Post/Author/DateTime	Post
GalaGalaxia 10-30-07, 02:35 PM	I just discovered a detail about the Archetype Advancement class feature for the Mythic Exemplar that I found quite interesting. When selecting the path of either Imdastri or Ktolemagne, the text in Complete Champion reads: "You gain +1 level of an existing divine spellcasting class" (or "arcane" respectively). This seems to indicate that it is not merely an increase in spells known and spells per day, but actually advances you as if you had also gained a level in the divine/arcane spell casting class to which you belonged before. This means that you may gain bonus feats (wizard), new familiar abilities (wizard/sorcerer), or improved turning abilities (cleric) ... or any other class features the regular class would normally grant you (minus BAB, saves, etc). The wording for the Archetype Advancement ability itself seems to support this, as it reads: "If your archetype advancement grants bonus feats, you must meet all the normal prerequisites for your selections, unless otherwise noted." None of the paths by themselves grant bonus feats. But, the Imdastri/Ktolemagne advancement (as written) could result in gaining of bonus feats due gaining "+1 level of an existing spellcasting class", as if you had gained a _real_ class level in a previous divine/arcane class. The question is just if this is truly the correct interpretation, or if the Complete Champion entry is simply poorly worded? The benefit of the two paths is stated as you gaining 1 level of your former class, effectively gaining class features in addition to only increased spell casting abilities. ... although one can certainly argue that it is intended to only mean normal casting progression, and nothing else. However, RAW says that you gain +1 level. Text trumps table. Casters benefit from class features (similar to Uncanny Trickster). Now, is that the real intention or not? Seeing how the other paths advance class features, I'd say yes. And RAW supports it in this case.
vorpo 10-30-07, 04:00 PM	Always go with the text, not table. So, I am sure the text says just spells and spellcasting ability that gets the +1 level, nothing else.
GalaGalaxia 10-30-07, 04:31 PM	Err, no ... As you will see from my original post above, the text says exactly this: "You gain +1 level of an existing divine spellcasting class" and "You gain +1 level of an existing arcane spellcasting class"
vorpo 10-30-07, 07:03 PM	Err, no ... As you will see from my original post above, the text says exactly this: "You gain +1 level of an existing divine spellcasting class" and "You gain +1 level of an existing arcane spellcasting class" Under what entry? Spellcasting I presume.
bkdubs123 10-30-07, 09:08 PM	Actually it says it in the ability description of Archetype Advancement. It is a very strange PrC, Vorpo, so just keep that in mind. I am of the assumption that the is only supposed to grant new spells known, more and higher level spell slots, and increased caster level just like normal +1 to exisiting spellcasting class, but I will note that the "if you would gain bonus feats" entry is a bit off putting, because as you say none of them could grant bonus feats unless you read that the Imdastri or Ktolemagne Advancement actually gives you a class level of spellcaster class. Let me further elaborate though. Uncanny Trickster and Legacy Champion grant class features as well as spellcasting (and what have you), and they specifically say, "+1 level of existing class features." The Mythic Exemplar does not say that in the Spellcasting portion of the table, nor does it say that in the description of Archetype Advancement. I will continue to assume that it is not meant to grant class features.
GalaGalaxia 10-30-07, 10:19 PM	Yeah, I assume the same ... But, if that's truly how it is intended (you advance in spellcasting, and nothing else) -- it is extremely poorly worded. If that is not how it is intended (you advance in class features as well) -- it is extremely poorly worded. In any case, this is one of those things where I certainly don't trust Customer Service to provide an accurate answer ... and seeing how the Sage has been wrong on important issues as of late, I don't trust the Sage either. Errata needs to clarify this. Reading and re-reading the description, I can actually see it go either way. Due to balance considerations, I'd assume it grants nothing but improved spellcasting. However, the wording indicates otherwise. I can't imagine them being _that_ sloppy with the wording, as to change it from standard wording (as in the Spellcasting section of the same class), and not elaborate one bit. Even the other Archetype Advancement portions are better worded. The simplicity and apparent clarity in the wording really leads me to think that they truly meant for you to advance in class features as well ... But since that's not explicitly stated (and since such advancement is certainly the exception) I'd have to agree that the intention is for spellcasting progression only. It is nevertheless still really puzzling. And, vorpo, since you obviously do not have the book itself, nor seem to read my posts before replying, I'm just going to ignore you :)
Jaxgaret 10-30-07, 11:16 PM	I'm going to post something with more relavance to the OP, but first this little tidbit: I am about to take my first level of a modified Mythic Exemplar class. It's modified because I am playing a Marshal/Crusader of St. Cuthbert, and I and my DM have altered the "+1 spellcasting level" to "+1 martial adept maneuvers and stances level", and the character is getting some of the ME class features from Orsos, some from Reikhardt, and one from Imdastri. I think it should work well.
GalaGalaxia 10-31-07, 02:33 AM	the character is getting some of the ME class features from Orsos, some from Reikhardt, and one from Imdastri Doesn't that defeat the purpose of the whole "once you have selected your path it cannot be changed" balancing factor explicitly stated in the PrC entry? ;)
Jaxgaret 10-31-07, 06:23 PM	Doesn't that defeat the purpose of the whole "once you have selected your path it cannot be changed" balancing factor explicitly stated in the PrC entry? ;) Not really. I didn't cherry-pick a path for power, it was designed by me and my DM jointly to represent a Crusader/Marshal Mythic Exemplar of Cuthbert. Allow me to expound upon what choices were made: Save Bonus: +Fort Paragons Gift, Least: As Reikhardt Archetype Advancement: As Reikhardt Paragons Gift, Lesser: As Orsos Paragon's Gift, Greater: As Reikhardt Paragon's Gift, Supreme: As Imdastri Embody Paragon: As Orsos Let me know if you disagree with any of those selections.
Hsien 11-01-07, 04:46 PM	I'm looking to possible go this path with a Marshal/Bard build. Currently talking with DM about allowing me to complete the 3 levels of Squire of Legend first, then take Exemplar...to show the character advancement and evolution in the Order so to speak. It is cherry picking to mesh with the character concept, whether or not its for power, idk. What your doing is creating a whole new Exemplar varient. Up to DM to figure out and to see if it becomes unbalancing in game. Does it make sense in general; I'd have to say no..at least not to me. Does it make sense for that character/game; I'd have to assume yes since you and the DM worked on it. Issue: Currently, Embody Paragon and one ability being Orsus; Archetype and 2 abilities being Reikhardt; and then having the Supreme Ability be Imdastri...where did Imdastri come from and why does it get the Supreme Power all of the sudden? I would think that the Embody Paragon and Archetype would match, and for me the Supreme and one of the lower ones should match, just to show the progression in power.
Jaxgaret 11-02-07, 12:57 AM	Does it make sense in general; I'd have to say no..at least not to me. Does it make sense for that character/game; I'd have to assume yes since you and the DM worked on it. Issue: Currently, Embody Paragon and one ability being Orsus; Archetype and 2 abilities being Reikhardt; and then having the Supreme Ability be Imdastri...where did Imdastri come from and why does it get the Supreme Power all of the sudden? I would think that the Embody Paragon and Archetype would match, and for me the Supreme and one of the lower ones should match, just to show the progression in power. It's a Mythic Exemplar of Cuthbert. The path selected no longer has anything to do with Reikhardt, Orsos, or Imdastri - consider it a new Cuthbert path, just using those specific abilities.
Hsien 11-02-07, 04:40 PM	I understand it's a new Exemplar, no problem. I'm familiar with St Cuthbert, my first 2nd Ed Cleric was of "The Stars." When you start mixing and matching it seemingly becomes more about cherry picking abilities and less about St Cuthbert of the Cudgel. When creating a varient Exemplar there may be some considerations... 1: Do the power/abilities reflect St Cuthbert and his abilitities? 2: Do other powers more accurately reflect St Cuthbert? 3: Do the powers accurately reflect each other and show progression? Again all in relation to St Cuthbert. If I was to create new varient, which is just my preference, I would have... ~Embody/Archetype match ~Supreme and at least one of the lower powers match ~Remaining powers match. Only the "Least" ability can be from a Paragon that has no further progression to it in the PrC; which would occur if Lesser/Greater/Supreme matched, i.e. were all chosen from the same Paragon list. This gives some variety without completely abandoning the previously set templates, imo.
Jaxgaret 11-03-07, 11:17 PM	I understand it's a new Exemplar, no problem. I'm familiar with St Cuthbert, my first 2nd Ed Cleric was of "The Stars." Okay, good. When you start mixing and matching it seemingly becomes more about cherry picking abilities and less about St Cuthbert of the Cudgel. When creating a varient Exemplar there may be some considerations... We picked the abilities that we thought most closely matched what a Mythic Exemplar of Cuthbert should gain. 1: Do the power/abilities reflect St Cuthbert and his abilitities? We think so, yes. 2: Do other powers more accurately reflect St Cuthbert? We don't think so, no. 3: Do the powers accurately reflect each other and show progression? Again all in relation to St Cuthbert. We think so, yes. If I was to create new varient, which is just my preference, I would have... ~Embody/Archetype match ~Supreme and at least one of the lower powers match ~Remaining powers match. Only the "Least" ability can be from a Paragon that has no further progression to it in the PrC; which would occur if Lesser/Greater/Supreme matched, i.e. were all chosen from the same Paragon list. This gives some variety without completely abandoning the previously set templates, imo. For what reason? Those abilities are matched up for other Exemplars; they have nothing to do with an Exemplar of Cuthbert. Do you have any specific suggestions for which abilities should be switched?
bkdubs123 11-03-07, 11:30 PM	I don't think he means powers strictly limited to the ones attributed to the exemplar paths illustrated by the Mythic Exemplar class. I think he means he would rather have made up an entirely different path for Cuthbert.
Jaxgaret 11-03-07, 11:34 PM	I don't think he means powers strictly limited to the ones attributed to the exemplar paths illustrated by the Mythic Exemplar class. I think he means he would rather have made up an entirely different path for Cuthbert. That's possible. I'm not really sure what he was going for there. I think the choices we made actually are pretty good for an ME of Cuthbert. Take a look at them, let me know if you agree bkdubs :)
bkdubs123 11-04-07, 12:45 AM	Sure, but it comes with a shameless request: Would you take a look at my Elegant Master PrC? In my opinion you would have been better off making your own exemplar path entirely from scratch for Cuthbert. He is the judge deity, a stern and lawful deity who has a penchant for war and vengeance. Nothing about St. Cuthbert has ever suggested bardlike abilities to me, nor defense against negative energy or fatigue really. To me he would probably grant a high Will save, a Smite Chaos sort of ability, and a Discern Lies sort of ability. I can't decide whether he should grant a bonus to Wisdom or Constitution though... maybe Constitution, but a bonus to Wisdom based skill checks or something...
Jaxgaret 11-04-07, 01:23 AM	Sure, but it comes with a shameless request: Would you take a look at my Elegant Master PrC? Sure thing, I posted a reply there :) In my opinion you would have been better off making your own exemplar path entirely from scratch for Cuthbert. He is the judge deity, a stern and lawful deity who has a penchant for war and vengeance. Nothing about St. Cuthbert has ever suggested bardlike abilities to me, nor defense against negative energy or fatigue really. We may have been better off with creating our own abilities, but we decided not to go overboard with it. Simplicity has its virtues. Also, and I mentioned this before briefly, this is not just a Mythic Exemplar of Cuthbert; this is a Mythic Exemplar of Cuthbert designed for a Marshal/Crusader, so the inspiration abiliities and defensive abilities actually dovetail quite nicely with the overall design. To me he would probably grant a high Will save, a Smite Chaos sort of ability, and a Discern Lies sort of ability. I can't decide whether he should grant a bonus to Wisdom or Constitution though... maybe Constitution, but a bonus to Wisdom based skill checks or something... I would have given this ME a good Will save as well, but the DM decided that a good Fort was more appropriate, and I don't strongly disagree at all. It's fine by me. The rest of those are interesting ideas, but we think that the current configuration is pretty good.
bkdubs123 11-04-07, 02:05 AM	Again, to be honest, it does seem more like the path was designed more with your character in mind than St. Cuthbert. But, its your game, and the DM approves so, I'm not going to knock it. It certainly isn't overpowered.