Aberrant tumor and Die for your master for sorcerer

[Starfox_SFX]

Hello

Does a sorcerer who takes "aberrant tumor" qualify for "die for your master"?

Aberrant Tumor:

Prerequisite(s): Aberrant bloodline.

Benefit: You gain a tumor familiar, as the tumor familiar alchemist discovery, with an effective alchemist level equal to the level of the class that grants your aberrant bloodline for determining the tumor familiar’s abilities. If multiple classes grant you the aberrant bloodline, those class levels stack for determining your effective alchemist level.

Die for your master:

Prerequisites: Tumor familiar alchemist discovery.
...

Die for your master has the prerequisite of the alchemists tumor familiar discovery. The Aberrant tumor gives you a familiar as per the tumor familiar alchemist discovery, but does that count as actually having the discovery?

Thanks in advance.

[Cavall]

With the line "effective level" I would say yes.

[2bz2p]

I agree, it says "as the tumor familiar alchemist discovery" so I think the first feat meets that prereq of the second.

[Belafon]

Sean K. Reynolds' (designer on PF1) "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck" post on terminology.

[Diego Rossi]

"Die for your master" require to have the discovery. "You gain a tumor familiar, as the tumor familiar alchemist discovery," don't give the discovery, it gives a familiar that is "as the tumor familiar (from) the alchemist discovery".
SKR post isn't relevant, as it is a case of "required to have paté de foie gras" and having a goose.

[Cavall]

100% disagree.

The line "with an effective alchemist level equal to the level of the class.." gives them not only the tumor but effective alchemist levels for its abilities.

That's more than enough to clear it. Having to add words to it means you're changing it. There is no "from". Its as the ability.

It works.

[Cavall]

It would help to read the linked advice by SKR before dismissing it

[Diego Rossi]

First, I have read SKR post when it was originally posted and several times after that.

Second, the effective alchemist level doesn't matter at all. The requirement is to have the discovery.

To have the discovery you must have the discovery or something that says that it works as the discovery, instead you have a familiar that works like the tumor familiar from the tumor familiar discovery.
If the sorcerer wants an ability that requires having a tumor familiar he can take it, but that isn't the requirement for Die for your master.

AoN wrote:

Die for Your Master

Source Ultimate Magic pg. 148
Your tumor familiar goes to any length to save your life.

Prerequisites: Tumor familiar alchemist discovery

[Mark Hoover 330]

So SKR's post linked above suggests that 2 class features, if not titled exactly the same but doing the exact same thing can be modified by feats in similar fashions, so I'd say RAI is that yes, an Aberrant Tumor from the feat could be modified by Die for your Master.

However Leggo my Diego here is correct; the prereq of Die for your Master specifically calls for the DISCOVERY, not the tumor familiar resulting from the Discovery, so by RAW no, the 2 don't work together.

I'd say it comes down to this: how could it POSSIBLY be game breaking to allow the tumor familiar gained by the feat to be modified by Die for your Master? The end result, whether from an Alchemis't Discovery or a feat is that you end up with a very specific, niche ability to avoid death in combat (not from a spell or special ability) only if said familiar is 1. attached and 2. makes a Ref save (DC = damage taken).

This ability could come online at level 1. The average CR1 monster (by the Monster Creation rules) deals approximately 7 damage with their High Attack. A 20 point buy, Human Aberrant Bloodline sorcerer that doesn't prioritize Con above a 13 has 8 HP, meaning the familiar has 4 and at level 1, in one hit, the tumor familiar they had to spend both their starting feats on is dead.

Even if the PC is built as a Human Bloodrager with the Aberrant Bloodline but still only has Con as a secondary stat they likely begin with 13 HP while their familiar has 6. In order for the familiar to survive the 1/day use of this feat combo that, at best, buys a PC another round of potential actions to deal with the threat to their lives is for the familiar to have the Mauler archetype, then also take Mauler's Endurance.

So if your player wants to spend 2 precious feats, likely from a PC that will only get 10 through their whole career, on this feat combo, what exactly would ruling against them accomplish?

[VoodistMonk]

Diego Rossi wrote:

"Die for your master" require to have the discovery. "You gain a tumor familiar, as the tumor familiar alchemist discovery," don't give the discovery, it gives a familiar that is "as the tumor familiar (from) the alchemist discovery".

SKR post isn't relevant, as it is a case of "required to have paté de foie gras" and having a goose.

Posts like this are why the rules arena sucks...

Isn't this just being overly fastidious?

Seriously, WTF is the difference?

Who goes through life being this nitpicking? Not the editors! None of them seem to care, why do you?

Can someone please explain to me what the mechanical difference between having the actual Discovery and having what the discovery gives you? Type slow, I can't read fast...

[Diego Rossi]

For this specific ability, not really relevant, the problem is that every time you give an inch on the rules people push for 3 more and often for stuff that has serious effects.
In a home game, you can houserule as much as you wish, it is your friends and your own game, not the forum game. But when someone asks about a rule it isn't about your own game, it is about the rule.
To houserule it is better to know how it officially works, then you houserule to your heart content.

[VoodistMonk]

There are no set standards for the language/grammar/verbiage which is used to write feats and abilities... so being overly anal is pointless, and counter to the entire point of playing a fantasy game.

Seriously, who does that?

In this particular case, there is absolutely no mechanical difference between the two. You have the Familiar but not the Discovery... and Die for Your Master affects the Familiar, not the Discovery... your Discovery isn't dying for its master, your Familiar is. But being that fastidious is ridiculous, isn't it?

Everyone becomes such the scholar of all things grammar in the rules arena. Lol.

[Belafon]

My two favorite takeaways from Sean's post:

Sean K. Reynolds wrote:

...And if for some reason two things that seem almost the same shouldn't act exactly the same, count on us to tell you how it is different...

Quote:

...And as James Wyatt says, "You can never write a rule that is so clear that *everyone* understands it." Skip Williams used to get Sage Advice questions like, "Do I have to take Power Attack before I take Cleave?" Obviously the answer is "yes" but it wasn't obvious to that reader, for some reason...

[Scavion]

Gonna go with quack on this one. Seems legit.