Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thanee" data-source="post: 1962239" data-attributes="member: 478">That's what I said. That's why Manyshot does not make any difference, since it is not listed. It falls into the &quot;not one of the many&quot; category.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; That (the standard Attack action) is not what I meant (read on).&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; Correct. But yet they are some kind of actions (read on).&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;Yes, but the move is not part of the action. It's not like in 3.0 where a standard action consists of a move and the actual action. They are two completely seperate actions now.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; It can be interrupted by movement, so the action itself can be split in two seperate parts.&nbsp;&nbsp; One could also say, that the attack itself is then a free action on the same turn.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;Same is true for the Full Attack action. Each seperate attack is a seperate entity, which can be seperated by the rest of the action with a 5-ft. step (just once per round, of course, but you could put it in any of the spaces between the attacks).&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;It's not really seperate actions, but then again... Disarm is listed as an action, and Grapple is listed as an action and both can be done within one Full Attack action.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;So there certainly is some evidence, that there are smaller parts, which are also actions and which together form the greater (standard, full-round, etc) actions like Full Attack.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;And this is also very specific to the Full Attack action and the Touch Spells, so I consider these two as exceptions and special cases. Not as the general case.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; Well... my explanation was a bit vague and misleading there. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/nervous.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":heh:" title="Nervous Laugh&nbsp; &nbsp; :heh:" data-shortname=":heh:" />&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; What I meant to differentiate is the action &quot;attacking with a ranged weapon&quot; and the attack &quot;attacking with a ranged weapon&quot;.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;It states, that &quot;attack with a ranged weapon&quot; is an action which provokes attacks of opportunity, which strongly implies that the Attack action is meant here, not the act of attacking. This is further underlined by refering to table 8-2.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;@RigaMortus: It's the same. But it's also the difference between the two opinions of Caliban and myself. The difference is what part of the action triggers the attack of opportunity... the acting or the attacking.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; Bye&nbsp;&nbsp; Thanee</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thanee, post: 1962239, member: 478"] That's what I said. That's why Manyshot does not make any difference, since it is not listed. It falls into the "not one of the many" category. That (the standard Attack action) is not what I meant (read on). Correct. But yet they are some kind of actions (read on). Yes, but the move is not part of the action. It's not like in 3.0 where a standard action consists of a move and the actual action. They are two completely seperate actions now. It can be interrupted by movement, so the action itself can be split in two seperate parts. One could also say, that the attack itself is then a free action on the same turn. Same is true for the Full Attack action. Each seperate attack is a seperate entity, which can be seperated by the rest of the action with a 5-ft. step (just once per round, of course, but you could put it in any of the spaces between the attacks). It's not really seperate actions, but then again... Disarm is listed as an action, and Grapple is listed as an action and both can be done within one Full Attack action. So there certainly is some evidence, that there are smaller parts, which are also actions and which together form the greater (standard, full-round, etc) actions like Full Attack. And this is also very specific to the Full Attack action and the Touch Spells, so I consider these two as exceptions and special cases. Not as the general case. Well... my explanation was a bit vague and misleading there. :heh: What I meant to differentiate is the action "attacking with a ranged weapon" and the attack "attacking with a ranged weapon". It states, that "attack with a ranged weapon" is an action which provokes attacks of opportunity, which strongly implies that the Attack action is meant here, not the act of attacking. This is further underlined by refering to table 8-2. @RigaMortus: It's the same. But it's also the difference between the two opinions of Caliban and myself. The difference is what part of the action triggers the attack of opportunity... the acting or the attacking. Bye Thanee [/QUOTE]

Verification