Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ARandomGod" data-source="post: 2784609" data-attributes="member: 17296">I have to disagree. I don't see the rules as written saying that you have to give up an attack first. If I'm missing some phrase, please point it out. But the phase that's there (...as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt.) doesn't qualify as saying you have to give up an attack in a trip attempt as prerequisite to making the attack the feat grants. It does say "If you trip an opponent in melee combat, you immediately get a melee attack against that opponent " which means that with the feat, if you trip an opponent in melee combat*, you immediately get a melee attack against that opponent. ... the following "as if..." phrase meantioned above simply clarifies that you do get this attack even IF you used one on the trip attempt, it does not say that you HAVE to have used one.Now, of course, if the AoO granted from Elusive Target doesn't count as melee combat, there's a RAW justification why this combo wouldn't work.Now I get to ask, where did they 'clarify' this? Was it in a rules errata, or just in an article interpreting the rules? And what was the clarification on, exactly? (And who did the clarification, for that matter) Because an errata on the Knockdown feat wouldn't effect the Improved Trip feat nor the Elusive Target feat... indeed the existence of such an errata would be proof that without the errata for either of those two feat they DO combine.  For that matter, the existance of someone, anyone, making a 'clarification' demonstrates that the rule As Written allows these two feats to combine.Of course, that does confirm my suspicion that the original feat (improved trip) assumed that you'd have to be giving up an attack, and therefore didn't see the need to make it a requirement that you do so. And also possibly that the writers of the Elusive Target didn't see this potential (or won't admit to it, or hoped noone would meantion it).  However, without errata to re-word the rule, as it is currently written it would allow you to follow up your successful trip attempt with an attack, no matter how you got the trip attempt. Note: I am, at this point, speaking from a highly Lawful "Rules As Written" viewpoint and not a more reasonable "rules as intended", or even "rules as balanced" viewpoint.  In general I play more in the second (and third) catagory, and not in RAW mode. But to fully understand and control Chaos (creativity) you have to fully understand Law, in all it's forms. For Law is a creation of chaos, and really simply a temporary manifestation within chaos.</blockquote>

Verification