Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
unfortunately not Finally settled, sunder and attacks of opp
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="bestone" data-source="post: 3358722" data-attributes="member: 48880"><p>Hyp is still wrong in his argument, he proves it by</p><p>a) agreeing that you can use it my way if there was no table, this succeeds that the text says that you can use it for an aoo.</p><p>b) Even quoting the action types, He picked out the section " Action types tell you how long an action takes" It says nothing about anything else, only that the only relevance the action type has, is it tells you how long they take</p><p>c) Being unable to come up with proof for his argument, He can not prove anywhere that you ignore the text *which he agrees with* for any reason. see my previous post for more information on such</p><p></p><p>Regardless of how long an action takes, you still read under the action for how to apply it, and what it does</p><p></p><p>He agree's with how the text says you can apply sunder</p><p></p><p>He disagree's because the table makes it a standard action</p><p></p><p>He is unable to prove the relevance, he is making an unfounded assumption that you have to use a sunder action for the text to apply, but can not show anywhere where it states you must have an action listed in the table free for the rule to apply.</p><p></p><p>Because it doesnt</p><p></p><p>The text proves our claim *as he's agreed*, but no rule proves his, only assumptions</p><p></p><p>I've challenged him several times, and each time he ignores it, to show me where it states the rules for actions only apply under whatever circumstance</p><p></p><p>The only proof he's quoted is proof for my claim, he's quoted that the type of action only tells you how long it takes to perform it, not how you do it, or what happens.</p><p></p><p>If the type of action only states the time required to do the action, how can you claim it dictates when you can do the action? or how the action works?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Thats it, it doesnt state and you must have that action free to do the specified attack, nor anything along those lines. The action still functions as it is written, and being a standard action only tells you how long it takes to perform. It also doesnt state that you disregard the text of an action if you dont have the time to do it, it only says it tells you how long it takes to perform. The text of the action tells you what it does.</p><p></p><p>So a sunder may take a standard actions length in time to perform</p><p></p><p>So does a melee attack, which can be used on a sunder</p><p></p><p>They take the same time, the text says you can use one as another</p><p></p><p>Action types DONT say you require that action to be able to use the rules from</p><p>a special attack.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="bestone, post: 3358722, member: 48880"] Hyp is still wrong in his argument, he proves it by a) agreeing that you can use it my way if there was no table, this succeeds that the text says that you can use it for an aoo. b) Even quoting the action types, He picked out the section " Action types tell you how long an action takes" It says nothing about anything else, only that the only relevance the action type has, is it tells you how long they take c) Being unable to come up with proof for his argument, He can not prove anywhere that you ignore the text *which he agrees with* for any reason. see my previous post for more information on such Regardless of how long an action takes, you still read under the action for how to apply it, and what it does He agree's with how the text says you can apply sunder He disagree's because the table makes it a standard action He is unable to prove the relevance, he is making an unfounded assumption that you have to use a sunder action for the text to apply, but can not show anywhere where it states you must have an action listed in the table free for the rule to apply. Because it doesnt The text proves our claim *as he's agreed*, but no rule proves his, only assumptions I've challenged him several times, and each time he ignores it, to show me where it states the rules for actions only apply under whatever circumstance The only proof he's quoted is proof for my claim, he's quoted that the type of action only tells you how long it takes to perform it, not how you do it, or what happens. If the type of action only states the time required to do the action, how can you claim it dictates when you can do the action? or how the action works? Thats it, it doesnt state and you must have that action free to do the specified attack, nor anything along those lines. The action still functions as it is written, and being a standard action only tells you how long it takes to perform. It also doesnt state that you disregard the text of an action if you dont have the time to do it, it only says it tells you how long it takes to perform. The text of the action tells you what it does. So a sunder may take a standard actions length in time to perform So does a melee attack, which can be used on a sunder They take the same time, the text says you can use one as another Action types DONT say you require that action to be able to use the rules from a special attack. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
unfortunately not Finally settled, sunder and attacks of opp
Top