Pathfinder 1E When you take an archetype, you take the whole archetype, right?

[koesherbacon]

When you choose an archetype, you take the whole archetype, right? You can't pick and choose alternate class features from different ones, correct?

I just need to clarify this rule for one of my players.

Thanks!

 

[Cadence]

When you choose an archetype, you take the whole archetype, right? You can't pick and choose alternate class features from different ones, correct?

Yup, gotta take them all, and can't sub those ones out with another archetype. Second and third paragraph on
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advanced/advancedCoreClasses.html

 

[koesherbacon]

That's what I thought. I'm going to make a DM decision and let this player combine two archetypes in this instance since the two play well with each other.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

And according to the rules, if two archetypes do not swap out the same abilities, a player can take both. Don't know if that is true in your decision, but it lends weight to multiple archetypes at once being okay.

If like the idea of just taking different archetype abilities - I would highly recommend Rogue Genius Games' Talented Class line. They have done Monk, Fighter, Cavalier and Rogue. They don't seem overpowering and very customizable.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

Honestly, if it isn't a top tier class or obvious abuse, I would let the player pick-up whatever powers and doodads from whatever archetype they want if it makes sense for their character. Pretty much let the players custom build their own classes from whatever sources they want with the idea that if it is overpowered it can be talked out or cut-back later. Your mileage may vary and there is definitely a social contract element here, but I think it should be fine with most groups.

 

[koesherbacon]

I'm apt to agree as well. The player wants to use different abilities from 2 Fighter archetypes: Armor Master & Tower Shield Specialist. So I decided we'll just combine certain aspects and call it an Armored Tower archetype. We'll give it a shot for one or two sessions and if it seems either overpowered or underpowered we'll adjust accordingly.

He's also trying the Trox race from Bestiary 4 and really wants to take the tank role in the party, but also have a decent attack, so I don't mind trying to accommodate his wishes while at the same time making sure he isn't going to out shine any of the other players who have yet to choose their characters.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

You should be fine then. Nothing strikes me as overpowered, just let the player know if it is causing difficulties in the group that they might need to lose a feature or two. I doubt that will happen though.

 

[gamerprinter]

While not as powerful as a top tier class, when you mix abilities between archetypes, there's a potential to be overpowered compared to other non-caster members of the party. If you look at any of the archetypes, one or a couple of the class features may be rather powerful compared to other abilities in the same archetype, this allows granting possible overly powerful abilities which are balanced with slightly underpowered abilities - this is true with every archetype. So if you only choose the most powerful class features in several archetypes, you could easily build one that is very over powered compared to other archetypes.

I don't allow my players to mix and match different archetypes into one they want to play. Since I do design archetypes for my various Kaidan books, if a player has a concept they want to play as an archetype, I look at what features they want, then try to build a custom archetype that includes what they want balanced with underpowered abilities so the final result is somewhat comparable to other archetypes in power.

Granted that any noncaster archetype is probably weaker than any Tier 1 class, so one may allow any powerful non-caster build. Again the problem is when you have blinders on and the only comparison is between the powerful archetype and a tier 1 class. Compare instead between a powerful archetyped martial build with another perhaps nonpowerful archetype martial build. Is there balance between the two? If not, your build as you want isn't very feasible way of building an archetype.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

If I am GMing I pretty much let non-casters have free reign in picking, swapping and adding whatever features that they need for their character to be good at what they do. If I have a novice player or someone who feels uncomfortable in messing around with the mechanical end of character creation, I will just offer what I think will work for them so everyone at the table will either be Tier 1 or at least Tier 1 in whatever their nice is.

I agree though that people who are professionally designing game content for sale or public consumption need to make sure that Archetypes are all relatively balanced with each other within a class. That is just best practices unfortunately otherwise end up putting out Complete Book of Elves type kits where there are vast power differences between the default and non-default options for a class.

I just wish PF classes were closer in relative power to each other, but that ship sailed a long time ago.

 

[Remathilis]

That's what I thought. I'm going to make a DM decision and let this player combine two archetypes in this instance since the two play well with each other.

You can take two archetypes, as long as they don't replace the same things.

For example, a rogue can take the acrobat and burglar archetypes (since one replaces trapfinding/sense and other uncanny dodge/improved) but couldn't take acrobat and rake (since they both replace trapfinding/sense).

Of course, your game, your call YMMV and all that.