Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TYPO5478" data-source="post: 2954414" data-attributes="member: 37531">Not true.&nbsp; Both Disarm and Trip are discribed as Melee Attacks, which, as you point out, the rules stipulate take a Standard Action.&nbsp; In this case, the table and the text actually disagree, and the Errata precedent requires that we consider the table incorrect.Let us use your test: &quot;Assuming the text and the table are both correct, does this work?&quot;<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">The Trip and Disarm descriptions refer to a game term defined as a Standard action pages earlier in the same chapter.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Table 8-2 defines both Trip and Disarm as not being standard actions.</li>
</ul>At this point, the text and table conflict.&nbsp; Assuming the text to be correct (and we must, since no corrigenda have been issued to correct it), the table is either wrong about Trip and Disarm or it is wrong about Sunder.&nbsp; The only alternative assumption that we can make is that the phrase &quot;melee attack&quot; does not have the same meaning in every context.In which case, how do we determine what exactly that phrase means?Take for example the term &quot;white house.&quot;&nbsp; Now, it could apply to the President's abode at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC.&nbsp; Further, via metonymy, it may refer to the President himself or his administration as a whole.&nbsp; Or it could simply mean a house, any house, that happens to be painted white.&nbsp; Similarly, the construction &quot;melee attack&quot; may specifically reference the game term (which is defined as a Standard Action), or it could mean &quot;an attack made during melee combat.&quot;Tune in next week when I list the numerous definitions of &quot;is&quot;.&nbsp; &nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="TYPO5478, post: 2954414, member: 37531"] Not true. Both Disarm and Trip are discribed as Melee Attacks, which, as you point out, the rules stipulate take a Standard Action. In this case, the table and the text actually disagree, and the Errata precedent requires that we consider the table incorrect. Let us use your test: "Assuming the text and the table are both correct, does this work?" [list]The Trip and Disarm descriptions refer to a game term defined as a Standard action pages earlier in the same chapter.[/list] [list]Table 8-2 defines both Trip and Disarm as not being standard actions.[/list] At this point, the text and table conflict. Assuming the text to be correct (and we must, since no corrigenda have been issued to correct it), the table is either wrong about Trip and Disarm or it is wrong about Sunder. The only alternative assumption that we can make is that the phrase "melee attack" does not have the same meaning in every context. In which case, how do we determine what exactly that phrase means? Take for example the term "white house." Now, it could apply to the President's abode at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC. Further, via metonymy, it may refer to the President himself or his administration as a whole. Or it could simply mean a house, any house, that happens to be painted white. Similarly, the construction "melee attack" may specifically reference the game term (which is defined as a Standard Action), or it could mean "an attack made during melee combat." Tune in next week when I list the numerous definitions of "is". ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification