Under the APG faq there is a discussion of this issue.
yup, sounds right
Are you guys reading the same FAQ that I am?
In general, if a class feature grants multiple subfeatures, it’s OK to take two archetypes that only change two separate subfeatures. This includes two bard archetypes that alter or replace different bardic performances (even though bardic performance is technically a single class feature)
Create Pit, Torturer's Eye, and Torturous Transformation are three different spells. Thus they are different things and do not overlap for the purposes of archetype stacking. They do not change the way that spellcasting works in general, and thus do not fall under more general stacking clauses.
So yes, these archetypes can be stacked.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nope, they don't stack. Spells aren't subfeatures nor are they class features. They both would be in the spell list class feature and thus stop.
Something as simple as adding a class skill counts as changing class skills, so two things that add different skills get stopped because of both changing class skills, thus adding spells is stopped by this similar function.
Things that full under the "separate features of one feature" are things that have their own heading with their own names and show up in the table with their names or in the class description with their names. Bardic performance is one of the few things that fall under this. Deeds from gunslinger and swash are another that would seem to be this exception.
Depends on your GM. The Qinggong Monk archetype's FAQ for instance touches on the subject of optional replacements.
"Can a qinggong monk take a second archetype if the character doesn’t swap out abilities the second archetype requires?
Yes. However, the other archetype takes priority over the various abilities granted at each level, and the character can’t delay taking an ability that the other archetype replaces—he must allow the second archetype to replace the standard ability at the standard class level."
Given that the features shared between the Vivisectionist and Dimensional Excavator are marked (X)=optional replacement for the Vivisectionist I'd allow them to be combined with the Dimensional Excavator taking precedence.
Depends on your GM. The Qinggong Monk archetype's FAQ for instance touches on the subject of optional replacements.
"Can a qinggong monk take a second archetype if the character doesn’t swap out abilities the second archetype requires?
Yes. However, the other archetype takes priority over the various abilities granted at each level, and the character can’t delay taking an ability that the other archetype replaces—he must allow the second archetype to replace the standard ability at the standard class level."
Given that the features shared between the Vivisectionist and Dimensional Excavator are marked (X)=optional replacement for the Vivisectionist I'd allow them to be combined with the Dimensional Excavator taking precedence.
Qinggong Monk is a unique case because you you get to choose how features are replaced. I have re-read the Vivisectionist and Dimensional Excavator descriptions and, despite your comments, neither states that parts of the archetypes are optional.
Nope, they don't stack. Spells aren't subfeatures nor are they class features. They both would be in the spell list class feature and thus stop.
Something as simple as adding a class skill counts as changing class skills, so two things that add different skills get stopped because of both changing class skills, thus adding spells is stopped by this similar function.
Things that full under the "separate features of one feature" are things that have their own heading with their own names and show up in the table with their names or in the class description with their names. Bardic performance is one of the few things that fall under this. Deeds from gunslinger and swash are another that would seem to be this exception.
That's a great summary of the stacking rules, and I completely agree with your conclusion. I do have a really nitpicky correction, though. You are correct that individual spells aren't Class Features or Sub-features, but the same is true of Spell Lists. They are part of the Spells Class Feature. So if anything changes the Spell List then the Class Feature being changed is actually the Spells Class Feature.
But Alchemists technically have a Formula List rather than a Spell List, and that is part of the Alchemy Class Feature. So Alchemy is the Class Feature that is being altered by both of the archetypes addressed in this thread.
Qinggong Monk is a unique case because you you get to choose how features are replaced. I have re-read the Vivisectionist and Dimensional Excavator descriptions and, despite your comments, neither states that parts of the archetypes are optional.
The table Class Features Changed or Replaced on the SRD have the Vivisectionist's Discoveries listed as (X). Unless they made a huge mistake when typing it there.
"Bleeding Attack
A vivisectionist may select the bleeding attack rogue talent in place of a discovery."
He may select the rogue talent or take the discovery, that is clearly optional. Therefore I'd still allow it in my games but the character would not be able to benefit from the bleeding attack feature.
Be careful: Although this particular archetype table entry appears to be correct at a quick glance, the www.d20pfsrd.com archetype table often have errors, often leaving out modifications or replacements to features. Although I just noticed that the Alchemist archetypes table suddenly got several recent archetypes added to it(*), so maybe something is starting to change -- still, be careful, and cross-check with Archives of Nethys and/or the Paizo PRD when you can (not always possible), as well as reading in the archetype entry itself rather than trusting the archetype table.
(*)The archetype tables on www.d20pfsrd.com were also missing ALL of the recent archetypes for every class, including ALL archetypes for ALL Occult classes; now some but not all classes seem to have suddenly gotten updated archetype tables, although I can't vouch for their correctness.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
The table Class Features Changed or Replaced on the SRD have the Vivisectionist's Discoveries listed as (X). Unless they made a huge mistake when typing it there.
By table you mean d20pfsrd?
You should know that they are wrong on the rules so much that I fundamentally don’t trust their tables, that they copy text correctly, that they don’t intentionally fudge the rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The more people say that the Qinggong Monk is a special case the more I believe they say that because a faq exists for it. If it didn't people would stop calling it special and say that it cannot stack either.
Devs have also said it’s a special case and not to apply it to other stacking questions.
Do you have a Source? Would be interested in having a look at that.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Not the one I was looking to find
But it’s a thread where someone is confused why FAQ on crossblood seemed similar to Qinggong FAQ.
Yeah, I can't really take that one to back your statement that the Devs said the Qinggong Monk is a special case as he doesn't mention it and is talking about using feats to gain Archetype abilities.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The table Class Features Changed or Replaced on the SRD have the Vivisectionist's Discoveries listed as (X). Unless they made a huge mistake when typing it there.
Qinggong Monk is a unique case because you you get to choose how features are replaced. I have re-read the Vivisectionist and Dimensional Excavator descriptions and, despite your comments, neither states that parts of the archetypes are optional.
I see the source of your confusion. d20pfsrd isn't a Paizo site. The tables there only represent the opinion of the website's author and aren't relevant when discussing the actual Pathfinder rules.
"Bleeding Attack
A vivisectionist may select the bleeding attack rogue talent in place of a discovery."
He may select the rogue talent or take the discovery, that is clearly optional. Therefore I'd still allow it in my games but the character would not be able to benefit from the bleeding attack feature.
You are confusing two different issues. Using an archetype-granted Class Feature is sometimes optional, but having the Class Feature is not. A Vivisectionist doesn't have to select the Bleeding Attack Rogue Talent, but they must have the Bleeding Attack Class Feature.
Each alternate class feature presented in an archetype either replaces or alters one or more specific class features from the base class.
When an archetype includes multiple alternate class features, a character must take all of them—often blocking the character from ever gaining certain standard class features, but replacing them with other options.
So every Vivisectionist has the Bleeding Attack Class Feature and any stacking consequences that it creates. It doesn't matter whether or not they use that Class Feature to select the Bleeding Attack Rogue Talent.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Gisher, good summary. +1 on “ignore d20pfsrd”. It’s wrong as often as right.
Another thing of note Empress is that there are no duplicate or conflicting FAQ. If you think two FAQ conflict, adjust your interpretation. It’s often hard to find messages from mid 2013 4 years after. It’s well understood that only the Qinggong archetype works this way and has a special FAQ that talks about it being a secondary archetype.
So every Vivisectionist has the Bleeding Attack Class Feature and any stacking consequences that it creates. It doesn't matter whether or not they use that Class Feature to select the Bleeding Attack Rogue Talent.
No they don't. Every Vivisectionist has the ability to replace a Discovery with Bleeding Attack or ignore it altogether.
Another thing of note Empress is that there are no duplicate or conflicting FAQ. If you think two FAQ conflict, adjust your interpretation.
What two conflicting faqs are you referring to? Please reread my posts and point out to me which two faqs I thought conflicted. I asked you for a reference in regards to your claim about what the Devs said and I am open for it. Until then, please do not try to deflect it into another direction.
So every Vivisectionist has the Bleeding Attack Class Feature and any stacking consequences that it creates. It doesn't matter whether or not they use that Class Feature to select the Bleeding Attack Rogue Talent.No they don't. Every Vivisectionist has the ability to replace a Discovery with Bleeding Attack or ignore it altogether.
I will cite the rule from Occult Adventures again.
Each alternate class feature presented in an archetype either replaces or alters one or more specific class features from the base class.
When an archetype includes multiple alternate class features, a character must take all of them—often blocking the character from ever gaining certain standard class features, but replacing them with other options.
And here it is from the Advanced Player's Guide.
Most of the options presented on the following pages include a host of alternate class features. When a character selects a class, he must choose to use the standard class features found in the Core Rulebook or those listed in one of the archetypes presented here. Each alternate class feature replaces a specific class feature from its parent class. For example, the elemental fist class feature of the monk of the four winds replaces the stunning fist class feature of the monk. When an archetype includes multiple class features, a character must take all of them—often blocking the character from ever gaining certain familiar class features, but replacing them with equally powerful options.
And from Ultimate Combat.
The primary way in which archetypes modify their corresponding base classes is via the use of alternate class features. When a character selects a class, he must normally choose to use the standard class features found in the class's original source—the exception is if he chooses to adopt an archetype. Each alternate class feature presented in an archetype replaces a specific class feature from its parent class. For example, the flowing monk archetype's redirection class feature replaces the Stunning Fist feature of the standard monk class.
When an archetype includes multiple alternate class features, a character must take them all—often blocking the character from ever gaining certain standard class features, but replacing them with other options.
And Ultimate Magic.
The following pages include alternate class features for each class. Each alternate class feature replaces a specific class feature from its parent class. For example, the enhance healing class feature of the songhealer bard archetype replaces versatile performance from the standard bard class.
When an archetype includes multiple class features, a character must take them all—often blocking the character from ever gaining certain standard class features, but replacing them with other options.
I could go on, but hopefully you get the point. When you select an archetype you must take all of its Class Features. It doesn't matter if you use them or not; you have them. So every Vivisectionist has the Bleeding Attack Class Feature even if they choose not to use it.
Which I agree with, for abilities that state a level and what replaces them and do not say it is optional. Which is not the case for the Vivisectionist's Bleeding Attack.
Bleeding Attack
A vivisectionist may select the bleeding attack rogue talent in place of a discovery.
But you can carry on reading it as you wish, I am done wasting time on this discussion.
I think Gish is saying simply the ability to take bleeding attack is a new class feature.
I think Empress is saying that Bleeding Attack is the feature and becomes a replacement feature if taken, as with Qinggong.
Risner is then saying that Qinggong is an exception to the rule (but not supporting it with a citation).
I have seen Archetypes ruled the way Empress is viewing them, but Gish's view also looks highly plausible. It would be great if someone found some dev comments on RAI. I can't find any but will look again tonight.
The table Class Features Changed or Replaced on the SRD have the Vivisectionist's Discoveries listed as (X). Unless they made a huge mistake when typing it there.By table you mean d20pfsrd?
You should know that they are wrong on the rules so much that I fundamentally don’t trust their tables, that they copy text correctly, that they don’t intentionally fudge the rules.
I don't think for a minute that anyone is intentionally fudging anything over there and not sure why you would accuse them of that. Now yeah there are errors from time to time and its always best to check your non-first hand sources anyways.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
intentionally fudging anything over there and not sure why you would accuse them of that.
Fudging is a harsh term, but they have no quibbles about doing editorial review. Things such as editing sentences “to make it easier to understand”, adding “Special:” lines to feats that don’t exist in the rules, and marking archetypes as stacking when they clearly don’t. I’ve brought up most of these issues with the site, none seem to get fixed.
I think they don’t see it as fudging as much as clarifying. It’s bad whatever term they want to use.
intentionally fudging anything over there and not sure why you would accuse them of that.Fudging is a harsh term, but they have no quibbles about doing editorial review. Things such as editing sentences “to make it easier to understand”, adding “Special:” lines to feats that don’t exist in the rules, and marking archetypes as stacking when they clearly don’t. I’ve brought up most of these issues with the site, none seem to get fixed.
I think they don’t see it as fudging as much as clarifying. It’s bad whatever term they want to use.
Ah that makes more since then.
Ah that makes more since then.intentionally fudging anything over there and not sure why you would accuse them of that.Fudging is a harsh term, but they have no quibbles about doing editorial review. Things such as editing sentences “to make it easier to understand”, adding “Special:” lines to feats that don’t exist in the rules, and marking archetypes as stacking when they clearly don’t. I’ve brought up most of these issues with the site, none seem to get fixed.
I think they don’t see it as fudging as much as clarifying. It’s bad whatever term they want to use.
I haven't seen all that much clarification that wasn't in a sidebar or something else labeled "Editor's note". What I have seen an awful lot of is just outright failure to edit properly -- for instance, for the longest time, several non-Human Core Races had the Human version of the Shadowhunter alternate racial trait (replacing the Human Bonus Feat), and whoever noticed it in some of them apparently didn't notice it in others (if I remember correctly, Dwarf was the last by a LONG time to get this fixed). Of course, problems like this have proven capable of hosing sidebars, Editor's notes, and even whole tables (for instance, the Recall Intrigues table under the Knoweledge skill is still missing).
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Fox Shape has a special line that doesn't exist in the book. Most of the archetype stacking doesn't make sense and is completely wrong.
There have been many other instances, all that escape my memory right now.
All of these issues in this post have been pointed out, none have been fixed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We appear to be off topic here.
Welcome to the forums!
When does something count as modified?
Lets look at the Vivisectionist and Dimensional Excavator Alchemists for an example.Vivisectionist:
- Bombs is definitely replaced because it says so.
- Is the formula book considered modified because of Torturer's Eye and Torturous Transformation? It doesn't say it is...
- Is the discovery list considered modified because of Bleeding Attack? It doesn't say it is...
- Is Dimenstional Excavator compatible with Vivisectionist?
Please cite rules.
I've never known the spells themselves to matter, only how many times per day you can cast which spells. (See duelblooded sorc as an example.) It just really depends if whether or not your DM wants to count your spell list as a class ability which i can see because hypothetically stacking an archetype that allowed a wizard to take cleric spells and an archetype that allowed a wizard to take psychic spells would be busted as all get out.
The discovery list is listed as an optional replacement (meaning you can take bonus things a normal alchemist couldn't) Oddly enough it's not strictly listed as modified even though because you lose bombs. If you lose bombs then you obviously lose the ability to choose bomb related discoveries (literally most of all discoveries.) My only justification for that is that i guess technically even though you dont have bombs you could still waste a discovery picking one that alters bombs? Either way they dimensional excavator alters discoveries and replaces the 4th level one, while vivisectionist gives more to choose from. I can't find a hard and fast ruling on whether or not (X) - optional replacements effect whether or not they stack with other archetypes or not.
If i had to have a guess i'd say they dont stack purely based on
A character can take more than one archetype (sometimes called “stacking” archetypes) and garner additional alternate class features, *but none of the alternate class features can replace or alter the same class feature* from the base class as another alternate class feature.
Based on that because they both ALTER discoveries. While it is not-so-strictly against the rules i'd still ask the DM. While they might say that just gaining more options for discoveries (Which is what both archetypes effectively do) could be problematic they should also keep in mind you're missing out on so many good discoveries with losing the bomb class feature because of vivisectionist.