It does.
I've been toying with a character concept and I've run into a question that I cannot find an answer for.
For example, if one were to make use of a Tome of Clear Thought to raise his Int to 13, would he then qualify for a feat like Combat Expertise that requires Int 13? Or do inherent bonuses not count towards requirements?
Thanks!
Any and all bonuses to your attributes can allow you to qualify for a feat. The only thing that matters is that your stat >= the minimum requirement. That being said, be aware that you lose the ability to use the feat if your attribute falls below that minimum requirement. You do not lose the feat, just the ability to use the feat.
Any and all bonuses to your attributes can allow you to qualify for a feat. The only thing that matters is that your stat >= the minimum requirement. That being said, be aware that you lose the ability to use the feat if your attribute falls below that minimum requirement. You do not lose the feat, just the ability to use the feat.I've been toying with a character concept and I've run into a question that I cannot find an answer for.
For example, if one were to make use of a Tome of Clear Thought to raise his Int to 13, would he then qualify for a feat like Combat Expertise that requires Int 13? Or do inherent bonuses not count towards requirements?
Thanks!
Which is why you want to have lots in the attribute in question. I have found that the best way to hamper a two weapon fighter is to hit his dex with a bestow curse or similar. Good fun.
So, be careful if you make a fighter or similar with 13 or 14 dexterity. An enlarge person spell will hinder you from using dodge, archery feats and more. If your fighter has been poisoned and lost strength, he might not be able to power attack, etc.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
I believe you are incorrect on this item. Specifically, enhancement bonuses (and perhaps other bonus types) don't apply for the purpose of learning feats or gaining skills at a level up. Enhancment bonuses do apply to spells per day. Inherent bonuses (such as from your above mentioned tome) are different, however, in that they are a permanent bonus. They do apply for the purpose of feats, skills at level up, ect.For the most part, permanent bonuses will be what you can use for determining weather or not you can gain a feat. To my knowledege, this includes Inherent bonuses (which cap at +5 as of 3.5, I haven't found the specific rule for this in pathfinder yet, but assume it is the same), your ability ups every 4 levels, and occasionally a permanent sacred bonus (I usually only see these as quest rewards in mid to high level published campaigns).
Temporary bonuses, such as from magic items, spells, and the like, will not help you for choosing feats.
So to make a long story short. Yes you can use the tome to get you int to 13 and take combat expertise. However, as kamelguru wrote, taking Int damage will temporarily knock out your access to the ability.
Actually, Enhancement bonuses can be permanent as well.
Any bonus to an Ability score that lasts longer than a day counts as Permanent, and gives you skill points/hit points/what have you.
Any and all bonuses to your attributes can allow you to qualify for a feat. The only thing that matters is that your stat >= the minimum requirement. That being said, be aware that you lose the ability to use the feat if your attribute falls below that minimum requirement. You do not lose the feat, just the ability to use the feat.I've been toying with a character concept and I've run into a question that I cannot find an answer for.
For example, if one were to make use of a Tome of Clear Thought to raise his Int to 13, would he then qualify for a feat like Combat Expertise that requires Int 13? Or do inherent bonuses not count towards requirements?
Thanks!
I believe you are incorrect on this item. Specifically, enhancement bonuses (and perhaps other bonus types) don't apply for the purpose of learning feats or gaining skills at a level up. Enhancment bonuses do apply to spells per day. Inherent bonuses (such as from your above mentioned tome) are different, however, in that they are a permanent bonus. They do apply for the purpose of feats, skills at level up, ect.
For the most part, permanent bonuses will be what you can use for determining weather or not you can gain a feat. To my knowledege, this includes Inherent bonuses (which cap at +5 as of 3.5, I haven't found the specific rule for this in pathfinder yet, but assume it is the same), your ability ups every 4 levels, and occasionally a permanent sacred bonus (I usually only see these as quest rewards in mid to high level published campaigns).
Temporary bonuses, such as from magic items, spells, and the like, will not help you for choosing feats.
So to make a long story short. Yes you can use the tome to get you int to 13 and take combat expertise. However, as kamelguru wrote, taking Int damage will temporarily knock out your access to the ability.
You can use any bonuses to qualify for feats. You can even use Fox's Cunning to qualify for Combat Expertise if it brings your Intelligence up high enough. The problem comes in when your attribute drops below the minimum. It was like this in 3.0, 3.5, and still like this in Pathfinder. It even had its own FAQ entry for 3.5 because it came up so often. There is nothing I can find that states temporary bonuses do not allow you to qualify for feats.
I am a supporter of the "use any given bonuses to qualify for feat" idea, since that helps mitigate the need to optimize out your pooper when making a character concept. Want a Sword&Board fighter? Enjoy having to get Dex19, while needing Str and Con.
To get a viable Sword and board TWF build (Str16+2race, Dex16 so you can bump it at lv4-8-12, Con14) with 15 point buy, the rest of the stats need to be 8,7,7. Enjoy your short-bus fighter. If you allow for items to mitigate, at least you won't be ridiculed for your mental stats, and start play with -2 to will saves or 1 skill point.
But it should be said that just barely being withing the minimum requirements is risky business. Take any amount of ability damage (poison, low-level magic, curses, disease etc) and your feat list crumbles.
Permanent Bonuses: Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.
I don't see how Fox's Cunning could be used to qualify for a feat. The quote, provided by the above link and matched in the core rule book, says that bonuses have to last 24 hours to become permanent, and therefore, cause a change in associated stats, such as skill points. By extension, though I can find no rule specifically for or against, would be that those bonuses would also have to be 24 hours, and thus considered permanent, to qualify for feats.
I think this is further supported by Fox's Cunning specifically saying it doesn't grant skill ranks in the spell description.
Fox's Cunning is minutes per level duration. IMO, not long enough to be considered a prerequisite for a feat.
It's not a good idea to use a short duration spell to qualify for a feat but there is nothing in the rules to prohibit it. I think it would be a waste of a feat slot in the very high majority of cases. I can see some unusual cases where it might be an interesting idea, but they are few and far between.
You might notice that the section you quoted never says that you can't use temporary bonuses to qualify for feats. The reading through the section on feats, it merely stats that you must meet the prerequisites.
What if we don't look at Fox's Cunning but instead look at Bull's Strength? It grants everything from a boost in Strength. Permanent or Temporary, Bull's Strength adds +4 to your Strength score while it is in effect. Why should it not be allowed to also allow you to qualify for a feat? How often do you think it's going to be an issue? Is it game breaking regardless?
I am a supporter of the "use any given bonuses to qualify for feat" idea, since that helps mitigate the need to optimize out your pooper when making a character concept. Want a Sword&Board fighter? Enjoy having to get Dex19, while needing Str and Con.
To get a viable Sword and board TWF build (Str16+2race, Dex16 so you can bump it at lv4-8-12, Con14) with 15 point buy, the rest of the stats need to be 8,7,7. Enjoy your short-bus fighter. If you allow for items to mitigate, at least you won't be ridiculed for your mental stats, and start play with -2 to will saves or 1 skill point.
But it should be said that just barely being withing the minimum requirements is risky business. Take any amount of ability damage (poison, low-level magic, curses, disease etc) and your feat list crumbles.
This is not true. You can build a very effective sword and board fight with the Elite Array. He can stand his own against the Bestiary and NPCs without being short-bussed. If a player feels the need to build a character with 3 dump stats, I would say that the player needs to learn how to build an effective character. We both agree that 3 dump stats is dumb. I don't think you need 3 dump stats to be effective. Rather than derail this thread though, if you want to continue the discussion on dump stats and whether or not effective characters can be built at 15, 20, or whatever point buy, I am up for it but you would have to make another thread.
I think temporary spells granting the ability to select feats comes down to one certain question. How long does it take to level up? To me that seems to be the crux of the matter, if its something that happens in between encounters when an xp total hits a magic number then temporary magic should work. If it is something that happens when everyone gets back to town and can rest and relax (or even train), then I don't see something covering a handful of minutes.
Let's say that it takes several days. In fact, let's say it takes a week to level up. How does that change the issue? Think about this: Before that week passes, Bob the Fighter does not have Power Attack, but afterwards (since he leveled up and took the feat), he does. Does that mean that the only reason he learned how to hit things better is because he learned it over that week? Does that mean it literally took him 24 hours a day for seven straight days to learn Power Attack? Was there any time during that week he was learning something else, like training his Athletics skill? Or did he, maybe, learn Power Attack gradually, over time, possibly over the last month that he was adventuring?
The reason I ask is because if you view him as a game mechanic, and he is functionally exactly the same at the end of a level as the beginning of a level, and he improves during the "level up" period (during which he is improving 100% of the time), then it would make no sense for him to meet the prerequisites of a higher ability score unless he has that higher ability score for 100% of the time he was improving. But if you view the level up process as less of a game mechanic and more of a thematic progress, then it makes more sense. Bob knows that if he was stronger, he could learn to focus his blows better. So, during the days they were traveling to and from the dungeon of ScaryDark, he uses his free time (whenever the wizard had a spare Bull's Strength spell) making use of this temporary strength increase to learn to focus his blows. When the spell wears off, he's too weak to pull it off, but he learns a little bit more every time, and by the time they finish their quest, Bob perfects the ability to focus his blows- he still has to be stronger to do it, but whenever he gains a temporary strength increase, he's ready to go, because he spent so many days practicing it (even when he didn't have the spell active, he was still practicing the mental side of it).
Just think about it for a second and you will understand. If I cast cat's grace on you (+4 dex) to qualify you for twf, it will last a few minutes, at most 40 mins if its a level 20 character casting it and its extended, (and why a level 20 character is hanging out with you if you still need cat's grace just to fight normally im not really sure), which doesn't give you the necessary 24 hr period of having the bonus to make it a permenant bonus and qualify you. Also are you imagining that your character just practices using the feat one day when someone cast cat's grace on you and you learned how to use the feat really quick in that period of time and now you are good to go whenever someone walks along and hits you with the dex buff? Feats represent a skill that was picked up through training, not just a skill that was picked up because your character sheet says so (even though that's how many players treat their character's abilities like twf.)
We're arguing two different points. From a purely game mechanics point of view, so long as you have the prerequisites, you can take the feat. From a role playing point of view, it's a different story.
Let me ask this: can a wizard put ranks in the fly skill even though he can't fly all the time? What if you want to make a character that has different features when he takes different forms? Wouldn't it be interesting to have a druid that gains Power Attack when he becomes a bear? What a wizard who takes Power Attack, Improved Natural Attack (claw), deep sight, eagle eyes, and weapon focus (claw)? These are possible, even if situational, within the rules.
There is nothing precluding you from taking a feat that you qualify for other than the GM. If you (or others) feel that you shouldn't be able to do that, that's perfectly fine (and very reasonable) with me. I'm only discussing this from a game mechanics point of view.
Thank you Dirk, that's roughly how I interpreted the rules as well. Specifically, the part where it says " duration of 1 day actually increase the ability scorer after 24 hours" by the logic of that statement, a bonus that lasts less than 24 hours does not actually change your ability score, and if your ability score has not changed, it can not be used as a qualifying prerequisite.
I think it is important to point out here, that this is the rules forum, and from what i see in the RaW, short term buffs do not apply.
On a side note, I understand and ( to an extent) agree with the logic of the above statements. They certainly are compelling arguments for a house rule. On the example of the power attack, it would be logical to say you have trained the feat, but without the Bull's Strength, you are simply not strong enough to put that extra oomph behind your swing. I just don't believe that it is in line with the rules as written.
Where in the RAW does it state that you cannot use temporary bonuses to qualify? Not an interpretation but an actual statement that says you cannot do so. I can find a statement that says all you need to qualify is to meet the prerequisites.
To be fair, no one is saying that it's necessarily a good idea. In fact, most of the time it is probably not a good idea. Just because the rules allow for something does not mean that someone should do that.
Where in the RAW does it state that you cannot use temporary bonuses to qualify?where does you say it can?
That's my point. You are having to interpret. I am just letting the rules stand as written. In the end, I think we're going to see the same results. It is extremely unlikely in both of our campaigns that anyone is going to use Bull's Strength to qualify for Power Attack. Your players are not allowed and mine think it's a foolish idea.
I tend to be fairly liberal on this issue; if you are able to qualify for the feat in any way, you can take it. You just only get the benefit when you qualify. To give an esoteric example, if there was a feat that only worked when Large size, I'd allow a medium character to take it as long as he understood he would only get the benefit when Enlarge Person or a similar spell was cast on him.
To give a more solid example, I allowed the Monk in my game to take Power Attack at first level, with the understanding that he could only use it during a Flurry of Blows (when his BaB was +1). We also treat his non-flurry and flurry BaBs as separate for how much damage his Power Attacks do. So at 8th level where he is right now, his normal Power Attack is -2 acc/+4 damage but during a flurry his Power Attack jumps to -3 acc/+6 damage.
My reasoning is basically that I don't see a good reason to limit player options as long as it doesn't feel overpowered. If Bob the Short Bus Fighter really wants to take a feat that he can only use after quaffing a potion of Fox's Cunning, he can be my guest.
Try thinking of it this way: Cleric of the war domain gets to use the Weapon Master (lets pretend the cleric has 19 dex just for the fun of it) ability and today he uses this ability to give him TWF for a # of rounds = to his cleric level. He also levels up today, hurray! He says "I'm taking Improved TWF". He has BAB of +6 because he's 9th level. I would suggest that in fact no, he cannot take this feat because he does not meet the prerequisite of TWF that you need to qualify for Imp. TWF, even though he has used TWF for 8 rounds today temporarily. I'm sorry to have to argue with such weak evidence here, I normally hold to the idea that convictions make convicts, but I'm just right on this one, and I'm not budging. You need a permanent bonus to qualify for a feat, not a temp one.
You are justifying an extremely reasonable and understandable house rule. One that I can completely agree with without argument if I was playing in a game that had that as a rule.
That being said, can you find anything that states you cannot use temporary bonuses to qualify for feats? Would it be an issue if someone did take ITWF that can only be used when he uses his domain ability for the very limited number of rounds?
That being said, can you find anything that states you cannot use temporary bonuses to qualify for feats?
A temporary ability bonus does not actually increase the relevant ability score, it gives specific bonuses related to that score. For example, Fox's Cunning gives you +2 on intelligence based skill-checks and +2 to the DC of intelligence-based spells; it does not actually increase your intelligence score by +4. After an ability bonus has been active for 24 hours, it does actually increase the relevant ability score. This is spelled out in the core book page 554-555.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Since this discussion seems to have been raised from the dead here, I'm going to take up Bob's cause.
If ability increases only become permanent after 24 hours, and you need a permanent increase in order to qualify for a feat, then wouldn't the same apply for ability decreases disqualifying somebody from a feat?
In other words, if a fighter is running around with 13 Int and he gets hit with a curse taking his Int down 6 points, he should lose access to combat expertise and all the maneuvers which build off of it immediately, correct? But that damage doesn't become permanent until 24 hours later, so he doesn't disqualify himself from the feat until then (since his "permanent" Int is still 13).
If you need a permanent ability above the prereq limit in order to qualify for a feat, then the entire strategy of going after lynchpin abilities to strip characters of their feats falls apart.
If an ability is decreased (which requires bestow curse or ability drain), it drops immediately, causing appropriate penalties. Penalties don't get the 24 hour delay, unfortunately. That's what makes bestow curse useful in combat (sometimes). It's what makes ability drain so nasty.
If an ability is decreased (which requires bestow curse or ability drain), it drops immediately, causing appropriate penalties. Penalties don't get the 24 hour delay, unfortunately. That's what makes bestow curse useful in combat (sometimes). It's what makes ability drain so nasty.
Not quite correct -- penalties and damage do not decrease your stats for the purposes of feats, spells capable of being cast, or the like.
Only ability drain does that.
If an ability is decreased (which requires bestow curse or ability drain), it drops immediately, causing appropriate penalties. Penalties don't get the 24 hour delay, unfortunately. That's what makes bestow curse useful in combat (sometimes). It's what makes ability drain so nasty.Not quite correct -- penalties and damage do not decrease your stats for the purposes of feats, spells capable of being cast, or the like.
Only ability drain does that.
Oops, forgot that part about penalties. I didn't mention ability damage, you'll note, as I'm aware that ability damage doesn't actually decrease the score. Good catch.
Edit: Ray of enfeeblement has specific verbiage about not reducing the Strength score below 1. Touch of idiocy specifically reduces stats as a penalty as well and says you may lose the ability to cast spells from the effects of the spell. I think you may be off on penalties Abraham.
Edit: Ray of enfeeblement has specific verbiage about not reducing the Strength score below 1. Touch of idiocy specifically reduces stats as a penalty as well and says you may lose the ability to cast spells from the effects of the spell. I think you may be off on penalties Abraham.
Touch of idiocy has specific language stating what it does specifically because it does not follow the general rule on penalties -- there are other spells with similar language too (feeblemind jumps to the fore).
please note the rules on ability penalty:
Ability Score PenaltiesSome spells and abilities cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time. While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die. In essence, penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1.
Basically put the language of ray of enfeeblement is redundant (and an artifact) while the language in touch of idiocy allows the penalty to specifically do something that a penalty normally can't do.
Edit: Ray of enfeeblement has specific verbiage about not reducing the Strength score below 1. Touch of idiocy specifically reduces stats as a penalty as well and says you may lose the ability to cast spells from the effects of the spell. I think you may be off on penalties Abraham.Touch of idiocy has specific language stating what it does specifically because it does not follow the general rule on penalties -- there are other spells with similar language too (feeblemind jumps to the fore).
please note the rules on ability penalty:
Basically put the language of ray of enfeeblement is redundant (and an artifact) while the language in touch of idiocy allows the penalty to specifically do something that a penalty normally can't do.
Ability Score PenaltiesSome spells and abilities cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time. While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die. In essence, penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1.
Ah, there's the problem. An unnecessary set of exceptions, as not much actually causes an ability penalty yet there are already two exceptions. I thought you were right before, this makes more sense. I'd probably have cleaned this up and said penalties always reduce the score or they never do instead of sometimes doing so.
Comes back to it being an exception based system -- and nothing has more exceptions than magic.
Kind of makes sense in a non-linear way.