Arcane Divine dual-casting classes

[AdmundfortGeographer]

One more option for arcane/divine blend classes: adopt Trailblazer's rules for a unified spellcasting mechanic. Then you could get 9th level divine spells and 9th level arcane spells with base classes alone.

 

[Visigani]

clearly? clearly what? how?

If a character no longer meets the requirements for a
prestige class, he or she loses the benefit of any class features
or other special abilities granted by the class.

That's not what I said. Read my post again if you may.

Saying that you no longer have access to power attack AT ALL... yet can still use power attack (which you can't do) as a qualifier is bizarre in the extreme.



A ring that gives power attack is effectively identical to gaining the feat power attack. If you lose access to the ring, or to the feat you may no longer use power attack. If power attack is a qualifier for the prestige class you are no longer qualified for that prestige class.

Saying you HAVE power attack you just don't have access to it is the same as saying you HAVE a ring of power attack it's just been temporarily broken into pieces. In either case, item or intrinsic ability you NO LONGER HAVE ACCESS TO POWER ATTACK. You may not use it as a feat, whether to qualify for a prestige class or in combat.

 

[Empirate]

To keep my Blackguard example: if I have Power Attack and get Str damaged so my Str is 12, I most certainly still know just how it works, I'm just not strong enought to pull it off anymore. The technique, the brain muscle, the memory of how it feels - it's all still there, I'm just a little too winded to pull it off at the moment. Similarly, cleaving through weakened foes into their allies, and breaking a foe's weapon effectively, are techniques I have mastered a long time ago and am not like to forget anytime soon. I just so happen to not have the strength RIGHT NOW to pull it off just right, until that thrice-damned Cleric finally gets his wrinkly behind over here to fix me.

Does that mean I forget how to sneak attack, or lose my bond with my fiendish companion, or suddenly lose access to all the spells the dark powers-that-be have granted me for the day? Do I suddenly risk poisoning myself when I wipe down my sword with Wyvern venom?

I think not. That's not 'inconvenient', as you claim, that's ridiculous.


Also, your rules text quotations aren't the only ones in this thread, and you haven't shown conclusively how your reading is superior to that of others. I prefer to assume that stuff works on a sane basis.

 

[Jimlock]

If a character no longer meets the requirements for a
prestige class, he or she loses the benefit of any class features
or other special abilities granted by the class.

from the text you sited:

Meeting Class Requirements: It’s possible for a character
to take levels in a prestige class and later be in a position
where the character no longer qualifies to be a member of the
class. An alignment change, levels lost because of character
death, or the loss of a magic item that granted an important
ability are examples of events that can make a character ineligible
to advance farther in a prestige class.

If a character no longer meets the requirements for a
prestige class, he or she loses the benefit of any class features
or other special abilities granted by the class. The character
retains Hit Dice gained from advancing in the class as well as
any improvements to base attack bonus and base save bonuses
that the class provided.



Some feats have prerequisites. Your character must have the
indicated ability score, class feature, feat, skill, base attack bonus,
or other quality designated in order to select or use that feat.

A character can’t use a feat if he or she has lost a prerequisite.
For example, if your character’s Strength drops below 13
because a ray of enfeeblement spell, he or she can’t use the Power
Attack feat until the prerequisite is once again met.

NOWHERE does it say that:

"Meeting the requirements" (a feat for a PrC) = being able to use that feat.

...and not simply having selected/"having"/knowing that feat.

The text explicitly says that you must fulfill requirements in order to SELECT or USE a feat, as it explicitly says that if you lose requirements you can't USE the feat.

NOWHERE does it say that if you lose a prerequisite, you lose the feat altogether.

You can yell and shout and moan, but NOWHERE is it written down that "meeting class requirements" means what you claim it means.

Moreover, the examples stated are the following:
1)Alignment change
2)levels lost because of character death
3)the loss of a magic item that granted an important ability.

#s 1 & 2 are pretty clear, so let's stick to #3 so as to respond to this:

A ring that gives power attack is effectively identical to gaining the feat power attack. If you lose access to the ring, or to the feat you may no longer use power attack.

Saying you HAVE power attack you just don't have access to it is the same as saying you HAVE a ring of power attack it's just been temporarily broken into pieces. In either case, item or intrinsic ability you NO LONGER HAVE ACCESS TO POWER ATTACK. You may not use it as a feat, whether to qualify for a prestige class or in combat.

When a magic item grants an ability, and this ability copies a class ability or feat, the magic item magically grants you ALL the knowledge required so as to allow you to do what it grants you. A ring of power attack grants you the knowledge of an experienced swordsman, thus permitting you to wield the sword in the appropriate way so as to receive Power Attack's benefits. You lose the ring, you lose the knowledge. No longer do you KNOW/HAVE Power Attack.

OTOH, if you have already selected Power Attack as a feat, it means that you have the knowledge and experience in you, that you have mastered the art, which will grant you Power Attack's benefits. Even if you lose some strength, the knowledge sticks with you, it doesn't evaporate as with the loss of the ring (You have already SELECTED/MASTERED that feat. You HAVE that feat).

Saying that you no longer have access to power attack AT ALL... yet can still use power attack (which you can't do) as a qualifier is bizarre in the extreme.

Don't twist the words of others, so as to create an effect. NOONE said that "you can still use power attack as a qualifier"

What we say is that by not being able to use a feat temporarily, does not mean you lose the feat altogether, as explained above.

What is bizarre in the extreme, is saying that if your muscles get weakened, you lose a swordsman's knowledge.

So, again, not only what you claim is not supported by RAW... It is not even supported by RAI.

 

[Visigani]

So your argument is that if a ring grants me knowledge of combat expertise and i lose that ring it is wildly different from if i cant use combat expertise because i become a drooling idiot.

Because the knowledge stays with you! Entirely ignoring the fact that all subsequent feats in the line are also negated.

Its just a self servong and brazenly off interpretation of the rules.

 

[Jimlock]

So your argument is that if a ring grants me knowledge of combat expertise and i lose that ring it is wildly different from if i cant use combat expertise because i become a drooling idiot.

Because the knowledge stays with you! Entirely ignoring the fact that all subsequent feats in the line are also negated.

Its just a self servong and brazenly off interpretation of the rules.

Quite a few ppl, including me, disagree with what you say, which by the way... are not rules written in stone, but claims made out of thin air.

You can stick around and alone by the side your unsupported opinion, that's fine.

But I 'm not gonna stick around in this thread, because I've already done my "one on one" VS irrational posts for the week, right here. It was quite tiring, and I don't think I have the nerves for a second one.

Adios.

 

[Visigani]

Simply because you say my views are unsupported doesn't mean they aren't. That's simply your opinion. And it's a wrong one. Which, of course, is my opinion. =)

 

[kitcik]

Simply because you say my views are unsupported doesn't mean they aren't. That's simply your opinion. And it's a wrong one. Which, of course, is my opinion. =)

The fact that [MENTION=6674931]Jimlock[/MENTION] says your views are unsupported is immaterial.

The fact that they are, in fact, unsupported is quite material. If you disagree with this, offer some support other than what you feel is logical. In other words, offer a rule. The rules as quoted throughout this thread support only one conclusion, logical or not: if you have a prerequisite feat, you qualify for the relevant PrC, whether or not you can currently use that feat.

In some cases, as some [like [MENTION=78958]Empirate[/MENTION] ] have pointed out, that is logical. In some cases, as you have pointed out, it is not.

However, in any case, those are the rules.

Here is one more thought. Say you had a ring that granted the following ability: "While you wear this ring, you are treated as having the Power Attack feat for purposes of qualifying for PrCs. However, while wearing this ring, you may not use the Power Attack feat, whether or not you have taken it and regardless of your strength." Seems to me this would work for certain, regardless of logic. Seems to me the RAW are analogous to this for PrC feat prerequisites.