Sneak Attack "class" ability and Craven

[schreier]

Craven has a prerequisite of "Sneak attack class feature, cannot be immune to fear."

I have seen a lot of notes recommending getting the Assassin's Stance from Tome of Battle to qualify for Craven.

Assassin's Stance says:
"While you are in this stance, you gain the sneak attack ability, if you do not already have it, which deals an extra 2d6 points of damage. If you already have the sneak attack class feature, your existing sneak attack ability deals an extra 2d6 points of damage. See the rogue class feature (PH 50) for a complete description of sneak attack."

It say "gain the sneak attack ability" without describing as a class ability. Do people have heartburn that it is not a "class ability" if granted by something other than a class, or is it the same thing?

[Doctor Despair]

Iirc, the only other time I've heard quibbling over getting X vs getting X as a class ability is in qualifying for MoMF using Divine Minion. In that case, too, I think the general consensus was that X works, although, as I'm sure will be the case here, there were staunch opponents to that reading. Browsing those threads could yield helpful prior discussion

[schreier]

Makes sense - there is no functional difference between a class ability and an ability. It is enough for a dm to say no if they want but not clear to force it

[Telonius]

If you're getting it through an item (something like an Assassination (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20070314a) weapon, or Shadow Hand Gloves keyed to Assassin's Stance), or from a temporary spell effect (like Hunter's Eye), I think there would be a lot more raised eyebrows. Something that's more permanent-ish, like actually having Assassin's Stance from Swordsage, isn't quite as airtight as being a Rogue, but it's generally a lot more acceptable. (Your class feature gave you access to stances and maneuvers, and your stance got you Sneak Attack, so your class feature gave you Sneak Attack). In either case, if you ever lost the ability to have sneak attack - either by setting down the magic item, having the spell dispelled or expire, or exiting the stance - you wouldn't get the benefit of the Craven feat until you regained Sneak Attack.

[Gruftzwerg]

By RAW "class feature" (or sole feature) ain't a defined term in 3.5 which allows us to fall back to general English definition and common sense.

Thus, sneak attack is a rogue class ability, since the primary source for the ability is the rogue class. So, no matter how you get it, it is a class ability.

It doesn't require you to get is from rogue nor from any other class. It is just demanding "sneak attack" that is generally defined as rogue "class feature". If you get thiis by a specific exception, you still get the rogues class feature sneak attack and not something else.

edit: see below

[Vaern]

By RAW "class feature" (or sole feature) ain't a defined term in 3.5

It is, actually. The 3.5 PHB glossary defines it as "Any special characteristic derived from a character class." If the ability is granted by something other than a character class, such as through a magic item or a spell effect, it is not a class feature.

Rogue may be the primary source for sneak attack, but the fact that the primary source for the mechanic happens to be a class feature doesn't mean the the mechanic itself is inherently a class feature regardless of how it's obtained. It only means that the rules listed take precedence in the event of a rulings conflict.

[Gruftzwerg]

It is, actually. The 3.5 PHB glossary defines it as "Any special characteristic derived from a character class." If the ability is granted by something other than a character class, such as through a magic item or a spell effect, it is not a class feature.

Rogue may be the primary source for sneak attack, but the fact that the primary source for the mechanic happens to be a class feature doesn't mean the the mechanic itself is inherently a class feature regardless of how it's obtained. It only means that the rules listed take precedence in the event of a rulings conflict.

Oh, I seem to have missed the glossary definition. Thx for pointing it out. Well then RAW is clear what a class feature is.

[schreier]

So RAW would not allow you to take Craven with your only source of Sneak attack damage being the stance.

[Crake]

So RAW would not allow you to take Craven with your only source of Sneak attack damage being the stance.

Well, considering that the sneak attack is being derived from a stance, which is itself a class feature, then the sneak attack is, by extension, also a class feature. Worth noting that there are in fact creatures that gain sneak attack as racial abilities, which this would seem to prevent, but, unless assassin's stance was gained via a feat, it would be considered a "class feature"

[Khedrac]

Well, considering that the sneak attack is being derived from a stance, which is itself a class feature, then the sneak attack is, by extension, also a class feature. Worth noting that there are in fact creatures that gain sneak attack as racial abilities, which this would seem to prevent, but, unless assassin's stance was gained via a feat, it would be considered a "class feature"

Disagree. The class feature is the ability to use manoeuvres not the "Sneak Attack".

This is easily demonstrated by comparing the manoeuvre to a spell that grants sneak attack and the class ability "Spellcasting".

In both cases the character gets to select which spell/manoeuvre to take and then only gains sneak attack by using that chosen spell/manoeuvre.

[Mordante]

Disagree. The class feature is the ability to use manoeuvres not the "Sneak Attack".

This is easily demonstrated by comparing the manoeuvre to a spell that grants sneak attack and the class ability "Spellcasting".

In both cases the character gets to select which spell/manoeuvre to take and then only gains sneak attack by using that chosen spell/manoeuvre.

Agreed, but depending on the player and how min/max the character is I'd still allow it as DM.

[Crake]

Disagree. The class feature is the ability to use manoeuvres not the "Sneak Attack".

This is easily demonstrated by comparing the manoeuvre to a spell that grants sneak attack and the class ability "Spellcasting".

In both cases the character gets to select which spell/manoeuvre to take and then only gains sneak attack by using that chosen spell/manoeuvre.

"Any special characteristic derived from a character class."

Stance is a characteristic derived from a character class. Stance grants the ability to use sneak attack. Ergo sneak attack is derived from a character class. I feel it's pretty cut and dry.

[Necroticplague]

(Your class feature gave you access to stances and maneuvers, and your stance got you Sneak Attack, so your class feature gave you Sneak Attack).

Counterpoint: Stance and Maneuvers can be acquired without any levels in initiation classes. So you can have, say, a feat giving you the stance. Ergo, something from a stance isn't intrinsically a class ability.

[Crake]

Counterpoint: Stance and Maneuvers can be acquired without any levels in initiation classes. So you can have, say, a feat giving you the stance. Ergo, something from a stance isn't intrinsically a class ability.

Correct, and neither are a myriad of other abilities. I did address this in an earlier post, stating that gaining assassin's stance with a feat would not count as a class feature.

[Khedrac]

"Any special characteristic derived from a character class."

Stance is a characteristic derived from a character class. Stance grants the ability to use sneak attack. Ergo sneak attack is derived from a character class. I feel it's pretty cut and dry.

On that logic a bonus feat is also a class feature so using a class's bonus feat to gain the stance would also count (but not a feat from levels/hit dice) - I am absolutely certain that it is cut and dry and it is not a class feature.

I think we will just have to agree to disagree.

[schreier]

I agree it is not a class feature as well - particularly since it says "you gain the sneak attack ability" not "class ability" in the description of Assassin's Stance

That being said - I would probably allow it as DM with rule zero

[liquidformat]

On that logic a bonus feat is also a class feature so using a class's bonus feat to gain the stance would also count (but not a feat from levels/hit dice) - I am absolutely certain that it is cut and dry and it is not a class feature.

I think we will just have to agree to disagree.

Honestly I think that logic chain is perfectly fine. For example martial study and martial stance are fighter bonus feats so if you take them as your fighter bonus feats I see no reason why you shouldn't qualify for Craven. Fighters deserve nice things too!


Iirc, the only other time I've heard quibbling over getting X vs getting X as a class ability is in qualifying for MoMF using Divine Minion. In that case, too, I think the general consensus was that X works, although, as I'm sure will be the case here, there were staunch opponents to that reading. Browsing those threads could yield helpful prior discussion
I have seen similar issues raised with Bamboo Spirit folk, Thorns, and so forth that gain 'class features' through their race. It's a little harder to justify with Divine Minion but in the case of Thorns and similar who have RHD since RHD are racial class levels they can qualify...

[Crake]

Honestly I think that logic chain is perfectly fine. For example martial study and martial stance are fighter bonus feats so if you take them as your fighter bonus feats I see no reason why you shouldn't qualify for Craven. Fighters deserve nice things too!

Yeah, I don't see an issue with that chain of logic either. Gained from class = class feature. Personally though, I think the notion that craven only works with a sneak attack class feature is simply the result of a writer not realising that sneak attack, or practically every other class feature, can be gained from other sources, and thus, specifying that it must be a class feature version is kinda stupid.

[Darg]

Yeah, I don't see an issue with that chain of logic either. Gained from class = class feature. Personally though, I think the notion that craven only works with a sneak attack class feature is simply the result of a writer not realising that sneak attack, or practically every other class feature, can be gained from other sources, and thus, specifying that it must be a class feature version is kinda stupid.

A lot of books seem to be written under the assumption that the corebooks are the only other books out there. I think a DM should be open to working with some things not expressly written in a book. There are a lot of lists that are pretty dated too.

[Crake]

A lot of books seem to be written under the assumption that the corebooks are the only other books out there. I think a DM should be open to working with some things not expressly written in a book. There are a lot of lists that are pretty dated too.

Well, I mean, the babau is a core monster with sneak attack as a racial ability rather than a class one, so even that's not congruent. I think it's more likely that the writer just assumed the only source of sneak attack was from classes, because honestly I feel like having to make a distinction between class or non-class feature is dumb. If you have the ability, you have the ability, it's source shouldn't really matter.

[Necroticplague]

Assassin's Stance is a class feature the same way Fireball is. By which I mean, it isn't. It's simply an option you can select for another ability.

The ability, of course, being Stances Known or Spellcasting, respectively.

So, even in the best case scenario, the 'chain' is that a class ability (Stances Known) gives you a not-a-class ability (Assassin's Stance), which in turn gives you another not-a-class ability (Sneak Attack).

[Crake]

Assassin's Stance is a class feature the same way Fireball is. By which I mean, it isn't. It's simply an option you can select for another ability.

The ability, of course, being Stances Known or Spellcasting, respectively.

So, even in the best case scenario, the 'chain' is that a class ability (Stances Known) gives you a not-a-class ability (Assassin's Stance), which in turn gives you another not-a-class ability (Sneak Attack).

That is certainly a way to look at it, but it is not the exclusive way of looking at it.

Ultimately though, I do personally think that the distinction in class ability or not should be irrelevant for qualification.

[Necroticplague]

That is certainly a way to look at it, but it is not the exclusive way of looking at it.

Ultimately though, I do personally think that the distinction in class ability or not should be irrelevant for qualification.

Oh, I agree wholeheartedely, there shouldn't be any such distinction. It serves no purpose but to limit build flexibility, and remove potentially interesting mechanical interactions. Neverless, there it is.