Why does Flyby Attack seem like it's so rife with terrible language...?

[SangoProduction]

Flyby Attack (Monster)
This creature can make an attack before and after it moves while flying.

Prerequisite: Fly speed.

Benefit: When flying, the creature can take a move action and another standard action at any point during the move. The creature cannot take a second move action during a round when it makes a flyby attack.

Normal: Without this feat, the creature takes a standard action either before or after its move.

So...The fluff says it can attack before *and* after it moves. The benefit says it can take a move action and *another* standard action during this move, which apparently can't be used for a second move action...

Like the hell? There are so many simple ways to say "You may use a move action to move both before and after you use a standard action (to the maximum of your normal move speed)," without implying, or even kind of outright stating that you get bonus actions (or attacks).

[Boggartbae]

Well apparently because it is.

Or maybe they were hoping that everyone would read spring attack and then extrapolate?

[SangoProduction]

Well apparently because it is.

Or maybe they were hoping that everyone would read spring attack and then extrapolate?

OK. So I'm not insane, and it is actually reading as terribly as I think it is?

[Elricaltovilla]

OK. So I'm not insane, and it is actually reading as terribly as I think it is?

Welcome to d20 systems. The complaints threads are stickied at the top of the forum.

[SangoProduction]

Welcome to d20 systems. The complaints threads are stickied at the top of the forum.

Truly incredible wit.

[daremetoidareyo]

Well apparently because it is.

Or maybe they were hoping that everyone would read spring attack and then extrapolate?

Flyby attack is superior because it allows you to make any standard action not just an attack

[CharonsHelper]

Flyby attack is superior because it allows you to make any standard action not just an attack

In that way yes. However, unlike Spring Attack you still provoke Attacks of Opportunity with Flyby Attack.

[Firechanter]

I always considered that terrible, terrible wording to be just a clerical error. Though of course, why they never bothered to fix it...

[SangoProduction]

Huh....OK. Revelation. Since Pathfinder just copy/pasted so much of 3.5...but I was quite certain it was fine in 3.5...I decided to look it up and see how the cocked that ... it's basically copy/pasted. OK. I didn't realize ...What's this? Adroit Flyby Attack? It's an upgrade to Flyby Attack? Wait, why is this one, which require flyby attack, just a worse version, since it's literally what Flyby Attack should be, but each of the 5 reprintings of the actual Flyby Attack say you get extra actions?

Like...It's been reprinted so many times. And it remains the same. I don't understand!

[KillianHawkeye]

Huh....OK. Revelation. Since Pathfinder just copy/pasted so much of 3.5...but I was quite certain it was fine in 3.5...I decided to look it up and see how the cocked that ... it's basically copy/pasted. OK. I didn't realize ...

Like...It's been reprinted so many times. And it remains the same. I don't understand!

I don't know which 3.5 you're looking at, but neither the 3e nor the 3.5 Monster Manual say anything about attacking before and after moving.

By the way, I can't speak to all the prerequisites for Adroit Flyby Attack, but it's literally just Spring Attack for flying creatures. Whereas the original Flyby Attack was intended for dragons to fly over and use their breath weapons and be able to fly away again, which is why it gives any Standard Action.

[Florian]

Well, welcome to the OGL and SRD. Some things simply didn't really change from 3E and 3PP, like Paizo is one in that case, can´t change anything. (Yes, I mentioned 3E, not 3.5E, so the flyby wording makes pretty much sense, because of a slightly different economy of actions (Haste I miss you))

[Serafina]

Dear gods that's horrible wording.
Because, well let's read that without any sense for context and balance, and just literary.

It says "take a move action and another standard action". Why would it say another, if not because you get another in addition to, well, your usual one? Normally you get a standard and a move action, this says you get another - how is that not a perfectly sensible reading of the rules? No other reading explains the word "another"?

And I can just see some table treating it like that, perfectly innocuously, because that's a perfectly sensible reading! You don't even necessarily spot the balance issue - after all, you're giving up your prescious full attack, and compared to spring attack you still provoke attacks of opportunity, and it's not like some feats aren't just stronger than others right?

Obviously we all know the actual design intent behind this - but that just goes to show how much you have to rely on stuff like that. And given that this wouldn't be an issue at all if it had just been worded "take a move action and A standard action", well.


Actually this reminds me of a story where I really just couldn't prase the misreading: a 5E group that calculated hitpoints like this:
at 2nd level, you get 1D8+Con Mod Hit points. At 3rd level, you get (1D8+ConM)x2. At 4th level, you get (1D8+ConM)x3. Etc.
Why?
Because they started playing with 5E, didn't have any familiarity with any other D&D-stuff, and because HP-increases are worded like this:

Hit Points at Higher Levels: 1D8 (or 5) + your Constitution modifier per level after 1st

Just think about that for a minute or two without any of the knowledge of how HP-increases are supposed to work.

A player with that knowledge will just read it the way the designer intended, but you shouldn't rely on that, especially when there's simple ways to phrase it better (in this case, just write "at each level after 1st").