My "Veteran" friends aren't too bookwormy. Input?

[Duboris]

So yeah, me and my friends are learning a ton of new ****, seeing as how as their most-book-wormy DM (Me) is finally deciding to read up on this, but I believe we've done something horribly wrong for a long time.

We play pathfinder, the role playing game, not SRD, or the beginner box, although I don't know if that edits anything.

I sort of had a moment of clarity, and as a result, I realized that our level 3 fighter is nowhere near being able to use greater vital strike.

Long story short, friends basically assumed that "Fighters get a bonus feat, so long as it is considered a fighter feat" threw pre-requisites out the window. Turns out I found out that that *might* not be true.

So do you boys want to tell me that we still have to meet pre-requisites? Because I think you're about too.

[Menteith]

I was all about to confirm that you need to meet the prereqs for Fighter Bonus Feats, but weirdly, the Pathfinder Fighter doesn't have the "A fighter must still meet all prerequisites for a bonus feat, including ability score and base attack bonus minimums," line on it that the 3.5 fighter does. Source (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/classes/fighter.html) for Pathfinder's Fighter, Source (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/fighter.htm) for 3.5's Fighter. Other sources for bonus feats in Pathfinder do specify that you need to meet the prereqs (Animal Spirit Druids (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advanced/coreClasses/druid.html#bonus-feat), for example). To me knowledge, it's intended that Pathfinder Fighters are still required to have met the prereqs for their bonus feats, but by the available text, they don't actually need to. If someone else could shed some more light on this, I'd appreciate it myself.

[KillianHawkeye]

Meeting prerequisites is the default assumption. A class feature would have to specify that you don't need to meet the prerequisites for that to be the case.

[Menteith]

Meeting prerequisites is the default assumption. A class feature would have to specify that you don't need to meet the prerequisites for that to be the case.

So an Arcane Duelist (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advanced/coreClasses/bard.html#bonus-feats) needs to meet the prereqs to gain their bonus feats? Does the Rogue Talent Finesse Rogue (which grants Weapon Finesse as a Bonus Feat) require that the Rogue have the Dex Req to pick up the feat? I mean, I think you're right and Pazio just dropped the ball with terrible editing again, but I'd really like to see a citation.

[Heatwizard]

So an Arcane Duelist (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advanced/coreClasses/bard.html#bonus-feats) needs to meet the prereqs to gain their bonus feats? Does the Rogue Talent Finesse Rogue (which grants Weapon Finesse as a Bonus Feat) require that the Rogue have the Dex Req to pick up the feat? I mean, I think you're right and Pazio just dropped the ball with terrible editing again, but I'd really like to see a citation.

Don't feats turn off when you lose their pre-reqs? I know this is the case for 3.5, but I could've sworn it was the case for Pathfinder too. Unless I'm mistaken there, what would happen is you'd get Weapon Finesse on your list of feats, but until your Dex is good enough to qualify you wouldn't gain its benefit.

[eggs]

So an Arcane Duelist (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advanced/coreClasses/bard.html#bonus-feats) needs to meet the prereqs to gain their bonus feats? Does the Rogue Talent Finesse Rogue (which grants Weapon Finesse as a Bonus Feat) require that the Rogue have the Dex Req to pick up the feat? I mean, I think you're right and Pazio just dropped the ball with terrible editing again, but I'd really like to see a citation.
That's what prerequisites are, that's what the general rule says and there's no specific exception in any of those cases.

So if you're being a stickler for the written rules, I think they do need to meet the prerequisites regardless.

But what tags those cases as writing oversights/Monk-fist-proficiency kinds of deals is that they're specifically identified as available options at specific times of classes that wouldn't otherwise qualify, which isn't quite the same as the Fighter's relatively open selections from the long list.

[Deathkeeper]

Considering Rangers and Monks specifically turn off prerequisites while fighter doesn't, yes, Fighter needs the prerequisites. Finesse Rogue and such don't have them because you're spending a class feature to get it.
Plus, you can't swap out a Fighter feat if it's a preq. for another fighter feat, which implies that the Fighter does use the prerequisites.

[HunterOfJello]

The typical rule is that when a class feature gives you a choice between several feat options, then you need to meet the prerequisite for the feat you choose. The class feature really should be specific and say whether you need to or not, but not all do. For instance, the Ranger feat choice for Combat Style says specifically that you don't need to meet the prerequisites.

When a class feature gives you a specific feat without a choice, then you never need to meet the prerequisite (unless it says otherwise).

I absolutely doubt this is stated anywhere in any book, but it is the general tendency for all 3.5 material and seems to be the same for Pathfinder.

~
Shorter explanation:

1. Class features don't require prerequisites, unless they say otherwise.

2. Feat choices require their prerequisites, unless they say otherwise.

[Duboris]

So long story short, all fighter based feats require their pre-reqs.

I started to have my "Balance" doubts about this sort of thing whenever the level 3 fighter in my campaign started to greater vital things when he only had a +4 to hit... (Pre req on greater vital is a minimum of 16, and quadruples damage.)

[Medic!]

If it makes you feel better, when our table-top group started out most of the players used Redblade to generate their characters and were walking around with things like Greater Weapon Focus on core-class non-fighters and taking Greater Weapon Specialization at 2nd level.

I don't know pathfinder at all but in 3.5 the rule of thumb is that if it says you gain a specific feat you get it regardless (like combat style on rangers), if it says you get a pick off a list whether you meat pre-reqs or not you get your pick (like the monk bonus feats), and if it just says "pick a bonus feat from this list" like fighter, scout, warblade, etc, you have to meet pre-reqs.

[only1doug]

Has this error made fighters horribly overpowered in your games?

If not then just leave it the way it is, "O.K. guys, I've reread the rules and this is what we are doing wrong, my solution is that we houserule it all in for the rest of this campaign, unless you guys want to deal with it differently?"

[HunterOfJello]

Has this error made fighters horribly overpowered in your games?

If not then just leave it the way it is, "O.K. guys, I've reread the rules and this is what we are doing wrong, my solution is that we houserule it all in for the rest of this campaign, unless you guys want to deal with it differently?"

This is the best way to handle rules that you find out about later for things that aren't causing problems. I found out about the actual rules for thrown weapon attacks and found out that the PC in my games that was using a 2handed weapon for thrown weapon attacks. However, he would have been beaten to death with a nerf bat if I actually implemented the official rules for thrown weapons instead of whatever we had been using at the time, so I left them alone and things progressed without a problem.

[Heatwizard]

This is the best way to handle rules that you find out about later for things that aren't causing problems. I found out about the actual rules for thrown weapon attacks and found out that the PC in my games that was using a 2handed weapon for thrown weapon attacks. However, he would have been beaten to death with a nerf bat if I actually implemented the official rules for thrown weapons instead of whatever we had been using at the time, so I left them alone and things progressed without a problem.

Now I want to play some huge-size character just so I can carry 50 greatswords and flick them at enemies from across the room.

[only1doug]

Now I want to play some huge-size character just so I can carry 50 greatswords and flick them at enemies from across the room.

There's a build for that.

[Heatwizard]

There's a build for that.

Eh, Hurler's too much for me and Bloodstorm isn't what I had in mind.

[only1doug]

You dont have to take levels in hulking hurler, brutal throw is a gimmee but throw anything may take a bit more focus than you want to put in.

Although I would just use hulking hurler for the build you described, just ignore the cheesier options.

[mattie_p]

Eh, Hurler's too much for me and Bloodstorm isn't what I had in mind.

Consider this (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/telekineticThrust.htm) for a slightly different perspective with similar results.

[Duboris]

We basically realized all this in transition from 1 campaign to another. Turns out my constant reading of the core rulebook has thrown a lot of our usual things into question. Namely combat maneuvers.

That just means I'm being a good DM though.