Attack of Opportunity during an attack of opportunity?

[Anubis]

From Sunder: "You can use a melee attack"

From Disarm: "As a melee attack"

From Trip: "as an unarmed melee attack"

These use the say phrasing and thus work the same way. All three say "a melee attack", and therefore all three actions are melee attacks.

The problem is that YOU ARE MISINTERPRETING THE TABLE. Actually, chances are more likely that the table just put the action in the wrong place. Either way, the text says it all and the FAQ clarifies exactly that.

A better way of looking at this: If WotC didn't think it was right, it wouldn't be in the OFFICIAL FAQ on the OFFICIAL web site. Get it?

 

[AGGEMAM]

<snipped> Get it?

Yes, but you don't appearantly.


Sorry to be so blunt here, but it's really not a matter of right or wrong. (Well, it is but that another point). It's a matter of interpretation.

I and a whole slew of other people as you've seen in this thread is of the opinion that the FAQ cannot change the rules, therefore we ignore Skip's interpretation until it is official. That the real point. I hope you got that.

 

[James McMurray]

I knew it would happen as soon as it cam up. Look folks, the rules contradict themselves (whether Hyp thinks they do or not). Just use whichever version you prefer and either point to the table entry or the FAQ for your backup.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I knew it would happen as soon as it cam up.

Law of nature

Look folks, the rules contradict themselves (whether Hyp thinks they do or not).

I can't agree

-Hyp.

 

[Tharen the Damned]

Arrow is fired.
It moves half the distance to the target.
It moves half the distance to the target again.
and again.
and again.

And it can keep doing so an infinite number of times - so how does it ever hit the target?

Just don´t use those weeny stickers!

Go for the real Two Handed Cutting Fun.

It hits and cuts half the distance through the body.
It cuts half the disatnce through the body again.
and again
and again.

Neverending Slaying Fun!

 

[Anubis]

Yes, but you don't appearantly.


Sorry to be so blunt here, but it's really not a matter of right or wrong. (Well, it is but that another point). It's a matter of interpretation.

I and a whole slew of other people as you've seen in this thread

I've seen a handful, not a slew. There's you and Hypersmurf and . . . ?

is of the opinion that the FAQ cannot change the rules, therefore we ignore Skip's interpretation until it is official.

It IS official. OFFICIAL FAQ on the OFFICIAL web site. WotC endorses it as the proper interpretation, therefore making it official. Your interpretation CAN'T trump the interpretation of the writers and publishers of the book. Unless you work for WotC, you're automatically wrong because you can't say they're wrong as THEY ARE THE OWNERS. They own the rights and they call the shots. If you don't follow their rules, you're not playing their game, thus making your interpretation a house rule. I go by what WotC says officially.

Even by your argument ("until it is official"), I am right as IT IS.

That the real point. I hope you got that.

Blarg. Why do I bother with people who don't pay attention to the basics? Ya' know, things like "the developers have the final say on what's official, and they say I'm right"?

 

[tauton_ikhnos]

I've seen a handful, not a slew. There's you and Hypersmurf and . . . ?

And me, probably. But really, consensus is often a poor measure of correct action.

Your interpretation CAN'T trump the interpretation of the writers and publishers of the book.

...even if they obviously haven't read their own rules. A writer can "interpret" his own writing all he wants - doesn't change what we read. If they made a mistake in what they wrote, well, they should issue errata. Not creatively "interpret" it to mean what they thought they said.

Unless you work for WotC, you're automatically wrong because you can't say they're wrong as THEY ARE THE OWNERS.

Funny thing about this: they aren't. They are the owners of the right to print or publish it. They are also the original source, and thus, considered to have some authority. But the final authority is what was written - that's why lawyers work so hard on their contracts, because saying, "well, I meant..." is a very weak legal argument. The document is writ.

I go by what WotC says officially.

So do I. Where we differ is in WHICH official thing WotC has said.

 

[Anubis]

And me, probably. But really, consensus is often a poor measure of correct action.

...even if they obviously haven't read their own rules. A writer can "interpret" his own writing all he wants - doesn't change what we read. If they made a mistake in what they wrote, well, they should issue errata. Not creatively "interpret" it to mean what they thought they said.

There was no mistake, though. One notation was "overlooked" on the TABLE, but the text clearly states what is meant to be, so they didn't make a mistake. The only "mistake", if you can call it that, is that they didn't make it clear on the table. Since the text does make it clear, that pretty much ends any argument. The text states "as a melee attack", and that's all that's needed.

Funny thing about this: they aren't. They are the owners of the right to print or publish it. They are also the original source, and thus, considered to have some authority. But the final authority is what was written - that's why lawyers work so hard on their contracts, because saying, "well, I meant..." is a very weak legal argument. The document is writ.

So do I. Where we differ is in WHICH official thing WotC has said.

A rules booklet is not a legal document. Anytime something is up for interpretation, their word is the law. The book SAYS that Sunder is a melee attack, but due to a weird notation on the table, some think there is a second interpretation. Legally speaking, if there are ever multiple interpretation s of the same thing, the writers/owners (the book writers and WotC in this case) make the final determination, and they have. According to the developers and publishers, Sunder is, in fact, an attack, and can be used in the same way as Disarm and Grapple and Trip.

 

[dcollins]

I've seen a handful, not a slew. There's you and Hypersmurf and . . . ?

And myself. Skip cannot change the written rules in the FAQ. That's what errata is for.

Hey, you should reply again and use the word "OFFICIAL" in all caps and say "their word is the law" maybe 3 or 4 more times. I'm sure that would convince everbody if you just did that again.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Let's steer clear of 'snarky', gentlemen...

-Hyp.
(Moderator)