Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 4594061" data-attributes="member: 19675">I addressed that before- you chose to ignore it.There is language ADDED to the 3.5PHB and other books in the Complete series (the aforementioned language about fists being natural weapons) that apparently has zero game effect according to WotC and the majority of players.Whether they intended to remove the language about pp being required to manifest a Mind Blade or not is something we cannot know without asking.&nbsp; Until WotC actually addresses the issue, what we have is the RAW.&nbsp; As it stands, that language is not contradictory to any other language within the class entry.I disagree:seems pretty explicit to me.Sure its a rule.&nbsp; The text in the Soulknife entry is a unique modifier to a rule elsewhere in the XPH.Wild Talent has, in its primary text, one purpose- to provide a PP reserve for PCs that otherwise wouldn't have one.The section in the Soulknife is both a reminder of that function PLUS a mechanical addition to the text of the feat, a modification unique to that class.&nbsp; In that, its no less a rule than treating Monks' unarmed strikes as both natural and manufactured weapons, or their ability to use only certain weapons with FoB.Really, you're asking for a level of drafting sophistication in this game that is often absent in the Codes of Law I deal with for work.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dannyalcatraz, post: 4594061, member: 19675"] I addressed that before- you chose to ignore it. There is language [I]ADDED[/I] to the 3.5PHB and other books in the Complete series (the aforementioned language about fists being natural weapons) that apparently has [B]zero[/B] game effect according to WotC and the majority of players. Whether they intended to remove the language about pp being required to manifest a Mind Blade or not is something we cannot know without asking. Until WotC actually addresses the issue, what we have is the RAW. As it stands, that language is not contradictory to any other language within the class entry. I disagree: seems pretty explicit to me. Sure its a rule. The text in the Soulknife entry is a unique modifier to a rule elsewhere in the XPH. Wild Talent has, in its primary text, one purpose- to provide a PP reserve for PCs that otherwise wouldn't have one. The section in the Soulknife is both a reminder of that function PLUS a mechanical addition to the text of the feat, a modification unique to that class. In that, its no less a rule than treating Monks' unarmed strikes as both natural and manufactured weapons, or their ability to use only certain weapons with FoB. Really, you're asking for a level of drafting sophistication in this game that is often absent in the Codes of Law I deal with for work. [/QUOTE]

Verification