Monk taking Stunning Fist ?

[justfisch]

I have a monk that took Improved Grapple at first level. Can I take Stunning fist at a later time, 3rd level or 6th level, as a regular feat? Or am I pigeon holed into one track?

cheers,
justin

 

[Creamsteak]

I believe that if you want to follow the rules absolutely, he can't take stunning fist until he qualifies for the normal prerequisites now.

 

[justfisch]

As a DM would you allow it?

 

[Stalker0]

Considering I can take stunning fist as my monk feat and then instantly take improved grapple, yeah I have no problems allowing it the other way around.

 

[Creamsteak]

I would allow it if the choice was made by a player that didn't know the rules around his choices. I would not allow it if the player was fully aware of this (like if I pointed it out specifically beforehand).

 

[Deset Gled]

I believe that if you want to follow the rules absolutely, he can't take stunning fist until he qualifies for the normal prerequisites now.

Correct. The benefit of feats as class abilites for monks and rangers is that you don't need to meet the prereqs. You can always take the same feats later on if you pass them up, but you need to do it as you would any other feat.

It's funny to note that in 3.0, the monk's Stunning Fist ability was potentially worse than the feat, because the monk's Stunning Fist was tied to monk levels, while the feat was tied to character level (allowing you to multiclass).

 

[IamTheTest]

As a DM I would allow it to happen. Its not like the monk is an especially strong PC choice.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I have a monk that took Improved Grapple at first level. Can I take Stunning fist at a later time, 3rd level or 6th level, as a regular feat? Or am I pigeon holed into one track?

Do you allow the PHII as a rules source? If so, you can use the retraining option.

 

[Darklone]

Agreed with INfinidude. I don't see a reason why taking Stunning Fist and Imp Grapple later should be different from picking them the other way round.