> > >There, that's "just" a standard attack/parry combination for a
> > >single action.
> > I count three different actions myself
>Obviously this is always going to be a matter of taste but from
>actually trying to do things like this myself[1]
Did the person you were fighting with survive?
>I would describe it
>as a single manouvre - note that it is in fact a single (rather
>advanced and probably tricky) swing of the weapon. It takes a lot
>less time to do it than to describe it!
But the single swing has three distinct effects happening to the other guy, none of which are necessarily dependent on the others for success. To smash the shield doesn't help you in breaking the sword or cutting the head off. Hence I still count three actions.
>This is certainly an extreme example and I doubt if I'll see anything
>like this in play for a long long time (if ever).
But you listed the extreme example as how one could smash a shield and a word and cut off a head in the same round. What's being debated here is the example of a Humakti who has all those feats at the same time. Unless you wish to argue that in every round that he's performing the movements you described, I fail to see why you should allow the bonuses for shield/weapon/ head destroyer feats on at all times.
>Claiming such a manouvre to be multiple attacks would gain nothing
>but derision from my group.
I never claimed it was a multiple attack, I simply counted three distinct actions.
--Peter Metcalfe
Powered by hypermail