Post/Author/DateTime

Post

The_Mess 02-10-08, 01:23 AM

Okay, a while back I contributed an idea to a thread looking for twinked-out first level characters (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=750056). My idea (http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=14816247&postcount=64) involved using the Share Soulmeld feat, which has the following prerequisite: Ability to shape soulmelds and a familiar, animal companion, or mount with whom you can share spells. I thought at the time, I was in the clear. The FAQ confirmed that you can qualify for prerequisites with abilities gained from soulmelds, but now... See, I was reading the prerequisite like this: Ability to shape soulmelds and a familiar, animal companion, or (mount with whom you can share spells). That is, the share spells requirement is only on the mount. You can't just buy a horse at the market and share a soulmeld with it, it has to be a special horse (as in, a paladin's mount or equivalent). But it's equally valid to read the line like this: Ability to shape soulmelds and (a familiar, animal companion, or mount) with whom you can share spells. That is, you have to be able to share spells with any of them. The problem is, you can't share spells with a soulspark familiar. If the second reading is true, then the combination doesn't work. This, frankly, wouldn't bother me given 6d6 ranged touch attack acid per turn at first level is pretty overpowered and probably *shouldn't* work, but I've just started a game encouraging rules-abusing over-powered builds and this being the only one I ever found on my own (versus reading about online), I'm a bit proud of it. So, which reading is correct or can I just take ambiguity to my advantage?