[PF] Retraining question

[Xunthrae]

I have a level 9 Witch at the moment. Can I, when i hit 10, use the retraining rules for feats (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/basics-ability-scores/more-character-options/retraining) to replace one of the feats i have with Split Hex (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/split-hex)? It has a prerequisite of Witch 10, but reading the retraining rules for feats, it doesn't say I had to meet the prerequisite when i took the original feat that it is replacing.

Edited for minor clarity

[Kudaku]

Yes, you can.


Retraining: Can I retrain a feat to replace it with a feat I didn't qualify for at the level I originally gained that feat?
Yes. As long as the new feat is a valid feat for your current character, you can retrain the old feat and replace it with the new feat.

For example, if you are a 3rd-level rogue who took Improved Initiative at 1st level, you can retrain that feat and replace it with Weapon Focus. Even though Weapon Focus has a prerequisite of "base attack bonus +1" (which means you couldn't take it as a 1st-level rogue), it is a valid feat for your current level (3rd), and is therefore a valid choice for retraining.

(Note: Likewise, the fighter class ability to retrain fighter bonus feats does not require you to meet all of the new feat's prerequisites at the level you originally gained the feat.)

[Xunthrae]

Awesome, thanks! :smallbiggrin:

[Kudaku]

Anytime :smallsmile:

I'd make a note that you should probably run this past your GM even though it is RAW and RAI legal. Some people consider retraining feats for other feats that you did not qualify for previously overpowered and/or broken.

[Xunthrae]

I will, he's pretty lenient about most things. There's also the thing about if I do something in his campaign I'd have to allow the same ruling while I'm dming, which I'm totally fine with this one. (we switch off every now and then so we both get to play as players)

[Ranos]

Wow. That's kind of ridiculous.

Guess I'll know to houserule that one away.

[Callin]

Follow up question. I was wondering if I could retrain the Gunsmith feat I got from Black Powder Inquisition to another feat when I get Gunsmith from Gunslinger. Is that an option or am I stuck with the redundant feat.

[Ranos]

I don't know if you can retrain the feat, but you can definitely retrain into another Inquisition/Domain. Since all Black Powder gets you now is the ability to give short-lived penalties to concentration checks, it's worth considering.

[Xunthrae]

Not sure, the segment on the d20pfsrd says this

"You may change one feat to another through retraining. Retraining a feat takes 5 days with a character who has the feat you want. The old feat can't be one you used as a prerequisite for a feat, class feature, archetype, prestige class, or other ability. If the old feat is a bonus feat granted by a class feature, you must replace it with a feat that you could choose using that class feature." (bolded for what i think is the relevant part you're looking for)

[Callin]

I don't know if you can retrain the feat, but you can definitely retrain into another Inquisition/Domain. Since all Black Powder gets you now is the ability to give short-lived penalties to concentration checks, it's worth considering.

Not a bad idea actually

[Kudaku]

In theory you'd either have to retrain your inquisition or be stuck with the redundant feat - there is specific text in place on some feats that allow you to take a different feat if you already have the one granted by class/ability/whatever, and if that text is not present then you do not have the option.

In practice, it is perfectly reasonable to request that the GM allow you to pick a different feat if you already have the feat from a different source.


Wow. That's kind of ridiculous.

Guess I'll know to houserule that one away.

My first thought when I realized this was that it was OP (I even made a thread about it on the Paizo forums) but the more I think about it the more I grew to like it.

Alternately, if you houserule it (so you can't retrain) then the players need to keep track of what levels they took what feats so they know what they're eligible to retrain to.

[Xunthrae]

Tracking them wouldn't be too difficult, just put a level on each feat spot. or just fill the slots in a specific order, like left to right, top to bottom, and so on, to know when, but i personally kind of like this, so it's in for when i'm dming.

[The Random NPC]

Interestingly, the retraining rules make Humans a lot weaker, as you can retrain racial bonus feats with no penalty. I would suggest that you keep the same class bonus feat idea, and only allow them to retrain it to another valid feat (such as another skill focus for Half-Elves).

[Raven777]

There are two conflicting elements pertaining to being able to retrain "racial" related elements, ones that are part of your character's being rather than your character's class.

First, there is the ruling on Sorcerer Bloodlines, which suggests that such alterations are possible but are better handled through a plot development than through mundane "training".


Some of the options listed below involve retraining features of your character that are essentially permanent parts of your heritage, such as a sorcerer's bloodline. The cost of retraining these things presumably includes magical or alchemical alterations to your body. The GM might rule that these changes are unavailable in the campaign, are only available under rare circumstances, take longer, are temporary, require some sort of quest, or are more expensive than the listed cost.

Second, there's the unrestricted permission to retrain Racial Traits :


If your campaign uses alternate racial traits, you can retrain a racial trait. This takes 20 nonconsecutive days and requires a trainer with the racial trait you want. The replacement trait must be an appropriate one from your racial list. The old and new racial traits must replace the same standard racial trait. For example, the magic resistant and stubborn alternate dwarven traits replace the hardy standard trait, so you can retrain one of those for the other.

This feels a bit inconsistent to me.