View Single Post

Thread: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

  1. - Top - End - #82
    Banned
     
    willpell's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

    Quote Originally Posted by Duke of URL View Post
    A 48
    If they are, take note of the consequences of anything strenuous, as specified by the free action clause.
    Which text of course specifically calling out quickened spells, and those have since become swift actions. So the answer leans toward "probably yes", even if the text doesn't clarify - it can't, since the extra action types were added after the 3.5 PHB went out.

    (Honestly I don't know why they didn't just publish a new PhB with the S&IA's rule, instead of putting a sidebar describing them into every single book published after the Minis Handbook. That would have been the place this question could get answered.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
    A 045 Yes.
    D&D 3.5 removed handedness except as an appearance factor, so your "off hand" attack doesn't have to be taken with a particular hand, or any hand.
    I'm inclined to dispute this call, since if two-handed weapons still allow you to make an unarmed strike, nearly every melee character would go for this option (an extra free attack, even for nonlethal and at AoO risk, is a pretty major deal), and so the setting would be full of guys running around throwing a kick or headbutt or butt-slam in after every single greatsword chop. That it's unrealistic and goofy doesn't matter for this thread's purposes, but I also suspect that it's very strongly against RAI and might well be prohibited by RAW in some less than obvious fashion. Isn't there anything in core or the Rules Compendium clarifying you can's toss other attacks in along with a THW attack unless you have more-than-human anatomy?
    Last edited by willpell; 2012-05-24 at 08:15 AM.