A Prestige Class Question

[thecrimsondawn]

So I split a wonky build I was making into two different builds, and this opened up quite a few blank levels that I have been looking to fill. Upon doing some searching, I found 2 PrCs that would mesh very well together save one small issue...

One says "To qualify to become a mongrel, a character must meet the following requirements:"
"Special: Must not possess the Kinslayer or Resist Kindred feats."

and the other PrC I want to take states that you need the Kinslayer feat.

Would I be in my written right, to take the 5 levels of Mongrel without the feat, and then take the feat later to qualify for the other PrC?

The way I am reading it, the qualifications are only for taking levels in the class, and it says nothing about loosing the benefits of the class should you no longer qualify (such as Paladin's alignment shift), but I wanted to check here just in case someone knows of, or finds a rule or clause that says otherwise :)

[TheFamilarRaven]

There was a somewhat related question that came up in the simple Q&A thread. Basically, prestige classes are not written like feats. With feats the rules explicitly say you lose the benefit if you lose the prerequisite. But with a PrC, as you point out, have no such rules. Only that missing a prerequisite prevents taking levels in the class.

So yes. By RAW, you shouldn't lose any abilities gained by the Mongrel class if you later take the kinslayer feat. But you will never be able to take another level in the class afterwards (unless the feat gets retrained).

[Psyren]

This is one of the most divisive topics on these boards. Godspeed.

[KillianHawkeye]

Well, I know that D&D had some controversy about this issue due to two slightly different rules being published about what you lost when you stopped having a prestige class' required qualifications. One of the major issues was that many prestige classes were designed in such a way that they would self-disqualify (ex: Dragon Disciple).

I am not familiar enough with Pathfinder, however, to know whether or not they fixed this or even if there's a definitive answer, but they seem to have been a lot better about keeping up with errata and having slightly more consistent FAQ answers than WotC ever was.