Trips?

[dcollins]

I'm not disproving your claim...

Indeed. I'll conclude by repeating my assertion that there are no examples of redundant claims under the PH weapon descriptions (other than this one you're trying to hold out). The fact that a "weapon that can trip" needs to be specifically noted in that section therefore does serve as strong evidence that other weapons are by default excluded. Your inability to find any other redundant quote in that section (one that holds for all weapons by default -- you had to invent one) reinforces this conclusion.

There is no "excess verbiage" in the weapons descriptions section of the PH, as shown by your inability to produce a single actual example of such.

 

[hong]

Indeed. I'll conclude

We'll see who rusts first.

by repeating my assertion that there are no examples of redundant claims under the PH weapon descriptions (other than this one you're trying to hold out). The fact that a "weapon that can trip" needs to be specifically noted in that section therefore does serve as strong evidence that other weapons are by default excluded.

Please to stop inventing rules where none exist. What I've said all along is that using weapons to trip is _not inconsistent_ with the rules as written. If they wanted weapons not to be usable for trips by default (stupid as it would be), they should have put it in the book.

Here's the situation. AFAIK, everyone agrees that not being able to use weapons like staffs or polearms to trip is silly. Therefore, I choose to interpret the rules in a manner that prevents such silliness. If you choose to interpret the rules in a manner that allows it, that's your business.

Your inability to find any other redundant quote in that section (one that holds for all weapons by default -- you had to invent one) reinforces this conclusion.

Your inability to disprove the redundancy of the trip descriptions reinforces my conclusion.

There is no "excess verbiage" in the weapons descriptions section of the PH, as shown by your inability to produce a single actual example of such.

"This weapon may be used to make trip attacks."

 

[Vuk]

consider this. to make a trip you make a melee touch attack. so you just get your BAB+your Str vs his natural ac. Consider im using a +5 halberd. now i get +5 to my bab+strength. there you have the diff. i also agree with the guy who says you can only use the marked weapons for a trip. they are all hooked or chained. the quarter staff and the spears for example are not. so you cant get a clean shot at his feet.

 

[Caliban]

Charging at someone from behind a shield, with the aim of knocking them flat, is basically a trip attack with a shield.

No, that's an overrun attack.

A punching dagger is more suspect, I admit.

See? I win.

 

[Stalker0]

I disagree with Hong that almost all weapons can be used to trip, while it might seem silly that certain weapons cannot be used to trip with, such as a staff, its even sillier to fix that by saying that all weapons can be used to trip with.


However, I do agree that if your making a trip attack with an unarmed strike that should provoke an AOO. MY attack provokes an AOO, but just trying to grap him doesn't? That's just plain silly. I believe the specifics of saying that a grapple (which also requires a touch attack) provokes an AOO means that there isn't a way to avoid that AOO, unless there's a feat that specifically says you can, like with improved disarm for disarm attempts.

Changing an unarmed strike to unarmed touch doesn't change the fact that unless the user is proficient with his fists/legs/whatever, he is open to the enemy. So while a monk or a person with improved unarmed strike could trip this way normally, others would have an AOO.

 

[Coredump]

Hong, try reading Page 140 again. And this time start from the *beginning* of the section titled "Unarmed Attacks".

It is *very* specific. It talks about "Striking for damage...is like attacking with a weapon, except for the following:"
And *then* it lists AoO's, 'armed' unarmed strikes, unarmed damge, and dealing normal damage. But **ALL** of these are under the initial paragraph, is *very specifically* states striking for damage. damage is a key word here.....

If they wanted weapons not to be usable for trips by default
(stupid as it would be), they should have put it in the book.

If they wanted weapons not to be usable for unlocking, they should have put it in the books.
If they wanted weapons to not be usable for flying, they should have put in the book.

Hey, some weapons say they let you fly, but maybe that is just 'excess verbiage' and *all* weapons let you fly. That is still 'consistent' with the rules.
Or better yet, everyone knows you can stir a pot with a dagger, so my +3 dagger and weapon focus should give me a +4 on my cooking skills. (it doesn't say it can't)


Again, you have avoided the challenge given you. *YOU* state that the ability to trip is 'excess verbiage'. Yet you can not find one *other* example where they use 'excess verbage'. It seems mighty convenient....

No one is saying you can't 'use' a staff to trip, just that you don't get any particular *benefit* from it.

Now, you may say you don't like that, you may house rule it, you may rule 0 it. But your belief is not supported by the rules.

Hey, if I bullrush with a +5 staff, do I get a +5 on my bullrush? huh?

Some weapons are 'special' and can help with tripping, WoTC just decided that staffs/etc. just are not special enough.

You want to use a staff to trip, fine. But you are still subject to a contest, and may get counter-tripped. And you cannot use the 'bonuses' of the staff to help with the trip.
If you do, you are changing the rules.


.

 

[Stalker0]

No one is saying you can't 'use' a staff to trip, just that you don't get any particular *benefit* from it.

.

I have to disagree. I think that one of the main arguments is that you actually cannot trip with a staff. And the implication of that is someone using a staff would have to drop it to trip the person.

Again I believe the staff should have been added to the tripable weapons category, and if you believe that simply house rule it. We don't need to start trying to pull the rules in 5 different directions when one house rule will do.



As to the argument about the possible AOO while armed, as far as I can tell the only time an unarmed melee touch attack does not provoke an AOO is when it is holding a spell, and "maybe" when the person has improved unarmed strike. The reason an AOO is not provoked by the trip action in the PH is because they didn't want tripping with a weapon to also provoke an AOO. However, that doesn't ignore the fact that making a melee touch attack unarmed DOES provoke an AOO.

 

[Caliban]

I have to disagree. I think that one of the main arguments is that you actually cannot trip with a staff. And the implication of that is someone using a staff would have to drop it to trip the person.

No one has suggested that. Nothing stops you from hooking your foot around someone's ankle while you are holding a staff, or anyone weapon.

Again I believe the staff should have been added to the tripable weapons category, and if you believe that simply house rule it. We don't need to start trying to pull the rules in 5 different directions when one house rule will do.

I agree.

As to the argument about the possible AOO while armed, as far as I can tell the only time an unarmed melee touch attack does not provoke an AOO is when it is holding a spell, and "maybe" when the person has improved unarmed strike. The reason an AOO is not provoked by the trip action in the PH is because they didn't want tripping with a weapon to also provoke an AOO. However, that doesn't ignore the fact that making a melee touch attack unarmed DOES provoke an AOO.

Except a trip is not an unarmed strike.

The PHB on page 128 lists whether or not a specific attack action provokes an AoO.

Unarmed Strike does.
Disarm does.
Grapple does.
Trip does not. Since trip attacks are assumed to be unarmed by default, then they don't provoke an AoO. (Otherwise they would state this in the Trip description.) Basically the return trip attempt takes the place of any possible AoO.

 

[Geoff Watson]

There is no "excess verbiage" in the weapons descriptions section of the PH, as shown by your inability to produce a single actual example of such.

There are other examples of excess verbiage.

Daggers: can be used with Weapon Finesse.
Tridents: can be thrown.

The 'trippy' weapons have the advantage that you can choose to be disarmed instead on being tripped if you lose the opposed rolls.

Geoff.

 

[Geoff Watson]

Please to stop inventing rules where none exist. What I've said all along is that using weapons to trip is _not inconsistent_ with the rules as written. If they wanted weapons not to be usable for trips by default (stupid as it would be), they should have put it in the book.

In Magic of Faerun there is a magic item called a Staff of Mighty Sweeping. It is clear that staffs can be used for Trip attacks, otherwise the item would be completely useless.

Geoff.