unfortunately not Finally settled, sunder and attacks of opp

[Fortain]

off topic, - if you now list threads by the amount of posts, this thread now takes the cake and is in top spot

Actually this one is: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=149266

And now, back to the discussion.

 

[bestone]

deleted

 

[Nail]

Because the relevant rules text takes precedence over the table.

Where are those relevant rules?

 

[Seeten]

In the feat text for Improved Unarmed Strike, and in the Monk class description, I'm guessing. AKA, the corner case exceptions.

 

[Nail]

off topic, - if you now list threads by the amount of posts, this thread now takes the cake and is in top spot

The post Fortain linked to has 24 pages.

This one only has 11.

Piddly!

 

[KarinsDad]

In the feat text for Improved Unarmed Strike, and in the Monk class description, I'm guessing. AKA, the corner case exceptions.

It's also in the Standard Action description for Unarmed Strikes and in the Special Attack Bull Rush text.

 

[bestone]

The post Fortain linked to has 24 pages.

This one only has 11.

Piddly!

Hey, i dindt say it had the most ever, if your in the D&d rules section, at you click on the replies button to list them by replies, this comes up first.

 

[bestone]

Originally Posted by Hypersmurf
If there were nothing else to distinguish them, I'd be inclined to agree; if the table did not exist, I would presume that the logical reading is as you say.

Originally Posted by Hypersmurf
Oh, I agree - that's exactly what it says, in the description of the Sunder action.

Originally Posted by KarinsDad
The Sunder text explicitly states Sunder is used as a Melee Attack. It's there in black and white.

Here is where I disagree.

wh...what?

You've stated earlier that you'd agree with the text how its written, if it wasnt for the table. You've also contradicted that statement.

The table doesnt change how the text is written.

And now two game designers and an official faq state that the text does explicitly state it is used as a melee attack. And you even agree that it can be read that way.

but apparently "use a melee attack" does not qualify you to use a melee attack??

 

[Nail]

Hey, i dindt say it had the most ever, ....

Ah.

These "sorts" are restricted to the last 30 days. There have been longer (and more acrimonious) threads. (BTW, thanks for toning it down, bestone. I've appreciated the difference in your posts. )

Book of Nine Swords -- Okay? has more views! W00T.


...oh dear, I've posted in both alot.

 

[Nail]

You've stated earlier that you'd agree with the text how its written, if it wasnt for the table. You've also contradicted that statement.

That's not an accurate assessment, IMO.