you site that. I know that 2 Archetypes can't affect the same feature. But an archetype and a class option don't have a rule stating that. I'm not sure if there is even another instance of this happening and I guess it could be argued that the lack of the class feature would be enough to say no to the archetype. But the new feature in this case is still venom immunity which could still be replaced by the archetype.
I could see making that argument if it were the other way around, but it's order of operations that kills you in this case. You choose the archetype before you choose the Domain. (Archetype being a modifier to your class, while Domain is a legal option for the Nature's Bond class feature of that modified class.)
So in this case, you've lost Venom Immunity before the Domain had a chance to modify it.
Which has the same net effect of getting the domain and losing it to the archetype.
|
|
It actually doesn't, because you can't even get to the stage of choosing the Domain until you have already set your archetype in stone.
Choosing the archetype finalizes the list of class features that you have.
Then you start making your class feature choices. You get to Nature's Bond, and the Serpent Domain isn't available to you because you no longer have Venom Immunity to trade out of.
If, instead, the archetype modified Venom Immunity, and then the Domain eliminated it, you *might* be able to do both. (I wouldn't want to try that in PFS, but there's a good chance I would allow it in a home game.)
This is because an archetype *modifies* a class, while class features are components of that class. Choices have to be made in hierarchical order, because until you finalize your class, you don't have any class features to make choices about.
|
|
Actually, rereading the section on Alternate Class Features in the APG, the restriction against stacking alterations to Class Features is *not* specific to archetypes, it is true for *all* Alternate Class Features. (I'd love to copy/paste the text, but I am on a tablet.) As Cleric Domains/Subdomains are included in that section, I would have to say that this precludes stacking any two class features that conflict, not just any two archetypes. So even in the reversed case I mentioned above, I would not consider this to be PFS legal. (But I might consider it in a home game, where I often relax the stacking rules.)
Yeah that does make sense, and yeah home game-wise I would allow it in a heartbeat.
Is a cleric or any other class besides a druid able to take that domain? If so, how does it work for them?
Yes any nature themed class that gets a domain can from what I understand. So that is a great question I'll probably see if there is a rules answer for it.
I did necro a thread on it which raised an interesting point. If not having a feature precludes you from taking a domain can Inquisitors take the Sun domain?
|
|
It's similar to ki vows. It says any user of ki can take them, but then says it trades out still mind.
So since this says it replaces venom immunity does that prohibit others from taking it or from gaining that ability if they can take it?
If having venom immunity isn't required then anyone can take it.
If it's required then only druids with that ability can take the domain.
Seems like the best approach to answering this question.
Also if it isn't required to have Venom Immunity to take the domain either because
A.) the domain gives nothing there since it lacks an ability to replace.
B.) the domain grants it even with nothing to replace.
Can the aforementioned Druid now take.