Qualifying for PrCs question


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 176 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

11 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

When the Arcane Archer lists BAB+6, could a PC with BAB+7 take levels in the class (assuming it has the other prereqs)?

-James


Sure. The BAB requirement is a minimum, not an exact requirement.


Why it shouldn't? If he cannot, you'd go into a paradox: 1st level of arcane archer bring his bab to +7, making him to lose the requirement for the class.


james maissen wrote:

When the Arcane Archer lists BAB+6, could a PC with BAB+7 take levels in the class (assuming it has the other prereqs)?

-James

Yes, and this applies to skill ranks and all other prereqs too, unless specified otherwise (and I haven't seen one that does).


Bizbag wrote:
james maissen wrote:

When the Arcane Archer lists BAB+6, could a PC with BAB+7 take levels in the class (assuming it has the other prereqs)?

-James

Yes, and this applies to skill ranks and all other prereqs too, unless specified otherwise (and I haven't seen one that does).

So why is it that people object to the ability to cast 3rd level spells to qualify for the ability to cast 2nd level spells?

-James


james maissen wrote:
Bizbag wrote:
james maissen wrote:

When the Arcane Archer lists BAB+6, could a PC with BAB+7 take levels in the class (assuming it has the other prereqs)?

-James

Yes, and this applies to skill ranks and all other prereqs too, unless specified otherwise (and I haven't seen one that does).

So why is it that people object to the ability to cast 3rd level spells to qualify for the ability to cast 2nd level spells?

-James

Can you be more specific? I don't know what you're talking about.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
james maissen wrote:
Bizbag wrote:
james maissen wrote:

When the Arcane Archer lists BAB+6, could a PC with BAB+7 take levels in the class (assuming it has the other prereqs)?

-James

Yes, and this applies to skill ranks and all other prereqs too, unless specified otherwise (and I haven't seen one that does).

So why is it that people object to the ability to cast 3rd level spells to qualify for the ability to cast 2nd level spells?

-James

Ha, totally saw that coming.

The answer is "because shut up, only aasimar can get early entry into subpar prestige classes, so take that, dreamspeaker elf!"


I smell a combo of feta and gouda approaching.


Quote:

Ha, totally saw that coming.

The answer is "because shut up, only aasimar can get early entry into subpar prestige classes, so take that, dreamspeaker elf!"

Can YOU tell me what he's talking about?

Liberty's Edge

Bizbag wrote:
Quote:

Ha, totally saw that coming.

The answer is "because shut up, only aasimar can get early entry into subpar prestige classes, so take that, dreamspeaker elf!"

Can YOU tell me what he's talking about?

I saw that one coming too. As per a recent FAQ, racially-granted SLAs count as spells of the same level for qualifying for PCs.

But it's one of those questions where my answer is "if it smells like gouda, tastes like gouda and runs like gouda...".


Bizbag wrote:
Quote:

Ha, totally saw that coming.

The answer is "because shut up, only aasimar can get early entry into subpar prestige classes, so take that, dreamspeaker elf!"

Can YOU tell me what he's talking about?

The silly ruling that SLAs count as 'able to cast x level spells' PrC and feat requirements.

This allows early access to subpar PrCs such as the mystic theurge.

But some people feel that 3rd (and higher) level spells don't count as 'able to cast 2nd level spells'.

My point is applying that same logic to any other prerequisite causes things to obviously fall apart.. so why apply it here?

As for 'cheese' you should take that up with the FAQ as they understood what the ruling meant and ran with it.

-James


That isn't what they FAQ'd though, and as such wouldn't work for things like pfs. Now if you post it as an faq, you might get it cleared to be ok (which is how it works in my home games).


FAQ wrote:

Spell-Like Abilities, Casting, and Prerequisites: Does a creature with a spell-like ability count as being able to cast that spell for the purpose of prerequisites or requirements?

Yes.
For example, the Dimensional Agility feat (Ultimate Combat) has "ability to use the abundant step class feature or cast dimension door" as a prerequisite; a barghest has dimension door as a spell-like ability, so the barghest meets the "able to cast dimension door prerequisite for that feat.

Edit 7/12/13: The design team is aware that the above answer means that certain races can gain access to some spellcaster prestige classes earlier than the default minimum (character level 6). Given that prestige classes are usually a sub-optimal character choice (especially for spellcasters), the design team is allowing this FAQ ruling for prestige classes. If there is in-play evidence that this ruling is creating characters that are too powerful, the design team may revisit whether or not to allow spell-like abilities to count for prestige class requirements.

See, I have always thought this was just the same as the 3.5 rule (see pg. 72 in Complete Arcane, Spellcasting Requirements and Specific Spell Requirements). That is, a spell like ability counts for pre-reqs of "cast X specific spell" but not "cast spells of Y level".

Ex. Dimensional Agility requires Dimension Door specifically, not 4th level spells. So a Dimension Door spell-like ability qualifies.

But Eldritch Knight requires "cast 3rd level arcane spells" so Dimension Door would not qualify (despite being 3rd/4th level, depending on class list).

There was nothing in the original FAQ to contradict this point of view, but the added clarification that it allows early PrC entry does imply something different.

I like the 3.5 rule better. Spell-likes count as a specific spell (ex. Mage Hand for Arcane Trickster), but not for a general casting requirement (ex. 2nd level arcane spells, also for Arcane Trickster).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

My answer to the initial question would be 'no' :)

SRD wrote:

Prestige Classes

Unlike the core classes, characters must meet specific requirements before they can take their first level of a prestige class. If a character does not meet the requirements for a prestige class before gaining any benefits of that level, that character cannot take that prestige class.

emphasis mine.

it's "meet" not "meet or exceed"...
it's "before they can take their first level" not all ...

so casting 3rd level spell does not meet the condition of casting 2nd-level spells.

(and you MUSt be BAB+6 ;p )


Vrischika111 wrote:

My answer to the initial question would be 'no' :)

SRD wrote:

Prestige Classes

Unlike the core classes, characters must meet specific requirements before they can take their first level of a prestige class. If a character does not meet the requirements for a prestige class before gaining any benefits of that level, that character cannot take that prestige class.

emphasis mine.

it's "meet" not "meet or exceed"...
it's "before they can take their first level" not all ...

so casting 3rd level spell does not meet the condition of casting 2nd-level spells.

(and you MUSt be BAB+6 ;p )

So, when you hit a new level that change your bab or gain a new level of spell, you don't meet anymore the requirement, and you cannot do the prc. Check the rules: if you lose the requirements, you lose the chance to advance further in the class:

Quote:
If a character does not meet the requirements for a prestige class before gaining any benefits of that level, that character cannot take that prestige class

So, BAB+6, you meet requirement, level up, you're now bab+7 and don't meet the requirement, if you'd be right.

Luckily this is not the case: at bab+7 you still meet the requirement of having a bab of +6.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd say there's a distinct difference between meeting a requirement and then adding further to the required stat vs gaining a higher then required ability without ever having the lower ones.

Not that anyone should care considering the weakness of most prestige classes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The fallacy to the argument being made here is rather simple, actually.

• Under no circumstances can a PC ever get to BAB +3 without passing through BAB +2 and BAB +1.
• The same WAS true for spellcasting as you could not cast 3rd level spells without already being able to cast 2nd level spells and 1st level spells.
• Unfortunately, the FAQ that allows SLAs to count as spells for the purpose of "ability to cast X level spells" has broken the assumption that being able to cast 3rd level spells means you automatically can cast 2nd level spells and 1st level spells.

My suggestion is to be wary of attempting to "expand" this FAQ ruling. I know many people (myself and my entire group, for example) have completely ignored this ruling and Paizo has said that if it became problematic, they would consider removing it. Comparing this silly scenario to other parts of the system is more likely to get the FAQ ruling reversed than expanded, IMO. (Then again, I've always been biased against this one, so take my comments with a grain of salt.)

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

james maissen wrote:
So why is it that people object to the ability to cast 3rd level spells to qualify for the ability to cast 2nd level spells?

Because someone with BAB +7 is the same as BAB +6 (+1 BAB) but someone with a 3rd level SLA doesn't also have a 2nd level SLA.


James Risner wrote:
james maissen wrote:
So why is it that people object to the ability to cast 3rd level spells to qualify for the ability to cast 2nd level spells?
Because someone with BAB +7 is the same as BAB +6 (+1 BAB) but someone with a 3rd level SLA doesn't also have a 2nd level SLA.

Someone with BAB+7 does not have BAB+6.

They had it at one time, but then they 'lost' it.

Now up front:

1. I think that SLA ruling is a mistake. Like many FAQs it didn't consider the full scope when making the ruling (much like this initial question).

2. The rules of this game are sufficiently complicated without making a plethora of single exceptions, but rather is something that can be comprehended because many things follow the same or similar rules.

3. I see my initial question as the same as this one, with one respect: it would not engender the same knee-jerk no that the other would. And I do think that's what people are reacting to in this case.

If we accept the FAQ ruling and its implications (as the devs seem willing to do), then we should accept the consequences of those rulings.

And frankly, who is splitting hairs here?

The person who is using an SLA to qualify as 'able to cast X level spells' consistent with what the devs have accepted, or the person who is saying that higher level spells aren't sufficient to satisfy lower level requirements?

The premise of pre-reqs for a PrC is that these are minimums. Otherwise the arcane archer, after taking a level in it, no longer qualifies to remain an arcane archer (as an example).

This alternative seems silly and non-functional, thus must be discarded.

I think we do one of two things:

1. Reject the SLA FAQ in its entirety. (Fighters crafting wondrous items, getting arcane strike, etc)

2. Embrace it and accept it without prejudice.

Personally I think that many of those PrCs instead need to be updated with the finished Pathfinder core classes in mind. Paizo updated them initially, and improved them based on the 3.5 base classes and PrCs, but then they increased the base classes to an extent that PrCs are closer to NPC classes than Prestigious Classes.

-James


1 person marked this as a favorite.
james maissen wrote:

I think we do one of two things:

1. Reject the SLA FAQ in its entirety. (Fighters crafting wondrous items, getting arcane strike, etc)

2. Embrace it and accept it without prejudice.

Number 1 for me.


james maissen wrote:
Personally I think that many of those PrCs instead need to be updated with the finished Pathfinder core classes in mind. Paizo updated them initially, and improved them based on the 3.5 base classes and PrCs, but then they increased the base classes to an extent that PrCs are closer to NPC classes than Prestigious Classes.

That is the stated design choice. PrC's are supposed to represent in-world organizations, ie, NPC's. So now a PrC is what you take when you want to turn your character into an NPC.

Digital Products Assistant

Removed a post and the replies. Please leave personal insults out of the conversation.


I think the original question could have been phrased a bit better, but I still understand the point.

However, here's what I'd say: BAB is a progression. When moving on to a +7 BAB, your +6 BAB doesn't suddenly disappear; it's still there, as part of the +7 BAB.

Under normal circumstances, spells are a progression as well. The ability to cast 3rd level spells does not cause your ability to cast 2nd level spells to vanish, even if you never memorize another 2nd level spell throughout your career.

However, an SLA is not a progression. If you can use an SLA that is equivalent to a 3rd-level spell, it doesn't mean that you magically have the capability to use SLAs equivalent to 1st and 2nd level; it's not a progression, it's a standalone feature. Thus, the only prerequisites you could meet would be things like, "Able to cast 3rd level spells," or "able to cast 1st\2nd level spells or higher" or "able to cast spells".

Now, that's from a RAW perspective. From a table perspective I would probably just say, "Yeah, go ahead," because even the most powerful of PrCs fill niche roles and are overshadowed by the core and base classes.


Xaratherus wrote:
Now, that's from a RAW perspective.

And that's what I'm challenging.

That 'progression' isn't defined as such in RAW.

Rather than 'progression' you could just as easily say you have to meet minimum pre-reqs. That a 7BAB qualifies, not because they had a 6BAB, but because they currently have better than a 6BAB.

Personally the thought that higher level spell casting don't meet pre-reqs for lower level spell casting is more unpalatable than the initial FAQ SLA ruling (and for the record, I'd go with option 1 as well).

To the other poster: I disagree that PrCs should be sub-optimal. It should not feel like taking levels in commoner! And if they are to be relegated to NPCs, then why have so much detail for them? A player shouldn't be mechanically punished for wanting the inherent flavor.

Now I understand there is backlash from 3e where they were the means to power creep classes, but it has gone too far over the other side and needs a balancing out. Multiclassing, archetypes, and PrCs should be about 'designing your own class' within a structured environment.

-James


james maissen wrote:


To the other poster: I disagree that PrCs should be sub-optimal. It should not feel like taking levels in commoner!

I completely agree. But I must realize that I live in the world that I live in, and the designers of this game think that the use of PrC's make you a metagaming min/max cheesehead. It's sad.


james maissen wrote:


And that's what I'm challenging.

That 'progression' isn't defined as such in RAW.

Rather than 'progression' you could just as easily say you have to meet minimum pre-reqs. That a 7BAB qualifies, not because they had a 6BAB, but because they currently have better than a 6BAB.

Simply put, if you want to force rules that way, you should literally erase all the prcs, and all the feat. Just to say one:

"Prerequisites: Str 13, base attack bonus +1"
Power attack. Nobody above level 2 is able to take, under your forcing. You're clearly fake a misunderstanding, I cannot believe you really think this way. Prcs are not the only thing that have a specific requirement. As I said, if a prc requires bab+6, and then you take a level, in your malicous interpretation, the 1st level of this prc (assuming a prc with full bab) already don't qualify you for the requisites, so you cannot advance in the prc itself. I ask again: do you really want to enforce such interpretation?

Quote:
Personally the thought that higher level spell casting don't meet pre-reqs for lower level spell casting is more unpalatable than the initial FAQ SLA ruling (and for the record, I'd go with option 1 as well).

Oh, for that, just rule that if something require a specific spell to cast, like mage hand for arcane trickster, if you have a SLA that duplicates that spell, you can use it as requisite. If the thing require you to cast X-th lev of spell, a single SLA is not valid. Job done.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigDTBone wrote:
james maissen wrote:


To the other poster: I disagree that PrCs should be sub-optimal. It should not feel like taking levels in commoner!
I completely agree. But I must realize that I live in the world that I live in, and the designers of this game think that the use of PrC's make you a metagaming min/max cheesehead. It's sad.

Or better, it's mad.

(sorry, cannot resist :))


Blackstorm wrote:
Nobody above level 2 is able to take, under your forcing. You're clearly fake a misunderstanding, I cannot believe you really think this way.

Blackstorm, I don't see the difference here and with saying being able to cast 3rd level spells doesn't satisfy being able to cast 2nd level spells as a prereq.

Read what I've written already in this thread.

-James


I'm going to be extremely amused if this ruling gets reversed not because players actually tried to abuse it but because forum posters just couldn't stop complaining about it.


james maissen wrote:
Blackstorm wrote:
Nobody above level 2 is able to take, under your forcing. You're clearly fake a misunderstanding, I cannot believe you really think this way.

Blackstorm, I don't see the difference here and with saying being able to cast 3rd level spells doesn't satisfy being able to cast 2nd level spells as a prereq.

Read what I've written already in this thread.

-James

Sorry, maybe I didn't understand your point. If I'm correct you're saying that if one go above prc requirements he cannot take the prc itself. If I'm correct in understanding that, you raise the the problem not only for prc but for feat as well. Maybe I don't understand, but in the way you seem to put, nobody could ever take more than 1 or 2 level in a prc, as they don't have requisites anymore. I read at your posts and that is what I understand for your position. If I'm wrong can you explain me better?


I don't really see an issue, unless you're talking in Organized Play games (and as the question isn't in that forum, I assume you're not.)

The GM gets to make the call at the end of the day, so they can interpret the rules however they wish.


Quote:
1. Reject the SLA FAQ in its entirety. (Fighters crafting wondrous items, getting arcane strike, etc)

Fighters can do that anyway with the Master Craftsman feat. But that doesn't affect this FAQ one way or the other.


Bizbag wrote:
Quote:
1. Reject the SLA FAQ in its entirety. (Fighters crafting wondrous items, getting arcane strike, etc)
Fighters can do that anyway with the Master Craftsman feat. But that doesn't affect this FAQ one way or the other.

First, it takes another feat for Fighters to do that. The earliest they could do so would be 7th. They need 5 ranks to take the feat, and then need another feat to take craft wondrous. This lets them do so with one feat at 3rd, just like a wizard.

Second, there is a restriction on which item creation feats that they can have. They can get craft wondrous and arm/armor, but no others. With this ruling they can craft staves, rings, rods, etc.

Third, it's not just item creation, but arcane strike, etc Just what a fighter needs the ability to spend their swift action for more damage cause they have a 0 level spell like ability once per day!

-James


Blackstorm wrote:

Sorry, maybe I didn't understand your point. If I'm correct you're saying that if one go above prc requirements he cannot take the prc itself.

If I'm wrong can you explain me better?

I'm saying the following situation:

1. The FAQ allows having a 2nd level SLA to count as 'able to cast 2nd level spells'. The devs accept this, and let it stand.

2. Some people are making the argument that having a 3rd level SLA might count as 'able to cast 3rd level spells' but that is not sufficient to meet the prereq 'able to cast 2nd level spells'.

I asked a question based on the logic of #2.

For me stance #2 is consistent with BAB7 doesn't count as BAB6, which we both find problematic.

Thus my position is that there were originally three choices:

1. Accept and embrace the FAQ. A 3rd level SLA can be used as a pre-req for Mystic Theurge.

2. Accept the FAQ, but don't embrace it. You need a 2nd level SLA for Mystic Theurge, but a higher level one will not suffice.

3. Reject the FAQ entirely.

I am saying that #2 has issues and problems with consistency, such as those that you are pointing out.

To whit: the prerequisites are listed as minimums and not exact values. Having slain 2 demons qualifies you for a PrC that requires that you have slain 1 demon.

-James

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

James, I see your rhetorical "trap" here, and I see where you think your conclusion gets to - BAB +7>BAB +6, therefore 3rd level spells>2nd spells, therefore goal.

Warning: Mathy talk ahead.

The problem with your argument is that base attack bonus builds in a different way than spells do. In this system you only gain higher base attack bonus by building up from lower numbers; a BAB+7 necessarily includes a BAB+6 as part of having it.

In a strict mathematical sense, if you have 7 of a thing you also have 6 of that same thing, plus one extra. The extra doesn't disqualify you from having 6.

Spell levels, however, do not work this way. The list of 3rd level wizard spells does not include any of the 2nd level wizard spells. Each spell level is a discrete set with discrete entries, and their sets have a null intersection. Through spell-like abilities, you actually can be able to have 3rd level spells without having 2nd.

In a technical sense, BAB is an interval measure while spell level is ordinal. Your analogy would have us compare them as ordinal measures then elevate the spell level to interval based on the comparison.

For the record, I agree with your overall goal. I think the SLA ruling is a bit oddball myself and produces too many weird, stilted builds. I don't think this argument is a good way to show it.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

james maissen wrote:

For me stance #2 is consistent with BAB7 doesn't count as BAB6

Accept and embrace the FAQ. You need a 2nd level SLA for Mystic Theurge, but a higher level one will not suffice.

Ok, fixed your lines there. Perfect!


It's possible to be able to cast level 3 spells and not level 2 spells, because spell levels are discrete, not cumulative. A character cannot combine one classes' ability to cast 1st level spells with their ability to cast 2nd level spells to qualify as casting 3rd level. BAB, saves and skill ranks are cumulative.

I don't mind the intent of the dev's FAQ, but I also see your point that it opens he door to unfortunate combos. Your rhetoric isn't standing up, though.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Bizbag wrote:
It's possible to be able to cast level 3 spells and not level 2 spells

I didn't think of this until now, but you are totally right.

You could play a Wizard who never learned any level 2 spells and always memorized level 1 spells in his 2nd level slots. He wouldn't be able to cast "level 2" spells and wouldn't qualify for a PrC requiring level 2 spells until he learned one level 2 spell in his spellbook.


ryric wrote:

The problem with your argument is that base attack bonus builds in a different way than spells do. In this system you only gain higher base attack bonus by building up from lower numbers; a BAB+7 necessarily includes a BAB+6 as part of having it.

So you would posit that if they added a way for a character to go from BAB+5 to BAB+7, then characters with BAB+7 would no longer qualify? (I mean prior to this ruling there was not a way to be able to cast 3rd level spells prior to being able to cast 2nd level ones).

Are you trying to say that perhaps having a prereq at a past time qualifies the character forever more?

I am positing that the prereqs are, by spirit, minimums and that exceeding them is sufficient to meet those prereqs. That seems to be in the spirit of what they are.. do you disagree?

Now, personally I don't like this form of meeting this particular prereq, but if I accept it, then I must fully accept it. That's the point of this thread after all.

Likewise if the prereq was 'slaying 2 demons in single combat' would having slain 3 demons in single combat not count?

-James

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
james maissen wrote:
So you would posit that if they added a way for a character to go from BAB+5 to BAB+7, then characters with BAB+7 would no longer qualify? (I mean prior to this ruling there was not a way to be able to cast 3rd level spells prior to being able to cast 2nd level ones).

Not exactly. I'm saying if you have 10 apples, you also have 6 apples, as 10 = 6+4. 7 includes 6, when used as a counting number, as in the case of BAB, which simply accumulates.

james maissen wrote:


Are you trying to say that perhaps having a prereq at a past time qualifies the character forever more?

Also not exactly, as losing a prerequisite has detailed game consequqnces.

james maissen wrote:


I am positing that the prereqs are, by spirit, minimums and that exceeding them is sufficient to meet those prereqs. That seems to be in the spirit of what they are.. do you disagree?

Now, personally I don't like this form of meeting this particular prereq, but if I accept it, then I must fully accept it. That's the point of this thread after all.

Likewise if the prereq was 'slaying 2 demons in single combat' would having slain 3 demons in single combat not count?

-James

Again, 3 demons includes 2 demons. If I ask you, "hey do you have 10 bucks?" and you in fact have $15, then the answer is "yes," you have 10 bucks, and you would qualify for things that required you to have 10 dollars.

If the requirement was instead, "do you have book 2 of a novel series?" and you only have a copy of book 3, you do not meet the stated requirement. That's the distinction between something like BAB and spell levels-spell levels are more discreet and don't necessarily include their lower level sets.


ryric wrote:

Not exactly. I'm saying if you have 10 apples, you also have 6 apples, as 10 = 6+4. 7 includes 6, when used as a counting number, as in the case of BAB, which simply accumulates.

But you don't also have a +6BAB, you have higher.

If your character makes an attack, then they add the full BAB, not a part of it.

So how is it like that you have a 6BAB rather than having something more than it?

I know the argument that you're making, but I think that it becomes one of splitting FAR too many hairs.

Think of it this way: if a player were to use such an argument to gain an advantage, then many would decry them as 'cheesing' the system, right?

That's how I see this 'middle' option. It is tenuous at best, and flawed in conception.

-James


BAB, skills and saves are cumulative numbers. They are made up of smaller accruing bonuses granted at each character level. Cleric level 5, for example, grants no BAB bonus, regardless of whether you have another class with the 3/4 progression.

Spell levels are discrete. If you have six classes all granting level 1 spells, you do not get level 2 spells. Having the ability to cast one level of spells is not the cumulative benefit of the lower level. This has, until now, been irrelevant because no class "skipped" spell levels.


I got this language from psrd website. I don't know where in the books this language comes from, but I assume it is somewhere in the books because they copy the language verbatim.

Quote:


Prerequisites

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. A character can gain a feat at the same level at which he gains the prerequisite.

A character can't use a feat if he loses a prerequisite, but he does not lose the feat itself. If, at a later time, he regains the lost prerequisite, he immediately regains full use of the feat that prerequisite enables.

Types of Feats

Some feats are general, meaning that no special rules govern them as a group. Others are item creation feats, which allow characters to create magic items of all sorts. A metamagic feat lets a spellcaster prepare and cast a spell with greater effect, albeit as if the spell were of a higher spell level than it actually is.

Feat Descriptions

Feats are summarized on Table: Feats below. Note that the prerequisites and benefits of the feats on this table are abbreviated for ease of reference. See the feats description for full details.

The following format is used for all feat descriptions.

Feat Name: The feat's name also indicates what subcategory, if any, the feat belongs to, and is followed by a basic description of what the feat does.

Prerequisite: A minimum ability score, another feat or feats, a minimum base attack bonus, a minimum number of ranks in one or more skills, or anything else required in order to take the feat. This entry is absent if a feat has no prerequisite. A feat may have more than one prerequisite.

Benefit: What the feat enables the character (“you” in the feat description) to do. If a character has the same feat more than once, its benefits do not stack unless indicated otherwise in the description.

Normal: What a character who does not have this feat is limited to or restricted from doing. If not having the feat causes no particular drawback, this entry is absent.

Special: Additional unusual facts about the feat.

While this is talking about Feats, it, nonetheless, seems to be stating that prerequisites are minimums. SO....


Driver 325 yards wrote:

I got this language from psrd website. I don't know where in the books this language comes from, but I assume it is somewhere in the books because they copy the language verbatim.

Quote:


Prerequisites

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. A character can gain a feat at the same level at which he gains the prerequisite.

A character can't use a feat if he loses a prerequisite, but he does not lose the feat itself. If, at a later time, he regains the lost prerequisite, he immediately regains full use of the feat that prerequisite enables.

Types of Feats

Some feats are general, meaning that no special rules govern them as a group. Others are item creation feats, which allow characters to create magic items of all sorts. A metamagic feat lets a spellcaster prepare and cast a spell with greater effect, albeit as if the spell were of a higher spell level than it actually is.

Feat Descriptions

Feats are summarized on Table: Feats below. Note that the prerequisites and benefits of the feats on this table are abbreviated for ease of reference. See the feats description for full details.

The following format is used for all feat descriptions.

Feat Name: The feat's name also indicates what subcategory, if any, the feat belongs to, and is followed by a basic description of what the feat does.

Prerequisite: A minimum ability score, another feat or feats, a minimum base attack bonus, a minimum number of ranks in one or more skills, or anything else required in order to take the feat. This entry is absent if a feat has no prerequisite. A feat may have more than one prerequisite.

Benefit: What the feat enables the character (“you” in the feat description) to do. If a character has the same feat more than once, its benefits do not stack unless indicated otherwise in the description.

Normal: What a character

...

Actually, the skills and BAB are minimums, but it specifically calls out "anything else" as a separate requirement. It does not say minimum for "anything else" it just is "anything else."

I would say based on this rules excerpt that it is clear 3rd level spells would not qualify you for 2nd level spells requirement because it does not get the "minimum" qualifier in the prerequisite description.

Shadow Lodge

BigDTBone wrote:

Actually, the skills and BAB are minimums, but it specifically calls out "anything else" as a separate requirement. It does not say minimum for "anything else" it just is "anything else."

I would say based on this rules excerpt that it is clear 3rd level spells would not qualify you for 2nd level spells requirement because it does not get the "minimum" qualifier in the prerequisite description.

+1

Selective language is selective. James, a character who has a BAB of 6+ does have a BAB of 6. It just happens to be 6+(extra amount). Reading the language such that you can only take a Prestige Class level when you qualify for it, and you no longer qualify for it as of taking the level or taking the second level defeats the purpose of a Prestige Class. If it helps, think of any requirements for a Prestige Class as these:

  • Do I have the required race? If yes, good. If no, bad.
  • Do I have the required alignment? If yes, good. If no, bad.
  • Do I have the required class features? If yes, good. If no, bad.
  • Do I have the required minimum BAB? If yes, good. If no, bad.
  • Do I have the required minimum skill ranks? If yes, good. If no, bad.

    Spells and spellcasting fall under the class features question. Spell-like abilities also fall under that feature, even though they are (generally) racial in origin. Class features don't strictly measure minimums. They care more about specific capabilities, and in some cases minimums may be present.

  • Do I have a Sneak Attack of at least +2d6? If yes, AT is open to you. If no, it is not.
  • Do I have the ability to cast mage hand and at least one arcane spell of 2nd level or higher? If yes, AT is open to you. If no, it is not. The ability to cast 1st level spells is irrelevant here. Aasimar and Tiefling Rogues who took Minor Magic (mage hand) as a Rogue talent qualify as early as level 5.
  • Do I have a BAB of at least +6? If yes, AA is open to you. If not, it is not.
  • Do I have the ability to cast 1st-level arcane spells? If yes, AA is open to you. If no, it is not. Unfortunately, a Tiefling Ranger 6 can't cast any 1st level arcane spells. He can only cast Darkness, which is second level. It does not say, as the previous one, at least. The Ranger does not have the class ability or other ability to cast a 1st-level arcane spell, and so does not qualify until he takes a level in an arcane spellcasting class.
  • Do I have the ability to cast 2nd-level divine spells and 2nd-level arcane spells? If yes, MT is open to you. If not, it is not. Tieflings can get early entry here, while standard Aasimar can't. Variant Aasimar can, however. All the variant heritages get 2nd-level SLAs.

    Also, here's another little quotation that is more immediately relevant to qualifying for Prestige Classes. Emphasis mine:

    PRD: Prestige Classes wrote:
    Prestige classes allow characters to become truly exceptional, gaining powers beyond the ken of their peers. Unlike the core classes, characters must meet specific requirements before they can take their first level of a prestige class. If a character does not meet the requirements for a prestige class before gaining any benefits of that level, that character cannot take that prestige class. Characters that take levels in prestige classes do not gain any favored class bonuses for those levels.

    My reading of that says that you do have to meet minimums, but it does not say that you cannot surpass the minimums. But, you must have met the minimums before you can take the Prestige Class, even if you later surpass the minimums. Hence an (base) Aasimar Rogue 4 can qualify for Arcane Trickster, but he cannot qualify for Mystic Theurge as a Wizard 1/Cleric 3, because he never could cast a 2nd-level arcane spell.

    If you disagree, please donate my 2cp to the nearest charity. :)

  • 1 to 50 of 176 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Qualifying for PrCs question All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.