Heya, looking for serious answers to help inform a friend

[Kaelik]

Fighters, rogues, ninjas, no such fucking clauses. The term is prerequisite as in REQUIRED.

You are an idiot. The default rule for feats is that you have to meet the prerequisites.

The default rule in 3e for bonus feats is that you don't have to. We know this because is fucking says so in the rules for bonus feats (all) as opposed to bonus feats for a specific class.

If there is not a clause, you don't automatically have the opposite of that clause, you have the default. The default is that bonus feats don't have to meet pre reqs.

It's some serious willful ignorance on your part to ignore that the default rule for bonus feats is that you don't have to meet pre reqs.

[Mask_De_H]

Since this tread is about Pathfinder, I will just stick to talking about that:

Now, I just found that the Ninja, Rogue, and the like have to meet the requirements for the feat.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-cl ... lents/feat

So that means that the ninja will have to meet the prerequisites first before getting the feat.

That's the Rogue one. Ninja's bonus feat doesn't work the same way, since it's not "as the Rogue Advanced Talent" They even have different names:

Combat Trick: A ninja who selects this trick gains a bonus combat feat.

Also, the clause you're looking at is for any other class to take it as one of their givens, not as a bonus.

[DMReckless]

Fighters, rogues, ninjas, no such fucking clauses. The term is prerequisite as in REQUIRED.

You are an idiot. The default rule for feats is that you have to meet the prerequisites.

The default rule in 3e for bonus feats is that you don't have to. We know this because is fucking says so in the rules for bonus feats (all) as opposed to bonus feats for a specific class.

If there is not a clause, you don't automatically have the opposite of that clause, you have the default. The default is that bonus feats don't have to meet pre reqs.

It's some serious willful ignorance on your part to ignore that the default rule for bonus feats is that you don't have to meet pre reqs.

We're talking about Pathfinder, you fucking moron. Show me where in Pathfinder it says what your ignorant ass assumes is the default. The default is the Prerequisite in Pathfinder. Prove me wrong.

[Edit:Pathfinder Wrote: Prerequisites

Some feats have prerequisites. Your character must have the indicated ability score, class feature, feat, skill, base attack bonus, or other quality designated in order to select or use that feat. A character can gain a feat at the same level at which he gains the prerequisite.

A character can't use a feat if he loses a prerequisite, but he does not lose the feat itself. If, at a later time, he regains the lost prerequisite, he immediately regains full use of the feat that prerequisite enables.]

[Pathfinder did NOT write anything about bonus feats superceding the Prerequisite clause; not anywhere I can find, at any rate.]

Edit the second: Hey, just for shits and giggles, why don't you link me to this bonus feats(all) rule in 3e you're so keen on too, maybe it'll help me find it in Pathfinder.

[DSMatticus]

We're talking about Pathfinder, you fucking moron. Show me where in Pathfinder it says what your ignorant ass assumes is the default. The default is the Prerequisite in Pathfinder. Prove me wrong.

Except that's not what happened with this fucking conversation at all. You responded to someone who was responding to someone who was quoting the 3.5 SRD, and in both that post and the one that responded to it there was the explicitly made assumption "if pathfinder has the same text for bonus feats." Your response "THE RULES DON'T WORK LIKE THAT" was totally off-key and confused, and the appropriate response is to say, "pathfinder doesn't have the same clauses." I.e., contradicting the explicit assumption they made.

However, given that pathfinder has a lot of old 3.5 monsters, and they use the bonus feat notation for some monster feats, I bet it wouldn't be hard to find a monster with a bonus feat it does not quality for: which leads to the conclusion that you do not need the prerequisites for bonus feats (as in 3.5) OR that the monsters don't actually get those feats. Which would be weird, because they're listed.

[TarkisFlux]

Edit the second: Hey, just for shits and giggles, why don't you link me to this bonus feats(all) rule in 3e you're so keen on too, maybe it'll help me find it in Pathfinder.

Ok, that's not hard. It's originally from the MM1 -

Source[/url])]The line gives the creature’s feats. A monster gains feats just as a character does. Sometimes a creature has one or more bonus feats, marked with a superscript B. Creatures often do not have the prerequisites for a bonus feat. If this is so, the creature can still use the feat. If you wish to customize the creature with new feats, you can reassign its other feats, but not its bonus feats. A creature cannot have a feat that is not a bonus feat unless it has the feat’s prerequisites.

Since they say "creatures often do not have the prereqs [but] can still use the feat," the implication is that any time a 'bonus feat' is granted and not explicitly qualified with respect to prereqs you get to ignore them. Yes, it's in an out of the way place, and yes, it was written for a monster context and not a character one, but the fact is that DnD wants to use 'bonus feat' as some sort of keyword and defines it with these qualities.

[Kaelik]

Edit the second: Hey, just for shits and giggles, why don't you link me to this bonus feats(all) rule in 3e you're so keen on too, maybe it'll help me find it in Pathfinder.

1) See DSM, we were talking about 3.5, suck a dick.

2) Oh, you mean the rule I already quoted before you ever posted that Koumei also posted right after you posted? You want me to copy paste it a third time because you refuse to read things until they are written a third time? Alternatively, how about you learn to read.

[DMReckless]

You are correct in that since I was reading a thread about Pathfinder, I made the mistaken assumption that Pathfinder was what was being discussed, rather than 3.5. Sorry for that.


But, yeah, Pathfinder's monster feat entry is:

"Feats: The creature's feats are listed here. A bonus feat is indicated with a superscript “B.”"

Huh, guess we're back to the default of Prerequisites in Pathfinder, like I was saying.

As a side note, I seriously doubt that the intention in 3.5 was for class bonus feats to be able to be taken without prerequisites. I'm pretty sure the monster manual entry was specifically talking about monster bonus feats. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find a wotc published npc who has a Bonus Feat without the prerequisites granted by a class that didn't specifically note that the prerequisites weren't required (Ranger TWF or Monk Feats) with the exception of a War Domain Cleric who gains Weapon Focus as a granted power, not a bonus feat. So, the reading being used here for bonus feat still seems like pretty willful ignorance when applies to class bonus feats.

[DMReckless]

I am willing to admit that the wording of the Fighter and Wizard Bonus Feats entry in 3.5 gives more credence to your interpretation by insisting that the prerequisites need to be met. Then, the wording of the Ranger and Monk entries swing the opposite way, specifically calling out that you do not need to meet the prerequisites. The rogue entry does not contain either type of clause, throwing the whole thing up for grabs.

The term "bonus feat" is not specificlly defined anywhere. The full entry on the 3.5 monster manual is:

"The line gives the creature’s feats. A monster gains feats just as a character does. Sometimes a creature has one or more bonus feats, marked with a superscript B (B). Creatures often do not have the prerequisites for a bonus feat. If this is so, the creature can still use the feat. If you wish to customize the creature with new feats, you can reassign its other feats, but not its bonus feats. A creature cannot have a feat that is not a bonus feat unless it has the feat’s prerequisites."

My interpretation of this is that creatures in the manual have specifically granted bonus feats by creature race, which all creatures of that race have regardless of any other changes you wish to make to that creature, and the creature does not need to meet the prerequisites for those specific feats.

The fact that you cannot alter those bonus feats when altering the creature gives support to this reading of that passage, and to the interpretation that they are RACIAL bonus feats.

Lacking any specified definition of the term "bonus feat" as it related to classes as opposed to races, and having a definition of the term Prerequisite, my reading of the rule is that class bonus feats need to meet the prerequisites in order to be selected or used, unless specified otherwise.

[DMReckless]

Then, the wording of the Ranger and Monk entries swing the opposite way, specifically calling out that you do not need to meet the prerequisites. .

Why would they need to do that if "bonus feat" meant that you don't need to meet the prerequisites....

[Kaelik]

As a side note, I seriously doubt that the intention in 3.5 was for class bonus feats to be able to be taken without prerequisites. I'm pretty sure the monster manual entry was specifically talking about monster bonus feats. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find a wotc published npc who has a Bonus Feat without the prerequisites granted by a class that didn't specifically note that the prerequisites weren't required (Ranger TWF or Monk Feats) with the exception of a War Domain Cleric who gains Weapon Focus as a granted power, not a bonus feat. So, the reading being used here for bonus feat still seems like pretty willful ignorance when applies to class bonus feats.

Umm... Are you retarded? Find me a single WotC NPC with ten or more levels of Rogue in the first place. And then narrow that to ones who choose a bonus feat instead of a special ability.

I mean, yes, I accept your premise that other than Clerics with Domains, you won't find anyone who has a feat they don't meet the pre reqs for, without it specifically saying they don't have to meet the pre reqs, because that's just Rogues whoa re at least level 10 and picked bonus feat instead of a different special ability.

There are six class bonus feats:

1) Cleric Domains
2) Fighters (specify meet pre reqs)
3) Wizards (specify meet pre reqs)
4) Monks (Specify not meet)
5) Rangers (Specify not meet)
6) Rogues

So when you say, "I bet you can't find one that doesn't meet pre reqs, aside from Cleric." You are actually saying "I bet you can't find a WotC NPC Rogue with ten or more levels who choose bonus feat."

I agree, I can't, but the fact that Fighters and Rangers both have clauses saying whether they need to meet pre reqs has no bearing on whether Rogues have to meet pre reqs.

It's not willful ignorance to read the only rules on bonus feats that exist, and then apply them to bonus feats. Technically, the rules for feat prerequisites never say they apply to feats granted by class either, so if you want to create a distinction between class vs regular feats, you are shooting yourself in the foot.

[DMReckless]

I agree, I can't, but the fact that Fighters and Rangers both have clauses saying whether they need to meet pre reqs has no bearing on whether Rogues have to meet pre reqs.

It's not willful ignorance to read the only rules on bonus feats that exist, and then apply them to bonus feats.

It is willful ignorance to interpret the rules for racial bonus feats as applying to all bonus feats. The monster manual entry does not say "All bonus feats do not need to meet the prerequisites." You have interpreted it to say this, but it doesn't actually state this.

Plus, those are not the "only rules on bonus feats that exist". The rules for bonus feats for fighters and wizards say that the prerequisites need to be met. the rules for Ranger and Monk bonus feats say that the prerequisites don't need to be met. The rules for monsters say that prerequisites do not need to be met for the specific feats marked "B" under the monster's entry and that these feats may not be swapped out for any other feats.

So that's 3 sets of rules for bonus feats. Not one of them is called out as the default for bonus feats specifically in the rules. Claiming otherwise is choosing to ignore the facts; willful ignorance.

[DMReckless]

Hey, found a couple more rule sets for bonus feats in the 3.5 srd:

Bonus Feats
A psion gains a bonus feat at 1st level, 5th level, 10th level, 15th level, and 20th level. This feat must be a psionic feat, a metapsionic feat, or a psionic item creation feat.
These bonus feats are in addition to the feats that a character of any class gains every three levels. A psion is not limited to psionic feats, metapsionic feats, and psionic item creation feats when choosing these other feats.
Bonus Feats
At 1st level, a psychic warrior gets a bonus combat-oriented feat in addition to the feat that any 1st level character gets and the bonus feat granted to a human character. The psychic warrior gains an additional bonus feat at 2nd level and every three levels thereafter (5th, 8th, 11th, 14th, 17th, and 20th). These bonus feats must be drawn from the feats noted as fighter bonus feats or psionic feats. The psychic warrior must still meet all prerequisites for the bonus feat, including ability score and base attack bonus minimums as well as class requirements. A psychic warrior cannot choose feats that specifically require levels in the fighter class unless he is a multiclass character with the requisite levels in the fighter class.
These bonus feats are in addition to the feats that a character of any class gains every three levels. A psychic warrior is not limited to fighter bonus feats and psionic feats when choosing these other feats.

I guess Psions are really powerful, being able to choose ANY psionic feat, metapsionic feat, or psionic item creation feat starting at 1st level according to your interpretation.

[John Magnum]

Are there any actually-impressive psionic, metapsionic, and psionic item creation feats that we care about the prerequisites and don't want to hand them out at level one?

[Meikle641]

Are there any actually-impressive psionic, metapsionic, and psionic item creation feats that we care about the prerequisites and don't want to hand them out at level one?

Speed of Thought is okay, gives a +10 insight bonus to speed. Needs 13+ Wis.

Hostile Mind could be okay. If hit by telepathy (or presumably, equivalent spells) powers, the caster makes a save or takes 2d6 damage. 15 Cha.

Ghost Attack is like Blind Fighting but for fighting incorporeal. Roll twice and if one makes it, you're treated as having Ghost Touch weapons. +3 BAB

Deadly Precision lets you re-roll 1s on Sneak Attack damage. 15 Dex and +5 BAB.

Cloak Dance lets you gain concealment with a move action or total for a full round action until your next action. Hide 10 ranks, Perform (Dance) 2 ranks.




Those are about the only feats I'd consider taking if given the change to ignore prerequisites of psi feats in the SRD. Whether they fit the bill? I dunno.

[John Magnum]

Those honestly do not seem like particularly hot shit, to the point where it's clearly absurd if we let psions get them at level one instead of level six. Cloak Dance is pretty cool, I guess.

[Foxwarrior]

Epic Psionic Focus and Improved Metapsionics are at least stronger enough than all other options that you'd have to be pretty silly not to pick them. Improved Metapsionics twice means that you can be tossing out Quickened powers at only a +2 pp cost at level 5; at level 6 you can also get Psionic Meditation in order to do this once per round.

I'd also like to point out that the creature bonus feats section refers specifically to those bonus feats marked with a B.

[John Magnum]

I was just about to wonder if there were Epic shenanigans that you could toss in.

[DSMatticus]

Yeah, the game has fucking rules text. Those rules sometimes lead to stupid things, but the fact that rules produce stupid results does not invalidate those rules. That's a fucking fallacy. The rules just fucking say what they fucking say. If you are arguing for the need to apply to house rules to D&D to get it to make sense, welcome to the club. We have known this all along. There are a lot of stupid things in D&D you have to fix on your own, and they have been since the game first existed. But those are you recognizing the failings of the system and then fixing them: the fact that you fixed them does not make the failing magically disappear.

Here's some relevant rules text and interpretations:

A cleric who chooses the War domain receives the Weapon Focus feat related to his deity’s weapon as a bonus feat. He also receives the appropriate Martial Weapon Proficiency feat as a bonus feat, if the weapon falls into that category.

If you interpret "prerequisites apply," there are cases where clerics do not actually get the benefits of their bonus feats. That's kind of retarded.

These bonus feats must be drawn from the feats noted as fighter bonus feats. A fighter must still meet all prerequisites for a bonus feat, including ability score and base attack bonus minimums.

Bonus Feat: At 1st level, a monk may select either Improved Grapple or Stunning Fist as a bonus feat. At 2nd level, she may select either Combat Reflexes or Deflect Arrows as a bonus feat. At 6th level, she may select either Improved Disarm or Improved Trip as a bonus feat. A monk need not have any of the prerequisites normally required for these feats to select them.

Okay, fucking see that? Do you realize how your argument is based on the fact, "hey, they made a specific exception here, so the general rule must be the opposite of the exception?" Well congratulations, that is flat-out self-contradictory and therefore the stupidest kind of stupid.

Creatures often do not have the prerequisites for a bonus feat. If this is so, the creature can still use the feat.

And there is the rules text saying that creatures can use bonus feats without meeting the prerequisites. Again. Barring exceptions, that is the rule that applies to bonus feats because that is the rules text of the game.

Now, here's a better fucking argument for why rogues and psions need to meet the prerequisites: being able to use feats and being able to take feats are two separate functions. The general rule is that you can use a bonus feat without prerequisites, but you cannot take a bonus feat without the prerequisites. This is totally consistent with the rules text, it lets clerics use their bonus feats (because they aren't taking those feats, they are being granted by a class feature), and it prevents rogues from taking anything in the game and psions from taking any psionic feats in the game. Fighters, monks, and rangers continue operating normally, because their entries contain specific exceptions that define how their bonus feats work.

Voila, done.

[Kaelik]

It is willful ignorance to interpret the rules for racial bonus feats as applying to all bonus feats. The monster manual entry does not say "All bonus feats do not need to meet the prerequisites." You have interpreted it to say this, but it doesn't actually state this.

It would be willful ignorance if those were the rules for racial bonus feats. But they aren't. The don't say racial bonus feats anywhere in there, even though they easily could.

Instead, they are rules for all bonus feats. For example, fighter bonus feats are marked with a B superscript.

Plus, those are not the "only rules on bonus feats that exist". The rules for bonus feats for fighters and wizards say that the prerequisites need to be met. the rules for Ranger and Monk bonus feats say that the prerequisites don't need to be met.

Okay, I was pretending you were not retarded. Yes, there are rule for Monk bonus feats. But if you think the rules for Monk bonus feats have any real bearing on the rules for Rogue bonus feats, you are retarded.

The rules for monsters say that prerequisites do not need to be met for the specific feats marked "B" under the monster's entry and that these feats may not be swapped out for any other feats.

No, the rules state that bonus feats are marked with a B, and that you do not need to meet pre reqs. They do not state that you do not need to meet pre reqs for feats marked with a B. Instead, all bonus feats, Ranger or Fighter or Monk, are marked with a B superscript. And in any case where the source of the bonus feat doesn't specify, IE Cleric Bonus feats, and Rogue bonus feats, and Racial bonus feats, they don't have to meet pre reqs, because that's the fucking rule for bonus feats.

So that's 3 sets of rules for bonus feats. Not one of them is called out as the default for bonus feats specifically in the rules. Claiming otherwise is choosing to ignore the facts; willful ignorance.

Yes, one of them is. The one that talks about bonus feats, and not the one that talks about Monk bonus feats.

A rule that says, "You do not need to meet pre reqs for bonus feats." applies to all bonus feats without a specific rule otherwise.

A rule that says, "Monks do not need to meet pre reqs for bonus feats" has no bearing on how non Monk bonus feats work.

[Username17]

Interesting note: the Monster Manual actually does have a fucking Cleric with the fucking War Domain in it. He's on page 148 and he fucking does have the little stylized B on his fucking Weapon Focus. It is unambiguous that Clerics get bonus feats and bonus feats do not require prereqs in order to function.

Now personally, I can't find any mention of what a bonus feat actually is in the Pathfinder SRD. And I sure as fuck don't own their actual books. It's entirely possible that Pathfinder left out the rule that you can actually have and use bonus feats, but that would be an example of bad Pathfinder editing and an example of Pathfinder being retarded, not an example of them deliberately changing the rules.

Stunning Fist says that Monks start with it even if they don't meet the prereqs, but the feat itself doesn't say they can use it without the prereqs. Absent a general rule on Bonus Feats, a Monk who decided to go Str/Wis would be unable to actually use their Stunning Fist. That is almost certainly not how Pathfinder is supposed to be played, so I submit that the choices are either that Pathfinder editing is as shitty as we already know it to be or the Bonus Feat rule is basically exactly what it is in 3.5 and exists in the hard copy books that have precedence. I can't be fucked to find out, btw.

-Username17

[Lago PARANOIA]

Absent a general rule on Bonus Feats, a Monk who decided to go Str/Wis would be unable to actually use their Stunning Fist.

To FrankTrollman and everyone else in this thread.

Have you forgotten the Golden Rules of D&D Rules Discussion?

Always, always interpret rules in the way that will most screw over players, no matter how unfair or convoluted the interpretation is. And even when the interpretation is rock solid, if it doesn't 'feel right' then it defaults to the interpretation that will most screw over the PC.

I know TGD values empiricism and intellectual honesty and consistency, but seriously, that's not how D&D is run. I thought that the Skip's Sage Advice debacles would have been ample evidence of How Things Really Are, but apparently not.

[DMReckless]

Now, here's a better fucking argument for why rogues and psions need to meet the prerequisites: being able to use feats and being able to take feats are two separate functions.The general rule is that you can use a bonus feat without prerequisites, but you cannot take a bonus feat without the prerequisites. This is totally consistent with the rules text, it lets clerics use their bonus feats (because they aren't taking those feats, they are being granted by a class feature), and it prevents rogues from taking anything in the game and psions from taking any psionic feats in the game. Fighters, monks, and rangers continue operating normally, because their entries contain specific exceptions that define how their bonus feats work.

Voila, done.

Yup, that's where I was headed after thinking about it overnight. The monster manual rule specifically prevents creatures from taking different bonus feats, but not from having and using them.

In fact,

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.

AND

At 1st level, a monk may select either Improved Grapple or Stunning Fist as a bonus feat. At 2nd level, she may select either Combat Reflexes or Deflect Arrows as a bonus feat. At 6th level, she may select either Improved Disarm or Improved Trip as a bonus feat. A monk need not have any of the prerequisites normally required for these feats to select them.

both of which support this reading of Bonus Feats.

Also supported by:

Prerequisites

Some feats have prerequisites. Your character must have the indicated ability score, class feature, feat, skill, base attack bonus, or other quality designated in order to select or use that feat. A character can gain a feat at the same level at which he or she gains the prerequisite.

And then the srd says:

A character can’t use a feat if he or she has lost a prerequisite.

but

Sometimes a creature has one or more bonus feats, marked with a superscript B (B). Creatures often do not have the prerequisites for a bonus feat. If this is so, the creature can still use the feat. If you wish to customize the creature with new feats, you can reassign its other feats, but not its bonus feats.

So a creature that has a bonus feat can use it without prerequisites, but a creature cannot select or be reassigned bonus feats that it doesn't meet the prerequisites for, unless it has an exception phrase in its bonus feats selection guidelines, such as the monk's entry.

[DMReckless]

The thing that is cool about the Rogue is that they get a selectable bonus feat with no preconditions. Rather than having to select one off a short list or having a to select a feat they meet the prereqs for (or in the case of the Fighter: both), they simply get to choose any feat in the game and add it to their character sheet.

-Username17

And it was this bullshit I'm arguing against, not that you can use bonus feats without the prerequisite (which the monster manual entry clearly states you can), but the concept that you can select bonus feats without the prerequisites, which the monster manual clearly does not state.

A rule that says, "You do not need to meet pre reqs for bonus feats." applies to all bonus feats without a specific rule otherwise.

That's not the rule. The rule is "You do not need to meet prerequisites to use bonus feats." The leap to "you do not need prerquisites to select bonus feats" is where your whole argument falls apart, because it's not supported by the rules you're quoting.

[Username17]

The rules also don't say that you can get bonus feats at all. The rules on feat selection clearly do not apply to bonus feats, because if they did you wouldn't be allowed to have any of them because the rules for feat acquisition only give you the feats for leveling up.

A bonus feat is just a feat. That is a bonus. What feat you are allowed to select is determined by what the thing that is giving you the bonus feat say, not the normal feat acquisition rules. As a War Domain Cleric you select "Weapon Focus" because that is your only option, as a Rogue you select "Any Feat". In neither of these cases do you worry about whether you are a level divisible by 3 or in any other way able to select the feat in question.

DMR, your argument is specious bullshit. You're trying to create gradients of distinction that simply don't exist in 3e or Pathfailure. Seriously: how the fuck do you think Stunning Fist and Cleric Weapon focus work?

-Username17

[ishy]

Actually the rules say bonus feats do not require any feat prerequisites.

Some creatures that have this feat lack the +1 base attack bonus prerequisite. Since bonus feats do not require the creature to fulfill any feat prerequisites (see page 301 in the Monster Manual), make the Weapon Finesse feat a bonus feat and add an additional feat (see the table below).