Follow Up Blow question

[Aulirophile]

I'm not so sure ""...may be used as a melee basic attack" is in any way different from "is a basic attack."

Bracers of the Perfect Shot add their damage bonus to Magic Missile, for instance. And the melee equivalent item works for druid powers like Grasping Claws.

And that works because you are using it "in place of." I make an RBA (with x). You get all the normal bonuses an RBA would get.

I am not claiming that makes any kind of sense, just that those are the rules. If a power can be used as a basic attack is gets any benefits that you would normally get... but that doesn't make it a basic attack.

 

[Kingreaper]

And that works because you are using it "in place of." I make an RBA (with x). You get all the normal bonuses an RBA would get.

I am not claiming that makes any kind of sense, just that those are the rules. If a power can be used as a basic attack is gets any benefits that you would normally get... but that doesn't make it a basic attack.

"Can be used in place of" doesn't get the bonuses.

"Can be used as a" either gets the bonuses, and IS a basic attack, or doesn't get the bonuses, and ISN'T, your choice.
(Except when you're allowed to make a basic attack, in which case is has to be a basic attack)



In other words: if something is getting bonuses that only apply to basic attacks, it is, at that point in time, a basic attack.

 

[Aulirophile]

"Can be used in place of" doesn't get the bonuses.

"Can be used as a" either gets the bonuses, and IS a basic attack, or doesn't get the bonuses, and ISN'T, your choice.
(Except when you're allowed to make a basic attack, in which case is has to be a basic attack)



In other words: if something is getting bonuses that only apply to basic attacks, it is, at that point in time, a basic attack.

No. Any power that says "Can be used as/in place of a Ranged Basic Attack" gets bonuses from Eagle Eye Goggles, for instance. Does that it an RBA? Nope, it is still a power that can be used in place of an RBA. The wording is different, the ruling is consistent.

Again, I concede this does not make a ton of sense.

 

[DarkLord Of DForce]

Whoah - I thought that anytime you were allowed to replace an MBA with a power, that you got everthing along with that power.

We've always played it that way in our campaign. For example, Power of Skill lets me use Overwhelming Strike for an MBA. So I get the movement abilities along with it.

First time I'd seen anyone say that you don't get the substituted powers abilities... is there some reference to support that?

Thanks.

 

[Kingreaper]

No. Any power that says "Can be used as/in place of a Ranged Basic Attack" gets bonuses from Eagle Eye Goggles, for instance. Does that it an RBA? Nope, it is still a power that can be used in place of an RBA. The wording is different, the ruling is consistent.

Again, I concede this does not make a ton of sense.

The ruling is consistent where? In the rules themselves? No, it's pretty clear that the wording that "in place of" (which I can't remember seeing for RBA's, only MBA's) and "as" have different meanings.

In character builder? Character builder isn't a rules source. Can't check right now whether character builder gets it wrong, but it WOULD be wrong if it gave Eagle Eye bonuses to "in place of" powers, because at no point are they an RBA, and thus at no point do they fit the definition of a power to which Eagle Eye bonuses apply.

Unless there's some rule somewhere that I'm missing that says otherwise?



And to illustrate why I'm sure there's a difference, look at Avalanche Hammers. They specifically require you do a charge and end it with an MBA. If anything used in place of an MBA gets the bonuses, then it's impossible to charge and not get the bonuses. So why do they specify it must be an MBA? Makes no sense under that interpretation.
But if you take the words as meaning what they say, suddenly it makes perfect sense. It stops you stacking OTHER powers with an extra [W] of damage.
(you can still get a Vanguard weapon, but it's a difference anyway)

 

[Aulirophile]

Whoah - I thought that anytime you were allowed to replace an MBA with a power, that you got everthing along with that power.

We've always played it that way in our campaign. For example, Power of Skill lets me use Overwhelming Strike for an MBA. So I get the movement abilities along with it.

First time I'd seen anyone say that you don't get the substituted powers abilities... is there some reference to support that?

Thanks.

No, you're correct. He is having a semantic argument with himself... that doesn't have rules support. This is generally due the nature of inconsistent wording on various items, abilities, feats, and etc., that create a bit of confusion.

 

[Kingreaper]

No, you're correct. He is having a semantic argument with himself... that doesn't have rules support. This is generally due the nature of inconsistent wording on various items, abilities, feats, and etc., that create a bit of confusion.

I'm sorry, "can be used in place of" now means "can be used as"?

Why do you ASSUME that the plain english interpretation of the rules is wrong?

It makes perfect sense to use it with the plain english interpretation ("can be used in place of" means: when you could do X, you can do this instead; "can be used as" means: this can be a type of X)

For example: Barbecue sauce can be used in place of ketchup on a burger.
(if you use barbecue sauce on a burger it doesn't become ketchup, but it takes the place that ketchup would have taken)

An old chair leg can be used as a fence post, when one needs replacing
(if you use an old chair leg, it'll be a fence post, with different properties to the standard fence post, but still a fence post)


The rules support is the fact that those are the wordings of the rules. What more support is needed? Would you ask for rules support that walking provokes OAs, and deny the use of any sections on walking, or OAs?

 

[NMcCoy]

To me, "as a" and "in place of" have very clear different meanings, and (everywhere I've been able to check) the CB handles these cases differently and correctly. Note that making Magic Missile, for example, count "as a" ranged basic (and get the benefits of being one) would require extra coding - and as such, is clearly "CB addressing a rules case" rather than "CB overlooking a rules case". The CB is not a rules source, but if something's been specifically implemented a certain way (as opposed to left unimplemented) that's a good sign that it's how the rules work.