Search results

Two attacks First Attack: ... Hit: ...Make a secondary attack. Secondary Attack: ... Second Attack: ... Hit: ... Make a secondary attack. Secondary Attack: ...

Yes, but saying "oh, we're just having an honest debate" and then following it up with "your rule-bending interpretation makes a fine house rule" is, frankly, disingenuous. It makes it very clear that you're not even listening to the actual points we're raising and are dismissing us out of hand...

You mean like the clarification two posts above yours? :)

Half-right, half-wrong. You must be a swordmage to take Intelligent Blademaster (multiclassing makes you count as a swordmage for feat purposes). However, Intelligent Blademaster is not a power, it is a feat, and even if the swordmage class powers specified that they had to be used with a blade...

Per the Stealth rules update:

Umm...no, it doesn't. In fact, the feat is very clear that it does not require you to be using a light or heavy blade. First of all, not all heavy/light blades are swords. Glaives are heavy blades and therefore usable by swordmages and all swordmage powers/class features, and the khopesh is...

Yeah, it's purely for simplicity and ease of play. If you want more detail, you're unlikely to break anything.

So, by that logic, my ranger can't use tiger's reflex because he isn't a tiger? :P

If it's generally considered rude to dismiss people's interpretations of the rules as a house rule, it's certainly rude to call them cheating. In this case, it's also inaccurate--Drudenfusz is talking about "allowing" the feat to work with a thrown javelin, suggesting he's the DM. Even if the...

No, because a Melee attack power is a melee attack. You can't replace a melee attack with a ranged attack.

You'd be correct if the Secondary Attack was an Effect, but it's not. "Make a secondary attack" is part of the Hit line. It's not an effect. Following this logic, where do you draw the line? "Make a secondary attack" is part of the Hit line, every bit as much as "2d8 + Wisdom modifier...

Exactly correct. There is nothing in the power that separates "make a secondary attack" from any other result of the "Hit" line. Arguing that the secondary attack only applies once is equivalent to suggesting that the damage from the attack only occurs once.

Every time you hit, you inflict all the effects of a hit. In the case of battle pyres, that includes the secondary attack. It's a very nasty little power.

Umm...why exactly should they all be identical? They're all different items that work differently.

An attack and an attack power are not necessarily the same thing. Rain of blows is an attack power that allows you to make multiple attacks. If it were a single attack with multiple targets (e.g. a hypothetical close blast 3 attack power that targets "three enemies in blast"), then you'd be...

As a general rule, the actual text of a rule always trumps the brief summaries you might see on tables.

This is correct. The target for rain of blows' primary attacks is "one creature." Not entirely true. Declaring the target of an attack is part of the attack itself. In the case of rain of blows, as you said, it doesn't matter because both have to be against the same target, so if the first...

At least he didn't say one of his players was planning to jump off the roof to use healing surges. :)

The question of whether a versatile weapon used in two hands counts as a two-handed weapon (because it's being wielded in two hands) or a one-handed weapon (because it's still part of the one-handed weapon group). The language in the PHB is never entirely clear and sometimes suggests one...

"You cannot take multiclass feats for your own class" is not a prerequisite for a feat, it's a general restriction on a type of feat. You don't count as a rogue for the purposes of general restrictions, you count as one for meeting the prerequisites of feats. Notice that the Prerequisite line on...