Failing to meet prestige class requirements

[Goolpsy]

Well i would stick to, not allowing them to take more levels in the class. How can a specializes silent thief be better at sneaking if he suddenly isn't as silent anymore?

 

[Anubis]

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. Example, the paladin; there is a section that tells what happens if you lose a requirement (lawful good alignment). The same thing goes for several prestige classes. Unless the description says otherwise, the class/prestige class functions normally.

Usually, only alignment requirements can cause you to lose class and prestige class benefits. If it were any other way, aging even to 35 could cause you to lose a whole mess of levels if you lose the ability to use Power Attack, Whirlwind Attack, or Two-Weapon Fighting. (Does a Tempest lose all benefits if his Dex drops to 14 at age 35? I think not.)

 

[Hypersmurf]

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.

CW p16 is fairly clear - if you fail to meet the requirements of the class, you lose all class features and special abilities. The exceptions, as Patryn noted, are BAB, saves, and hit dice.

There are other ways to lose a requirement. For example, if a Sorcerer enters the Loremaster class with seven divination spells, and subsequently trades one of them out for an evocation, they no longer qualify for Loremaster.

-Hyp.

 

[Cheiromancer]

The sorcerer/ex-loremaster would have reduce the number of his known spells when he loses his loremaster status, wouldn't he? Does that mean the trade has to be undone? If so, then he qualifies again, and so can make the trade, which loses his status...

I sense a Schrodinger's Loremaster situation looming. Probably less painful than the Schrodinger's Dragon, but still pretty nasty.

I'm not a big fan of CW 16.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Does that mean the trade has to be undone?

It depends on whether +1 spellcasting level applies to spell swapping or not, I think.

If a Sor7 takes a level in a PrC that grants +1 spellcasting level, is that considered an "even-numbered sorcerer level"?

Or are the even-numbered sorcerer levels specifically Sor4, Sor6, Sor8, regardless of spellcasting level?

Psychic Reformation would be another way to lose a requirement. If a Dwarven Defender uses Psychic Reformation to swap out his Endurance or Toughness feat for something that's actually useful, CW16 would say he loses all Dwarven Defender benefits.

-Hyp.

 

[Coredump]

I think the actual rule is...

Can you quote where that rule is located? Book? Page?

 

[CyberSpyder]

Can you quote where that rule is located? Book? Page?

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.

 

[Hypersmurf]

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.

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.

 

[CyberSpyder]

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.

Interesting. I didn't realize that - I'm not as familiar with 3rd edition as I am with 3.5.

Nevertheless, the fact that it went out of its way to specify first level indicates that it probably was not a matter of a simple omission, but rather a conscious design choice that was later, for whatever reason, revised.

It is admittedly hard to lose prestige class requirements most of the time, but it remains true that for many or even most of them, losing all features as a result simply makes no sense. Alignment-based requirements are probably the easiest to lose. Consider the Daggerspell Mage and Shaper, who, upon becoming evil, lose the ability to perform sneak attacks. Or there's the Dread Pirate, who stops being able to fight with two weapons when he becomes lawful. Or from Complete Warrior itself, there's the Cavalier, who forgets a great deal about how to ride if he ceases being Lawful, and the Eye of Gruumsh, whose massive, AC-bonus-granting scarring is apparently instantaneously healed if he stops hanging out in CE-land.

And heaven forbid that you use features from a PrC to qualify for another PrC. That's a recipe for a swift descent back to powerlessness in the middle of a campaign.

edit: Furthermore, a shift back can still be a radical shift.

 

[Coredump]

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.

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.

However, it's not a radical shift; it's a shift back. From the 3E DMG, p27:

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.....