Minigiant |
So I have recently started to get into
Familiar Archetypes, and have really been leaning towards the Figment one
I have two questions regarding that
1. Could I take the Extra Feat Evolution?
2. What happens if I then select additional traits?
willuwontu |
FYI
The eidolon gains an extra feat. It must meet the prerequisites of the feat. Requirements: Twinned eidolon.
That is an unchained eidolon evolution.
Manifest Dreams (Su): At 3rd level, a figment is shaped by its master’s dreams. Each time the master awakens from a full night’s rest, he can apply to the figment 1 evolution point’s worth of eidolon evolutions that don’t have a base form requirement. At 7th level, he can apply 2 points’ worth of eidolon evolutions; at 13th level, he can apply 3 points’ worth of eidolon evolutions.
Figment gives access to Eidolon evolutions, not Unchained Eidolon Evolutions. Even if it does, it requires a twinned eidolon base form, which means the figment cannot take it.
willuwontu |
See this is why it is confusing because D20 has it as an Eidolon Evolution
"Extra Feat (Ex)
Source: PZO9480
The eidolon gains an extra feat. It must meet the prerequisites of the feat."
And doesn't need the twin Eidolon form
Yeah, I looked up the source material, it's available for both chained and unchained summoner eidolons, but it requires that the summoner has the Twinned Summoner Archetype which restricts the base form to either biped (chained eidolon), or twinned eidolon subtype (unchained eidolon).
It's definitely not intended for a figment familiar to be able to take it. It could be available RAW though.
Fuzzy-Wuzzy |
D20 may have felt they were legally barred from referencing the base form / subtype requirement there (though I can't think why) or they may have just dropped it on the floor. When the Archives of Nethys conflict with d20pfsrd, always believe the former---especially since a few months back Paizo actually declared them the official online rules source.
willuwontu |
D20 may have felt they were legally barred from referencing the base form / subtype requirement there (though I can't think why) or they may have just dropped it on the floor. When the Archives of Nethys conflict with d20pfsrd, always believe the former---especially since a few months back Paizo actually declared them the official online rules source.
Nah, I've found issues on both sites, and in this case both were wrong.
Always check the source material.