Provoke Attacks of Opportunity from yourself


Homebrew and House Rules


I would like to use a spell storing weapon to cast a spell on myself, like Lead Blades, when I strike a foe. However, I know that spell storing says it casts the spell on the target, so unless I can persuade my DM to allow this without involving my body orifices, I'll have to find a cheesy way to do this.

Let's say I have Combat Reflexes and DEX 17. If 4 Orcs pass through my dagger's threatened area, I could strike each of them once with an AoO before my turn arrives. If I can do that, I can also leave my guard open just for myself and strike myself four times with AoO, each with a different dagger (free action to drop and quick draw to draw the others). I could do so with -4 penalty and apply only nonlethal damage to myself while also delivering the spell's stored in the daggers, right?

So, is it ok to do that? To use a AoO to attack yourself? I know it looks bad but I blame the strictness of the rules.


No.


There probably should be special rules for attacking yourself, but there aren't. If your DM doesn't want you doing this, you aren't going to find anything in RAW to convince him. If your DM does like this idea, he will need to make a houserule for it.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber

While you can strike yourself as an attack (either as a standard action or as one of your iterative attacks in a full attack action), I can't think of any action you can take that would allow you to provoke from yourself.

Silver Crusade

No. Another thing that will make you sad: Most GMs will rule (correctly, IMHO) that you can only trigger a Spell Storing Weapon via an attack on your own turn, not via an AoO.

Similarly, a Barbarian (with Combat Reflexes) can't activate Rage during an AoO before their turn starts. AoOs before your turn can happen, but you can't activate even Free Action abilities (Rage, Spell Storing, etc) on an AoO.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

You know, if the goal is just having a way for a buddy to put a spell into an item for you to use later because you can't cast it yourself, there's an ioun stone for that.


Ok, why not? Where are the rules to support that?

The goal here is to cast the spell as a free action (2 free actions, actually, considering TWF and not droping the weapons.


By the rules for AoO, only "enemies" can threaten. Since you are always your own ally, you can't be your own enemy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kchaka wrote:

Ok, why not? Where are the rules to support that?

The goal here is to cast the spell as a free action (2 free actions, actually, considering TWF and not droping the weapons.

The AOO rules dosent allow you to attack your self with a AOO.

What you hope to find is a rules exploit and it isent there. Sligthly more sad than using a actual hole in the rules IMOP.


If you are using a dagger, Lead Blades is utterly worthless for you. Why cast a spell to deal +1 damage a swing? That's a waste of even a free action.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Kchaka wrote:
unless I can persuade my DM to allow this ... I'll have to find a cheesy way to do this

Pretty much everyone I know dreads playing with players that ask for strange things like this or try cheesy things like that.


The dagger was just an example, the character in question uses a dwarven waraxe and a maulaxe.

As I said, I don't want to do this the cheesy way, what I want is to use spell storing in a slightly different way, but some only see the rules as B&W.

What I actually want is to be able to do this with just 2 weapons, one on each hand, once per combat.

I still haven't seen anything concrete saying this is not possible, and even if there were, what if it's an ally of mine who uses his AoO on me when I move by his threatened area or cast a spell next to him? A rogue next to an archer could use all his AoO on the archer as the archer does his full-attack on some enemy. No rules saying allys can't AoO each other, we move by each other's threatened areas at our own peril, just because we trust each other doesn't mean we can't literally be backstabed. Even if we're aware that AoO is gonna happer, knowing won't prevent it.

Again, I know this is cheesy as hell, but that's not the point, the point is if the rules allow it, just for the sake of argument. What I hope to achiev by this is to convince my DM to let me make this special spell storing enchantment to cast spell on myself as I attack, which btw would only work on attack spells, spells that in some way harm the enemy being attacked, like Lead Blades or Rage (I don't think it would be right to cast shield thanks to an weapon attack).

Now, I "appreciate" your opinion, but I ask you guys help to find actual evidence in the rules to either support this or deny it.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber
Kchaka wrote:
No rules saying allys can't AoO each other . . .

You seem to have missed this (emphasis mine):

CRB p128 wrote:
An enemy that takes certain actions within a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you.


Thry aren't giving you "oppinions" there are no rules for "selfAoAtion"


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Disclaimer: This whole idea is ridiculous, not worth doing if it even worked, and against the spirit of the game, and I would not want to play/run a game with you if you tried to pull this in a real game, rather than just as a thought experiment. In the interest of the thought experiment, though, I will see what I can do.

So, the first hurdle is that Lead Blades is not a valid option for Spell Storing to begin with. Lead Blades is a personal spell, so it can target only you.

Rage however, would work, so we can go with that.

Yes, you can absolutely take AoOs against your allies. If you want to hit them with a weapon and deal damage to them, that's a totally legal (but again, ridiculous and anti-RAI) method.

If you really want to cheese it up, though, you should get spell storing armor. Get another ally with spell storing armor and your chosen buff inside. Stand next to each other. Make sure neither of you have Improved Unarmed Strike. Whoever moves first provokes from the other. Take the AoO with an unarmed strike. Making an unarmed strike provokes in return, so, the guy that moved gets to hit back. Assuming both attacks hit, you guys can both spend immediate actions to get your chosen buffs for minimal, nonlethal damage.


You would have to have improved unarmed strike in order to take an AoO with an unarmed strike. Otherwise, you don't threaten with it.


I can't use armor, and I don't have an immediate action to spare.

Once again, for the 3RD TIME, I KNOW this is cheesy and it isn't actually gonna happen in game, it's just for the sake or argument.

JohnF, I know it says "enemy", and we know why it says enemy, you didn't expect to read in the book "An enemy, or your friends who may be dominated or an enemy disguised as an ally, that takes actions withing a ..." Allys can attack each other if they think what the other is doing is wrong, like if an ally tries to kill a already defeated enemy instead of arresting him for interrogation or a trial, another ally may try to grapple him to stop it.


If you were playing a Gnoll with an Intelligence of 5 or less, had Enlarge Tail cast on yourself, and used the tail against someone next to you, I'd allow you to attack your tail as an AoO, but any attacks you made in that round against anyone but your own tail would automatically fail as you spun around in circles, provoking AoO's from any enemy nearby. If you roleplay it well, I'd be willing to say the enemies you'd provoke would have to make a DC 10 Will Save to avoid being Fascinated.


MPLindustries, thanks for unarmed attack idea, too bad we can't make AoO with them, as Pala-Baha said, but it's a start.

The maximum Gorgonzola I could come up with is 2 characters with Combat Reflexes, Quick Draw and Rapid Reload. Who ever wins the initiative starts to reload a hand crossbow as a free action and provokes a AoO from the other. He can then drop the crossbow as a free action and draw another empty hand crossbow and do the same thing. The other one doing the AoO drops the spell storing weapon he used and draws another one. They do that until they run out of hand crossbows or spell storing weapons.

So, still no concrete RAW saying you can't AoO yourself, other than "An enemy that takes certain actions..." which we have seen it's not true, as friends can AoO friends.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Kchaka wrote:
So, still no concrete RAW saying you can't AoO yourself, other than "An enemy that takes certain actions..." which we have seen it's not true, as friends can AoO friends.

It doesn't say I can't isn't solid support. I don't see where it says you can AoO your allies.


Kchaka wrote:

MPLindustries, thanks for unarmed attack idea, too bad we can't make AoO with them, as Pala-Baha said, but it's a start.

The maximum Gorgonzola I could come up with is 2 characters with Combat Reflexes, Quick Draw and Rapid Reload. Who ever wins the initiative starts to reload a hand crossbow as a free action and provokes a AoO from the other. He can then drop the crossbow as a free action and draw another empty hand crossbow and do the same thing. The other one doing the AoO drops the spell storing weapon he used and draws another one. They do that until they run out of hand crossbows or spell storing weapons.

So, still no concrete RAW saying you can't AoO yourself, other than "An enemy that takes certain actions..." which we have seen it's not true, as friends can AoO friends.

You can argue this all day long. The rules are not on your side by RAW or RAI. They specifically told you what you could do so by strict RAW you can only do that.

Also if your buddy is disguised as an enemy then your perception of him is as an enemy. You however never actually see yourself as your own enemy. You can trying something like "I dislike myself for all the problems I caused myself so I am my own worst enemy", but don't expect for a GM to allow that to pass either.

Even if strict RAW allowed it, which it does not say you can do this, he is under not obligation to use RAW over RAI.

You have two hills to climb, and neither one is going to happen by the book.

If you wanted to stab yourself during your turn I would allow that, but I am not your GM. However I would not allow you to do it as an AoO. Immediate action casting, which is basically what you would be getting is limited with good reason,


My objective, from the start, is to have a spell storing weapon that targets me with a attack enhancment spell instead of the attack's target. This line of thought is just to help me debate, in case the DM says "the rules don't allow the spell storing weapon to do that", then I could say "well, if we are going follow RAW by the letter, then I could do this, this and that...".

wraithstrike wrote:
Immediate action casting, which is basically what you would be getting is limited with good reason

The spell storing weapon already allows you to free action cast is you succeed on the attack, right? All I'm doing is using this resource in a clever way.

My logic behind striking yourself with an AoO is that it seems unreasonable to think you have this AoO that can only be used if triggered by something other than yourself, but you can't use it to strike yoursef as an "injection" even if that would be in your interrest.

You could even close your eyes and imagine the enemies passing by you and provoking AoOs and you would be able to practice these attacks, striking the air by yourself, but for some readon, even though you had the time to do all those attacks, you still can't use them to "attack" yourself as an injection?

I'm sorry, but to me this is a classic case of Jack Sparrow using a cannon to throw himself in to the other ship. "Oh, but you can't do that, Jack! That's MADNESS!". Jack:"Well, it if wasn't this probably would never work".

Last but not Least, I don't know what the hell you guys do in your own games, if you eat your dead, abuse the goats or worse, but please don't try to judge how I play my games with my friends. Some people like to role play and do crazy stuff outside the rules, like jumping in front of the fireball or biting someone's nose off. Me and my friends like to build powerfull characters and compete to see who's the strongest, we actually like the math. So, even though this all may look cheesy as hell to you, to us is just clever use of game mechanics. In the end, we also think it's cheesy as hell, so we don't use it, but we do acknowledge when one of us manages to pull something like this off, like using a teleportation move to also get out of prone.

Magda Luckbender, where did you read we can't activate things like spell storing with an AoO? Do you remember? Thanks.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Maps Subscriber
Kchaka wrote:
where did you read we can't activate things like spell storing with an AoO? Do you remember? Thanks.

It comes from the wording on spell-storing weapons and armor.

Spell Storing Weapon enchantment wrote:

...Anytime the

weapon strikes a creature and the creature takes damage
from it, the weapon can immediately cast the spell on that
creature as a free action if the wielder desires.
...

Though it says 'immediately' earlier on in the sentence, the only free action that can be done on someone else's turn is talking.


Kchaka wrote:
Once again, for the 3RD TIME, I KNOW this is cheesy and it isn't actually gonna happen in game, it's just for the sake or argument.

Why do people come here to start arguments?

You initially said you didn't want to do it the "cheesy" way, but now you know it's cheesy. Which is it?

Now you are trying to get people to discuss it anyway, even though most people agree that it is illegal, cheesy, and a bad idea, by telling us it's just "for the sake of argument".

If you can find a GM that lets you completely destroy the action economy that the game is founded on, good for you, enjoy your game, but it's unlikely you will find much support for it on the forums.


An attack of opportunity is an attack. You don't get an action of your choosing when someone provokes an AoO, you get a single attack. As well, that attack is to be used against the person who provoked not someone else standing conveniently nearby. I could be misunderstanding your interpretation of AoO's but it appears to me that you believe an AoO can be any action you want it to and it can be used on characters other than the one that did the provoking, neither of which are the case. Apologies if I'm mistaken.


Attack Procs, like Spell Storing, are in fact legal free actions that can be taken when it is not your turn.

Check out the Grab FAQ, which works during AoOs as well.


Kchaka wrote:
My objective, from the start, is to have a spell storing weapon that targets me with a attack enhancment spell instead of the attack's target. This line of thought is just to help me debate, in case the DM says "the rules don't allow the spell storing weapon to do that", then I could say "well, if we are going follow RAW by the letter, then I could do this, this and that...".

But it isn't RAW, so this won't work for you. You'll have to convince your GM to let you do something non-RAW no matter what. You'd probably be better off writing up a variant of spell storing that lets you target yourself and asking the GM to let you use it.

Kchaka wrote:

My logic behind striking yourself with an AoO is that it seems unreasonable to think you have this AoO that can only be used if triggered by something other than yourself, but you can't use it to strike yoursef as an "injection" even if that would be in your interrest.

You could even close your eyes and imagine the enemies passing by you and provoking AoOs and you would be able to practice these attacks, striking the air by yourself, but for some readon, even though you had the time to do all those attacks, you still can't use them to "attack" yourself as an injection?

It might help to realize that AoOs are just you taking advantage of someone else's mistake. It's not that you have all of these extra attacks floating around that you can't use: it's that the other guy messed up, and you get a free "bonus" attack that you normally don't get.

You're capitalizing on your opponent's mistake. Without the mistake, there's no AoO. You can't capitalize on your own mistake (and if you do it on purpose, it's not a mistake, is it?), and in theory, you wouldn't capitalize on your ally's mistake.

Instead of asking a rules question, you might ask about the best way to accomplish your goal, like "What's the quickest way to buff at the start of a fight?" or "What's the coolest thing I can do with a spell storing weapon?"

For your specific rules questions, you'll get specific rules answers:
"Can I use an AoO on myself?" No, because you can't provoke from yourself.
"Can I use a spell storing weapon to cast a spell on myself?" I suppose if you want to attack yourself and do damage, I'd let you do it, but it would take up one of your attacks on your turn.
"Can I use a spell storing weapon to cast Lead Blades on myself?" No, because Lead Blades is a personal spell and therefore can't be cast into a spell storing weapon.

If you ask something like, "How can I get Lead Blades cast on myself when I can't cast the spell?", then the answer is a [http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magicItems/rings.html#ring-of-spell-storing-minor]ring of spell storing[/url] or similar item.


Fine, if you don't like my Gnoll suggestion, I'll make a more serious one that is against RAI (I'm about 95% sure), but if all you care about is twisting RAW for laughs, this'll fit the bill. I give you:

The Pain Taster.

Quote:

Masochism (Ex): At 1st level, a pain taster becomes empowered by pain, and is inured to its effects. She receives a +4 class bonus on saving throws made against pain effects.

Additionally, a pain taster can deal lethal damage to herself at any time to gain a bonus on attack and damage rolls. Doing so is a swift action that deals 2 points of damage to the pain taster, does not require an attack roll, and bypasses any damage reduction the pain taster possesses. For 1 round, the pain taster gains a +1 morale bonus on attack rolls and a +2 bonus on damage rolls. Every 3 levels thereafter (4th, 7th, and 10th), the amount of damage the pain taster deals to herself increases by 2 and the resulting bonus she receives on damage rolls increase by 1 (to a maximum of 8 points of self-inflicted damage and 5 points of bonus damage to other targets at 10th level). At 7th level, the bonus on attack rolls gained when using this ability increases to +2.

Happy? It's a swift action, not an immediate, but it's much more likely to pass muster at a table.

EDIT: Oh and just to be clear, I don't mean to come across as hostile, and I don't imagine the other posters here do either, Kchaka; it's just that this is the 'Rules' forum, so people try to follow the rules as much as possible. If you had posted this in the 'Homebrew' section, you'd probably have gotten a more positive response. How you play at your table is your business, and of course your group is free to have their fun how they want. =]


Thanks, Cuu, and the Masochism is a fine suggestion, though I don't think I would take a 1 level dip in another class just for that, but it gives me the idea for making some sort of contraption that will stab myself when I attack, or some other trigger.

Even if it's a swift or immediate action, I already use mine every round (I'm even trying to convince them to houserule for everybody to have 1 swift and 1 immediate action every round, but that didn't happen yet).

Gwen Smith wrote:
You'd probably be better off writing up a variant of spell storing that lets you target yourself and asking the GM to let you use it.

That's what I'm tring to do.

Quote:
Without the mistake, there's no AoO

I find this wierd. Think of your character, adjacent to an Orc, threatening it with your weapon, and the Orc is threatening you. You wanna attack the orc, but you don't right away because you know if you do he'll attack you back. Like a UFC fight, the two of you use your footwork, keep throwing fake strikes, dodging, etc. The Orc tries to grab your feet to throw you down and leaves himself wide open, and you use that moment to strike as an AoO, and you kill the Orc.

Now that the Orc is dead, "helpless", it's like he's wide open all the time, you could just stab him as many times as you can in 6 seconds.

I think you could consider yourself wide open, "helpless" agains yourself all the time. It should be no problem to stab yourself.

Think of it this way, you just used your full-attack, you have a spell storing spiked gauntlet and a spear, you want to "inject" yourself with the gauntlet but you CAN'T. Then a bunch of orcs charge you, you slay them all with your spear's AoO and there's one AoO left, but you still CAN'T use it to "inject" yourself. Doesn't this sounds ridiculous too, or what?

BTW, in the FAQ it specifically says you can use a spell storing weapon with an AoO, HERE


An AoO is essentially a counter attack, especially if you want to go with the UFC analogy. A counter striker can't work his magic until his opponent attacks him. Look at what a dull fight you get between two counter strikers, say Rashad Evans and Thiago Silva. Neither of them really did much because they spent the whole fight waiting for the other guy to throw a punch they could counter (provoke an AoO); lots of dancing around but a tragic punch clock.

Sometimes strikers struggle against ground fighters because striking, particularly kicking, leaves them vulnerable to a take down. Without the kick, the striker is not off balance and the ground fighter would not be able to drive forward for the take down as easily. Very rarely do you see a successful single that is not provoked by the striker's attack; the ground fighter goes for a double or a hip toss instead. The kick opening up the single takedown is comparable to the kicker provoking an AoO.

The trouble with this analogy is that there are other rules that provide for counter attacking in the game so that muddies the water somewhat. Still though, I don't really understand how you envision provoking from yourself. How do you leave yourself vulnerable to an attack from yourself? How do you counterattack yourself?

As I stated earlier, an AoO is a single attack that is performed upon the person who provoked it. It isn't an extra free action to do with whatever you want against whomever you want. What you are trying to do is increase your action economy in a way that doesn't make sense and is, IMHO, against the spirit of the AoO rules.

None of this precludes activating a spell storing weapon as part of an AoO. Go ahead and activate your stored spell and make the attack against the opponent who provoked. What you can't do is activate a stored spell and attack yourself since you didn't provoke the AoO.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Lead Blades isn't cast on yourself but your weapon, so you're out from the start on this.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This isn't "clever use o game mechanics" because the rules don't allow it. So it would be classified as one of two things.

1. House rule
2. Cheating

But as others have said there are no rules supporting Self AoOation and if you keep tryin it you'll grow hair on your palms and go blind.


Ok, I'll acknowledge that the RAW rules don't support self AoO. Not denying it isn't the same. But can you guys at least acknowledge that it should be reasonable stab yourself with the same amount of effort it would take to make an AoO agains someone else?

Havoc, even if we can't AoO ourselves, it is still clever use of game mechanics by using a friend to AoO you with the spell storing weapon or armor. No cheating there.

Lazar, just so you know, the combo will be a lv 8 psiwarrior with TWF Impact Dwarven Wareaxes, Graft Weapon, Expansion to Huge size and Strong Jaw on the spell storing weapon, for x4 8d8 and "pounce" all rounds.


Kchaka wrote:
Havoc, even if we can't AoO ourselves, it is still clever use of game mechanics by using a friend to AoO you with the spell storing weapon or armor. No cheating there.

If you have absolutely nothing else constructive that you can do with your standard action that round, I suppose you could spend it by attempting to grapple your ally or performing some action that will provoke so that your ally can use the AoO to buff you with their spell storing weapon. Strictly speaking, you would be saving your ally's standard action in the next round because he will not have to use it to buff you then, however I feel that there are almost always going to be better things to do with your standard action than attacking your allies to get a buff as an AoO.

Why not buff yourself? Why not attack the baddie? Why no tactical movement? Besides which, I'm not sure I've come across anyone that puts buffs in their spell storing blade. Usually it's an offensive spell to add damage or some condition to a melee attack in my experience although not many of the ppl I have played with ever used a spell-storing item so I have a pretty thin sample to work with. Maybe buffs are a thing but I'm finding it difficult to see the appeal to or benefit of provoking and using AoO's in this manner.

To each his own.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

"I know it is not allowed in the rules, but I want it!" That's pretty much your whole argument. You want 2 free action casts of buffs per combat in 1 round. I don't know a GM that would give anyone two free action spells in a round as a made up magic item. Spell Storing on weapons are for attack spells, at least in intent. Having allies using attacks of opportunity also make no sense, they are attacks, not buffs of opportunity. Also, Impact is a size up enchant, is a nat weapon SIZE up, and expansion is hmmm another size up, I don't know how stacking is with psi, but sure looks like at least one stacking issue. Pretty sure impact does not stack with strong jaw, and none of these abilities give pounce, but I am guessing you have some work around for that too.

Only question with your friendly AoO buffing is, can you eat the damage just to get a buff, I am betting you are going for a no damage use of the AoO, another cheat...oh and that's cheat just for the sake of argument.


I do agree that the rules deny taking AoOs on yourself, and I do agree that AoO-ing yourself to buff yourself is against the spirit and balance of the game.

That said, I do agree with the OP that, from a realism standpoint, if you're able to take 4 AoOs on enemies, you should be able to take 4 AoOs on yourself.

Unfortunately for the OP, Pathfinder rules don't always support realism. This is one of those cases.


So, for some reason, deliveing a 10d6 3rd level vampiric touch as a free action, no save, along with a regular weapon strike on the enemy is ok, but delivering the strike and casting a 3rd level protection from energy on yourself as a free action is cheating. I'm sorry, but I trully don't get it.

Fireborn, the idea is to start your turn adjacent to an ally with combat reflexes.

If he moves first, you can try to grapple him, provoke an AoO, and in turn he'll use his AoO on you, or you can just let him walk and on your turn you walk into his threatened area and then he strikes you.

If you move first, then he just strikes you as an AoO.

Rhaleroad, I intend to heal myself as I attack with claws of the vampire for 4d8 HP on each strike.


It's not the actions that make it cheating. It's using an AoO on yourself to do it that's cheating. An AoO is provoked by actions that distract or leave one vulnerable to attacks from enemies. How can an action distract you or leave you vulnerable... to yourself? It's patently absurd. You can punch yourself in the chest if you want, but it won't trigger the spell-storing armor, because the magic of the spell-storing armor is set to trigger on an attack, and punching yourself in the chest isn't an attack.


Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:
You can punch yourself in the chest if you want, but it won't trigger the spell-storing armor...

Pala-Baha, you're a Genius!

Spell Storing Weapon + Spell Storing Armor + Self Strike during Full-Attack Action = 2 Buffs / 1 Strike!


Seriously? You are suggesting that moving from a square adjacent to an ally provokes an attack of opportunity? That would NEVER fly at any table I play at or with any DM I know. The rules for AoO's talk about your opponent, your enemy or your foe. They also say that you have to be engaged in melee combat.


Quite a few misunderstandings of the rules going on here.

1) You cannot draw weapons as a free action with quick draw when it is not your turn. So your buddy cannot be making an AoO against you, drop the weapon, quick draw another, then make another AoO as you keep provoking.

2) You cannot grapple as an AoO.

And on the reverse side:
3) Who is your enemy and who is your friend is a matter of perspective, not mechanical law in the game. I can decide at any given point in time whether I want to treat someone as a friend or an enemy. There are some very legitimate reasons for doing so. Mind controlled, feared (and you don't want your ally running off into unknown parts of the dungeon attracting who knows what), role-play reasons to be mad at your ally (which covers a very very broad spectrum), etc. And some not so legitimate ones such as in this thread, looking for loopholes to cheese something.

Though honestly, if the most optimal action someone can take is to frequently stab their friend to give them a buff, you should sit down with that player and help them build a more effective character. Most of the time the player would be better of doing something else.


bbangerter wrote:
You cannot draw weapons as a free action with quick draw when it is not your turn.

Doh!

Quote:
You cannot grapple as an AoO.

DOohh! I mixed it up with 3.5.

Quote:
if the most optimal action someone can take is to frequently stab their friend to give them a buff,...

Well, the character would just have to use his AoOs, so most of his regular actions will all still be available to him on his turn.

A good reason within the rules I see for not being able to AoO yourself is that, if you could AoO yourself because you can always consider yourself helpless against yourself, always vulnerable against yourself, then it stands to reason that you also would be able to deliver your AoOs agains any helpless character, and that is not the way game mechanics work.

Let me ask these other 2 questions:

Do you think it's reasonable, acceptable, to create a magic item similar to a spell storing weapon, but that instead casts the spell on the wielder of the weapons instead of the target on a successful attack with the weapon? (An attack against a "Real Enemy", if you will") Why?

Do you think it's an exploit of the rules to use a regular spell storing weapon to "inject" yourself or a friend with a beneficial spell by using a regular attack with the weapon? Why?


Kchaka wrote:
Quote:
Without the mistake, there's no AoO

I find this wierd. Think of your character, adjacent to an Orc, threatening it with your weapon, and the Orc is threatening you. You wanna attack the orc, but you don't right away because you know if you do he'll attack you back. Like a UFC fight, the two of you use your footwork, keep throwing fake strikes, dodging, etc. The Orc tries to grab your feet to throw you down and leaves himself wide open, and you use that moment to strike as an AoO, and you kill the Orc.

Now that the Orc is dead, "helpless", it's like he's wide open all the time, you could just stab him as many times as you can in 6 seconds.

You can only stab him once in 6 seconds unless you have a BAB of 6 or higher. Helpless has nothing to do with AoOs.

Kchaka wrote:
I think you could consider yourself wide open, "helpless" agains yourself all the time. It should be no problem to stab yourself.

Feel free to stab yourself all you want--as a standard action.

Kchaka wrote:
Think of it this way, you just used your full-attack, you have a spell storing spiked gauntlet and a spear, you want to "inject" yourself with the gauntlet but you CAN'T. Then a bunch of orcs charge you, you slay them all with your spear's AoO and there's one AoO left, but you still CAN'T use it to "inject" yourself. Doesn't this sounds ridiculous too, or what?

No, it doesn't sound ridiculous at all: it sounds exactly like the rules intend it to.

AoOs are not a "resource" that you have and can use however you want. An AoO is a free "bonus" attack that you get because your opponent screwed up. If your opponent does not screw up, you don't get the bonus attack.

That's the rule. That's how AoOs work. Period.

If you don't like that rule, then take your suggestions to the Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrews forum. In that forum, people will actually be able to help you figure out how to make your own rules work the way you want.

In this forum--the Rules Questions forum--people will just continue to tell you how the rules currently work.

Paizo Glitterati Robot

Moved thread and removed a few posts. Personal insults really don't add anything to the conversation.


I couldn't be bothered to read the whole thread.... that said, what if it was a +1 Vicious Spell Storing Weapon? Then, when you use it to attack, it damages you as well... you might be able to funnel that spell back at you instead of into the enemy.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Provoke Attacks of Opportunity from yourself All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules