Anubis said:I think the actual rule is that you keep everything from the prestige class (or any class for that matter) unless there is a section in the description that says otherwise.
Cheiromancer said:Does that mean the trade has to be undone?
Can you quote where that rule is located? Book? Page?Anubis said:I think the actual rule is...
Well, what the DMG actually says about prestige classes is as follows:Coredump said:Can you quote where that rule is located? Book? Page?
CyberSpyder said:Well, what the DMG actually says about prestige classes is as follows:
"...meaning that the first step of advancement is always choosing a class. If a character does not meet the requirements for a prestige class before that first step, that character cannot take the first level of that prestige class." (Emphasis mine)
Similarly, under "Requirements" for each PrC, the exact wording used is "To qualify to become a...", as opposed to "To qualify to be a" or even "To qualify to advance as a."
Taken together, these two facts certainly suggest to me that the original intent was that requirements only mattered for taking the first level in the class. Obviously, that was radically shifted with Complete Warrior. It's a move that I don't feel makes a lot of sense.
Interesting. I didn't realize that - I'm not as familiar with 3rd edition as I am with 3.5.Hypersmurf said:However, it's not a radical shift; it's a shift back. From the 3E DMG, p27:
Should a character find herself in a position (changed alignment, lost levels, and so on) where she no longer meets the requirements of a prestige class, she loses all special abilities (but not HD, BAB, or base save bonus) gained from levels of the prestige class.
It's quite possible that this paragraph - much like the line stating that XP penalties do not apply for PrCs - was accidentally omitted from the 3.5 DMG, and CW is merely restoring the lost text.
-Hyp.
Well, I think it makes sense, the same way that losing a pre-req makes you lose access to a feat. But that just makes it a decent house rule.... You have point otherwise, by RAW.CyberSpyder said:Well, what the DMG actually says about prestige classes is as follows:
(snip)
Obviously, that was radically shifted with Complete Warrior. It's a move that I don't feel makes a lot of sense.
Okay, but does that make it RAW? Since we seem to have contradictory rulings, which source is 'primary'? I would have to assume the DMG would be.....Hyp said:However, it's not a radical shift; it's a shift back. From the 3E DMG, p27: