Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="VonRichthofen" data-source="post: 3318475" data-attributes="member: 49184">I have cited the relevant passage PHB. As to my humble thinking, had they meant &quot;Standard Action&quot; they wouldn't have named it &quot;Melee Attack&quot;. Now you can say they thought of this as a Standard Action &amp; provided clue to this in the table - but it is still not what is written, even though Patryn's argument follows that line. To me, there is a contradiction between text and table.&nbsp; Apart from that, why should you be capable of using Disarm or Trip several times in a round alltough the discriptive text uses the same wording (&quot;Melee Attack&quot;) ?Actions such as Feint are clearly outlined as Standard Actions - why wouldn't they name &quot;Sunder&quot; in the same and obvious manner? Thus, as long as no official WotC erratum comes up to gainsay this interpretation, I will keep it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="VonRichthofen, post: 3318475, member: 49184"] I have cited the relevant passage PHB. As to my humble thinking, had they meant "Standard Action" they wouldn't have named it "Melee Attack". Now you can say they thought of this as a Standard Action & provided clue to this in the table - but it is still not what is written, even though Patryn's argument follows that line. To me, there is a contradiction between text and table. Apart from that, why should you be capable of using Disarm or Trip several times in a round alltough the discriptive text uses the same wording ("Melee Attack") ? Actions such as Feint are clearly outlined as Standard Actions - why wouldn't they name "Sunder" in the same and obvious manner? Thus, as long as no official WotC erratum comes up to gainsay this interpretation, I will keep it. [/QUOTE]

Verification