NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hypersmurf" data-source="post: 3357477" data-attributes="member: 1656">I'm saying you don't use the rules for applying Sunder that are written under the header 'Sunder' in the Special Attack section unless you're Sundering.Remember, a specific rule can override a general rule.  I can wield a one-handed weapon in two hands in order to apply 1.5x Str bonus to damage.  But I can't wield a rapier (a one-handed weapon) in two hands in order to apply 1.5x Str bonus to damage, because the specific rule for rapiers says otherwise.  It takes a standard action to activate a supernatural ability, unless the ability description states otherwise - the specific rule for the specific supernatural ability overrides the general rule for all supernatural abilities.But this isn't a case of specific trumping general; the text refers to Sunder, and the table refers to Sunder.  It isn't a case of resolving a contradiction by the text taking precedence over the table; there isn't a contradiction.Both text and table contain rules for Sunder.  The table tells us it is a standard action, and the text tells use we can use a melee attack to strike a weapon.  Both rules apply - we take a standard action, and use a melee attack to strike a weapon.  Simple - no contradiction occurs, so no precedence need be established.If you ignore the table, then it's possible to read the text differently, and then when you look at the table you have a contradiction.Let's say we have a sequence of numbers: 1, 2, 4, ...  I decide that the rule is "Double the previous number", so the next number in the sequence should be 8.  When the next number is revealed, the sequence is now 1, 2, 4, 7, ...  I declare that there has obviously been a typo, since the new sequence disagrees with the rule.Instead, I should see if there are any alternative rules I can find so that it satisfies both the original sequence and the new sequence.  The contradiction doesn't indicate that the second sequence is wrong; rather, it shows that when I made my decision of how to resolve multiple possibilities the first time, I chose the wrong one.The text can be read two ways.  But if you choose the one that is contradicted by the table, you chose the wrong one.  If the choose the one that leads to no contradiction, everything is fine.-Hyp.</blockquote>

Verification