Multiattack

[green slime]

It implies exactly the same amount of metagame knowledge the druid has to have to change into a bear for level up.

No it doesn't, as I explained earlier, it merely required that the ability be within the capactity of the character at the time of level up. "Borrowing" equipment belonging to another player is not on the same scale at all. It implies not only some sort of knowledge that the character possesses (the ability to change shape into a bear, which he can basically do any time he so chooses, it is an ability under his control), but the metagame knowledge that he can borrow an item from another person. Which isn't at all certain.

 

[Dimwhit]

A question, for all of you arguing for the druid being able to take Multiattack. Would you allow a fighter with a 9 Int to have Fox's Cunning cast on him in order to pick up Combat Expertise?

Nope, but they're not at all the same thing. One is a supernatural ability of the character, the other is a temporary spell cast by someone else.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Nope, but they're not at all the same thing. One is a supernatural ability of the character, the other is a temporary spell cast by someone else.

The exact same analogy is available the other way. One is a natural part of the creature and the other is a temporary supernatural ability. If you really believed what you wrote above, you'd have to rule against allowing wildshape, for the exact same reason you disallow the fox's cunning.

 

[Dimwhit]

For one, how is Fox's Cunning a natural part of the creature. Second, there's no such thing as a temporary supernatural ability, just a SA with a duration. The ability is permanent and cannot be lost or taking away (short of violating a Druid's oath--but that's a whole different beast).

In short, I don't see how that analogy is available the other way. Makes no sense the other way.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

For one, how is Fox's Cunning a natural part of the creature.

Not the Fox's Cunning, the natural weapons. INA requires you to have natural weapons as a part of your being, not as bestowed by a temporary supernatural ability.

Second, there's no such thing as a temporary supernatural ability, just a SA with a duration.

I fail to see the distinction. If a supernatural ability has a beginning and an end, then by definition it is temporary.

The ability is permanent and cannot be lost or taking away (short of violating a Druid's oath--but that's a whole different beast).

Or walking into an Antimagic Field. I suppose the druid had better hold off on leveling up until he gets out of the field, then.

But, we aren't debating what ruling is best for versimiltude, we're debating which is RAW, so what type of 'world' you want to play in is irrelevant. In certain types of games, introducing a houserule for versimilitude might be a fine idea, but that has no bearing on what the RAW say.

A fair point. Can you provide a quote which supports your assertion that leveling is a known in-game event (for which PCs can prepare by using buffs/special abilities)? Or that a PC need merely have the ability to temporarily acquire a prerequisite to gain a feat? If so, it would go a long way to proving your point. Otherwise, your debate is founded on personal playstyle as much as mine is.

Well, except for the fact that I am basing my ruling on a bit of text.

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.

There was a spell in the Spellbook feature on the WotC site a while back, that allowed a wizard to temporarily gain a feat, merely by observing someone else who had it. Would this allow a wizard with this spell in his spellbook to treat any feat prerequisite as fulfilled, for the purposes of selecting feats? He has, after all, the capacity to temporarily gain any feat he needs.

I rule no. He may be using the prerequisite feat, but it isn't his feat. Likewise, a druid wildshaped into a tiger may be using three natural weapons, but they aren't his. He doesn't actually have three natural weapons (unless, again, he's an awakened tiger druid), and therefore, clear as day, he can't take Multiattack.

 

[FEADIN]

I think that all that it's interpretation of the rule, an humanoide doesn't have three natural attacks in his natural form.
For all the prerequisite and to be sure put the character naked in an Antimagic Field and you will see what feat he can take, that's how I see it.

 

[glass]

I suppose the druid had better hold off on leveling up until he gets out of the field, then.

Yep!

A fair point. Can you provide a quote which supports your assertion that leveling is a known in-game event (for which PCs can prepare by using buffs/special abilities)? Or that a PC need merely have the ability to temporarily acquire a prerequisite to gain a feat? If so, it would go a long way to proving your point. Otherwise, your debate is founded on personal playstyle as much as mine is.

Actually, my preference is to have training rules for versimiltude, but I recognise that I would be using house rules not RAW.

FWIW, I don't think there needs to be an allowance for the character to know the he is leveling. The player knows, and the player makes the decisions for his character. It's not great for SoD, but that doesn't make it not the RAW.

Well, except for the fact that I am basing my ruling on a bit of text.

The bit of text you quote says nothing about having the prereq in his natural form, or permanently, or without magical help; it just says he has to have it.

There was a spell in the Spellbook feature on the WotC site a while back, that allowed a wizard to temporarily gain a feat, merely by observing someone else who had it. Would this allow a wizard with this spell in his spellbook to treat any feat prerequisite as fulfilled, for the purposes of selecting feats? He has, after all, the capacity to temporarily gain any feat he needs.

Any feat he had seen used and cast the spell to select just before levelling, yes. Not any feat in the world though.


glass.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

The bit of text you quote says nothing about having the prereq in his natural form, or permanently, or without magical help; it just says he has to have it.

Heh. Look, I don't think we're going anywhere here. I've already stated my reasoning and the text I believe backs it up. I think you're warping a clear ruling to get the effect you like. You probably think I'm just off my rocker. Let's just agree to disagree.

Good gaming.