| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don’t be so literal.
General rules for style feats require you to be in the stance.
The original style description in Ult Comb is this:
"As a swift action, you can enter the stance employed by the fighting style a style feat embodies. Although you cannot use a style feat before combat begins, the style you are in persists until you spend a swift action to switch to a different combat style. You can use a feat that has a style feat as a prerequisite only while in the stance of the associated style. For example, if you have feats associated with Mantis Style and Tiger Style, you can use a swift action to adopt Tiger Style at the start of one turn, and then can use other feats that have Tiger Style as a prerequisite. By using another swift action at the start of your next turn, you could adopt Mantis Style and use other feats that have Mantis Style as a prerequisite."
You can split hairs here, but it seems to me the intention is that only one style is used at a time, barring an ability to do othwrwise. But I'm not the GM at your table, so what does my opinion matter?
I can see there will be GMs who will be hyper literal in reading "jabbing style functions when you just have the feat, no need to enter the style since it doesn't." I'm just not one of those.
A related question, however, does the "only take a -2 penalty when fighting defensively" clause require you to enter crane style? Crane Style's subsequent clause obviously requires being in the style. I figure this is the question most parallel to the OP's.
I can see there will be GMs who will be hyper literal in reading "jabbing style functions when you just have the feat, no need to enter the style since it doesn't." I'm just not one of those.
A related question, however, does the "only take a -2 penalty when fighting defensively" clause require you to enter crane style? Crane Style's subsequent clause obviously requires being in the style. I figure this is the question most parallel to the OP's.
The literal reading is how the rules work. What you do at your table is not RAW. The OP is looking for if there is a FAQ or something but as from as I have looked, there does not seem to be. This has been brought up in the past and it seems that the answer is yes, you can use the feats since you do not need to be in the style per how it is written.
Java Man is correct, one style at a time. Consider the purpose of Master of Many Styles.
Style Feats <--- 2nd paragraph down.
"As a swift action, you can enter the stance employed by the fighting style a style feat embodies. Although you cannot use a style feat before combat begins, the style you are in persists until you spend a swift action to switch to a different combat style. You can use a feat that has a style feat as a prerequisite only while in the stance of the associated style. For example, if you have feats associated with Mantis Style and Tiger Style, you can use a swift action to adopt Tiger Style at the start of one turn, and then can use other feats that have Tiger Style as a prerequisite. By using another swift action at the start of your next turn, you could adopt Mantis Style and use other feats that have Mantis Style as a prerequisite."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The literal reading is how the rules work. What you do at your table is not RAW. The OP is looking for if there is a FAQ or something but as from as I have looked, there does not seem to be.
I disagree entirely. Rules are how the people in a given game choose to interpret the text, RAW is an illusion because all natural language sentences require interpretation, and these interpretations will naturally vary; most of the time this does not result in significant differences but sometimes it does. "All style feats follow the same rules" is a valid interpretation so is "due to a quirk in the wording, jabbing style works without entering it" - learn to love table variation.
Wanting to find an FAQ or errata is useful in terms of "I want to understand how this works" but less so to force an interpretation on someone not inclined to already have said interpretation. Since if a person considers the literalist interpretation absurd, that is when they reject "RAW."
As previously stated that does not apply to the first style feat in each line as none of them have themselves as prerequisites.Style Feats <--- 2nd paragraph down.
"As a swift action, you can enter the stance employed by the fighting style a style feat embodies. Although you cannot use a style feat before combat begins, the style you are in persists until you spend a swift action to switch to a different combat style. You can use a feat that has a style feat as a prerequisite only while in the stance of the associated style. For example, if you have feats associated with Mantis Style and Tiger Style, you can use a swift action to adopt Tiger Style at the start of one turn, and then can use other feats that have Tiger Style as a prerequisite. By using another swift action at the start of your next turn, you could adopt Mantis Style and use other feats that have Mantis Style as a prerequisite."
Okay, maybe I'm unclear as to what you're attempting to do; let's nail down what exactly you're trying to say Jabbing Style does. Are you trying to say that you can use Jabbing Style to get extra damage even when you're not in the stance? Or are you trying to say that you can use Jabbing Style while in a different stance? Or both? Or have I missed your thesis entirely and you're saying something else?
Gah, don't start threads like this when I'm asleep!
Since we already had this discussion here, here, and here, I'm mostly gonna copy paste my argument that have never been refuted.
The style feat rules say this: ""
*) Presumably, "cannot use a style feat" OoC is supposed to mean "cannot enter a stance" OoC, but it's irrelevant for this topic anyway.
The last sentence is the only relevant limitation, and it only applies to feats with style feat prereqs. The style feat itself obviously has no such prereq. They could have said "a style feat or a feat that has a style feat as a prerequisite", but they did not, they worded it so that it only applies to followup feats.
Most style feats (52 out of 68) contain the words "while using this style" or similar wording, thus making everything following those words only active after you've spend a swift action to enter that style. Everything before those word, or the entire description if these words aren't present, is constantly active because nothing say it isn't.
Now, on some feats this might be considered reminder text, but then there are feats (like Snake Style or Crane Style) where that line shows up in the middle. It makes absolutely no sense to put it in the middle if it's supposed to apply to the whole description!
For instance, Crane Style says "You take only a -2 penalty on attack rolls for fighting defensively. While using this style and fighting defensively or using the total defense action, you gain an additional +1 dodge bonus to your Armor Class." The reduced penalty is always active, but the +1 AC requires the stance.
The feat rules say you get the benefits section of feats you possess. The style feat rules say followup feats only work in stance. The second doesn't overrule the first, so that one still applies to style feats. The way the rules work, unless something overrides the general feat rules, they're what counts.
Consider the purpose of Master of Many Styles.
Master of Many Styles allows you to benefit from multiple follow-up feats, e.g. Dragon Ferocity and Jabbing Master, at the same time. It's these follow-up feats that are the main power, anyway. Ascetic Form, Crane Wing (at least pre-nerf), Dragon Ferocity, Jabbing Master, Outslug Sprint, Pummeling Charge, Shikigami Manipulation, Startoss Comet/Shower; these are the money-maker feats, the ones beyond what a normal feat can do.