PDA

View Full Version : More GM Issues



Phillip0614
2008-06-04, 02:05 PM
Hey all! Thanks to everyone for all the feedback on the TWF post I made a few days ago...appreciate it! But now, my GM and I have gotten into another little rules debate.

Since my previous post, I've changed my character build to a Ranger/Scout that focuses on archery, and was planning on getting just four levels of Scout and the rest in Ranger, for the BAB and what-not, not to mention the free archery feats at levels 2, 6, and 11. After talking with my GM about it on the phone today, though, he's delivered the assertion that the wording of the Ranger's Combat Style ability in the PHB is such that he rules that since the Ranger is only treated AS IF he has the Rapid Shot, et. al., feats, then he doesn't ACTUALLY have them, and therefore they don't satisfy prerequisites. The prime example that I have is that he said the Ranger would not qualify for the Greater Manyshot feat, which requires Rapid Shot and Manyshot, since the character is only treated AS IF he has those feats, and doesn't actually possess them.

He's not listening to any reason I've put forth, and I was wondering if anyone here has any input that I can give him that would make the intent of the designers more apparent? Has this question (that being, Do the Ranger's Combat Style class ability feats meet prerequisites for feats higher up the chain?) ever been brought up to Wizards, or has the meaning of it simply always been as obvious as it seems to be (at least to me)?

sonofzeal
2008-06-04, 02:11 PM
He's got a point - it doesn't use the words "bonus feat" at any point. However, "treated as having" could easily include meeting requirements. You don't have those feats, but you're TREATED as if you have them, and if you have Rapid Shot and Manyshot, you qualify for Greater Manyshot.

ShellBullet
2008-06-04, 02:14 PM
Tell him that game designers didn't put those things for nothing, but they actually has to have effect.

Alternatively you could tell him to stop being such bastard.

Behold_the_Void
2008-06-04, 02:15 PM
As I recall it is possible to count as having the prerequisites for a feat with magic items or other things that give you to them temporarily or under certain specific conditions. You just lose access to all the feats should you stop using the item/meeting the prerequisites.

Torger
2008-06-04, 02:18 PM
Your DM's being deliberately obtuse, it seems. If you're "Treated as if" you have the feats, then, for all intents and purposed, you have them. Frankly, it sounds like you have a rubbish GM who's more interested in "winning" against the players than ensuring everyone is having fun.

Aleron
2008-06-04, 02:18 PM
Yup, treated as having and having are, in mechanical terms, the same thing. Greater Manyshot is, or should be, an available feat to you at this point as long as you meet the other pre-reqs, which is something you don't have to do for the combat style feature.

EDIT: Also, I know it's not 3.5 or even normal D&D, but in NwN, a Ranger that had archery actually got the feats at those levels, and qualified for later feats in that line if the other pre-reqs were met. Again, not actual D&D, but it's similar. :)

Keld Denar
2008-06-04, 02:19 PM
Combat Style (Ex)
At 2nd level, a ranger must select one of two combat styles to pursue: archery or two-weapon combat. This choice affects the characterís class features but does not restrict his selection of feats or special abilities in any way.

If the ranger selects archery, he is treated as having the Rapid Shot feat, even if he does not have the normal prerequisites for that feat.

If the ranger selects two-weapon combat, he is treated as having the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, even if he does not have the normal prerequisites for that feat.

The benefits of the rangerís chosen style apply only when he wears light or no armor. He loses all benefits of his combat style when wearing medium or heavy armor.

Its a virtual feat, which granted is kind of a wonky concept. Its treated as a feat with respect use, meeting prereqs, and satisfying conditions of entry into PrCs. If the ranger ever wears medium or heavy armor, however, the feat essentially "turns off" and so do any dependant feats.

You are right, your DM is wrong. I suggest hitting him with the PHB until he realizes this. If that fails, play a druid, shift into something nasty, and proceed to devour his entire campaign. :P

j/k on the devouring part.....

Singhilarity
2008-06-04, 02:20 PM
"Now, why, specifically, would I need the feats in order to gain this next one in the progression?"

"Because you need to be able to preform the skills required in order to do it"

"So, particular names of the skills aside, if I were able to do these things (Rapid Shot + Many Shot) I might be able to pull off a skill exactly the same as Greater Many Shot, even if, say, I called it by it's name in SWAHILI?"

Aleron
2008-06-04, 02:24 PM
"Now, why, specifically, would I need the feats in order to gain this next one in the progression?"

"Because you need to be able to preform the skills required in order to do it"

"So, particular names of the skills aside, if I were able to do these things (Rapid Shot + Many Shot) I might be able to pull off a skill exactly the same as Greater Many Shot, even if, say, I called it by it's name in SWAHILI?":biggrin: That sir just got Quote of the Day status and added to my sig. AWESOME!

sonofzeal
2008-06-04, 02:31 PM
Yup, treated as having and having are, in mechanical terms, the same thing.
Not quite true. You can't Embrace/Shun "virtual feats", but you could with Bonus Feats. Both help you meet prereq's though.

SamTheCleric
2008-06-04, 02:32 PM
You need to head back to the DM store... the one you've got is broken.

HellFencer
2008-06-04, 02:50 PM
Let's think about this... If you are "treated as having the rapid-shot feat", and a prerequisite for having many-shot (for instance) is "having the rapid-shot feat", then this becomes a VERY simple math concept.

Let me reiterate.

"treated as having the rapid-shot feat" = You have the rapid shot feat in all ways it could mean. Your character has the rapid-shot feat, but its just called "combat style".

Prerequisite = "You need to have the rapid-shot feat"

THUS,

If you are treated as having a feat, and you need to be treated as having the feat to get a feat, then you can get the feat. I don't see how this could be any simpler.


In these sorts of scenarios, I usually just opt for a new DM.

BrainFreeze
2008-06-04, 03:24 PM
Your DM really seams to have developed a rather serious case of a disease of "the stupid" you really should take him in to have it checked out. It can be fatal if left untreated.

On the note of having proof of this i'm sure the question was asked in one of the dragon magazines, just dont remember which. Check the FAQ.

Corolinth
2008-06-04, 04:33 PM
There is a very simple solution to your problem. Don't play this guy's campaign.

Tsotha-lanti
2008-06-04, 05:04 PM
You're "treated as if", so you do qualify. If you put on Medium or Heavy armor, you cease qualifying for the other feats you took, though. That's it.

FlyMolo
2008-06-04, 05:28 PM
There's a chapter in Sword and Fist? Or CWarrior, perhaps, about virtual feats, and how they allow prerequisites.

It's somewhere, and it invalidates your DMs argument. Neatly, I think. If you really have to, get him to think about "treated as having". If you're treated as having this feat, shouldn't you be treated as having it for the purposes of other feats?

HellFencer
2008-06-04, 06:57 PM
If you're treated as having this feat, shouldn't you be treated as having it for the purposes of other feats?

Finally! Someone said what I couldn't seem to say. ;)