Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Jason Snyder 11-24-04, 07:14 AM	We were playing a little mini-adventure the other day. Our party was at the base of a steep hill, one that could only be climbed with a reasonably easy climb check. At the very top of the hill was a plateau with a hill giant who would attempt to whack us with his club and knock us back down the hill. An interesting little puzzle and fun was had by all. One question came up though... The hill giant gets multiple attacks with his club (Greatclub +16/+11). The DM ruled that if we were near the edge of the plateau or on the hill when we got hit, we had to make a save or go tumbling down the hill. Fair enough. The question that came up is whether the giant gets his second attack if his first attack knocked the player down the hill. A lot of us thought that that seemed illogical - the giant would have to smack the player up in the air like a baseball, then hit him again for that to make sense. Another player argued that the rules state that multiple attacks occur essentially simultaneously. We just ran with it since we didn't want to go wading through the rulebooks, but could someone point me to the correct rule in the SRD or in the PHB/DMG? Are multiple attacks with the same weapon considered simultaneous? Thanks.
Mediator 11-24-04, 07:48 AM	The problem is, that your DM's ruling was not according to the RAW. The Hill Giant needs to Bull Rush you to kick you down the hill. Successful attacks from the Giant will not cause you to be knocked anywhere (he has a 25 strength, just consider the implications when you start to throw people around depending on the strength of the attacker and the weight of the defender and his backback and his size etc.). No matter what his first attack caused, the giant has a second one.
Naeron 11-24-04, 08:02 AM	The problem is, that your DM's ruling was not according to the RAW. The Hill Giant needs to Bull Rush you to kick you down the hill. Successful attacks from the Giant will not cause you to be knocked anywhere (he has a 25 strength, just consider the implications when you start to throw people around depending on the strength of the attacker and the weight of the defender and his backback and his size etc.). No matter what his first attack caused, the giant has a second one. It is according to the RAW - Under the climb rules "Any time you take damage while climbing, make a Climb check against the DC of the slope or wall. Failure means you fall from your current height and sustain the appropriate falling damage. and the poster stated they needed to make climb checks. Alternatively the Hill Giant may just have had the Awesome Blow feat "If the creature hits a corporeal opponent smaller than itself with an awesome blow, its opponent must succeed on a Reflex save (DC = damage dealt) or be knocked flying 10 feet in a direction of the attacking creature’s choice and fall prone". This would however limit it to one attack as its a standard action with one attack at -4. If the first attack caused an effect that removed the PC from within the Giants threatened area (i.e. because the fell down the slope) then the second attack would have no valid target. The use of the second attack would then be limited to those times when the first attack missed or the save was made after the first hit. Attacks during the full-attack action are not simultaneous - as evidenced by the fact that you are allowed to see the result of each attack before deciding what to do with the next one and also in that it is permitted to take a 5ft step during a full-attack action. Further support is that if a target is tripped any subsequent attacks gain the bonus for them being prone. The attacks are all resolved on the same initiative but thematically they are spread out over time.
Jason Snyder 11-24-04, 08:07 AM	The problem is, that your DM's ruling was not according to the RAW. The Hill Giant needs to Bull Rush you to kick you down the hill. Successful attacks from the Giant will not cause you to be knocked anywhere (he has a 25 strength, just consider the implications when you start to throw people around depending on the strength of the attacker and the weight of the defender and his backback and his size etc.). Fair enough, we knew we were playing somewhat fast and loose with the rules. Perhaps a more logical way to say it was that we were standing on very uncertain footing and a successful melee attack caused us to recheck our footing. ;) No matter what his first attack caused, the giant has a second one. Interesting. So if I attack a guy with a "Sword of Sending Target to Another Dimension" and I get two attacks and my first blow sends him to another dimension, I still get to hit him with the second attack? Is there someplace in the SRD I can read up on this? I couldn't find it explicitly called out.
Mediator 11-24-04, 08:44 AM	Interesting. So if I attack a guy with a "Sword of Sending Target to Another Dimension" and I get two attacks and my first blow sends him to another dimension, I still get to hit him with the second attack? Is there someplace in the SRD I can read up on this? I couldn't find it explicitly called out. You still get a second attack (when you have one). Nowhere is it written that you have to direct all your attacks on one enemy. The second attack can be on somebody else. And no, in your example, you can't hit him with the second attack (of course not, and I didn't state that you always automatically can attack the same person both times). But it seems your question was if the giant can attack the PC he just has send down the hill a second time. In this case the answer is no (which should be obvious by common sense, attacks are on after the other and not at the same time).
Jason Snyder 11-24-04, 09:45 AM	I didn't state that you always automatically can attack the same person both times. Ah, I misunderstood. attacks are on after the other and not at the same time This is the key point. We had a fellow who was arguing that attacks occurred at the same time, rather than one after another. Most of us argued that that was illogical, but he insisted it was in the rules. I can't find it spelled out either way in the rules, hence this post. To be honest, I don't want to argue with this guy based on logic, I'd really like to find a printed rule that shows the correct answer. A slightly different question: Say we were attacked by a lizardman which gets claw/claw/bite attacks. Would the multiple attacks from different weapons be considered simultaneous or would they occur one after another?
Mediator 11-24-04, 09:49 AM	I think this quote from the CombatI section of the SRD should be enough evidence: Full Attack If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon or for some special reason you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones. The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks. If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first. Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out. If you’ve already taken a 5-foot step, you can’t use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.
Jason Snyder 11-24-04, 09:51 AM	You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones. Perfect! Thanks!
Phrennzy 11-24-04, 12:56 PM	Under the climb rules "Any time you take damage while climbing, make a Climb check against the DC of the slope or wall. Failure means you fall from your current height and sustain the appropriate falling damage. and the poster stated they needed to make climb checks. Ooh. I've never seen that. :plotting: I must use that on my PCs. That's awesome. Especially if it is a slope with a pit of something awful at the base of the slope. :evillaugh