Meeting minimum feat prerequisites

[Scion]

And that's the fundamental disconnect between you and moritheil.

Of course I think both he and I know where the disconnect is.

I just dont understand where his arguement has any rules basis, that is all.

The only rules arguement he has used he admitted from the start wasnt even the same thing. So it isnt useful here.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I just dont understand where his arguement has any rules basis, that is all.

Well, it has rules basis if one considers both use and 'use' to be prohibited by "can't use".

If one doesn't, then your point holds.

-Hyp.

 

[Scion]

Well, it has rules basis if one considers both use and 'use' to be prohibited by "can't use".

Which is of course why I didnt like the word 'use'.

In order to use the feat you must have all of the prereqs. Just because you dont have the prereqs to 'use' a different feat does not mean that you do not 'have' the feat for the other prereq.

It is still on your character sheet, nothing asks you to use power attack in order to cleave. You just have to have spent a feat on power attack (or have it through some other means).

If I have power attack and cleave but my str drops to 12 do I still have power attack and cleave? sure, I just cant say, 'I am useing power attack'.

But if someone had a weapon which said, 'anytime this weapon hits a person with the power attack feat they take X extra damage' then the weapon would still trigger.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If I have power attack and cleave but my str drops to 12 do I still have power attack and cleave? sure, I just cant say, 'I am useing power attack'.

But if someone had a weapon which said, 'anytime this weapon hits a person with the power attack feat they take X extra damage' then the weapon would still trigger.

If I have the Stunning Fist feat, and another ability that says "You can give up one daily use of Stunning Fist in order to heal 4d6 points of damage", and my Wisdom drops below 13, can I give up one daily use of Stunning Fist in order to heal 4d6 points of damage? Is activating this ability considered to be using the Stunning Fist feat, or 'using' the Stunning Fist feat?

-Hyp.

 

[Scion]

If you had a feat that had a prereq of stunning fist then you could use it.

However, if you do not have the prereqs for stunning fist than you cannot use the stunning fist feat. So you do not have the 'times to use' option.

Just like if your str drops below 13 you cant just say, 'well, I have power attack, so I will give myself a penalty to attack but not gain the benefit of no extra damage'.

Part of the benefit from stunning fist feat is the number of uses per day, if you cannot use stunning fist then you do not get the uses.

But, again, if you had a feat that merely required having the stunning fist feat, which you do still have you merely cannot use it, then you could still use that feat (assuming of course it didnt ask you for something else that you do not have to use it, such as actul stunning attempts or having a prereq of 13 wisdom or something similar).


So in summary, you cannot gain the 'benefit' part of the feat, but you can still use the feat as a prereq for other feats. You still 'have' the feat, you simply cannot use the benefits that the feat grants. (in this case I am talking about the benefits text, not some other benefit such as having the feat)

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

In short, Scion's argument involves making up new definitions for words and adding parentheses and quotation marks all over the place to cover the corner cases.

Mine does not.

I wonder which is better ...

EDIT:

And, for the record ...

Part of the benefit from stunning fist feat is the number of uses per day, if you cannot use stunning fist then you do not get the uses.

Part of the benefit of Power Attack is being able to use Cleave.

 

[Scion]

In short, Scion's argument involves making up new definitions for words and adding parentheses and quotation marks all over the place to cover the corner cases.

Unless of course we are useing english, and then it doesnt require any new definitions

I am merely trying to be exact. Sorry if my doing so offends you.

"Part of the benefit of Power Attack is being able to use Cleave."

Oh?

POWER ATTACK [GENERAL]
Prerequisite: Str 13.
Benefit: On your action, before making attack rolls for a round, you may choose to subtract a number from all melee attack rolls and add the same number to all melee damage rolls. This number may not exceed your base attack bonus. The penalty on attacks and bonus on damage apply until your next turn.

Odd.. I dont see it under the benefits.

I am useing english and playing d&d, in case it matters

Which of course means that there are game terms and language terms. Use the first whenever appropriate and then fall back to the other when necissary.

Hence the problem in word useage. The benefit of the feat is clearly listed. Although for plain english one could say that it is a benefit of having power attack that you may get cleave, but that is not proper d&d useage.

Which is why I clarified.

I have still seen no reason to do it the other way. There is no benefit overall to the game nor does it seem to follow the rules.

 

[atom crash]

what is your perceived difference between use and 'use', Scion?

the way i see it, you either can use the feat or you cannot use the feat.

if you no longer qualify (meet the prerequisites) for the feat or PrC, you can no longer use it. you still have it -- you don't suddenly have a free feat slot to fill -- but you can no longer use it. it's unavailable until you meet the prerequisites again.

if you're playing Diablo and you have a weapon you can't use yet, it appears as red, but it's still taking up space in your inventory. and if you've got an item that boosts a stat and allows you to use a weapon you normally don't qualify to use, then you remove that item, the game also removes the weapon you no longer qualify to use. you cannot equip an item you can't use, though you can retain possession of it.

 

[FireLance]

what is your perceived difference between use and 'use', Scion?

the way i see it, you either can use the feat or you cannot use the feat.

if you no longer qualify (meet the prerequisites) for the feat or PrC, you can no longer use it. you still have it -- you don't suddenly have a free feat slot to fill -- but you can no longer use it. it's unavailable until you meet the prerequisites again.

If we're making a distinction between using and having a feat, then the question is:
If Feat A is a prerequisite for Feat B, can you use Feat B if you merely have Feat A, or must you also be able to use Feat A as well?

In many cases, it is not an issue, because the prerequistes of Feat B usually include the prerequistes of Feat A as well, so if you are unable to use Feat A, you are also automatically unable to use Feat B. It becomes a more interesting and real question when applied to PrCs. Many PrCs do not have a minimum ability score requirement, although several have prerequisite feats that do. So, are a PrC's prerequisites that you must have the feats or that you must be able to use the feats? If a blackguard's Strength falls to 12 or less, and he is unable to use Power Attack, does he also lose his spells, his ability to sneak attack, his ability to smite good, the services of his fiendish servant, his bonus to saves from dark blessing, his ability to command undead, and his aura of despair?

 

[Scion]

what is your perceived difference between use and 'use', Scion?

it comes down to how you are 'useing' it, such as with hypersmurfs example.

the guy did not 'use' his card, he merely possessed it and it produced an effect in the waiter.

All you need for a prereq is to 'have' the prereq, not be able to use it. Such as with the old, and exhausted, example of point blank shot and far shot

if you're playing Diablo and you have a weapon you can't use yet, it appears as red, but it's still taking up space in your inventory.

but you could be useing those inventory slots for something else, so it is definately there. Also, you could sell it for something, or show it off as a status symbol, so you can still get some sort of 'use' out of it.

Or for earlier diablo types if you had a couple of unique rings in your inventory, even if you couldnt use them, you would always get the third unique ring. so in that case they are still 'useful' or 'being used', just not for their stat boosts or whatever.

old school diablo reference.. scary!