Prestige class prereqs (from Simple Q&A by RAW)

[Jasdoif]

Rather then clutter up the Simple Q&A with discussion.


My FAQ is late 06. It has no such restriction that I can find about having to continue to meet a Prestige Classes preqs to get the benifits. If your FAQ says otherwise can you please tell/show me where.

Fiendish Servant is based on Character levels, not class levels, so it does include Paladin levels for working out advancement.

I was not disputing your answer that the Special Mount abilities use reformed Blackguard levels. I wondered if anywhere Wizards had covered more ground on the interelation between the two classes. From your answer, you, like me, haven't seen anything, which means, unless anyone can point to such a thing, they don't.

StephenThe FAQ upload I'm looking at is less then one or days old.


Can a soulmeld or its chakra bind allow you to meet the prerequisites for a feat or the requirements for a prestige class?
Yes, but you only gain the benefits of the feat or prestige class as long as you continue to meet its requirements. If you unshape the meld or change the chakra bind, you would lose the feat or prestige class benefits and wouldn’t be able to advance further in the prestige class.(Italic emphasis mine).

Now, the question itself isn't about prestige classes in general, but the statement is. Thus, you have to continue to meet its requirements in order to gain the benefit.

Now, there are some prestige classes that have trouble with it, in that they disqualify themselves (for example Ur-Priest, requires you not have any divine spellcasting ability but the class grants divine spellcasting at first level). However, I see it like this: If the class disqualifies you for itself, then you're denied the abilities. But then, you don't have the abilities that prevent you from qualifying again. So you qualify again, and get the class abilities. But then, you've disqualified yourself. Ad nauseum. And these alterations don't take any time.

So, rather then introducing superposition, where you both qualify and don't qualify at the same time and thus are both granted and denied the class abilities at the same time, I believe it's just as well to say that a prestige class can't disqualify itself. Same general effect (since you do have your abilities all the time, just alongside not having them), but far less headaches.

[Zincorium]

Dragon Disciple is another one, and with two easily visible examples and no errata, it would be safe to assume they were not intended to lose all class abilities, regain them again, and so on.

Really, I've never been able to find any 3.5 rulings (I've been told there was one in sword and fist, but I haven't been able to find it) on the subject of what happens, specifically, when you cease to meet the requirements of a PrC, until now. And it's in a rather odd place.

This information should, by all rights, be in the PrC section of the DMG. It is not. Personally, I think it should work like most of the ex-classes descriptions in the PHB. Clerics, druids and paladins are punished for losing the class, but that's more indicative of them being given that power. Bards, monks, and except for rage, barbarians all retain abilities but can no longer progress. Thus it seems to set a bit of a precedent, that classes which are given power through an outside force lose it, but those whose power relies solely on training retain it but cannot advance.

[Stephen_E]

The FAQ is referring to a specific ability been used.

Now while I'd ussually be willing to consier it as been applied to the general case, as you point out in the case of the Ur-Priest this quite patently doesn't work.

We could make up some ruling that a prestige class can't disqualify you from it's self, BUT we would be making it up with no support from the RAW, or we could conclude that, with a clear example showing the specific FAQ ruling clearly not working in some cases if we try and make it a general ruling, that we can't assume a general ruling.

So our choices are
a) 1:We have a RAW FAQ specific to certain situation. End of Story.

b) 1:We have a Raw FAW specific to a certain situation.
2:We assume/rule that the specific is intended to be general.
3: We make up an exception to the 2nd step to avoid getting into a infintely loop of rules failure. End of Story.

I think you can see why, for the moment, I'll go with choice a).

Stephen

[PinkysBrain]

Really, I've never been able to find any 3.5 rulings (I've been told there was one in sword and fist, but I haven't been able to find it) on the subject of what happens, specifically, when you cease to meet the requirements of a PrC, until now. And it's in a rather odd place.
It's been reprinted a couple of times, but the grand-daddy of references concerning this is Complete Warrior page 16.

[Zincorium]

It's been reprinted a couple of times, but the grand-daddy of references concerning this is Complete Warrior page 16.

Thanks, and I'm not surprised I didn't find it before. Again, why they abyss wasn't this put where it would be most useful, i.e. the DMG? It's not like PrCs were introduced in complete warrior.

[Asaris]

It seems to me that there's a difference between certain sorts of pre-reqs (feats most immediately come to mind) and other sorts (like spellcasting in the case of the Ur-priest). If you lose the former, you can't use any abilities of the prestige class, but if you lose the latter, you can. But I can't find any support in the RAW for this.

[Khantalas]

The FAQ is referring to a specific ability been used.

The ability used is specific. The wording "you only gain the benefits of the feat or prestige class as long as you continue to meet its requirements", however, is not.

[Stephen_E]

The ability used is specific. The wording "you only gain the benefits of the feat or prestige class as long as you continue to meet its requirements", however, is not.

You're taking it out of context. The the part of sentance you're quoting is part of sentance which specifies it to be regarding the prereqs been meyt by a Soulmeld or Chakra bind.

More important is the forward in Comp Warrior and Comp Arcane, but not the DMG, Comp Divine or Comp Advent, say that if you at anytime cease to meet the preqyou lose all class abilities.

Since some prestige classes make you ineligible for the prereqs on entry to them is plainly a problem here. I suspect you have different authors with different understanding of the rules, keeping in that under 3.0 the DMG was quite specific that you did have to always meet the prereqs. So whether the peices in Comp Warrior and Comp Arcane are the correct ruls or someone just remembering the 3.0 rules and assuming thye haven't changed is anyones guess.

Stephen

[Khantalas]

Not really. That single sentence doesn't refer to chakra binds or anything like that at all.

Wizards has been known to overrule itself at the same source, though (monks and gauntlets, anyone?). I just can't rely on what the Wizards says anymore. Though I always ruled that if you don't meet the prerequisites for reasons other than the PrC features, you'd lose the class benefits.

What, I can be a champion of evil without being evil? With being good? and would the Shadowbane Inquisitor's Absolute Conviction ability make sense otherwise?

[AtomicKitKat]

My general solution is to retain all Extraordinary class features, unless it's a Bonus Feat derived from a Pre-requisite Feat. That solves most of the problems, and the first part at least, has some precedent in the Barbarian.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

So whether the peices in Comp Warrior and Comp Arcane are the correct ruls or someone just remembering the 3.0 rules and assuming thye haven't changed is anyones guess.
I'd wager the latter.

The DMG is the primary source on Prestige Class Rules.

It takes a higher degree of intention to remove something over the course of a revision than it does to keep it in. In fact, some things get kept in by accident, such as the footnote about cone-shaped breath weapons for dragons in the Monster Manual.

The rules changed, and some people just weren't paying attention.

[Curmudgeon]

As I see it, the only way to not go schizoid when reading the rules is to interpret the requirements in Complete Warrior and Complete Arcane as applying to the prestige classes in those books only. This means there's no problem with the Ur-Priest in Complete Divine, because that book has no such rule to maintain prestige class abilities.

Short of nullifying the Complete Warrior/Complete Arcane rule, I can't think of any other position that works without making up house rules (such as "No prestige class abilities can invalidate membership in that prestige class.")

[Shhalahr Windrider]

As I see it, the only way to not go schizoid when reading the rules is to interpret the requirements in Complete Warrior and Complete Arcane as applying to the prestige classes in those books only. This means there's no problem with the Ur-Priest in Complete Divine, because that book has no such rule to maintain prestige class abilities.
But then you have to wonder why those Prestige Classes should have such a rule when no other does.

It's even easier to just say, "Hey someone screwed up when writing these. I think I'll just use the rules from the DMG instead."

[squishycube]

Not really. That single sentence doesn't refer to chakra binds or anything like that at all.
Actually it is:
"you only gain the benefits of the feat or prestige class as long as you continue to meet its requirements"
Notice how it says "the", a specific whats-it (don't know English word) and not a general whats-it. This "the" refers back to what they where talking about, not to things in general.

But slightly more on-topic:
There is a problem with the way RAW (does not) handle no longer meeting prereqs, for classes, PrCs and feats.
For specific cases, this is explained either in the standard rules (Monk, barbarian), or in the FAQ.
Often it is easy to extrapolate general rules from specific rules, because they are consistent. This is not the case here, the way this is handled is different in each case, or not present at all.
This means we as DM's must use our common sense (Shock Horror!) and judge things on a case-by-case basis, while harassing Wizards to do a better job.

I think there are certain things to keep in mind while doing the common sense thing:
There are precedents for losing abilities when you no longer meet the requirements. There is precedent for losing everything (paladin), precedent for losing certain things (barbarian) and precedent for not being able to progress further (monk).
In my opinion this means that all these solutions are reasonable to a certain extent, within certain situations.

Based on this I think I can make a few general remarks about judging the no-longer-meeting requirement scenario: (Each of these rules is intended as a guideline, not an unbendable rule.
In the case of feats, most prereqs simulate you having to be able to do certain things, you have to be quite dexterous to wield two weapons at the same time. If you are no longer able to full-fill those requirements, you are simply not able to use the feat.
For other feats (mostly exalted feats) you have to be allowed to use them. In the case of exalted feats, you gain 'divine favours', you have to be good to use them. Same applies as with other feats, but for a different reason.
Then there is PrC's. This is where it can get really iffy.
For some PrC's you have to be able to do certain things. If you can no longer do those things, you cannot use the abilities of the PrC, because they depend on that.
For other PrC's the requirements are more about what you are allowed to be when you enter that PrC. The Ur-priest is an example of this. Once you master the abilities of such a class, these abilities do not depend on the requirements.

Based on this I'd separate PrC requirements in two groups:
1. Those things you need to be able to do to do the stuff the PrC does.
2. Those things that are only 'tested' when you enter the PrC.

You don't worry about group 2. You do worry about group 1.
Note: The requirements in group 1 should be treated as one block. If you do not meet one the requirements, you meet nothing. This is to prevent players arguing as follows:
My character has PrC A with ability x. But I lost the requirement y. But y has nothing to do with x. So I can still use x. (Think Blackguard: Hide and Aura of Evil)

[Stephen_E]

Quote:
Originally Posted by FAQ
Can a soulmeld or its chakra bind allow you to meet the prerequisites for a feat or the requirements for a prestige class?
Yes, but you only gain the benefits of the feat or prestige class as long as you continue to meet its requirements. If you unshape the meld or change the chakra bind, you would lose the feat or prestige class benefits and wouldn’t be able to advance further in the prestige class.



Not really. That single sentence doesn't refer to chakra binds or anything like that at all.



Note, the 1st word of the sentance is "Yes," in reply to the question regarding Chakra bind and Soulmeld. Thus the sentance is refering to Chakra bind and Soulmeld. The 2nd sentance makes this even clearer. It is, to be blunt either poor reading or been disingenous to portray the statemnt as a general ruling. That isn't to say you can't make a generalisation from it (although I've mentioned why I'm not keen to in this specific case) but it would be the reader deciding to make a generalisation rather than the writer making it.

Stephen