Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Corwin" data-source="post: 75662" data-attributes="member: 1560">Thread summarization and analysis. Cool, let's do.I think you are getting into two different issues with regards to your complaint with me. Confusing the two is, IMO, the real root of the problem.1) The fact that Irky is a gnome and that this fact was clearly evident before you posted.2) What my problems with certain comments regarding the apprentice level rules are.I'll respond to some of your most recent comments:There are actually numerous ways to get more than two feats for a 2nd level PC. None of them are relevant to this thread.Fact: Irky is a gnome fighter-1/cleric-1 with 3 feats.Question: How does he have three feats?Answer: Either one of his cleric domains provides a bonus feat or it is an error.That's it.This is still not at issue. What does a human apprentice's 3 feats have to do with anything? My contention is with Hornblower's comments regarding apprentice class levels. I will quote them here for you...and...These are what I noticed. What is he referring to here? It appears as though he believes that a PC who chooses the apprentice level option gets an extra feat above and beyond what is normally expected. This would be wrong. I clearly got into that with my lengthy post on the matter.But the fact that Irky was a gnome was already established. Your not knowing this throws your entire argument into "Uselessville". <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> That's my point. You are making statements that have no bearing on the thread. None what so ever. Your comments were incorrect because of this very fact. Because your question had no bearing on Hornblower's assumption or my answer to it. You went off on some tangent about human bonus feats which meant nothing here. Im sure your answer is relevant to some question somewhere. Just not mine. Just like a broken clock is correct twice a day. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Because it, like yours, added nothing relevant. Further, it was nothing more than reiterating what was already stated previously. I believe he did not read the thread before posting. It is a safa assumption because of the wording of his reply. That, or he simply wasn't paying attention. Either way, I felt like commenting on that matter. So sue me. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification