Complete Adventurer (merged)

[Marshall]

The Attack (Ranged) action is, but Manyshot doesn't use the Attack (Ranged) action. It's a standard action... but because it's an attack with a ranged weapon, it draws an AoO per the text of AoOs.

Manyshot is not the attack action with a ranged weapon; that's why it can't be combined with Shot on the Run.

Hence, if you read it the way Skip did, Manyshot doesnt draw an AoO.
Its not an Attack with a ranged weapon, its a Manyshot with a ranged weapon.

Its a whole heck of a lot easier all around to just admit that Skip was full of BS 90% of the time. Note that there is no balance reason to disallow MS+SotR, and by extension SA+DS. And just get on with our lives...

 

[Hypersmurf]

Hence, if you read it the way Skip did, Manyshot doesnt draw an AoO.

Of course it does.

Its not an Attack with a ranged weapon, its a Manyshot with a ranged weapon.

It's not the Attack action with a ranged weapon. It's still an attack: just read the feat. "For every five points of base attack bonus you have above +6, you may add one additional arrow to this attack."

It's clearly an attack; it's with a ranged weapon; attacking with a ranged weapon provokes an AoO.

"Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Casting a spell and attacking with a ranged weapon, for example, are distracting actions."

-Hyp.

 

[Gez]

Kewl. Hypersmurf and co. just demonstrated why everybody should ban Manyshot and similar feats.

 

[Morrow]

Kewl. Hypersmurf and co. just demonstrated why everybody should ban Manyshot and similar feats.

I disagree. Every feat is currently formated like this:

FEAT NAME [TYPE OF FEAT]
Prerequisite: A minimum ability score, another feat or feats, a minimum base attack bonus, a minimum number of ranks in one or more skills, or a class level that a character must have in order to acquire this feat. This entry is absent if a feat has no prerequisite. A feat may have more than one prerequisite.
Benefit: What the feat enables the character (“you” in the feat description) to do. If a character has the same feat more than once, its benefits do not stack unless indicated otherwise in the description.
In general, having a feat twice is the same as having it once.
Normal: What a character who does not have this feat is limited to or restricted from doing. If not having the feat causes no particular drawback, this entry is absent.
Special: Additional facts about the feat that may be helpful when you decide whether to acquire the feat.

Hypersmurf and company have just demonstrated that between the "Prerequisite" and "Benefit" lines, there should be an "Action" line which clearly states what kind of action it is to use the feat. Otherwise, we're forced to parse the "Benefit" and "Normal" text, and get into laborious arguments like the one chronicled above.

They've also demonstrated that even our most conscientious board citizens can't stay on topic when a point of rules minutia presents itself. "Gee," thinks Morrow to himself, "this thread about Complete Adventurer would be really useful, if it was actually about Complete Adventurer."

Morrow

EDIT: That's "Conscientious," not "Contentious." Stupid spell-checker.

 

[Gez]

Contentious did fit, however.