Manyshot requires a full-attack action, not a standard.And, full attacks allow a move action after the first attack, if you haven't moved already.No.
If you only make one attack it's a standard attack.
Full Attack: This works just like the attack standard action except that you can make any extra attacks you have available because of your base attack bonus or equipment. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.
You decide between the full attack and attack actions after you make your first attack. If you decide to use a move action after attacking, then your first attack is considered the attack standard action. Even if you choose the full attack action, you can take a 5-foot step before, after, or during the action. You can interrupt your attacks with a 5-foot step to bring new opponents within reach.
While the game is backwards compatable 3.5 quotes are not always going to be how the rules work in PF.
While the game is backwards compatable 3.5 quotes are not always going to be how the rules work in PF.
Actually it kinda is 3.5(don't tell anyone.)
And what I quoted is still correct. That's not going to change anytime soon.
If you want to understand vague parts of the rules. Reading Rules of the Game is probably your best option.
Understand I;m fine with this reading of the rules as long as its applied fairly and equally across the board to anyone using any feat/ability that grants some kind of bonus on a Full attack.
Understand I;m fine with this reading of the rules as long as its applied fairly and equally across the board to anyone using any feat/ability that grants some kind of bonus on a Full attack.
*spits in hand*
*shakes on it*
You decide between the full attack and attack actions after you make your first attack...
If the decision about whether to full attack or not isn't made til after the first attack... How can any first attack prevent you from moving instead of making additional attacks?
Understand I;m fine with this reading of the rules as long as its applied fairly and equally across the board to anyone using any feat/ability that grants some kind of bonus on a Full attack.
What feats or abilities would be problematic with this reading of the rules?
Look this is simple. You can't use Manyshot unless you use a full attack.
I don't really care if you use the rest of your attacks or not. If nothing else you can punch the air for the remainder of your attacks.
But you don't get a move action. You do get a 5 foot step.
I could draw a diagram for you if it would help.
You simply can't use Manyshot unless you plan on making a full attack action that turn.
It's an investment. You have to pay the piper.
See my post on the earlier page all of those prevent opting out if your going to rule that full attacks that are more than full attacks can't be opted out of.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does anyone else think this whole arguent is a bit silly? Essentially the 'stop your full attack' and move Rule is there for when you have done something that is the equivalent to a standard action then drop your oponent.
Example, Declair rapid shot take the -2 kill your oponent. At this point all you've done is shoot one arrow at a penalty. Ditto for Two weapon fighting Or really any initial attempt to use iterative attacks where the target dies ont he first hit.
The problem is Many shot isnt intended to be a standard action, it locks you into the full attack action. The moment you do many shot you have done something you cant do as a standard action (fired two arrows).
So while you can stop firing if the target Dies you cant Many shot then Move anymore than you can move and many shot.
Which is really the difference between this and other full attack acton cancelatons. Those actoons you can do without declairing a full attack.
You simply can't use Manyshot unless you plan on making a full attack action that turn.
It's an investment. You have to pay the piper.
Not saying that you don't have to plan on using a full-attack. But, sometimes things work out differently than planned.
You can exchange the remainder of your attacks for a move action after seeing how the first attack turns out.
Not saying that you don't have to plan on using a full-attack. But, sometimes things work out differently than planned.
You can exchange the remainder of your attacks for a move action after seeing how the first attack turns out.
If you decide to only make one attack then you aren't making a full attack and your GM would have to time travel back to before you made your first attack and tell you you couldn't use your feat because you were only. But then he would have changed the past and that would cause a time paradox that would destroy the universe.
Stop trying to destroy the universe.
If you decide to only make one attack then you aren't making a full attack...
Sure you are... You just abort the full attack after your first attack.
Does anyone else think this whole arguent is a bit silly? Essentially the 'stop your full attack' and move Rule is there for when you have done something that is the equivalent to a standard action then drop your oponent.
Example, Declair rapid shot take the -2 kill your oponent. At this point all you've done is shoot one arrow at a penalty. Ditto for Two weapon fighting Or really any initial attempt to use iterative attacks where the target dies ont he first hit.
The problem is Many shot isnt intended to be a standard action, it locks you into the full attack action. The moment you do many shot you have done something you cant do as a standard action (fired two arrows).
So while you can stop firing if the target Dies you cant Many shot then Move anymore than you can move and many shot.
Which is really the difference between this and other full attack acton cancelatons. Those actoons you can do without declairing a full attack.
There isn't a line limiting the action to only things you could accomplish on a standard action. If you going to claim manyshot locks you in then its only fair that if i'm planning on using rapid shot or TWF (both of which are decided before my first shot) then I'm just as lock in since there is no way i can take the -2 penalty unless I'm taking a full attack action.
Sure you are... You just abort the full attack after your first attack.
If you decide to only make one attack then you aren't making a full attack.
Making only one attack at your highest attack bonus is called a standard attack
Making all of your attacks is called a Full Attack.
You get a move action after(or before) a Standard Attack.
You do not get a move action after a Full Attack.
A Full Attack is a single action. It is a Full Round action.
"A full-round action requires an entire round to complete. Thus, it can't be coupled with a standard or a move action, though if it does not involve moving any distance, you can take a 5-foot step."
If you are taking a full Attack action then there is no more actions left to make a move action.
There is an escape clause that allows you to exchange your remaining attacks for a move action, after your first attack (provided that you didn't move before your first attack).
Funny thing is this...
An archer that wanted the effect of firing two arrows and moving, instead of making additional attacks, could get that effect cheaper than Manyshot. Vital Strike would do it with no Dex requirement and two fewer feat slots. And... ONE LESS ARROW!!!!
And, yet, dropping the iteratives for a move is considered overpowered or gaming the system????
There is an escape clause that allows you to exchange your remaining attacks for a move action, after your first attack (provided that you didn't move before your first attack).
You're really getting this all wrong. All it is saying is that you don't have to pick whether or not you're making a Full Attack or an Attack until after you've made your first attack.
"Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack"
"Attack
Making an attack is a standard action."
"Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks."
If you use the feat however you have already made that decision before you get to that point.
You don't get to unmake your decision.
If you move then you are not taking a full attack action though, which is what I keep saying. The official answer is the same as the regular rules.
No full attack=no manyshot
The wording allows that interpretation, to be sure. And, that's why I like to see it addressed in the Core Rulebook FAQ.
Personally, I don't see adding a second arrow to the first attack as all that powerful, if the archer decides to give up the rest of his attacks and move, instead. He's already spent a few feats to get it. I see this as having already taken the disadvantage that James Jacobs was concerned about (realizing that he doesn't agree).
It's odd that they'd use the "first attack" wording in the manyshot feat, if they didn't intend for it to allow for the option of giving up the rest of the archer's attacks in order to move.
The part in the Combat section about deciding between an attack and a full attack could have just as easily have said this:
** spoiler omitted **
It could have, but it didn't, and the power of an ability is not the issue. The issue is what the rule actually says. I am sure that allowing Lunge to hit opponents that are not adjacent, or to allow Vital Strike on a charge is not gamebreaking, but both are against the rules.
So just breaking this down once you do anything other than simply take a full attack with no riders that apply just during full attack actions your commited to the full attack and you give up any ability to cancel if somthing goes right or wrong after the first attack?
A short list I'll bring up more as I find them. And note that there is nothing that says you get the option to cancel under x circumstance because its just a penalty on the first attack.
TWF
Manyshot
Rapid shot
FoB
Monk or ninja extra attack from Ki
Whirlwind attack.
Dawnflower dervishish lighting blade
Parry
Powerful and Deadly Sneak
I have yet to be shown quote saying that TWF calls out a full attack as a requirement. TWF is an option allows you to get an extra attack if you make it to that extra attack. If you cancel before that attack comes up then you just have to eat the penalty. Now if you show me the quote saying TWF requires you to commit to the full attack, and not just a penalty then I will say you are correct, at least by RAW.
Cheapy:
If his statement is contradictory to clearly established RAW (he has done that on occassion, he is human) then no, I do not put trust into that particular statement.
However, on something which I really think is not as confused as some people make this out to be (yes, my own opinion there) and he confirms it then why wouldnt I trust it? After all, the man is closer to the source than we are.
Yes, SKR or Jason's statements have more force but since they are often silent we only have James to ask.
- Gauss
James actually agrees with us on the Manyshot statement. If they are reading it differently they read it wrong. :)
If you decide to only make one attack then you aren't making a full attack...Sure you are... You just abort the full attack after your first attack.
You do know the book says you decide "after". Since you are deciding "after" you are not committed to the full attack yet, therefore you are not making a full attack. In short the book disagrees with you. In order for you to be correct you need a quote with the word "before", but in that case you will have a rules contradiction at best.
Understand I;m fine with this reading of the rules as long as its applied fairly and equally across the board to anyone using any feat/ability that grants some kind of bonus on a Full attack.
A feat that takes place during the course of a full attack such as TWF, and one that calls out a full attack as a requirement are not the same thing.
Declaring TWF locks you in the penalty in case you decide to TWF.
Manyshot locks you into the full attack action. I am not saying you have to take all of your attacks, but you can't take a move action either since you don't have a move action left to take.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think part of the confusion is of the repeated misuse of wording by various parties in this thread.
A few points:
1. You do not, ever opt out of a full attack. There is no such thing as an "op out".
2. You do not 'upgrade' your standard attack to a full attack or 'downgrade' your full attack to a standard attack.
3. There is no 'escape clause'.
What you do instead, is make one normal, unmodified attack, THEN choose whether that attack is a standard action [Attack] or a full-round action [Full Attack].
This is what it says literally, hence I do not get the continued need for clarification and why I chalk it up as failure to read properly. In this case the rules are clear as day.
Skip Williams says the exact same thing in the quoted sections above.
I think part of the confusion is of the repeated misuse of wording by various parties in this thread.
A few points:
1. You do not, ever opt out of a full attack. There is no such thing as an "op out".
2. You do not 'upgrade' your standard attack to a full attack or 'downgrade' your full attack to a standard attack.
3. There is no 'escape clause'.What you do instead, is make one normal, unmodified attack, THEN choose whether that attack is a standard action [Attack] or a full-round action [Full Attack].
This is what it says literally, hence I do not get the continued need for clarification and why I chalk it up as failure to read properly. In this case the rules are clear as day.
Skip Williams says the exact same thing in the quoted sections above.
To add to this.
1.Skip Williams was one of the creators of 3.5, and PF is made from 3.5
2.If the words are the same, then the meaning is the same, at least until a PF dev comes in and changes how things work.
Deciding between an Attack or a Full AttackAfter your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out. If you’ve already taken a 5-foot step, you can’t use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.
The words are basically the same, except that the second sentence is worded a little differently, but it still has the same meaning. The second sentence however has no bearing on when you can choose the full round action.
Understand I;m fine with this reading of the rules as long as its applied fairly and equally across the board to anyone using any feat/ability that grants some kind of bonus on a Full attack.A feat that takes place during the course of a full attack such as TWF, and one that calls out a full attack as a requirement are not the same thing.
Declaring TWF locks you in the penalty in case you decide to TWF.
Manyshot locks you into the full attack action. I am not saying you have to take all of your attacks, but you can't take a move action either since you don't have a move action left to take.
Concerro can you TWF without using a Full attack action?
No you can't.When you TWF you choose to make a full attack or you can't even take the penalty correct?
Multiple Attacks: A character who can make more than one attack per round must use the full-attack action (see Full-Round Actions) in order to get more than one attack.
So yes you are required to full attack to get more than one attack so your declaring your intent to use TWF before you make the first attack.
Manyshot
Benefit: When making a full-attack action with a bow, your first attack fires two arrows. If the attack hits, both arrows hit. Apply precision-based damage (such as sneak attack) and critical hit damage only once for this attack. Damage bonuses from using a composite bow with a high Strength bonus apply to each arrow, as do other damage bonuses, such as a ranger's favored enemy bonus. Damage reduction and resistances apply separately to each arrow.
Many shot is a rider to a full attack that doesn't even have to be declared and creates no penalty. If something that functions anytime you make a full attack locks you in then how can something that must be declared and in a sense activated not lock you in.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The only thing stopping you from TWFing without taking a full attack is that you have to make the second attack, which requires a full attack action, but there is nothing stating TWF requires the use of a full attack like there is for manyshot. By the time you get to the second attack you are locked into a full attack action, and it is that second attack that locks you in, just as it would for a normal full attack action.
When you TWF you don't have to choose to full attack until after the first attack is made. As I said there is no verbage saying you have to agree to a full attack with TWF. You are agreeing to take the penalty for the benefit of an extra attack if you get to that point.
With Manyshot the feat calls out a full attack action, and that is why you are locked into it from the first attack.
But your always taking hte penalty so you've decided on a course of action that requres a full attack to complete.
If you use Manyshot you're deciding to use a full attack otherwise you can't use it.
A full attack is a full round action.
"A full-round action requires an entire round to complete."
After your first attack you are NOT given the option to reverse your previous decision.
You are given the choice between an Attack and a full Attack but only if you didn't already choose one or the other.
You can't for instance use Vital Strike and finish it off with a Full round attack.
Nope and you can't decide to use a full attack for TWF and then take a move since TWF is a full round action you have to decide on before rolling the first rol.
If you use the feat however you have already made that decision before you get to that point.
You don't get to unmake your decision.
According to Skip, you don't make the decision to full-attack until after your first attack.
You decide between the full attack and attack actions after you make your first attack...
So, you don't have to unmake your decision, because you haven't made it, yet. And, couldn't make it until after your first attack.
Effectively, with manyshot (if read to require the full attack), you don't know if the second arrow was fired with the first shot until the second attack roll is made. That's because you can't know if your full-attacking until you decide to make the second attack, after your first attack.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I will explain it another way. Manyshot is a special action(not action type, just to be clear) in and of itself that specially requires a full round attack. Now if manyshot was not worded so as to require a full round attack then I would say you could get the two arrows with the first attack and still have the option to not go into the full round attack
TWF is just an option you can use if you do use a full round attack. However in order to make sure the penalty is applied to every attack you must declare the intent up front. Declaring yourself open to the penalty is not the same as declaring a full round attack. All you are doing is saying that if I full attack I would like to get an extra attack in.
I look at manyshot as getting the heated leather seats in a car. Well you can't get the heated leather seats without the car.
Agreeing to the penalty for TWF is more like buying insurance. You might not ever need it, but since you chose to have it you have to pay for it whether you use it or not. However just because you buy the insurance that does not mean you have to keep the car.
If you use the feat however you have already made that decision before you get to that point.
You don't get to unmake your decision.
According to Skip, you don't make the decision to full-attack until after your first attack.
You decide between the full attack and attack actions after you make your first attack...So, you don't have to unmake your decision, because you haven't made it, yet. And, couldn't make it until after your first attack.
Effectively, with manyshot (if read to require the full attack), you don't know if the second arrow was fired with the first shot until the second attack roll is made. That's because you can't know if your full-attacking until you decide to make the second attack, after your first attack.
That is the general rule. Manyshot which works on the first attack requires a full round attack to be in place in order for you to even release two arrows, so you must already be committed.
The only other way I can see you reading it is to say you make the first attack roll then you decide if two arrows were released or not. While I don't like that interpretation either it would solve the issue of getting two arrows as a standard action when the book calls out a full round action.
The thing is you only take the penalty if you are going to gain an extra attack which only happens on a full attack. If you can't use manyshot without a full attack action when it simply adds on to the full attack then how can you say a declared action that also only functions on a full attack is any different.
According to Skip, you don't make the decision to full-attack until after your first attack.
You decide between the full attack and attack actions after you make your first attack...
Yes: "Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack"
So, you don't have to unmake your decision, because you haven't made it, yet. And, couldn't make it until after your first attack.
You CAN'T use Manyshot unless you are using a Full Attack.
If you decide to only use the Attack action you are not making a Full Attack.
Attack is defined earlyer:
"Attack
Making an attack is a standard action."
Full Attack is defined differently:
the section: "Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack:" is under "Full Attack" but that doesn't mean that it's exclusively a "Full Attack" rule.
For instance I could only intend to make an Attack but when I realize that my foe hasn't dropped I can follow with my remaining attacks.
If I chose to use Vital Strike on that first attack I couldn't then choose to use a Full Attack because Vital Strike requires An Attack action.
Design Manager
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe if it helps, you can look at this through the lens of "specific vs. general". Generally this applies: "You decide between the full attack and attack actions after you make your first attack".
Specifically an ability which requires a certain type of action (i.e. Vital Strike, Manyshot, Flurry) overrides the former general rule, and can only be used with the appropriate action as specified in the ability.
As stated many times, specific overrides general.
The RAW of manyshot and full round attack seems to mean (to me) that you can take your first attack (which happens to be two shots/arrows) and then decide if you want to take the rest of your full round attack or move. RAI may be different, but as written, it seems pretty clear. No where in RAW for full round attack does it say that the first attack need to be a standard attack (or something that could be done as a standard attack).
To back this assertion (that the two first arrows are just ONE attack), up, look at this answer from James Jacobs regarding deflecting a manyshot attack.
How does Manyshot work with Deflect Arrows?
"Deflect Arrows works only once per round. Manyshot allows an archer to shoot multiple arrows, but you only make one attack roll, so Deflect Arrows would block all arrows grouped in anyone particular Manyshot attack."
So, the first volley of grouped arrows is one attack. Full round attack says "after your first attack" you can decide to take a move action. It seems pretty cut and dry to me.
I don't believe I would homerule this either. It really isn't that super powerful pwnsome or awesome. There are a number of feats that let you do increased damage as a standard attack and then move. And we all know that many caster clases to the bulk of their damage in their standard action, still have their move left over, and that's not really considered overpowered. Allowing an archer who's sunk a few feats into getting into manyshots this utility hardly makes him a harbinger of death (well, not much more so than he already is!).
The thing is you only take the penalty if you are going to gain an extra attack which only happens on a full attack. If you can't use manyshot without a full attack action when it simply adds on to the full attack then how can you say a declared action that also only functions on a full attack is any different.
Actually the penalty is gained with the intention of using two weapons, not with the declaration of a full attack.
Here is how it works you can make a normal full attack or you can TWF. With TWF they want to add a penalty to make up for the extra attack so you declare intent of the extra attack, but intent to use an extra attack if it gets that far is not an agreement to go into a full round attack. If you drop the enemy on attack 1 then you still get to decide to continue attacking to make sure he is dead or to move on. TWF mentions no upfront payment other than the penalty. When you agree to the penalty you are giving yourself an option. It is not a "buy-in". Another way to look at it is if you buy tickets to a concert, but you don't make it because you decide not to go. You paid for the tickets, but you still had the option to not use them.
Manyshot locks you in from the beginning because it says you must use this action to do X. Manyshot by mentioning the full attack in the manner that it does is letting you know the intent. You have to pay the cost or you do not pass go. Manyshot is still forcing you to pay for the tickets, but the doors are closed and locked once you step inside. You can't just decide to go do something else.
In short the penalty for TWF is the penalty itself. The penalty for Manyshot is not being able to change your mind. It is not that them not having the same penalties is unfair. They just penalize you differently.
Manyshot locks you in from the beginning because it says you must use this action to do X. Manyshot by mentioning the full attack in the manner that it does is letting you know the intent. You have to pay the cost or you do not pass go. Manyshot is still forcing you to pay for the tickets, but the doors are closed and locked once you step inside. You can't just decide to go do something else.
It doesn't say you must use a Full attack it Says when you make a full attack.
You are making that full attack when you make your first attack. Its not a standard action until you make the second attack or it would be too late for manyshot to apply. Its not a standard action or you couldn't even choose to use TWF.
Your ignoring the fact that you are still making a full attack either way both are abilities that change the effect of it.
The only reason IMHO that people want to apply it differently is because there is a percieved advantage.
The RAW of manyshot and full round attack seems to mean (to me) that you can take your first attack (which happens to be two shots/arrows) and then decide if you want to take the rest of your full round attack or move. RAI may be different, but as written, it seems pretty clear. No where in RAW for full round attack does it say that the first attack need to be a standard attack (or something that could be done as a standard attack).
To back this assertion (that the two first arrows are just ONE attack), up, look at this answer from James Jacobs regarding deflecting a manyshot attack.
How does Manyshot work with Deflect Arrows?
"Deflect Arrows works only once per round. Manyshot allows an archer to shoot multiple arrows, but you only make one attack roll, so Deflect Arrows would block all arrows grouped in anyone particular Manyshot attack."So, the first volley of grouped arrows is one attack. Full round attack says "after your first attack" you can decide to take a move action. It seems pretty cut and dry to me.
I don't believe I would homerule this either. It really isn't that super powerful pwnsome or awesome. There are a number of feats that let you do increased damage as a standard attack and then move. And we all know that many caster clases to the bulk of their damage in their standard action, still have their move left over, and that's not really considered overpowered. Allowing an archer who's sunk a few feats into getting into manyshots this utility hardly makes him a harbinger of death (well, not much more so than he already is!).
It seems you have skipped a lot of posts. The book does not allow you to back out of a full attack. It only allows you to opt into a full attack by RAW. You attack first and decide second by the general rule. However if you attack, and then move that means you are not using a full round attack.
Manyshot requires a full attack. No full attack=no manyshot.
The only way this works is by committing up front. Whether something is broken or not is a nonfactor, with regard to what the rules are.
|
Design Manager
|
The RAW of manyshot and full round attack seems to mean (to me) that you can take your first attack (which happens to be two shots/arrows) and then decide if you want to take the rest of your full round attack or move. RAI may be different, but as written, it seems pretty clear. No where in RAW for full round attack does it say that the first attack need to be a standard attack (or something that could be done as a standard attack).
To back this assertion (that the two first arrows are just ONE attack), up, look at this answer from James Jacobs regarding deflecting a manyshot attack.
How does Manyshot work with Deflect Arrows?
"Deflect Arrows works only once per round. Manyshot allows an archer to shoot multiple arrows, but you only make one attack roll, so Deflect Arrows would block all arrows grouped in anyone particular Manyshot attack."So, the first volley of grouped arrows is one attack. Full round attack says "after your first attack" you can decide to take a move action. It seems pretty cut and dry to me.
I don't believe I would homerule this either. It really isn't that super powerful pwnsome or awesome. There are a number of feats that let you do increased damage as a standard attack and then move. And we all know that many caster clases to the bulk of their damage in their standard action, still have their move left over, and that's not really considered overpowered. Allowing an archer who's sunk a few feats into getting into manyshots this utility hardly makes him a harbinger of death (well, not much more so than he already is!).
The thing is, Manyshot must be used as part of a Full Attack action. Says it right in the text of the feat. You lose the option to not make a full attack when you use the ability.
|
But under full attack description it makes it clear that after the first attack of a full attack action the player can move instead of taking their remainder attacks. It really is that simple . You guys are making it much more complicated then this thought process needs to be with arguements like 'its not a full attack if he moves'. That's silly. The description in full round attacks makes it clear that you DO have the option to do either....and either one would be a valid full round action.
|
Design Manager
|
But under full attack description it makes it clear that after the first attack of a full attack action the player can move instead of taking their remainder attacks. It really is that simple . You guys are making it much more complicated then this thought process needs to be with arguements like 'its not a full attack if he moves'. That's silly. The description in full round attacks makes it clear that you DO have the option to do either....and either one would be a valid full round action.
This is wrong. What it says is:
"Full AttackIf you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.
The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks.
If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first.
Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you've already taken a 5-foot step, you can't use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action."
You're associating two different items in the combat section. the first item I emphasized should make it clear that if you're taking a move action, you are not full attacking.
But under full attack description it makes it clear that after the first attack of a full attack action the player can move instead of taking their remainder attacks. It really is that simple . You guys are making it much more complicated then this thought process needs to be with arguements like 'its not a full attack if he moves'. That's silly. The description in full round attacks makes it clear that you DO have the option to do either....and either one would be a valid full round action.
If it's true for A Full Attack it's also true for an Attack.
You might have been intending to only use a single attack and move but after your first attack you have the option to take the rest of your attacks.
Do you think that means you can use Vital Strike for that first attack and then decide to take the rest of your attacks?
After much reading and re-reading, followed by scrutiny of the Vital Strike feat, I will consed the point that the intent of Manyshot is to allow it only on a full-attack action that uses only attacks. However, I still believe that the wording of several of the quoted sections muddies the literal interpretation as such.
The keystone for me was that the effective "single attack Manyshot" interpretation would also allow for the "Vital Strike with iterative attacks"
The issue for me now is the fact that attack actions are technically undefined until after the first attack. Until we either make these feats (Manyshot, Vital Strike, etc.) their own actions instead of options to preexisting actions or redefine the attack/full attack timing, there will still be grey area for argument.
Ed it wouldn't allow for that your are not making a standard action attack then upgrading it your making full attack then down grading it.
|
Design Manager
|
Ed it wouldn't allow for that your are not making a standard action attack then upgrading it your making full attack then down grading it.
You're not actually doing either of those. Until your first attack is completed and you either move, make a subsequent attack, or take some other action, you haven't committed to either a standard or full attack action unless the first attack was made with an ability that stipulates use of a specific kind of action. In which case you have to use whichever action the ability requires. For example Manyshot says it can be used "when making a full attack action with a bow". If you use Manyshot, you're locked in to a full attack action.
I agree but for somereason some people want to say that TWF is not one of those abilities.
|
Design Manager
|
I agree but for somereason some people want to say that TWF is not one of those abilities.
"Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6."That's because you can get an extra attack, not you must take an extra attack. You take the penalty because you're attacking while wielding two weapons with the intent of going all out with both, but there's nothing that locks you into it like with the other abilities.
I'm dropping the TWF issue because we wont agree that penalty is a lock in just as much as the extra manyshot attack. That penalty can't exist if you not performing a full attack action just like the manyshot attack can't exist outside of a full attack action.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm dropping the TWF issue because we wont agree that penalty is a lock in just as much as the extra manyshot attack. That penalty can't exist if you not performing a full attack action just like the manyshot attack can't exist outside of a full attack action.
You do not have to choose between the attack and full attack actions until after you have made your first attack on your turn (see page 143 in the Player's Handbook). However, if you intend to attack with two weapons during your action, you must take the correct penalty for each attack or give up your opportunity to use your second weapon (because the rules require you to take a penalty on attacks you make with both your primary and off hands).