Open X Chakra

[Kelb_Panthera]

In an effort to keep another thread from derailing:

The open X chakra feats from MoI seem to be a source of debate.

One side argues that by RAW the feats allow you to bind a soulmeld or magic item to your chakra if you're not a meldshaper.

The other argues that by RAW the feat does nothing if you don't have any chakra binds available as a class feature, making the feats worthless for characters that don't have meldshaping levels.


Discuss.

[Psyren]

Quoting myself from the other thread:


If you restrict it to needing a chakra bind from an external source, the feat violates its own RAW - it says you can do something that you can't actually do. The easiest ruling is to let it grant a bind as well as granting access to the chakra, and it certainly doesn't break anything to rule this way either.

Since both routes apparently violate RAW in some way, I would rule in favor of the more specific wording (i.e. the feat's "you can" vs. the general rule saying you wouldn't be able to) and thus have the feat come prepackaged with a bind.

[Piggy Knowles]

The feat does not explicitly grant you a chakra bind, and having a chakra bind is actually separate from the ability to bind something to a chakra. (For example, a 5th-level totemist has only one chakra bind, despite having four "open" chakras.)

The book DOES mention in multiple places that characters without meldshaping levels can gain a limited ability to use soulmelds via the Shape Soulmeld and Open Chakra feats, although this doesn't change the fact that the feat, as written, does not grant you a chakra bind.

I think this is obviously an oversight in a poorly edited book, but if you're reading things in the strictest way possible, then if you have 0 chakra binds, the Open X Chakra feat doesn't increase that number.

[Psyren]

Which runs into the problem I mentioned; if you rule that the feat has no binds, then the feat violates its own RAW by saying you can now do something that you can't actually do.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Throwing in my two cp: I don't really care which version is more RAW. The feat needs to actually grant a chakra bind earmarked for that particular chakra to be worth a feat slot, so that's how it gets used at my table.

If that doesn't happen it's only even remotely useful for characters with a quick dip in a meldshaping class. Straight meldshapers and characters in meldshaping advancement PrC's get those chakras opened before the feats are even available for the most part.

I really don't think the feats were intended to be used only by incarnum dippers.

[eggs]

The only text requiring characters have a certain number of Chakra binds available in order to bind a soulmeld is associated with class features which grant binds, not with the meldshaping system itself.

The Open Chakra feats/spells/powers do not reference those class features.

Unless a character has levels in the classes with those limitations, I see no compelling reason that they would be relevant.

[rot42]

The feats grant the ability to bind to a chakra in the same sense that a driver's license grants the ability to drive a car: you have access to an otherwise illegal ability, but you still need to bring your own car. The existence and wording of the epic Extra Chakra Bind feat (MoI 213, immediately adjacent to Open Heart Chakra) argue that binds are supposed to be meldshaper-exclusive.

Granting a bind in addition to opening access is a perfectly reasonable house rule, and indeed applies in my games.

[Psyren]

The feats grant the ability to bind to a chakra in the same sense that a driver's license grants the ability to drive a car: you have access to an otherwise illegal ability, but you still need to bring your own car.

But that's exactly why your analogy doesn't work - I have my car (i.e. my chakras/body slots) with me all the time. So the license is in fact the missing piece I need.

If a chakra bind gave you a body slot you didn't have before then you'd be right.

[Cruiser1]

Note the "Open X Chakra" spell specifically states that does allow you to form binds, i.e. "A creature benefiting from this spell can bind a soulmeld or magic item to his opened chakra just as if he had gained the ability to form a chakra bind from a feat or class feature." (MoI 103) Since the spell definitely gives you the ability to form binds, the "Open X Chakra" feats should act the same (at least by RAI if not RAW).

[Answerer]

The only text requiring characters have a certain number of Chakra binds available in order to bind a soulmeld is associated with class features which grant binds, not with the meldshaping system itself.

The Open Chakra feats/spells/powers do not reference those class features.

Unless a character has levels in the classes with those limitations, I see no compelling reason that they would be relevant.
This is a very interesting point. I think it's a very strong case.

[Person_Man]

I am not a RAW expert, and never have been. But I've played with MoI a lot.

If you rule that the Open Chakra feats do not grant a Chakra bind, then only multi-class Incarnates and Totemists would ever take the Feat. In this way, it is somewhat analogous to Practiced Caster.

If you rule that the Open Chakra feats do in fact grant one additional Chakra bind for a specific chakra slot, then anyone who isn't crazy should probably take it, because it offers a wide array of awesome options.

For example, consider the Phase Cloak soulmeld. It makes you Ethereal whenever you take a Move Action to move. So no difficult terrain, no attacks of opportunity, ability to move right through walls, and you essentially get flight/swim/climb/burrow speeds (though you must end your move on the material plane, and thus must end your move on normal ground).

If you rule that Open Lesser Chakra does not grant an extra chakra bind, then I could see some situations where a Totemist/Swordage or something similar might want to take the Feat. He would have to "give up" using one of his chakra binds on his Totem, Crown, etc chakra binds. But he'd probably be getting access to a better, "higher level" chakra bind in it's place.

If you rule that Open Lesser Chakra does grant one extra chakra bind, then every build that depends on Standard Actions (ie, most Wizards, Sorcerers, Warlocks, Psions, etc) would definitely want to take it, because it's so much more powerful then standard Feat options. (With the exception of some metamagic Feats).

Which decision you make should probably depend on the general Tier of the players in your group, and not a legalistic reading of the poorly written rules.

[Psyren]

There is actually a third option, Person_Man - namely, that it grants a bind if you don't have any from your class, but if you do, you use your class bind progression instead. It would function a bit like Hidden Talent in this respect - you use your manifester level if you've got one, otherwise you get a free "manifester level" that you can manifest your power with, and rather than adding it on you would just use whichever is higher.

This would result in a separate scenario from the two you've listed above. As before, the feat would be useful for non-meldshaping classes, as it both opens the chakra and allows them to bind to it. But it would be less useful for classes that can actually meldshape, since they generally get access to each tier earlier than the feat does and now they wouldn't get any bonus binds from taking them. Multiclass meldshapers might still want it, to get access to a particular chakra they can't open normally (e.g. an Ironsoul Forgemaster who wants his Throat Chakra.)

Thus, the power level of this scenario would fall somewhere between the two you listed.

[Eldonauran]

There is actually a third option, Person_Man - namely, that it grants a bind if you don't have any from your class, but if you do, you use your class bind progression instead. It would function a bit like Hidden Talent in this respect - you use your manifester level if you've got one, otherwise you get a free "manifester level" that you can manifest your power with, and rather than adding it on you would just use whichever is higher.

This would result in a separate scenario from the two you've listed above. As before, the feat would be useful for non-meldshaping classes, as it both opens the chakra and allows them to bind to it. But it would be less useful for classes that can actually meldshape, since they generally get access to each tier earlier than the feat does and now they wouldn't get any bonus binds from taking them. Multiclass meldshapers might still want it, to get access to a particular chakra they can't open normally (e.g. an Ironsoul Forgemaster who wants his Throat Chakra.)

I agree with this interpretation. It is exactly the impression that I got when I looked over the feats.

[Curmudgeon]

The feats grant the ability to bind to a chakra in the same sense that a driver's license grants the ability to drive a car: you have access to an otherwise illegal ability, but you still need to bring your own car. The existence and wording of the epic Extra Chakra Bind feat (MoI 213, immediately adjacent to Open Heart Chakra) argue that binds are supposed to be meldshaper-exclusive.

Granting a bind in addition to opening access is a perfectly reasonable house rule, and indeed applies in my games.
The Extra Chakra Bind [Epic] feat is part of why I think that Open Least Chakra and successors grant only what they say, and do not grant chakra binds. It seems incongruous that an Epic feat which also has moderately steep Incarnum requirements would grant just a portion of what is granted by one of the easiest Incarnum feats to qualify for.

However, I think your analogy is rather confusing. I liken chakra binds in this scenario to something more like batteries for an electric car. If you're already in possession of the vehicle (your body) and have a limited license to use it for some purposes like daytime driving of a 2-axle vehicle (the Open ... Chakra feat), you still need the energy (chakra binds) to get anywhere. A car without batteries just isn't going to go.

[Psyren]

My "third option" above would actually preserve the power of the Epic Extra Chakra Bind feat. Under that interpretation, a meldshaper, or even a class that had already taken Open X Chakra once, would have no way of getting more chakra binds than their class allows than via the epic feat, thus keeping it unique. But if you have no binds from your class, Open X Chakra will give you one (and only one) that you can use.

The reason it would not give you more binds, of course, would be the "the benefits don't stack" clause. Even if you open multiple chakras on a given tier by taking the feat multiple times, you would still only have the one bind to share amongst them (unless you bit the bullet and became a meldshaper.)


EDIT: I'm a visual sort, so I'll summarize the three stances in a table:

{TABLE=head] Interpretation | Relative Power | Useful for?
Open Chakra always grants a bind|Highest|Everyone (pure meldshapers included)
Open Chakra grants a bind if you have none, and doesn't if you do|Middle|Non-meldshapers, multiclass meldshapers who only want the specific chakra
Open Chakra never grants a bind|Lowest|Multiclass meldshapers who want the specific chakra only[/TABLE]

[Glimbur]

If you rule that Open Lesser Chakra does grant one extra chakra bind, then every build that depends on Standard Actions (ie, most Wizards, Sorcerers, Warlocks, Psions, etc) would definitely want to take it, because it's so much more powerful then standard Feat options. (With the exception of some metamagic Feats).

Which decision you make should probably depend on the general Tier of the players in your group, and not a legalistic reading of the poorly written rules.

Open X Chakra is (nearly) useless unless you have the ability to shape a soulmeld. So, it requires two feats to get those sweet sweet bind abilities. It's still worth considering on a wizard or what have you, but two feats is a steep cost. Or you can dip Incarnate or Totemist and spend a feat, but levels are also expensive.