Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Keyar81 05-08-07, 10:51 AM	Question, Can a character with a base attack bonus of +1, sheath a bow, AND draw a long sword in the same round? would they have any room for more actions? I know it says a +1 BAB makes drawing/sheathing a free action combined with a move, but could they do both in the same round?
Merestil Haye 05-08-07, 10:58 AM	Question, Can a character with a base attack bonus of +1, sheath a bow, AND draw a long sword in the same round? would they have any room for more actions? I know it says a +1 BAB makes drawing/sheathing a free action combined with a move, but could they do both in the same round?Drawing a weapon does not become a free action when you have a +1 base attack bonus. The bonus allows you to take a move action to move and at the same time draw a weapon. If you want to make drawing a weapon a free action, you take the Quick Draw feat - that is what the feat is for. Since the prereq for quick draw is +1 base attack bonus, if the mere possession of the base attack bonus made drawing a weapon a free action, why does the feat exist at all, since everyone gets it by second level anyway? If you use a move action to do something else, like (say) sheathe a weapon, you cannot combine that with drawing another weapon, because you are not actually moving.
BigJohn42 05-08-07, 12:29 PM	I'm I'm not mistaken, the OP's question was merely misphrased. Understanding that, with a BAB of +1, a character gets to draw/sheathe a weapon as part of a move action (essentially "for free"), the question should be, can this be done more than once? The short answer is no. This can be done once per move action... ... now, if the character needed to make two move actions, he could move/sheathe the bow, then move/draw a sword. Two move actions, two weapon draw/sheath actions. Alternatively, you could drop the bow on the ground as a free action, move/draw longsword, and then take a single attack. You'll just have to remember to pick up the bow when you're done.
Inigo Carmine 05-08-07, 12:34 PM	Sheathing a weapon cannot be done for free, whether you have the quickdraw feat or use a move action (with +1 BAB). It is its own separate move action, and draws an AoO.
tos_shai_hulud 05-08-07, 12:55 PM	Sheathing a weapon cannot be done for free, whether you have the quickdraw feat or use a move action (with +1 BAB). It is its own separate move action, and draws an AoO. Does Quick Draw (Player’s Handbook, page 98) allow you to sheathe a weapon as a free action? No. Quick Draw clearly states that it allows you to “draw a weapon as a free action.” Nowhere does it suggest anything about sheathing a weapon more quickly than normal (a move action). You may be confusing Quick Draw with the ability of any character with a base attack bonus of +1 or better to draw or sheathe a weapon as a free action as part of movement (Player’s Handbook, page 142). While these functions are similar and overlap to some extent, they are different. According to the FAQ, sheathing a weapon can be combined with a move action. That said, there are no rules for how many draw/sheaths can take place during a move. As BigJohn42 stated, you can easily rule that only one can be accomplished per move, but truly, that would be a DM call, just as it would be a DM call to not move and instead take a move action to both draw and sheath separate weapons. It really comes down to how many hands it takes to do either. If it takes two hands to sheath a weapon, then I would say you would not have enough time to also draw a weapon, but if you only needed one hand to sheath and one hand to draw, then you could do them simultaneously. So, sheathing a longbow and drawing a longsword seems like it can be done with little trouble in the same move, at least to me.
crashlogic 05-08-07, 02:35 PM	Or just drop the bow as a free action that does not provoke AoO and draw the longsword as a free action and charge! If you survive the fight you can get back to the bow. If you are killed, you don't need it anyway:D
BigJohn42 05-08-07, 04:45 PM	Or just drop the bow as a free action that does not provoke AoO and draw the longsword as a free action and charge! If you survive the fight you can get back to the bow. If you are killed, you don't need it anyway:D That was the premise I was working under, crashlogic. The only possible problem with that is if someone sneaks over, picks up your bow of awseomeness +4, and starts taking potshots. ... of course, if you have a bow of awesomeness +4, you'll probably take the extra action to make sure it's secured, or simply hold it in your off-hand while fighting with the longsword.
crashlogic 05-08-07, 05:27 PM	If I had a bow of awesomeness +4 I would have Point blank shot, and shot on the run, and a host of magic arrows and I would not bother with the sword. But really, in this case, you can move and sheath your bow, draw your longsword as a free action if you have quick draw, and attack. If you don't have quick draw, then make a move action an seath your bow, and make another move action and draw your long sword. Otherwise you are stuck.
Inigo Carmine 05-08-07, 05:32 PM	Originally Posted by 3.5 FAQ Does Quick Draw (Player’s Handbook, page 98) allow you to sheathe a weapon as a free action? No. Quick Draw clearly states that it allows you to “draw a weapon as a free action.” Nowhere does it suggest anything about sheathing a weapon more quickly than normal (a move action). You may be confusing Quick Draw with the ability of any character with a base attack bonus of +1 or better to draw or sheathe a weapon as a free action as part of movement (Player’s Handbook, page 142). While these functions are similar and overlap to some extent, they are different. According to the FAQ, sheathing a weapon can be combined with a move action. That said, there are no rules for how many draw/sheaths can take place during a move. As BigJohn42 stated, you can easily rule that only one can be accomplished per move, but truly, that would be a DM call, just as it would be a DM call to not move and instead take a move action to both draw and sheath separate weapons. It really comes down to how many hands it takes to do either. If it takes two hands to sheath a weapon, then I would say you would not have enough time to also draw a weapon, but if you only needed one hand to sheath and one hand to draw, then you could do them simultaneously. So, sheathing a longbow and drawing a longsword seems like it can be done with little trouble in the same move, at least to me. I am right. The FAQ is wrong. It is slightly less wrong than it was about a year ago when it said that quickdraw did allow you to sheath a weapon as a free action (it appears they left the bottom half of the incorrect answer intact though). From the actual rules: Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat, or putting it away so that you have a free hand, requires a move action. This action also applies to weapon-like objects carried in easy reach, such as wands. If your weapon or weapon-like object is stored in a pack or otherwise out of easy reach, treat this action as retrieving a stored item. If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you may draw a weapon as a free action combined with a regular move. If you have the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, you can draw two light or one-handed weapons in the time it would normally take you to draw one. The real rules are quite explicit. The bolded section says you can draw a weapon as a free action combined with a regular move. Nothing about sheathing. Ironically, the FAQs justification for why quickdraw doesn't allow quicksheathing refutes it later statement; Also, the underlined section implies that you can only draw one weapon for free as part of a regular move, as with the TWF feat, you can draw twice as many weapons for free as part of your move. This distinction would be meaningless if you were able to draw more than one weapon as a free action as part of a regular move.
Ceirnian 05-08-07, 05:36 PM	I had a character take quick draw and a made up feat called quick sheath. My DM was nice and let me draw / sheath weapons in between attacks as a bonus for actually taking both (Let's say 3 attacks. First two attacks with your two handed weapon, quick sheath that and pull out your one hander and attack. Wasn't really broken and it made combat more fun for me) As for the original question, Inigo Carmine answered it quite well.
Steely_Dan 05-09-07, 06:24 AM	I had a character take quick draw and a made up feat called quick sheath. Yeah, I designed a Quick Sheath feat: QUICK SHEATH You may sheath a weapon with startling speed. Prerequisites: BAB +1, Quick Draw Benefit: You may sheath a weapon as a swift action without provoking an attack of opportunity. Normal: Sheathing a weapon is a move action that provokes an attack of opportunity. Special: A fighter may take Quick Sheath as one of his fighter bonus feats.
BigJohn42 05-09-07, 12:32 PM	I am right. The FAQ is wrong. At the risk of starting an argument, a statement such as "The FAQ is wrong" needs some pretty impressive support. d20 SRD doesn't include the language about sheathing weapons as part of movement, so I'd be inclined to accept this. My previous statements intended to only allow one weapon-draw per move action (which is perfectly acceptable, since AFAIK that hasn't changed to a swift action). My preferred answer to the overall question would be to continue to hold the bow in the off-hand (unless it was needed for something else), or drop it as a free action (to be recovered after the battle). This allows the character to still move/attack in a round. If someone doesn't care about attacking that round, then they could easily take the second movement action to put the bow away properly, thus avoiding the issue. Or, if the player can talk the DM into allowing Star Wars feats to carry over, they offer "Heroic Surge", which can add an extra move-action, so many times per day. I didn't realize that about TWF feat, though... That's interesting.
crashlogic 05-09-07, 01:19 PM	so then sheathing a weapon can never be done as a free action? this actually makes sense. You can move and draw if you have a + 1 BAB And quick draw lets you do it as a free action, so you can quick draw and full attack.
calvinNhobbes 05-09-07, 01:35 PM	At the risk of starting an argument, a statement such as "The FAQ is wrong" needs some pretty impressive support. No, not really. The FAQ is the biggest pile of crap ever released by WOTC. It blatantly contradicts itself and the rules often enough to make it almost worthless. Not to mention descrepancy between it and some of the RoTG articles. As a fun exercise, try reading all the FAQ responsing regarding grappling. The number of times it contradicts itself is hilarious.
tos_shai_hulud 05-09-07, 01:42 PM	No, not really. The FAQ is the biggest pile of crap ever released by WOTC. It blatantly contradicts itself and the rules often enough to make it almost worthless. Not to mention descrepancy between it and some of the RoTG articles. As a fun exercise, try reading all the FAQ responsing regarding grappling. The number of times it contradicts itself is hilarious. While I have notices several one or two self-contradictions, on the whole, the FAQ is a VERY useful piece of material and frequently gives very good advice for how to adjudicate difficult concepts quickly. It is also accepted by the RPGA. That gives it far more bearing than a guy who decided he didn't like it and posted on the forum.
calvinNhobbes 05-09-07, 01:49 PM	While I have notices several one or two self-contradictions, on the whole, the FAQ is a VERY useful piece of material and frequently gives very good advice for how to adjudicate difficult concepts quickly. It is also accepted by the RPGA. That gives it far more bearing than a guy who decided he didn't like it and posted on the forum. Then you need to read it more carefully. It is not very useful at all. Most of the responses anyone with an ounce of common sense would know. The areas where the rules are incomplete (like grappling), the FAQ sucks the big one. It is accepted by the RPGA because the RPGA is run by WOTC. How would it look if WOTC affiliations refused to use the "official" WOTC FAQ? The FAQ is simply the blind leading the blind.
tos_shai_hulud 05-09-07, 02:01 PM	Then you need to read it more carefully. It is not very useful at all. Most of the responses anyone with an ounce of common sense would know. The areas where the rules are incomplete (like grappling), the FAQ sucks the big one. It is accepted by the RPGA because the RPGA is run by WOTC. How would it look if WOTC affiliations refused to use the "official" WOTC FAQ? The FAQ is simply the blind leading the blind. I just read through the grappling rules in the FAQ and did not notice any inconsistencies. Perhaps you can post an instance from the FAQ where it "sucks the big one". I must be one of those without "an ounce of common sense" because I have found many entries to be very useful in my games.
Frugal 05-09-07, 02:32 PM	While I have notices several one or two self-contradictions, on the whole, the FAQ is a VERY useful piece of material and frequently gives very good advice for how to adjudicate difficult concepts quickly. It is also accepted by the RPGA. That gives it far more bearing than a guy who decided he didn't like it and posted on the forum. The main issue with the sheathing comment in the FAQ is that it's not even related to the question and appears to be a misquoting of the PHB as part of his explanation for how it works or what they might have been thinking of. The FAQ should strictly be limited to clarifying the rules in the game, but if it is going to state something like that which is contradictory to what the PHB says then it should at least clarify that it is a correction/addition/revision to the rules.
tos_shai_hulud 05-09-07, 02:42 PM	It is not actually a contradiction. The wording in the SRD groups together drawing and sheathing weapons as a move action. Then it groups weapon-like objects into that category, as well. This grouping makes it difficult to distinguish whether sheathing of weapons was intentionally left out or whether it was intended to be included. The FAQ may be interpreting the text as though it was meant to be included, so it is merely clarifying the text (as the FAQ is supposed to do). While it is possible that the FAQ is incorrect, it is also possible that its interpretation is simply breaking down the grouping that was made in the SRD.
calvinNhobbes 05-09-07, 02:48 PM	I just read through the grappling rules in the FAQ and did not notice any inconsistencies. Perhaps you can post an instance from the FAQ where it "sucks the big one". I must be one of those without "an ounce of common sense" because I have found many entries to be very useful in my games. I will present a very simple question that the FAQ should easily be able to answer: Is a grapple check a melee attack? In other words, how many grapple checks do I get each round? Can a monk make disarm, sunder, and trip attacks during her flurry of blows? What about grapple checks? What about bull rushes, overruns, or other special combat maneuvers? As long as every attack is made with one of the monk’s special weapons (that is, weapons allowed as part of a flurry), the monk can perform any special attack that takes the place of a normal attack. She’s free to disarm, sunder, trip, and grapple to her heart’s content. Since a monk can use flurry to grapple "to her heart's content", then by this answer, the number of grapple checks is obviously determined by the number of attacks. In other words a grapple check is a melee attack roll. Can you always use Escape Artist instead of a Strength check when you’re grappling, or is this only for escaping a grapple? You don’t make a Strength check when grappling; you make a grapple check, which is like a melee attack roll. (See Grapple Checks in Chapter 8 of the Player’s Handbook). This answer some what supports the first. It depends on what "like" means. Is it a melee attack roll or not? Can you score a critical hit with a grapple check made to damage your opponent? No. Despite its similarity, a grapple check is not an attack roll, and thus can’t score a critical hit (nor does it automatically succeed on a natural 20 or fail on a natural 1). Wait, so if a grapple check is not a melee attack roll, why does a monk get to use flurry? Why is a monk not limited by BAB like every single other creature? Grapple is NOT listed a flurry weapon, and an unarmed strike is not the same thing as grappling. Is sunder a special standard action or is it a melee attack variant? It has its own entry on the actions table, but the text describing it refers to it as a melee attack. Is sunder a melee attack only in the sense of hitting something with a melee weapon, or is sunder a true melee attack? Snip to end... You can also disarm, grapple, or trip as a melee attack (or attack of opportunity). Wait, so grapple IS a melee attack? But you just said it wasn't. Perhaps they meant to say grapple attempt. The FAQ has a habit of using the generic "grapple" to represent both grapple attempts and grapple checks, which only further adds to the confusion. So basically, a grapple attempt is probably a melee attack, which the monk should be able to flurry, but the grapple check is not, so the monk shouldn't be able to flurry those, but the answer on pg 18 says the monk can. So a grapple check is ONLY a melee attack for a monk? That can't be right, as it is not supported anywhere in the rules. Perhaps the FAQ is wrong. Just maybe. WOTC is only human.
calvinNhobbes 05-09-07, 02:52 PM	The FAQ may be interpreting the text as though it was meant to be included, so it is merely clarifying the text (as the FAQ is supposed to do). Clarifying text and ADDING text is two completely different things. IF you want to add or change text, then it should be in the errata, NOT the FAQ.
Frugal 05-09-07, 02:56 PM	So basically, a grapple attempt is probably a melee attack, which the monk should be able to flurry, but the grapple check is not, so the monk shouldn't be able to flurry those, but the answer on pg 18 says the monk can. So a grapple check is ONLY a melee attack for a monk? That can't be right, as it is not supported anywhere in the rules. Perhaps the FAQ is wrong. Just maybe. WOTC is only human. Um, isn't it just saying that you can replace a melee attack with a grapple attempt but that you can't crit with the grapple check to damage the opponent (note, not the melee touch attack to initiate the grapple) isn't an attack roll, but an opposed check? Note, you can't crit with the initial melee touch attack because that does no damage, and you can't crit with the grapple check because that's not an attack roll.
calvinNhobbes 05-09-07, 03:00 PM	Um, isn't it just saying that you can replace a melee attack with a grapple attempt but that you can't crit with the grapple attempt because the grapple check to damage the opponent (note, not the melee touch attack to initiate the grapple) isn't an attack roll, but an opposed check? You'd think that but read the question on pg 18 about monks and grapple checks: Can a monk make disarm, sunder, and trip attacks during her flurry of blows? What about grapple checks? What about bull rushes, overruns, or other special combat maneuvers? As long as every attack is made with one of the monk’s special weapons (that is, weapons allowed as part of a flurry), the monk can perform any special attack that takes the place of a normal attack. She’s free to disarm, sunder, trip, and grapple to her heart’s content. It specifically answers the question that you can flurry with grapple checks. Therefore, grapple checks are melee attack rolls, but this is obviously not supported elsewhere in the FAQ. Basically they screwed up with that question, and should have clarified grapple attempts instead of just grapple since the question specifically asked about grapple checks. EDIT: I mean you can use a little logic to figure out the FAQ, but isn't the whole point of the FAQ to provide clarification so you don't need to do that?
Frugal 05-09-07, 03:05 PM	You'd think that but read the question on pg 18 about monks and grapple checks: It specifically answers the question that you can flurry with grapple checks. Therefore, grapple checks are melee attack rolls, but this is obviously not supported elsewhere in the FAQ. Basically they screwed up with that question, and should have clarified grapple attempts instead of just grapple since the question specifically asked about grapple checks. No, it says he can grapple to his heart's content, whether that means grapple attempts or grapple checks or both is unclear. However, given that the rules on actions in combat simply state "grapple" it sounds like you can, in fact it explicitly states: These attack forms substitute for a melee attack, not an action. As melee attacks, they can be used once in an attack or charge action, one or more times in a full attack action, or even as an attack of opportunity. So, I can replace a grapple check with a melee attack (explicitly stated in the rules), I can flurry to make melee attacks, therefore I can make grapple checks as part of a flurry. Now then, I can't crit with a grapple check because I don't make an attack roll.
Frugal 05-09-07, 03:13 PM	Grapple is NOT listed a flurry weapon, and an unarmed strike is not the same thing as grappling. :confused: grapple isn't a weapon at all! Note that it says it's "equivalent to an unarmed strike" and that a monk uses their increased unarmed strike damage. Equivalent to an unarmed strike = is an unarmed strike in any way unless otherwise specified, there are no exceptions listed, therefore grappling to inflict damage = unarmed strike = monk weapon = flurriable.
crashlogic 05-09-07, 03:16 PM	Ultimately I pretty much agree a bout the FAQ as opposed to the errata. I rely on it in RPGA games, because players expect me to. But in my game, I rely only on the RAW, the errata and my interpretation of those. Its not exactly a house rule, its just that as a DM its my job to interpret the rules in light of an uncertainty.
calvinNhobbes 05-09-07, 04:40 PM	No, it says he can grapple to his heart's content, whether that means grapple attempts or grapple checks or both is unclear. EXACTLY! It is the FAQ, which is supposed to clarify the rules, but it does not! It makes them MORE confusing! So, I can replace a grapple check with a melee attack (explicitly stated in the rules), I can flurry to make melee attacks, therefore I can make grapple checks as part of a flurry. Now then, I can't crit with a grapple check because I don't make an attack roll. This is actually incorrect. If what you stated was true, monsters could make grapple checks in place of natural attacks (since they are melee attacks). A monsters number of grapple checks is solely depedent on their BAB. A grapple attempt replaces a melee attack, not a grapple check. This is the most consistent interpretation. The problem is that the FAQ should make it perfectly clear, but it doesn't! Note that it says it's "equivalent to an unarmed strike" and that a monk uses their increased unarmed strike damage. Equivalent to an unarmed strike = is an unarmed strike in any way unless otherwise specified, there are no exceptions listed, therefore grappling to inflict damage = unarmed strike = monk weapon = flurriable. No, that is NOT what it says. It says it does damage equivalent to an unarmed strike. BIG difference.
PenderGrass 05-10-07, 04:44 AM	EXACTLY! It is the FAQ, which is supposed to clarify the rules, but it does not! It makes them MORE confusing! It seems that you are the one confused by them - and in that regard, it is likely a good course of action for you to not use them. For others, that can make sense of them, it is a viable resource. :dragon: ****
Frugal 05-10-07, 08:39 AM	This is actually incorrect. If what you stated was true, monsters could make grapple checks in place of natural attacks (since they are melee attacks). A monsters number of grapple checks is solely depedent on their BAB. A grapple attempt replaces a melee attack, not a grapple check. This is the most consistent interpretation. The problem is that the FAQ should make it perfectly clear, but it doesn't! Do you have a source for this?
Marcus Majarra 05-10-07, 05:18 PM	http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#miscellaneousActions Attempting to start a grapple is a substitute for a melee attack: 2: These attack forms substitute for a melee attack, not an action. As melee attacks, they can be used once in an attack or charge action, one or more times in a full attack action, or even as an attack of opportunity. Furthermore, only iterative attacks from BAB can be used for grapple checks if you're already grappling: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#ifYoureGrappling When you are grappling (regardless of who started the grapple), you can perform any of the following actions. Some of these actions take the place of an attack (rather than being a standard action or a move action). If your base attack bonus allows you multiple attacks, you can attempt one of these actions in place of each of your attacks, but at successively lower base attack bonuses.
Frugal 05-11-07, 07:43 AM	Thanks Marcus, I still fail to see the issue with the FAQ regarding a monk's flurry (not brought up by you I realise, just saying this in general).
Marcus Majarra 05-13-07, 03:21 PM	Let me make this simple: A monk, while performing a flurry of blows, can use any of his attacks to initiate a grapple. While grappling, a monk is no longer making a flurry of blows.
Keyar81 06-02-07, 09:19 PM	Wow, I never realized i got this many replies to my original question. I kinda stopped checking it after the first few replies. But it seems to me per my own judgement, that a character should be able to sheathe a weapon in the same amount of time it would take to draw one, albeit provoking an AoO
Nom 06-03-07, 08:07 AM	But it seems to me per my own judgement, that a character should be able to sheathe a weapon in the same amount of time it would take to draw one, albeit provoking an AoOTry it. If you don't have a sword and sheath handy, try this instead. Stick a roll of newspaper in your pocket. While jogging gently, pull it out of your pocket. While still jogging, stick it back in. Which is easier? Sheathing a weapon is something that is normally done once you are no longer fighting. Generally, there's no particular need for "fast sheathing", and for the most part you should clean the blade before sheathing the weapon anyway (or it will gunk up your sheath and you won't be able to quick draw either). In contrast, getting a weapon in your hand as quickly as possible can be the difference between life and death.
Marcus Majarra 06-03-07, 11:16 AM	I'm guessing the need to sheath a weapon quickly is so that you can switch the weapon you're using without dropping it to the ground (since picking it up, later on, can be hazardous).
Keyar81 06-03-07, 04:29 PM	Try it. If you don't have a sword and sheath handy, try this instead. Stick a roll of newspaper in your pocket. While jogging gently, pull it out of your pocket. While still jogging, stick it back in. Which is easier? True it does take about 1 second longer for me to put a sword back in its sheath. Of course, i'm not some hero who uses a sword on a regular basis and is an expert on it. I also wouldn't say i have any proficiency with it, thus this analogy is flawed. Sheathing a weapon is something that is normally done once you are no longer fighting. Generally, there's no particular need for "fast sheathing", and for the most part you should clean the blade before sheathing the weapon anyway (or it will gunk up your sheath and you won't be able to quick draw either). In contrast, getting a weapon in your hand as quickly as possible can be the difference between life and death. Perhaps not to sheath a sword until done fighting, but what if you want to put your bow 'away' to pull out a 2h sword for close combat? or vice versa, Maybe your putting your sword away to pull out a ranged weapon. I can certainly see a 'need' for fast sheathing, just maybe not as common. This post started from my ranger wanting to put away her bow(not dropping it) and drawing her 2h sword and moving into melee range all in the same round.
Nom 06-03-07, 08:47 PM	I can certainly see a 'need' for fast sheathing, just maybe not as common.Quite possibly. But the Player's Handbook provide no rules for sheathing more quickly than a move action. It wouldn't be unreasonable to add a feat that allowed this, with Quick Draw as a pre-requisite (see Steely_Dan's post). This post started from my ranger wanting to put away her bow(not dropping it) and drawing her 2h sword and moving into melee range all in the same round.You can do this anyway. Putting away the bow is a move action, moving into melee range is a second move action, and drawing a sword is a free action when combined with movement (as long as the character has BAB +1, which is trivially true for the ranger). The catch comes if you want to attack as well. In that case, you need to drop the bow (free action) rather than put it away (move action).
Mystic Lemur 06-03-07, 11:34 PM	I just read through the grappling rules in the FAQ and did not notice any inconsistencies. Perhaps you can post an instance from the FAQ where it "sucks the big one". I must be one of those without "an ounce of common sense" because I have found many entries to be very useful in my games. I will present a very simple question that the FAQ should easily be able to answer: And I will pick apart you responses like some sort of nit picky nit-picker. :D Is a grapple check a melee attack? In other words, how many grapple checks do I get each round? Can a monk make disarm, sunder, and trip attacks during her flurry of blows? What about grapple checks? What about bull rushes, overruns, or other special combat maneuvers? As long as every attack is made with one of the monk’s special weapons (that is, weapons allowed as part of a flurry), the monk can perform any special attack that takes the place of a normal attack. She’s free to disarm, sunder, trip, and grapple to her heart’s content. Since a monk can use flurry to grapple "to her heart's content", then by this answer, the number of grapple checks is obviously determined by the number of attacks. In other words a grapple check is a melee attack roll. No. This is where it has diverged from the truth. A grapple attempt is a melee attack. However, a grapple check is not a melee attack roll. The melee attack roll is the touch attack that precedes the grapple attempt. Can you always use Escape Artist instead of a Strength check when you’re grappling, or is this only for escaping a grapple? You don’t make a Strength check when grappling; you make a grapple check, which is like a melee attack roll. (See Grapple Checks in Chapter 8 of the Player’s Handbook). This answer some what supports the first. It depends on what "like" means. Is it a melee attack roll or not? In this case 'like' means 'similar in the sense that you roll a d20+BAB+Str but you add some special modifiers.' Nope, still not a melee attack roll. Can you score a critical hit with a grapple check made to damage your opponent? No. Despite its similarity, a grapple check is not an attack roll, and thus can’t score a critical hit (nor does it automatically succeed on a natural 20 or fail on a natural 1). Wait, so if a grapple check is not a melee attack roll, why does a monk get to use flurry? Why is a monk not limited by BAB like every single other creature? Grapple is NOT listed a flurry weapon, and an unarmed strike is not the same thing as grappling. Because a grapple attempt is a melee attack roll. Grapple isn't listed because grapple isn't a weapon. You don't sword somebody, you stab them with a sword. In this case grapple is a noun, not a verb; a thing, not an action. A melee touch attack, however, is exactly like an unarmed strike. You could crit on a melee touch attack, but since you don't do any damage (unless you have a feat similar to Improved Grab) you wouldn't notice. Unless you have thew bludgeoning equivalent of Vorpal on your hands, then you might still have to check. :D Is sunder a special standard action or is it a melee attack variant? It has its own entry on the actions table, but the text describing it refers to it as a melee attack. Is sunder a melee attack only in the sense of hitting something with a melee weapon, or is sunder a true melee attack? Snip to end... You can also disarm, grapple, or trip as a melee attack (or attack of opportunity). Wait, so grapple IS a melee attack? But you just said it wasn't. Perhaps they meant to say grapple attempt. The FAQ has a habit of using the generic "grapple" to represent both grapple attempts and grapple checks, which only further adds to the confusion. You probably further confused the issue with your snip, but hopefully it was obvious what they meant in the context it was given.:rolleyes: A better phrasing would have been "...also attempt to...". You are something like right, here. A grapple attempt is a melee attack, a grapple check isn't. Using grapple to represent both (like the FAQ apparently does) certainly adds confusion. So basically, a grapple attempt is probably a melee attack, which the monk should be able to flurry, but the grapple check is not, so the monk shouldn't be able to flurry those... And there we have it! If you had stopped rambling right there, you would have been absolutely correct. Too bad you took the FAQ at face value. The part that I don't get is that, when the grapple is maintained, on the next round does the monk have to choose between an opposed check to deal damage (once?) or taking a -4 on a full attack to get all his attacks in? That's the way I read it...
Mystic Lemur 06-03-07, 11:49 PM	Perhaps not to sheath a sword until done fighting, but what if you want to put your bow 'away' to pull out a 2h sword for close combat? or vice versa, Maybe your putting your sword away to pull out a ranged weapon. I can certainly see a 'need' for fast sheathing, just maybe not as common. This post started from my ranger wanting to put away her bow(not dropping it) and drawing her 2h sword and moving into melee range all in the same round. Well, unless your ranger has a compound bow (with pulleys and such), it isn't truly sheathed until it is unstrung. You wouldn't walk around all day with your bow strung and slung over your shoulder! The string would get wet or eventually the bow would lose its spring. So in that case, dropping the bow would be the only reasonable thing to do... In the case of melee weapons, the only acceptable place to sheathe a sword during combat is in the bodies of your enemies.:devil:
calvinNhobbes 06-05-07, 09:56 AM	Using grapple to represent both (like you and the FAQ apparently do) certainly adds confusion. Actually you missed the ENTIRE point of my post!!!!!!! I don't use grapple to represent both. The point of my post was to show that the FAQ does, and therefore show it is confusing, which others have denied. Therefore, you are just agreeing with my original position, not actually refuting it. And there we have it! If you had stopped rambling right there, you would have been absolutely correct. I already was absolutely correct, but some people require proof, hence the examples from the FAQ. It's good to know you agree with my position, even if you did not understand my argument.
Downtym 06-05-07, 03:12 PM	According to the FAQ, sheathing a weapon can be combined with a move action. You are confusing move action with movement. The relevant quote here is From the SRD: "If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you may draw a weapon as a free action combined with a regular move. If you have the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, you can draw two light or one-handed weapons in the time it would normally take you to draw one." The important part is REGULAR MOVE. This is not a MOVE ACTION. This is movement - as in using a move action to move x feet in a round. You may not use a move action to sheathe a weapon and then draw a weapon for free as part of that same move action "By The Raw".
Downtym 06-05-07, 03:15 PM	Sheathing a weapon is something that is normally done once you are no longer fighting. Generally, there's no particular need for "fast sheathing", and for the most part you should clean the blade before sheathing the weapon anyway (or it will gunk up your sheath and you won't be able to quick draw either). In contrast, getting a weapon in your hand as quickly as possible can be the difference between life and death. This would be true in a world where fighters do not carry a golfbag of weapons. But, presume you swing your sword at the bad guy and it bounces off harmlessly. Well, crap. Now you need to dig through your golfbag to find the weapon that beats his DR. But this is your Really Awesome Sword of Awesomeness (+2) and you don't want to drop it on the ground because that evil canniving GM will have an imp run by, pick it up, and run off. So, you really want to sheath it to keep some random vagabond from picking it up during the fight.
BigJohn42 06-05-07, 05:23 PM	This would be true in a world where fighters do not carry a golfbag of weapons. But, presume you swing your sword at the bad guy and it bounces off harmlessly. Well, crap. Now you need to dig through your golfbag to find the weapon that beats his DR. But this is your Really Awesome Sword of Awesomeness (+2) and you don't want to drop it on the ground because that evil canniving GM will have an imp run by, pick it up, and run off. So, you really want to sheath it to keep some random vagabond from picking it up during the fight. If it's really that important, then take the move action to sheathe the weapon. Otherwise drop it, or hold it in your off-hand.
Downtym 06-05-07, 06:57 PM	If it's really that important, then take the move action to sheathe the weapon. Otherwise drop it, or hold it in your off-hand. ... The relevant quote from Nom that I was contesting within the context of D&D was Sheathing a weapon is something that is normally done once you are no longer fighting. I merely presented a claim that sheathing inside of combat has a place.
BigJohn42 06-05-07, 09:41 PM	... The relevant quote from Nom that I was contesting within the context of D&D was Sheathing a weapon is something that is normally done once you are no longer fighting. I merely presented a claim that sheathing inside of combat has a place. Yes, sheathing a weapon during combat has a place. You can do it either: - as a move action, putting it back in its scabbard. - as an attack action, putting it in your enemy. The only time I've seen this actually be an issue was when a player wanted to introduce an oriental-style character who carried his katana around sheathed, quick-draw it for a strike, and immediately re-sheathe it after each strike. A character-fluff situation like that can be easily dealt with, without overly complicating the rules or adding new feats. Beyond that one example, I've never seen a player complain about having to spend a move action to sheathe a weapon, or drop their weapon, or hold the weapon in their off-hand.
Frugal 06-05-07, 11:04 PM	Yes, sheathing a weapon during combat has a place. You can do it either: - as a move action, putting it back in its scabbard. - as an attack action, putting it in your enemy. The only time I've seen this actually be an issue was when a player wanted to introduce an oriental-style character who carried his katana around sheathed, quick-draw it for a strike, and immediately re-sheathe it after each strike. A character-fluff situation like that can be easily dealt with, without overly complicating the rules or adding new feats. Yes, but I suspect that historically the samurai still only did that after combat, and the reason the fighting style favours quick drawing strikes was because it was intended for honourable single combat, not a messy battlefield. I seriously doubt that in the middle of a mass combat the samurai kept sheathing and drawing their weapons.
Mystic Lemur 06-05-07, 11:28 PM	I already was absolutely correct, but some people require proof, hence the examples from the FAQ. It's good to know you agree with my position, even if you did not understand my argument. Well I'm glad we've disagreed to agree. :P Really this is just another issue where WotC, DMs, and players have just taken a (relatively) easy to follow concept and muddied it all up with facts. I am glad we can both agree that parts of the FAQ are full of contradictions and loopholes, but can be followed by those who take the answers with a grain of salt (and due research). I have edited parts of my post to reflect the fact we seem to be agreeing. :)
calvinNhobbes 06-06-07, 09:59 AM	I have edited parts of my post to reflect the fact we seem to be agreeing. :) Good show mate! But I still disagree with this statement: Too bad you took the FAQ at face value. I have never taken the FAQ at face value. That was this entire point of my post, that no one should due to its inconsistencies.
BigJohn42 06-06-07, 04:28 PM	Yes, but I suspect that historically the samurai still only did that after combat, and the reason the fighting style favours quick drawing strikes was because it was intended for honourable single combat, not a messy battlefield. I seriously doubt that in the middle of a mass combat the samurai kept sheathing and drawing their weapons. We were willing to overlook the historical accuracy issues for the "coolness factor" of that type of character. **This is something that players and DMs alike should remember... If it really seems like that cool of an idea, work with each other to help make it happen***