Timeboxer
Explorer
Forgive me if the book actually covers this somewhere and I've missed it, but.
Basically, I have been trying to understand the Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords, and I figured the best way to do this was to make a character from Levels 1 through 20.
So apparently some maneuvers have a prerequisite of some number of maneuvers from the same school/way/methodology/style/discipline to learn. However, you can also swap maneuvers at every other level. So the question is, if you lose a maneuver from a given discipline, and this leads you to dip below the prerequisite for a certain maneuver, does that maneuver become inaccessible?
The argument for inaccessibleness seems like it would be something like: Well, in all other instances in D&D losing prerequisites means you lose access to the derivative ability. So, yes, you do lose access to it. This prevents silly situations like having a maneuver require three of a certain discipline and then replacing one of those discipline maneuvers.
Whereas the argument against is: Well, by the RAW, it seems like you need the prereqs to learn a maneuver, not to perform it. Plus, it prevents maneuver-swapping from being terribly complicated.
Any light that can be shed on this would be appreciated.
Basically, I have been trying to understand the Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords, and I figured the best way to do this was to make a character from Levels 1 through 20.
So apparently some maneuvers have a prerequisite of some number of maneuvers from the same school/way/methodology/style/discipline to learn. However, you can also swap maneuvers at every other level. So the question is, if you lose a maneuver from a given discipline, and this leads you to dip below the prerequisite for a certain maneuver, does that maneuver become inaccessible?
The argument for inaccessibleness seems like it would be something like: Well, in all other instances in D&D losing prerequisites means you lose access to the derivative ability. So, yes, you do lose access to it. This prevents silly situations like having a maneuver require three of a certain discipline and then replacing one of those discipline maneuvers.
Whereas the argument against is: Well, by the RAW, it seems like you need the prereqs to learn a maneuver, not to perform it. Plus, it prevents maneuver-swapping from being terribly complicated.
Any light that can be shed on this would be appreciated.