does a Exploiter Wizard qualify for Extra Arcanist Exploit feat???
The prerequisite for Extra Arcanist Exploit is
Prerequisites: Arcanist exploit class feature.
Exploiter Exploit: At 1st level and every 4 levels thereafter, the exploiter wizard gains a single arcanist exploit (see page 9). The exploiter wizard uses his wizard level as his arcanist level for determining the effects and DCs of his arcanist exploits. This ability replaces arcane school.
The Exploiter Wizard has the Exploiter Exploit class feature. RAW they probably do not, but I would allow it. Hero Lab does allow an exploiter wizard to take the feat. While they are not an official source, they do have a strong relationship with Piazo and are correct more often than not.
is the Exploiter Exploit class feature quality for the Extra Arcanist Exploit even when it says it gives u Arcanist Exploits?? ain't the purpose of the exploits would make u quality ?? hero lab allows a character to qualify or do u think its an errata ?
If you went strictly by what the rule says... The feat states "Acanist Exploit Class Feature".
The Exploiter wizard has the "Exploiter Exploit" class ability. That allows you to gain Arcanist Exploits, but it's not actually the "Arcanist Exploit class feature" mentioned as the prerequisite for the feat.
That said, ask your GM if they'll allow it. I could see a case for yes or no.
Paizo is no longer supporting 1E so there is not going to be any official clarification on the matter.
RAW no, but ask your GM. Personally, I would not have a problem with it, but that is my own opinion.
This might fall under the FAQ When do I count as having a class feature?.
I agree with the consensus that under explicit RAW, you do not qualify. However, it is close enough to me that I would allow it without hesitation as a GM.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It’s probably supposed to qualify you. If it doesn’t then paladin and Oracle can’t take a lot of channel feats. This is from SKR who was one of the original designers so it’s semi-official.
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ln8z?Can-a-Life-Oracle-with-Channeling-take#3 0
It’s really long but here’s an excerpt:
So when the cleric class has a header section called "Class Features" and under that is an entry that says "Channel Energy," and the oracle class has a section called "Class Features" and under that is an entry that says "Channel: You can channel positive energy like a cleric," and the paladin class has a section called "Class Features" and under that is an entry that says "Channel Positive Energy (Su): ... she gains the supernatural ability to channel positive energy like a cleric," those all are intended to work the same way, even though they're not given identical names. For one, because the paladin and oracle "versions" of that ability tell you it works like the cleric "version" of the ability. For two, because having them all work the same way is simpler and easier to remember than each of them working a different way. Now, given, the oracle gets 1+Chamod per day instead of the cleric's 3+Chamod, and the paladin spends uses of lay on hands instead of a separate X/day allotment, but if you line up a good cleric 5, a life oracle 5, and a paladin 5, and tell each of them to channel a burst of positive energy, all three of them are healing 3d6 to living or dealing 3d6 to undead, DC 10 + 1/2 level + Chamod, 30 ft. radius, no AOO, and so on. Exactly the same. Because it's easier to remember that way. Because it makes the game easier to run that way.
Except that the Paladin actually does have the channel energy class feature. That 100% qualifies for the channel feats that require it.
The life oracle with the channel revelation is a little more of a gray area, but like the feat we're talking about now, I would probably allow it.
The paladin has the "Channel Positive Energy" class feature, which is not the same as the cleric's "Channel Energy" class feature.
Unless we just accept SKR's ruling and say that if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it's probably a duck.
@Melkiador Most of the people here including myself are saying although going STRICTLY BY RAWit does not qualify, but that they would allow it in their games. They also recommend checking with checking with the GM to be sure. That is sound advice because there are some GM's that have no common sense.
|
In my opinion... Yes, the exploiter can take Extra Arcanist Exploit.
I came to this conclusion by exploring the counterfactual and the implications.
"In order to take Extra Arcanist Exploit you must have a class feature strictly called 'Arcanist exploit'. If you have a class feature that functions exactly like 'Arcanist exploit' but has a different name you don't qualify."
And here's where that leads us: The Exploiter Exploit class feature says "At 1st level and every 4 levels thereafter, the exploiter wizard gains a single arcanist exploit. The exploiter wizard uses his wizard level as his arcanist level for determining the effects and DCs of his arcanist exploits." What it does not say is
"the exploiter counts as an arcanist."
Now look at every single arcanist exploit. Let's take Acid Jet (first alphabetically).
The arcanist can unleash a jet of acid by expending 1 point from her arcane reservoir and making a ranged touch attack against any one target within 30 feet. . .
Aha! The Exploiter uses his wizard level to determine the effects and DCs, but this ability can only be used by an arcanist. So he can't actually use this. In fact, almost all the exploits say something like "the arcanist can..." or "the arcanist selects..." But the exploiter isn't an arcanist.
I would say yes as well, for a reason not mentioned yet. That is, the old PF1 "Hero Lab" allows this, AND it was vetted in the forums there. They allowed it, someone called them on it, and they checked with Paizo and kept it as-is.
That's not confirmation of anything, since it's all unofficial people having unofficial conversations, but it was enough for me to shrug and allow it in my games. YMMV.