| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
question
No, since he is not a fighter, but a samurai.
|
Beginning at level 3, a samurai is treated as a fighter of his samurai level + fighter level if any for meeting the prerequisites of feats. So yes, he can, once you are level 3.
Also, for people saying "no he doesn't get fighter levels if he isn't multiclassed", search the official developer answer on the topic that confirms what I said previously.
Answer
No,he is a caviler so can't take fighter feats. Wrong class.
Yes, since his samurai levels stack with his fighter levels for the purpose of meeting the prerequesites as per weapon expertise.
And that, my friends, is the million dollar question.
The issue is that most other features that do something like this use different text, such that they specifically state you count your levels as fighter levels. This ability does not do that, but says it stacks.
|
The closest example I can think of is bark skin, which gives an enhancement bonus to natural armor (and thus stacks with natural armor), then specifically states if you don't have natural armor it is counted as 0.Yes, since his samurai levels stack with his fighter levels for the purpose of meeting the prerequesites as per weapon expertise.And that, my friends, is the million dollar question.
The issue is that most other features that do something like this use different text, such that they specifically state you count your levels as fighter levels. This ability does not do that, but says it stacks.
or even the amulet of natural armor, which mimics barkskin.
|
|
And that, my friends, is the million dollar question.
Well, it got a 2-cent answer already. Basically, you treat samurai levels as fighter levels because otherwise that would make half the ability basically useless without at least 1 level of multiclassing, which didn't make a lot of sense. Don't remember the developer's name. I think this comes from Sean K Reynolds, but it has been said for sure.
The fun with that assumption is for feats that require a class, but no levels.
The strongest example of this is the feat Witch Knife. Assuming that if you don't have levels in a class that you actually have 0 levels in that class means that anyone can take that feat.
Some (much) weaker examples are Divine Interference and Planar Preservationist.
If you have 0 levels in cleric, you are a divine spellcaster, so could take divine interference.
If you have 0 levels in preservationist alchemist, you can still take that feat.
But as I said, those two are weak examples, so I would never rely on them.
|
Yes, since his samurai levels stack with his fighter levels (presumably 0) for the purpose of meeting the prerequesites as per weapon expertise. Only for that weapon though.
Weapon Expertise (Ex): At 3rd level, a samurai gains an unparalleled expertise with his chosen weapons. At 3rd level, the samurai selects either the katana, longbow, naginata, or wakizashi. The samurai can draw the selected weapon as a free action as if he had the Quick Draw feat. In addition, whenever he threatens a critical hit with the selected weapon, he gains a +2 bonus on the confirmation roll. Finally, his samurai levels stack with any fighter levels he possesses for the purposes of meeting the prerequisites for feats that specifically select his chosen weapon, such as Weapon Specialization.
but only for feats that, as the text says, "specifically select his chosen weapon". So, if the feat does not specifically select the samurai's chosen weapon, he cannot use his samurai levels as fighter levels to qualify for the feat.
For example, they do not qualify for the following (I am sure that there are more that they do not qualify for):
Critial Mastery (not specific to a single weapon)
Disruptive
Spellbreaker
Greater Sheild Focus (not a listed weapon for Weapon expertise)
Disruptive Shot (not specific to a single weapon)
Pin down (not specific to a single weapon)
Edit to add: not disagreeing with shadowcatx, just expanding.
And that, my friends, is the million dollar question.Well, it got a 2-cent answer already. Basically, you treat samurai levels as fighter levels because otherwise that would make half the ability basically useless without at least 1 level of multiclassing, which didn't make a lot of sense. Don't remember the developer's name. I think this comes from Sean K Reynolds, but it has been said for sure.
It was James Jacobs.
NO class should require multiclassing to work as its own class. That's a fundamental philosophy of Pathfinder's design.
When we say: "The samurai levels stack with fighter levels," that's the same as saying, "For the purposes of meeting the prerequisite for feats like Weapon Specialization normally only available to fighters, the samurai treats his samurai levels as fighter levels.
Thus, a 4th level Samurai can take Weapon Specialization without multiclassing.
I know the RAI is that the samurai counts his levels as fighters, that's pretty clear. But for things like PFS, where RAW is king and the GM doesn't have much room for interpretations...well there's an issue, IMO.
But I do think that if you assume that you have 0 levels in a class when you don't have any levels in it, then anyone could take the Witch Knife feat. Witch Knife does not require any levels in Witch. You wouldn't need text to say it stacks. You just need levels in witch. And, due to this assumption, you have 0 levels in Witch, and "0 is a number" :)
It's the difference between assuming that "you have 0 levels" vs "you have null levels". You know how Undead don't have a constitution score? They don't have a Con score of 0. They just flat out do not have one. That's having "null levels".
You seem to be arguing that you need the text saying you can do stuff with that 0 levels in all other classes to be able to...well...do stuff with it. Which would bypass my issue nicely. But I can't think of anything in the rules that supports or undermines that argument.
I will fully admit upfront that this "null" vs "0" issue is the windmill to my Quixote.
But Witch Knife doesn't require any witch levels, just witch class :)
|
But Witch Knife doesn't require any witch levels, just witch class :)
I think this line of discussion is irrelevant, since that feat is simply badly written.
All feats I've ever seen that depend on something from a class (other than this) either list the class feature they require or the level they require, rather than just the class.
The witch knife's prerequisites should be "Patron Spells class feature", not "Witch class".
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
In general no. However with regards to their chosen weapon:
Yes, since his samurai levels stack with his fighter levels (presumably 0) for the purpose of meeting the prerequesites as per weapon expertise. Only for that weapon though.
So he would never qualify for: Disruptive, Greater Shield Focus, etc
Edit: Ninja'd by Happler.
And, of course, assuming that not having levels in a class is the same as having 0 levels in the class is what allows the samurai to take fighter feats, RAW.
So it follows that anyone can take Witch Knife.
Stabbity: It's very relevant if you're going by RAW. Not at all if you're going by RAI.
Amusingly, Amateur Gunslinger also has this issue. Well, you have 0 levels in gunslinger. And since 0 is a number, you have levels in it. So...no one can take it!
How would I fix this?
1) Witch Knife requires hex class feature, or patron.
2) The text of the samurai ability is changed to be the same as all other class abilities that let you treat your levels as fighter levels.
3) No clue what to do with Amateur Gunslinger.
|
|
And, of course, assuming that not having levels in a class is the same as having 0 levels in the class is what allows the samurai to take fighter feats, RAW.
So it follows that anyone can take Witch Knife.
Stabbity: It's very relevant if you're going by RAW. Not at all if you're going by RAI.
Amusingly, Amateur Gunslinger also has this issue. Well, you have 0 levels in gunslinger. And since 0 is a number, you have levels in it. So...no one can take it!
How would I fix this?
1) Witch Knife requires hex class feature, or patron.
2) The text of the samurai ability is changed to be the same as all other class abilities that let you treat your levels as fighter levels.
3) No clue what to do with Amateur Gunslinger.
Fine. Everyone can take witch knife. It's also useless to them, so why bother? By your own admission it would be RAI that the requirements are "Patron Spells class feature", so please don't try to use it as proof that a different rule can't work because of it.
In relation to Amateur Gunslinger: It says "no levels in a class that has the grit class feature". Guess what? 0 levels and no levels are the same thing, so people can take it. It's also somewhat badly written, as it should probably just say "Must not already possess the Grit class feature."
I don't disagree that the Samurai class should probably be phrased differently to prevent confusion, but that does NOT mean that it is useless without multi-classing by RAW.
Of course it's not useless: "The samurai can draw the selected weapon as a free action as if he had the Quick Draw feat. In addition, whenever he threatens a critical hit with the selected weapon, he gains a +2 bonus on the confirmation roll. " :)
But saying "his samurai levels stack with any fighter levels he possesses" when you mean "His samurai levels count as fighter levels for etc" causes issues.
And I'm no longer sure on the intent, due to that damnable "possesses" word. That's certainly how I would write the text if I didn't want to treat them as fighter levels, but still give some benefit.
More abilities that touch on similar issues:
If the dragon disciple does not have levels of sorcerer, he instead gains bloodline powers of the draconic bloodline, using his dragon disciple level as his sorcerer level to determine the bonuses gained.
If "not having" means "having 0", then that text is weird. That means that clause would be useless!
Uncanny Dodge isn't relevant though, due to the language of it. (that is, until someone convinces me that it is!)
Also, Diverse Training.
An eldritch knight adds his level to any levels of fighter he might have for the purpose of meeting the prerequisites for feats (if he has no fighter levels, treat his eldritch knight levels as levels of fighter). He also adds his level to any levels in an arcane spellcasting class for the purpose of meeting the prerequisites for feats.
So the CRB already dealt with this issue.
I think they might.
|
|
I going to sum up all the other wordings that say "if you don't have X, use Y as X": Clarity. It's something that's always nice to get in these systems. One thing that aids clarity is consistency, which (unfortunately) the Ultimate books do not always have.
To keep it simple: No base class should ever, nor do I expect that they will ever, grant a class ability that requires multi-classing. Prestige classes do this all over the place, but base classes do not. Every single thing in a base class is meant to be useful without taking any levels in any other class. Therefor, it is obvious that the Samurai ability is intended to function without levels in the Fighter class and any arguments otherwise are just taking advantage of a writer's poor choice in wording.
I do not feel in the mood for picking any more nits today.
To which I reply that if your argument depends on ignoring sections of the CRB or inserting text that isn't there, you need to rethink it. Especially when the text you're ignoring speaks directly to this issue.
Also, Internal Alchemists can choose Extra Ki instead of a discovery. This was an explicit design decision to reward people who multiclassed between the internal alchemist and monk or ninja. The oracle has specific provisions for multiclassing. As does a druid's animal companion.
|
|
To which I reply that if your argument depends on ignoring sections of the CRB or inserting text that isn't there, you need to rethink it. Especially when the text you're ignoring speaks directly to this issue.
Also, Internal Alchemists can choose Extra Ki instead of a discovery. This was an explicit design decision to reward people who multiclassed between the internal alchemist and monk or ninja. The oracle has specific provisions for multiclassing. As does a druid's animal companion.
But those provisions are an option, not the entire ability. Just because there is a discovery that gives Extra Ki does not mean they must multi-class to use their discoveries. An oracle does not need to multi-class to use their curse. A magus does not need to multi-class to use their arcana (even though Broad Study is an option, it is not required that you take it). If they must multi-class to use something they received without a choice otherwise, then I would agree that my stance is incorrect (though still a good design philosophy).
What I'm saying is that you wouldn't have the text of "Rogue Talent" say "You can only take these if you are also a fighter", and you won't see "Wild Shape" say "You can only use this if you are also a Sorcerer." That's because that would leave the player, without any choice in the matter, with an ability they cannot use without diverging from their base class.
Plus, I also stated that I believe the text in the Samurai ability is written incorrectly, so please stop being obtuse about my position. I agree it's written wrong, but not that it means "You need to be a fighter."
Jesus, do some of you guys get extra XP from your GM if you pick enough nits on these forums?
Sometimes it gets so bad around here I wonder if the incentive isn't something more like "favors" from "actual girls."
Cheapy, I'd say the difference between the samurai levels qualifying for fighter feats and your witch blade example lies in the word stacks.
First, okay, it's pretty obvious that 0 levels of witch doesn't qualify you for anything. That's clear.
But in the case of the Samurai X/Fighter 0, he doesn't technically have 0 fighter levels for the purposes of qualifying for feats. His fighter level for this purpose is 0 (his actual fighter level) plus half his samurai level. The other posters are correct that the samurai level stacking with 0 can create whole numbers and qualify him for levels.
The difference with your witch blade example is there's nothing that's stacking with witch 0 for the purpose of forming witch levels.
Witch 0 stacked with 0 equals still zero levels of witch for the purpose of feats. Doesn't qualify.
Fighter 0 stacked with 1/2 of X levels of samurai equals 1/2 of X levels of fighter for the purposes of the indicated feats. That does qualify, and it's not the same thing as witch 0 because for the purposes of qualifying for those feats, he does have 1/2 of X levels of fighter (or in other words isn't a fighter 0 for this purpose).