|
old summoner.
Old is no longer legal to play, but unless PFS posts a PFS ruling that everything uses the unchained version they work as originally made and use the old version.
This issue is the same as rogue talents from other classes and rage powers from other classes. Unchained options need to be specifically called out to be used.
|
|
Old summoner isn't legal for play as a class, but that doesn't make it's evolutions voided for classes that use evolutions. Nothing in the restrictions for play say that it's options are no longer legal. And the rules are you go off of the old class when class abilities are referenced by default.
So unless PFS leadership makes a rule otherwise, you are required to only select from old list and can't access new list.
|
|
Yes, Mark confirmed that all the classes that say pick rage power, rogue talents, go off of the old lists. That for unchained to be the list to choose from it would need to specifically say from unchained.
If PFS leadership said that all references to summoners are swapped to unchained, or made specific exceptions for stuff to go off of unchained. But as is per RPG rules it's old summoner, and PFS hasn't said anything to override that.
Then why did the archetype only become legal when Unchained was made legal?
Around the same time (I believe), the archetype got a serious nerf, going from full evolution point progression to a small pool of points.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I suppose that the safest thing to do would be to select evolutions that would be legal and cost the same either way.
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
And the summoner still exists as legal material. You just can't create any new ones for play.
A PFS GM has no right to say no to old evolutions or to allow unchained evolutions.
The summoner does *not* still exist as legal material:
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Advanced Player's GuideAs of 4/27/15 the summoner class in this book is no longer legal for play. A summoner character that has played at least once at level 2 or higher by this date qualfies to continue using this version of the class. Otherwise, only the summoner in Pathfinder RPG Pathfinder Unchained is legal for play.
It explicitly says the new summoner is the only legal option.
|
|
This is like races.
aasimars and their options are legal even though aasimars aren't legal for play. It's because there are ways to legally get around the rule of play. Same with this. You cannot PLAY a summoner, but that doesn't make the the material a non legal source if you gain it in a legal way.
Or like how multi-attack as a monster feat isn't legal for PC's, unless they get it legally through ranger class.
Just because you can't normally play with it doesn't stop other legal rules from using it still.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
This is like races.
aasimars and their options are legal even though aasimars aren't legal for play. It's because there are ways to legally get around the rule of play. Same with this. You cannot PLAY a summoner, but that doesn't make the the material a non legal source if you gain it in a legal way.
Or like how multi-attack as a monster feat isn't legal for PC's, unless they get it legally through ranger class.
Just because you can't normally play with it doesn't stop other legal rules from using it still.
Aasimar options are explicitly legal for play. APG summoner options are not.
"Aasimars: all alternate racial traits, favored class options, racial archetypes, racial equipment, feats, magic items, and spells are legal for play"Rangers can use multi attack because bestiary has this language:
Feats: none of the feats are legal for play for PCs, animal companions, or familiars unless specifically granted by another legal source;
Other legal rules would need to contain text saying the bypassed the legality issues.
Otherwise you are saying "evolution legalities can be bypassed taking a class other than summoner that grants evolutions." Which means that the Primal hunter can take racial evolutions.
He's talking about Summoners that were around before the terrible idea that was Unchained and got 'grandfathered' in. Just like Goblins are still in PFS because there are people with boons that say they can play Goblins.
Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
This is like races.
aasimars and their options are legal even though aasimars aren't legal for play. It's because there are ways to legally get around the rule of play. Same with this. You cannot PLAY a summoner, but that doesn't make the the material a non legal source if you gain it in a legal way.
Or like how multi-attack as a monster feat isn't legal for PC's, unless they get it legally through ranger class.
Just because you can't normally play with it doesn't stop other legal rules from using it still.
Aasimar options are explicitly legal for play. APG summoner options are not.
"Aasimars: all alternate racial traits, favored class options, racial archetypes, racial equipment, feats, magic items, and spells are legal for play"Rangers can use multi attack because bestiary has this language:
Feats: none of the feats are legal for play for PCs, animal companions, or familiars unless specifically granted by another legal source;Other legal rules would need to contain text saying the bypassed the legality issues.
Otherwise you are saying "evolution legalities can be bypassed taking a class other than summoner that grants evolutions." Which means that the Primal hunter can take racial evolutions.
Is that an official wording because they aren't at all consistent with it when it comes to archetypes that uses banned material?
|
|
Let's walk through this:
Player Bob makes a Primal Hunter, it's legal.
Bob goes to select APG Summoner evolutions. GM 1 says he can't because the APG Summoner is no longer allowed as a class.
Bob then uses UC Summoner evolutions. GM 2 says he can't because nowhere does it say his PC can access UC evolutions.
What's Bob to do?
(Other than what David K. says above and only choose what's on both lists at the same cost, which admittedly is what I'll likely do...)
The APG Summoner class is explicitly banned (for new PCs).
The APG Summoner evolutions list is not. If one can access that list through a legal source (i.e. Primal Hunter), then they should be playable.
The UC Summoner replaces the APG Summoner class, and has access to its own list, not the APG list.
To some here, this implies that the UC evolutions also replace the APG evolutions in other cases as well.
But is there language saying the UC Summoner's evolutions should (or even can) be used in place of APG evolutions for other legal sources of evolutions?
If not, players have to use the APG list. It's the default.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Is that an official wording because they aren't at all consistent with it when it comes to archetypes that uses banned material?This is like races.
aasimars and their options are legal even though aasimars aren't legal for play. It's because there are ways to legally get around the rule of play. Same with this. You cannot PLAY a summoner, but that doesn't make the the material a non legal source if you gain it in a legal way.
Or like how multi-attack as a monster feat isn't legal for PC's, unless they get it legally through ranger class.
Just because you can't normally play with it doesn't stop other legal rules from using it still.
Aasimar options are explicitly legal for play. APG summoner options are not.
"Aasimars: all alternate racial traits, favored class options, racial archetypes, racial equipment, feats, magic items, and spells are legal for play"Rangers can use multi attack because bestiary has this language:
Feats: none of the feats are legal for play for PCs, animal companions, or familiars unless specifically granted by another legal source;Other legal rules would need to contain text saying the bypassed the legality issues.
Otherwise you are saying "evolution legalities can be bypassed taking a
class other than summoner that grants evolutions." Which means that the Primal hunter can take racial evolutions.
Yes, those are the official wordings, you can look them up yourself in the Additional Resources.
By the way, which archtypes reference banned material?
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Let's walk through this:
Player Bob makes a Primal Hunter, it's legal.Bob goes to select APG Summoner evolutions. GM 1 says he can't because the APG Summoner is no longer allowed as a class.
Bob then uses UC Summoner evolutions. GM 2 says he can't because nowhere does it say his PC can access UC evolutions.
What's Bob to do?
(Other than what David K. says above and only choose what's on both lists at the same cost, which admittedly is what I'll likely do...)The APG Summoner class is explicitly banned (for new PCs).
The APG Summoner evolutions list is not. If one can access that list through a legal source (i.e. Primal Hunter), then they should be playable.The UC Summoner replaces the APG Summoner class, and has access to its own list, not the APG list.
To some here, this implies that the UC evolutions also replace the APG evolutions in other cases as well.
But is there language saying the UC Summoner's evolutions should (or even can) be used in place of APG evolutions for other legal sources of evolutions?
If not, players have to use the APG list. It's the default.
No, the evolution list is part of the class. And the entirety of the class is banned.
|
|
Unless a class says it uses unchained it doesn't. Primal hunter makes no mention of unchained. Thus it cannot use unchained. This is the RPG line rule. PFS follows RPG line rules unless PFS makes a specific overriding rule to that. PFS has not said that primal hunter uses the unchained list for it's evos. Thus it must use the normal list for it's evos.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
Is that an official wording because they aren't at all consistent with it when it comes to archetypes that uses banned material?This is like races.
aasimars and their options are legal even though aasimars aren't legal for play. It's because there are ways to legally get around the rule of play. Same with this. You cannot PLAY a summoner, but that doesn't make the the material a non legal source if you gain it in a legal way.
Or like how multi-attack as a monster feat isn't legal for PC's, unless they get it legally through ranger class.
Just because you can't normally play with it doesn't stop other legal rules from using it still.
Aasimar options are explicitly legal for play. APG summoner options are not.
"Aasimars: all alternate racial traits, favored class options, racial archetypes, racial equipment, feats, magic items, and spells are legal for play"Rangers can use multi attack because bestiary has this language:
Feats: none of the feats are legal for play for PCs, animal companions, or familiars unless specifically granted by another legal source;Other legal rules would need to contain text saying the bypassed the legality issues.
Otherwise you are saying "evolution legalities can be bypassed taking a
class other than summoner that grants evolutions." Which means that the Primal hunter can take racial evolutions.Yes, those are the official wordings, you can look them up yourself in the Additional Resources.
By the way, which archtypes reference banned material?
Third Eye from Occult Adventures is a banned feat granted by the Nexian Medium which is a legal archetype. None of the wording that you talk about appears in the Occult Adventures thing but the archetype definitely gives you the feat.
|
Let's walk through this:
Player Bob makes a Primal Hunter, it's legal.Bob goes to select APG Summoner evolutions. GM 1 says he can't because the APG Summoner is no longer allowed as a class.
Bob then uses UC Summoner evolutions. GM 2 says he can't because nowhere does it say his PC can access UC evolutions.
What's Bob to do?
(Other than what David K. says above and only choose what's on both lists at the same cost, which admittedly is what I'll likely do...)The APG Summoner class is explicitly banned (for new PCs).
The APG Summoner evolutions list is not. If one can access that list through a legal source (i.e. Primal Hunter), then they should be playable.The UC Summoner replaces the APG Summoner class, and has access to its own list, not the APG list.
To some here, this implies that the UC evolutions also replace the APG evolutions in other cases as well.
But is there language saying the UC Summoner's evolutions should (or even can) be used in place of APG evolutions for other legal sources of evolutions?
If not, players have to use the APG list. It's the default.
This is a great summary of the situation. And also one of the few situations that looks to me to be totally grey -- I understand the arguments for both sets of positions and don't see anything which causes me to favor one interpretation over the other.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Third eye - Nexian Channeler probably needs clarification.
Previously when classes have granted illegal feats (most often scribe scroll or brew potion) they have simply not granted anything until staff weighed in on a replacement.
Obviously that won't work for Nexian Channeler, since that feat is the entire point of the class.