Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hypersmurf" data-source="post: 3213548" data-attributes="member: 1656">But the definition of Attack of Opportunity in the glossary is "a single extra attack".  Surely, the phrase "additional attack of opportunity" is nonsensical; it's no longer a single extra attack, but one of a pair of extra attacks.But the glossary defines a bonus as "a positive modifier to a die roll".  An increase in speed is not a positive modifier to a die roll.  An increase in armor class is not a positive modifier to a die roll.  How can these be bonuses, if the glossary contains the authoritative definition of the term?But the glossary definition of competence bonus states that it cannot apply to a damage roll.  How can Greater Bracers of Archery provide a competence bonus to a damage roll, if the glossary contains the authoritative definition of the term?Why is the feat that allows you to deflect javelins, thrown daggers, and crossbow bolts called "Deflect Arrows"?Feat names do not contain rules information.  The feat text contains the rules information.A feat named "Longsword Mastery" which was otherwise word-for-word identical to Improved Unarmed Strike would allow a character to be considered armed while otherwise unarmed, and to deal lethal damage with unarmed strikes.  It would have no effect on his use of a longsword.  The name might be deceptive, but it does not invalidate the effects of the feat.In assorted places, not limited to discussion of unarmed strikes; yes.I don't think Ki Strike is horribly drafted at all.  I think that in any case where the damage dealt by your unarmed attack would otherwise be reduced by DR X/Magic, Ki Strike lets you bypass it.  I think that the drafting differences don't affect the end result, because all the information can be found in the rules, and they do not contradict each other (unless you include the glossary, which I've already agreed I consider incorrect in this case).Goodness, it wouldn't be the first time I've considered a CustServ response to be at ninety degrees to the printed rules!  (On occasion, they manage 180 degrees to another CustServ response to the same question!)Except when it gets them wrong.-Hyp.</blockquote>

Verification