Question about S&S feat

[BlindKobold]

I can read the skill description on page 64 of the PHB, where it explicitly states that your target only loses their Dex against your next attack.

You are looking at only half of the equation is the problem. And actually referring to FEINT, as opposed to Quicker than the Eye since obviously Quicker than the Eye is in S&S, not PHB.

The confusion, I'm guessing, is coming from the fact that expert tactician states that ANYTIME an opponent is denied their DEX bonus, you can make an extra attack. It further states that this attack can happen BEFORE or after your normal action. Therefore, which really comes first?

For example....

ME - I use Quicker than the Eye and succeed.

Action - I go to attack... whoops... he's denied his DEX, therefore Expert Tactician IMMEDIATELY kicks in. I can now make an attack BEFORE the attack I just started to make, then finish by making the attack I started. True?

Not that different. Quicker than the Eye let's you do a partial action, but they still don't lose their Dex bonus until you take that partial action.

There is no point to this statement that I can see. As Expert Tactician states, ANYTIME an opponent is denied their DEX, you can make an attack.... the attack may be BEFORE or AFTER your normal action.

Again...

ME - Quicker than the Eye
Partial - Start to do a partial action --- EXPERT TACTICIAN steps in and grants me an attack BEFORE or AFTER this current action.

It doesn't matter if you were meaning to refer to page 127 or not, that's the rules that cover using two partial actions for a full round action, and it very clearly does not apply to the Full Attack Action. The Sage cannot change the rules in the PHB, he can only offer clarifications. He made a rulling specifically regarding haste and full round spells. It doesn't apply to the Full Attack Action, and it wouldn't be a valid ruling even if he did say that it did. That would be errata, and he can't release official errata.

I agree (as I stated in my previous post) that until something official does come out, the sage HAS set a precedent that two partials can be combined into a full.

As far as the Sage not releasing errata... the DnD FAQ is considered errata I believe, or at least the "official" interpretation of the rules. If you compare the errata with the sage advice column, you will find many word for word sections. Therefore, it can be concluded that either A) The sage does release errata, or B) The sage releases official interpretations of rules. He is not the ONLY person who does, but it's obvious that he has a huge part in the FAQ at least.

It's not a gray area at all. A single attack by itself is not a partial action. (A partial action can be used to make an attack, but the attack itself is not a partial action.)

I agree with this.

An Attack of Opportunity is a single attack, and it is very clearly not a partial action.

True... it's also a special case rule that is outside and beyond normal attacks.

A Speed weapon grants a single extra attack, and explicitly states that it is not an extra partial action.

And as you state, the description SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT IT IS NOT AN EXTRA PARTIAL ACITON. The description for Expert Tactician does not explicitly state it is not an extra partial action. However, as I stated earlier, I would tend to agree, having re-read the S&F errata that it does not, in fact, grant a partial action.

So, as I stated earlier, COMPLETELY is a powerful word. Don't misuse it.

I didn't.

Well, since I wasn't COMPLETELY wrong... just PARTIALLY wrong...you DID misuse it. It's ok for you to be wrong.... really...


Anyway... I am done bantering semantics with you. I have to get back to work.

 

[Caliban]

For example....

ME - I use Quicker than the Eye and succeed.

Action - I go to attack... whoops... he's denied his DEX, therefore Expert Tactician IMMEDIATELY kicks in. I can now make an attack BEFORE the attack I just started to make, then finish by making the attack I started. True?

False. You can't go back in time. Since they didn't lose their Dex until you started the action, you now only have the option of taking the extra attack after your partial action.

IF They had been denied their dex before you started your action, you could have taken the extra attack either before or after your action, but you would have had to decide before you took the action, not in the middle of taking your action.

I agree (as I stated in my previous post) that until something official does come out, the sage HAS set a precedent that two partials can be combined into a full.

He has set no such precedent.

The PHB makes a specific allowance for combining two partials into a Miscellaneous Full Round Action from table 8-4 on page 128 from the PHB.

The Sage made a clarifcation in the Tome and Blood that expands that to include Full Round spells. This is an option, not a core rule.

It in no way applies to the Full Attack Action.

Well, since I wasn't COMPLETELY wrong... just PARTIALLY wrong...you DID misuse it. It's ok for you to be wrong.... really...

I'm wrong all the time. And I admit it when I am. However, I was not wrong in this case.

 

[AuraSeer]

[Oops, posted to the wrong thread. It's late, I've got no coffee, ignore me.]

 

[FANGO]

Actually...in 3e, you can go back in time ;-)

If someone walks away from you, and then after that decides that he would like to do something else that round, you get a retroactive attack of opportunity on him because he did something other than move in the round.

Not that that means anything, just proving that you can indeed go back in time in 3e (and you can also teleport...anyone else think it's weird that all your movement happens on your turn? ah well)

 

[Madfox]

If someone walks away from you, and then after that decides that he would like to do something else that round, you get a retroactive attack of opportunity on him because he did something other than move in the round.

::stares at the above remark for some time before deciding to react - realizing it probably was a joke, but having seen a similar remark seconds earlier on Monte Cook's message board cannot keep his mouth shut::

If you as a DM allow a PC that opted for the retreat action let do anything besides moving, you are IMO doing something wrong. Just describe retreating as a full round action and suddenly it becomes much less difficult for all involved to deal with.