D&D 3E/3.5 Shuriken have changed in 3.5E

[Jesuit]

"If a character had a Spiked Chain and the Cleave feat, would you allow them to use their Cleave attempt to Trip someone? By the rules, this is allowed, even though it doesn't say (under Cleave or Trip) that you can "combine" these feats/tactics.

If someone has Cleave and Greater Cleave, do you allow them to take advantage of both? If I kill someone, can I Cleave AND Great Cleave the same opponent? By the rules I beleive this is allowed (someone correct me if I am wrong)."

No I wouldn't, but that would be a house rule. We decided that if your attack kills, your cleave must do damage. Purely conjecture, but the nature of the Feat is that you swing hard enough to kill something and then follow through. Our ruling was that following that up with a trip isn't in the spirit of the Feat.

As to Cleave and Greater Cleave, no because you can't have two "simultaneous" attacks. They both must take place immediately, so by definition one can't follow the other.

"Speed is stated not to stack with Haste. TWF is not stated not to stack with Rapid Shot."

Nor is it stated to specifically stack with Rapid Shot. Nothing definitive there.

Both Feats still are a benefit. Both allow you to get an extra attack, through different means and for different types of combat. Don't like them? Don't take them.

"How is it not a house rule? You are clearly basing your "interpretation" off of old 3.0 rules, not 3.5. No where, as it is written in the 3.5 rules, does it suggest that TWF + Flurry + Rapid Shot don't stack. It does in 3.0, but not 3.5. There is a also a difference between how the "3.5 mechanics are supposed to work" and how they actually DO work. One is written in the rule book, the other is being made up by you..."

Last time I'm saying this. We are making nothing up. Nowhere in the PHB is there an example of all three of these mechanics being used in the same attack sequence. We use the 3.0 ruling because it's the only written example we have, and unless Skip Williams shows up at my door telling me that we were mistaken about 3.5 and the ambidexterity removal, it's not changing. That's not a House rule, it's how we view the rules governing the two feats.

Now I really am wasting my time, so I'll make it easier for everyone.

*Cut and paste opportunity*

"You are right! I see your wisdom!"
-Jesuit

I never have understood the incredible need of people on message boards to be right. If it is so important for you to be correct about TWF + Rapid Shot + Flurry, then be my guest. I'll never agree, but so what. Just cut my comment, add it to your post or sig or whatever, and have a nice life. Good day.

 

[Liquidsabre]

I never have understood the incredible need of people on message boards to be right.

Me neither, particularly in your case Jesuit. I don't get it but I don't have to I suppose. More power to you just the same. I'm glad you and your players are satisfied with the game as you play it and that is as it should be.

Folk here on the boards are just trying to help, try not to get to cross with them, but it is difficult to hold a discussion with someone who does not believe in a right/wrong or correct/incorrect but instead holds a general philosophy that everything is relative and definition/meaning are entirely based on point of view. I usually stay away from such discussions at is quite the waste of time and there is no sense in trying to help someone that obviously does not want to be helped.

Badgering and nose-sticking I can withstand but when it's done to the community (who again only try to help others out a love of the game and for the sake of others) I cannot stand. Just leave the issue to rest and back away, if you cannot you are only likely to stir up further resentment on the issue. Something that aids no one. ENWorld boards have alot to offer as it's a wonderful place to congregate and discuss with others about the game we love, but its best to ease into such things (especially with so many here all with a variety of insights and opinions) and to take things easy. No sense hardlining until you are sure as to what it is exactly you are standing on.

 

[Camarath]

Nor is it stated to specifically stack with Rapid Shot. Nothing definitive there.

But it does set a precedence for stating that if abilities, which grant additional attack, do not stack then they will be stated not to stack. How can one tell if an ability that grants an additional attack stacks or does not stack with other similar abilities if not by whether or not it is stated not to stack with certain other additional attack granting abilities (since stacking seems to be the defualt in this case since non-stacking abilities are the stated exceptions as opposed to DR when stacking abilities are the stated exceptions)?

 

[Arkhandus]

Aye, if the rules specify that Haste and weapons of Speed do not stack, why wouldn't it also specify that TWF and Flurry don't mix Jesuit, or TWF+Flurry+Rapid Shot don't mix? Why would the rules specify only a few rare cases and not simply state "multiple sources of extra attacks don't work simultaneously"? Because that's not the case, everything stacks unless it is explicitly restricted in a line of the rules. Haste and Speed don't stack because there is a specific line of ruling that states they don't, but there is no such rule specifying that any part of the so-far-pointlessly-debated combo doesn't work. Do you assume that Power Attack and a character's Strength bonus don't stack, or that Power Attack and Weapon Specialization don't stack, just because they don't state otherwise? Where do you even get the idea that extra attacks are named bonuses somehow, let alone of the same name? Only bonuses of the same specified name (like sacred, deflection, haste, enhancement, etc.) don't stack with other bonuses of the exact same named type. And nowhere do the rules state the the extra attacks from Flurry, TWF, or the like are somehow "bonus" attacks.

You're interpreting the rules your own way, and you're thinking that it's simply the way they are, rather than acknowledging that it is merely the (technically wrong) way you've personally interpreted it because of your own biases and inability to reason properly with the changes in 3.5. 3.0 material DOES NOT take precedence where 3.5 happens to not specify, generally because 3.5 doesn't specify clarifications of old rules that no longer apply; the rules assume that you see the lack of those old rulings and recognize that they were dumped because they were not liked by the designers of the revision. The 3.5 books reprint plenty of text from the old 3.0 books, they obviously don't just print revised rules, they print the COMPLETE 3.5 rules.

Anything that may have been in the 3.0 books but not in the 3.5 books is obviously something the designers ditched and SELECTIVELY discarded because it did not belong anymore, or it's something that will be updated in a later 3.5 book like Complete Arcane or whatever, in which case it should not be assumed that the designers simply chose to leave it alone; otherwise the 3.5 core rulebooks wouldn't reprint anything verbatim from the 3.0 books, they'd leave out anything redundant, wouldn't they? Please try and process this and fix your logic. So far you've been operating on a mere logical fallacy, which is fine for your own houseruled games, but you should not be trying to impose a fallacy upon others as though it were official truth.

 

[Coredump]

"Speed is stated not to stack with Haste. TWF is not stated not to stack with Rapid Shot."

Nor is it stated to specifically stack with Rapid Shot. Nothing definitive there.

Both Feats still are a benefit. Both allow you to get an extra attack, through different means and for different types of combat. Don't like them? Don't take them.

Rapid shot allows an extra attack.

TWF does *not* allow an extra attack. You do *not* need TWF to attack with your off hand, anyone can do it. All TWF does is *reduce penalties*

There is no stacking here... with no feats, at first level, you can throw a dagger in each hand. With rapid shot, you get to throw one additional dagger. Now, there are mad penalties.... and taking twf will reduce those penalties...but it does not give an extra attack.

 

[FireLance]

I hadn't realised you could stack Flurry of Blows with the Two-Weapon Fighting feat chain. Does this mean that a Monk 12/Fighter 8 could use Flurry of Blows and Greater Two-Weapon Fighting to attack at +15/+15/+15/+10/+5/+0 with his primary hand and +15/+10/+5 with his off hand (ignoring Strength, enhancement and other bonuses)? How would this work with the Epic feat Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting? Would he be able to attack at +15/+15/+15/+10/+5/+0 with both hands (ignoring Strength, enhancement, epic attack bonus and other bonuses)?

 

[RigaMortus]

Rapid shot allows an extra attack.

TWF does *not* allow an extra attack. You do *not* need TWF to attack with your off hand, anyone can do it. All TWF does is *reduce penalties*

There is no stacking here... with no feats, at first level, you can throw a dagger in each hand. With rapid shot, you get to throw one additional dagger. Now, there are mad penalties.... and taking twf will reduce those penalties...but it does not give an extra attack.

That is exactly what I said...