Ranged Attacks

[Cogidubnus]

Ok. Slightly bizarre question, but this has never actually come up before.

Do you get more ranged attacks for a higher BAB? I'd have said yes, but the flavour of things like Rapid Shot makes me wonder.

[PId6]

Base Attack Bonus

A base attack bonus is an attack roll bonus derived from character class and level or creature type and Hit Dice (or combinations thereof). Base attack bonuses increase at different rates for different character classes and creature types. A second attack is gained when a base attack bonus reaches +6, a third with a base attack bonus of +11 or higher, and a fourth with a base attack bonus of +16 or higher. Base attack bonuses gained from different sources, such as when a character is a multiclass character, stack.

From here. This does not specify melee or ranged, meaning it applies to all attacks. (If archery didn't get extra attacks from BAB, it would be so hilariously bad it's not even funny.)

[Lord Vukodlak]

From here. This does not specify melee or ranged, meaning it applies to all attacks. (If archery didn't get extra attacks from BAB, it would be so hilariously bad it's not even funny.)

All attacks from manufactured weapons and unarmed strikes but natural weapons[bite, claw, wing, tail, slam etc] never gain irrelative attacks.

[Runestar]

Bear in mind that the process of reloading a ranged weapon may prevent you from taking advantage of the full-attack action. For example, drawing a new rock to throw is typically a move action, so a hill giant can only throw 1 rock each round even with bab+9 unless he has quickdraw.

Same goes for crossbows.

[PId6]

All attacks from manufactured weapons and unarmed strikes but natural weapons[bite, claw, wing, tail, slam etc] never gain irrelative attacks.

That's because the rules for natural weapons say:

Creatures do not receive additional attacks from a high base attack bonus when using natural weapons.

Source

It's a special case. Ranged weapons have no such rule with regards to iteratives.

[Lord Vukodlak]

That's because the rules for natural weapons say:

Source

It's a special case. Ranged weapons have no such rule with regards to iteratives.

Well you should have included that clarification to begin with. You told the OP it applies to all attacks, and before he could make the jump to natural weapons I decided its best to nip it in the butt.

[PId6]

Well you should have included that clarification to begin with. You told the OP it applies to all attacks, and before he could make the jump to natural weapons I decided its best to nip it in the butt.

It doesn't apply to spells with ranged touch attacks either, because those spells specify their casting times in the spell description and only allow a number of attacks based on the spell description. It doesn't apply to most martial strikes either, because those require the specific action listed for the strike (usually standard) rather than attack actions.

If you had to list all the exceptions to every rule, you'd always end up with a list at least five times as long as the rule itself. For the purposes of the OP, the distinction between melee and ranged attacks was enough. Natural weapons had nothing to do with it, and thus were not relevant. The entire D&D 3.5 system rests upon the idea of "general rules, many exceptions," and to list every exception even when not relevant is to pursue a futile endeavor.

[Cogidubnus]

I thought this was the case. There's nothing in the rules. Just wondered, cos of Rapid/Many Shot. Though I suppose archers need those extra attacks to be useful before being mauled by enemies.

Oh, I remember why I was confused. The Monster Manaul lists all ranged attacks as singular, even using full attack. A good example is the Hobgoblin javelin.

[2xMachina]

Javelin... you need to draw and throw. Move action I think.

Arrows are free to nock.

[Cogidubnus]

Javelin... you need to draw and throw. Move action I think.

Arrows are free to nock.

Ah, ok. Thought, as most peopl carry javelins in quivers, they wouldn't need an action to draw. But that makes sense.

[Yuki Akuma]

Throwing weapons always require an action to draw. Ammunition does not.

If you want to be a thrown weapon user, take Quick Draw.

(Shuriken are treated as ammunition, even though you throw them. But shuriken suck and are exotic weapons to boot.)

[Cogidubnus]

Throwing weapons always require an action to draw. Ammunition does not.

If you want to be a thrown weapon user, take Quick Draw.

(Shuriken are treated as ammunition, even though you throw them. But shuriken suck and are exotic weapons to boot.)

I know! It's mad. Assassins AT LEAST ought to get proficiency.

[Escheton]

They do, on a ninja base

[HunterOfJello]

(Shuriken are treated as ammunition, even though you throw them. But shuriken suck and are exotic weapons to boot.)

Unless you're a Crusader.

~~


One thing I've always wondered is if you can choose the order in which you attack for the BAB values.

For instance, can you make your +1 attack and then your +6 attack afterwards?

[Cogidubnus]

Unless you're a Crusader.

~~


One thing I've always wondered is if you can choose the order in which you attack for the BAB values.

For instance, can you make your +1 attack and then your +6 attack afterwards?

Why would anyone want to?

[KillianHawkeye]

One thing I've always wondered is if you can choose the order in which you attack for the BAB values.

For instance, can you make your +1 attack and then your +6 attack afterwards?

I'm pretty sure you're supposed to make your attacks in order from highest to lowest (including ALL your attacks such as those from secondary weapons or natural weapons), but for the life of me I have no idea where this is stated.

[Kobold-Bard]

...
One thing I've always wondered is if you can choose the order in which you attack for the BAB values.

For instance, can you make your +1 attack and then your +6 attack afterwards?

I can't see how that would benefit you unless you wanted to order the bonuses after you knew the result of your rolls, and I wouldn't allow that.

[Runestar]

It's under the section for full attack in the PHB.

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.

Why would anyone want to?

I am guessing that the player may want to sacrifice his normally "throwaway" attacks for some bonuses which can be used to augment his attacks which are more likely to hit. Say using your worst attacks to chip away at a mage's mirror images, reserving your best attack for actually hitting him or something?

Granted, I can't really think of why one would one to do this though.

[Curmudgeon]

That's because the rules for natural weapons say:

Creatures do not receive additional attacks from a high base attack bonus when using natural weapons.

... except for unarmed strikes. They're a unique case of natural weapons which use the iterative attacks of manufactured weapons.

(Just to be confusing.)

[Yuki Akuma]

Unarmed strikes are normal weapons, not natural weapons. I don't see the problem.

[Cogidubnus]

Unarmed strikes are normal weapons, not natural weapons. I don't see the problem.

Normal unarmed strikes I'm not sure about, but I know Monk's count as both natural attacks and strikes with weapons. It specifically states it.

[Yuki Akuma]

Unarmed strikes are simple weapons, not natural weapons.

The monk has special unarmed strikes.

[Greenish]

Normal unarmed strikes I'm not sure about, but I know Monk's count as both natural attacks and strikes with weapons. It specifically states it.

"A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons."

Now, WotC has been very inconsistent with Unarmed Attacks. In passing, they're sometimes referred to as natural weapons, but there are plenty of contradictions. (Skip Williams is on the opinion that Unarmed Attacks aren't natural weapons, if someone is willing to pay him attention.)

[Cogidubnus]

Rule 0 and Rule 1 mean its not THAT important though, don't they?

[balistafreak]

Why would anyone want to?

1d2 Crusader trick for infinite damage. It's strictly TO - no DM would let you get by with it - but it's a neat rules trick, nonetheless.

[Greenish]

Rule 0 and Rule 1 mean its not THAT important though, don't they?

Which raises the question of why did you even bother trying to correct someone.

[Cogidubnus]

Just trying to add something xD. The rules comment was more in response to how strange WotC have been about unarmed strikes in general.

[Frosty]

Unarmed strikes are simple weapons, not natural weapons.

The monk has special unarmed strikes.

Special or not, Monks are not proficient with Simple weapons, so while they can make iterative punches, they provoke each time they do so.

EDIT: On a separate note, can a monk throw his own fists if he has Bloodstorm Blade levels?

[Yuki Akuma]

No, he doesn't provoke - he has Improved Unarmed Strike.

He just takes a -4 nonproficiency penalty.

Edit: By a literal reading of the rules... maybe.

Kensei can definitely do it, though.

[Frosty]

No, he doesn't provoke - he has Improved Unarmed Strike.

He just takes a -4 nonproficiency penalty.

Edit: By a literal reading of the rules... maybe.

Kensei can definitely do it, though.

Sorry. You're right. I got the two mixed up for some reason

I suddenly want to make a Warforged Monk/Kensai/Warblade/Bloodstorm Blade...