| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I find this thread useful when rules are kept in the defendable realm, and entirely useless when blantanly deviating from the rules by purposefully reading a rule incorrectly.
I agree 100%.
Please note that I didn't quote your reply to me, but to someone else. You weren't answering a question he asked, just discouraging him from following a line of honest inquiry. Any post along the lines of "you won't be welcome at my gaming table if you try this", in my opinion, should not be here, in the thread where we're trying to optimize characters to their theoretical limits within the rules. My hope is that at this point, we can go back to talking about how the rules work, and not whether a given GM would allow them.
On a completely separate note, it seems to me the rule in question here isn't blatantly deviating from the rules, because it literally says in the description "attack as a free action." I've heard there's no such thing as RAW, because we all interpret things differently, but I can't imagine reading that as anything other than "you can attack with this as a free action" without twisting the meaning of words beyond usefulness.