Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

RPG Superstar 2015

Feats-Step Up


Skills and Feats

1 to 50 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

This feat is needlessly cumbersome and restrictive. I think it should be made to simply grant a 5' step as an immediate action. It also should not count toward your next round's movement. First, it allows for many more options written this way. For instance, besides the benefit of moving with an opponent that it currently grants, one could also move to interpose himself between an ally and an oncoming foe, dodge an area effect of a spell (if he is on the edge... I'd write in lightning bolt that it can't be dodged by this feat). Second, removing the movement penalty in the following round cuts out bookkeeping. We are only talking about 5' after all.

Sovereign Court

I'd rather instead of consuming your entire movement, it counted as a 5ft move penalty on your next turn. That means that you already count as having taken a move action, so you can't full attack or 5ft step, but what you could do is move up to 25ft if you had a 30' movement and still make a standard action attack or CMB manuever.

This is a lot better than being locked in place on your next round.


Those are good potential fixes guys.

First, let me say Step Up is a great mechanic and I’d be very happy to include it in my game. It’s a fix for a couple classic problems:

1. The fighter breaks through the line of minions and runs up to the wizard to disrupt the wizard’s spellcasting. On the wizard’s turn, he takes a 5-foot step back and blasts the fighter. The fighter just watches while the wizard does it. “Hey it’s a turn based game baby.”

2. Two warriors are battling back and forth. One takes a time out by drinking a potion of healing. The other warrior whacks him with an attack of opportunity. Now the other warrior takes a time out to drink his option. Only this time he takes a 5-foot step back first. The other warrior just stands there and watches.

If I have it right, Valente and Last Knight are expressing that you just don’t get enough for your feat purchase and are looking at some good suggestions to give Step Up a little more utility.

There’s another possibility though; we could go the other way on this. In my view, Step up is an integral move that makes the game play out more intuitively. What if Step Up were just a basic game mechanic available to anyone with +1 BAB? It would be like the ability to draw a weapon as part of a move action. Once you become a serious combatant, it’s just something you can do if some turkey tries to get away from you by 5-foot stepping instead of committing to a withdraw action. It then becomes balanced by the sacrifice of your ability to move again when your own turn comes up should you elect to “Step Up” on someone.

I realize we’re supposed to be talking feats and not combat, but I did want to give a shot. Especially since there’s a lot of thought being given to how disrupting spellcasting will work at this point.

I realize I’ll be in the minority on this one and assuming this idea crashes and burns, I’d be very happy if Step Up were to make it into Pathfinder as a feat (with or without a combination of the above suggestions) and I hope it’s here to stay.


Feat: Step-Up
Benefit: As an immediate action, you may execute a 5' step once per round. This 5' step follows the same rules as 5's step taken during full round actions, however it also may be used to change position outside of your turn without provoking attacks of opportunity.
Special: You may take this feat only once.
Normal: Ordinarily, you may take 5' only during full-round actions.

Feat: Step-Up, Improved
Prerequisites: Step-up feat, BAB 6+.
Benefit: When using Step-up feat outside of your turn, you may move up to your speed instead of 5'. You do not provoke attacks of opportunity while using Improved Step-Up.

Note: I maintained no AoO in order to avoid mess of counter AoOs.

Regards,
Ruemere


Ask a Shoanti wrote:
In my view, Step up is an integral move that makes the game play out more intuitively. What if Step Up were just a basic game mechanic available to anyone with +1 BAB? It would be like the ability to draw a weapon as part of a move action.

YES! And an "Improved Step Up" feat would eliminate the trade-offs and penalties. Cool! These changes would restore a minor fraction of the mobility that melee characters enjoyed in 1e/2e.

Although I'd still really like to see a feat chain allowing melee characters to take a full attack as a standard action. Maybe one analogous to the off-hand attacks granted by the TFW feats...

Efficient Strike (Combat)
You take quick advantage of any opening to deliver a number of blows.
Prerequisites: BAB +6
Benefit: You can take your second iterative attack as part of a standard action, or as part of a single attack of opportunity.
Normal: You may make only one attack as a standard action. Each attack of opportunity an opponent provokes allows you only one attack.

And then of course you'd have Improved Efficient Strike (BAB +11), Greater Efficient Strike (+16), and Epic Efficient Strike (all attacks).

Lantern Lodge

Ask a Shoanti wrote:
There’s another possibility though; we could go the other way on this. In my view, Step up is an integral move that makes the game play out more intuitively. What if Step Up were just a basic game mechanic available to anyone with +1 BAB? It would be like the ability to draw a weapon as part of a move action. Once you become a serious combatant, it’s just something you can do if some turkey tries to get away from you by 5-foot stepping instead of committing to a withdraw action. It then becomes balanced by the sacrifice of your ability to move again when your own turn comes up should you elect to “Step Up” on someone.

I have to disagree, making this a basic action makes almost all combat movement more complicated. By limiting it to a feat it will most likely end up in the hands of warriors and martial types who are specializing in harrying mages. There is a good feat path, with this included that makes someone a mage slayer, and I think we should keep that path reserved. Otherwise casters will never get to cast, and as much as I like to slay NPC casters, I really really really want my groups cleric alive.

Lantern Lodge

Kirth Gersen wrote:
Ask a Shoanti wrote:
In my view, Step up is an integral move that makes the game play out more intuitively. What if Step Up were just a basic game mechanic available to anyone with +1 BAB? It would be like the ability to draw a weapon as part of a move action.

YES! And an "Improved Step Up" feat would eliminate the trade-offs and penalties. Cool! These changes would restore a minor fraction of the mobility that melee characters enjoyed in 1e/2e.

Although I'd still really like to see a feat chain allowing melee characters to take a full attack as a standard action. Maybe one analogous to the off-hand attacks granted by the TFW feats...

Efficient Strike (Combat)
You take quick advantage of any opening to deliver a number of blows.
Prerequisites: BAB +6
Benefit: You can take your second iterative attack as part of a standard action, or as part of a single attack of opportunity.
Normal: You may make only one attack as a standard action. Each attack of opportunity an opponent provokes allows you only one attack.

And then of course you'd have Improved Efficient Strike (BAB +11), Greater Efficient Strike (+16), and Epic Efficient Strike (all attacks).

I would love that, but is it balanced? I know in 3.5 there was a feat that let you have your full attack at the end of a charge, but it was an epic feat, and you only got it once per combat. They really went out of their way to make it possible to escape the full fury of a warrior, so that a weaker character could withdrawal possibly risking an AoO but two attacks were better then a full 4 (or more if hasted.)


Galnörag wrote:
I would love that, but is it balanced? I know in 3.5 there was a feat that let you have your full attack at the end of a charge, but it was an epic feat, and you only got it once per combat. They really went out of their way to make it possible to escape the full fury of a warrior...

That was the downfall of 3.0, in my opinion. In earlier editions, I could move, make a full attack (at full BAB for all iterative attacks), and if any of those attacks hit, any caster automatically lost his spell that round... and all that required no feats whatsoever; that was the "base line" for martial characters. 3.0 went out of its way to ensure that warriors were helpless at higher levels.

In 1e, any wizard within 6" (60 ft.) of a fighter, and who had no bodyguards to protect him from said fighter, died if he failed initiative (and casting higher level spells made his initiative worse). That's a bit extreme, but now we have a situation in which, above 9th level or so, no fighter is even a vaguely credibly threat to a wizard of comparable level who's 60 ft. away.


I love this Feat, but it's very Offensive focused,
preventing an opponent from "Disengaging" from you to do something else.

I'd like to see a DEFENSIVE usage, which used the same mechanic (Immediate 5' Step)
but let you step BACK when an Opponent moved towards YOU.
(This also has the effect that two opposing Swashbucklers who both have Feat effectively cancel out,
except that they're more mobile than everyone else around them.)

I generally agree with the OP, though I think keeping it triggered by enemy movement into or out of your/ their threat area keeps the ability focused, so it can't be exploited for other purposes, like coordinating with allies or Spellcasting. For Movement Conservation purposes,
I think counting that 5' towards next round is reasonable. (precluding a 5' step, but only reducing your max movement by 5')

Note that as currently writtten, it's consuming next round's movement AND Swift Action - Tough on Barbarians, for one.
I'd almost rather see a "Immediate Move Action" concept used, functioning like Immediate Actions/Swift Actions, but applying to 5' steps (and no longer consume the Swift Action).

Also, the current wording says you can only use this ability when an opponent "takes a 5' step" towards you.
So if they move 10' or 15', or Charge you, you can't use this ability.
That seems a bit off to me. I'd prefer saying that ANY enemy movement which causes you or the enemy to enter or leave each others' threat area, is a valid trigger for the ability.


anthony Valente wrote:
This feat is needlessly cumbersome and restrictive. I think it should be made to simply grant a 5' step as an immediate action. It also should not count toward your next round's movement. First, it allows for many more options written this way. For instance, besides the benefit of moving with an opponent that it currently grants, one could also move to interpose himself between an ally and an oncoming foe, dodge an area effect of a spell (if he is on the edge... I'd write in lightning bolt that it can't be dodged by this feat). Second, removing the movement penalty in the following round cuts out bookkeeping. We are only talking about 5' after all.

Ok, after some thought and playtesting on my own, Step Up written this way is a little too good and although interesting, too problematic. Granting a 5' step as simply an immediate action opens up a whole world of weirdness. With it, one could simply step away from an attacking enemy, negating any chance for attack, or duck behind a corner as an archer shoots at him, dodge a sprung pit trap, and so on. Not to mention that for all intents and purposes grants an extra 5' of movement with no drawbacks. So back to the drawing board...

I still think that Step Up as written in Beta is too restrictive and messes up a character's subsequent round of actions. What if a character with this feat used it in one round to follow an opponent who stepped 5' away from him, then in the ensuing turns before his turn comes up again, the dynamics of the combat have changed such that the character's most prudent option would be to flee for instance? He's screwed by his own feat! I don't know if this is ultimately good or bad however without more playtesting.

So instead, I propose the following change to Step Up:

Step Up (Combat)
You can press foes who back away from you as well as react to incoming foes.
Benefit: Whenever a creature takes a standard action, move action, or full-round action within 10' of you, you may take a 5' step toward that creature as an immediate action. This 5' step follows all the normal rules for a 5' step.

The benefits written this way are as follows:

1) It works as Jason intends it to.
2) It also works to make a slight adjustment to your position when foes come at you or your allies (to hopefully interpose yourself between a foe and an ally, or at the very least to get an AoO vs. a foe who tries to slip by.
3) Keeps the character from gaining a free 5' of movement, other than in the specific instance stated.
4) Prevents movement against foes adjacent to you.

What do you think?


anthony Valente wrote:
Whenever a creature takes a standard action, move action, or full-round action within 10' of you, you may take a 5' step toward that creature as an immediate action. This 5' step follows all the normal rules for a 5' step.

What if someone takes a move action (say, drawing a weapon) and a standard action (say, attacking). Can you move into their space? If multiple creatures do it, can you hop all over the place in 5-ft. increments, like Bugs Bunny? I'm not pro or con one way or the other; just pointing out where clarification is needed. Because if we limit characters to one 5-ft. step per round, this feat doesn't really give them anything they didn't already have. So, maybe it grants 1 extra 5-ft. step, and maybe if you also have Combat Reflexes, you could get a max number equal to Dex bonus? (Just thinking out loud, as it were.)

Also, it's still useless against the guy who takes a full move away (and accepts your AoO because he's got a mirror image up, or is displaced or invisible), and then hits you with a hold person from 30 ft. away (Wait! Now he's only 25 ft. away!). We'd still have to change casting rules so that standard action spells require a full attack action.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
What if someone takes a move action (say, drawing a weapon) and a standard action (say, attacking). Can you move into their space?

Either action would allow you to use this feat. If they were adjacent to you when they started either action, Step Up would not apply, as you must take a 5' step toward the target. As far as I know, only specific feats, abilities and actions ever let you actually move into an opponent's space. If the opponent were 10' away however you may take your immediate 5' step on either action. If he were 15' or more away the feat does not apply.

Kirth Gersen wrote:
If multiple creatures do it, can you hop all over the place in 5-ft. increments, like Bugs Bunny?

Not sure what you mean. You may only take one swift/immediate action per round. So, with multiple triggers, you still only get to do it once per round.

Kirth Gersen wrote:
I'm not pro or con one way or the other; just pointing out where clarification is needed. Because if we limit characters to one 5-ft. step per round, this feat doesn't really give them anything they didn't already have. So, maybe it grants 1 extra 5-ft. step, and maybe if you also have Combat Reflexes, you could get a max number equal to Dex bonus? (Just thinking out loud, as it were.)

Perhaps it should clarify that this 5' step is in addition to any movement you have taken that round, including a 5' step. The combat reflexes thing gets too complicated IMO.

"Kirth Gersen wrote:
Also, it's still useless against the guy who takes a full move away (and accepts your AoO because he's got a mirror image up, or is displaced or invisible), and then hits you with a hold person from 30 ft. away (Wait! Now he's only 25 ft. away!). We'd still have to change casting rules so that standard action spells require a full attack action.

One feat can't fix everything :)


Granting a 5' step as simply an immediate action opens up a whole world of weirdness. With it, one could simply step away from an attacking enemy, negating any chance for attack, or duck behind a corner as an archer shoots at him, dodge a sprung pit trap, and so on.
Not to mention that for all intents and purposes grants an extra 5' of movement with no drawbacks.
So back to the drawing board...

OK, by this (Immediate Action, or Immediate MOVE Action) I meant it would work like Immediate Actions/Swifts Actions do:
The 5' Step would be 'used up' from your next turn, 'conserving' total movement (& you can't 5' step and F-Attack next round).

In only a few situations (@ max movement range of opponent, 'around corner from archer') would it actually 'negate any chance for attack', but it might force the opponent to move further than a 5' Step, negating a FULL ATTACK. Of course, if the opponent had "Step Up", it would balance out, and they could still take the Full Attack.

I agree that this is more useful than only allowing you to "follow" opponents taking a 5' step AWAY, so it could reasonably be an "Improved Step Up". 2 Feats to be able to have the effects of cover as long as you're within 5' of it seems balanced, certainly when it's using your 5' Step from next round. I would say that it only applies against opponents you are AWARE of and can PERCEIVE, so hidden snipers or other concealed opponents could not trigger it. Likewise, if it's specified to be triggered by OPPONENTS, then Traps would not count.

Kirth Gersen wrote:
We'd still have to change casting rules so that standard action spells require a full attack action.

That's definitely a viable change scenario I could support.

That scenario would actually be interesting because there could then be a "mini-Quicken Spell" (with lesser Spell Level Adjustment)
that would allow casting a Spell as a Standard Action. Hmmm...

Sovereign Court

anthony Valente wrote:

Ok, after some thought and playtesting on my own, Step Up written this way is a little too good and although interesting, too problematic. Granting a 5' step as simply an immediate action opens up a whole world of weirdness. With it, one could simply step away from an attacking enemy, negating any chance for attack, or duck behind a corner as an archer shoots at him, dodge a sprung pit trap, and so on. Not to mention that for all intents and purposes grants an extra 5' of movement with no drawbacks. So back to the drawing board...

I still think that Step Up as written in Beta is too restrictive and messes up a character's subsequent round of actions. What if a character with this feat used it in one round to follow an opponent who stepped 5' away from him, then in the ensuing turns before his turn comes up again, the dynamics of the combat have changed such that the character's most prudent option would be to flee for instance? He's screwed by his own feat! I don't know if this is ultimately good or bad however without more playtesting.

So instead, I propose the following change to Step Up:

Step Up (Combat)
You can press foes who back away from you as well as react to incoming foes.
Benefit: Whenever a creature takes a standard action, move action, or full-round action within 10' of you, you may take a 5' step toward that creature as an immediate action. This 5' step follows all the normal rules for a 5' step.

The benefits written this way are as follows:

1) It works as Jason intends it to.
2) It also works to make a slight adjustment to your position when foes come at you or your allies (to hopefully interpose yourself between a foe and an ally, or at the very least to get an AoO vs. a foe who tries to slip by.
3) Keeps the character from gaining a free 5' of movement, other than in the specific instance stated.
4) Prevents movement against foes adjacent to you.

What do you think?

1) I don't think you've changed it to work the way Jason intended it to, I think step up was designed to allow a character to follow someone who attempts the 5' shuffle to drink a potion or cast a spell or something. I don't think it was intended to allow you to randomly close with bad guy you weren't threatening because he did something 10 ft away from you.

2) yes it does, but I once again don't think that was what Jason was going for

3) Um you have standard, move, and full round action. That equates to get a free five foot step if an enemy is within ten feet from you. There's no limit, so a person on a battlefield surrounded by enemies is going to be taking a lot of 5' steps. or even heck, orc #1 attacks your ally you close with it and take an AoO, orc you just left drinks a potion, you take a 5' step back and take another AoO. Your version leaves a lot open for abuse.

4)how?

Sovereign Court

Step Up (Combat)
You can close the distance when a foe tries to move away.
Benefit: Whenever an adjacent foe attempts to take a 5-foot step away from you, you may also make a 5-foot step as an immediate action so long as you end up adjacent to the foe that triggered this ability. If you take this step, you count as having moved 5' of a full move action during your next turn. This means you may not take a 5' step or a full attack, but you may complete the move action sans the 5' you moved as an immediate action and perform a standard action.

I think this is the best way to fix the feat, albeit my wording is clunky, is someone wants to help clarify the grammer feel free. I would also follow it with a follow up feat, but I wouldn't call it Imp. Step Up, I'd call it...

Dogged Pursuit
You follow the footsteps of your enemies like a bloodhound on the hunt.
Prerequisites: Step Up, Mobility
Benefit: Whenever an Adjacent foe attempts to leave your threatened area you may take up to your full move action to follow them provided you end the movement adjacent to them. You are treated during your round as having made your move action for the round.


If the Step Up feat takes 2 rounds' worth of movement and/or prevents a full attack in either round, then you've spent a feat in order to have a net loss in actions. That's a bad deal for any character.


Kirth: the Step Up occurs outside of YOUR turn, so you got your Full Action on your previous turn.
Ideally it just 'borrows' the 5' Step from your next turn, parallel to how Immediate Actions 'borrow' Swift Actions.

LTL: it shouldn't say "you must end up adjacent" unless the intent is to NOT work vs. opponents w/ Reach.

IMHO, it also shouldn't say "you can't take a 5' step OR Full Attack (on your next turn)".
if you don't need to take a 5' step from that position, you should be able to Full Attack. (or FullRound Cast)


Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

For what it's worth, I've always house-ruled it(almost accidentaly)as follow:

Stick-with (combat option): You can use any movement remaining un-used in a round to keep engaged with an opponent moving away in the same round.

So if you full-attack and don't take a 5' step you can use it later in the round (as an immediate action I guess) to stay with your opponent. Or, if you move 15' to your foe and he moves off you can, at the same time, in the same round follow for up to another 15' (with a base move of 30).

Kind of a delaying of move. It kept many things about engagement more "real" for us.


Hopefully, this wording makes more sense.

Step Up (Combat)

Benefit: When a creature attempts to perform a standard action, move action, or full-attack action within 10' of you, as an immediate action, you may move 5' directly toward the creature. This 5' move does not provoke attacks of opportunity and is not considered a 5' step.

Essentially this feat may only be used if the creature is not adjacent to you and is not 15' or more away from you. Think of medium a sized creature wielding a longspear (a reach weapon)... under normal circumstances, you can't attack foes adjacent to you and you can't attack foes 15' or more away from you. You can only attack foes exactly 10' from you (i.e. one 5' square is between you and your opponent). In the same way as this example, you may only use Step Up if there is exactly one 5' square between you and your target (or 10' away). Under no other circumstances does this feat come into play.

Does this work as Jason intended? Yes... if an opponent adjacent to you takes a 5' step away from you (putting himself 10' away from you and falling into the range of this feat) and tries to cast a spell, you may "Step Up" moving 5' toward him as an immediate action.

However, the feat does much more than this. Any time any creature (friend or foe) performs an action at this exact 10' range you may move 5' toward that creature as an immediate action. Weather you get the anticipated AoO is another story.

Here are examples:
1) foe takes 5' step away from you and begins to cast a spell: you Step Up and he provokes an AoO
2) a foe 10' away from you full attacks an ally: you may step up but the foe does not provok an AoO
3) foe 20' away from you charges an ally adjacent to you: when foe moves into this 10' ring you move 5' toward said foe and interpose yourself between the foe and your ally... the foe does not provoke an AoO, but may attack you.

The only cost for using the feat is an immediate action. This is consistent with the cost of Quicken spell (which is mentioned alot, when referring to how casters own melees).

Being an immediate action, you may only perform it up to once per round... no hopping around like bugs bunny.

It is free movement only under the specific conditions stated above.

It does not screw up your next turn.


Yikes. Well, I can say I feel your suggestion is WAY TOO MUCH.
And I think Jason can write Feats how he intends them to work, so claiming that is rather silly.
Anyhow, I'm not sure how to continue this thread, but I'll summarize how I see developing the Feat "Step Up"
(I'm reproducing the current Step Up, with only the changes I see as necessary highlighted in blue. I think an "expanded use" of it could be part of the same Feat, but I present that as an "Improved Step Up" just for clarity.)

Step Up (Combat)

Spoiler:
Benefit: Whenever a foe who threatens you or is threatened by you, moves away from you, you may also make a 5-foot step as an Immediate Move Action so long as either you or the foe that triggered this ability end up within each other's threat area. If you take this step, you count as if you had take a 5-foot step on your next turn.

I changed the "attempts to take a 5-foot step" part, because it doesn't seem necessary, and it in most cases you want to take this immediate 5' step AFTER their movement but before any other actions of theirs. Otherwise, if you are in a 5' corridor & they are adjacent to you and "attempt" a 5' step, you can't move in the direction they are "attempting" to step, because they are still in the way.

I changed the "5' Step away" trigger to "move away", because I thought the other restrictions (in mutual threat area, moving away, using next 5' step) were already restrictive enough, and simplified it while not seeming to add much power.

This reduces the 'penalties' by being distinct from an Immediate Action, which count against Swift Actions. Instead using a new Immediate Move Action concept, it only counts against the next 5' step, reducing possible movement by 5' and prevent 5' + Full Attack, not negating ALL movement. The language about 'adjacent squares' is also updated to be neutral whether or not you or the opponent has Reach.

Improved Step Up/ "Step Back"

Spoiler:
Benefit:Whenever a foe moves towards you, placing either you or the foe within each other's threat area, you may also make a 5-foot step away from the foe as an Immediate Move action. This otherwise works like Step Up.

Like I mentioned, I feel this could be part of one Step Up Feat, though it should have an appropriate BAB requirement if that was the case. In any case, it is still triggered only by enemy movement. The wording is neutral to whether you or the foe have Reach advantage on each other, it still can be triggered in either scenario.

p.s. these Feat titles make me want to see vehicular combat detailed more, so we can have a Feat called "Step on it!"
(though that could also apply to an "anti-Swarm" Feat... :-)


Quandary wrote:
Yikes. Well, I can say I feel your suggestion is WAY TOO MUCH.

And here I was thinking it was barely enough; it doesn't give the melee classes back much of what they got in 1e for free. If this feat is WAY TOO MUCH, then how do you feel about, for example, the gate spell?


Let me put it this way: I think a Feat should be as simple and focused as possible.

Wording like this:
When a creature attempts to perform a standard action, move action, or full-attack action within 10' of you
is losing the focus of instantaneously responding to enemy movement, and instead is trying to increase your AoO threat range in all but name. But funnily enough, it WOULN'T actually enable an abilty like this:
1) foe takes 5' step away from you and begins to cast a spell: you Step Up and he provokes an AoO
Because a 5' step is NOT a move action, and thus the only 'trigger' would be the spellcasting itself, which allows the free step, but has then already started, so it doesn't trigger an AoO on it's own.

Honestly, I think a Feat that just increased your threat range 5' WOULD be appropriate with a high BAB requirement (+12? 14?),
and that would basically grant all the capabilities that I don't think need to be in THIS Feat. But in a MUCH simpler way.

In any case, do you really think that this single Feat which returns Melee-ists to all their glory should really be called "Step Up"?
Doesn't "1st Edition Revival" sound more appropriate? ;-)


Quandary, I believe you may be right in that this feat is too much as I have proposed. Feats in general have a very narrow scope and I've been intrigued by the potential of this feat that perhaps I've blown it out of proportion. I am also a fan of simplicity with the rules, and while I believe that I've come up with a simple alternative for Step Up, it is becoming evident that it may not be so simple as I have had trouble explaining its features.

It would be nice to simply make taking a 5' move toward a foe who takes a 5' step away from you a general rule, but I just don't think that will happen.

So going back to how it originally is, there a few questions.

1) As Kirth Gersen pointed out earlier, (I believe) if a foe took a 5' step away from you, intending to cast a spell, then you 5' step adjacent to him again, can the foe then abort the 5' step and simply take a normal move incurring an AoO? If this is the case, I don't see why any foe would stay near you as taking 1 AoO is preferable to taking a full attack.

2) Why does it need to use up your next turn's movement? I feel it should only consume your immediate action.

Assuming the foe can decide if after taking a 5' step and seeing you move up, to just take a normal move and standard action, the following would occur:

1) Foe takes a 5' step away from you
2) You use Step Up and take a 5' step to be adjacent to him
3) The foe decides to move his full 30' taking an AoO, and casts a spell at you as a standard action.
4) On your turn, you can't move according to the feat's description.
5) On the foe's next turn he proceeds to act normally.

Hmm, This is bad.

If Step Up were changed to this:

Whenever an adjacent foe attempts to take a 5' step away from you, you may take a 5' step as an immediate action so long as you end up adjacent to that foe. This 5' step may take place even if you have moved for the round, and even if you have already taken a 5' step.

How would the above situation play out in this case?

1) Foe takes a 5' step away from you
2) You use Step Up and move 5' adjacent to him
3) Foe decides to move his full 30' taking an AoO, and casts a spell at you as a standard action
4) On your turn, you charge the foe
5) On the foe's next turn the foe repeats the process

This would work better IMO.

If a feat such as Kirth Gersen presented that allows you to take your second iterative attack along with your primary attack on a standard action, you start to become a serious threat.

It still feels strange however, even if written this way.


Anyhow, I think this thread is beat,
but thought I might share something I just discovered:

The Proposed "Lunge" Feat by Jason works DIFFENTLY than 3.5's Lunge,
in that it DOES increase your threatened area by 5', 360*. It requires BAB+6 (certainly very reasonable) and reduces your AC by 4 until your next turn. But I think it will enable alot of what you want to see.
(It's not clear whether you still threaten your normal threat area, though I suspect it will)

Sovereign Court

anthony Valente wrote:

Step Up (Combat)

Benefit: When a creature attempts to perform a standard action, move action, or full-attack action within 10' of you, as an immediate action, you may move 5' directly toward the creature. This 5' move does not provoke attacks of opportunity and is not considered a 5' step.

Essentially this feat may only be used if the creature is not adjacent to you and is not 15' or more away from you. Think of medium a sized creature wielding a longspear (a reach weapon)... under normal circumstances, you can't attack foes adjacent to you and you can't attack foes 15' or more away from you. You can only attack foes exactly 10' from you (i.e. one 5' square is between you and your opponent). In the same way as this example, you may only use Step Up if there is exactly one 5' square between you and your target (or 10' away). Under no other circumstances does this feat come into play.

The problem is that the way you've worded it means that an enemy 5' away activates it too(5' is within 10'). if you want it to be only enemies 10' away you need to change it to "when a creature exactly 10' away from you makes a ..."

anthony Valente wrote:


Does this work as Jason intended? Yes... if an opponent adjacent to you takes a 5' step away from you (putting himself 10' away from you and falling into the range of this feat) and tries to cast a spell, you may "Step Up" moving 5' toward him as an immediate action.

However, the feat does much more than this. Any time any creature (friend or foe) performs an action at this exact 10' range you may move 5' toward that creature as an immediate action. Weather you get the anticipated AoO is another story.

Here are examples:
1) foe takes 5' step away from you and begins to cast a spell: you Step Up and he provokes an AoO
2) a foe 10' away from you full attacks an ally: you may step up but the foe does not provok an AoO
3) foe 20' away from you charges an ally adjacent to you: when foe moves into this 10' ring you move 5' toward said foe and interpose yourself between the foe and your ally... the foe does not provoke an AoO, but may attack you.

The only cost for using the feat is an immediate action. This is consistent with the cost of Quicken spell (which is mentioned alot, when referring to how casters own melees).

Being an immediate action, you may only perform it up to once per round... no hopping around like bugs bunny.

It is free movement only under the specific conditions stated above.

It does not screw up your next turn.

It also makes you immune to reach weapon attacks unless the enemy has a spiked chain. When the enemy tries to attack you with a pole arm you get a free 5' step towards him, he doesn't threaten the area within 5' and therefore no longer can target you. so it has an unintended and unfair consequence as well.

Sovereign Court

anthony Valente wrote:


Assuming the foe can decide if after taking a 5' step and seeing you move up, to just take a normal move and standard action, the following would occur:

1) Foe takes a 5' step away from you
2) You use Step Up and take a 5' step to be adjacent to him
3) The foe decides to move his full 30' taking an AoO, and casts a spell at you as a standard action.
4) On your turn, you can't move according to the feat's description.
5) On the foe's next turn he proceeds to act normally.

Hmm, This is bad.

The good thing is that in order to take a 5' step the enemy has to forgo all other movement in the round. A player who declares a 5' step cannot then instead take a movement just because the 5' step didn't work. thus the current version works. Now nothing stops the guy from just moving 30' away by withdraw action, or just taking the AoO and doing a normal move action the following round, but at least you shut them down for a round.

That is specifically stated in the 5' step rules, and a DM that allows what you've just posted is actually making that feat useless. But that's bad DMing, not a loophole in the rules.


lastknightleft wrote:

The good thing is that in order to take a 5' step the enemy has to forgo all other movement in the round. A player who declares a 5' step cannot then instead take a movement just because the 5' step didn't work. thus the current version works. Now nothing stops the guy from just moving 30' away by withdraw action, or just taking the AoO and doing a normal move action the following round, but at least you shut them down for a round.

That is specifically stated in the 5' step rules, and a DM that allows what you've just posted is actually making that feat useless. But that's bad DMing, not a loophole in the rules.

I would like this to be true, but after looking at the rules for a 5' step, I don't see where it explicitly states such as you say. I've looked on p. 141 specifically. Can you point to where it says that?


anthony Valente wrote:
lastknightleft wrote:

The good thing is that in order to take a 5' step the enemy has to forgo all other movement in the round. A player who declares a 5' step cannot then instead take a movement just because the 5' step didn't work. thus the current version works. Now nothing stops the guy from just moving 30' away by withdraw action, or just taking the AoO and doing a normal move action the following round, but at least you shut them down for a round.

That is specifically stated in the 5' step rules, and a DM that allows what you've just posted is actually making that feat useless. But that's bad DMing, not a loophole in the rules.

I would like this to be true, but after looking at the rules for a 5' step, I don't see where it explicitly states such as you say. I've looked on p. 141 specifically. Can you point to where it says that?

Page 138

Move
The simplest move action is moving your speed. If you take this kind of move action during your turn, you can't also take a 5-foot step.

Page 141
Take 5-Foot Step
You can move 5 feet in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement.

Pretty clear from both sides of the equation.


Dennis da Ogre wrote:
anthony Valente wrote:
lastknightleft wrote:

The good thing is that in order to take a 5' step the enemy has to forgo all other movement in the round. A player who declares a 5' step cannot then instead take a movement just because the 5' step didn't work. thus the current version works. Now nothing stops the guy from just moving 30' away by withdraw action, or just taking the AoO and doing a normal move action the following round, but at least you shut them down for a round.

That is specifically stated in the 5' step rules, and a DM that allows what you've just posted is actually making that feat useless. But that's bad DMing, not a loophole in the rules.

I would like this to be true, but after looking at the rules for a 5' step, I don't see where it explicitly states such as you say. I've looked on p. 141 specifically. Can you point to where it says that?

Page 138

Move
The simplest move action is moving your speed. If you take this kind of move action during your turn, you can't also take a 5-foot step.

Page 141
Take 5-Foot Step
You can move 5 feet in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement.

Pretty clear from both sides of the equation.

I won't even try to get the quotes of who said what straight.

I think calling it 'clear' or Bad DMing is unfair. We have new rules in effect and 'precedence' supports that you can change 5' step into a Move. The only similar situation (precedence) we have to judge is a Full Round Action Reiterative attack. After your first attack, you can change it to a standard action and then move. Similarly if your five foot step causes an immediate raction from the opponent, why would it be bad DMing to say you can now count that as the first five feet of a move? He did say the opponent would get an AoO.


Exactly. You can move 5', & decide to move 5' more (say, if your opponent follows you w/ Step Up, or you step around the corner and see that you need to move 5' more to attack the guard)
This is more than a 5' Step now, so it counts as a Move Action, but still leaves you a Standard Attack.

I think the more important thing is just keeping your own Action Economy intact, rather than worry about "well if Step Up can only be triggered by a 5' Step (RAW currently), and you "extend" that 5' Step into a Standard Move Action, how to account for the Step Up?" I think if you used the first 5' Step to evade an AoO, it's reasonable to say that the only "extension" you can possibly do, Move-wise, is to a Withdraw action.

The wording on this should definitely be clarified in the Combat Section, obviously.


Since we are doing abstract discussion. Why not make a 5' Step (w/o AoO) a Move Action? Full Round Actions, or any other time you do no other movement, you could allow a 5' Step (w/o AoO) as a Swift Action.

The Step Up would allow you to 'move out of order' and use your next 5' Step as an immediate reaction. During your next turn you have already used a 5' Step which means you can say it was your Move action or you could say it was your 5' Step as part of a Full Round Action.

Withdrawl would merely become a 5' Step followed by a Move (which could be a second 5' Step). Likewise, in a particularly sticky combat, someone could spend their turn doing two 5' Steps to maneuver around (although they would get no attacks they would also get no AoO).

Note this would still allow a Wizard to retreat (two 5' Steps) against a Fighter with Step Up but it would take his entire turn. The Wizard would 5' Step back and the Fighter might be able to follow with Step Up. Presuming the Fighter had Step Up, the Wizard would still have the option at this point of casting (with an AoO), or moving away (with an AoO) or taking a second 5' Step back and ending his turn. This allows the Fighter to screw with the retreating Wizard, but still lets the coward withdrawl. Since the Fighter already used his 5' Step pre-emptively, I don't think he could attack on his turn if the Wizard took two 5' Steps (at least against the Wizard), but the Wizard also did not get his spell off.

EDIT: Currently, Withdrawl is a Full Round Action that allows movement up to double your movement rate. But there is also a 'Partial Withdrawl' (I think it is called a Restricted Withdrawl) if you only have a Standard Action available. Withdrawl could become obsolete if we change the 5'Step (w/o AoO) to a Move Action. I suppose you could keep the Withdrawl Full Round Action, but there would now be another way to safely exit combat.

Sovereign Court

Quandary wrote:
Exactly. You can move 5', & decide to move 5' more (say, if your opponent follows you w/ Step Up, or you step around the corner and see that you need to move 5' more to attack the guard)

No you can't. Because if that was the case then that first 5' step would have then activated an AoO, since it didn't, you can't say afterwards that, well that was just the first part of my movement, to say you can is deliberately altering the rules of the game which were quoted from page number. The best you might be able to say is that, well it was the first 5' of a withdraw action. however then the step up feat did its job and sucked up an action from the enemy and still provoked an AoO

Quandary wrote:


This is more than a 5' Step now, so it counts as a Move Action, but still leaves you a Standard Attack.

I think the more important thing is just keeping your own Action Economy intact, rather than worry about "well if Step Up can only be triggered by a 5' Step (RAW currently), and you "extend" that 5' Step into a Standard Move Action, how to account for the Step Up?" I think if you used the first 5' Step to evade an AoO, it's reasonable to say that the only "extension" you can possibly do, Move-wise, is to a Withdraw action.

The wording on this should definitely be clarified in the Combat Section, obviously.

You don't need to worry about that situation because by the rules it can't be done. and if it is allowed it allready HAS to be into a withdraw action because you allready took your movement WITHOUT provoking an AoO.

Sovereign Court

Duncan & Dragons wrote:
Dennis da Ogre wrote:
anthony Valente wrote:
lastknightleft wrote:

The good thing is that in order to take a 5' step the enemy has to forgo all other movement in the round. A player who declares a 5' step cannot then instead take a movement just because the 5' step didn't work. thus the current version works. Now nothing stops the guy from just moving 30' away by withdraw action, or just taking the AoO and doing a normal move action the following round, but at least you shut them down for a round.

That is specifically stated in the 5' step rules, and a DM that allows what you've just posted is actually making that feat useless. But that's bad DMing, not a loophole in the rules.

I would like this to be true, but after looking at the rules for a 5' step, I don't see where it explicitly states such as you say. I've looked on p. 141 specifically. Can you point to where it says that?

Page 138

Move
The simplest move action is moving your speed. If you take this kind of move action during your turn, you can't also take a 5-foot step.

Page 141
Take 5-Foot Step
You can move 5 feet in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement.

Pretty clear from both sides of the equation.

I won't even try to get the quotes of who said what straight.

I think calling it 'clear' or Bad DMing is unfair. We have new rules in effect and 'precedence' supports that you can change 5' step into a Move. The only similar situation (precedence) we have to judge is a Full Round Action Reiterative attack. After your first attack, you can change it to a standard action and then move. Similarly if your five foot step causes an immediate raction from the opponent, why would it be bad DMing to say you can now count that as the first five feet of a move? He did say the opponent would get an AoO.

What precedence? the attack into full attack is different than a 5' step, I actually like your idea of changing 5' steps into a swift action, but to say that the rules for attacks are similar doesn't add up. A standard action attack does not say you can only take it if you take no other attacks in the round. I don't understand how it's ambiguous? The 5-foot step on page 141 says you can only do it when you take no other movement, its the first sentence in the description of the 5' step and it hasn't changed at all from 3.5. If you turn it into a movement afterward, then you've taken another movement which means you are retroactively reversing your declared actions after someone uses step up. Quite literally what you are saying effectively is:

player: "I cast magic missle at the ogre"
DM: *rolls some dice* "okay as you cast your magic missle the sorcerer springs into action countering your spell with a magic missle"
Player: "Well in that case instead of magic missle I'm casting color spray."

You're changing your declared action after the result of the action has been resolved. You can't do that.

If you let someone turn their 5' step into a move action, then by the rules, the person who used step up couldn't because the only action that allows them too step up is a 5' step and you didn't take a 5' step you took a normal action, this is in no way ambiguous it is clearly stated by the rules.


The fact that we are even debating weather or not you can choose to turn a 5' step into a normal move if you haven't done anything else yet proves that the wording is unclear. LKL, the wording is clear to you, however it is not clear to me.

I can't think of any existing situation that sets up the sequence of events that Step Up introduces for us to fall back on. There is no situation I can think of where a 5' step causes a reaction in which case the question we are discussing comes into play: Can I decide to turn my 5' step into a normal move when technically I haven't done anything else yet?

EDIT: In other words, the rules for 5' step were clear until Step Up was introduced.

EDIT: The rule states: You can move 5' in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement.

In the Step Up scenario:

Technically, you haven't performed any other kind of movement yet. In fact you haven't technically done anything yet except move 5'. The ultimate problem is what was intended course of action.

Perhaps a solution would be this for Step Up: If an opponent steps 5' away from you and then begins to perform an action that would otherwise provoke an attack of opportunity if you threatened that opponent[/i], as an immediate action, you may take a 5' step to move adjacent to that opponent and are granted an attack of opportunity.

... or something along those lines.

Sovereign Court

anthony Valente wrote:

The fact that we are even debating weather or not you can choose to turn a 5' step into a normal move if you haven't done anything else yet proves that the wording is unclear. LKL, the wording is clear to you, however it is not clear to me.

I can't think of any existing situation that sets up the sequence of events that Step Up introduces for us to fall back on. There is no situation I can think of where a 5' step causes a reaction in which case the question we are discussing comes into play: Can I decide to turn my 5' step into a normal move when technically I haven't done anything else yet?

AoOs

They set up the situation

if your 5 foot step would have prevented an AoO and you took your 5 foot step, not provoking that AoO then yes actions have been set and to then turn it into a move action alters the results because then you have to go back and alter the previous result. It's just like the counterspell example I gave. Changing from a 5' step to a move action means that the attack of opportunity that wasn't taken should have had the chance to be taken. Now a lot of people don't mind that kind of rewind. but with the step up feat it's the same thing. if you turn a 5 foot step into a move action, then the player who used step up takes his step up back and is in his original position because he couldn't have used step up because you never took a 5 foot step.

I'll use a game example, you're a spellcaster, there is a fighter threatening your space. you take a 5 foot step back from him. you haven't taken any other move action, is it okay now that your out of his threatened area to say I haven't done anything else so I'm turning that 5 foot step into a move action and moving thirty feet away then casting a spell, but you didn't take your AoO so you can't now. It's the same thing for the step up feat. his action is based on you taking a 5 foot step. To then say you can just move another 25' and he is stuck having used step up is not ambiguous, it is wrong.

I don't see how step up is any different than AoOs?


lastknightleft wrote:
anthony Valente wrote:

The fact that we are even debating weather or not you can choose to turn a 5' step into a normal move if you haven't done anything else yet proves that the wording is unclear. LKL, the wording is clear to you, however it is not clear to me.

I can't think of any existing situation that sets up the sequence of events that Step Up introduces for us to fall back on. There is no situation I can think of where a 5' step causes a reaction in which case the question we are discussing comes into play: Can I decide to turn my 5' step into a normal move when technically I haven't done anything else yet?

AoOs

They set up the situation

if your 5 foot step would have prevented an AoO and you took your 5 foot step, not provoking that AoO then yes actions have been set and to then turn it into a move action alters the results because then you have to go back and alter the previous result. It's just like the counterspell example I gave. Changing from a 5' step to a move action means that the attack of opportunity that wasn't taken should have had the chance to be taken. Now a lot of people don't mind that kind of rewind. but with the step up feat it's the same thing. if you turn a 5 foot step into a move action, then the player who used step up takes his step up back and is in his original position because he couldn't have used step up because you never took a 5 foot step.

I'll use a game example, you're a spellcaster, there is a fighter threatening your space. you take a 5 foot step back from him. you haven't taken any other move action, is it okay now that your out of his threatened area to say I haven't done anything else so I'm turning that 5 foot step into a move action and moving thirty feet away then casting a spell, but you didn't take your AoO so you can't now. It's the same thing for the step up feat. his action is based on you taking a 5 foot step. To then say you can just move another 25' and he is stuck having used step up is not ambiguous, it is wrong.

Sorry LKL, read my edit... I'm a little slow. :)


Gavrin is needed.....

Sovereign Court

anthony Valente wrote:
Sorry LKL, read my edit... I'm a little slow. :)

I really just don't see how step up differs that much from AoOs, either one is an action taken by an enemy during someone elses turn. A 5 foot step doesn't provoke an AoO but does Provoke a step up, a full move provokes an AoO but doesn't provoke a step up.

how is it okay to say well he used step up so I'll turn my 5 foot step into a move action when it isn't okay to say well he didn't get an AoO so I'll turn my 5 foot step into a move action?


lastknightleft wrote:
I'll use a game example, you're a spellcaster, there is a fighter threatening your space. you take a 5 foot step back from him. you haven't taken any other move action, is it okay now that your out of his threatened area to say I haven't done anything else so I'm turning that 5 foot step into a move action and moving thirty feet away then casting a spell, but you didn't take your AoO so you can't now. It's the same thing for the step up feat. his action is based on you taking a 5 foot step. To then say you can just move another 25' and he is stuck having used step up is not ambiguous, it is wrong.

I don't see how this example clarifies things. If the wizard were to 5' step away, and then turn it into a move action and move another 25' away and cast a spell, this reverts to a move action + standard action and thus the fighter would be entitled to his AoO when the wizard leaves the first 5'.

This example actually just shows the problem in a different way. 5' step: You can move 5' in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement. In your example, you have performed another kind of movement, in which case that first 5' of movement could not be a 5' step. Again, I don't see any rule that says you can't change your mind about turning a 5' step into some other move action if you haven't done anything else yet.

I really think the key here is to add to Step Up: "and then begins to perform an action that would otherwise provoke an AoO..."

What do you think?


Or we could add a rule from Chess...

Once you take your hand off your figurine you can't change your mind! :)

Hey, it would certainly clarify things.

Sovereign Court

anthony Valente wrote:
lastknightleft wrote:
I'll use a game example, you're a spellcaster, there is a fighter threatening your space. you take a 5 foot step back from him. you haven't taken any other move action, is it okay now that your out of his threatened area to say I haven't done anything else so I'm turning that 5 foot step into a move action and moving thirty feet away then casting a spell, but you didn't take your AoO so you can't now. It's the same thing for the step up feat. his action is based on you taking a 5 foot step. To then say you can just move another 25' and he is stuck having used step up is not ambiguous, it is wrong.

I don't see how this example clarifies things. If the wizard were to 5' step away, and then turn it into a move action and move another 25' away and cast a spell, this reverts to a move action + standard action and thus the fighter would be entitled to his AoO when the wizard leaves the first 5'.

This example actually just shows the problem in a different way. 5' step: You can move 5' in any round when you don't perform any other kind of movement. In your example, you have performed another kind of movement, in which case that first 5' of movement could not be a 5' step. Again, I don't see any rule that says you can't change your mind about turning a 5' step into some other move action if you haven't done anything else yet.

I really think the key here is to add to Step Up: "and then begins to perform an action that would otherwise provoke an AoO..."

What do you think?

But that makes my point. Step up specifies that it can only work to follow a 5' step. It's just like you said, if the enemy turns a 5 foot step into a move action, then you could never have followed him with your step up in the first place because he never took a 5-foot step, just like you would get to take your AoO, you wouldn't get to take the 5 foot step to follow him. You answered the question exactly like I'm saying so i don't understand where our communication is getting mixed up.

Step Up (Combat)
You can close the distance when a foe tries to move away.
Benefit: Whenever an adjacent foe attempts to take a 5-foot step away from you, you may also make a 5-foot step as an immediate action so long as you end up adjacent to the foe that triggered this ability. If you take this step, you cannot take a 5-foot step during your next turn and you count as if you had take a 5-foot step on that turn (preventing any other movement).

Sovereign Court

anthony Valente wrote:

Or we could add a rule from Chess...

Once you take your hand off your figurine you can't change your mind! :)

Hey, it would certainly clarify things.

That's actually exactly how I play it. You declare your action, you can't take it back once things become resolved.

I guess its the way I see a 5 foot step, taking a 5 foot step is the same thing as casting a spell, you can't change a magic missle into a melfs acid arrow because it turns out that the enemy could counterspell it, you can't turn a 5 foot step into a move action because the enemy can follow you. You just see it differently I guess.

I mean there's no rule saying that you can't turn a standard action spell into a full round action spell. And spells are closer to attacks then move actions are.


anthony Valente wrote:

Or we could add a rule from Chess...

Once you take your hand off your figurine you can't change your mind! :)

Hey, it would certainly clarify things.

lastknightleft wrote:

That's actually exactly how I play it. You declare your action, you can't take it back once things become resolved.

I guess its the way I see a 5 foot step, taking a 5 foot step is the same thing as casting a spell, you can't change a magic missle into a melfs acid arrow because it turns out that the enemy could counterspell it, you can't turn a 5 foot step into a move action because the enemy can follow you. You just see it differently I guess.

I mean there's no rule saying that you can't turn a standard action spell into a full round action spell. And spells are closer to attacks then move actions are.

I think the problem is that the Full Round Actions are highly restrictive. DMs and Players want to be able to have more options. I have participated in threads about about Charges, Standard Actions Charges, Readied Actions, Modification of Move actions and now we are having similar discussions about 5' Steps.

I think LKL is correct in how Jason wanted the feat to work. I forgot about the lack of a AoO which restricts the person moving to a Full Round Action. As soon as the person declared '5'Step w/o AoO', they now have few follow-up actions to choose from. Many DMs would even say 'no changing your actions'. I personally would have liked to be able to 'modify' my action when someone does an interrupt. Others, myself included, thought this feat might have been opening up a more free form style of play. Instead, it is one feat that has a very limited application. For what it is worth, I think if we do not address Full Round Actions and 'Partial' Full Round actions, we will continue to have folks habitually modify the rules because they are so restrictive.


lastknightleft wrote:
anthony Valente wrote:

Or we could add a rule from Chess...

Once you take your hand off your figurine you can't change your mind! :)

Hey, it would certainly clarify things.

That's actually exactly how I play it. You declare your action, you can't take it back once things become resolved.

I guess its the way I see a 5 foot step, taking a 5 foot step is the same thing as casting a spell, you can't change a magic missle into a melfs acid arrow because it turns out that the enemy could counterspell it, you can't turn a 5 foot step into a move action because the enemy can follow you. You just see it differently I guess.

I mean there's no rule saying that you can't turn a standard action spell into a full round action spell. And spells are closer to attacks then move actions are.

Hmm... now I'm beginning to see why we aren't quite understanding each other's points of view.

A 5' step normally doesn't provoke anything. But the Step Up feat is unique as far as I can tell in that it is triggered on a 5' step. I don't agree this should be the case. I think the feat description needs to clarify this so a player or GM can't "take his move back"... his 5' move in this case.

It should be triggered on any action (that would provoke an AoO) taken after a foe moves 5' away from you. I could be wrong, but I think that some wording along these lines would make it crystal clear for all. It would certainly make it clear at my gaming table.


Duncan & Dragons wrote:
I think LKL is correct in how Jason wanted the feat to work.

I certainly want it to work this way as well. I simply want the wording to support it is all so as not to have it turn into a debate at the gaming table


anthony Valente wrote:
The fact that we are even debating weather or not you can choose to turn a 5' step into a normal move if you haven't done anything else yet proves that the wording is unclear. LKL, the wording is clear to you, however it is not clear to me.

No it proves that a group of people are refusing to read a fairly clearly worded section of the rules.

I am completely baffled at where the issue is here when the rules in this case are so clear.

Sovereign Court

anthony Valente wrote:
Duncan & Dragons wrote:
I think LKL is correct in how Jason wanted the feat to work.
I certainly want it to work this way as well. I simply want the wording to support it is all so as not to have it turn into a debate at the gaming table

Just out of curiosity is english your first language? I don't mean that as insulting, honestly to me the wording is crystal clear and supports it exactly as I have stated it, I can't see any loopholes in the wording that you are saying are there. I understand that it seems reasonable to say that a 5' step if no other action is taken can be turned into a move action, but the rules as written do not support that, the rules as written expressly deny that, in fact your change to the rules to write it the way you are saying actually allows the ability to then follow someone who moved after a 5 foot step, which is something that because they are allowed to take no other move action isn't allowed. Because moving 5 feet and taking a five foot step are not the same thing. I've as a player moved characters 5 feet intentionally provoking AoOs instead of taking 5 foot steps before. They are two seperate things.

Sovereign Court

anthony Valente wrote:

Perhaps a solution would be this for Step Up: If an opponent steps 5' away from you and then begins to perform an action that would otherwise provoke an attack of opportunity if you threatened that opponent[/i], as an immediate action, you may take a 5' step to move adjacent to that opponent and are granted an attack of opportunity.

... or something along those lines.

Remember, them moving counts as an action that would provoke an AoO if you threatened them. So this is no different than what you were saying where the opponent takes a 5 foot step. you follow, they then decide since you followed to move the extra 25'. When you followed they were threatened again so you took your AoO.


I think the issue is declaration of your action. It sounds like the way LKL plays the player would say "I am doing a Full Round Action to get all my attacks (or something like that). I take this five foot step (which does not provoke as AoO). Then I attack.."

"STOP," Says DM, "He has Step Up and he takes a 5' Step to be next to you."

Then the argument breaks out. The player wants to react to the Step Up. The DM might rule that the player is committed. The question in my mind is does the DM say you must do a Reiterative attack or does he allow you to substitute another Full Round Action as a response to the Step Up. If the DM wants to let the player react, can the player now do say .... a Standard Action w/o movement?

(As a blatant plug, I like my 5'Step w/o AoO Move Action proposed above.).


Duncan & Dragons wrote:

I think the issue is declaration of your action. It sounds like the way LKL plays the player would say "I am doing a Full Round Action to get all my attacks (or something like that). I take this five foot step (which does not provoke as AoO). Then I attack.."

"STOP," Says DM, "He has Step Up and he takes a 5' Step to be next to you."

Then the argument breaks out. The player wants to react to the Step Up. The DM might rule that the player is committed. The question in my mind is does the DM say you must do a Reiterative attack or does he allow you to substitute another Full Round Action as a response to the Step Up.

(As a blatant plug, I like my 5'Step w/o AoO Move Action proposed above.).

This reminds me of the first time my players discovered Combat Reflexes.

"He already took his AoO, he can't attack me".

The problem is not with the rules, it's with the players expectation.

As a DM you want your player to be happy and we let them get away with lots of little things like this. So when he changes his mind you give him the option of withdrawing or taking a full move action instead of the 5' step. If the player opts for a move action then he takes a AoO as normal. If the player opts to withdraw then follow the normal rules.

If the player is aware of the rule then he knows it's possible that he might get whacked and should deal with that possibility as appropriate. Just like they do with combat reflexes.

1 to 50 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Older Products / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder RPG Prerelease Discussion / Design Forums / Skills and Feats / Feats-Step Up All Messageboards

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.