| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does a Brawler 1/Fighter 3 with weapon focus qualify for weapon specialization?
Martial Training (Ex): At 1st level, a brawler counts her total brawler levels as both fighter levels and monk levels for the purpose of qualifying for feats. She also counts as both a fighter and a monk for feats and magic items that have different effects based on whether the character has levels in those classes (such as Stunning Fist and a monk's robe). This ability does not automatically grant feats normally granted to fighters and monks based on class level, namely Stunning Fist.
Yes the brawler 1/fighter 3 would qualify.
nope
Yes, assuming you are using Martial Flexibility or retraining rules to obtain the feat at that level.
you're a fighter 1 and fighter 3, how are you getting fighter 4 to qualify for the feat?
As Valantrix said, Martial Flexibility or retraining.
I'm not asking how you got a feat, I'm asking how you're qualifying with fighter 1 and fighter 3
Fighter 1 + Fighter 3 = Fighter 4?
This isn't like the brawler and monk unarmed damage class feature not stacking. Halgur's question applies to class level prerequisites for feats that martial training specifically mentions.
So what about a skald and barbarian for rage powers?
how about a viking fighter and barb/skald for rage powers?
Order of the Hammer cavalier and monk for unarmed damage?
Sacred fist Warpriest and monk for unarmed damage?
Evangelist cleric and bard for bardic performance?
There are others too.
EDIT: Then compare it to Myrmidarch magus that says
At 7th level, a myrmidarch counts his magus level –3 as his fighter level for the purpose of qualifying for feats (if he has levels in fighter, these levels stack).
I'd love for it to work, but as far as I see in the rules things don't stack unless they say they do, thus you can count as fighter 1 and be fighter 3 and not be or count as a fighter 4.
I'm pretty sure that Chess Pwn is correct. In the playtest, hybrid classes couldn't be multiclassed with their parent classes. That restriction was lifted, but with restrictions.
Parent Classes: Each one of the following classes lists two classes that it draws upon to form the basis of its theme. While a character can multiclass with these parent classes, this usually results in redundant abilities. Such abilities don't stack unless specified. If a class feature allows the character to make a one-time choice (such as a bloodline), that choice must match similar choices made by the parent classes and vice-versa (such as selecting the same bloodline).
It seems clear to me that they intended to discourage mixing hybrid classes with their parent classes.
In this particular case, Martial Training doesn't specify that Brawler levels stack with Fighter levels for purposes of meeting feat prerequisites. So they don't.
I believe that the brawler would still qualify. Just because it isn't stated that brawler and fighter levels stacks doesn't mean they don't. He is fighter level 3. He also is brawler level 1. which means he is counted as fighter 3 and fighter 1 which would equal fighter 4. Because the brawler levels COUNT as fighter levels. Also levels are not abilities which means that the same ability clause stated by gisher does not apply.
Basically you have 3 levels of fighter and count as having one more level of fighter for the purpose of feats that require fighter levels.
IMHO they stack.
Also levels are not abilities which means that the same ability clause stated by gisher does not apply.
Levels are not abilities. The ability to use your class levels to qualify for fighter feats is an ability.
Class Level prereqs for a feat aren't class features or abilities.
Classes stacking for rage powers, monk unarmed damage, bardic performance? Class features.
Brawler 1 counts as Fighter 1 for the purpose of:
"Does he qualify for weapon specialization?"
"No, he doesn't have enough fighter levels yet."
"How about 3 more fighter levels?"
"Hey! He has enough."
this is very clear and explicit in the ACG, the levels stack for purposes of qualifying for a feat.
so the answer is yes a Brawler 1/Fighter 3 (with weapon focus) qualifies for weapon specialization (in any weapon which they have focus)
Class Level prereqs for a feat aren't class features or abilities.
For Brawlers, the ability to count levels as fighter levels is actually a class feature. It's the Martial Training class feature that you quoted above.
For earlier books, class features that let levels count toward fighter prerequisites always had language specifying that they stacked with fighter levels. Chess Pwn pointed that out for the Myrmidarch. Here are two more examples.
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.
Fighter Training (Ex): Starting at 10th level, a magus counts 1/2 his total magus level as his fighter level for the purpose of qualifying for feats. If he has levels in fighter, these levels stack.
None of the fighter-hybrid classes (Brawler, Swashbuckler, and Warpriest) have any such language. That fact, combined with the statement I quoted above regarding abilities from parent classes not stacking, is telling for me.
this is very clear and explicit in the ACG, the levels stack for purposes of qualifying for a feat.
Could you please cite the text that clearly and explicitly states that?
I suspect that they were supposed to stack, but as is well known, the ACG had a lot of editing issues.
I may not be a big city rules lawyer. But I say it would seem to make sense that the levels would stack. Furthermore I think it would be silly to consider someone to have 2 different fighter levels at the same time.
|
I may not be a big city rules lawyer. But I say it would seem to make sense that the levels would stack. Furthermore I think it would be silly to consider someone to have 2 different fighter levels at the same time.
Yeah, there's a number of things I have to wonder about here, since all 3 ACG classes based on the fighter have similar abilities where their class levels count as fighter levels, but don't mention stacking with fighter levels. Now whether it's an omission that never got changed when the classes were allowed to multiclass with a parent class, or whether it's intentional I'm not sure. And whether it's intentional because you can't be a fighter 3/fighter 1 because class levels stack.
If I had to make a judgement call on this for a game I was GMing, I'd say the levels stack, and you qualify, but it would nice to have some clarification.
this is very clear and explicit in the ACG, the levels stack for purposes of qualifying for a feat.Could you please cite the text that clearly and explicitly states that?
alright I looked back and it isn't explicit in the ACG - but I still can't can't understand the confusion.
We would all agree that a fighter level stacks with a fighter level.
If a brawler level = a fighter for a specified purpose, it must stack for that purpose.
I suspect that they were supposed to stack, but as is well known, the ACG had a lot of editing issues.
That could very well be true. We should know soon since the errata is supposed to be out this summer.
To be clear, until I read Chess Pwn's post I always assumed that they stacked. But I realize now that I assumed that because it always worked like that before the ACG. I never even noticed that the wording allowing stacking was missing.
To summarize my argument at this point:
1.) Previous to the ACG, the authors felt it necessary to state that effective fighter levels stacked with actual fighter levels. That suggests that such stacking isn't supposed to be assumed.
2.) The ACG states that when multiclassing with a parent class, hybrid class abilities should only stack if they explicitly say that they do.
3.) the fighter-hybrid classes lack the stacking language included in previous books.
Conclusion: Effective fighter levels gained from hybrid classes don't stack.
Side Note: This is the rules forum, so I am making an argument based on the RAW as I read it. This is not necessarily the way that I want it to work or even the way that I would implement it in my own games.
To summarize my argument at this point:1.) Previous to the ACG, the authors felt it necessary to state that effective fighter levels stacked with actual fighter levels. That suggests that such stacking isn't supposed to be assumed.
...
I'd just say that the counterpoint is that there is a difference between assuming they stack and interpreting the meaning of the language used.
the case here isn't that a brawler level= both a monk and fighter level for every ability.
But there is a specific class ability that allows a brawler level to equal a fighter level for this narrow purpose of feat qualifying.
raw is technically unclear - or we wouldn't have any topic for discussion here.
Ultimately any rules question response is either a clear answer -essentially a quote - or an interpretation as a guidance point for a fellow player/gm
My vote is stack them.