MC feats and classes with multiple power sources?

20 posts / 0 new
Last post
Now that we have multiple classes that have sub-classes with different power source combinations, it really brings up the question of what power sources the MC feats grant. Since base class and sub class are no longer one and the same, the base class needs to have power sources assigned to it for these purposes. For instance, a Ranger (Ranger) is martial, but a Ranger (Scout) and Ranger (Hunter) are martial AND primal.

The problem is made most clear when put in the context of the classes that have re-named PHB classes. For example, we have the wizard parent class, and we can have Arcanists, Mages, Bladesingers, and Witches. Each of the sub-classes is specifically given a power source, but the parent class label isn't actually provided a power source, so by RAW at the moment, wizard MC does not make you count as being an arcane class, because only the sub-classes have the power source listing.

So this is realy in need of errata to clarify how MC-ing and power sources works...
You have never counted as your MC's power source, any more than you have counted as its role (per PH1 FAQ #33).  

You only count as the class, just like the rule says.
You have never counted as your MC's power source, any more than you have counted as its role (per PH1 FAQ #33).  

You only count as the class, just like the rule says.



That's not at all true, because the feats that require a particular power source all require 'any [power source] class'.

Since you count as (for example) a fighter, that qualifies you as 'any martial class', because fighter is a martial class.


I would think that MCing into a multi-power-source class would count you as a member of a class of either power source, just as being the class itself does.  As for subclasses, this is really just a matter of sloppy errata; any generic wizard MC should be relisted as arcanist MC, and so on for other classes.
The difference between madness and genius is determined only by degrees of success.

TIchrimo, that question is an issue of qualifying as a member of a role not qualifying as a power source. 

People have been using multiclassing as a way to get access to feats, paragon paths, and EDs with specific power source requirements for a while.  Both CBs allow it and I have never seen any evidence that this is not RAI.

I agree this needs errata, or at least a FAQ for the multiclassing into multiple sources.

You have never counted as your MC's power source, any more than you have counted as its role (per PH1 FAQ #33).  

You only count as the class, just like the rule says.



That's not at all true, because the feats that require a particular power source all require 'any [power source] class'.

Since you count as (for example) a fighter, that qualifies you as 'any martial class', because fighter is a martial class.


I would think that MCing into a multi-power-source class would count you as a member of a class of either power source, just as being the class itself does.  As for subclasses, this is really just a matter of sloppy errata; any generic wizard MC should be relisted as arcanist MC, and so on for other classes.


But that's just it -- if the feat doesn't expressly say a class, you don't qualify.  

A fighter who multiclasses wizard qualifies neither for feats with a prerequisite of "Controller role" nor "Arcane class".  Or are you arguing that the wording "Arcane class" makes it qualify where the wording "Arcane power source" would not?  (Because both wordings do exist.)
If you MC sorcerer you count as a member of that class for the purpose of feat prereqs. Sorc is an arcane class, so you can take any feat with a prereq of any arcane class. But this no longer works for classes with a main class/sub class break because the main class doesn't have a power source designator.
Maybe if I say it a third time...  The rule -- the one you quoted-- does not say you count as the class' power source, just the class.

Just because "full" members of that class gain the power source does not mean that multiclass members of that class gain the power source (just like they don't gain the role of their multiclass).

So it doesn't matter that there's a break in power sources and roles with the new class/subclass layout, because none of it is inherented via multiclass feats.  (I do agree there is some cleanup needed for the multilass feats of the renamed classes (templar, arcanist, weaponmaster, etc.), but that is a separate issue.)
I do not mean to be rude, but that is innane and against /years/ worth of consensus. How would you adjudicate multiclass power swaps? I count as the class, I have powers from the class and the source, but just because the rules don't specifically and emphatically state how to gain a power source despite fairly sensible and clear RAI you cannot.

Sure.
What "years worth of consensus" have you seen?  I've raised this point a few times in recent months, each time with a different outcome.  If it were such an inane idea, I'd expect to have been solidly smacked down already.  Instead:

Some agree with me.
Some disagree with me.
Some think it will depend on the wording ("any [source] class" works, but specifically requiring a source by name won't). 

That doesn't sound like consensus to me.  
I quote the char op board. The whole thing. Since basically day one, people have been posting builds utilizing this very assumption, mostly to poach martial power feats or the occasional PP. No one has poo-pood those builds then or now. That is the consensus I speak of.

I grant it does not specifically state you gain the source. But it does not need to. What is a fighter as far as prereqs are concerned? It is a martial defender. If you count as a fighter for prereqs, then you count for /all/ the things a fighter counts for (like being a martial defender).
Maybe if I say it a third time...  The rule -- the one you quoted-- does not say you count as the class' power source, just the class.

Just because "full" members of that class gain the power source does not mean that multiclass members of that class gain the power source (just like they don't gain the role of their multiclass).

So it doesn't matter that there's a break in power sources and roles with the new class/subclass layout, because none of it is inherented via multiclass feats.  (I do agree there is some cleanup needed for the multilass feats of the renamed classes (templar, arcanist, weaponmaster, etc.), but that is a separate issue.)



The rule does not need to explicitly say you inherit the class's power source (You are considered to have a power source if you have a single power belonging to that source). I don't know why you seem to think it does. Sorc is an arcane class. If you MC sorc you count as a sorc for feat pre-reqs, and since you count as a sorc, you count as a member of an arcane class and can take any feat that has that as a pre-req. What exactly is the logical argument against this?

There is a mechanical difference between things that require belonging to "any arcane class", and those that just require "arcane power source". There are almost none of the latter because those can be bypassed without necessarily multiclassing (most easily with themes now).
The PH1 FAQ I cited earlier states that you do not count as the role of your multiclass class.

My logical extension was that another trait of the multiclass class, its power source, is a similar mechanical object that would be treated in a similar way.

 
FAQs do not count as rule sources (as crazy as that is). That they specifically named roles and yet were silent on sources, based on the very assumptions I described that were prevelant from the beginning, only serves to highlight that sources are intended to be counted.
Except as Ankiyavon said, most feats say "any [power source]" class, and some even say "any [role] class"


A fighter is a martial class no? And you count as a member of it via a feat.


Now if it it simply said "martial power source" then no.     
Except as Ankiyavon said, most feats say "any [power source]" class, and some even say "any [role] class"


A fighter is a martial class no? And you count as a member of it via a feat.


Now if it it simply said "martial power source" then no.     


And there are a small number (of paragon paths) that do.
Except as Ankiyavon said, most feats say "any [power source]" class, and some even say "any [role] class"


A fighter is a martial class no? And you count as a member of it via a feat.


Now if it it simply said "martial power source" then no.     


And there are a small number (of paragon paths) that do.



ANYTHING that has a pre-requisite of just "power source" is satisfied just by having a single power belonging to that source. So anyone with the Sohei theme automatically qualifies for anything with a requirement of "Divine Power Source".
Except as Ankiyavon said, most feats say "any [power source]" class, and some even say "any [role] class"


A fighter is a martial class no? And you count as a member of it via a feat.


Now if it it simply said "martial power source" then no.     


And there are a small number (of paragon paths) that do.



ANYTHING that has a pre-requisite of just "power source" is satisfied just by having a single power belonging to that source. So anyone with the Sohei theme automatically qualifies for anything with a requirement of "Divine Power Source".


Not to belabour the point, where does that interpretation come from?  I can't find a reference anywhere that says/implies "once you have a power from a power source you 'have' that power source"...
Except as Ankiyavon said, most feats say "any [power source]" class, and some even say "any [role] class"


A fighter is a martial class no? And you count as a member of it via a feat.


Now if it it simply said "martial power source" then no.     


And there are a small number (of paragon paths) that do.



ANYTHING that has a pre-requisite of just "power source" is satisfied just by having a single power belonging to that source. So anyone with the Sohei theme automatically qualifies for anything with a requirement of "Divine Power Source".


Not to belabour the point, where does that interpretation come from?  I can't find a reference anywhere that says/implies "once you have a power from a power source you 'have' that power source"...



Well, it *is* kind of hard to use a flashlight without batteries...


How would you expect a half-elf fighter with magic missile to *use* magic missile without having the arcane power source?  
When you count as a x, and being x means having properties y and z, then you also count as having properties y and z when count as x.

FAQs to the contrary are irrelevant to RAW. It might be an example of RAI. But even then, extending a statement of RAI from a non-RAW source to include something not even mentioned in the FAQ is not, nor ever will be, RAW (and impossible to determine if RAI).
Tichrimo, seriously.  Have you ever multiclassed with a different power source class than your own?  If you have, you'd notice you are not open to taking all the same feats, paragon paths, and ED that that MC class can unless there's a specific requirement of a class feature that you don't get from the MCing.  It really is that simple.  A fighter who MCs as a sorcerer or any arcane class could take the Duel Implement Spellcaster feat if he wanted to, because you have to be an arcane class for it.  There'd be no reason to, but you can.  You also qualify for any PP/ED that require an arcane class as the prereqs.  Same would go if say a sorcerer MCed as a fighter, and then chose the Ultimate Defender ED or whatever it's called where the prereq is Defender role.

But hey if you want to play that way, that's cool.  Defeats some of the purpose of MCing if you limit yourself to only feats/PP/ED/etc that only have the MC class as the prereq, but that's your deal.