Raw vs RAI Shield Champion Brawler Question / What would you rule as GM

[Koshimo]

So about to get into a lvl 9 campaign and a friend of mine is looking to play Shield Champion Brawler

at lvl 11 they receive shield master as a bonus feat, but only if they meat the prerequisites

as part of brawlers flurry (which they can use with their thrown shields) they receive the feat two weapon fighting when flurrying

so my question is by raw and by rai does my friend have to take two weapon fighting again? to qualify for the free shield master or does the one from brawler's flurry accomplish that for him?

[DesolateHarmony]

According to discussion, and I believe that there is a developer's quote somewhere, the Brawler has the TWF feat when he is performing the brawler's flurry. This means that at other times, he would not have TWF, and so could not use the Shield Master feat. While using a brawler's flurry, he could use the Shield Master feat.

I have heard rumors that they are working on errata for the Advanced Class Guide now.

Hope this helps.

[claudekennilol]

Brawler's flurry should qualify.

[mplindustries]

Yes, they qualify with Brawler's Flurry.

[DM_Blake]

To clarify, they qualify to take the feat but per the core rulebook, you cannot use feats that you already have if you have no longer meet an prerequisite for the feat (when you regain that prerequisite, you can use your feat again). This means that when not using Flurry, they no longer meet the prerequisite and therefore cannot use this feet when they are not flurrying.

[Melkiador]

And of course this creates the odd circumstance where they have Shield Master for a flurry, but not for a standard attack, charge or attack of opportunity.

Brawler's Flurry is a pretty big mess. Note that it doesn't even say what the attack penalties are for flurrying, so if you were to flurry with a large shield, you create an odd rules limbo of having and/or not having a light off hand weapon for two weapon fighting. So are your attacks when flurrying with a large shield -0/-0, -2/-2 or -4/-4?

[Melkiador]

As for what would I houserule? I'd probably just let the Brawler count as having two-weapon fighting all of the time. The brawler is not an OP class. It's probably bottom of the full-BAB heap for damage, unless I'm missing something huge.

[Rushley son of Halum]

Melkiador your post has been flagged for FAQ. I hadn't even picked up on that.

Personally i've taken the approach of ignoring most of the weird inconsistencies in the archtype. It's never been an issue for my GM's, even in PFS they seem to get why you need to just ignore some of the nonsense in the ACG to make the thing work.

As Melkiador said, the only sensible option is to rule they have 2 weapon fighting at all times by having flurry. Otherwise the pre-requisite issues just get weird and you get into a question of when you're actually able to use things like shield slam, and yeah just don't buy into it. People will try to insist certain things RAW. Ignore them. In home games and PFS. I've been advocating this approach since day 1. Until Paizo fixes the book then we're on our own. If a PFS GM suggests otherwise just leave the table. If they try to penalise you for doing that then ignore that too.

[BartonOliver]

As written, the brawler only has TWF while flurrying, but unlike the monk actually has the feat. He can get the free shield master, but only has it while flurrying.

Oddly, this isn't even the biggest RAW problem with that archetype.