Tell me more ×
Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 8 down vote favorite

I have a Psion(Egoist)/Thrallherd with Psychic Reformation. I'm wondering whether I can use Psychic Reformation to drop the points in Diplomacy and the Inquisitor feat, and reassign the points to something else. Also, when I reform myself, I remain a Thrallherd. Does this mean I don't have to spend 8 points on Diplomacy, as it's already a class skill, thus letting me just put the required 4 points into Diplomacy, and use the other 4 on something else?

share|improve this question

3 Answers

up vote 3 down vote accepted

Leaving aside the question of whether any self-respecting DM would let you pull this kind of crap...

As per the SRD, "the subject can choose to spend its most recently gained skill points differently". To me, that means that you get to spend those points within the same constraints as when they were originally used, so you wouldn't get to count Diplomacy as a class skill.

And if you're planning to get them in a new level, you're forgetting that once you no longer meet the prerequisites to enter a PrC, you can no longer gain a level on that PrC until you meet them again (and, depending on whose word you take, you also lose all benefits of the PrC). Therefore, as soon as you level up, you won't be able to gain a new level of Thrallherd.

share|improve this answer
1  
Strictly speaking, losing the benefits of a PrC when you lose its prerequisites only applies to the PrCs in Complete Warrior and Complete Arcane, since only those books contained rules to that effect. They do seem to imply that these rules are global, but 1. that contradicts the DMG, 2. the errata rules state that in case of contradiction, the primary source (DMG in this case) wins, and 3. applying those rules globally breaks quite a few PrCs (such as Dragon Disciple, whose capstone prevents it from meeting its own prerequisites). – KRyan Dec 30 '12 at 19:24
@KRyan: Like I said, that depens on whose word you take. The issue is that, no matter your answer, there is always some contradiction (e.g., if you play by "you can no longer gain a level on a PrC if you don't meet the prerequisites", you can't take more than one level in Ur-Priest). In the end you should really just rely on common sense. – Yandros Dec 31 '12 at 0:16
No, you do not always get a contradiction. As I just said, that rule applies to Complete Arcane and Complete Warrior only. Applying it to any other book's content is a houserule, and will lead to contradictions as you say. The official rules have a contradiction but have rules for resolving it, which simultaneously resolves the other conflicts. – KRyan Dec 31 '12 at 0:43
@KRyan: The rule in CW and CA is actually a copy/paste from the 3rd ed. rules on PrCs. 3.5 ed. does not define any rule contradicting them in any of the core books, so "that only applies in those books only" is just an assumption on your part and should never be treated as an unquestionable truth like you are doing. That said, this discussion does not add any value in answering the question it's on, so I won't continue it further. – Yandros Dec 31 '12 at 4:31
up vote 2 down vote

I really feel like this use of Psychic Reformation goes against the intent of the power. The power is intended to let you remake poor decisions, not eliminate prestige class prerequisites. As a DM, I would never allow a player to Psychic Reformation away their prestige class prereqs.

That said, the rules text backing that up is very shaky. There's no mention of prerequisites in the test of the power, and there is no errata mentioning them either. The only thing that's related that I can find in the text of the power is:

The subject must abide by the standard rules for selecting skills and feats, and so it 
cannot take feats for which it doesn’t qualify or take crossclass skills as class skills.

This makes me believe that you cannot end up with an invalid character after you finish redoing skills and feats. Since you can't take Thrallherd without first taking its prerequisites, you can't Reform those prerequisites away.

Again, this is not a strict rules interpretation, it's more of an inference about what the intent of the power is, and a logical extension of the power's rules. In any case, if you no longer meet the prerequisites for Thrallherd, you can't take further levels of the class.

share|improve this answer
1  
I think the power wouldn't be a problem if they remembered to add "or remove something used as a prerequisite" to the list at the end there. – Yandros Apr 29 '12 at 18:47
up vote 0 down vote

Sounds good to me. Neither the skill points nor the inquisitor feat are required for any of the thrallherd's abilities to function, so losing the feat/skills wouldn't de-power it's abilities, you simply couldn't gain further levels in the class till you reacquired the pre-reqs. Though, if you're only going for 1 level, it might be worth more to just pick up the leadership feat. Though, after reading through power documentation, it seems fully possible, if you're willing to spend the xp on it, to take 10 levels of thrallherd, then Reformat yourself back 10 levels and reapply all those skills and feats however you want. Sure your DM can rule however they want, since their word trumps source material, but by the wording itself this is perfectly acceptable.

And no where in the description does it say you must spend the skills based on your character at the time. So yes, you technically could take the 8 points out of the 4 cross class, and respend them as a class skill which it now is.

If anything, the only problem I see is that the power level seems a bit low for what it can do. The only arcane or divine way of replicating this effect is through wish or miracle and since it's not listed as a safe wish, the DM will probably screw you for trying it. Maybe if the power was 8 or 9 and/or the xp cost was 50 xp per character level per level you wanted to revision, it might be a little more balanced.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.