Rage Class feature vs Rage Power Class feature

[Xavram5]

A friend and I are having an argument over this. He is saying that there is no distinction between these two things, Rage Class Feature and Rage Power Class Feature. I say they are two seperate things.

I pointed out the difference between the Pre-reqs on feats Gore Fiend and Extra Rage Power

Gore Fiend
Prerequisites: Half-orc or orc, rage class feature.

Extra Rage Power
Prerequisite: Rage power class feature.

I think the reason he's pushing back on this is because he has a Primalist Bloodrager and that archtype gives access to Rage Powers...but explicitly says this does not give the character the "Rage Power class feature"

Primalist:
Primal Choices: At 4th level and every 4 levels thereafter, a primalist can choose to take either his bloodline power or two barbarian rage powers. If the primalist chooses rage powers, those rage powers can be used in conjunction with his bloodrage, and his bloodrager level acts as his barbarian level when determining the effect of those bloodrage powers and any prerequisites. Any other prerequisites for a rage power must be met before a primalist can choose it. This ability does not count as the rage power class feature for determining feat prerequisites and other requirements.

I'm referring to the last sentence here, "This ability does not count as the rage power class feature for determing feat prerequisities"

Am I missing something here? Seems that "Rage" and "Rage Power" are two seperate class features and Primalist does NOT allow a character to select feats like "Extra Rage Power".

Can anyone/more than one person confirm what is the correct ruling on this?

[Taja the Barbarian]

He has the Rage feature and can take abilities that require the Rage Class Feature.
While he can take Rage Powers as a Primalist, he does not meet any 'Rage Power Class Feature' prerequisite requirement due to the restriction in the Primalist text that you noted.

So, Extra Rage Power is not available to Primalists (nor is it available to 1st level barbarians who haven't gotten the 'Rage Power class feature' yet).

EDIT: As I recall, this archetype was banned from PFS because it just made the Barbarian class obsolete.

[thorin001]

1) Rage and Rage Powers are two separate class abilities. You get Rage at level 1 and Rage Powers at level 2 (at the earliest).

2) Your interpretation is correct. Primalist allows you to select Rage Powers in specific circumstances, but explicitly does not grant the Rage Power class ability. Thus you cannot take the Extra Rage Power feat.

I really do not see any other supportable interpretation.

[MrCharisma]

Agreed, Primalist can't take the Extra Rage power feat.

I'm playing a Primalist, and as long as you plan your Rage Powers it shouldn't be an issue.

If he really wants more Rage Powers he can take 2 levels of Barbarian. I'm pretty sure any Rage Powers he selects would work with Bloodrage as well as Rage, so 2 levels of Barb would open up that feat for him, but also set him back 2 levels (almost certainly not worth it). I could be wrong on this though so I'm willing to be corrected.

[Derklord]

Xavram5 wrote:

A friend and I are having an argument over this. He is saying that there is no distinction between these two things, Rage Class Feature and Rage Power Class Feature.

Either he's an idiot, has trouble grasping the English language, or is deliberately trying to cheat.

Extra Rage Power asks for a class feature named "rage power". If the character does not have a class feature named such, they don't qualify for the feat. It couldn't be any clearer.

[David knott 242]

Derklord wrote:

Extra Rage Power asks for a class feature named "rage power". If the character does not have a class feature named such, they don't qualify for the feat. It couldn't be any clearer.

There was some discussion to the contrary several years ago in regard to channeling energy (as several classes and archetypes had that class feature under varying names) -- the conclusion reached is that it was not the exact name but the ability that mattered. For that reason, I would go so far as to say that the Primalist would count as having the rage power class feature as soon as he selected his first two rage powers if it were not for the specific language to the contrary in the archetype description. Unlike the case with the earliest rules, the descriptions for the bloodrager class and Primalist archetype are pretty explicit about whether they qualify as having the rage and rage power class features.

[MrCharisma]

David Knott 242 is referring to this:

Sean K Reynolds" wrote:

And that means things like Improved Channel and Alignment Channel and Extra Channel should apply equally to the cleric, life oracle, and paladin .... Because to do otherwise means we need different versions of these feats for oracles and paladins because under the strictest interpretation, neither of them has a class ability that's specifically and explicitly named "channel energy;" and three sets of redundant identical feats for clerics, oracles, and paladins is lame and a waste of space.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

(The actual post is quite long, but that's the most relevant part ... that I already had a quote for in an old thread so I could just copy/paste it here)

So without the specific text a Primalist WOULD qualify for Extra Rage Power.

However I think what Derklord is saying that if "Rage" and "Rage Power" aren't separate powers then the "Extra Rage Power" feat wouldn't beavailable to anyone since it specifically calls that out as a separate Class Ability.

So you only have to look as far as the feat they want to take (Extra Rage Power) to find evidence that they are actually separate class abilities, and thus the Primalist does not qualify for this feat.

[Derklord]

In any case, you undoubtedly need a class feature that grants rage powers to qualify for the feat, which no form of rage is. There isn't really an argument there, just a transparent attempt to cheat. There is literally just one feat in the entire game that's affected by Primal Choices' "This ability does not count as the rage power class feature for determining feat prerequisites", and that's Extra Rage Power. The archetype all but in name tells you that a Primalist doesn't qualify for ERP.

David knott 242 wrote:

There was some discussion to the contrary several years ago in regard to channeling energy (as several classes and archetypes had that class feature under varying names) -- the conclusion reached is that it was not the exact name but the ability that mattered.

MrCharisma wrote:

David Knott 242 is referring to this:

Sean K Reynolds" wrote:

And that means things like Improved Channel and Alignment Channel and Extra Channel should apply equally to the cleric, life oracle, and paladin .... Because to do otherwise means we need different versions of these feats for oracles and paladins because under the strictest interpretation, neither of them has a class ability that's specifically and explicitly named "channel energy;" and three sets of redundant identical feats for clerics, oracles, and paladins is lame and a waste of space.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

(The actual post is quite long, but that's the most relevant part ... that I already had a quote for in an old thread so I could just copy/paste it here)

So without the specific text a Primalist WOULD qualify for Extra Rage Power.

Quite frankly, what SKR wrote in some thread is irrelevant. If he had wanted to make it a general rule, he could have made an FAQ. He didn't. I'd actually like a general rule, I just don't see any! Also, the three example class features all share a word behave pretty much the same, that's not the case for "rage power" and "primal choices".

Yes, I know there's a bunch of instances where you can't go by name (just about everything with animal companion for instance, as neither Druid nor Ranger have a class feature called that), but that's not the case here. The feat doesn't ask for the ability to select rage powers (that would make Primalist qualify for it; compare Improved Share Spells from the same book as Extra Rage Power), but for the rage power class feature.

Also note that the bloodrage description explicitly says "Bloodrage counts as the barbarian’s rage class feature for the purpose of feat prerequisites, feat abilities, magic item abilities, and spell effects." - that is how the book makes one class feature count as another of a different name. Rage and Bloodrage are almost identically worded, which according to SKRs post should be enough, but still there is that line I just quoted. That's not hard evidence, as the Pathfinder rules are full of reminder text (the Primalist ability's respective sentence actually being an example), but it makes clear that the writer didn't want to rely on that "similar = same" thing.

Funny thing: I actually linked and quoted that same SKR post recently here to argue in favor of similar things not being intentionally different. Of course, I was deliberately talking about intend there.