I take it back. It seems *Many* threads are having the same issue, and some even reference back to the quotes I also linked here.
ONE post out there claimed that it was within the lead designer's vision that feats Do work the way OldSkoolRPG would suggest. But so far I've seen many opinions, no proof...
...Unfortunately, I'm going to say "No, they do not", once again, until I find something new.
I take it back. It seems *Many* threads are having the same issue, and some even reference back to the quotes I also linked here.
ONE post out there claimed that it was within the lead designer's vision that feats Do work the way OldSkoolRPG would suggest. But so far I've seen many opinions, no proof...
...Unfortunately, I'm going to say "No, they do not", once again, until I find something new.
Feel free to say whatever you want, everyone has house rules.
But note that since Evasion is a prerequisite for the Twist Away feat, you do lose access to the Twist Away feat when you have no panache points (since that is a requirement for you to have Evasion).
Could you use a ring of evasion to qualify for the Twist Away feat?
But note that since Evasion is a prerequisite for the Twist Away feat, you do lose access to the Twist Away feat when you have no panache points (since that is a requirement for you to have Evasion).Could you use a ring of evasion to qualify for the Twist Away feat?
Same deal. Arguably, if you could use one, you could use the other. That is, if there's evidence out there that shows you can use magic items in feat prereqs, then the Swashbuckler taking Twist Away should be no problem at all.
Saw a neat thread out there that suggests Retraining entire feat trees, once you acquire a feat from a magic item.
All this can be yours for the low, low price of.... Proof plz =P
...just gotta figure out if you can use conditional/temporarily acquired abilities as feat prereqs.
Retraining entire feat trees? But if you don't meet all of the prereqs the feat is worthless to you.
Retraining entire feat trees? But if you don't meet all of the prereqs the feat is worthless to you.
Hehe...Yeeeep. Bit of a weakness =P
Anyways. Still searching.
I think we have a winner. Credit to Rhatahema
Alright. Recapping.
1) As long as you have the "substance"/mechanics of a class ability (Such as an archetype having it but under a slightly different name) , you qualify has having that class ability for meeting prerequisites. Example/proof given by Pupsocket, earlier in this thread.
2) It is confirmed, courtesy of OldSkoolRPG and his link to the FAQ, that Temporary Ability Score Bonuses benefit everything that Permanent ability score bonuses would-- Including meeting feat prerequisites.
3) In the thread linked above, a quote by Jason was brought to light that the Brawler's Flurry class ability (which grants feats such as Two-Weapon Fighting) -CAN- be used to qualify for other feats (which the Brawler only benefits from when performing their Flurry).
A brawler can use the feats granted by brawler's flurry to qualify for other feats, but can only use those other feats when using brawler's flurry (as that's the only time she actually meets those prerequisites).
... I believe that the above implies that Other features and/or feats temporarily (but reliably) granted by similar class features also qualify you for feats.
That is to say, the same can be applied to:
- Temporary Fly Speeds
- Alchemist's Feral Mutagen / Druid's Wild Shape
- Swashbuckler/Gunslinger's Deeds
- abilities granted during Barbarian's Rage
- Familiar's "Awareness"
- ETC
It would Also -STRONGLY IMPLY- magic items would qualify as well.
Again, if anyone has any other evidence to contribute that'd be nice... but that seems to be the clincher. Thanks to all.
Again, if anyone has any other evidence to contribute that'd be nice... but that seems to be the clincher. Thanks to all.
We aside from it relying on implications and generalizations I'd say its a good thing that you're at least waiting for proof. I look forward to see what comes out of this.
Again, if anyone has any other evidence to contribute that'd be nice... but that seems to be the clincher. Thanks to all.We aside from it relying on implications and generalizations I'd say its a good thing that you're at least waiting for proof. I look forward to see what comes out of this.
I've looked up and down the messageboards, with the keywords "Prereq" and "feat" in the search box (Fell asleep after 22/6x pages of results). The closest thing in the FAQs was what OldskoolRPG posted. A lot of other threads linked to the same ones I did previously ( Quotes by SKR, who was in turn quoting Jason ). A LOT of generalization and simple, general consensus was found. Anywhere where it was taken more critically, made the same dead ends. There were a few close calls when it came to threads about fly speed, others about wild shape. Nothing seemed to give conclusive evidence. The only thing that Was conclusive was the quote by SKR on Jason, saying that a temporary flyspeed was not enough to qualify for a feat (even if it was reliable enough to train in the fly skill). But that was an old quote in itself.
This is the closest I've personally found, and it was by chance brought up by another individual in a recent rules thread. It contradicted my stand thus far. But it's the closest (Edit: Officially answered) example of a class feature Temporarily granting a feat/prereq that I've seen.
If this is relying on generalizations and implications, then the only other solution I see is to FAQ this *bleep*.
If this is relying on generalizations and implications, then the only other solution I see is to FAQ this *bleep*.
Well I did say I was looking forward to the outcome. But to clarify, it is definitely a generalization to take a specific instance of something occurring and to presume anything other then a precedent from it. and with your liberal use of "this implies" I'm pretty sure I don't have to explain that one :P
Unfortunately, It's the best "Hint" I could find, personally. In light of the lack of evidence for all related temporarily-met-prereq issues, I think it's the closest, most recent example and thus best reference for anyone researching the subject. Due to the sheer number of cases, there's a great pressure to find a general all-encompassing rule. Either someone takes this thread as reference, or faces an opinion-saturated abyss.
Honestly, I'm contemplating setting up a new thread specifically to have a callout for an FAQ on the matter (as it really does touch so many aspects of the game)... Just can't seem to garner support. Erks me.
In all other cases I would agree with you. My standard for evidence has lowered significantly, since actually attempting the research. =P