# Deadeye Shot Feat Question (PHB2)



## Exquisite Dead Guy (Aug 12, 2006)

Using the deadeye shot feat can the party rogue, who gets two attacks with a bow with a full round action, ready both attacks (assuming he takes no move action) and get sneak attack damage on both or just one?  

This is of course assuming that another party memebr hits the opponent in question with a melee attack and the rogue then hits with both arrows.

Thanks.


----------



## Egres (Aug 12, 2006)

Exquisite Dead Guy said:
			
		

> Using the deadeye shot feat can the party rogue, who gets two attacks with a bow with a full round action, ready both attacks (assuming he takes no move action) and get sneak attack damage on both or just one?



Nope, because you can't ready a full round action.


----------



## Christian (Aug 12, 2006)

Exquisite Dead Guy said:
			
		

> Using the deadeye shot feat can the party rogue, who gets two attacks with a bow with a full round action, ready both attacks (assuming he takes no move action) and get sneak attack damage on both or just one?




No. Multiple attacks require the full attack action, which is a full-round action. Only standard or move actions can be readied. (Note that if the character had Manyshot, he could ready a single shot with multiple arrows; but a rogue would still get sneak attack bonus dice only once on such an attack.)


----------



## Egres (Aug 12, 2006)

Christian said:
			
		

> (Note that if the character had Manyshot, he could ready a single shot with multiple arrows; but a rogue would still get sneak attack bonus dice only once on such an attack.)



I disagree.

The Manyshot feat requires a standard action, while the DES feat requires a ready ranged attack.

And we know that a standard action and an attack action are 2 different things.

The problem is readying a standard action which is not an attack action (In this case the action required to use manyshot).

This wouldn't be a problem for a normal readied action, you can ready any standard action.

However, the deadeye shot feat specifically says "if you ready a ranged attack..."

A ranged attack is a standard action, but no other types of standard actions are ranged attack actions. 

Since the standard action to ready manyshot is not really a "ranged attack action" that is being readied it might not work with DES feat.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 12, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> A ranged attack is a standard action, but no other types of standard actions are ranged attack actions.
> 
> Since the standard action to ready manyshot is not really a "ranged attack action" that is being readied it might not work with DES feat.




There's a difference between a ranged attack, and the Attack action (ranged).

It's easier to see with melee attacks.  There are lots of ways to make a melee attack without taking the Attack action (melee).  The Full Attack action.  The Charge action.  The Sunder action.  An AoO.  The Cast a Spell action (when casting a touch spell on an enemy).

A melee attack is not a standard action; the Attack action (melee) is a standard action, but it is not the only way to make a melee attack.

Similarly: The Manyshot standard action is not the Attack action (ranged), but it does provide a ranged attack.

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 13, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Similarly: The Manyshot standard action is not the Attack action (ranged), but it does provide a ranged attack.



But you are not readying a ranged attack with Manyshot.

You readying a standard action to use the feat.

Not to mention that you cannot ready anything else than an action, and the "ranged attack" would be the result of the Manyshot feat, but not what you did ready.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 13, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> But you are not readying a ranged attack with Manyshot.
> 
> You readying a standard action to use the feat.




You can ready a standard, move, or free action.

Given that a ranged attack is not an action - but rather, something that occurs as part of an action - you cannot ever, strictly, 'ready a ranged attack'.

You can ready an Attack action, and use that Attack action to make a ranged attack... but that is just as close to 'readying a ranged attack' as readying a Manyshot action, and using that Manyshot action to make a ranged attack.

If readying the Attack action qualifies as 'readying a ranged attack', then so does readying Manyshot.  If readying Manyshot does not, then neither does readying the Attack action.  The same logic applies to both; you can't separate them out.

-Hyp.


----------



## Marshall (Aug 14, 2006)

by which logic it would also be legal to ready a Lesser Orb(or any other ranged touch) spell....

Not saying thats a BAD thing, just another observation.

(and another reason to be able to use Manyshot with SotR)


----------



## ThirdWizard (Aug 14, 2006)

Marshall said:
			
		

> by which logic it would also be legal to ready a Lesser Orb(or any other ranged touch) spell....




Does anyone think you can't?


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Aug 14, 2006)

Marshall said:
			
		

> by which logic it would also be legal to ready a Lesser Orb(or any other ranged touch) spell....
> 
> Not saying thats a BAD thing, just another observation.
> 
> (and another reason to be able to use Manyshot with SotR)




Actually, I don't even think it has to be that specific.  You Ready the "cast a spell" action, at which point when the trigger happens, you can cast any spell at that time, you don't need to specify Lesser Orb.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 14, 2006)

Marshall said:
			
		

> (and another reason to be able to use Manyshot with SotR)




Well, no - Shot on the Run quite explicitly specifies 'the attack action', which _does_ exclude Manyshot.

A single, normal bowshot is a ranged attack, and uses the attack (standard) action.

A single, multiple-arrow bowshot is a ranged attack, and uses the Manyshot (standard) action.

A feat (like Deadeye Shot) that refers to a ranged attack works with either.  A feat (like Shot on the Run) that refers to the attack action only works with the first one.

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 14, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> You can ready a standard, move, or free action.
> 
> Given that a ranged attack is not an action - but rather, something that occurs as part of an action - you cannot ever, strictly, 'ready a ranged attack'.
> 
> ...



By your reasoning, readying a partial charge with the Cometary Collision feat would qualify for a "ready melee attack".

I don't buy it.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 14, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> By your reasoning, readying a partial charge with the Cometary Collision feat would qualify for a "ready melee attack".




As far as I can tell, Cometary Collision would allow charging up to twice your speed, not a restricted charge.

That aside, doing so woukd result in your making a melee attack as a result of a readied action.  Something that affects a readied melee attack should work with that just fine.  Had you an example in mind?

-Hyp.


----------



## Marshall (Aug 14, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Well, no - Shot on the Run quite explicitly specifies 'the attack action', which _does_ exclude Manyshot.
> 
> A single, normal bowshot is a ranged attack, and uses the attack (standard) action.
> 
> ...



 Right. The argument is that SotR and/or Manyshot are _intended_ to function together and one or the other really needs to be reworded.


----------



## Egres (Aug 15, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Something that affects a readied melee attack should work with that just fine.



Unfortunately the DES feat _doesn't_ affect your readied action.

It _requires_ a readied ranged attack.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 16, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> Unfortunately the DES feat _doesn't_ affect your readied action.
> 
> It _requires_ a readied ranged attack.




Right.

With Manyshot, you are making a ranged attack as the result of a readied action.
With the Attack action, you are making a ranged attack as the result of a readied action.

Either both of these satisfy the DES requirement, or neither do.  There is no way to "Ready a ranged attack"; you can only Ready a Standard, Move, or Free action, which action may or may not allow you to make a ranged attack.

Both the Manyshot action and the Attack action are standard actions which can be readied and permit a ranged attack.  I would consider these ranged attacks to satisfy the requirement of 'a readied ranged attack', since they are ranged attacks made as the result of a readied action.  I could see someone claiming that the intervening step disqualifies both.  But I can't see any way to logically claim that one is valid and not the other.

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 16, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> With Manyshot, you are making a ranged attack as the result of a readied action.
> With the Attack action, you are making a ranged attack as the result of a readied action.



So, would you allow a character with the Cometary Collision and the Hurling Charge feats to qualify for the Deadye Shot requirement?


----------



## Nail (Aug 16, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Both the Manyshot action and the Attack action are standard actions which can be readied and permit a ranged attack.  I would consider these ranged attacks to satisfy the requirement of 'a readied ranged attack', since they are ranged attacks made as the result of a readied action.  I could see someone claiming that the intervening step disqualifies both.  But I can't see any way to logically claim that one is valid and not the other.
> 
> -Hyp.



Ahhhhhhh....clarity.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 17, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> So, would you allow a character with the Cometary Collision and the Hurling Charge feats to qualify for the Deadye Shot requirement?




I'll need to read the feats, but assuming Hurling Charge lets you make a ranged attack on a charge, Cometary Collision lets you ready a charge, and the two work together, then the result would be a ranged attack on a readied charge, which I would consider a readied ranged attack.  So probably yes, I would.

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 17, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> I'll need to read the feats, but assuming Hurling Charge lets you make a ranged attack on a charge, Cometary Collision lets you ready a charge, and the two work together, then the result would be a ranged attack on a readied charge, which I would consider a readied ranged attack.  So probably yes, I would.



I see.

That's why I disagree: there are too many ways to go further than a simple readied ranged attack, by your reasoning.

But I'll admit your PoV is more adherent to the RaW.


----------



## Egres (Aug 18, 2006)

Just one more observation:



> assuming Hurling Charge lets you make a ranged attack on a charge, Cometary Collision lets you ready a charge, and the two work together, then the result would be a ranged attack on a readied charge, which I would consider a readied ranged attack. So probably yes, I would.



But the ranged attack here isn't direct result of the readied action.

Proof: you don't have to make the ranged attack as part of the charge.

Thus, how can you say that you have readied something that you can actually avoid to do?

The DMG explains how to deal with characters that want to "skip" their readied action, but in my example you have _started_ the readied action, the charge with the CC feat, but you _don't have_ to use the HC feat.

So, how can you argument that the eventual ranged attack is a readied action, since you didn't ready it and can avoid to do it?


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 19, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> But the ranged attack here isn't direct result of the readied action.




Certainly it is.  Had you not taken the readied action, you would not have made the ranged attack.



> Proof: you don't have to make the ranged attack as part of the charge.




If you make the ranged attack, it is part of the charge, and thus a result of the readied action.

If you don't make the ranged attack, you can't use Deadeye Shot anyway, so it's irrelevant.

Thus, how can you say that you have readied something that you can actually avoid to do?



> The DMG explains how to deal with characters that want to "skip" their readied action, but in my example you have _started_ the readied action, the charge with the CC feat, but you _don't have_ to use the HC feat.




But if you _do_ use the HC feat, you are making a ranged attack as the result of a readied action.



> So, how can you argument that the eventual ranged attack is a readied action, since you didn't ready it and can avoid to do it?




I'm not arguing that the attack is a readied action; it's not an action at all.  It's the result of an action which was readied.

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 19, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Certainly it is.  Had you not taken the readied action, you would not have made the ranged attack.



Nope.

By your reasoning, it's your parents' fault if you kill someone.

Go and tell it to the court...



> If you make the ranged attack, it is part of the charge, and thus a result of the readied action.



It's a part of the reaided action?

Absolutely not.

It's something I do in the middle of my readied action, and has nothing to do with the action itself cause I don't have to do it.



> If you don't make the ranged attack, you can't use Deadeye Shot anyway, so it's irrelevant.
> 
> Thus, how can you say that you have readied something that you can actually avoid to do?



Easy: I have readied a charge, and I can choose to not use the HC charge feat.

So, I can ready something that isn't a readied ranged attack.

So, if I decide to add a ranged attack during my readied action, I will simply add something that I didn't ready.

Heck, if I can decide _after_ I start the charge (the readied action) what to do, how can you affirm that I readied a ranged attack _before_.

It's blatantly illogical.


> I'm not arguing that the attack is a readied action; it's not an action at all.  It's the result of an action which was readied.



Nope.

It's not what you have readied at all.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 19, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> It's something I do in the middle of my readied action, and has nothing to do with the action itself cause I don't have to do it.




How can it have nothing to do with the action, given that were it not for the action, you couldn't do it at all?

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 21, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> How can it have nothing to do with the action, given that were it not for the action, you couldn't do it at all?
> 
> -Hyp.



It happens _in the middle_ of the action, but you _did not_ ready the ranged attack, but the charge.

_DM:"It's your turn"

PC:"I ready an action"

DM"What action?"

PC:"A charge, using the Cometary Collision feat"_

So, where's the readied ranged attack?


----------



## Kapalen (Aug 21, 2006)

I just gotta say I side with Hyp here.  And, if you know me, that means he's right.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 21, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> So, where's the readied ranged attack?




If you readied the attack action, the ranged attack would occur in the middle of the action you readied as well.  It just happens that in that case, the action doesn't allow anything else.

Since the attack occurs as part of the action in both cases, what's the difference?

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 22, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> If you readied the attack action, the ranged attack would occur in the middle of the action you readied as well.



You have just admitted that you _didn't_ ready the ranged attack.



> Since the attack occurs as part of the action in both cases, what's the difference?



The difference is easy to see: in my example you didn't ready the ranged attack.

Thus, the DES feat can't apply.


----------



## Legildur (Aug 22, 2006)

Egres,

I think I see where you are coming from, but I can't decide whether you can 'ready a ranged attack' or 'ready an attack'.

"You can ready a standard action, a move action, or a free action." (PHB p160)

Obviously a ranged attack can't result from a move action or free action, so we can concentrate on the standard action.

Standard actions consist of attack, cast a spell, activate magic item, use special ability, total defense, start/complete full-round action. (PHB pp139-142)  Comprehensive examples are provided in table 8-2: actions in combat.  Once again, we are only interested in the attack action.

So you ready an attack action (standard action) to time your blow with that of your ally in order to benefit from the DES feat.

But what I can't discern is whether you specifically ready an 'attack action' or a 'ranged attack'.  Ranged attack (along with melee attack and unarmed attack) is listed explicitly under table 8-2, and so are other standard actions that don't otherwise appear in the list of standard actions I quoted from the PHB, above (for example, where does 'make a dying friend stable' fit in to the above list? I know it is listed under Miscellaneous actions (145)).

Is it readying an attack and then relying on a ranged attack to trigger the benefits of the feat?  Or is it readying a ranged attack?


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 22, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> You have just admitted that you _didn't_ ready the ranged attack.




_In either case_.  In both cases, you readied an action, not an attack.  In both cases, the attack is made as part of the readied action.  But since an attack is not an action, it can _never_ be directly readied; it can only ever be indirectly readied by readying the action the attack is part of.



> The difference is easy to see: in my example you didn't ready the ranged attack.




You don't ready the ranged attack if you Ready the Attack action either.  So, again - what's the difference?

-Hyp.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Aug 22, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> You don't ready the ranged attack if you Ready the Attack action either.  So, again - what's the difference?
> 
> -Hyp.




According to the *Actions in Combat* table, wouldn't it be:

Ready: Attack (ranged)


----------



## Legildur (Aug 22, 2006)

RM2, that's exactly what I'm talking about a couple of posts earlier.  I think it is Ready - Attack and that the attack is an attack (ranged).  But it could also be the way you prescribe.


----------



## Egres (Aug 22, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> _In either case_.  In both cases, you readied an action, not an attack.  In both cases, the attack is made as part of the readied action.  But since an attack is not an action, it can _never_ be directly readied; it can only ever be indirectly readied by readying the action the attack is part of.



But in my example you aren't readying _any_ ranged attack, even indirectly.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 22, 2006)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> According to the *Actions in Combat* table, wouldn't it be:
> 
> Ready: Attack (ranged)




Yup.  Which is the Attack action.



			
				Egres said:
			
		

> But in my example you aren't readying any ranged attack, even indirectly.




Of course I am.  I'm readying the Charge action; that allows me a ranged attack when my readied action is triggered.  Just like when I ready the Attack (ranged) action, it also allows me a ranged attack when my readied action is triggered.

The two situations are identical.

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 23, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Of course I am.  I'm readying the Charge action; that allows me a ranged attack when my readied action is triggered.  Just like when I ready the Attack (ranged) action, it also allows me a ranged attack when my readied action is triggered.
> 
> The two situations are identical.



Absolutely not.

It's crystal clear that they are blatantly different.

- In my example you are reading a charge, and _after _you started it you can choose to make the ranged attack.

Thus, you _didn't_ ready any ranged attack.

- In your example, where you ready an attack action, you _can't_ choose to not make a ranged attack.

In my example the readied action and the ranged action are not the same thing: in your example they do.

They couldn't be more different.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 23, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> - In your example, where you ready an attack action, you _can't_ choose to not make a ranged attack.




Certainly you can; just don't make the attack.

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 23, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Certainly you can; just don't make the attack.
> 
> -Hyp.



In my example you can do both: do the readied action _and_ avoid to do the ranged attack.

See the difference now?


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 23, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> In my example you can do both: do the readied action _and_ avoid to do the ranged attack.
> 
> See the difference now?




Nope.

I don't have a 3.5 DMG handy, but I'm assuming the language is similar - in the 3E DMG, under 'Adjudicating the Ready Action', it notes that the DM should require players to be specific about their action.  They don't ready to 'cast a spell'; they have to say _which_ spell.  They don't ready an attack; they ready an attack against a specific opponent, or against an opponent who meets specific criteria.

So - if the Readied attack action is required to be specific, so should the Readied charge action... including whether or not Hurling Charge will be used.

If the Readied attack action is not required to be specific, then when it triggers, I can declare that I'm making my ranged attack against, say, Bigby.  I take the action, but since I don't have line of sight to Bigby, I can't make the attack the action allows.

So if the declared actions must be specific, there's no difference - I must declare Hurling Charge when I ready the charge action.  If the declared actions need not be specific, there's no difference - I can take the readied Attack action without a ranged attack resulting from it.

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 24, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Nope.
> 
> I don't have a 3.5 DMG handy, but I'm assuming the language is similar - in the 3E DMG, under 'Adjudicating the Ready Action', it notes that the DM should require players to be specific about their action.  They don't ready to 'cast a spell'; they have to say _which_ spell.  They don't ready an attack; they ready an attack against a specific opponent, or against an opponent who meets specific criteria.



Right.

I ready a charge.


> So - if the Readied attack action is required to be specific, so should the Readied charge action... including whether or not Hurling Charge will be used.



Nope.

I would be readying more than I can, since I can only ready a standard, move or free action.


> If the Readied attack action is not required to be specific, then when it triggers, I can declare that I'm making my ranged attack against, say, Bigby.  I take the action, but since I don't have line of sight to Bigby, I can't make the attack the action allows.
> 
> So if the declared actions must be specific, there's no difference - I must declare Hurling Charge when I ready the charge action.  If the declared actions need not be specific, there's no difference - I can take the readied Attack action without a ranged attack resulting from it.



But in this example only because you wanted to but you _couldn't_.

In my example you could _choose_ to not do it.

See the difference now?


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 24, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> I would be readying more than I can, since I can only ready a standard, move or free action.




Either the Hurling Charge is made as part of the standard action that you ready (Cometary Collision charge), or it isn't.

If it is, you declare it when you Ready.  If it isn't, you can't perform it when your Readied action triggers.

I can take free actions while performing another action normally.  If I Ready to attack Bob when he gets close... at the point that my Readied action triggers, can I drop my longsword, Quick Draw my greatsword, cast a Quickened True Strike, and attack him?

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 25, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Either the Hurling Charge is made as part of the standard action that you ready (Cometary Collision charge), or it isn't.
> 
> If it is, you declare it when you Ready.  If it isn't, you can't perform it when your Readied action triggers.



Nope.

Nowhere you'll find that I must ready something more than my readied action.

And the extra attack granted by the §Hurling charge feat is more than my readied action, that is a simple charge.



> I can take free actions while performing another action normally.  If I Ready to attack Bob when he gets close... at the point that my Readied action triggers, can I drop my longsword, Quick Draw my greatsword, cast a Quickened True Strike, and attack him?



Buit we _aren't_ talking about free actions here, Hyp.

Weren't you the one who underlined that an attack _isn't_ an action, even a free action?

Should you declare that you are going to sunder your opponent's shield at the end of your charge, or do you need only to declare that you are readying a charge?

You know the answer.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 25, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> Buit we _aren't_ talking about free actions here, Hyp.




No, but you're talking about doing something above and beyond the action you've readied.



> Should you declare that you are going to sunder your opponent's shield at the end of your charge, or do you need only to declare that you are readying a charge?
> 
> You know the answer.




Well, that also depends on whether one allows Sunder as part of a charge - the Sunder action doesn't carry footnote 7, after all.

But let's use Disarm as the example instead.

Can you say "I Ready a charge", and then as part of that charge, attempt a Disarm?  Or must you say "I Ready a charge with an attempt to Disarm"?

Adjudicating the Ready Action says you must make the player using it be _as specific as possible_ about what the character is doing.

"I Ready the Cast a Spell action" is not sufficient.  "I Ready the Cast a Spell action to cast Magic Missile at the high priest" is required.

So, by the same logic, "I Ready the Charge action" is not sufficient; "I Ready the Charge action with the aim of Disarming the blackguard" would be required.  And if you intended to make use of Hurling Charge in the course of that readied action, _as specific as possible_ would require you to include that in your declaration.

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 25, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Can you say "I Ready a charge", and then as part of that charge, attempt a Disarm?



Readying an action to "attack anyone that tries to hurt my helpless ally" is allowed, and nowhere you'll find that I need to declare what I will do in this "attack".

For example, I could use the Sundering Cleave maneuver to sunder my opponent's shield and attack him.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 25, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> Readying an action to "attack anyone that tries to hurt my helpless ally" is allowed, and nowhere you'll find that I need to declare what I will do in this "attack".




How is that different to readying an action to "cast a spell on anyone that tries etc", without declaring which spell?

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 28, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> How is that different to readying an action to "cast a spell on anyone that tries etc", without declaring which spell?
> 
> -Hyp.




Because attacking my opponent is quite more specific than casting "a spell", and you know it.

Please, note that in my example I am _effectively_ readying an attack, and nothing more.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 28, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> Because attacking my opponent is quite more specific than casting "a spell", and you know it.




But is Readying to 'attack my opponent', and then attempting to Disarm him, within the bounds of what you readied?  And if so, is what you readied specific enough?

Is 'attack my opponent', with the option to disarm, trip, or grapple left open, any more specific than 'cast an offensive spell at my opponent', with the choice of Magic Missile, Scorching Ray, or Acid Arrow left open?

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 28, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> But is Readying to 'attack my opponent', and then attempting to Disarm him, within the bounds of what you readied?  And if so, is what you readied specific enough?



Actually, my example was completely different.

I talked about the sundering cleave option.

Would you mind answering basing your answer to my example?


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 28, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> I talked about the sundering cleave option.
> 
> Would you mind answering basing your answer to my example?




Well, yes, because I wouldn't allow a Sunder as part of a Charge - the Sunder action doesn't carry footnote 7 - so I consider your example invalid, and thus can't base my answer on it.  Which is why I substituted Disarm in the first place.

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 29, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Well, yes, because I wouldn't allow a Sunder as part of a Charge - the Sunder action doesn't carry footnote 7 - so I consider your example invalid, and thus can't base my answer on it.  Which is why I substituted Disarm in the first place.
> 
> -Hyp.



Nope.

My example was: "I attack anyone that tries to hurt my helpless ally".

Can I use the sundering cleave option?  (I'm not charging anyone here)


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 29, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> Nope.
> 
> My example was: "I attack anyone that tries to hurt my helpless ally".
> 
> Can I use the sundering cleave option?  (I'm not charging anyone here)




Since the action you're taking is Sunder, I'd require that your readied action be "I sunder the weapon of anyone that tries to hurt my helpless ally".

If you did so successfully, Combat Brute would allow you to Cleave into the wielder, just as dropping someone with an attack granted by a readied action would allow you to Cleave into another opponent.  And I would consider the attack from the Sundering Cleave to be 'a readied attack', since it occurs as part of a readied action.

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 29, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> And I would consider the attack from the Sundering Cleave to be 'a readied attack', since it occurs as part of a readied action.



But, unfortunately, that wasn't what you readied at all.

You readied a sunder attempt: nothing more.

What happens after your readied action is meaningless, since the readied action has already triggered.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 29, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> But, unfortunately, that wasn't what you readied at all.




Certainly I did.

I readied a Sunder, which in conjunction with the Combat Brute feat results in an attack against the weapon and an attack against the wielder being triggered by the right conditions.

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Aug 30, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Certainly I did.
> 
> I readied a Sunder, which in conjunction with the Combat Brute feat results in an attack against the weapon and an attack against the wielder being triggered by the right conditions.
> 
> -Hyp.



Actually, it's not in conjunction at all.

You take the extra attack granted by the maneuveur after _completing _your readied action.

Bob: "I ready an action: if someone sunders John's weapon, I attack him/her".

Mike:"I ready an action. I'll sunder the weapon of the first one who'll enter in my threatened area."

Then, John enters in Myke's threatened area, and Mike sunders his weapon.

Bob, then, attacks Myke thanks to his readied action, and kills him with a single blow.

Did Myke end his readied action?

Yes.

He sundered John's weapon.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Aug 30, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> Then, John enters in Myke's threatened area, and Mike sunders his weapon.
> 
> Bob, then, attacks Myke thanks to his readied action, and kills him with a single blow.
> 
> ...




If Bob had not killed him, Mike would have continued on via Sundering Cleave to strike John.  The result of Mike's trigger condition being met was incomplete at the time Bob attacked.

Mike had not fully resolved what was readied.

-Hyp.


----------



## Korak (Aug 30, 2006)

Without betraying my own position, let me just say that I am enjoying the debate.


----------



## Egres (Aug 31, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> If Bob had not killed him, Mike would have continued on via Sundering Cleave to strike John.



If Bob parents had not given him life, Mike would have continued on via Sundering Cleave to strike John.



> The result of Mike's trigger condition being met was incomplete at the time Bob attacked.



Did he ready a sunder action?

Yes.

Did he sunder his opponent's weapon?

Yes.



> Mike had not fully resolved what was readied.



Actually, what he readied was a sunder attempt.

You admit that too:


			
				Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Since the action you're taking is Sunder, I'd require that your readied action be "*I sunder the weapon of anyone that tries to hurt my helpless ally*".
> 
> If *you did so successfully*,


----------



## Korak (Aug 31, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> Did he ready a sunder action?
> 
> Yes.




more precisely... he readied a specific *standard action: sunder*



			
				Egres said:
			
		

> Did he sunder his opponent's weapon?
> 
> Yes.




without a doubt



			
				Egres said:
			
		

> Actually, what he readied was a sunder attempt.




negative... as pointed out before, he readied a specific *standard action: sunder*.  Players cannot ready melee attacks, dice rolls, mountain dew drinks, bathroom breaks, or anything else apart from standard actions, move actions, and free actions... Mike readied a standard action.  By virtue of feats, abilities, and skills possed by Mike, he is entitled to do a number of things within a single *standard action: sunder* provided certain conditions are met.  The salient point though, is that all of those things he may do are contained within the standard action... and the action is the thing that is readied.  Assuming Bob is able to kill Mike with a readied *standard action: attack* that was triggered by the sundering of John's weapon, then Mike's action would indeed be interrupted and incomplete.  Mike would have still been eligible to do more within the bounds of his readied *standard action: sunder* had he not been killed in mid-action.


----------



## Egres (Sep 1, 2006)

Korak said:
			
		

> negative... as pointed out before, he readied a specific *standard action: sunder*.  Players cannot ready melee attacks, dice rolls, mountain dew drinks, bathroom breaks, or anything else apart from standard actions, move actions, and free actions... Mike readied a standard action.  By virtue of feats, abilities, and skills possed by Mike, he is entitled to do a number of things within a single *standard action: sunder* provided certain conditions are met.



Actually, with the sundering cleave maneuveur he obtains more than a standard action, unless you are going to state that the extra attack is a non action.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Sep 1, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> Actually, with the sundering cleave maneuveur he obtains more than a standard action, unless you are going to state that the extra attack is a non action.




No melee attack is an action; they're all something that occurs as part of an action (or AoO).

Someone who is restricted to only a standard action can take the Attack action, and make potentially multiple attacks via the Great Cleave feat as a result of that action.

-Hyp.


----------



## Egres (Sep 1, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> No melee attack is an action; they're all something that occurs as part of an action (or AoO).
> 
> Someone who is restricted to only a standard action can take the Attack action, and make potentially multiple attacks via the Great Cleave feat as a result of that action.



But you dont have to.

Bob readies an attack to strike the first creature enters in his threatened area.

He doesn't know, of course, if his attack will drop his opponent, so he simply readies an attack action.

However, he could also add the great cleave feat extra attacks if he drops his opponent and other creatures too, but these attacks were not readied at all.


----------



## Korak (Sep 1, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> Actually, with the sundering cleave maneuveur he obtains more than a standard action, unless you are going to state that the extra attack is a non action.




Not all standard actions are created equal.  By virtue of feats, class abilities, and other tactical choices, some characters are able to "do more things" with a standard action than other characters.



			
				Egres said:
			
		

> But you dont have to.



Immaterial.  When a human in light armor takes a move action, he doesn't have to use all 6 squares of movement, but whether he moves 3 squares or 6 squares, it is still the same move action.  It is not important whether or not a character chooses exercise all the options allowed to him within his action, he has still spent an action, and all those possibilities that he ends up exercising will still fall under the same action.



			
				Egres said:
			
		

> Bob readies an attack to strike the first creature enters in his threatened area.



Nope... Bob cannot ready an attack.



			
				Egres said:
			
		

> He doesn't know, of course, if his attack will drop his opponent, so he simply readies an attack action.



That's correct.  He readies a standard action: attack



			
				Egres said:
			
		

> However, he could also add the great cleave feat extra attacks if he drops his opponent and other creatures too, but these attacks were not readied at all.



No the attacks allowed by cleave and great cleave were not readied specifically, but then again, neither was the very first attack.  Characters can't ready attacks.  They ready actions.  Many of the actions that can be readied allow one or more attacks.  What Hyp and I are saying is that since a character readies an action, and *not* an attack, then any attacks allowed by the readied action should be considered readied attacks for purposes of other feats and abilities that refer to readied attacks.


----------



## Egres (Sep 2, 2006)

Korak said:
			
		

> What Hyp and I are saying is that since a character readies an action, and *not* an attack, then any attacks allowed by the readied action should be considered readied attacks for purposes of other feats and abilities that refer to readied attacks.



Check the FAQ.

Readying an "attack on the first creature that attacks my ally" is perfectly legal.


----------



## Legildur (Sep 2, 2006)

IMO that's just lazy phrasing in the FAQ.  I find it a useful document, but it's hardly a reliable source for a rules discussion at this level of detail.


----------



## Egres (Sep 2, 2006)

Legildur said:
			
		

> IMO that's just lazy phrasing in the FAQ.  I find it a useful document, but it's hardly a reliable source for a rules discussion at this level of detail.



Maybe.

Then, let's read the DMG 3.5:

"_I shoot the first enemy that comes from the door_".

Thats' a perfect example of a readied action.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Sep 2, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> Maybe.
> 
> Then, let's read the DMG 3.5:
> 
> ...




And if it were phrased more precisely, it would likely be "I ready the attack action, triggered by the condition of an enemy coming through the door, to make a ranged attack on that enemy with my bow".

Given that the standard, move, or free action someone uses to 'shoot the first enemy' is likely the attack action.  If they meant something else, it would pay them to be explicit about it.

-Hyp.


----------



## Legildur (Sep 2, 2006)

Egres said:
			
		

> Maybe.
> 
> Then, let's read the DMG 3.5:
> 
> ...



I wouldn't be hanging my hat on an example of the game in play using 'plain speak' as way to support a rules argument.  But that's just me.


----------



## Egres (Sep 2, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> And if it were phrased more precisely, it would likely be "I ready the attack action, triggered by the condition of an enemy coming through the door, to make a ranged attack on that enemy with my bow".



In your, absolutely respectable, opinion.

But the authors seem to think differently.


----------



## moritheil (Sep 2, 2006)

I was about to respond to this:



			
				RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Actually, I don't even think it has to be that specific.  You Ready the "cast a spell" action, at which point when the trigger happens, you can cast any spell at that time, you don't need to specify Lesser Orb.




when I saw this:



			
				Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> I don't have a 3.5 DMG handy, but I'm assuming the language is similar - in the 3E DMG, under 'Adjudicating the Ready Action', it notes that the DM should require players to be specific about their action. They don't ready to 'cast a spell'; they have to say which spell. They don't ready an attack; they ready an attack against a specific opponent, or against an opponent who meets specific criteria.





Korak - It may be true that "a character readies an action, and not an attack," but it does not necessarily automatically follow that "any attacks allowed by the readied action should be considered readied attacks."  You seem to be implying that it does.


----------



## Korak (Sep 5, 2006)

moritheil said:
			
		

> Korak - It may be true that "a character readies an action, and not an attack," but it does not necessarily automatically follow that "any attacks allowed by the readied action should be considered readied attacks."  You seem to be implying that it does.




No, my second statement is not logically required.  However, given the actual rule text which specifies that only actions can be readied combined with the lack of an explicit definition of a "readied attack" leads me to conclude that the simplest explanation for what a readied attack is... is that it's an attack that is made as part of a readied action.


----------

