Can you dish out your attacks onto different targets on a full attack? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Can you dish out your attacks onto different targets on a full attack?

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
akarth
Feb 22, 2011 6:30:37 Hello everyone! We had an arguement last night, trying to figure out whether you can hit multiple targets on a full attack or not. I also couldn't find any answer on the net, so.. Full Attack description says:
"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."
So, this should mean you can actually hit even 3 targets on your threatened squares, regardless of if you kill someone, right? Plus, I believe that when D&D rules don't mention something as impossible in the description (provided it makes sense), then it is possible. Cheers!
#2
Ogiwan
Feb 22, 2011 8:22:59 First, 3.5 questions should go in the "past editions" section.

Second, you have the right reading of the rules. If you have three attacks, you can attack one target with your highest attack. By the rules, you're supposed to wait to the end of the round to make your other iterative attacks, but whatever. Then, you make your second attack, and you choose then and there who you're swinging at. Same for the third. So, yeah, if you really want, you could slash three separate foes just to do some damage.
#3
akarth
Feb 22, 2011 8:28:39 Justice is done! =) Great, many thanks, and sorry about posting in a wrong section, I was pretty clueless and thought of this one as the best suitable :s
#4
FlashbackJon
Feb 22, 2011 17:46:13 Perhaps not the best ("What's a Player to do?" is typically more theoretical and behavioral than rules mechanics), but it is still suitable. The D&D Community section is edition-agnostic.
#5
mandatorysuicide
Feb 22, 2011 18:58:09 Ive never gotten the feel that this place is supposed to be 4e exclusive, i have posted and answered multiple 3.5 questions in here and will continue to do so
#6
salla
Feb 22, 2011 20:44:49
First, 3.5 questions should go in the "past editions" section.

Second, you have the right reading of the rules. If you have three attacks, you can attack one target with your highest attack. By the rules, you're supposed to wait to the end of the round to make your other iterative attacks, but whatever. Then, you make your second attack, and you choose then and there who you're swinging at. Same for the third. So, yeah, if you really want, you could slash three separate foes just to do some damage.

Not quite.

1, as mentioned, this section of the forums is edition-neutral.
2, you make all your attacks consecutively; you don't make one, then wait until the end of your turn to do the iterative attacks.
#7
Neutronium_Dragon
Feb 23, 2011 1:03:04 Waiting until the end of the round for the second+ attacks was part of the 2E ruleset, as I recall. I'm not sure if that was also the case in 1E.
#8
LordOfWeasels
Feb 23, 2011 14:05:06
Ive never gotten the feel that this place is supposed to be 4e exclusive, i have posted and answered multiple 3.5 questions in here and will continue to do so

The D20-specific forums do tend to have more and more knowledgeable D20 players. And a "how do the rules work?" question will often get better answers in a forum about rules.

So there's at least two good reasons to ask D20 rules questions in the D20 section, rather than the "What should I do?" forum.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 akarth Feb 22, 2011 6:30:37	Hello everyone! We had an arguement last night, trying to figure out whether you can hit multiple targets on a full attack or not. I also couldn't find any answer on the net, so.. Full Attack description says: "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." So, this should mean you can actually hit even 3 targets on your threatened squares, regardless of if you kill someone, right? Plus, I believe that when D&D rules don't mention something as impossible in the description (provided it makes sense), then it is possible. Cheers!
#2 Ogiwan Feb 22, 2011 8:22:59	First, 3.5 questions should go in the "past editions" section. Second, you have the right reading of the rules. If you have three attacks, you can attack one target with your highest attack. By the rules, you're supposed to wait to the end of the round to make your other iterative attacks, but whatever. Then, you make your second attack, and you choose then and there who you're swinging at. Same for the third. So, yeah, if you really want, you could slash three separate foes just to do some damage.
#3 akarth Feb 22, 2011 8:28:39	Justice is done! =) Great, many thanks, and sorry about posting in a wrong section, I was pretty clueless and thought of this one as the best suitable :s
#4 FlashbackJon Feb 22, 2011 17:46:13	Perhaps not the best ("What's a Player to do?" is typically more theoretical and behavioral than rules mechanics), but it is still suitable. The D&D Community section is edition-agnostic.
#5 mandatorysuicide Feb 22, 2011 18:58:09	Ive never gotten the feel that this place is supposed to be 4e exclusive, i have posted and answered multiple 3.5 questions in here and will continue to do so
#6 salla Feb 22, 2011 20:44:49	First, 3.5 questions should go in the "past editions" section. Second, you have the right reading of the rules. If you have three attacks, you can attack one target with your highest attack. By the rules, you're supposed to wait to the end of the round to make your other iterative attacks, but whatever. Then, you make your second attack, and you choose then and there who you're swinging at. Same for the third. So, yeah, if you really want, you could slash three separate foes just to do some damage. Not quite. 1, as mentioned, this section of the forums is edition-neutral. 2, you make all your attacks consecutively; you don't make one, then wait until the end of your turn to do the iterative attacks.
#7 Neutronium_Dragon Feb 23, 2011 1:03:04	Waiting until the end of the round for the second+ attacks was part of the 2E ruleset, as I recall. I'm not sure if that was also the case in 1E.
#8 LordOfWeasels Feb 23, 2011 14:05:06	Ive never gotten the feel that this place is supposed to be 4e exclusive, i have posted and answered multiple 3.5 questions in here and will continue to do so The D20-specific forums do tend to have more and more knowledgeable D20 players. And a "how do the rules work?" question will often get better answers in a forum about rules. So there's at least two good reasons to ask D20 rules questions in the D20 section, rather than the "What should I do?" forum.