Qualify for feats via enchantments

[KingSmitty]

As the title suggests, I'm looking to qualify for the Knockback feat with my Warforged Juggernaut. As I am only medium sized, would a continuous item of Enlarge Person embedded in me allow me to now qualify for the feat? The prereq's say I need to be large to take the feat. Someone said I could have enlarge person permanencied on me, but that costs too much gold if a dispel check will take that away for good. Gold is pretty scarce in this game, so purchasing a continuous embedded component of enlarge person is gonna cost a bunch, but worth it for my build if it counts.

My opinion is that as being now permanently large (unless the embedded component is removed/destroyed or dispelled, though dispel would only suppress the enchantment) I would be permitted to take this feat. Only on the instances that I'd be no longer large would I then not get the benefit from the feat.

Also, with the PrC War Hulk, a prerequisite of Large is also necessary. Under the same assumptions I would qualify to take this PrC but if I lost the ability to be large I'd lose all class abilities and such.

Am I correct in my thinking?

[Captnq]

Ask your DM.

In my opinion?

No.
Hell No.
No Way.
Negative.
Never.
N to the O.


Why? Because someone then makes a unique spell that gives you I dunno, a feat or a skill rank, or any one of a billion things you need to qualify for any class.

If I can just spend enough gold to buy my way into a class, what's the point?

[torrasque666]

I think I asked this on reddit once and the response I got was essentially "sure, but if you lose/suppress it, you lose access to the ability." I was asking in regards for War Hulk which would have been even worse as that would be levels of abilities that would be canceled. But I think it would. After all, why would they approve of a class that requires you to be large if most(i'm actually pretty sure all) player races are medium/small and only get to large through templates and/or spell effects, of which enchantments would be.


Ask your DM.

Why? Because someone then makes a unique spell that gives you I dunno, a feat or a skill rank, or any one of a billion things you need to qualify for any class.

If I can just spend enough gold to buy my way into a class, what's the point?

Here's the thing though, he is asking about using the RAW for item enchantments, of which a ring of Enlarge Person would cost (1 x 12 x 4,000) 48,000 GP.

[KingSmitty]

I think I asked this on reddit once and the response I got was essentially "sure, but if you lose/suppress it, you lose access to the ability." I was asking in regards for War Hulk which would have been even worse as that would be levels of abilities that would be canceled. But I think it would. After all, why would they approve of a class that requires you to be large if most(i'm actually pretty sure all) player races are medium/small and only get to large through templates and/or spell effects, of which enchantments would be.



Here's the thing though, he is asking about using the RAW for item enchantments, of which a ring of Enlarge Person would cost (1 x 12 x 4,000) 48,000 GP.

yes this, War Hulk would be even more handicapped because it does not gain any BAB

double that price for a slotless embedded component, though in our game RAW prices like that are very far out of reach, and haggling ensues.

[TuggyNE]

The extra vulnerability to dispels/sunder/theft/AMF/etc is, I think, a fairly reasonable counterbalance, so this seems not too bad. RAW is a little unclear, but there seems no particular reason to distinguish between some artificial idea of "permanent" bonuses and those from magic items, so no problem there either.


Ask your DM.

In my opinion?

No.
Hell No.
No Way.
Negative.
Never.
N to the O.


Why? Because someone then makes a unique spell that gives you I dunno, a feat or a skill rank, or any one of a billion things you need to qualify for any class.

The problem with this is not so much the ability to qualify through items, but the custom spell designed to exploit this. Custom spells need to be approved separately, so, I dunno, just say no to that. How hard is that?

Basically, any time you say "allowing X is bad, because then if you also allowed Y, Z would happen!", you're not actually arguing against X at all.

[Yomega]

I will try to find the official ruling wording on this but I know I have seen this.

You qualify for feats if you either have the effect for 24 hours or have a reliable way to have the effect every day, the former is simple things like belts of +str after 24 hours count as you , the "every day" part as I recall had to do with with creatures able to gain a fly speed regularly and thereby being able to take flyby attack and hover.

As I said tho I will go look up the ruling now, 3.5 I assume?

[TuggyNE]

I will try to find the official ruling wording on this but I know I have seen this.

You qualify for feats if you either have the effect for 24 hours or have a reliable way to have the effect every day, the former is simple things like belts of +str after 24 hours count as you , the "every day" part as I recall had to do with with creatures able to gain a fly speed regularly and thereby being able to take flyby attack and hover.

As I said tho I will go look up the ruling now, 3.5 I assume?

That sounds like PF's Fly skill point restriction, which as far as I know doesn't apply to anything else. It's not a bad precedent to use, but it's not RAW for much either.

[Chronos]

You can take a feat if you qualify for it at the time you gain the feat. In principle, this could be due to a perfectly-timed short-duration spell, but in practice, it's probably going to mean you need some way to keep the prerequisite for the better part of the day, every day. If you somehow lose a prerequisite for a feat, then you are no longer able to use the feat until you re-gain the prerequisite. So, yes, if your DM lets you have an item which continually enlarges you, then you could use that to qualify for Knockback, but if the item ever got stolen/destroyed/suppressed/disjoined etc., you would then be unable to use Knockback until you got large size again somehow (not necessarily via the same method).

Do note, however, that a custom item of continuous enlargement is very much at the discretion of your DM: Not only are all custom items up to the DM, but the spell you're using as the basis for this one can't even be cast on a warforged.

[torrasque666]

However an "X of Giant Size" would work, as it has a target of "You." Now you'd just need to find a Wu Jen who would make it.

[KingSmitty]

Do note, however, that a custom item of continuous enlargement is very much at the discretion of your DM: Not only are all custom items up to the DM, but the spell you're using as the basis for this one can't even be cast on a warforged.


I hadn't considered that. hmmm.

Upon further research, I believe it should still work, as Humanoid is a type and Living Construct is a subtype.

[torrasque666]

Except that Living Construct is a subtype of Construct, not Humanoid.

A living construct is a new subtype of construct, a created being given sentience and free will through powerful and complex creation enchantments. Living constructs combine aspects of both constructs and living creatures, as detailed below.

[Malroth]

a psionic Item of expansion would work, A Magic Item of enlarge person would not.

[Chronos]

An item of Enlarge Person or of Expansion would either one work, if your DM approves it. And there is precedent: Lords of Madness has a ring based on Reduce Person that nonetheless works on all creature types. But even given that, your DM is still perfectly within the rules to turn down either or both.