can he also make use of the two additional attack of opportunities provided by combat reflexes feat?
Whirlwind attack normally has no effect on the number of opportunity attacks you can make. It's extra attack restrictions apply to attacks you make on your own turn, not other people's turns.
2nd question: Would this be cheesy?Now, assuming that this all is technically allowed... I was thinking of having a fighter who has whirlwind attack, greater trip and improved combat reflexes. So whirlwind attack to trip everyone nearby and AoOs against them as they fall. (For those who haven't noticed, you no longer get extra attacks from improved trip but with greater trip, enemies provoke AoO when you manage to trip them.)
The answer is yes it is cheesy, but it could be very clever if whirlwind attack allows combat maneuvers against oppnents in reach. From the PRD, the feat says:
"you can give up your regular attacks and instead make one melee attack at your highest base attack bonus against each opponent within reach"I just don't know if this means that you can make trip attempts against foes. I am inclined to think not, but I am not sure. If you can, I am not sure how Combat Reflexes would work, since the opportunities are provoked on your turn.
I am also not positive that the Lunge feat allows you to whirlwind attack opponents that would otherwise be out of reach, but the wording of Lunge and Whirlwind Attack seem to be compatible.
A combination of Greater Trip and Combat Reflexes, with Whirlwind Attack and Lunge, could be both cheesy and effective, but personally I don't think Whirlwind Attack can be used for combat maneuvers.
I still don't know how the opportunit attacks from Greater Trip and Combat Reflexes work with Whirlwind Attack. The wording of the feat implies that you are too busy "whirlwinding" to make any extra attacks.
I hope that one of Paizo's staff will weigh in on this.
I have to lean towards not getting the AoO's caused by Greater Trip. Based on this sentence of Whirlwind "When you use the Whirlwind Attack feat, you also forfeit any bonus or extra attacks granted by other feats, spells, or abilities." Combat Reflexes is a feat that grants extra AoO's which are attacks provided by a feat.
Now it could be argued that an AoO is not a feat, spell or ability. In which case you could say you still get one AoO, but not the extra ones provided by the feat. Yea that wouldn't be confusing....
By the rules as written I lean towards the idea that you could trip them using Greater Trip, but you would not get the AoO's. Its a bit of a weird situation as getting AoO's during your turn is really making me scratch my head and I can't fully back up my logic here with rules to quote. =(
I think with the number of feats invested it should work getting an AoO from greater trip during the whirlwind. I saw this in play with a 3.5 spiked chain and improved trip and it was interesting, but not deadly.
The last thing to keep in my is that if you ever fail the CMB roll by 10 or more you are tripped instead. Their is no longer an option to drop your weapon to prevent yourself from being tripped. So with the increased number of rolls do to whirlwind the dice will go against you at some point and down you will go. ;)
I am bumping this. I wanna know more about whirl-tripping. If PCs can do it, then monsters can do it too. Specifically, guisarme and flail wielding Marileth demons can do it too.
I am prepared to bump this thread daily until I get questions answered (or I get banned).
Specifically, I wish to know:
Can you use Combat Maneuvers (e.g. Trip & Disarm) while Whirlwinding? (The reason I suspect you may not be able to is the specific wording of the feat states that you give up your normal attacks, in favor of the Whirlwind attack).
Can you make Opportunity attacks at all while Whirlwinding? (e.g. those provoked by your Trip maneuvers & Greater Trip feat) and does Whirlwinding affect how many opportunity attacks you can make on your own turn if you have Combat Reflexes?
And is Whirlwind Attack as sympatico with Lunge feat as it appears to be?
The feat says that you give up extra attacks, but doesn't say how long that restriction applies. I would assume that the restriction is in effect for as long as you are actively using the feat.
Assuming that we have a fighter who can normally make 5 AoO in a round, during the whirlwind, he wouldn't be able to make more than 1 AoO (the extra attacks from Combat Reflexes are not allowed). In fact, I don't even think he would be able to make one, since that is a result of the Greater Trip feat. However, as everybody starts to stand up (provoking AoOs), I see no reason why he couldn't use all of his remaining AoOs against those opponents.
I am prepared to bump this thread daily until I get questions answered (or I get banned).
Specifically, I wish to know:Can you use Combat Maneuvers (e.g. Trip & Disarm) while Whirlwinding? (The reason I suspect you may not be able to is the specific wording of the feat states that you give up your normal attacks, in favor of the Whirlwind attack).
Can you make Opportunity attacks at all while Whirlwinding? (e.g. those provoked by your Trip maneuvers & Greater Trip feat) and does Whirlwinding affect how many opportunity attacks you can make on your own turn if you have Combat Reflexes?
And is Whirlwind Attack as sympatico with Lunge feat as it appears to be?
Eh, probably no reason to bump this thread. They don't seem to like "ANSWER ME DANGIT!" threads (:
I think what needs to be answered is what defines a "regular attack". Attacks of opportunity aren't "regular attacks" since you can't choose when you can make them -- they're reactions to other things opponents do. You can't choose to make an attack of opportunity using the full attack action, and that is a requirement of the Whirlwind Attack feat. You can make an attack as part of attack of opportunity, not part of your "regular attacks".
Since you can substitute a number of combat maneuvers as attack actions (see note 6 in the table: Actions In Combat), you can make combat maneuvers as melee attack substitutions for every attack in a Whirlwind Attack. And if some of those combat maneuvers cause enemies to provoke attacks of opportunities from you, the AoO interrupts the action to resolve what happens during an AoO -- which typically is an attack (which could also be substituted for yet another combat maneuver!).
If Combat Reflexes lets you dish out more AoOs, then you can make more as part of a Whirlwind Attack.
Correction: Yes, Lunge is sympatico with Whirlwind Attack (:
I would not allow lunge. Both lunge and WW are separate combat maneuvers with different intentions. The lunge is a classic fencing move to use your whole body to reach a foe. How could you reach out 10' and then spin in a circle? That would be a move for cartoons.
If PCs can do it, monsters can do it too. And it seems to me that a whirl tripping monster with reach could be a major pain in the a@@ to an adventuring party. Particularly since it is unlikely to be fighting them by itself, and will most likely be part of a gang (who will also be getting lot's of opportunity attacks against the tripped PCs).
That would be a move for cartoons.
|
Whirlwind says, "Benefit: When you use the full-attack action, you can..." and "When you use the Whirlwind Attack feat, you also forfeit any bonus or extra attacks granted by other feats, spells, or abilities."
The first thing I see here is that there is no specific duration listed to the penalty... So I'd say it lasts for the duration of the benefit; or during the full-attack action.
Greater Trip says, "... Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes attacks of opportunity."
So... for the duration of the full-attack action which you are using the Whirlwind Attack, Greater Trip gets turned off and is replaced with "Normal: Creatures do not provoke attacks of opportunity from being tripped."
So Combat Reflex doesn't even come into play during the full-attack action, because there are no attacks of opportunity granted during the Whirlwind Attack.
Now, after the full-attack action is completed the Greater Trip feat is turned back on.
Assuming a 14+ Dex... If on his turn, an enemy you just tripped stands up from prone (which provokes an AoO), you could still take an AoO (your 1st) to trip the enemy... then get the Greater Trip's AoO (your 2nd) when he falls prone.
Assuming an 18+ Dex... If he burns his standard action to stand up from prone a second time, you could take a AoO (your 3rd) to trip him again... then get the Greater Trip's AoO (your 4th) when he falls prone.
That's how I see it.
That's how I see it.
I agree.
The rules support using maneuvers as part of a WW-attack, but you get only one swing at each opponent, regardless of any feat, spell, magic item, whatevers-and-whatsnots.
As for Lunge that is a completely different story. The appropiate thread has strong arguments for WW-lunges only attacking the 16 squares 10' away from the attacker.
It might not make sense to whirlwind lunge, but it makes for good theatrics :)
|
Assuming a 14+ Dex... If on his turn, an enemy you just tripped stands up from prone (which provokes an AoO), you could still take an AoO (your 1st) to trip the enemy... then get the Greater Trip's AoO (your 2nd) when he falls prone.
This part is actually incorrect, a creature standing from prone that provokes an Attack of Opportunity is considered prone for the AoO, therefor you can't trip him, because he is already prone. So you won't activate Greater trip.
Now if he stands, then leaves a threatened square after standing, you can try to trip him, since you have combat reflexes. But you can't trip a person with the AoO from standing.
Whirlwind says, "Benefit: When you use the full-attack action, you can..." and "When you use the Whirlwind Attack feat, you also forfeit any bonus or extra attacks granted by other feats, spells, or abilities."
The first thing I see here is that there is no specific duration listed to the penalty... So I'd say it lasts for the duration of the benefit; or during the full-attack action.
Greater Trip says, "... Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes attacks of opportunity."
So... for the duration of the full-attack action which you are using the Whirlwind Attack, Greater Trip gets turned off and is replaced with "Normal: Creatures do not provoke attacks of opportunity from being tripped."
AoOs interrupt actions.
An attack of opportunity “interrupts” the normal flow of actions in the round. If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character's turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character's turn).
It doesn't matter that Whirlwind Attack causes you to give up your regular attacks during a round. When someone provokes an AoO, you stop the "normal flow of actions in the round" and resolve the AoO outside of what is currently happening.
Greater Trip doesn't get "turned off"; the feat makes a static change to how trips work. If you trip an enemy, they provoke an AoO from all opponents that threaten them. If you get to make an AoO, then that means you stop the flow of actions during your turn or, in fact, any turn -- including the full-attack action as part of the Whirlwind Attack -- and resolve the AoO. AoOs don't count as "regular attacks" during your turn because they're technically something you can't choose to do normally on your turn. . . you can only take them when the AoOs are provoked.
|
|
I would not allow lunge. Both lunge and WW are separate combat maneuvers with different intentions. The lunge is a classic fencing move to use your whole body to reach a foe. How could you reach out 10' and then spin in a circle? That would be a move for cartoons.
while I agree with this as a simulationist, the feat does allow it.
So a Marilith Demon (10' natural reach), armed with guisarmes and flails, using the lunge feat could whirl-trip characters that are 2, 3 or 4 squares distant, but not characters that are only 5' distant. If not using the lunge feat, she could attack PCs 1, 2 or 3 squares distant.
For every party member she successfully trips, she gets an immediate opportunity attack at +4 att since target is prone, until she runs out of opportuity attacks (combat reflexes and 19 Dex = 5 total). If she has any left at the end of her turn, she can make opportunity attacks against any PC within reach (up to 3 squares away), who stand up, at +4 att since they are considered prone while standing.
If she has any cronies with her, who are meleeing the PCs. Said cronies can make opportunities against tripped party members, both when they are tripped and as they stand up, unless they run out of opportunity attacks.( Even if a cronie doesn't have combat reflexes, it could still get two opportunity attacks against a PC, if it takes it's turn between the Marilith's and the characters.) And any attacks made by the cronies, opportunity or normal, would be at +4 att if the character is considered prone.
Did I get all this right?
So a Marilith Demon (10' natural reach), armed with guisarmes and flails, using the lunge feat could whirl-trip characters that are 2, 3 or 4 squares distant, but not characters that are only 5' distant. If not using the lunge feat, she could attack PCs 1, 2 or 3 squares distant.
Is I interpret the rules, yes. But the restrictions on Lunge at short range have nt been clarified as far as I know
For every party member she successfully trips, she gets an immediate opportunity attack at +4 att since target is prone, until she runs out of opportuity attacks (combat reflexes and 19 Dex = 5 total). If she has any left at the end of her turn, she can make opportunity attacks against any PC within reach (up to 3 squares away), who stand up, at +4 att since they are considered prone while standing.
No. By using WW-attack she forfeits all attacks except the single attack against each opponent within reach.
If she has any cronies with her, who are meleeing the PCs. Said cronies can make opportunities against tripped party members, both when they are tripped and as they stand up, unless they run out of opportunity attacks.( Even if a cronie doesn't have combat reflexes, it could still get two opportunity attacks against a PC, if it takes it's turn between the Marilith's and the characters.) And any attacks made by the cronies, opportunity or normal, would be at +4 att if the character is considered prone.
No. The cronies do not get AoO just by standing next to someone who is tripped. They are entitled to AoO when the prone character tries to rise.
Did I get all this right?
Not all. but some :)
From PRD (greater trip feat)- "Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes attacks of opportunity."
Why don't cronies get an opportunity attack?
Also, while I understand interpreting Whirlwind Attack as preventing opportunity attacks on your own turn, it's clear that some people don't interpret it that way. It think it would be helpful if someone on the Paizo staff would clarify that.
|
|
This part is actually incorrect, a creature standing from prone that provokes an Attack of Opportunity is considered prone for the AoO, therefor you can't trip him, because he is already prone. So you won't activate Greater trip.
Now if he stands, then leaves a threatened square after standing, you can try to trip him, since you have combat reflexes. But you can't trip a person with the AoO from standing.
I have been unable to find anything in the PRGCR that states the Prone condition grants immunity to trip.
I have been unable to find anything in the PRGCR that states a creatures that is prone cannot be tripped... Though I did find the line, "Some creatures-such as oozes, creatures without legs, and flying creatures-cannot be tripped."
I would have thought that if Paizo wanted it it that way, they would have at least changed that line to, "Some creatures-such as oozes, creatures without legs, flying creatures, and prone creatures-cannot be tripped." They did not.
I have been unable to find anything in the PRGCR that states the Prone condition grants immunity to trip.I have been unable to find anything in the PRGCR that states a creatures that is prone cannot be tripped... Though I did find the line, "Some creatures-such as oozes, creatures without legs, and flying creatures-cannot be tripped."
I would have thought that if Paizo wanted it it that way, they would have at least changed that line to, "Some creatures-such as oozes, creatures without legs, flying creatures, and prone creatures-cannot be tripped." They did not.
Their is no rule that says you can't trip a prone target, but its just that it does no good. It has to do with how an AoO interrupts the normal flow of combat.
1) The target starts to stand up, but he is still prone.
2) You take your AoO by doing a trip attack and if successful he becomes prone which is exactly what he already is. If the trip attack fails the the target is prone because he started as prone.
3) The target stands up from prone finishing the move that provoked the AoO in the first place.
|
|
Whirlwind says, "Benefit: When you use the full-attack action, you can..." and "When you use the Whirlwind Attack feat, you also forfeit any bonus or extra attacks granted by other feats, spells, or abilities."
The first thing I see here is that there is no specific duration listed to the penalty... So I'd say it lasts for the duration of the benefit; or during the full-attack action.
Greater Trip says, "... Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes attacks of opportunity."
So... for the duration of the full-attack action which you are using the Whirlwind Attack, Greater Trip gets turned off and is replaced with "Normal: Creatures do not provoke attacks of opportunity from being tripped."
AoOs interrupt actions.
Oooh, I agree they do. My point if you re-read my post was that the feat granting him the extra attacks becomes turned off during the whirlwind.
Greater Trip doesn't get "turned off"; the feat makes a static change to how trips work.
Yep you're right and I was wrong... The feat doesn't get turned off, it's the AoO's that get turned off.
AoOs don't count as "regular attacks"
Why you threw quotes around "regular attacks" is a bit beyond me. The term "regular attacks" is not defined anywhere in the PRGCR let alone the Whirlwind feat.
Now I suppose you might argue something like, "Well AoO are not attacks." Well... "Making an Attack of Opportunity: An attack of opportunity is a single melee attack, and most..." seems pretty clear to me as defining it as an attack. Nothing contradicts it as being an attack.
Now I suppose you might argue something like, "AoO's are not granted by feats, magic, or abilities." I would argue that all AoO are abilities granted by being a creature. Of course, someone could argue this... But if you do there will be DM's out there just waiting to get to attack some poor PC with every blade of grass, twig, and stone they pass... AND 20's auto hit... AND minimum damage is 1.
This thread has convinced me that, yes, in my games AoOs will be turned off for the duration of the Whirlwind action... At least until Paizo in loud clear text is does not.
I agree. Not allowing a whirlwind attacker to make opportunity attacks on his/her own turn, may not be explicitely mandated by the feat, but is in keeping with the rest of the text of the feat. The text implies that the whirlwind attack completely occupies the whirlwinder for the duration of the attack, and so opportunities for other attacks will be missed opportunities.
At least, thats how I see it.
Assuming a 14+ Dex... If on his turn, an enemy you just tripped stands up from prone (which provokes an AoO), you could still take an AoO (your 1st) to trip the enemy... then get the Greater Trip's AoO (your 2nd) when he falls prone.
This part is actually incorrect, a creature standing from prone that provokes an Attack of Opportunity is considered prone for the AoO, therefor you can't trip him, because he is already prone. So you won't activate Greater trip.
Now if he stands, then leaves a threatened square after standing, you can try to trip him, since you have combat reflexes. But you can't trip a person with the AoO from standing.
Actually, where is that stated ? Because in the final FAQ for DnD 3.5 (aka the "Rules Compendium" by WOtC) it was actually made pretty clear that you actually could do just that. The "move" of standing up was ended through a successful trip attack, leaving your prone again. End of move, suffer a AoO, if the attacker is entitled to one through some feat or ability.
Otherwise, if being tripped while moving, you would actually be entitled to move on (for what remains of your movement not yet resolved) after having just been tripped if one simply bend the wording of when and how an AoO is resolved beyond recognition. Which obviously does not happen.
|
|
Assuming a 14+ Dex... If on his turn, an enemy you just tripped stands up from prone (which provokes an AoO), you could still take an AoO (your 1st) to trip the enemy... then get the Greater Trip's AoO (your 2nd) when he falls prone.
This part is actually incorrect, a creature standing from prone that provokes an Attack of Opportunity is considered prone for the AoO, therefor you can't trip him, because he is already prone. So you won't activate Greater trip.
Now if he stands, then leaves a threatened square after standing, you can try to trip him, since you have combat reflexes. But you can't trip a person with the AoO from standing.
Actually, where is that stated ? Because in the final FAQ for DnD 3.5 (aka the "Rules Compendium" by WOtC) it was actually made pretty clear that you actually could do just that. The "move" of standing up was ended through a successful trip attack, leaving your prone again. End of move, suffer a AoO, if the attacker is entitled to one through some feat or ability.
Otherwise, if being tripped while moving, you would actually be entitled to move on (for what remains of your movement not yet resolved) after having just been tripped if one simply bend the wording of when and how an AoO is resolved beyond recognition. Which obviously does not happen.
Show me please, because I've heard nothing but the opposite, so if you could link it or show the quote.
Why you threw quotes around "regular attacks" is a bit beyond me. The term "regular attacks" is not defined anywhere in the PRGCR let alone the Whirlwind feat.
Whirlwind Attack specifically states you give up "regular attacks" -- you're correct in that the term "regular attacks" isn't defined in the book. The quotes are used to show that it is a specific term, in this case from the Whirlwind Attack feat. Until there is an official definition of the term "regular attacks", we really can't resolve this issue.
My argument is that attacks of opportunity are not regular. They aren't something you can do on your turn as a full-round/standard/move/swift/immediate/free action. Other creatures provoke the attacks. If I can only make an attack based on the combat actions of another creature, then how is that regular? Wouldn't "regular attacks" be the attacks you *usually* make during an attack action or a full-round attack?
It might make sense that enemies cannot provoke attacks of opportunity from you while you're using the Whirlwind Attack feat. But that's an opinion and not a rule.
Actually, where is that stated ? Because in the final FAQ for DnD 3.5 (aka the "Rules Compendium" by WOtC) it was actually made pretty clear that you actually could do just that. The "move" of standing up was ended through a successful trip attack, leaving your prone again. End of move, suffer a AoO, if the attacker is entitled to one through some feat or ability.This part is actually incorrect, a creature standing from prone that provokes an Attack of Opportunity is considered prone for the AoO, therefor you can't trip him, because he is already prone. So you won't activate Greater trip.
Below is from the 3.5 FAQ about tripping and being prone. Nothing in Pathfinder has changed this rule and it was why the spiked chain was never broken. You could not keep tripping a person to the ground with AoO's. I also covered this above when I went over the the steps of an AoO.
3.5 Main FAQ Version 6/30/2008 - Last one put out.
When a character gets up from prone, when does the attack of opportunity take place? When he is still prone? When he is standing? Can the attacker choose when to attack? In one case, the attacker can get a +4 bonus to hit. In the other, he can make another trip attack.
All attacks of opportunity happen before the actions that trigger them (see Chapter 8 in the PH). When you make an attack of opportunity against someone who’s getting up, your target is effectively prone, and therefore cannot be tripped. You could ready an action to trip a prone foe after he gets up, however.
|
|
Whirlwind Attack specifically states you give up "regular attacks" -- you're correct in that the term "regular attacks" isn't defined in the book. The quotes are used to show that it is a specific term, in this case from the Whirlwind Attack feat. Until there is an official definition of the term "regular attacks", we really can't resolve this issue.My argument is that attacks of opportunity are not regular. They aren't something you can do on your turn as a full-round/standard/move/swift/immediate/free action. Other creatures provoke the attacks. If I can only make an attack based on the combat actions of another creature, then how is that regular? Wouldn't "regular attacks" be the attacks you *usually* make during an attack action or a full-round attack?
It might make sense that enemies cannot provoke attacks of opportunity from you while you're using the Whirlwind Attack feat. But that's an opinion and not a rule.
So... Who do we need to contact to get a ruling about what a "Regular Attack" is?
From PRD (greater trip feat)- "Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes attacks of opportunity."
I did not notice that. Is far as I remember that is a change since 3.5
Also, while I understand interpreting Whirlwind Attack as preventing opportunity attacks on your own turn, it's clear that some people don't interpret it that way. It think it would be helpful if someone on the Paizo staff would clarify that.
On that, I think we all can agree ;)
|
|
Otherwise, if being tripped while moving, you would actually be entitled to move on (for what remains of your movement not yet resolved) after having just been tripped if one simply bend the wording of when and how an AoO is resolved beyond recognition. Which obviously does not happen.
I also don't get where you are getting that from. A person moving who provokes an AoO by leaving a threatened square is considered in the square when the trip happens. (i.e. the provoking action takes place after the AoO) so if you trip him he is triped in the square that originally threatened, how does he move on.
If anything, by your interpretation he would be able to finish his move. After all if standing from prone provokes and he isn't prone when the AoO took place that means that he finished the provoking action before the AoO. So if movement is what provoked the AoO he would have gotten to finish his movement before your AoO took place.
The way I said it works makes sense, the way you said it works makes it abusable and opens arguments on what can be done.
|
|
Actually, where is that stated ? Because in the final FAQ for DnD 3.5 (aka the "Rules Compendium" by WOtC) it was actually made pretty clear that you actually could do just that. The "move" of standing up was ended through a successful trip attack, leaving your prone again. End of move, suffer a AoO, if the attacker is entitled to one through some feat or ability.
I'm going to have to get me a copy of this book or whatever...
I was reading up on crawl action... "Crawling: You can crawl 5 feet as a move action. Crawling incurs attacks of opportunity from any attackers who threaten you at any point of your crawl. A crawling character is considered prone and must take a move action to stand up, provoking an attack of opportunity."
Just for the sake of completeness, we'll toss in the rogue ability for consideration too:
Rogue Crawl(Ex): While prone, a rogue with this ability can move at half speed. This movement provokes attacks of opportunity as normal. A rogue with this talent can take a 5-foot step while crawling.
Can someone who is crawling be tripped? If this final FAQ for DnD 3.5 (aka the "Rules Compendium" by WOtC) says that trip also ends move actions that would really settle most debates along these lines.
The PRGCR's Trip entry should be changed. The first line of the second paragraph should be expanded to something like: "If your attack exceeds the target's CMD, the target is knocked prone. If the target was participating in a move action that provokes an attack of opportunity, the move action is ended and then the target is knocked prone." I think that fixes the whole problem with trip.
Anyone heard anything official on these ambiguous areas?
Actually, where is that stated ? Because in the final FAQ for DnD 3.5 (aka the "Rules Compendium" by WOtC) it was actually made pretty clear that you actually could do just that. The "move" of standing up was ended through a successful trip attack, leaving your prone again. End of move, suffer a AoO, if the attacker is entitled to one through some feat or ability.
Incorrect. Quoted: "TRIP RESULTS: If you win, you trip the defender, knocking it prone in its space. It must use a move action that provokes attacks of opportunity to stand up again. If you lose, the defender can immediately react to try to trip you." So it never actually says anything about tripping someone standing from prone. However this article does: All about trip attacks pt2
Quoted: "It's possible to attempt a trip attack as an attack of opportunity. Fortunately, you can't be tripped while getting up from prone, at least not through the attack of opportunity you provoke. That because attacks of opportunity are resolved before the actions that provoke them (there are a few exceptions..." So no cannot trip a prone person. Also means they get the -4 to ac from any AoO while standing from prone.
Now back to the proper matter at hand, I also believe the AoO given by a successful greater trip works during a whirlwind attack. Quoted p180: "An attack of opportunity 'interrupts' the normal flow of actions in a round immediatly resolve the AoO then continue with the next character's turn (or complete the current turn if it was provoked in the midst of a character's turn)" So I believe that an AoO doesn't count as a 'bonus or extra attack' it is the consequence of a situation. Additionally sources of 'bonus or extra attacks' label them as such. Haste grants an 'extra attack' as does two-weapon fighting and the speed weapon property. So as written I'd rule whirlwind->trip->AoO is fair game until it's officially ruled on or put into errata.
|
|
Quoted: "It's possible to attempt a trip attack as an attack of opportunity. Fortunately, you can't be tripped while getting up from prone, at least not through the attack of opportunity you provoke. That because attacks of opportunity are resolved before the actions that provoke them (there are a few exceptions..." So no cannot trip a prone person. Also means they get the -4 to ac from any AoO while standing from prone.
Just because something can be quoted does not mean it is worth quoting or correct. Let’s look at some examples:
Example 1:
Setup: A kobold stands 3 squares from a fighter with improved trip (but not combat reflexes).
1. The kobold spends a move action to move (up to his movement for 6 squares) past the fighter.
2. As he leaves square 3 he provokes an AoO from the fighter, who successfully trips him. The kobold is now prone in square 3.
3. He uses his move equivalent action to stand up in square 3.
4. The kobold changes his standard action to a move action.
5. The kobold moves right by the fighter to square 9.
6. The kobold’s turn ends.
That just doesn’t sound right, does it? At least not to me. Let’s try that again.
Example 2:
Setup: A kobold stands 3 squares from a fighter with improved trip (but not combat reflexes).
1. The kobold spends a move action to move (up to his movement for 6 squares) past the fighter.
2. As he leaves square 3 he provokes an AoO from the fighter, who successfully trips him. The kobold is now prone in square 0.
3. He uses his move equivalent action to stand up in square 0.
4. The kobold changes his standard action to a move action.
5. The kobold moves six squares, right by the fighter again, to square 6.
6. The kobold’s turn ends.
Ugh, that doesn’t sound right to me either.
This whole line of, “attacks of opportunity are resolved before the actions that provoke them.” seems problematic. In fact, I’m happy to say I can’t even find it in the PRGCR.
Example 3:
Setup: A kobold stands 3 squares from a fighter with improved trip (but not combat reflexes).
1. The kobold spends a move action to move (up to his movement for 6 squares) past the fighter.
2. As he leaves square 3 he provokes an AoO from the fighter, who successfully trips him. The kobold is now prone in square 3.
3. The kobold changes his standard action to a move action.
4. The kobold stands up from prone in square 3.
5. The kobold’s turn ends.
Now that, that does sound right to me. So if we’re going to use the line of, “attacks of opportunity are resolved before the actions that provoke them.” we need to change the word "actions" to “part of the action” in order for us to make example 3 work. Sound logical?
If a square is just one part of a move action used to move… I'd say we could break down all move actions into squares of movement. Sound logical? Let's give it a try, shall we?
Example 4:
Setup: A kobold is prone in square adjacent to a fighter with improved trip (but not combat reflexes).
1. The kobold spends a move action to stand up (equivalent to 6 squares). He goes through something like:
___A. The kobold is no longer prone (equivalent to square 0). Maybe up on his hands and knees?
___B. The kobold is in the process of getting his feet underneath him and then getting upright (equivalent to squares 1-5). He is provoking an AoO.
___C. The kobold finishes standing (equivalent to square 6). He no longer provokes.
2. The fighter waiting for the prefect opportunity, successfully trips the kobold on step 1B, square 3.
3. The kobold, unable to use what remains of his move equivalent action (equivalent to 3 squares) to stand up from prone (equivalent to 6 squares), changes his standard action to a move action.
4. The kobold uses his move action to stand up from prone. He again goes through something like:
___A. The kobold is no longer prone (equivalent to square 0). Maybe up on his hands and knees?
___B. The kobold is in the process of getting his feet underneath him and then getting upright (equivalent to squares 1-5). He is provoking an AoO.
___C. The kobold finishes standing (equivalent to square 6). He no longer provokes.
5. The kobold moves 1 square (a 5ft step) because he has taken any real movement yet.
6. The kobold’s turn ends.
Now that sounds about right to me.
That’s why I’m going to add the following rules to any table I run:
Standing up from prone – takes a full move equivalent action which provokes AoO, during which the target is not prone.
Trip – when used to interrupt an action, ends that action then knocks the target prone.
|
|
… So I believe that an AoO doesn't count as a 'bonus or extra attack' it is the consequence of a situation. Additionally sources of 'bonus or extra attacks' label them as such. Haste grants an 'extra attack' as does two-weapon fighting and the speed weapon property. So as written I'd rule whirlwind->trip->AoO is fair game until it's officially ruled on or put into errata.
So… what you’re saying is that I just need to scour the PRGCR to find one or more examples of getting additional attacks without the words ‘bonus’ or ‘extra’ appearing. Okay, a 6th level barbarian, fighter, paladin, and ranger all have a BAB of +6/+1.
So does this disprove you?
Probably not… If it were me, I’d look up the Whirlwind feat and find “Benefit: When you use the full-attack action, you can give up your regular attacks and instead make one melee attack at your highest base attack bonus against each opponent within reach.”
So BAB is a regular attack. That’s why you loose them, right?
Okay, so… How about animals? Like Ape’s “Attack: bite (1d4), 2 claws (1d4)” which are not listed as regular, bonus, or extra attacks.
How about a monk’s Flurry of Blows? They are listed as ‘additional’ attacks.
How about Medusa’s Wrath? “…you can make two additional unarmed strikes…”
Have I made the point yet? Good grief, we're still only in the one book. Imagine the fun a player can have as more books come out. UGH!
The intention of Whirlwind Attack is to give up all attacks not granted by Whirlwind Attack for the duration the full-attack action.
That’s the way I will run Whirlwind Attack.
Quoted: "It's possible to attempt a trip attack as an attack of opportunity. Fortunately, you can't be tripped while getting up from prone, at least not through the attack of opportunity you provoke. That because attacks of opportunity are resolved before the actions that provoke them (there are a few exceptions..." So no cannot trip a prone person. Also means they get the -4 to ac from any AoO while standing from prone.Just because something can be quoted does not mean it is worth quoting or correct. Let’s look at some examples:
Example 1:
Setup: A kobold stands 3 squares from a fighter with improved trip (but not combat reflexes).
1. The kobold spends a move action to move (up to his movement for 6 squares) past the fighter.
2. As he leaves square 3 he provokes an AoO from the fighter, who successfully trips him. The kobold is now prone in square 3.
3. He uses his move equivalent action to stand up in square 3.
4. The kobold changes his standard action to a move action.
5. The kobold moves right by the fighter to square 9.
6. The kobold’s turn ends.That just doesn’t sound right, does it? At least not to me. Let’s try that again.
Its not right. As soon as the kobold stood up his turn ended as he used his move-action to move and a standard action to stand up. He can't move anymore as he has no actions left.
Example 2:
Setup: A kobold stands 3 squares from a fighter with improved trip (but not combat reflexes).
1. The kobold spends a move action to move (up to his movement for 6 squares) past the fighter.
2. As he leaves square 3 he provokes an AoO from the fighter, who successfully trips him. The kobold is now prone in square 0.
3. He uses his move equivalent action to stand up in square 0.
4. The kobold changes his standard action to a move action.
5. The kobold moves six squares, right by the fighter again, to square 6.
6. The kobold’s turn ends.Ugh, that doesn’t sound right to me either.
Same problem here as soon as the kobold stood up his turn ended. A Move-equivalent actions uses up a MOVE ACTION it is not in and of its self a special action. In other words you don't have a Standard, Move, Swift, and a Move-equivalent action each turn. You have a Standard, Swift, and Move action each turn.
This whole line of, “attacks of opportunity are resolved before the actions that provoke them.”...
Sorry but this is how it works in all versions of D&D sense 3.0 including 4e. It works perfectly and prevents the whole trip with spiked chain from ever being broken unless you decide to change this.
Example 4.
The only thing to say here is that their is no sitting position or on hands and knees inside the rule system. You are either standing or you are prone on the ground. No difference to how ALL medium creatures have a reach of 8ft. Regardless if its a 4ft tall dwarf or a 7ft half-orc. They both still have an 8ft reach. Same here you are either prone or you are standing. More rules are not needed as those two rules solves all situations nicely.
My opinion on the matter is that there's virtually no difference between a monk getting a lunging, tripping, whirlwind attack of opportunity, and just flurrying the deal.
In the prior scenario, he's doing it at 3/4 of full BAB, and he only gets a handful of AoO, and all at a hefty feat cost.
In the latter, he gets a mixture of better and worse attacks, and if he's doing something as desperate as this, I'd hope that the targets he's going after are peons with craptacular AC, anyways, plus he gets the opportunity to instead of making trip attempts, to instead make attacks against opponents who are suffering minuses while being on the ground.
He'll just be not-so-pleasantly surprised when he notices that he knocked down all his soft-cover as a black rain of arrows come his way, or when enemies start learning different attack patterns.
attacks of opportunity are resolved before the actions that provoke them
thrikreed, as ShadowChemosh pointed out already this is the way AoO were defined to work in 3.5. Since Pathfinder hasn't put any detailed rule forth on it it would hold that the rule is kept the same. Again as he pointed out, you had already used up the rest of your actions when you stood up. It's precisely the movement of leaving a threaten square that the AoO gets resolved before, not the entire move action but only the point at which your character provokes that attack.
A monk's flurry of blows is a full round action so it couldn't be used.Medusa's wraith claims the additional attacks as bonus attacks.
So I fail to see where you've made a point.
What I'm trying to say is that Whirlwind attacks intent was to have the player give up their additional attacks yes but it was never meant to force them to give up their attacks of opportunity until their next round. It doesn't matter if the AoO is provoked during their turn or not since an AoO hasn't ever been considered a bonus attack.
Another consideration. Whirlwind specifically states " you also forfeit any bonus or extra attacks granted by other feats, spells, or abilities." A characters AoO is not granted by a feat a spell or an ability. So he should not be denied any AoOs by whirlwind attack. Greater trip only causes your foe to provoke. If you're going to let other people take advantage of that provoke there's no reason your tripper shouldn't be able to take advantage of it.
If it seems like it's 'overpowered' to you, consider that a trip is harder than ever now since it's done against the opponents CMD and that if they fail at anypoint in the whirlwind attack that they could very easily end up prone themselves. Say I use whirlwind attack and intend to trip all my foes within reach (lets claim 3) I succeed on foe#1 and he's tripped (here if I had greater trip I'd get my AoO on him) I fail miserably to trip foe#2 and as a result I'm now prone. Since prone doesn't prevent me from making melee attacks, I still get my attack on #3 though now at a -4 penalty. To me it seems fairly balanced since trip is abit harder to do now and there are consequences to failing still.
A completely successful Whirlwind>trip>AoO is a costly maneuver since you'll need to have gotten both the very costly whirlwind attack feat and the costly greater trip feat. Even still you'd need combat reflexes and a high enough dex to make it worthwhile... It's also a tricky thing to pull off since it can easily screw you just as well as it can screw your opponents.
So again, it seems rather clear to me and if it wasn't intended or the devs determine that it's gamebreaking then they'll errata it so that you can't use combat maneuvers during a whirlwind attack.
|
|
Its not right. As soon as the kobold stood up his turn ended as he used his move-action to move and a standard action to stand up. He can't move anymore as he has no actions left.
Exactly my point! Example 1 was not correct. Thank you for agreeing with me.
Same problem here as soon as the kobold stood up his turn ended. A Move-equivalent actions uses up a MOVE ACTION it is not in and of its self a special action. In other words you don't have a Standard, Move, Swift, and a Move-equivalent action each turn. You have a Standard, Swift, and Move action each turn.
Again, exactly my point! Example 2 was not correct. Thank you for agreeing with me.
Sorry but this is how it works in all versions of D&D sense 3.0 including 4e. It works perfectly and prevents the whole trip with spiked chain from ever being broken unless you decide to change this.
Really? I don’t see anything like what Sprith mentioned. I'll quote it here just so we can have another gander:
Quoted: "It's possible to attempt a trip attack as an attack of opportunity. Fortunately, you can't be tripped while getting up from prone, at least not through the attack of opportunity you provoke. That because attacks of opportunity are resolved before the actions that provoke them (there are a few exceptions..." So no cannot trip a prone person. Also means they get the -4 to ac from any AoO while standing from prone.
This is what I was arguing against. The AoO are not resolved BEFORE but during. My example 1 and 2 were showing how silly things would get if the AoO were resolved BEFORE and not during.
Sigh… Here’s the most relevant sections from the books ShadowChemosh mentions…
From PHB 4.0 (yes I still own one) and never mind the ‘Melee Basic Attack: An opportunity attack is a melee basic attack (page 287).’… which was one way of fixing AoO… continuing on ‘Interrupts Target’s Action: An opportunity action takes place before the target finishes its action. After the opportunity attack, the creature resumes its action. If the target is reduced to 0 hit points or fewer by the opportunity attack, it can’t finish it’s action because it’s dead or dying.’
From PHB 3.5, ‘An attack of opportunity “interrupts” the normal flow of actions in the round. If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character’s turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character’s turn).’
Sorry, I don’t own a PHB 3.0 anymore.
Now let’s compare that to the PRGCR, ‘An attack of opportunity “interrupts” the normal flow of actions in the round. If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character’s turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character’s turn).’
Yup, there has been no change from 3.5 to the PRGCR… So yeah, I’m still at a loss as to where Sprith is getting his information. Whatever the source, I’d say it’s best to forget the source ever existed as Paizo did when they created the PRGCR.
This whole line of, “attacks of opportunity are resolved before the actions that provoke them.”...Sorry but this is how it works in all versions of D&D sense 3.0 including 4e. It works perfectly and prevents the whole trip with spiked chain from ever being broken unless you decide to change this.
Really? I’d ask where it says it works like this but I just proved that in every version of 3.5 and 4.0 I’ve played under the AoO are resolved during the action that provoked them and are not resolved before the action that provoked them.
The only thing to say here is that their is no sitting position or on hands and knees inside the rule system. You are either standing or you are prone on the ground. No difference to how ALL medium creatures have a reach of 8ft. Regardless if its a 4ft tall dwarf or a 7ft half-orc. They both still have an 8ft reach. Same here you are either prone or you are standing. More rules are not needed as those two rules solves all situations nicely.
Really?
"Crawling: You can crawl 5 feet as a move action. Crawling incurs attacks of opportunity from any attackers who threaten you at any point of your crawl. A crawling character is considered prone and must take a move action to stand up, provoking an attack of opportunity."
Just for the sake of completeness, we'll toss in the rogue ability for consideration too:
Rogue Crawl(Ex): While prone, a rogue with this ability can move at half speed. This movement provokes attacks of opportunity as normal. A rogue with this talent can take a 5-foot step while crawling.
This sounds like being on hands and feet to me.
Just because something exists, does not mean it cannot be improved. And if it doesn't exist, it doesn't mean it shouldn't exist.
|
|
The only thing to say here is that their is no sitting position or on hands and knees inside the rule system. You are either standing or you are prone on the ground. No difference to how ALL medium creatures have a reach of 8ft. Regardless if its a 4ft tall dwarf or a 7ft half-orc. They both still have an 8ft reach. Same here you are either prone or you are standing. More rules are not needed as those two rules solves all situations nicely.
This sounds like being on hands and feet to me."Crawling: You can crawl 5 feet as a move action. Crawling incurs attacks of opportunity from any attackers who threaten you at any point of your crawl. A crawling character is considered prone and must take a move action to stand up, provoking an attack of opportunity."
Just for the sake of completeness, we'll toss in the rogue ability for consideration too:
Rogue Crawl(Ex): While prone, a rogue with this ability can move at half speed. This movement provokes attacks of opportunity as normal. A rogue with this talent can take a 5-foot step while crawling.
Oh and I missed on page 195 pg of the PRGCR table 8-6: "Kneeling or sitting... -2 Melee... +2 Ranged".
....
Oh and I missed on page 195 pg of the PRGCR table 8-6: "Kneeling or sitting... -2 Melee... +2 Ranged".
That is something brand new and I had not seen that one. That actually causes more problems than it actually solves. As I can't find anything that says what action it takes to get into a kneeling position or if it provokes an AoO.
Having a Prone or Standing only rules made things very easy to use. Having an in between rule that is not well defined actually makes things worse.
But I do appreciate it being pointed out. Thanks
As to my point in 3.5 you either where standing or prone. Even if you crawled you where still PRONE to the rules. Which meant a +4 bonus for melee to hit you. It was also easy to figure out. If you where standing you where not prone. If not standing then you where prone. Not arguing the definition of the word prone, but it was simply either you where prone or not. Very easy to rule during the game.
Snip
Wow that post is so long it won't even quote correctly. LOL
I had a big post actually but just erased it as you quote the actually rule and then say it does not exist.
Now let’s compare that to the PRGCR, ‘An attack of opportunity “interrupts” the normal flow of actions in the round. If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character’s turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character’s turn).’
The whole thing is really the rule, but the highlight parts are what Spirth is talking about. A simpler way of saying it is that AoO's happen before the action that provoked them, but that is the same as what you quoted yourself.
Another example to show that AoO's happen before. A target moves from square A to B provoking an AoO. You critically hit for 5,000 damage and kill the target. Which square is the dead body lying in A or B? The correct answer is A as he never actually left the square as the AoO happened before the move actually happened.
I quoted the below higher in this thread and its directly from the WotC FAQ that explains why and how a Trip and AoO work against a prone target.
Below is from the 3.5 FAQ about tripping and being prone. Nothing in Pathfinder has changed this rule and it was why the spiked chain was never broken. You could not keep tripping a person to the ground with AoO's. I also covered this above when I went over the the steps of an AoO.3.5 Main FAQ Version 6/30/2008 - Last one put out.
When a character gets up from prone, when does the attack of opportunity take place? When he is still prone? When he is standing? Can the attacker choose when to attack? In one case, the attacker can get a +4 bonus to hit. In the other, he can make another trip attack.
All attacks of opportunity happen before the actions that trigger them (see Chapter 8 in the PH). When you make an attack of opportunity against someone who’s getting up, your target is effectively prone, and therefore cannot be tripped. You could ready an action to trip a prone foe after he gets up, however.
If all the above does not show that AoO happen before the action that provoked them than I am not sure what to show that will. Maybe someone else can explain it better. Or check other sources like Enworld or the WotC rule forums if anything is left for 3.5.
|
|
....
Oh and I missed on page 195 pg of the PRGCR table 8-6: "Kneeling or sitting... -2 Melee... +2 Ranged".That is something brand new and I had not seen that one. That actually causes more problems than it actually solves. As I can't find anything that says what action it takes to get into a kneeling position or if it provokes an AoO.
Having a Prone or Standing only rules made things very easy to use. Having an in between rule that is not well defined actually makes things worse.
But I do appreciate it being pointed out. Thanks
As to my point in 3.5 you either where standing or prone. Even if you crawled you where still PRONE to the rules. Which meant a +4 bonus for melee to hit you. It was also easy to figure out. If you where standing you where not prone. If not standing then you where prone. Not arguing the definition of the word prone, but it was simply either you where prone or not. Very easy to rule during the game.
On page 151 of the PHB 3.5 published by WOTC... Table 8-6: Armor Class Modifiers: "Kneeling or sitting... -2 Melee... +2 Ranged".
It's there too.
|
|
The whole thing is really the rule, but the highlight parts are what Spirth is talking about. A simpler way of saying it is that AoO's happen before the action that provoked them, but that is the same as what you quoted yourself.
It is far more complicated because it creates, for lack of a better term, a termporal loop. The very idea may make things easier to understand for some but the real mechanics of it has examples 1 and 2 occuring.
Why not just say the kobold in square three starts moving to square four and is interrupted by a trip before arriving at square 4? Why not break it down some more... The kobold on in square 3 moves 1 foot of the 5 foot journey to square 5, then provokes, then gets tripped? It's just easier to break it down like this in my opinion that start some debate about 'Which came first, the chicken or the egg?'
Below is from the 3.5 FAQ about tripping and being prone. Nothing in Pathfinder has changed this rule and it was why the spiked chain was never broken. You could not keep tripping a person to the ground with AoO's. I also covered this above when I went over the the steps of an AoO.3.5 Main FAQ Version 6/30/2008 - Last one put out.
When a character gets up from prone, when does the attack of opportunity take place? When he is still prone? When he is standing? Can the attacker choose when to attack? In one case, the attacker can get a +4 bonus to hit. In the other, he can make another trip attack.
All attacks of opportunity happen before the actions that trigger them (see Chapter 8 in the PH). When you make an attack of opportunity against someone who’s getting up, your target is effectively prone, and therefore cannot be tripped. You could ready an action to trip a prone foe after he gets up, however.
Yeah, I never saw or played under that rule. I'm glad I didn't as it's one of the most absurd things I've heard. This is probably why Paizo did not add it to the PRGCR.
|
I think what's causing the confusion is that the AoO happens *during* the move, but *before* the specific 5 feet of movement that provoked it (not to be confused with a 5' step). It wasn't the move action itself that provoked the AoO, it was moving through a threatened area, which didn't happen until the middle of the move. The AoO doesn't take place before the *Action Type* that provoked it, but before the *specific action or part of an action* that provoked it.
In the example given by thrikreed, the AoO would not be provoked in the first 5' of movement, from square 1 to square 2. Neither would it be provoked from square 2 to square 3. It *would* be provoked by the movement from square 3 to square 4, despite this being in the middle of a move action.
It's precisely the movement of leaving a threaten square that the AoO gets resolved before, not the entire move action but only the point at which your character provokes that attack.
So just as Sprith said, the move action would temporarily stop to resolve the AoO. During this time, the kobold would be in square 3, having not yet stepped into square 4.
As long as the kobold is not prevented from continuing the movement (such as by being tripped, knocked unconscious, killed, stunned, etc) it could continue its move action to its intended conclusion. However, if the kobold was prevented from continuing its action due to one of the aforementioned conditions, the move action would be over, and assuming the kobold was not incapacitated, it would have a standard action left for the round (and a swift, but lets not get technical).
Step by step:
1: Kobold declares movement of 30 feet.
2: Kobold begins movement.
3: Movement is interrupted by presence of an armed fighter after the kobold moves through a threatened square.
4: Movement freezes, the fighters takes his AoO.
5: The kobold is now able to continue his movement, exactly as he previously declared in Step 1, assuming he is still able to do so.
If the kobold is not free to continue his movement, his move action is over.
I hope that clears things up for everyone.
|
|
What I'm trying to say is that Whirlwind attacks intent was to have the player give up their additional attacks yes but it was never meant to force them to give up their attacks of opportunity until their next round.
I’ve never said that. Close, but not quite. I did say…
This thread has convinced me that, yes, in my games AoOs will be turned off for the duration of the Whirlwind action.
I did not say until the beginning of the player’s character’s next turn. Just during the full-attack action the player’s character is using whirlwind attack. If that player’s character wants to take AoO while it’s not his turn, I will certainly allow that. I will not allow him to do it during the whirlwind attack.
As to the rest of you post, it's answered in my other posts.
|
|
I think what's causing the confusion is that the AoO happens *during* the move, but *before* the specific 5 feet of movement that provoked it (not to be confused with a 5' step).
If you are going to use the ruling, use the full ruling. The ruling being questioned is:
All attacks of opportunity happen before the actions that trigger them (see Chapter 8 in the PH). When you make an attack of opportunity against someone who’s getting up, your target is effectively prone, and therefore cannot be tripped. You could ready an action to trip a prone foe after he gets up, however.
Note: The ERRATA says, "All attacks of opportunity happen before the actions that trigger them (see Chapter 8 in the PH)." Doesn't it disturb you in the least that the ERRATA states that line can be found in the PHB?!? You are literally quoting someone that is misquoting a the core rule book... Or have you found this in chapter 8 of your PHB? Which page? Are you disturbed yet?
It says, “before the actions”
I cannot find anything in the PHB that says using a move action to move uses a series of 5ft actions. If I did, then I’d have to say that they suddenly fall under the Miscellaneous Action ‘Take a 5-Foot Step’ and suddenly don’t provoke.
I can find no rule in the PHB that says I can exchange 1 action for 6 actions. It would be nice and go right up there with wishing for six wishes.
It says, “before the actions that trigger” and not before the individual 5ft steps segments of a move action when moving your speed. It may not make sense, it may need errata to errata this errata, it may be why this is not errata did not get published in the PRGCR. Whatever else can be said of it, it is quite clear.
It says, “before the actions”
Now, if you can’t accept the whole rule and let everyone do example 1 or example 2, don’t use the rule. Don't go cherry-picking parts (because you like it or it makes sense to you) and then ignore the rest of it.
As long as the kobold is not prevented from continuing the movement (such as by being tripped, knocked unconscious, killed, stunned, etc) it could continue its move action to its intended conclusion. However, if the kobold was prevented from continuing its action due to one of the aforementioned conditions, the move action would be over, and assuming the kobold was not incapacitated, it would have a standard action left for the round (and a swift, but lets not get technical).Step by step:
1: Kobold declares movement of 30 feet.
2: Kobold begins movement.
3: Movement is interrupted by presence of an armed fighter after the kobold moves through a threatened square.
4: Movement freezes, the fighters takes his AoO.
5: The kobold is now able to continue his movement, exactly as he previously declared in Step 1, assuming he is still able to do so.If the kobold is...
Where, in any core rulebook, does it say that being tripped or knocked prone ends your movement?
All the books say is, “Prone: The character is lying on the ground. A prone attacker has a –4 penalty on melee attack rolls and cannot use a ranged weapon (except for a crossbow). A prone defender gains a +4 bonus to Armor Class against ranged attacks, but takes a –4 penalty to AC against melee attacks.
“Standing up is a move-equivalent action that provokes an attack of opportunity.”
Really, look at it. What’s to stop the kobold from continuing the movement? Tell me what page it says it on. The best I can come up with the crawling stuff but no-where in crawling does it preclude other forms of movement while prone. Guess that kobold that you just tripped finishes his 30 feet movement right?
What about if the kobold cast fly on himself, walks to square 3, then provokes an AoO which is used to trip him to prone. Does this halt his movement or can he use his fly movement to ignore prone and fly the remaining 3 squares?
Trip says, “Some creatures – such as oozes, creatures without legs, and flying creatures – cannot be tripped.”
The kobold with [I]fly[/] cast on himself was not flying when he was tripped and knocked prone. So he starts flying, and no where can I find anything about flying creatures being immune to prone – just to trip. So does he
How about if the kobold had a climb speed or a burrowing speed?
Does you opinion change if the kobold was moving underwater and had a swim speed?
Where does it say a prone target cannot use a move action to move his base speed (or the rest of his base speed if tripped on an AoO)?
Where does it say anywhere that a prone target cannot be knocked prone? What if the prone target is kneeling, sitting, or crawling? All conditions found somewhere in the PHB and the PRGCR.
What do you think?
... However this article does: All about trip attacks pt2
You can see in my earlier reply quite plainly where I got my information as all I did was direct quote from it. That information I provided about when a AoO resolves was directly from the online 3.5 article library written by Skip Williams co-creator of 3rd edition. The highlighted text you are arguing with are his words not mine. Read that article as well as his series All about Attack of Opportunities
The full archive is here: Rules of the Game Archive and I highly recommend it as it addresses many misconceptions and has even answered my questions before I've thought to ask about them.
Edit-- Can we get back on topic now?
|
|
... However this article does: All about trip attacks pt2You can see in my earlier reply quite plainly where I got my information as all I did was direct quote from it. That information I provided about when a AoO resolves was directly from the online 3.5 article library written by Skip Williams co-creator of 3rd edition. The highlighted text you are arguing with are his words not mine. Read that article as well as his series All about Attack of Opportunities
The full archive is here: Rules of the Game Archive and I highly recommend it as it addresses many misconceptions and has even answered my questions before I've thought to ask about them.
Finally!!! This is what I was looking for…
Sigh… Darn it! This is obviously outdated material… It directly contradicts the PRGCR in several places including and not limited to: the whole CMB vs. CMD, size bonuses, whether flying creatures being tripped, etc... and since the PRGCR is newer... I'd say it takes precedence.
I’m not even getting into the whole Prone targets immune to being Prone… Which he’s wrong about. He might as well have said Stunned targets are immune to Stun or Poisoned targets are immune to Poison.
I will admit that there are a few points he makes that can adapted to fill the gaps the PRGCR didn’t fill in… sort of. Sigh.
Edit-- Can we get back on topic now?
Sure the topic is "Whirlwind Attack and Combat Reflexes."
I happen to be looking at a player's 8th level human fighter build that has a trip CMB of +21 (Str Mod +8 (22 Str, +4 stat item), BAB +8, fighter weapon training +1 (pole arms), feats +4). He has Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Greater Trip, Improved Trip, Lunge, Mobility, Spring Attack, and Whirlwind Attack. With two spells - Enlarge Person and Fly, he adds a huge area to the reach and becomes immune to being tripped back. He can take a total of 3 AoO per round (1 + 2 from Dex).
So when he attacks and trips everything within 5 squares of him ((5ft reach + 5ft reach from Guisarme)*2 for Enlarge Person + 5ft from lunge) with his +22 (21, +2 for Enlarge Person), what's the draw back? He can’t attack within 10 feet of that? Maybe he might not roll their CMD? Unless they are built for CMD, this fighter is pretty much shooting for 9's or less (a lot less probably).
The 9th level druid decided to help him out by casting Animal Growth on his horse (animal companion) and let's the fighter ride him around. It increases the fighter's reach by another square since the fighter counts as being in every square the huge horse is in and there is a pretty strong argument that it totally eliminates not being able to attack adjacent targets but that’s not on topic. Keep in mind the fighter is still flying and thus still immune to counter trips.
Well, the 9th level human rogue said “Anything you can do I can do better...” His CMB is only +14 (Dex Mod +8 (22 Dex, +4 stat item), BAB +6) so he only selectively trips casters. He has Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Whip, Mobility, Spring Attack, Weapon Focus: Whip, and Whirlwind Attack (not sure which one was picked with the rogue's Combat Trick). With three spells - Enlarge Person, Fly, and Improved Invisibility, he's up to 9 squares reach, immune to being tripped, and sneak attacking with every attack. He's swinging at +19 to hit and ignores the targets Dex to AC. He does 1d3+2 (+2 whip) +3 (str) + 5d6 (sneak attack) + 5 (Bleeding Attack, ignores damage reduction) for an average of 29.5 damage… Compared to a 9th level wizards fireball which is only ¼ the area and averages 31.5 damage it’s broken… Since the rogue can do this 9 rounds for every casting of [I]Improved Invisibility[/].
Is that the topic we’re talking about?
I happen to be looking at a player's 8th level human fighter build that has a trip CMB of +21 (Str Mod +8 (22 Str, +4 stat item), BAB +8, fighter weapon training +1 (pole arms), feats +4). He has Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Greater Trip, Improved Trip, Lunge, Mobility, Spring Attack, and Whirlwind Attack. With two spells - Enlarge Person and Fly, he adds a huge area to the reach and becomes immune to being tripped back. He can take a total of 3 AoO per round (1 + 2 from Dex).
So when he attacks and trips everything within 5 squares of him ((5ft reach + 5ft reach from Guisarme)*2 for Enlarge Person + 5ft from lunge) with his +22 (21, +2 for Enlarge Person), what's the draw back? He can’t attack within 10 feet of that? Maybe he might not roll their CMD? Unless they are built for CMD, this fighter is pretty much shooting for 9's or less (a lot less probably).
I don't think that reach and enlarge person works the way you think it does.
A humanoid creature whose size increases to Large has a space of 10 feet and a natural reach of 10 feet. This spell does not change the target's speed.
Enlarge person will increase a characters natural reach, but only their natural reach, and it is most definitely not multiplicative with their weapon.
Well, the 9th level human rogue said “Anything you can do I can do better...” His CMB is only +14 (Dex Mod +8 (22 Dex, +4 stat item), BAB +6) so he only selectively trips casters. He has Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Whip, Mobility, Spring Attack, Weapon Focus: Whip, and Whirlwind Attack (not sure which one was picked with the rogue's Combat Trick).
Even using Combat Trick to get one bonus feat, that's still more feats than a 9th level rogue can possibly have. A human 9th level rogue should have 6 normally, (Human Bonus, 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, and 9th) 7 if they took Combat Trick. But Combat Trick cannot be taken multiple times, and that rogue has at least 8 feats.
With three spells - Enlarge Person, Fly, and Improved Invisibility, he's up to 9 squares reach, immune to being tripped, and sneak attacking with every attack.
You may want to re-read the whip description.
Whip: A whip deals no damage to any creature with an armor bonus of +1 or higher or a natural armor bonus of +3 or higher. The whip is treated as a melee weapon with 15-foot reach, though you don't threaten the area into which you can make an attack. In addition, unlike most other weapons with reach, you can use it against foes anywhere within your reach (including adjacent foes). Using a whip provokes an attack of opportunity, just as if you had used a ranged weapon.
So first of all, no sneak attacks against anyone with armor, or natural armor of +3 or better. 2nd, no threatened area, so no attacks of opportunity, period. Third, you provoke attacks of opportunity, but that may not be an issue with his reach. Fourth, the reach for an enlarged character using a whip should be 20 ft. not 45 ft. (again, it's +5 base reach, not double your total reach). Lastly, if you check the weapons table in the equipment chapter, you'll note that Whips only deal subdual damage, so even against unarmored targets, the worst he can do is knock them out.
He's swinging at +19 to hit and ignores the targets Dex to AC. He does 1d3+2 (+2 whip) +3 (str) + 5d6 (sneak attack) + 5 (Bleeding Attack, ignores damage reduction) for an average of 29.5 damage… Compared to a 9th level wizards fireball which is only ¼ the area and averages 31.5 damage it’s broken… Since the rogue can do this 9 rounds for every casting of [I]Improved Invisibility[/].
Note the objections above. I think your players are either A> getting a bit overexited and missing important details, or B> Trying to pull the wool over your eyes.