Do races with Powerful Build qualify for warhulk?

[Desiani]

I am wanting to turn my goliath psi-warrior into a warhulk for various RP reasons that have happened. I am 7th level and plan on going into warhulk next level up.

The way me other player with a powerful build char, half ogre I think from dreamscarred Psionics unleased, see the wording is that he is considered 1 size larger. It doesn't say wether or not it does or doesn't allow entry into Prcs. Hence why I'm asking yall.

[Flickerdart]

It depends on the wording of your particular race (third parties aren't known for getting wording right) but normal Powerful Build from the half-giant and goliath does not allow you to count as Large for any purpose other than what it lists.

[Studoku]

Rules as written, no.


Powerful Build: The physical stature of a goliath lets him functionin many ways as if he were one size category larger. Whenever a goliath is subject to a size modifier or special size modifier for an opposed check (such as during grapple checks, bull rush attempts, and trip attempts), the goliath is treated as one size larger if doing so is advantageous to him. A goliath is also considered to be one size larger when determining whether a creature’s special attacks based on size (such as improved grab or swallow whole) can affect him. A goliath can use weapons designed for a creature one size larger without penalty. However, his space and reach remain those of a creature of his actual size. The benefits of this racial trait stack with the effects of powers, abilities, and spells that change the subject’s size category.
Emphasis mine: note that none of the "many ways" listed include "qualifying for prestige classes".

[Shoat]

Powerful Build specifically limits itself to "you are treated as one size larger for this following list of stuff", so it doesn't allow entry into large-only prestiges.

However, that doesn't mean it's unavailable to you:
Maybe you can convince your DM to let you take it on the basis of the Expansion power (similar to how any sane DM will allow you to take natural-weapon related stuff as a psychic warrior) due to you being able to be large for 70 minutes at a time (it's rather easy to keep up since it costs only 3 PP a pop and you should have around 20), but of course with the restriction that you only profit from it's features while you're large.

[HurinTheCursed]

When feats such as knockback came out, they chose to support the now existing powerful build trait and to integrate it as a possible prerequisite.

When the Miniature handbook came out, and thus the warhulk, powerful build didn't exist at the time. Hence it could not have been integrated in the prerequisite (IMO, it's the same with hulking beast from dragonlance campaign setting).

If your DM has no problem with having a warhulk PC, that the player is fine with playing one, I believe he should allow the PC to be a warhulk.

[OldTrees1]

RAW: No.

However I see no problem with allowing it. It makes sense and is not unbalanced.

However if your DM disagrees with my estimate, then you could always take 1 level of Goliath Barbarian to get Mountain Rage which does by RAW qualify for Warhulk.

[Desiani]

When feats such as knockback came out, they chose to support the now existing powerful build trait and to integrate it as a possible prerequisite.

When the Miniature handbook came out, and thus the warhulk, powerful build didn't exist at the time. Hence it could not have been integrated in the prerequisite (IMO, it's the same with hulking beast from dragonlance campaign setting).

If your DM has no problem with having a warhulk PC, that the player is fine with playing one, I believe he should allow the PC to be a warhulk.

What do you mean OK with war hulk pc? I am under the assumption it's available to players because it doesn't say npc only.

[Threadnaught]

Races of Stone has a bunch of Feats that the Goliath qualifies for because of its Powerful Build racial trait.

Prerequisite for these Feats involves Size Large or larger, which is what Powerful Build acts as a substitute for. I do not believe Feats are listed as one of the "many ways" that you shared with us Studoku.


If the rules allow Goliaths to be classed as Large for Feats, there's no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to class as Large for PrCs. This is one of those cases where RAW gives you a few examples, but leaves a lot to the reader's imagination.


Oh but it doesn't specifically list every little thing Powerful Build does and allows a Character to qualify for.

Just as it doesn't specifically say Humanoids can see and hear. Oh, then Humans can't take Ranks in Spot or Listen when they're not Class Skills because reductio ad absurdum.
I don't think anyone appreciates the argument I've given, but it's in favour of allowing it and has RAW support.

[Red Fel]

If the rules allow Goliaths to be classed as Large for Feats, there's no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to class as Large for PrCs. This is one of those cases where RAW gives you a few examples, but leaves a lot to the reader's imagination.

Actually, it's worth noting that a Goliath Barbarian can take a racial substitution level that turns Rage into Mountain Rage. Mountain Rage makes you actually large, as opposed to functionally large, while raging. As a result, anything that requires large size is satisfied, but only while you're raging.

There are also several templates which are appropriate for PCs which give you a size increase, such as the Half-Ogre and Half-Minotaur templates.

You mention DSP, however, which is Pathfinder; is this a 3.P game? Because that may change your options. For example, the Giant (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/templates/simple-template-giant-cr-1) and Giantblooded Creature (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/templates/giantblooded-creature-cr-3) templates offer size increases, making it fairly straightforward.

[Flickerdart]

Prerequisite for these Feats involves Size Large or larger, which is what Powerful Build acts as a substitute for. I do not believe Feats are listed as one of the "many ways" that you shared with us Studoku.
The feats make a special exception for Powerful Build because they need to. That's yet more proof that it doesn't qualify.

[XionUnborn01]

The feats make a special exception for Powerful Build because they need to. That's yet more proof that it doesn't qualify.

I agree. If they intended powerful build to make them count as Large for all purposes, they would've said that. Instead they give a specific list of things it does and then made feats that made an exception for them.

I seem to recall a book with some feats that had PreReqs something like: Size large or larger, or Powerful Build ability.

I believe it was from a book but maybe it's something that I saw online.

[Necroticplague]

I seem to recall a book with some feats that had PreReqs something like: Size large or larger, or Powerful Build ability.

A few things in races of stone has something along the lines of:

Prerequisite: Large size (Goliath's qualify due to their Powerful Build racial quality)

People have already said it several time, but I'll throw in as well: No. Powerful Build lets you qualify as larger for very specific purposes (it's basically Jutonbrud+wield bigger weapons). Qualifying for feats or PRCs is not one of those purposes. The feats with which it does work specifically call it out as an exception, which is a good indicator that it isn't that way by default.

[HurinTheCursed]

What do you mean OK with war hulk pc? I am under the assumption it's available to players because it doesn't say npc only.
No, the problem I would see are
1) meeting the prerequisite, easy or difficult according to the DM's open-mindedness
2) playing a PC that cannot have ranks in any mental skill but intimidate. OK for dungeon crawling but it can be limitating to play.

[daremetoidareyo]

No, the problem I would see are
1) meeting the prerequisite, easy or difficult according to the DM's open-mindedness
2) playing a PC that cannot have ranks in any mental skill but intimidate. OK for dungeon crawling but it can be limitating to play.

Which makes taking warhulk on the basis of the expansion power a fun possibility. You get big and dumb when you activate it. If you need some of dem mental skillz, you just shrink back down.

[atemu1234]

Actually, it's worth noting that a Goliath Barbarian can take a racial substitution level that turns Rage into Mountain Rage. Mountain Rage makes you actually large, as opposed to functionally large, while raging. As a result, anything that requires large size is satisfied, but only while you're raging.

There are also several templates which are appropriate for PCs which give you a size increase, such as the Half-Ogre and Half-Minotaur templates.

You mention DSP, however, which is Pathfinder; is this a 3.P game? Because that may change your options. For example, the Giant (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/templates/simple-template-giant-cr-1) and Giantblooded Creature (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/templates/giantblooded-creature-cr-3) templates offer size increases, making it fairly straightforward.

Heck, you may even get the DM to allow the simple template for a size increase.

[Mr Adventurer]

Is there a psionic version of the Rage spell? Would that trigger Mountain Rage?

EDIT: Or... you know. Expansion.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

I am wanting to turn my goliath psi-warrior into a warhulk for various RP reasons that have happened. I am 7th level and plan on going into warhulk next level up.

The way me other player with a powerful build char, half ogre I think from dreamscarred Psionics unleased, see the wording is that he is considered 1 size larger. It doesn't say wether or not it does or doesn't allow entry into Prcs. Hence why I'm asking yall.

If it's the standard Powerful Build ability, then nope! I'm not familiar with Dreamscarred Press stuff, so I can't comment directly on that, though.

[Andezzar]

Which makes taking warhulk on the basis of the expansion power a fun possibility. You get big and dumb when you activate it. If you need some of dem mental skillz, you just shrink back down.That's not how it works. Without the broken rules from CArc or CW, you only ever need to meet the prerequisites when taking the first level in a PrC. And there is no rule that the PrC or some class features of it go away if you no longer qualify for it. The rules in CArc and CW only apply to the PrCs in those books respectively.

Once you take the 1st level in warhulk you cannot use your skill ranks until you remove all warhulk levels.

[Necroticplague]

That's not how it works. Without the broken rules from CArc or CW, you only ever need to meet the prerequisites when taking the first level in a PrC. And there is no rule that the PrC or some class features of it go away if you no longer qualify for it. The rules in CArc and CW only apply to the PrCs in those books respectively.

Once you take the 1st level in warhulk you cannot use your skill ranks until you remove all warhulk levels.

Can we get a citation on the bolded part? The rules involved (at least for CWar, haven't looked at CArc yet) don't specify 'prestige classes in this book', or even the synonymous 'martial prestige classes' It just says 'prestige classes', a statement that applies to all of them. You could try 'primary vs. secondary source' rule, but the DMG is quite on the subject of what happens if you no longer qualify, so this isn't contradicting the primary source.

quote of relevent section:
Meeting Class Requirements:
It’s possible for a character to take levels in a prestige class and later be in a position where the character no longer qualifies to be a member of the class. An alignment change, levels lost because of character death, or the loss of a magic item that granted an important ability are examples of events that can make a character ineli-gible to advance farther in a prestige class.
If a character no longer meets the requirements for a prestige class, he or she loses the benefit of any class features or other special abilities granted by the class. The character retains Hit Dice gained from advancing in the class as well as any improvements to base attack bonus and base save bonuses that the class provided.

[jiriku]

Races of Stone writes a prerequisite that says "Size Large or larger (goliaths qualify by virtue of their powerful build racial trait)."

There are two ways to interpret this. Some see two rules: (a) Large+ is required and (b) powerful build is an alternate qualification method. I see where they're coming from, but I disagree. I see only one rule here: Large+ is required. The parenthetical text is an explanation of how to interpret the preceding rule; it is advice for the DM on how to decide what "Large" means in this context. Now, if the parenthetical text is a rule, then it applies only to the feat where it appears. But if it is advice, then it applies for all similar situations. This interpretation permits us to establish the general principle that powerful build is an acceptable substitute for being large when meeting prerequisites. This interpretation also reinforces the intent of powerful build: it lets a Medium character fight like a giant. However, your DM will have to decide which of these two interpretations to use.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Can we get a citation on the bolded part? The rules involved (at least for CWar, haven't looked at CArc yet) don't specify 'prestige classes in this book', or even the synonymous 'martial prestige classes' It just says 'prestige classes', a statement that applies to all of them. You could try 'primary vs. secondary source' rule, but the DMG is quite on the subject of what happens if you no longer qualify, so this isn't contradicting the primary source.

quote of relevent section:

One frequently cited counterexample is the existence of the Dragon Disciple PrC in the DMG/SRD. At DD 10, you gain the half-dragon template, so you no longer qualify for the class on the basis of race, so you lose your class features, including the dragon type granted by the half-dragon template. Because you're no longer a dragon, you qualify for DD and regain all your class features including the template which causes you to lose all your class features again. And so on and so on forever. I find the presence of self-negating PrCs to be compelling evidence that the CWar/CArc rules only apply to what's in those books.

[jiriku]

Or it could be compelling evidence that the designers expected you to assume that effects do not generally self-negate.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Except there's nothing written that would indicate that. The CWar rule is quite clear:

If a character no longer meets the requirements for a prestige class, he or she loses the benefit of any class features or other special abilities granted by the class.

There are no listed exceptions.

[jiriku]

QR, I would respectfully submit that your position, while logical, is more intelligent than it is wise. The game rules are not a legal document or a set of government specifications. They were written by artsy creatives, not by lawyers, logic professors, or bureaucrats. I guarantee you that no one on the Complete Warrior design team ever said, "Wait, before we publish this paragraph, let's take several days and review every 3rd edition prestige class ever published in any sourcebook to make sure there won't be any minor semantic problems with our text!" I submit that you are missing the forest for the trees.

[Necroticplague]

One frequently cited counterexample is the existence of the Dragon Disciple PrC in the DMG/SRD. At DD 10, you gain the half-dragon template, so you no longer qualify for the class on the basis of race, so you lose your class features, including the dragon type granted by the half-dragon template. Because you're no longer a dragon, you qualify for DD and regain all your class features including the template which causes you to lose all your class features again. And so on and so on forever. I find the presence of self-negating PrCs to be compelling evidence that the CWar/CArc rules only apply to what's in those books.
The fact that some classes are dysfunctional does not change how the rules work. The rules apply everywhere unless specified otherwise.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Err. No. This is the old conflict between RAI and RAW. You're looking at rules, finding them wanting and choosing an interpretation that makes them work for you. And that's nice and all, but it's not the rules as they are written.

What happens with the RAW is that there's a conflict between some PrCs and the de-qualification clause in CWar/CArc. That needs to be resolved somehow. Globally applying that clause is the cause of, not the solution to, the conflict. Handwaving that clause away for some classes in some cases but not all cases just makes stuff more complicated. Applying the clause narrowly, meanwhile, just negates every one of those conflicts. And what evidence is there that a narrow application is correct? Well, for one, the de-qualification clause wasn't reprinted in the 3.5 DMG, or added to the errata, or added to the SRD, or written up in a WotC online supplement. It appears nowhere in the core rules, or in any widely-distributed official medium. It doesn't even appear in the entire Complete set (good thing, too, because it'd break Ur-Priest), or in any of the subsequent books. I see no evidence that it was ever intended to apply to anything beyond the scope of the books it appears in.

[Andezzar]

QR, I would respectfully submit that your position, while logical, is more intelligent than it is wise. The game rules are not a legal document or a set of government specifications. They were written by artsy creatives, not by lawyers, logic professors, or bureaucrats. I guarantee you that no one on the Complete Warrior design team ever said, "Wait, before we publish this paragraph, let's take several days and review every 3rd edition prestige class ever published in any sourcebook to make sure there won't be any minor semantic problems with our text!" I submit that you are missing the forest for the trees.


Well they better did that, since both distinct rules are completely dysfunctional, as they offer no way to get back whatever they remove (it's different stuff in each book). All PrCs with a spellcasting prerequisite in those books also autodisqualify by sleeping or otherwise becoming unable to cast a spell, by strict interpretation every time it is not the character's turn(and he hasn't prepared 2 immediate action spell of the correct level).

Most likely someone just paraphrased what the 3.0 DMG said about PrCs and didn't know/ignored that they work differently in 3.5.

I cannot at the moment find the explicit reason why the CArc rule does not apply to other PrCs, but it is implicit by only giving a couple of classes a feature that causes the class to be stripped of some of its power (paladin, cleric, blackguard). Otherwise you gain class features and you can use them.

The CW rule odes not apply to PrCs in other books because that rule is under the heading Martial Prestige Classes. There are no PrCs in other books that are named Martial PrCs.

[Necroticplague]

Err. No. This is the old conflict between RAI and RAW. You're looking at rules, finding them wanting and choosing an interpretation that makes them work for you. And that's nice and all, but it's not the rules as they are written.
Actually, that's what you're doing. I'm the one going 'the rules are the rules, and they always apply', while you're trying to create a rule that isn't written ('the rules in CWar only apply to PRCs in that book') out of thin air based on some precedence caused by a dysfunctional rules entity (DD).


What happens with the RAW is that there's a conflict between some PrCs and the de-qualification clause in CWar/CArc. That needs to be resolved somehow. Globally applying that clause is the cause of, not the solution to, the conflict. Handwaving that clause away for some classes in some cases but not all cases just makes stuff more complicated. Applying the clause narrowly, meanwhile, just negates every one of those conflicts. And what evidence is there that a narrow application is correct? Well, for one, the de-qualification clause wasn't reprinted in the 3.5 DMG, or added to the errata, or added to the SRD, or written up in a WotC online supplement. It appears nowhere in the core rules, or in any widely-distributed official medium. It doesn't even appear in the entire Complete set (good thing, too, because it'd break Ur-Priest), or in any of the subsequent books. I see no evidence that it was ever intended to apply to anything beyond the scope of the books it appears in.

And.....? That only establishes that they didn't think the rules through very thoroughly, not that the rules are actually any different. You said it yourself, the only thing you have is intent, not any actual rule. And it not being intended doesn't make it not true.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Actually, that's what you're doing. I'm the one going 'the rules are the rules, and they always apply', while you're trying to create a rule that isn't written ('the rules in CWar only apply to PRCs in that book') out of thin air based on some precedence caused by a dysfunctional rules entity (DD).



When you find a disagreement between two D&D® rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees.

Another example of primary vs. secondary sources involves book and topic precedence. The Player's Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for playing PC races, and for using base class descriptions. If you find something on one of those topics from the DUNGEON MASTER's Guide or the Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player's Handbook, you should assume the Player's Handbook is the primary source. The DUNGEON MASTER's Guide is the primary source for topics such as magic item descriptions, special material construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities. Note: The most recent updates are shaded like this.

The DMG is the primary source for PrCs. The de-qualification clause in CWar/CArc has never been reprinted elsewhere, including in later editions of the DMG; the Premium Edition, which contains all then-existing errata and published in Sept. 2012, for example. There is no reason to believe it applies broadly.

[Flickerdart]

The DMG is the primary source for PrCs. The de-qualification clause in CWar/CArc has never been reprinted elsewhere, including in later editions of the DMG; the Premium Edition, which contains all then-existing errata and published in Sept. 2012, for example. There is no reason to believe it applies broadly.
"Primary source" is utterly irrelevant when the rules do not conflict.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

"Primary source" is utterly irrelevant when the rules do not conflict.

PrCs in the DMG cannot exist in the rules from CWar. That is, in fact, a conflict.

[jiriku]

People certainly disagree on RAW vs RAI debates. But I definitely fall into the school of thought that "RAW" is a myth -- the rules were never intended to be usable without commonsense intepretation. The designers wrote that themselves, and assigned the DM the task of arbitrating the rules and resolving the (expected) contradictions.

Remember, people like you and I who will argue the semantics of this line or that line in the rulebook are not mainstream D&D players. We are the fringe. Mainstream players call us rules lawyers, and they mean it as a disparaging term for people who try to use the rules too legalistically. The designers didn't write their rules to suit our tastes. They wrote for the mainstream crowd that just wants to have a good time bashing orcs.

Still, you're right. We do have a rules conflict, or at least an ambiguity. What guideline is the DM supposed to follow when arbitrating this sort of thing? The DMG (page 6) advises: "Look to any similar situation that is covered in a rulebook. Try to extrapolate from what you see presented there and apply it to the current circumstance.... Choose the rule that you like the best, then stick with it for the rest of the campaign." So we have explicit instructions to consider context, extrapolate, and to consider personal preference (rather than logic or semantics) when resolving apparent conflicts.

Now, what does powerful build let you do? It makes you big, so big that you count as large some of the time, even though you're Medium. Does warhulk explicitly allow you to get in with powerful build? Well, no, it doesn't, but on the other hand powerful build was written afterwards so we can understand why it's not mentioned. Is there precedent for using powerful build to meet prerequisites that require Large size? Yes, there are several places we can find where it does exactly that. Is it therefore reasonable for a DM to "extrapolate from what you see presented there and apply it to the current circumstance" to read warhulk's "Large" requirement to mean "Large or possessing powerful build"? Yes, it is reasonable to do so. Might the DM see that as "the rule you like best"? Sure, a big, hulk-smash goliath sounds like fun to me.

[Necroticplague]

The DMG is the primary source for PrCs. The de-qualification clause in CWar/CArc has never been reprinted elsewhere, including in later editions of the DMG; the Premium Edition, which contains all then-existing errata and published in Sept. 2012, for example. There is no reason to believe it applies broadly.

I already addressed this in an earlier post, primary source rule only comes up when the rules contradict. The DMG is utterly silent on what happens if you no longer qualify. Thus, CWar is filling in a hole, not overriding anything from the DMG.

[Flickerdart]

PrCs in the DMG cannot exist in the rules from CWar. That is, in fact, a conflict.
They can totally exist. Risen Martyr's capstone literally kills you, and then you become a petitioner with no levels at all, so self-removing PrCs are hardly nonexistent in the game.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

They can totally exist. Risen Martyr's capstone literally kills you, and then you become a petitioner with no levels at all, so self-removing PrCs are hardly nonexistent in the game.

Any 3.5 examples?

[atemu1234]

Any 3.5 examples?

Book of Exalted Deeds is 3.5.

Granted, Risen Martyr sucks.

[Curmudgeon]

Can we get a citation on the bolded part? The rules involved (at least for CWar, haven't looked at CArc yet) don't specify 'prestige classes in this book', or even the synonymous 'martial prestige classes' It just says 'prestige classes', a statement that applies to all of them.
The rule (on page 16) is under the heading of THE MARTIAL PRESTIGE CLASSES. The point of a header ("one of the chief parts or points of a written or oral discourse; a main division of a subject, theme, or topic") is to establish the context for the following material, so we just need to establish that that's the case for this particular header. At the same level of scope as the Meeting Class Requirements paragraph is a paragraph which begins with:
Most of these classes have combat-oriented requirements. Obviously the heading applies to that paragraph, so it reasonably applies to all the paragraphs until the next heading: all the statements under THE MARTIAL PRESTIGE CLASSES apply specifically to the martial prestige classes. To the best of my knowledge, "Martial Prestige Classes" is a term that is only used for those classes in Complete Warrior.

[Necroticplague]

Remember, people like you and I who will argue the semantics of this line or that line in the rulebook are not mainstream D&D players. We are the fringe. Mainstream players call us rules lawyers, and they mean it as a disparaging term for people who try to use the rules too legalistically. The designers didn't write their rules to suit our tastes. They wrote for the mainstream crowd that just wants to have a good time bashing orcs.
Kinda hard to believe this, given that the main other product the company makes has rules written like a lawbook.

Still, you're right. We do have a rules conflict, or at least an ambiguity.
Not really, it's pretty clear-cut. Warhulk requires you to be Large. A Medium creature with Powerful Build is still Medium (though it can wield weapons for a Large creature, and is considered to be large when determining whether size-based special attacks can effect them, as well as for purpose of combat maneuvers).


Now, what does powerful build let you do? It makes you big, so big that you count as large some of the time, even though you're Medium. Powerful Build isn't necessarily linked to size (as shown by the Stoneboned template). All it does is let you count as being bigger for three purposes: What weapons you wield, whether you can be effected by things like Swallow Whole, and you bonus to grapple, bull-rush, trip and co.


Does warhulk explicitly allow you to get in with powerful build? Well, no, it doesn't, but on the other hand powerful build was written afterwards so we can understand why it's not mentioned. Is there precedent for using powerful build to meet prerequisites that require Large size? Yes, there are several places we can find where it does exactly that. Is it therefore reasonable for a DM to "extrapolate from what you see presented there and apply it to the current circumstance" to read warhulk's "Large" requirement to mean "Large or possessing powerful build"? Yes, it is reasonable to do so. Might the DM see that as "the rule you like best"? Sure, a big, hulk-smash goliath sounds like fun to me.
What seems reasonable to one is not necessarily what seems reasonable to another, and certainly doesn't help answering a question about if it does by default. People will always rule 0 and houserule things regardless of what the rules say, so there's there's no need to answer a rules question with 'you can houerule it such a way'.

[jiriku]

If it was clear-cut, how do you explain the lack of consensus in this thread? We have a great number of intelligent people who have solid system mastery, each of whom has a slightly different answer to the OP's question. This is a textbook example of something that is not clear-cut. You may strongly support your view of the rules, but "clear-cut" occurs when many people consider the same answer to be obviously correct, not when you personally have an answer that you consider to be obviously correct.

The word 'build' in this context refers to physique. When we say in the real world that someone has "a powerful build", we mean that they have bulky, massive muscles. As such we are definitely talking about how heroically proportioned such a creature would be. If I told you "I have a powerful build", you would hardly imagine me to be scrawny or slender (disclaimer: I do not have a powerful build :smalltongue:).

I draw a distinction between making something up, which is a "house rule", and deciding whether something is a general precedent or narrow exception (that is called "interpreting the rules"). The heart of this discussion is whether certain text printed in Races of Stone should be interpreted as applying to a narrow selection of feats, or whether it constitutes a general rule of thumb to be applied in many situations. We are talking about interpreting the rules, not creating a house rule.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Book of Exalted Deeds is 3.5.

Granted, Risen Martyr sucks.

You're correct. I thought that BoED was late 3.0; BoVD is but BoED was published about three months after the changeover.

Now, that being said, I don't see anywhere where Risen Martyr disqualifies itself from the PrC. Yeah, in most instances finishing that 10th level means the player loses the character (I guess you could have a campaign that does stuff in the Upper Planes?). But the character doesn't stop being an x Y/Risen Martyr 10. It just irrevocably plane shifts to the Upper Planes. We can all agree that the class is stupid and awful. What part of the PrC causes it to no longer qualify for itself?

[jiriku]

and then you become a petitioner with no levels at all

That part. It's not written into the prestige class. It's a consequence of the rules for being dead. I'm not sure if I agree with Flicker on that one, but that's what he's referring to.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

That part. It's not written into the prestige class. It's a consequence of the rules for being dead. I'm not sure if I agree with Flicker on that one, but that's what he's referring to.

Mhm. Though...


(A) risen martyr is an exalted character who continues in his
earthly existence after his martyrdom, rather than entering the
ranks of the petitioners on the celestial planes, in order to finish
some unfulfilled task.

The word 'petitioner' only comes up four times in BoED; the quote is the only example relevant to the Risen Martyr (or even to being dead!). Per the wording of the RM capstone, it seems like the RM skips being a petitioner completely.

[jiriku]

I think you have a point there. Although at this juncture, we've gone rather far afield from goliath warhulks.

[Necroticplague]

If it was clear-cut, how do you explain the lack of consensus in this thread? We have a great number of intelligent people who have solid system mastery, each of whom has a slightly different answer to the OP's question. This is a textbook example of something that is not clear-cut. You may strongly support your view of the rules, but "clear-cut" occurs when many people consider the same answer to be obviously correct, not when you personally have an answer that you consider to be obviously correct. Well, a solid good half of the thread (before all the arguing started) was people saying the exact same thing (and keep in mind, the latter half has devolved mostly into discussion about losing PRC levels). That some people are capable of twisting obvious truths into falsehoods through creative processes says nothing about what the truth is.


I draw a distinction between making something up, which is a "house rule", and deciding whether something is a general precedent or narrow exception (that is called "interpreting the rules"). The heart of this discussion is whether certain text printed in Races of Stone should be interpreted as applying to a narrow selection of feats, or whether it constitutes a general rule of thumb to be applied in many situations. We are talking about interpreting the rules, not creating a house rule.
And it's completely unreasonable to take a line from prerequisites (which are inherently self-referential and narrow) about specific feats (which are not PRCs), and somehow expand it into 'powerful build counts as large for purposes of qualifying for all PRCs and feats. After all, if that was the case, those feats wouldn't need that line, would they?

[jiriku]

I have refrained from calling anyone in this thread "completely unreasonable", nor would I accuse anyone of "twisting obvious truths into falsehoods". You might wish to consider the same level of conduct for yourself.

We are discussing a rules interpretation, neh? Let's stick with that.

[daremetoidareyo]

I assumed that psychic warrior expansion as qualifications would require house ruling. But the clause about complete warrior prestige class disqualification points to a solution.

[Andezzar]

I assumed that psychic warrior expansion as qualifications would require house ruling.No houserules neded, just as with any other temporary qualification, but if you cannot manifest expansion 24/7 you must still make sure to have it on when you level up.

But the clause about complete warrior prestige class disqualification points to a solution.How so?

[Necroticplague]

I have refrained from calling anyone in this thread "completely unreasonable", nor would I accuse anyone of "twisting obvious truths into falsehoods". You might wish to consider the same level of conduct for yourself.

We are discussing a rules interpretation, neh? Let's stick with that.

I did not call you completely unreasonable (if i thought you were such, I would not being trying to reason with you), I said your interpretation was, because it takes something very, very narrow (goliaths qualify for this feat), and expands it into something very, very broad (PB lets you qualify for both PRCs and feats), without any apparent reason to show that this is the case. Prerequisite lines are inherently very narrow because of what their function is (they only tell you about the prereqs for this feat, not some other one).

[HurinTheCursed]

By RAW, no, powerful build is not enough.
By RAI, I believe it is.

RAi development:
If Miniatures Handbook had come out after Races of Stone, I'm pretty sure the powerful build would have been included in the requirements as it was for some Races of Stone prerequisite (if the writer had enough knowledge of the product line). The same way, I believe Hulking Brute from DLCS would have become Powerful Build if Races of Stone had been published before, one of the Dragonlance writer even wrote it was a great idea to allow Hulking Brute to work as Powerful Build or even large prerequisite when I suggested that.
There were few but usually clever exemples with some features / feats specifically counting as another regarding prerequisites. If it doesn't endanger the campaign balance, being more open-minded for prerequisite makes the game better by allowing the players to play what they want rather than what they are forced to.

[Threadnaught]

I did not call you completely unreasonable (if i thought you were such, I would not being trying to reason with you), I said your interpretation was, because it takes something very, very narrow (goliaths qualify for this feat), and expands it into something very, very broad (PB lets you qualify for both PRCs and feats), without any apparent reason to show that this is the case. Prerequisite lines are inherently very narrow because of what their function is (they only tell you about the prereqs for this feat, not some other one).

This does look a little off to me.

The interpretation appears to be more "PB may let you qualify for PrCs and Feats, ask your DM."
Than anything definitive.

[Necroticplague]

This does look a little off to me.

The interpretation appears to be more "PB may let you qualify for PrCs and Feats, ask your DM."
Than anything definitive.

Which is a useless non-answer. 'Ask you DM' can be an answer to literally any DnD rules question, so it's useless as an answer.

[nyjastul69]

Which is a useless non-answer. 'Ask you DM' can be an answer to literally any DnD rules question, so it's useless as an answer.

It's not useless if that's the actual answer. That's the only answer given in the RAW thread at times.

[OldTrees1]

Which is a useless non-answer. 'Ask you DM' can be an answer to literally any DnD rules question, so it's useless as an answer.

An incorrect answer is worse than a useless answer and the qualifier "but ask your DM" is far from useless.