Knockdown errata

[Shnigda]

Hey guys, so in another thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?481323-Knock-Down-Feat-3-5e) about the Knockdown feat (or was it just about issues between players?), Troacctid brought up the errata saying that Knockdown doesn't trigger the extra attack from Improved Trip.
However, OldTrees1 said that there is some debate as to whether the errata is valid or not. I'm just curious as to why that is as I haven't come across that before (with any errata for that matter, most errata seem to be accepted). So any explanation would be much appreciated!

[MisterKaws]

It's not just knockdown, but every extra trip attempt. Improved Trip lets you make an extra attack as if you hadn't used your attack on the trip attempt, which you didn't, in case of an extra trip attempt, because it's an extra. This means Improved Trip only works when you trip as one of your iterative attacks(or a single attack, in case of standard action), and not when using it on a trip attempt granted by another source.

[nyjastul69]

Where is the link in the OP supposed to lead?

[Shnigda]

Where is the link in the OP supposed to lead?

That's embarrasing, my apologies. :smallredface: Moral of the story is to always double check your posts!

[nyjastul69]

That's embarrasing, my apologies. :smallredface: Moral of the story is to always double check your posts!

No apologies necessary. I wasnt offended. I was hoping it wasn't something on my end. Yeah, I always check my links just to make sure they're functional.

[Troacctid]

It's not so much "debate" as "misunderstanding". As is often the case with errata, many people are simply unaware that it exists. The RAW is not in any dispute, AFAIK.

[Sliver]

The problem is that the errata is for an older book, but the feat was reprinted, with the errata not being included.

[Shnigda]

The problem is that the errata is for an older book, but the feat was reprinted, with the errata not being included.

Ah ok, so it's about precedence in regards to publishing date then. Guess I'll have to ask my DM about it. (Being the little munchkin that I am, I sort of hope he says the errata isn't valid...:smallbiggrin:)

[Darrin]

Ah ok, so it's about precedence in regards to publishing date then. Guess I'll have to ask my DM about it. (Being the little munchkin that I am, I sort of hope he says the errata isn't valid...:smallbiggrin:)

Here's a post with some of the publication history (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=11917825&postcount=8).

Let me try and clarify a few points...

The text changed slightly between the Sword & Fist version and the Deities & Demigods version. The SRD version changed the text back to the Sword & Fist version, but kept it in the Divine feats section. In all publications, it was printed as a [general] feat, and as near as we can determine was always intended to be used by PCs.

The Sword & Fist FAQ (which was published before the Sword & Fist errata) said that you couldn't get an extra attack from Improved Trip when using Knock-down, but the reasoning they used was confusing and not explained very well. Mostly it was based on the "as if you hadn't made an attack", but this particular wording comes from a 3.0 understanding of how tripping works, and the SRD version was published under a 3.5 mindset where a trip can be made at nearly any time you could make a melee attack.

The Sword & Fist Errata just explicitly forbids the extra attack without attempting to explain why.

From a RAW/Rules Precedence standpoint, the SRD version online was the last published, and takes precedence over the 3.0 sources.

What we DO NOT KNOW is if the person who wrote the SRD version was explicitly ignoring the Sword & Fist errata because they thought Knock-Down should work and was balanced to work with Improved Trip, or if they were simply unaware of the errata. I suspect it is the latter, but I tend to favor the former for my games because I think MSHNT (Melee Should Have Nice Things).