|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Would quick shield block from fighter/bastion stack with quick block from champion? They're the same (function), yet not quite the same (naming), so I'm not sure.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
The wording of both feats are exactly the same. They both provide for an extra reaction that can only be used to Shield Block.
So no, they don't stack.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Technically allowed since they dont have a trigger requirement. If it said
"Trigger your turn starts"
Then no it wouldnt since they would have the same trigger and you can only recieve one effect from one trigger. And there is no restriction on 2 feats granting the same bonus not stacking unless its a typed bonus or specifically restricting(i.e. nimble elf and fleet stack but tiefling hoofs aren't allowed)
Alternatively 2 completely different named feats with the same trigger wouldnt work. Ie if you were a dual class wizard/monk with effortless concentration and master of many styles. You could only gain either the free sustain or the free stance. Since both have the same trigger. But nothing is stopping you from taking both.
Also you didn't ask this and i assume you didnt mean it this way but figured I'd say it anyway. You still only get to use 1 shield block per attack. But im pretty sure you didn't mean it that way.
And as usual theres the "up to gm discretion" for the multitude of ambiguous rules out there.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
I believe the name discrepancy was an oversight, and that they should not stack.
However, RAW they do appear to stack. A GM might even be convinced to allow it.
Gary Bush wrote: The wording of both feats are exactly the same. Not quite, in any way! Even the mechanics part doesn't include "perform a" in the Fighter version. :b
Silliness aside, this seems like a funky oversight from the playtest days, but although it has the scent of cheese it does seem to work just fine by the rules and takes until at least Lv 10, with an archetype requirement or extra feat needed on top. Seems like enough investment to potentially make it not broken, but GMs would be well within their right to raise an eyebrow at this particular combo and forbid it.
The reason the Champion version is different is because it doesn't have a requirement, while the fighter/bastion version does.
They shouldn't stack, but they would have to add a clause to the Champion version saying it doesn't.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Cordell Kintner wrote: The reason the Champion version is different is because it doesn't have a requirement, while the fighter/bastion version does.
They shouldn't stack, but they would have to add a clause to the Champion version saying it doesn't.
I'll believe it when the errata happens. Until then, they are different abilities with different requirements, even if they are functionally the same effect.
Plus, it's not at all OP until Indestructible Shields become available, since Shield HP is definitely a concern well beyond the levels you have these reactions. 2 to 3 reactions against effective enemies will destroy that shield within 2 or 3 rounds, barring crits, which will make it even worse.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Darksol the Painbringer wrote: Cordell Kintner wrote: The reason the Champion version is different is because it doesn't have a requirement, while the fighter/bastion version does.
They shouldn't stack, but they would have to add a clause to the Champion version saying it doesn't.
I'll believe it when the errata happens. Until then, they are different abilities with different requirements, even if they are functionally the same effect.
Plus, it's not at all OP until Indestructible Shields become available, since Shield HP is definitely a concern well beyond the levels you have these reactions. 2 to 3 reactions against effective enemies will destroy that shield within 2 or 3 rounds, barring crits, which will make it even worse. Agree it might be going against RAI or it might not but overpowered it definitely isnt. Indestructible shield or possibly a combination of the mending lattice with an orichalcum shield and shield salvation could but even still that's not overpowered by itself unless paired with disarming block or aggressive block. And then youre talking a huge feat tax to get there.
And also by the time indestructible shield or the other combination comes online a fighter is only a couple levels from boundless reprisals anyway. So your talking a fighter with 1 block per enemy plus standard block plus quick block available versus a champion that took the 2 extra block feats and maybe the extra champion reaction feat. Seems pretty comparable.
WatersLethe wrote: I believe the name discrepancy was an oversight, and that they should not stack.
However, RAW they do appear to stack. A GM might even be convinced to allow it.
No convincing needed, it's all there in black and sepia.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
It's not overpowered, anyway. There is a diminishing return in stacking up your number of allowed shield blocks (as you don't always get to use them all), so if you want to spend multiple feats to block more, I don't think that you are breaking anything.
Recent threads in Rules Discussion
|
