[3.5/E6] Rizban's E6 Compendium

[TheWombatOfDoom]

(Wombat's Review of:)Skillful Classes(PART 3!)

The Troubadour

Spoiler

Show

Role: A storyteller, poet, and musician, the troubadour is the master of inspiration. Whether encouraging his allies or demoralizing his foes, a troubadour's words are his weapons.

So, I've said it before and I'll say it again. I love bards. But not as a player. As a DM, I find them the perfect DMPC, a buffer and information giver, the party's Navi - "HEY LISTEN! You can open that chest with A!" "Watchout! Skeletons can't get maimed by criticals!" "LISTEN! I'm inspiring my LAZER!" Okay, okay, perhaps I'm getting carried away with references, but basically, what I want to see is not just a buffer/debuffer, especially since the knowledge thing has now been taken over by the sage. I want the the buffing, but I also want something that has unique feel...so I don't feel like I'm making everyone else do something, but not myself...But perhaps in this system, that's what an archetype is for!

Hit Die: d6
Class Skills (6 + Int modifier per level, ×4 at 1st level): Appraise (Int), Balance (Dex), Bluff (Cha), Craft (Int), Decipher Script (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Disguise (Cha), Escape Artist (Dex), Gather Information (Cha), Hide (Dex), Intimidate (Cha), Jump (Str), Knowledge (all skill, taken individually) (Int), Listen (Wis), Move Silently (Dex), Perform (Cha), Profession (Wis), Sense Motive (Wis), Sleight of Hand (Dex), Speak Language (None), Spellcraft (Int), Swim (Str), and Tumble (Dex).

Interesting that the bard has the least amount of skills of the skillful. I'd have thought the acrobat might have been.

Class Features

Inspiring Aura (Su): A troubadour learns to inspire his allies and demoralize his enemies using only words and music. As a standard action, he may project an Inspiring Aura. The aura remains in effect until he uses a free action to dismiss the aura or activates a different aura as a standard action. A troubadour need not be in battle to activate an aura and may have it active at any time, and there is no limit to the number of times per day that a troubadour may activate his aura. A troubadour must sing, play a instrument, recite poetry, chant, whistle, or use some other verbal or musical style to produce the aura. If the troubadour is deaf, he has a 20% chance each turn of the aura failing and deactivating.
Unless otherwise noted, any variable bonus is equal to the bonus given on the table, and the aura affects all allies or enemies within the range given who can hear the troubadour, though they do not have to share a language. Creatures who are deaf are immune to all benefits and penalties granted by the aura. The aura does not work in an area of silence, and is automatically dismissed if the troubadour is dazed, stunned, paralyzed, unconscious, or is otherwise unable to continue producing the necessary sounds.
A troubadour begins play knowing three Inspirations of his choice, gaining one new Inspiration at each additional level to a maximum of 8 known at 6th level.

Alright, so I could do this all day, with no limitation, so long as I'm performing? No perform check, or negatives after a certain amount of time? You'd think the troubadour might get tired of playing the instrument or what not for hours. Are there concentration checks to continue playing if something attacks the troubadour? Being that it is E6, I appreciate that it never gets to more than one aura at a time until 6th, and only for a limited time there. I like the range and + increase progression.

Beguiling Influence (Ex): A troubadour uses his natural charm at wit to his advantage. He gains a circumstance bonus equal to his beguiling influence bonus on Bluff, Diplomacy, Gather Information, and Perform checks when used in social situations. He never gains this bonus for other uses, such as when feinting in combat.

See bolded area - did you mean natural charm AND wit?

Streetwise (Ex): A troubadour understands more about life on the streets of a city than most. He gains a bonus on Knowledge (local) checks and on Survival checks made inside of a city equal to his Charisma modifier (if positive).

Seems a little underwhelming to me. *shrug*

Quick Thinking (Ex): Troubadours are known to quickly assess a situation and respond rapidly. Anytime a troubadour is aware of an enemy before combat starts, he gains a circumstance bonus to his initiative checks equal to his Beguiling Influence bonus. Enemies who gain a surprise round against him deny him this bonus.

However, I really like this one.

Social Graces (Ex): When using Bluff or Diplomacy, a troubadour can quickly cover minor mistakes and smooth a botched attempt to influence someone. Any time a troubadour fails a Bluff or Diplomacy check, he may spend a swift action to immediately roll the check again. He must use the second result, even if the roll is lower. A troubadour may only use this ability against a particular target once per day.
This ability can not be used in combat, such as when attempting to feint.

I approve of all limitations on this. I like it. Well done putting in "he must use the second check".

Mental Resistance (Su): Troubadours carry many dark secrets they would prefer remain secret combined with a large amount of knowledge based on half-truths and false rumors. This makes a troubadour’s mind unreliable to those who would seek to mentally affect it. At 4th level, a troubadour receives a morale bonus equal to his Beguiling Influence bonus to saves made against Enchantment (Charm) spells and any ability that would read or detect his thoughts.

What dark secrets? It's not like they get any bonuses to knowledge save knowledge: local in cities. I like the ability, just not the fluff. Wouldn't be easier to say that they get better saves to their Will period? Or is that too much?

Fortune's Friend (Ex): For some reason, luck seems to favor a troubadour. At 5th level, he gains the ability to reroll a single ability check, skill check, attack roll, or saving throw but must use the second result, even if the result is lower. This ability is a free action and can be used a number of times per day equal to the troubadour's Charisma modifier, but only once on any one roll.

I'd recomend using something better to start off your ability description than "for some reason". It just strikes me as odd for the entity that's describing the class feature to say - "I don't know why luck favors the troubadour...but it does!" It'd be better to say, "Few know exactly why the troubadour is favored by luck, but whyever the case, they always seem to come out on top." An upgraded social graces. Nice.

Sound and Fury: [*]Inspirational Speech (Su): By spending a full-round action, a troubadour may activate a second inspiring aura for three rounds. At the end of the third round, he chooses which of the two auras is dismissed.

Cool, though Harmonize might be a better word for it. Can I choose to use the same aura two different ways, such as inspire ability?

[*]Great Motivator (Su): By spending a standard action, the troubadour's inspiring aura bonus increases by +1 for three rounds.

I also like this.

[*]Quite Fortunate (Su): The troubadour may use his fortune's friend ability once without it counting against his daily uses of that ability.

Nice.

Inspiring Auras

Spoiler

Show

[*]Assault: All allies affected by this aura gain a bonus on rolls to confirm critical hits equal to twice the normal aura bonus.

That's a deadly combo with a brawler!

[*]Alacrity: This aura grants a boost in reaction time to all allies within the aura, granting them a bonus on Initiative checks and on Reflex saves.

Sweet! I like.

[*]Countersong: An aura user can use his aura to counter magical effects that depend on sound (but not spells that simply have verbal components). Each round of the countersong, he makes a Perform check and adds his aura bonus to the result. Any creature within 30 feet of the aura user (including the user himself) that is affected by a sonic or language-dependent magical attack may use the Perform check result in place of its saving throw if, after the saving throw is rolled, the Perform check result proves to be higher. If a creature within range of the countersong is already under the effect of a noninstantaneous sonic or language-dependent magical attack, it gains another saving throw against the effect each round it hears the countersong, but it must use the Perform check result for the save. Countersong has no effect against effects that don’t allow saves. The aura user may keep up the countersong for 10 rounds. After the countersong ends, the aura user must rest for at least 1 minute for each round the countersong was active before he can use it again.

So this affects any spell that has verbal components?

[*]Distraction: While this aura is active, all enemies within the aura take a penalty to attack rolls and Concentration checks. As an immediate action, the aura user may end this aura to apply the penalty to a saving throw of one affected enemy.

Nicely named. And nice that there's an alternate method. Allows for a lot of playing around.

[*]Fascinate: Enemies affected by this aura have a chance of becoming fascinated. Each creature to be fascinated must be within 90 feet, able to see and hear the aura user, and able to pay attention to him. The aura user must also be able to see the creature. The distraction of a nearby combat or other dangers prevents the ability from working. For every level a character attains beyond 1st, he can target one additional creature with this aura.

To fascinate a creature, the aura user makes a Perform check, adding his aura bonus to the result. His check result is the DC for each affected creature’s Will save against the effect. If a creature’s saving throw succeeds, the user cannot attempt to fascinate that creature again for 24 hours. If its saving throw fails, the creature sits quietly and listens to the performance, taking no other actions, for as long as the user continues to play and concentrate (up to a maximum of 1 round per class level). While fascinated, a target takes a -4 penalty on skill checks made as reactions, such as Listen and Spot checks. Any potential threat requires the aura user to make another Perform check and allows the creature a new saving throw against a DC equal to the new Perform check result.

Any obvious threat, such as someone drawing a weapon, casting a spell, or aiming a ranged weapon at the target, automatically breaks the effect. Fascinate is an enchantment (compulsion), mind-affecting ability.

A non combat Aura, that might help in preventing combat.

[*]Inspire Ability: When this aura is activated, the aura user chooses one ability score. Affected allies gain a bonus on ability checks with that ability and on skill checks that have the chosen ability as its key ability.

In bolded area, I don't think you meant ability score, I think you meant "ability". Otherwise, pretty cool. I get to choose between upping the party's HP, possibly AC, or attacks, or even one of the other abilities for something or another. I'd likely commonly choose STR or CON, unless for a specific situation. WAIT. nevermind. this is only for checks, not abilities. Sadface. Can I stop the song and change it to a different ability at will?

[*]Inspire Competence: When this aura is activated, the aura user chooses one skill. Affected allies gain a bonus on skill checks with that skill equal to twice the normal aura bonus. Certain uses of this ability are infeasible, as ruled by the DM. An aura user can't inspire competence in himself. This is a mind-affecting ability.

I could technically really do this for the skill that's being used all the time, since I can use this aura as many times as I want per day, all day. So if I have a team mate trying to do a jump check, I sing for that aura, and now he needs a climb check, so I change to that, and so on. Not to mention, how about an ally that is trying to listen (or some other conflicting skills)? I'm singing loudly to make someone hear better? Something I've always wondered about and want your take on.

[*]Intractability: This aura grants a boost in strength of will to all allies within the aura, granting them a bonus on Concentration and Sense Motive skill checks and on Will saves

I like your alike bonuses in these. Makes things more useful and attractive.

[*]Repose: All allies affected by this aura ignore the effects of fatigue, exhaustion, hunger, and thirst while affected by the aura. This does not remove the need to sleep, eat, or drink, characters simply do not suffer the negative effects of the fatigue.

Everybody gets to sleep in their armor, so long as I sing while you sleep!

[*]Rousing Combat: All allies affected by this aura gain a bonus when making or attempting to resist a bull rush, disarm, feint, grapple, overrun, sunder, or trip attempt.

Nice.

[*]Taunt: One enemy within twice the normal aura range must make a Will save (DC 10 + aura bonus + Charisma modifier) or become enraged and attempt to attack the aura user, moving toward him if necessary and charging if beneficial. This aura must be maintained each round as a swift action.

If the taunted creature is attacked, injured, or targeted or damaged by a spell from any source other than the aura's user, the taunt effect immediately ends. After a number of rounds equal to the aura bonus, the taunted creature gets a new saving throw. A creature that successfully saves against a taunt is immune to taunts from the aura user for 24 hours. This is an enchantment (compulsion), mind-affecting ability.

Reminds me of the sentinel! A sentinel and troubadour might have fun with this. Though, only if done right.

[*]Tenacity: This aura grants a boost in resolve and resilience to all allies within the aura, granting them a bonus on Fortitude saves and damage reduction X/magic where X is the aura bonus. This does not stack with other sources of damage reduction.

Interesting! I like this a lot.

[*]Valor: All allies affected by this aura gain a bonus on attack rolls and weapon damage rolls.

Nice. Always handy.

[*]Vigor: All allies affected by this aura gain a bonus on armor class and saves against fear, poison, and disease.

Oh wow! A very nice one. That's a pretty big bonus to AC. What if you did Dex bouns to AC, so they'd get the max of their armor, or some such. If you'd like to keep it as is, I'll not complain, I just don't see what kind of AC bonus this is. Natural? Circumstance? so on...
[/list]

One problem I see with this is there's not a lot of things that affect enemies. I count 3 enemy debuffs, and 11 buffers. I don't suppose there's a way to fan that out more?

[stack]

Stupid question: Does the hoplite still take the -2 penalty on attacks for wielding a tower shield if he is using the shield to make the attack? There does not appear to be any abilities listed to mitigate the penalty, so I believe the answer is yes.

Does the hoplite threaten with a tower shield? I believe the answer is yes, since he can forgo normal attacks to make shield bashes. I don't believe you ever officially answered the tower shield damage question, either.

Why yes, I have been mentally building hoplites, why do you ask?

[Rizban]

Stupid question: Does the hoplite still take the -2 penalty on attacks for wielding a tower shield if he is using the shield to make the attack? There does not appear to be any abilities listed to mitigate the penalty, so I believe the answer is yes.

I honestly hadn't even thought about that. I'm leaning towards yes, because you're basically wielding a door as a weapon.

Does the hoplite threaten with a tower shield? I believe the answer is yes, since he can forgo normal attacks to make shield bashes. I don't believe you ever officially answered the tower shield damage question, either.

Yes, a hoplite should threaten with any shield he wields.
Well, following the progression, a light shield does 1d3, and a heavy does 1d4. So, logically, it would be 1d6; however, that just seems lame. Let's make it 1d8.

Why yes, I have been mentally building hoplites, why do you ask?

Oh, no reason...

[stack]

Could a character with powerful build wield a large shield? I don't expect the ac to change, but it would certainly help the bash damage. Especially if you get the bashing enchantment (requires CL 8, which an auger can pull off).

Though tower shields can't get bashing, since it specifies light and heavy shields only. Might need a line that a hoplite can treat his tower shield as a heavy shield for the purpose of feats and enchantments, since the shield specialization feat ( Player's Handbook II, p. 82) also does not appear to apply to tower shields. Normally I wouldn't care about that feat, but it is a pre-req for the feat that makes your shield bonus apply against touch attacks.

[Rizban]

There's another feat that does the same thing but doesn't have the prerequisite. The name escapes me at the moment.

[stack]

Parrying Shield, ( Lords of Madness, p. 181)

It doesn't give the bonus to resist bull rush, disarm, grapple, overrun, or trip attempts that shield ward does( Player's Handbook II, p. 82) . Plus LoM is a less common source than PHB II, making the other feat the only option if LoM isn't allowed.

There's also the bashing enchantment issue, but I suppose that could slide as an 'ask your DM nicely'.

[darklink_shadow]

Ask your DM nice rules are terrible. Some of us play with rules lawyers.

[stack]

Thought about changing the Cad significantly. The current version basically cribs PF's dirty tricks. This limits it to melee. Might re-name and re-fluff it to use true-names to inflict status effects, allowing both buffs and debuffs, plus some range. I would NOT be using the truenaming mechanic for both legal and function reasons. This sounds like a good idea?

[darklink_shadow]

Cad was skill type wasn't it?

True naming sounds like magic type to me.

[stack]

Cad was skill type wasn't it?

True naming sounds like magic type to me.

But there are only so many low level language spells in core.

[jojolagger]

I like what I see. I can think of a few domain related suggestions, but really out of it and need sleep so will wait until I can think straight and probably not say something stupid before saying a lot.

[stack]

I'm starting up an arena playtest here. I want to keep it open so others can DM or even take over entirely if I get too busy at some point.

[Saidoro]

From arena thread:(For those just joining us, the argument was about when spellblades gain spells from their archetypes, and my position was "this loophole should be closed" not "You should give me unbalanced abilities because I found a loophole")

What? No. There is absolutely nothing in the archetype that is "more specific" than what is in the classes as far as how spellcasting works beyond defining arcane/divine and defining a spell list. There is absolutely nothing in any of them that says you can override maximum spell level or anything of the sort. There is nothing at all that says that they gain higher level bonus spells at 1st level. Show me, by RAW, proof of what you're claiming. I want to see where you're getting this.

The extra spells ability simply says that you gain the spells, and there is nothing inherent in the rules about needing to be a certain level to cast a certain spell. It's similar to how you don't need to meet the prerequisites for a bonus feat unless the granting ability states otherwise, the specific rule saying you get it trumps the general one saying you don't qualify.

[Rizban]

To repost what was said...

When a spellblade has an archetype like priest which grants extra spells known when do they gain those spells? First level? Whenever they gain the appropriate spell level? Whenever an augur or magus would gain an appropriate spell level? The text indicates the first, but that's the least reasonable interpretation so I thought I'd ask.

Chapter 2: The Archetypes

[snip]

Priest

[snip]

Divine Touch: If a priest's deity is of Good or Neutral alignment, he channels positive energy and learns Cure Light, Cure Moderate, and Cure Serious Wounds as bonus spells at the appropriate levels. If a priest's deity is of Evil alignment, he channels negative energy and learns Inflict spells instead.

Yes, they gain it at the appropriate spell level, but there's nothing to stop a first level spellblade from casting third level spells, they don't use slots. And if they have to wait to cast them that still raises the question of whether they have to wait until when their specific glass gains access to them(so 4th level for 2nd level spells and never for third) or when those spells can be cast in general(3rd level for 2nd level spells and 5th for 3rd).

Except, you know, that they have a stated maximum spell level of 1st. Whether or not they use slots has nothing to do with it. Do you assume that a Warlock can cast any and all invocations just because it doesn't use slots? That's silly.

Obviously the answer to this is "Yes." If the class can't cast spells of that level, then the class can't cast spells of that level. I thought that was one of the core underlying principles of spellcasting. I never knew that was up for debate.
Sorcerers have delayed spellcasing. Dread Necros have delayed spellcasting. Lots of other classes do too. I don't see why Spellblade having delayed spellcasting is that confusing or what would possibly lead you to assume that it would use the spell progression of a completely different class for one of its abilities.

I'm not sure what is ambiguous about that line...

I don't see how "appropriate levels" can possibly be interpreted to mean "All at first level," or "When a completely different class gains spells of the same level."

This is what I assumed, just making sure. The spellcasting ability described by the archetypes is more specific than the maximum spell level described in the class so by RAW they would gain them at first level, but that's a pretty obviously unreasonable interpretation which is why I asked.
I'm not trying to justify cheese by RAW, I'm trying to clarify RAW to stop others from doing the same.

What? No. There is absolutely nothing in the archetype that is "more specific" than what is in the classes as far as how spellcasting works beyond defining arcane/divine and defining a spell list. There is absolutely nothing in any of them that says you can override maximum spell level or anything of the sort. There is nothing at all that says that they gain higher level bonus spells at 1st level. Show me, by RAW, proof of what you're claiming. I want to see where you're getting this.

[Rizban]

The extra spells ability simply says that you gain the spells, and there is nothing inherent in the rules about needing to be a certain level to cast a certain spell. It's similar to how you don't need to meet the prerequisites for a bonus feat unless the granting ability states otherwise, the specific rule saying you get it trumps the general one saying you don't qualify.

No, it doesn't. It says you gain them "at the appropriate levels," as I pointed out at the very beginning.

---

1You seem to be confused on the general vs specific issue, as shown by your example.
Using feats as a basis:
General Rule: To gain a feat, you must meet the feat's requirements.
General Rule: To gain a feat, you must be gaining your 1st HD or a HD divisible by 3.

Those rules always apply unless specifically stated to not apply. You have it backwards in your understanding. You only ignore those rules when it specifically says you ignore them. Look at the monk, for example.

A monk need not have any of the prerequisites normally required for these feats to select them.

That's an example of a specific rule. Without that line, he'd have to meet the prereqs to choose the feat.

As opposed to the Fighter entry along the same lines:

A fighter must still meet all prerequisites for a bonus feat, including ability score and base attack bonus minimums.

This is an example of the book simply reminding the player what the rules are. It's restating the general rule, not applying a specific rule.

To arrive at your interpretation of how bonus feats work, you have to assume an unprinted specific rule stating that you ignore all general rules relating to the acquisition of feats then turn around and apply another specific rule overriding the first specific rule which states to return to the general rule.

[Rizban]

What about this line: "If a priest's deity is of Evil alignment, he channels negative energy and learns Inflict spells instead"?

Would you go on to argue that "learns Inflict spells" 'obviously' includes Mass Inflict Light Wounds, Mass Inflict Moderate Wounds, Mass Inflict Serious Wounds, and Mass Inflict Critical Wounds? After all, it just says an evil priest "learns Inflict spells instead," and those are "Inflict spells." Wow! Spellblade Priest can at will 8th-level spells at 1st level!

[TheWombatOfDoom]

Oh boy...it seems I've walked into a semantics debate...

Looking forward to starting my review on magic! Getting close to half way through the system!

Then maybe I'll have more of an opinion on all these magical archetypes I've been purposely ignoring.

[Rizban]

It's less a semantics debate and more of a pure misunderstanding of what's written. Gaining a spell as a bonus spell known at the "appropriate level" doesn't mean in any way that you gain a bonus 2nd- and 3rd-level spell at your first class level that you know and can cast at 1st level. I still don't understand how you can interpret that in any way other than "You gain X as a bonus spell known when you can cast spells of the same level as X."

[planswalker]

the same way "base statistics" somehow doesn't tell you what statistics are and are not used.

[jojolagger]

Earth domain thing mentions the stonecutting ability, which I think is actually meant to be the stone cunning ability that dwarfs get.
Should a dwarf with the earth domain get improved stonecunning instead (from UA, earth dwarf, same but +4 instead of +2)?

[planswalker]

no, they wouldn't. Gaining stone cutting from neither the earth domain nor the dwarf race mentions suddenly having ISC if you gain the ability twice.

[jojolagger]

no, they wouldn't. Gaining stone cutting from neither the earth domain nor the dwarf race mentions suddenly having ISC if you gain the ability twice.

Is suggestion because it makes sense for a dwarf that likes earth even more to be even better with rocks.

[darklink_shadow]

It doesn't mention it NOW bu this entire system is in alpha. It COULD mention it. It just doesn't yet. I'm going to have to side with Jojo. Earth Domain SHOULD say that. I mean, seriously, are you going to try to convince me a dwarf priest with ISC is more over powered than a Dwarf priest who gets nothing from the earth domain is under powered? Or even overpowered at all?

[planswalker]

Jojo, you said would, not should. There's a world of difference between what is currently true and what would make sense to have. I do agree that it would make sense thematically for that to be amended into the earth domain, but that isn't what's currently there. Your question, grammatically, is asking about what happens now, not what would make sense to happen.

[darklink_shadow]

Oh grammar... thou art a heartless bitch. Yes, I see how what he actually said isn't what I assumed he meant. I also just got out of bed and might go back as soon as I can. I feel ill.

[jojolagger]

There, is should.

Also, may I suggest the Earth's Embrace domain gets something about healing more when the caster (or target) is standing on stone or earth? Or maybe a few temporary hp? Earthen Reinforcement.
Also, Earthen Grace, Earthfast, and Foundation of Stone (all spell compendium) are spells that might fit Earth's Embrace.

[stack]

There, is should.

Also, may I suggest the Earth's Embrace domain gets something about healing more when the caster (or target) is standing on stone or earth? Or maybe a few temporary hp? Earthen Reinforcement.
Also, Earthen Grace, Earthfast, and Foundation of Stone (all spell compendium) are spells that might fit Earth's Embrace.

I believe Rizban is trying to only use OGL and homebrew spells. Opening up the entire spell compendium would make it SO much easier to fill domains, though.

[Rizban]

Earth domain thing mentions the stonecutting ability, which I think is actually meant to be the stone cunning ability that dwarfs get.
Should a dwarf with the earth domain get improved stonecunning instead (from UA, earth dwarf, same but +4 instead of +2)?

I like that idea. I think I'll include it.

I believe Rizban is trying to only use OGL and homebrew spells. Opening up the entire spell compendium would make it SO much easier to fill domains, though.

This. While using SpC would make things much easier to fill, Imwant to keep thing OGL compliant. Feel free to use those spells as a basis for something homebrewed though. Just be sure it isn't a verbatim copy.

[Saidoro]

What about this line: "If a priest's deity is of Evil alignment, he channels negative energy and learns Inflict spells instead"?

Would you go on to argue that "learns Inflict spells" 'obviously' includes Mass Inflict Light Wounds, Mass Inflict Moderate Wounds, Mass Inflict Serious Wounds, and Mass Inflict Critical Wounds? After all, it just says an evil priest "learns Inflict spells instead," and those are "Inflict spells." Wow! Spellblade Priest can at will 8th-level spells at 1st level!

I am not attacking you. I am not saying that the rules should work the way I describe. I am informing you of a valid reading of the ability which you quite clearly did not intend.
Regardless, the bonus feat thing is an old debate which I am sure we have both heard all sides of and which I doubt either of us is likely to have our opinions changed on. In the interest of not getting into a fruitless and potentially volatile argument on pointless semantics I'll concede the point. Just be aware that someone could read it the way I had and not all who do so will take my "if it's ridiculous but technically legal you still shouldn't do it" stance.

[Rizban]

I never said you were attacking me. I just was doing the same "technically legal" misinterpretation of the rules using a different example.


I still don't see where you're getting this "valid reading of the rules." I've asked you to quote the lines which say what you claim and show exactly how they say that. You still have not done so. Until you do, I'm not going to continue this "debate".


I've been playing D&D since back in the 90s before 3rd edition even came out. I've played in a number of different groups in a number of different cities and states across the country. I've been on this site (and others) for a number of years playing D&D with people from around the world.

In all that time, this is the first time I've ever heard that this "old debate" you're talking about even exists. Additionally, this is the first time that I've ever heard your particular interpretation of how bonus feats are "supposed to work."

Based on my own experience, that I've never heard your interpretation or of this The existence "old debate", yet you seem to encounter people who disagree with your interpretation frequently, I have to wonder if you've ever considered that your interpretation of that and your interpretation of General vs Specific might just be wrong.