Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thanee" data-source="post: 1960575" data-attributes="member: 478">I explained that part already. It does not say, that ranged attacks provoke, but that the Attack (ranged) action provokes. It only says the first if read out of context. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />&nbsp;&nbsp;Full Attack should read &quot;maybe&quot; not &quot;no&quot;. I consider this an error. It contradicts the rest of the rules.&nbsp;&nbsp;And I don't see anything inconsistent in the whole &quot;actions provoke AoO&quot; view.&nbsp;Manyshot, for example, is an action, which is not listed, therefore it can be both... obviously &quot;AoO: yes&quot; makes most sense here. Full Attack (see above).&nbsp;&nbsp;Also, saying, that a ranged touch attack is a touch spell and provokes an attack of opportunity clearly contradicts the rules (as quoted above).&nbsp;&nbsp;Anyways, I've said how I believe it works and that fits (IMHO) to all the text quotes we have seen. I've yet to see a text quote, which gives more than an obscure hint at your claim, that the attack and not the action is crucial in provoking the attack of opportunity. Not just an example line, which is bathed in the term &quot;action&quot; all around (see above) and is linked to a table (8-2), which only lists actions and a yes/no for AoO, including both of the examples (I have included the table entries in the text quoted above to make that clear what the text snippets are meant to represent IMHO).&nbsp;&nbsp;Bye&nbsp;Thanee</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thanee, post: 1960575, member: 478"] I explained that part already. It does not say, that ranged [u]attacks[/u] provoke, but that the Attack (ranged) action provokes. It only says the first if read out of context. ;) Full Attack should read "maybe" not "no". I consider this an error. It contradicts the rest of the rules. And I don't see anything inconsistent in the whole "actions provoke AoO" view. Manyshot, for example, is an action, which is not listed, therefore it can be both... obviously "AoO: yes" makes most sense here. Full Attack (see above). Also, saying, that a ranged touch attack is a touch spell and provokes an attack of opportunity clearly contradicts the rules (as quoted above). Anyways, I've said how I believe it works and that fits (IMHO) to all the text quotes we have seen. I've yet to see a text quote, which gives more than an obscure hint at your claim, that the attack and not the action is crucial in provoking the attack of opportunity. Not just an example line, which is bathed in the term "action" all around (see above) and is linked to a table (8-2), which only lists actions and a yes/no for AoO, including both of the examples (I have included the table entries in the text quoted above to make that clear what the text snippets are meant to represent IMHO). Bye Thanee [/QUOTE]

Verification