As far as I know, AOOs do not provoke AOOs (unless there's a feat for it.)
If a PC is engaged in melee combat with a creature that has a number of Attack of Opportunities because of feats and the creature has reach. Does the PC that is engaged in melee combat get an attack of opportunity on the creature if the creature decides to make an AOO?
Making an attack of opportunity does not normally provoke.
If the creature elects to use his attack of opportunity to do something that does provoke, then it provokes.
Example:
Ranger walks up to an Ogre. Ogre gets an AoO when the ranger attempts to leave his threatened square. Ogre does not provoke.
Ranger then begins to cast a spell. Ogre gets an AoO because ranger is performing a distracting action in a threatened square. If Ogre just hits ranger, then ogre will not provoke. But if Ogre instead makes a Trip attempt (without the Improved Trip feat) then he provokes an AoO from Ranger. If ranger just hits ogre (with a weapon), he does not provoke. If instead, ranger elects to use his AoO to trip the ogre, he provokes. Continue until someone runs out of AoOs, then resolve in reverse order.
Grick has the right of it. The act of an AoO itself does not provoke (oh god, if it did...) but if you do something as part of the AoO that provokes, it'll provoke.
Because an AoO doesn't provoke an AoO unless you use it to do something that specifically provokes AoO, like tripping without the improved trip feat. Because simply making a melee attack does not provoke an AoO, a regular AoO used to make a normal attack does not provoke an AoO.
Grick, does the Ranger have to cease casting to take advantage of his opportunity to take an AoO? seems like he should.
The AoO happens "before" the spellcasting starts, so no. Yea, it's weird that he can make >1 attacks before casting his spell, but it's just an abstraction.
If the ogre takes a regular attack as the AoO, the ranger does not get any AoO because attacking normally doesn't provoke. The ogre doesn't do anything that provokes AoO's. If the ogre decides to try to trip the fighter, the ranger gets an AoO.
Chobemaster: RAW, no. The AoO happens before the ranger begins the very casting act (see the discussion on AoO tripping prone opponents), so the ranger gets its AoO, then it casts.
We are fast approaching "Ask your GM" territory.
Grick, other than the explicit case of full attacks, do you know of any general rule that says you can change your actions after you've started them?
|
I am sorry I did not explain myself clearly.
Example as above;
Ranger is engaged in melee with Ogre, Fighter moves into ogre's threatened square to attack the ogre. If the ogre decides to make an AoO on the fighter, does the Ranger get AoO?
And if not why not?
Why would he? Attacking doesn't inherently provoke AoO. If the Ogre did something like a Combat Maneuver it'd provoke, but normal attacks don't do that.
Grick, following on, then, if the Ogre's AoO was instead a grab (w/o Improved Grab) and predictably ends in the ranger being grappled, but he hasn't ACTUALLY started casting yet (a necessary conclusion if he can take some other action), is the spell still "burned"?
You can still cast spells while grappled, provided you make your concentration check (you're presumed to have one hand free). You can't cast spells if you're the one doing the grappling, though. (Still Spell notwithstanding.)
What if the Ogre's trip attempt triggers an AoO and the ranger attacks with it, crits and kills the Ogre and then no longer wants to cast his spell, presumably he can decide not to cast it.
This seems reasonable.
Can the ranger PRETEND to start to begin to commence casting, if he wanted to?
Why not? I see no reason why a character couldn't choose to let their guard down and provoke an attack of opportunity. Maybe make a Bluff check (similar to Feint) to see whether the opponent believes you're really casting, but they get the AoO regardless. Seems like a pretty desperate gambit; if the ogre chose to pound your face in instead, you gained nothing from the ruse.
Also note that a non-Improved maneuver only provokes from the target of said maneuver, not from everyone else.
Well, there goes that gambit. : D
Combat chapter, Standard Actions, Cast a Spell:
Concentration: "If you start casting a spell but something interferes with your concentration, you must make a concentration check or lose the spell."
Attacks of Opportunity: "Generally, if you cast a spell, you provoke attacks of opportunity from threatening enemies. If you take damage from an attack of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 10 + points of damage taken + the spell's level) or lose the spell."
and under Full Round Actions, Cast a Spell:
"You only provoke attacks of opportunity when you begin casting a spell, even though you might continue casting for at least 1 full round. While casting a spell, you don't threaten any squares around you.
This action is otherwise identical to the cast a spell action described under Standard Actions."
Since the part about not threatening squares is under full round actions, it could be said that it doesn't apply to standard action spells.
As for changing actions, I don't know.
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).
Since you only provoke at the beginning of casting a spell, it could be understood that it's not actually the casting, but the preparation of casting that provokes. So if you start casting, provoke, he provokes, then you kill him, you don't expend the spell.
It's also reasonable to assume that in order to provoke from casting, you must have begin casting. The AoO interrupts it, rather than taking place before it happens like a Ready action would. So the decision to cast has been made, but you could change any decisions that are made at the end of casting (range, target, area, effect, version, and so forth).
Because it's an abstraction of the fact that everyone is actually acting at the same time.
But perhaps more importantly, that would make every AoO a chain of AoOs.
The ogre attacks the fighter, provoking an AoO from taking the AoO. The ranger then attacks the ogre, provking. The ogre then attacks back, provoking again...
Why is making a an AoO not considered a distracting action?
Why is attacking something not considered a distracting action?
Because it's what combatants do. They attack. All day long. Attacking something doesn't provoke.
During combat, you're constantly fighting. Attacking, defending, moving about within your squares.
When you stop and cast a spell, you're not fighting, so opponents can take advantage of this.
When you're hitting something with your sword, you're still fighting, there's nothing to take advantage of.
When you try something fancy that you're not good at (like an untrained combat maneuver, or an un-improved unarmed strike) then you're distracted by not being good at it, so the opponent can smack you.
The damage the ranger takes from the Ogre's AoO would cause a concentration check to be made for the spell. Therefore, the AoO happens immediately after the ranger begins casting. The ranger could still make his AoO, and I would apply the "vigorous motion" concentration check if he chose to take the AoO.
"Injury: If you take damage while trying to cast a spell, you must make a concentration check with a DC equal to 10 + the damage taken + the level of the spell you're casting. If you fail the check, you lose the spell without effect. The interrupting event strikes during spellcasting ... if it comes in response to your casting the spell (such as an attack of opportunity provoked by the spell or a contingent attack, such as a readied action)."
Also, AoOs as Grick quoted continue with the characters turn after being resolved. So the Ranger does finish casting his spell.
My house rule, is that you can freely give up an action. So in that case, the Ranger would lose his standard action, but would not expend the spell slot.
Also strange that in round 2 of casting, you don't provoke again.
A way to think of this is it's not the actual spellcasting that provokes, it's preparing to cast. You start getting your materials out and thinking of the words, etc. That provokes because you're distracted. Once you're casting, you're performing a known action and can pay attention enough to defend yourself. And if the spell is very involved, taking a long time to finish, you can't easily pause to take a stab at something.
Odd that if someone attacks me when I start to begin to commence to cast under an AoO and damages me, I need to make a concentration check (i.e. I'm committed to the casting) (and presumably same if I'm attacked via a readied action, but the quote is silent on that, see textual consistency point), but if I'm tripped, I can choose not to cast.
I'm not sure what this means.
If you start casting, provoke, and something hits you, you need a concentration check. If you fail, you lose the spell.
If you start casting, provoke, and something trips you, most people rule you need a vigorous motion concentration check. If you fail, you lose the spell.
If you succeed at either of those concentration checks, you could finish casting, or possibly choose to lose the spell. (I'm not sure why you would, though)
Also strange that taking damage potentially ruins the spell, but swinging my own weapon does not...a conundrum they somewhat APPEAR to be attempting to resolve w/ the "not threatening while casting."
I imaging getting hit with a sword is more distracting than trying to hit someone that stopped paying attention.
|
But the ogre is not paying attention to the Ranger, the ogre decides to attack the fighter the ranger is already engaged in combat, so to me the ogre is performing a distracting action by "reaching" to attack the fighter.
Remember, this isn't real world, it's PF. There is no facing in PF/DnD 3.5. Really, with a fighter, ranger, and an ogre, the only thing that would provoke an AoO is movement, which is leaving a threatened square. (Of course, the ranger could cast a spell, yadda, yadda, but we are trying to impart the basics here.) If the Ogre doesn't move, he doesn't provoke. Plus, the Ogre isn't "reaching" anywhere...his natural reach is 10ft. He's just big.
But the ogre is not paying attention to the Ranger, the ogre decides to attack the fighter the ranger is already engaged in combat, so to me the ogre is performing a distracting action by "reaching" to attack the fighter.
The ogre only provokes if he does something the rules say provokes.
Performing a Distracting Act: "Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Table: Actions in Combat notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity."
Table: Actions in Combat: Attack (melee) - Attack of Opportunity: No
|
But the ogre is not paying attention to the Ranger, the ogre decides to attack the fighter the ranger is already engaged in combat, so to me the ogre is performing a distracting action by "reaching" to attack the fighter.
Basically, that's not how the rules are designed to work. Being distracted by multiple opponents in melee is simulated/modeled by the Flanking rules rather than the AoO system.
Dontheox, I think you might benefit greatly from a close reading of the combat chapter of the core rulebook. You can read it online by following that link.
Please don't take this as an insult or dismissal. We don't mind answering your questions, but it'll be more productive for all of us if there's a basic understanding of the terms and mechanics involved.
Just a caveat, attacking with a ranged weapon *does* provoke against creatures adjacent to the person using the ranged weapon. Each time they make an attack with a ranged weapon, they provoke. Same for making an unarmed strike if you don't have Improved Unarmed Strike.
But if you are just swinging your sword? That does not provoke.
The reason this wasn't really brought up is because you can't normally use a ranged weapon or an unarmed strike for AoOs.
Just a caveat, attacking with a ranged weapon *does* provoke against creatures adjacent to the person using the ranged weapon.
Not only adjacent, but any creature that threatens your square(s).
Each time they make an attack with a ranged weapon, they provoke. Same for making an unarmed strike if you don't have Improved Unarmed Strike.
Exception: (unimproved) Unarmed Strikes only provoke from the creature you're attacking.
It doesn't. I didn't say it did. I said that moving from the 10ft threatened square into the 5ft threatened square provokes. Whether the ranger attacks or not is irrelevant to that point.I know you did not say that but the rules do, in the list of what does and does not provoke a AoO. A melee attack does not provoke
You haven't attacked yet if you're moving towards him. You haven't even tried to attack him yet, you are just moving towards him.
dontheox,
Being prepared for combat has nothing to do with whether someone gets an aoo. There is a chart in the combat section which shows which actions provoke aoo's. Movement out of a threatened square is one of those actions which provoke aoo's. So, the ranger is prepared for combat, and attacking with a weapon he is proficient with is not going to provoke, but getting within melee range of the ogre means he must leave a threatened square, thus he provokes an aoo from the ogre.
Because he isn't fully prepared for every single action that could occur in combat.
You can't just say "I don't provoke an AoO" and expect it to be true, any more than a level 1 fighter can just say "I cast time stop" and actually cast time stop.
I assume you're trying to understand AoOs, and not looking for a way to avoid them by twisting the wording and intent of the rules. The Attack of Opportunities section and the Actions In Combat table explain, with diagrams, what AoOs are and how they work.
Moving out of a threatened square provokes an AoO from the threatening creature. Making a non-unarmed strike melee attack against that creature does not provoke, however if you moved out of one of their threatened squares to get close to them, you will provoke unless you took a 5' step since a 5' step to leave a threatened square explicitly does not provoke. (Of course, once you take a 5' you cannot move, and if you've moved that round, you can't take a 5' step.)
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
My friend does not believe it is fair for any creature regardless of size or reach to get an attack of opportunity "IF" the PC is running up to engage in melee since he is prepared for combat.
Perhaps I can help here.
Suppose I'm wielding my comically-large pencil and you want to stab me with your sword (perhaps because you hate scholastic lizards, but that's beside the point). You approach.
Being a medium creature with only 5ft reach, I only threaten the 5ft squares immediately adjacent to me. So when you come up to me to lay the smackdown, you enter my threatened area, but don't leave my threatened area, so I don't get an AoO against you.
We're on even terms, and we engage. Just like your friend wants.
But what happens when my mage buddy casts enlarge person on me? Suddenly I'm 12ft tall, I can eat babies for breakfast, and I can hit you from a mile away. (And by "a mile", I mean "10ft".)
Sure, you can walk up to me... but you have to get right next to me (just like before), except this time I've got these long arms and an even more oversized pencil. If I can hit you from 10 feet away, and I'm watching you come up to me, why would I wait and let you get all the way to me? Haven't you (or rather, your friend) seen the movies where the guy has to approach the giant dragon or whatever and is dodging the claws and tail on his approach?
That's the AoO from moving from 10ft to 5ft.
If you want to avoid that, you can move into my 10ft area and stop. Then on your next turn, take a "5ft step" (make sure you know what that is and how it differs from normal movement) to become adjacent to me. This is slower and more careful, but doesn't provoke the extra attack.
Alternatively, if you're trained in Acrobatics and wearing light or no armor, you can use Acrobatics to tumble through the wide swath of my pencil without leaving yourself open.
Another option is the Mobility feat, which will increase your AC against this type of situation, representing the guy advancing on the dragon and sidestepping each preemptive attack as it comes until he's finally in striking distance.
And finally, if you're the GM, you could just get rid of AoO's altogether. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The basic description, is that the creature is just so big, it can fight farther out. Stereotypical example is little brother vs big brother. Big brother puts his hand on little brothers head, and little brother can't even land a swing.
Same thing, except big brother is a large ogre, and little brother is a medium fighter. And instead of putting his hand on the fighters head, the ogre just punches him instead.
Well, simply ask him where the rule he thinks exists is. When he can't find it, tell him that to safely approach ("be fully prepared") would mean take 5' steps each round until he's able to attack. That movement will not provoke. Might take him a while to get there, but that's the cost of safety.
This is pretty much one of the main advantages of reach weapons. You can hit people coming at you when it's their turn, as they pass through your threatened square.
The picture clearly shows the fighter provoking an AoO from moving towards the ogre through the ogre's threatened square.
Being flat-footed means you can't make AoOs since you aren't ready for combat. But once you are no longer flat-footed, you can. There's no qualifications about being "fully prepared for combat". If he would like to have his character emulate that, he should take Mobility, so that AoOs from movement will hit him less.
A slightly different tactical option would be to move 20' away from the ogre. This way if the ogre wants to attack you, he has to move 10' in, and will not get a full-attack. Once he does that, you can then 5' step past his reach (and not provoke) and get your full-attack.
The rules are not designed to model reality, although sometimes they try to model it as closely as possible without creating unwieldy mechanics. This is simply how the rules work. If you, as a DM, feel that the rule does not make sense, you can change it, although that does take away a large mechanical advantage that larger creatures are supposed to have. If, however, you feel that the rule makes sense to you, you simply need to make the ruling, and let the player know that as the DM, you are open to discussions of the rules, but after you make a ruling, whether it coincides with the written rules or not, the discussion is over, and it is time to move on.