| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is that writers don't always have final control over their work, so what they intended might be totally different than how it ends up. Editors and others may change things to fit the system or their vision better, or there might be some kind of miscommunication in general about what it's supposed to do...
For example, lets pretend I wrote this ability. Let's pretend my intention was that you needed Elemental Fist to take the styles that require it, but otherwise you could ignore pre-requisites.
I submit the ability, but I wrote it strangely, and the first editors change the wording, but in the process accidentally make it ambiguous. Then it gets submitted to the rules development team, and they read it as needing to meet the requirements of Elemental Fist, but that you could otherwise take styles that required it without taking it first.
They decide that's ok, and let it through. So even though my intention was A, they evaluated it and accepted it as B. Does my original intention matter more than theirs?
Anyway, the end result is, it's a hell of a lot more complicated to get an answer to a question like this on a team project than you think.
This post needs so many more likes. I don't know how many times our team has become confused lately because I'll write something story/character ability wise, one of our rules guys changes it just a little bit to make it fit better rules-wise, and then the editor changes the wording just a little bit to make the sentence flow better and then suddenly we've got 6 people, all with a different idea of what we had originally wanted it to do.
This did come up in another discussion so I would like to hear if there is an official answer as well. However, as it has been pointed out I do understand if this takes a long time to happen.
If not, what is probably going to happen is that we will just continue not dealing with that part of it as we have in the past.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Any idea when we might see an FAQ entry or clerification?
This has been marked as "answered in FAQ" which means the powers that be have decided an official answer already exists.
I wish that when those decisions were made, a link was dropped in the thread, because I see no such answer in the FAQ for Ultimate Combat.
I think they put "answered in FAQ" for quite a few threads like this--probably because they are writing a new FAQ in which these things are answered, but they haven't actually released said FAQ.
Fingers crossed, then.
I'm one of the individuals who originally marked this for a FAQ. I am disappointed that it is marked as "Answered in FAQ" when it is not (yes, I checked UC's FAQ). How do we get this re-raised ?
Re-phrase the question, click the FAQ.
I hope this is a mistake and they'll answer it.
I still hope they answer the Magus / Arcane Mark question.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I still hope they answer the Magus / Arcane Mark question.
Don't drag that into this--this is a real issue. Arcane Mark works with spellstrike to give a bonus attack. There's no rules question, just a "I don't like that this works" question.
Whoa, sorry... I was hoping they mention it because Arcane Mark breaks conventional spell description format and no GM I know will allow it unless they see a clarification. If there's an FAQ for it, then cool. I'll check the blogs and see if it's there.
Back on subject, I agree this is a serious issue as it would render the Marid and Efreeti Styles out of reach. Such feats have pretty hefty requirements as is.
Though I had one player try to be an ifrit monk with Efreeti Style. Even with viewing the archetype description in the best light, it didn't quite work out that well.
Well in my opinion, How it goes is like this:
1) at 1st, 2nd and every four levels there after, a master of many styles may select a bonus style feat, or the elemental fist feat.
Meaning: He can take the elemental fist as a bonus feat at level 1
2) He does not have to meet the perquisites of that feat, except the elemental fist feat.
Meaning: He must HAVE the elemental fist feat, TO QUALIFY him to be able to take style feats which REQUIRE elemental fist. FOR EXAMPLE: Djinni style, or Janni style.
If this is correct please let me know. I do not see any other way of this happening, because the elemental fist style feats are required to have elemental fist to use the ability. So why would you want to take these feats without having elemental fist in the first place???
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I'm one of the individuals who originally marked this for a FAQ. I am disappointed that it is marked as "Answered in FAQ" when it is not (yes, I checked UC's FAQ). How do we get this re-raised ?Me too. There is no FAQ, just two ways to read one sentence.
Yes, however just like any trick question on the test there is always one more right answer. One which makes the most logical sense. So, after much thinking and processing I have determined that The ruling is indeed as such:
You replace your existing bonus feats with either style feats or the elemental fist feat
2) You do not need to meet the pre-reqs for these feats
3) Style feats which require elemental fist, cannot be taken without the elemental fist feat
4) If you have already have a style feat when picking your bonus feats, you may pick the next feat in that styles progression.
5) You may only select style feats within this archetype to avoid pre-req's, when picking a feat within either another class or your normal levelling progression you must meet the pre-req's of that feat regardless of if it is a style feat unless stated otherwise in that class.
Now, a question which has been plaguing me, in terms of balance if the stated above is indeed correct. Does this mean you could take the Janni, and Djinni style feats at each level past the first? even though they normally require base lvl 5?