[3.5E] New Revision Spotlight article - The Combat Chapter

[Enkhidu]

Mwha? Since when did you need the Sunder feat to break a weapon? Since when was striking a weapon not a combat action?

I think this was simply so they could use the same reasoning as, say, trip or disarm - both are simple attack actions usuable by anybody, and have feats with "improved" in front of them that make them better.

So now you have Disarm, Trip, and Sunder, with improved versions of each - it makes naming conventions consistent.

 

[Renaissance Man]

So now you have Disarm, Trip, and Sunder, with improved versions of each - it makes naming conventions consistent.

I, for one, am all for this. Especially when the naming conventions denote essentially the same thing across the board; i.e., "Improved X" = combat maneuever X, minus the AoO. Much less rules-referencing in the long run.

 

[Spatula]

I think this was simply so they could use the same reasoning as, say, trip or disarm - both are simple attack actions usuable by anybody, and have feats with "improved" in front of them that make them better.

So now you have Disarm, Trip, and Sunder, with improved versions of each - it makes naming conventions consistent.

I like the name change, it makes sense. But whoever wrote that piece seems to think that you needed the feat to attack weapons, and that attacking a weapon was not an attack action. Both of which are wrong.

 

[MerricB]

There was an inconsistency between Attack a Weapon and the Trip or Disarm actions.

Attack a Weapon was a Standard action - you could only do it once a turn.

Trip and Disarm were Special actions, that replaced normal melee attacks.

I think that's what Ed Stark is implying - Attack a weapon will now replace a normal melee attack (so you could do it several times a turn with enough attacks/round).

Cheers!

 

[drnuncheon]

I, for one, am all for this. Especially when the naming conventions denote essentially the same thing across the board; i.e., "Improved X" = combat maneuever X, minus the AoO. Much less rules-referencing in the long run.

...except for Improved Trip.

J

 

[hong]

There was an inconsistency between Attack a Weapon and the Trip or Disarm actions.

Attack a Weapon was a Standard action - you could only do it once a turn.

Trip and Disarm were Special actions, that replaced normal melee attacks.

I think that's what Ed Stark is implying - Attack a weapon will now replace a normal melee attack (so you could do it several times a turn with enough attacks/round).

Attacking a weapon has always been in place of a normal melee attack, though.

 

[Nail]

I think this was simply so they could use the same reasoning as, say, trip or disarm - both are simple attack actions usuable by anybody, and have feats with "improved" in front of them that make them better.

So now you have Disarm, Trip, and Sunder, with improved versions of each - it makes naming conventions consistent.

And being consistant is important: I've recently joined a gaming group that had several of these attack options and the "improved feats" horribly confused. For example, they thought you could not sunder unless you had the feat.

Needless to say, the DM was surprised when I sundered an NPCs weapon......"But you don't have the feat!?"

 

[Spatula]

There was an inconsistency between Attack a Weapon and the Trip or Disarm actions.

Attack a Weapon was a Standard action - you could only do it once a turn.

Trip and Disarm were Special actions, that replaced normal melee attacks.

Striking a weapon/object is listed as a Standard Action (attack) on the summary table in the PHB, pg 128. The other combat maneuvers are not listed. I've always taken the to mean that they are regular attack actions.

 

[MerricB]

Attacking a weapon has always been in place of a normal melee attack, though.

Not the way it is written.

Here's the appropriate text from the SRD:

Disarm(4) [Varies][AoO: Yes]

This action substitutes for a melee attack, not an action. As melee attacks, it can be used once in an attack or charge action, one or more times in a full attack action, or even as an attack of opportunity.

Trip an opponent [Varies][AoO: No]

This attack form substitutes for a melee attack, not an action. As a melee attack, it can be used once in an attack or charge action, one or more times in a full attack action, or even as an attack of opportunity.

Strike a weapon [Standard][AoO: Yes]

Description: A character can use a melee attack with a slashing or bludgeoning weapon to strike a weapon or shield that a character's opponent is holding.

###

The implication is that you take a Standard action to use the Strike a Weapon action, and you get a single melee attack - it doesn't substitute for a melee attack like Trip, Grapple or Disarm.

Cheers!

 

[hong]

Strike a weapon [Standard][AoO: Yes]

Description: A character can use a melee attack with a slashing or bludgeoning weapon to strike a weapon or shield that a character's opponent is holding.

###

The implication is that you take a Standard action to use the Strike a Weapon action, and you get a single melee attack - it doesn't substitute for a melee attack like Trip, Grapple or Disarm.

It says "use a melee attack". Not a standard action, a melee attack. The language moreover is consistent for all special attacks in the PHB.

Strike a weapon: "You can use a melee attack with a slashing or bludgeoning weapon..."

Disarm: "As a melee attack, you may make a disarm attempt..."

Starting a grapple: "Attempting to start a grapple is the equivalent of making a melee attack..."

Trip: "You can try to trip an opponent as a melee attack..."

[PHB pp.136-139]