|
| 11 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A monster, X, threatens a prone character, Y, who has a standing ally, Z, that is adjacent to character Y but on the opposite side of character Y (placement is the battle grid is XYZ). Character Z is not being threatened by anyone and monster X does not have reach. Character Z wants to drag the willing character Y directly back and away from monster X. Does character Y provoke an attack of opportunity from monster X when leaving the threatened square?
My ruling is that because character Y left a threatened square, an attack of opportunity was provoked.
It was brought to my attention that the combat maneuver Drag simulates the same situation. In the case of the combat maneuver, it is a monster X who is prone being dragged by character Y with neither being threatened by any other combatants. The combat maneuver provokes an attack of opportunity from the monster to the character when it is initiated (for two willing characters this would not occur), however, paragraph 3 under the Drag section states that "an enemy being moved by a drag does not provoke an attack of opportunity because of the movement unless you possess the Greater Drag feat." If an enemy does not provoke because of movement, why would an ally?
Here's the link to Drag, if needed.
So, does a prone PC being dragged out of threatened square provoke an AoO from the creature threatening it?
I would say so. The 'spirit' of the rule is that if you're doing something that distracts you from defending yourself properly while in reach of an opponent, they get to whack you. Getting dragged out of a square means that you're not in control of your destiny, so I would say a good carpet beating by anyone in range is warranted.
|
|
I would say so. The 'spirit' of the rule is that if you're doing something that distracts you from defending yourself properly while in reach of an opponent, they get to whack you.
I agree and that was my ruling at the table.
However, this situation seems to imitate grappling. The section in the Core Rulebook about moving a grappled foe does not state anything about AoO, which implies that leaving a threatened square, grappled or not, still provokes. Performing a Drag maneuver, essentially the same as grapple, seems to indicate the opposite. The result is two rules that appear to yield different results for the same activity.
|
The section in the Core Rulebook about moving a grappled foe does not state anything about AoO, which implies that leaving a threatened square, grappled or not, still provokes.
Correct. However, the grapple rules DO say that moving an opponent through (or to) a square they consider dangerous will grant them an extra grapple check to break free (which I assume also means an extra Escape Artist check should they choose to use that skill instead).
Performing a Drag maneuver, essentially the same as grapple, seems to indicate the opposite. The result is two rules that appear to yield different results for the same activity.
Because the Drag maneuver only considers the person being dragged as an enemy. Generally when you move an enemy via an action (Bull Rush or Shield Bash, for example) their movement doesn't provoke as it's ripe for abuse.
I would treat this as "they are fighting against being moved just like they'd be fighting anyone else". While moving an ally is more of "I'm going to stop squirming around so my friend can move me easily (i.e. without any massive checks)".
From the drag description "An enemy being moved by a drag does not provoke an attack of opportunity because of the movement unless you possess the Greater Drag feat. You cannot move a creature into a square that is occupied by a solid object or obstacle. If there is another creature in the way of your movement, the drag ends adjacent to that creature."
|
|
When I weigh the idea that dragging an ally out of combat as a standard action which would not provoke AoO against the other actions normally needed to get out of a prone position (standing up provokes, crawling provokes, using Acrobatics is a DC 20 check and a full round action) it seems that in the spirit of Rules As Intended it should provokes even though Rules As Written, it may not.
It also seems as though the rules governing drag are there to prevent it's abuse when dragging a prone foe adjacent to the PC's allies and doesn't seem to be intended for use on an ally. However, that is just my interpretation.
And while Drag is in the section of the APG which is listed as optional, and therefore not necessarily "canon" for a disapproving DM, it is legal for Pathfinder Society play therefore could be problematic for that environment.
How do I get a ruling on this from an official source? If I have over looked the proper process, I apologize in advance. I did search the message boards for similar topics and didn't find an official ruling.
The FAQ button is your friend for drawing attention to a question. You are correct that the rules do not cover the draging of a friend, but it would be odd that I cannot hit a monster being dragged past, but the monster can hit a player being dragged past.
Moving while prone is possible using the Acrobatics skill:
"In addition, you can move through a threatened square without provoking an attack of opportunity from an enemy by using Acrobatics. When moving in this way, you move at half speed. You can move at full speed by increasing the DC of the check by 10. You cannot use Acrobatics to move past foes if your speed is reduced due to carrying a medium or heavy load or wearing medium or heavy armor. If an ability allows you to move at full speed under such conditions, you can use Acrobatics to move past foes. You can use Acrobatics in this way while prone, but doing so requires a full-round action to move 5 feet, and the DC is increased by 5."
So moving through the threaten square would be Opponents CMD +5 (for being prone)
Had a similar situation come up in a game last night. This time though the ally being dragged was still standing. In my opinion there is no doubt that there is going to be an attack of opportunity granted, in our case the well armored fighter was doing the dragging and much prefered to be the one taking the risk of an AOO instead of the badly hurt mage he was trying to drag.
In the end we decided to handle it like a Bull Rush attempt against the monster, in essence an attempt to barge in between the two. I thought this was quite fair (speaking as the Fighter here). I am curious how others handle combat manuevers against allys.
I'm resurrecting this thread because I faced it yesterday as a GM: The barbarian dropped to negative hit points, the paladin wanted to drag him to safety, and the demons surrounding them had reach weapons and instructions to "destroy what they (the PCs) love", so it was obvious that they'd use their AoO's on the unconscious barbarian as he was dragged.
After much debate and reading this thread, I used an alternate form of Nitzle's post: The paladin rolled a CMB check against the demons' CMDs, and even after failing I gave the barbarian 20% cover.
It was a moot point: The demons rolled terribly, so had to spend their next round flying after the barbarian and finishing him off, but it was enough of an argument I'd love to hear what people thought of this.
(Normally I don't have monsters attack PCs who obviously aren't coming back into the fight any time soon, but he'd dropped their mistress and they had it out for him. Plus the "destroy" thing made it pretty clear.)
I'd treat it as a drag maneuver with a willing target. No provoke. I don't see how it violates the spirit of whatever.
I'd treat it as an AoO against the character doing the dragging. This would represent him covering and defending his friend as he drags him to safety.
I've had PCs use the drag maneuver for this in the past, but looking at it again and reading over some of the rules I think I like a different solution a little better: treat it as a "Manipulate an Item (move heavy object)" move action and use the pulling/dragging rules in the Additional Rules section under carrying capacity rules. As far as how far you can move while dragging, I couldn't find anything specific so that's probably up to the GM.
I would also say that enemies would get AoOs against a PC who is dragged away from them in this way based on the rule that moving out of a threatened square provokes. The general rule on provoking doesn't directly specify that moving out of a threatened square due to the actions of someone else... the various forced movement combat maneuvers would be specific exceptions to that rule.
Agreed, unless they have Improved Drag.
I made an account just to post on this thread.
I'm working on a character focused on combat maneuvers. After reading over the Drag maneuver as well as AoO I've come to the conclusion that dragging an individual out of a threatened square does not cause AoO against the individual being dragged. Drag specifies that without Improved Drag there are no AoO on the target(I assume when dragging an ally you still don't provoke AoO with this feat). When a PC reaches negative HP they do no provoke AoO with the limp dying bodies. Five foot steps do not provoke AoO. All of these things I believe correlate with dragging an ally. I personally would treat the event as a drag attempt against an ally, who willingly forgoes their save for success. The dragger however, is under a medium/heavy load and encumbered may not have full movement. Also, the dragger provokes AoO unless using the Improved Drag feat. Finally, I don't see any reason for applying additional penalties to a prone, unconscious, bleeding, individual with lowered AC and presumably a few additional problems, when there is a (most likely) healthy and more threatning target attempting to drag them away.
Interestingly, lying unconscious next to a bad guy doesn't provoke an AoO from him either, despite your complete inability to defend yourself at all, let alone properly... the AoO rules do tend to break down a bit in the logic department when you start to think about them too much...
AoO's don't really make sense at all when you think about it. What provokes an attack of opportunity should actually just cause you to become flat footed until the end of your next turn, not allow a free attack
I'd run it as closest to the Move a Heavy Object or Pick Up an Item options on the combat chart on page 183 of the Core Rulebook. So the character being dragged does not provoke, but the one *doing* the dragging does provoke.
but objects never provoke AoO, so you can't do that either. Yur right about the person doing the dragging though, they would certainly provoke
From the drag description "An enemy being moved by a drag does not provoke an attack of opportunity because of the movement unless you possess the Greater Drag feat. You cannot move a creature into a square that is occupied by a solid object or obstacle. If there is another creature in the way of your movement, the drag ends adjacent to that creature."
its only written that way because dragging a friendly isn't incorperated into the rule. If anything it should be flipped when dragging a friendly, so that they do provoke unless you have Greater Drag in which case they would not
It clearly states that the movement from dragging doesn't cause AoOs.
It clearly states that the movement from dragging doesn't cause AoOs.
no it doesn't, it clearly states that moving an enemy doesn't cause the enemy to provoke. What's clear about it is the specification of "enemy"
I admit that it could apply to friendlies too, I just don't agree that its clear on friendlies
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It clearly states that the movement from dragging doesn't cause AoOs.no it doesn't, it clearly states that moving an enemy doesn't cause the enemy to provoke. What's clear about it is the specification of "enemy"
I admit that it could apply to friendlies too, I just don't agree that its clear on friendlies
If you accept that Drag can even be used on an ally. Then you have already made equivalent ‘drag an ally’ and "drag a foe".
You have already accepted that the “ally” is being treated as a “foe” for the purpose of this maneuver.
So, if you accept that an ally can be the target of this maneuver, then, when this maneuver is performed on them... they do not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Whether or not this is a valid maneuver on an ally is a better question.
But if you accept that it can be used on them, then they do not provoke.
Whether or not this is a valid maneuver on an ally is a better question.
Are suggesting that it is not possible to drag an ally because it is not specified under the drag maneuver?
Are suggesting that it is not possible to drag an ally because it is not specified under the drag maneuver?Whether or not this is a valid maneuver on an ally is a better question.
Not really.
I'm suggesting that if you get hung up on terms like "foe" and "enemy"... then you should be asking if you can use the maneuver... not whether or not they provoke.
The ability explicitly states that the movement you cause the target of this maneuver doesn't provoke.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I'm not saying that you can't use Drag on an ally either. What I'm saying is that its not the action itself that does or doesnt provoke, its the skill level of the dragger. Its confusing because they didn't consider it being used on an ally in the rules so its worded specifically for an enemy.
A person not skilled at dragging does it poorly, the enemy doesn't provoke. Once they have improved their skill level with Greater Drag then the enemy does provoke
To flip it an use it on an ally, A person not skilled at dragging still does it poorly which causes the ally to provoke. Once they have improved their skill level with Greater Drag then their ally no longer provokes
If you apply the same reasoning for the rule being what it is, this is how it would be done with an ally
I'm not saying that you can't use Drag on an ally either. What I'm saying is that its not the action itself that does or doesnt provoke, its the skill level of the dragger. Its confusing because they didn't consider it being used on an ally in the rules so its worded specifically for an enemy.
A person not skilled at dragging does it poorly, the enemy doesn't provoke. Once they have improved their skill level with Greater Drag then the enemy does provoke
To flip it an use it on an ally, A person not skilled at dragging still does it poorly which causes the ally to provoke. Once they have improved their skill level with Greater Drag then their ally no longer provokes
If you apply the same reasoning for the rule being what it is, this is how it would be done with an ally
That doesn't make sense either though.
By default being dragged doesn't provoke.
But you can get so good at forcefully dragging someone that you also learn how to cause it to provoke.
By the same token, dragging an ally by default wouldn't cause them to provoke. And you simply wouldn't want to drag them so forcefully that it causes them to provoke, although you could if you wanted to with greater drag.
Greater Drag adds an effect that isn't present by default. It should not even be consulted in discussions about the default maneuver.
Imagine for a moment that the feat Greater Drag doesn't exist. Would the question of whether dragging an ally provokes or not even exist anymore?
Yur not understanding the reason it provokes
By default it doesn't provoke when dragging an enemy, and that's because by default yur character sucks at something he's not taken special care to train in. Apply that logic to flipping the rule and dragging an ally and it causes the ally to provoke. If you happen to become skilled at it then you are good enough to drag him safely and also good enough to force the enemy to provoke
If greater drag did not exist then you would always suck at dragging. AoO would never be in your favor, you would cause an ally to provoke but not an enemy. It doesn't cause my theory to change in any way
Also Remy, it does not explicitly state that "the movement you cause the target of this maneuver doesn't provoke". "Enemy" and "Target" have very specific and important meanings of their own in PF. If you don't believe me, hit chapter 9 of the CRB.
But there's nothing anywhere saying that sucking at doing something will provoke AoO if and only if you don't want it to. Either something provokes or it doesn't.
that's true, but they aren't going to print every formula and philosophy they used to create every single rule.
I'm not saying that sucking at something causes you to provoke, I'm saying that some special actions, such as this maneuver, are to complex to use a flat rule. Skill level must be factored in to determine whether or not it provokes.
Shooting from range would never provoke, no matter how bad you are at it. Shooting while adjacent to an enemy does, unless you are skilled at it illustrated by the Sword and Pistol feat. This is similar to dragging and the Greater Drag feat. The difference is that dragging can be flipped to use on an ally, which is a rare concept
This does need to be addressed by someone with authority on the matter. I by no means have that, this is just how I think the rule would best mimic reality. Its not overly complex, you simply flip the order of AoO when used on an ally
Can you offer a single example anywhere in the rules of "flip the AoO when used on an ally"?
I'm not sure, I'll try. It might not matter though because this is a pretty unique maneuver involving a PC, an ally, and an enemy which in my opinion warrant accommodations just as unique. Using other rulings as a standard is certainly a great tool, but I think this is a case that requires special attention. The FAQ has been qued
I'd like to add that I actually don't like the way drag works at all. I don't think the target should ever provoke, not even with greater drag. I think the dragger should provoke unless he does have greater drag. The target should simply be flat footed or take a dex penalty
I know this isn't how it works, just wanted to point out that I don't really agree with either of the methods dicussed above. The reason I didn't mention this before is because the RAW only allow for the 2 interpretations in debate above. This would be a complete houserule
As a general rule, forced movement does not provoke, unless the person doing the moving has a feat or special ability that says otherwise.
As a general rule, forced movement does not provoke, unless the person doing the moving has a feat or special ability that says otherwise.
this would answer the question as to the RAW then. Where can we reference this?
for some reason my edit button is gone, but I take this^ statement back. Its not a forced movement if the ally is willing
for some reason my edit button is gone, but I take this^ statement back. Its not a forced movement if the ally is willingTwo issues:
1. By definition, unconscious implies willing, so that creates problems for dragging unconscious enemies.
2. "Forced" in this case is a term of art, that does not refer to willingness or unwillingness, but to whether the movement is one you are taking or consists of some other force or entity moving you.
ah yes, I see. However you could possibly drag a conscious ally as well. Perhaps they have been tripped and are low on HP. Unable to take a full attack from the surrounding enemies, an ally who acts before the enemy could drag you out of the hot zone. Or perhaps they are just prone and stunned
So I know this is an old thread but I just had this come up in my game so I thought I'd share my rant.
touching someone because they let you and lifting a 200lb person to any position in reach have much different effects and results. By your interpretation a 30lb gnome could move a 300lb half orc to any square he wanted as long as the half-orc allowed it. I don't even want to get, in to the bag of rats argument or the peasant rail gun debate. You may be correct by RAW and we play by RAW in PFS...but your reasoning is completely unsound in my opinion ommit.
This is why I encouraged you to reach out if you disagreed.
Lastly, just think of what you guys would feel like if I threw rank after rank of orcs in front of you in a narrow hall. Soon as you damage one..the other one behind him has a readied action to "reposition" him effectively creating and endless "congo-line" of no AoO's...it's all legal and perfectly acceptable until you have to face it. Not to mention..it equates to free movement for the subject of the reposition. Lets imagine this: a large creature and another creature begin combat. The large creature isn't fighting (takes fighting defensively) but the other is. Well large creature can basically position up to a huge dragon anywhere on the battlefield within his reach right (yep according to ommit he gives up the CMD effectively giving the Dragon every spot that's empty within reach of the large creature. So the large moves the Dragon from one side of the battle field to the other with no AoO because well the rules so the dragon now gets flank with one of the with the large creature he plopped the dragon right over your messily monk with combat reflexes. Now the Dragon on his turn has a full attack. Because he didn't need any of his own movement.
Oh yeah! I can position myself without fear of any AoO's as long as I have a buddy near and he uses an action. It's so funny that there's so many class abilities and feats that, do similar things! But, somehow we've stumbled across a hack that was right in the core rules all along! I am sure that, was there intent (smile wink)..
that's to say as long as 2 players are together and one is willing to sacrifice an action.... they can move anywhere on the battlefield within the players reach, with total impunity. Is that about right? Is that what was intended here? Cause it's a terrible rule if it was designed as such..still makes me wonder why they mentioned the word enemy or foe 5 times in the design of the rule... if that was their intention...maybe they just knew the players would eventually tick off the GM so bad he'd view them all as foes after a while...LOL..or it could mean just that...it was intended for enemies # this is not a good interpretation of the rules sorry.