I know someone will ask so I may as well post it.
Some spells and abilities increase your ability scores. Ability score increases with a duration of 1 day or less give only temporary bonuses. For every two points of increase to a single ability, apply a +1 bonus to the skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability.......Permanent Bonuses: Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.
That FAQ does not conflict with this text from the book. It is just explaining that when it comes to numerical bonuses as attack rolls, damage, and so on that the temp score counts. In no way does it say that the temp bonus changes your actual ability score.
If you have a strength score of 11, and get hit with bulls strength your actual ability score is still 11. It is just how ability damage does not actually lower your score, but you are treated as if it is lower for the purpose of modifiers.
That FAQ does not say that temporary scores count as permanent scores.
It says "temporary ability bonuses should apply to anything relating to that ability score, just as permanent ability score bonuses do. "
Basically, the FAQ was covering bonuses, not the actual score. Nothing in the FAQ says to treat a temp score as a permanent one in call cases. It is only saying for the purpose of bonuses permanent bonuses and temporary ones will work the same, and that fall in line with my other posts, and the FAQ, without allowing temp scores to qualify for feats.
A score is not a bonus.
However many feats call out the actual score. They do not call out the bonus. If power attack as an example said you need a "+1 strength bonus" then you could qualify with a temporary score, but it does not say that.
That's a useful Design Team link, thanks. I hadn't noticed any FAQs recently so was wondering if they were still doing the every Friday thing.
While unofficial staff posts are exactly that, they still lend weight to whatever the discussion is. This thread, again, is a good example of that.
No problem. A lot of the recent FAQs have been pretty low-key. Easy to miss if you're not looking for them.
That FAQ does not say that temporary scores count as permanent scores.
It says "temporary ability bonuses should apply to anything relating to that ability score, just as permanent ability score bonuses do. "Basically, the FAQ was covering bonuses, not the actual score. Nothing in the FAQ says to treat a temp score as a permanent one in call cases. It is only saying for the purpose of bonuses permanent bonuses and temporary ones will work the same, and that fall in line with my other posts, and the FAQ, without allowing temp scores to qualify for feats.
A score is not a bonus.
However many feats call out the actual score. They do not call out the bonus. If power attack as an example said you need a "+1 strength bonus" then you could qualify with a temporary score, but it does not say that.
But I'm not using that FAQ as a basis for my belief (although it does support it).
Under feat prerequisites: "... Your character must have the indicated ability score, ..."
Belt of Giant's Strength: "The belt grants the wearer an enhancement bonus to Strength of +2, +4, or +6."
Thus, if you have 12 Strength and are wearing a +2 belt, when your Strength score is referenced by something else it will see a 14.
As the feat prerequisite rules don't specifically call out anything about how the ability score should be checked, you default to the general rule of using the total adjusted value.
Granted, this technically allows a character to cast bull's strength right before they level up and do the same. But realism and GM sanity checks should come into play here to disallow this. (in addition to other reasons I'm not interested in discussing atm)
Well if you are not using the FAQ the only other source is the CRB, and the CRB says your score does not change due to a temporary enhancement bonus until 24 hours have passed. I even quoted it.
Did you miss it or do you believe have another reason to believe you can qualify for power attack(as an example) without having a score of 13 or higher in strength?
edit: Here is the entire section I was quoting from regarding temporary vs permanent ability bonuses.
Ability Score Bonuses
Some spells and abilities increase your ability scores. Ability score increases with a duration of 1 day or less give only temporary bonuses. For every two points of increase to a single ability, apply a +1 bonus to the skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability.Strength: Temporary increases to your Strength score give you a bonus on Strength-based skill checks, melee attack rolls, and weapon damage rolls (if they rely on Strength). The bonus also applies to your Combat Maneuver Bonus (if you are Small or larger) and to your Combat Maneuver Defense.
Dexterity: Temporary increases to your Dexterity score give you a bonus on Dexterity-based skill checks, ranged attack rolls, initiative checks, and Reflex saving throws. The bonus also applies to your Armor Class, your Combat Maneuver Bonus (if you are Tiny or smaller), and your Combat Maneuver Defense.
Constitution: Temporary increases to your Constitution score give you a bonus on your Fortitude saving throws. In addition, multiply your total Hit Dice by this bonus and add that amount to your current and total hit points. When the bonus ends, remove this total from your current and total hit points.
Intelligence: Temporary increases to your Intelligence score give you a bonus on Intelligence-based skill checks. This bonus also applies to any spell DCs based on Intelligence.
Wisdom: Temporary increases to your Wisdom score give you a bonus on Wisdom-based skill checks and Will saving throws. This bonus also applies to any spell DCs based on Wisdom.
Charisma: Temporary increases to your Charisma score give you a bonus on Charisma-based skill checks. This bonus also applies to any spell DCs based on Charisma and the DC to resist your channeled energy.
Permanent Bonuses: Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.
What that means is permanent bonuses actually increase your score, while temporary ones do not increase your actual score. You are only getting the benefits of the bonus, but your real score does not change.
If your score did not change then you do not qualify.
That's a useful Design Team link, thanks. I hadn't noticed any FAQs recently so was wondering if they were still doing the every Friday thing.
While unofficial staff posts are exactly that, they still lend weight to whatever the discussion is. This thread, again, is a good example of that.
The goal from what I understand is to have them every Friday, but it doesn't always happen.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The dev team has said repeatedly that forum posts by devs are NOT meant to be taken as proper rules clarifications.
A good example being the Titan Mauler Barbarian. The dev for that archetype said
The only reason we have this situation is when forum posters would continually argue with the rules posted by dev members even when the dev member said it was unanimous opinion of the dev team. If I remember, the change to "nothing is official" happened in a Charge debacle thread after a Charge FAQ changed how some forums posters thought Charge worked.
Your example of a author isn't useful, as that is someone who wrote the material before it passed through the dev team.
I'll still use any post by SKR/MS/JB/SRM or PDT as official regardless of the current "unofficial" stance. Especially anything before the Charge FAQ.
Permanent Bonuses: Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.What that means is permanent bonuses actually increase your score, while temporary ones do not increase your actual score. You are only getting the benefits of the bonus, but your real score does not change.
If your score did not change then you do not qualify.
Your "actual" score is irrelevant, though.
If something references an ability score, it's going to see whatever it's currently at. While the bonuses associated with the ability score may be temporary rather than permanent, this doesn't change the fact that your ability score has still increased.
Or to quote your quote:
Ability score increases with a duration of 1 day or less give only temporary bonuses.
I see we will not agree on this one. I will FAQ it, since I am sure others are wondering also.
The dev team has said repeatedly that forum posts by devs are NOT meant to be taken as proper rules clarifications.
A good example being the Titan Mauler Barbarian. The dev for that archetype said
The only reason we have this situation is when forum posters would continually argue with the rules posted by dev members even when the dev member said it was unanimous opinion of the dev team. If I remember, the change to "nothing is official" happened in a Charge debacle thread after a Charge FAQ changed how some forums posters thought Charge worked.
Your example of a author isn't useful, as that is someone who wrote the material before it passed through the dev team.
I'll still use any post by SKR/MS/JB/SRM or PDT as official regardless of the current "unofficial" stance. Especially anything before the Charge FAQ.
That's nice? I never said you couldn't.
But by their own words, forum posts are not official. You can't use them as full rulings for PFS, for example. What you do in your game is your business, but that has little to nothing to do with what I said.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think its a mistake to assume that the underlying mechanics of a system that lead to rulings are themselves consistent. Usually the result comes first and then the rationale follows.
On the other paw, sometimes you have to do that when going into unknown territory.
The dev team has said repeatedly that forum posts by devs are NOT meant to be taken as proper rules clarifications.
A good example being the Titan Mauler Barbarian. The dev for that archetype said
The only reason we have this situation is when forum posters would continually argue with the rules posted by dev members even when the dev member said it was unanimous opinion of the dev team. If I remember, the change to "nothing is official" happened in a Charge debacle thread after a Charge FAQ changed how some forums posters thought Charge worked.
Your example of a author isn't useful, as that is someone who wrote the material before it passed through the dev team.
I'll still use any post by SKR/MS/JB/SRM or PDT as official regardless of the current "unofficial" stance. Especially anything before the Charge FAQ.
Yeah, it was the old Mounted Charge/Vital Strike issue.
SKR had previously said it's the mount charging, not you. A later FAQ was issued that said both the mount and PC are charging, which meant you couldn't do things like combine Vital Strike your attack from the back of a charging mount.
Anyhoo, back to your regularly scheduled programming.
/historical footnote
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
But by their own words, forum posts are not official. You can't use them as full rulings for PFS
Actually, in PFS I absolutely can do so. Because if the meaning of the rules is ambiguous, the GM determines RAW and the GM may (at their digression) use an official or unofficial forum post to guide him.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
SKR had previously said it's the mount charging, not you. A later FAQ was issued that said both the mount and PC are charging, which meant you couldn't do things like combine Vital Strike your attack from the back of a charging mount.
Which gets weird when you use a lance. You have to stop after your attack, but the charging horse has to keep going to fulfill the requirements of a charge so... what happens?
Which just goes back to the idea that trying to go back to a deeper, more fundamental idea behind a rule usually hits some inconsistancies.
But by their own words, forum posts are not official. You can't use them as full rulings for PFSActually, in PFS I absolutely can do so. Because if the meaning of the rules is ambiguous, the GM determines RAW and the GM may (at their digression) use an official or unofficial forum post to guide him.)
So you do the same when you're a player, I take it?
A GM ruling ambiguous text in agreement with dev quotes is one thing. Using those quotes as if they were rules in all situations is entirely another matter.
SKR had previously said it's the mount charging, not you. A later FAQ was issued that said both the mount and PC are charging, which meant you couldn't do things like combine Vital Strike your attack from the back of a charging mount.Which gets weird when you use a lance. You have to stop after your attack, but the charging horse has to keep going to fulfill the requirements of a charge so... what happens?
Which just goes back to the idea that trying to go back to a deeper, more fundamental idea behind a rule usually hits some inconsistancies.
Yep. Mounted Combat rules in particular are a heaping pile of mess. They were before the port and it'd probably take a complete overhaul to really make any sensible changes.
So you do the same when you're a player, I take it?
A GM ruling ambiguous text in agreement with dev quotes is one thing. Using those quotes as if they were rules in all situations is entirely another matter.
In my experience very few things will actually work to bludgeon a PFS dm into agreeing with you on the rules if there's a pre existing disagreement.
SKR had previously said it's the mount charging, not you. A later FAQ was issued that said both the mount and PC are charging, which meant you couldn't do things like combine Vital Strike your attack from the back of a charging mount.Which gets weird when you use a lance. You have to stop after your attack, but the charging horse has to keep going to fulfill the requirements of a charge so... what happens?
Which just goes back to the idea that trying to go back to a deeper, more fundamental idea behind a rule usually hits some inconsistancies.
Which means you drop the lance immediately after you hit, or your lance attack is the only one that goes off.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just to be clear, if the temporary bonuses did/do apply equally to permanent bonuses to attributes for the purposes of feat prerequisites, can you use the feat always, or only when you meet the requirements?
You can only use the feat if you meet the requirements at the time you intend to use it. This has never been in question. For example, if you are wearing a belt of strength to qualify for Power Attack, you could not use Power Attack while you were in an anti-magic field (and the belt's power was suppressed).
The only change the brawler discussion made was clarifying that you could take feats even if you only had the prerequisites under specific circumstances (in this case, brawlers only "have" the TWF feat when they are flurrying, but they can still take feats that have the TWF feat as a prerequisite, even if they are not constantly flurrying).
The brawler precedent combined with October 2013 FAQ on temporary bonuses has caused a lot of people to think that you can actually use short term spells to qualify for feats, but you can then only use the feat when you cast those spells again.
The basic "brawler argument" is that flurry is a full round action that lasts only 6 seconds. If the brawler can qualify for a feat based on an effect that lasts only 6 seconds, why is it unreasonable to use a minute-long effect to qualify for the exact same feat? (Your GM has to be the one to answer that question. And remember that "Because I say so" is a valid answer from your GM.)
But no matter what you rule on the prerequisite qualifications, there is no argument that you can only use the feat if you meet the prerequisite right now. If you have a natural strength score of 18, and your strength is somehow lowered below 13 (polymorph effect, drain, curse, whatever), you can't use Power Attack until you get that fixed.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Using those [ambiguous text] quotes as if they were rules in all situations is entirely another matter.
While I generally avoid building and stop playing characters with a lot of ambiguous text rules (for example I've got a 10th level Druid with Overrun I'll never play again), I'd use a forum post from a developer to show the GM an alternate interpretation from theirs if I agreed with the developer over the GM.
Remember, there is no "one true RAW". It is all interpreted, and it is possible that player and GM alike can be reading the rule incorrectly. We have a lot of FAQ examples of just that.
The point I'm trying to make is that while dev quotes can be valuabke for providing context for a ruling, or intent, they're still not rules.
A dev quote that contradicts very clear text (say a dev mistakenly thinks an item costs more than it does, or suggests the item SHOULD be more expensive when it really isn't) or a later FAQ is not to be considered rules.
Looking at dev quotes from the context of potential INTENT is useful, as is taking their suggestions for houserules, but using them as though they are set in stone RULES is a can of worms best not opened.
The devs often have insight into the rules, but none of them fully determines what is officially official. That's why posts by the PDT for FAQs have to be hashed out by the team as a whole, not individuals.
|
But no matter what you rule on the prerequisite qualifications, there is no argument that you can only use the feat if you meet the prerequisite right now. If you have a natural strength score of 18, and your strength is somehow lowered below 13 (polymorph effect, drain, curse, whatever), you can't use Power Attack until you get that fixed.
Wow. Didn't realize they worked this, and it's good to know. Thanks.
So, as a caster, I could deny power attacks by lowering my enemy's strength? That is super useful. I had figured it would lower the strength, but not affect feats if the spell was temporary.
I assume the exception here would be feats that the character doesn't need to meet prerequisites for (like ranger fighting styles)?
Also, does this apply to feats given access in a chain? Like if I lower strength enough to prevent use of power attack, does it affect feats that require power attack (even if they don't require the same strength)?
Generally speaking temporary penalties don't apply to most derived statistics. Int damage or temporary penalties (such as an Alchemist's Mutagen) don't lower your skill ranks or spells per day, for instance.
I see no reason why that doesn't extend to such things as Feats.
|
|
Just to be clear, if the temporary bonuses did/do apply equally to permanent bonuses to attributes for the purposes of feat prerequisites, can you use the feat always, or only when you meet the requirements?But no matter what you rule on the prerequisite qualifications, there is no argument that you can only use the feat if you meet the prerequisite right now. If you have a natural strength score of 18, and your strength is somehow lowered below 13 (polymorph effect, drain, curse, whatever), you can't use Power Attack until you get that fixed.
This is not actually true. Penalties/damage are not the same as bonuses. And, a decrease in Strength does not affect your encumbrance. Nor does Intelligence damage lower skill points. This is the same for feat prereqs.
Remember, ability score damage does not actually reduce an ability score. It just applies a penalty to things related to that score, at a rate of -1 per two points.
For example. If I have 18 strength and take 1 point of strength damage... I do not take any penalties at all; my strength is still 18, my encumbrance has not changed, my to hit has not changed. As damage applies a penalty only per each two points of damage.
If I were to take an additional point of strength damage; my encumbrance still does not change, my strength is still 18 and mod is still +4, I suffer -1 to strength-based skill checks, strength-based attack rolls, strength-based damage rolls, CMB and CMD if I use strenth for them.
Also, ability penalties are the same as damage except they can not reduce an ability below 1.
|
|
Just to be clear, if the temporary bonuses did/do apply equally to permanent bonuses to attributes for the purposes of feat prerequisites, can you use the feat always, or only when you meet the requirements?But no matter what you rule on the prerequisite qualifications, there is no argument that you can only use the feat if you meet the prerequisite right now. If you have a natural strength score of 18, and your strength is somehow lowered below 13 (polymorph effect, drain, curse, whatever), you can't use Power Attack until you get that fixed.This is not actually true. Penalties/damage are not the same as bonuses. And, a decrease in Strength does not affect your encumbrance. Nor does Intelligence damage lower skill points. This is the same for feat prereqs.
Remember, ability score damage does not actually reduce an ability score. It just applies a penalty to things related to that score, at a rate of -1 per two points.
For example. If I have 18 strength and take 1 point of strength damage... I do not take any penalties at all; my strength is still 18, my encumbrance has not changed, my to hit has not changed. As damage applies a penalty only per each two points of damage.
If I were to take an additional point of strength damage; my encumbrance still does not change, my strength is still 18 and mod is still +4, I suffer -1 to strength-based skill checks, strength-based attack rolls, strength-based damage rolls, CMB and CMD if I use strenth for them.
Also, ability penalties are the same as damage except they can not reduce an ability below 1.
Your (Lorewalker) the only one mentioning ability damage in the above quotes.
Example, basic level 1 caster hits me with a Ray of Enfeeblement. If this drops my strength below 13, can I use power attack (assuming I have that feat)?
I think if penalties prevent feat use, then bonuses should enable feat use. Seems reasonable.
|
|
Your (Lorewalker) the only one mentioning ability damage in the above quotes.Example, basic level 1 caster hits me with a Ray of Enfeeblement. If this drops my strength below 13, can I use power attack (assuming I have that feat)?
I think if penalties prevent feat use, then bonuses should enable feat use. Seems reasonable.
" If you have a natural strength score of 18, and your strength is somehow lowered below 13 (polymorph effect, drain, curse, whatever), you can't use Power Attack until you get that fixed." <--- this.
Gwen Smith brought up ability damage. I was only correcting the statement made.
If you get hit with a Ray of Enfeeblement, that is an ability score penalty.
An ability score penalty is defined as an ability score damage except that penalties, unlike damage, can not cause you to fall unconscious or die. Thus produces every effect that ability damage does.
Ability damage only applies a -1 per two points to certain things the ability score applies to. It never actually reduces your ability score.
You can read all of this
here on PFSRD.
Or in the core rulebook.
I will give two examples to make it clear why you would never lose access to Power Attack due to ability score damage...
1) I have 13 strength and get hit with 1 point of strength penalty from Ray of Enfeeblement...
Literally nothing negative happens. As your strength is not actually lowered, and the penalty that ability damage causes is only -1 per 2 points. 1 point is not enough damage. No other effects are listed for ability damage.
2) I have 13 strength and get hit with 2 points of strength penalty from Ray of Enfeeblement...
My strength does not get lowered, but I do have -1 to strength-based rolls. My encumbrance does not change. I retain my feat usage.
Ability damage works similar to negative levels. Your level does not change, there is only a penalty involved with some additional text explaining effects beyond the penalty and where the penalty applies. You do not lose access to level granted class abilities, for example.
So, no, ability damage that is greater than the amount of strength between 12 and your current strength would never lower your access to Power Attack or any feat prereq.
This works even for alternate forms that have an ability score penalty... as that is still just an ability score penalty just as is Ray of Enfeeblement. Look at most polymorph or tranmutation spells, they are listed as ability score penalties.
Ability score damage does not follow even similar rules to bonuses. So, that is why one can achieve effects that the other can not.
|
|
Guess I misunderstood. Sorry.
I should note, though, in the case of Bestow Curse... it is neither damage nor penalty. Curse actually lowers your ability score and CAN prevent you from meeting prereqs of feats
So what happens to your feats if you don't meet the prereqs of them? Can you still use them?
Guess I misunderstood. Sorry.
I should note, though, in the case of Bestow Curse... it is neither damage nor penalty. Curse actually lowers your ability score and CAN prevent you from meeting prereqs of featsSo what happens to your feats if you don't meet the prereqs of them? Can you still use them?
Nope. They turn off and are completely useless.
|
|
Guess I misunderstood. Sorry.
I should note, though, in the case of Bestow Curse... it is neither damage nor penalty. Curse actually lowers your ability score and CAN prevent you from meeting prereqs of featsSo what happens to your feats if you don't meet the prereqs of them? Can you still use them?
You can not use them until you meet the prereqs for them again.
|
|
Wow. That's huge. Thanks.
Yes, it is. But it's also fairly rare. Only a very very small number of effects in the game actually reduce your ability score, and only those effects which actually reduce your ability score(as opposed to damage which does not) can make you no longer able to meet prereqs.
What is more worrying than what an opponent may do to you is if you have a strength belt making your prereq... you must never take it off or lose your access to your feat for 24 hours after putting it on again.
Of, if you happen to be a caster, touch of idiocy actually counts as having less of your mental stats for determining what spells you are able to cast. This is due to the extra text at the bottom of the description of the spell.
Generally speaking temporary penalties don't apply to most derived statistics. Int damage or temporary penalties (such as an Alchemist's Mutagen) don't lower your skill ranks or spells per day, for instance.
I see no reason why that doesn't extend to such things as Feats.
Lowering a wizards intelligence won't make him forget memorized spells, but it may render him unable to cast them.
If you reduce casting stat enough, you can lose access to bonus spell slots, in which case you actually do lose that spell, I believe.
Only if the penalty is semi permanent or better. Ability Drain and Feeblemind level stuff.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The latter, you simply don't have the stamina to fly,so your wings simply become dead weight. I'd probably also impose a penalty on acrobatic checks, like a -2.Okay, here's a scenario for you...
An Aasimar with a Con of 10 has a ring of Bear's Endurance we'll say. Gives her +4 Con. So, she wears it for 24 hours so she can take the Angelic Blood feat. Then at level 11 she takes Angel Wings. What happens when she removes her ring? Does she LOSE the wings, or they just become worthless?
Yes, let's just add arbitrary penalties based on flavor text (the fact that your flight is because you have wings is 'flavor text') of a feat that is no longer usable. Better yet, let's not.
Yes, let's just add arbitrary penalties based on flavor text (the fact that your flight is because you have wings is 'flavor text') of a feat that is no longer usable. Better yet, let's not.The latter, you simply don't have the stamina to fly,so your wings simply become dead weight. I'd probably also impose a penalty on acrobatic checks, like a -2.Okay, here's a scenario for you...
An Aasimar with a Con of 10 has a ring of Bear's Endurance we'll say. Gives her +4 Con. So, she wears it for 24 hours so she can take the Angelic Blood feat. Then at level 11 she takes Angel Wings. What happens when she removes her ring? Does she LOSE the wings, or they just become worthless?
Whilst I agree with you that arbitrary penalties are a terrible idea, the flight being granted by the wings is in the rules text.
Benefit: You gain a pair of gleaming feathered wings that grant a fly speed
Yes, let's just add arbitrary penalties based on flavor text (the fact that your flight is because you have wings is 'flavor text') of a feat that is no longer usable. Better yet, let's not.The latter, you simply don't have the stamina to fly,so your wings simply become dead weight. I'd probably also impose a penalty on acrobatic checks, like a -2.Okay, here's a scenario for you...
An Aasimar with a Con of 10 has a ring of Bear's Endurance we'll say. Gives her +4 Con. So, she wears it for 24 hours so she can take the Angelic Blood feat. Then at level 11 she takes Angel Wings. What happens when she removes her ring? Does she LOSE the wings, or they just become worthless?
...No. Winged flight and non-winged flight are very different within the rules. It's not just flavor text.
The main enormous difference is that winged flight is usually Ex, and non-winged flight is always Su.
Of course adding penalties involving an appendage you always have is unnecessary as well, but two wrongs don't make a right.
|
|
Lowering a wizards intelligence won't make him forget memorized spells, but it may render him unable to cast them.Generally speaking temporary penalties don't apply to most derived statistics. Int damage or temporary penalties (such as an Alchemist's Mutagen) don't lower your skill ranks or spells per day, for instance.
I see no reason why that doesn't extend to such things as Feats.
This is true for things such as Bestow Curse, Touch of Idiocy and abilities that Drain.(Though, you can lose 'bonus' spells that you only gain from higher ability scores)
But ability score damage/penalties do not actually lower your ability score, and thus have no affect on your spell casting abilities other than modify your DCs.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
The original word from SKR when he was still in charge of direct rules explanations, was that a Barbarian with a 12 Str could take the Power Attack feat, but only use it while raging
If I remember the history correctly, that was true. But the dev team got together and decided you couldn't.
Does someone have that post of SKR saying "I don't agree" ?
Or the post saying of dev team saying you couldn't.
Awesome, thanks for the link. That changes my stance now, unfortunately.