|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No AoO.
Move actions provoke attacks of opportunity. Movement, in of itself, does not.
Not true. "Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes AoOs"
No reference to move actions there
I would say the jumping does provoke. Movements that do not provoke clearly say so
|
|
If you go by that interpretation, Raven Black, then people would provoke an AoO whether they save or not, as falling into the pit would still be moving out of a threatened square.
I believe forced movement does not provoke AoOs unless the forced movement says otherwise.
This is often interpreted as such (and I quite agree BTW), though I am not sure if there is actually some explicit RAW about this.
More precisely, it is generally understood (and used in several feats' wording) that you do not incur AoOs for involuntary movement forced by an opponent, but that you do for movement caused by an ally.
But here the jumping is voluntary, not forced.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
No AoO.
Move actions provoke attacks of opportunity. Movement, in of itself, does not.
Not true. "Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes AoOs"
No reference to move actions there
I would say the jumping does provoke. Movements that do not provoke clearly say so
Incorrect.
Read the preface to the section:
"Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing certain actions within a threatened square."
Thus, the movement they are referring to is movement resulting from an action, the most common of which is the Move Action.
Movement resulting from things other than your actions do not provoke.
*head* *desk*
*head* *desk*
*head* *desk*
When a figure makers its Reflex save to not fall in a Create Pit it may 'jump to safety'. Would this move trigger an opportunity attack? Im assuming they could just fall in the pit so its their choice! *grin*
Wakrob
Reflex saves vs many spell effects often infer defensive movement in the assumptions. Nowhere in the rules have I seen any indication whatsoever that they give attacks of opportunity.
A good rule of thumb is 'if the spell does not explicitly state it does something then it doesn't'.
Reflex saves of themselves are not 'actions' or actual movement and they are not listed anywhere as triggers for AoO's.
While GM's can of course rule otherwise, it is not standard as per the published rules.
Just like you do not get an AoO against someone who makes a reflex save vs a fireball.
|
|
When a figure makers its Reflex save to not fall in a Create Pit it may 'jump to safety'. Would this move trigger an opportunity attack? Im assuming they could just fall in the pit so its their choice! *grin*
Wakrob
Reflex saves vs many spell effects often infer defensive movement in the assumptions. Nowhere in the rules have I seen any indication whatsoever that they give attacks of opportunity.
A good rule of thumb is 'if the spell does not explicitly state it does something then it doesn't'.
Reflex saves of themselves are not 'actions' or actual movement and they are not listed anywhere as triggers for AoO's.
While GM's can of course rule otherwise, it is not standard as per the published rules.
Just like you do not get an AoO against someone who makes a reflex save vs a fireball.
Here the spell explicitly states that making the reflex save means you jump to safety in the nearest open space.
Such a text does not appear in Fireball.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here the spell explicitly states that making the reflex save means you jump to safety in the nearest open space.
Such a text does not appear in Fireball.
True but what it does NOT explicitly state is that this is movement that can cause an AoO. It merely says that the result of the save is to place a figure in the closest clear square.
No, the enemy making their saves does not give you a free attack.
arent AoO's immediate actions?
Also, in most instances you have to take a feat (such as greater bull rush or greater overrun) to make forced movements provoke AoO's, which to me sounds like it shouldn't be given out for free to anyone.
eh, gonna run into the seething pit of worms that is the martial/caster differences.
A martial has to have (without special class/archetype abilities granting free feats) 3 feats and 6 levels to make forced movement provoke. If create pit can do the same thing it means a wizard/sorc just needs to stay alive until level 3/4. seems a bit unbalanced imo, but on the other hand i'd probably reward the cleverness of a group that tried to set it up as an ambush with a caster and a martial with reach by handwaving it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You guys are trying to add an effect on a spell on a successful save.
The effects are very simple:
- Saving Throw Reflex negates
- Reflex saving throw to jump to safety in the nearest open space
Neither say "provoking an AoO"
Spells do what they say they do. Adding effects because you like to make them more powerful is a bad idea.
If your idea that "jump to safety" is some form of movement, a creature that has used all of its movement the previous turn can't make the save? It can't try it if it has used a 5' step? If it is unable to jump?
If it is unconscious? Helpless? Pinned?
None of the above negate the ability to try a reflex saving throw, albeit at high penalties. But they negate the ability to move.
So if we assume that "jump to safety" is a form of movement, de should suppose that you need to be able to move to try the save, something that contradict the rules.
As a GM I would note that the potential for abuse is smellable.
(That is the point of it, isn't it?)
I am not the one to argue whether it can be justifiable as RAW or RAI, since that is not my primary concern as a GM. (I did not see any PFS flags here.)
It sucks, but like someone mentioned above, Paizo has not ruled on this.
It is impossible to be sure. Logic states that because there are so many, "movement in this way does not provoke an AoO" phrases in the rules and that phrase is missing from here, that it is very possible that an AoO would be provoked.
Same goes for any spell or effect that moves someone against their will but does not have the disclaimer.
There is also merit to the idea that it does not provoke because so many forms of forced movement don't.
But all you logic geeks (said with love) have to realize that you can't prove either side.
Not that I would necessarily consider it abusive, since the caster is unlikely to have a great AoO chance
It is unlikely the caster would be the one making the AoO's.
He is, however, likely to have 2-3 friends engaged with the target(s).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mostly it's the fact that if you allow an AoO, it could result in an attack involving a CMD like trip, grapple, or bullrush, which by the very nature of AoO, would occur before the movement.
In this case, relocation of the character after s successful save is not "movement". Prone/grappled characters that passed their reflex save are still placed on the nearest safe square.
Reading the rules as a whole, instead of taking specific sections out of context, I would say forced movement does not provoke without specific feats or abilities.
... movement provokes unless you're told otherwise. It's right there in the rules.
I think your wall of text is beautifully written and the logic checks out. I think Diego's point here,
If your idea that "jump to safety" is some form of movement, a creature that has used all of its movement the previous turn can't make the save? It can't try it if it has used a 5' step? If it is unable to jump?
If it is unconscious? Helpless? Pinned?
None of the above negate the ability to try a reflex saving throw, albeit at high penalties. But they negate the ability to move.
So if we assume that "jump to safety" is a form of movement, de should suppose that you need to be able to move to try the save, something that contradict the rules.
is the next thing that needs to be taken into consideration. It fits with the internal consistency of the rules and (at least my own) logical analysis.
If the reflex save isn't a form of movement then it does not fall under the set of actions that provokes by default. The spell also does not include specific language stating that a successful save provokes in this situation.
So (from my pov) the point in contention here is whether or not the reflex save is a form of movement within the rules system(obviously the character is moving), and I think Diego's evidence strongly suggests that it is not.
As far as unconscious, helpless, or pinned creatures go, they can't do anything anyway. How is an unconscious character supposed to make a reflex save and jump to a nearby square?
You always get saves, no condition prevents you from making saves (even unconsciousness and reflex saves). The (apologetic/internal) logic here is that even though your character may not be able to move, they may still get lucky. There are plenty of mechanics for reducing saves, or forcing rerolls, but there aren't any for outright denying them (aside from the character's own choice in giving one up for a 'willing creature' type situation).
This is why Diego's evidence is so strong imo, a save is its own game mechanic and is worth considering as an answer to this question (aka, you are making a save and not any type of game-defined move action, saves are not on the default list of actions that provoke).
|
|
As far as unconscious, helpless, or pinned creatures go, they can't do anything anyway. How is an unconscious character supposed to make a reflex save and jump to a nearby square?
You see something saying that you can't make a reflex save here?
Helpless: A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent's mercy. A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (–5 modifier). Melee attacks against a helpless target get a +4 bonus (equivalent to attacking a prone target). Ranged attacks get no special bonus against helpless targets. Rogues can sneak attack helpless targets.
As a full-round action, an enemy can use a melee weapon to deliver a coup de grace to a helpless foe. An enemy can also use a bow or crossbow, provided he is adjacent to the target. The attacker automatically hits and scores a critical hit. (A rogue also gets his sneak attack damage bonus against a helpless foe when delivering a coup de grace.) If the defender survives, he must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + damage dealt) or die. Delivering a coup de grace provokes attacks of opportunity.
Creatures that are immune to critical hits do not take critical damage, nor do they need to make Fortitude saves to avoid being killed by a coup de grace.
Nothing about automatically falling it if paralyzed in the magic chapter, too:
Automatic Failures and Successes: A natural 1 (the d20 comes up 1) on a saving throw is always a failure, and the spell may cause damage to exposed items (see Items Surviving after a Saving Throw, below). A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a success.
Voluntarily Giving up a Saving Throw: A creature can voluntarily forego a saving throw and willingly accept a spell's result. Even a character with a special resistance to magic can suppress this quality.
A unattended magical object can make a reflex save, but it can't move by itself at all.
I don't know any piece of the rules that say that you can't try a reflex save while paralyzed, unconscious, etc., while I know several pieces of the rules that say that you are subject to an effect that require a reflex save you can try it, no exception listed.
So you are making a statement that contradict the rules. You have some citation that support your position?
|
|
People like pointing out the wording in Bull Rush to show that movement generally provokes. I think Bull Rush is worded like it is to show a change from D&D 3.5 was intentional and not an unintended change from editing.
Here is the 3.5 Bull Rush text.
"First, you move into the defender’s space. Doing this provokes an attack of opportunity from each opponent that threatens you, including the defender. (If you have the Improved Bull Rush feat, you don’t provoke an attack of opportunity from the defender.) Any attack of opportunity made by anyone other than the defender against you during a bull rush has a 25% chance of accidentally targeting the defender instead, and any attack of opportunity by anyone other than you against the defender likewise has a 25% chance of accidentally targeting you. (When someone makes an attack of opportunity, make the attack roll and then roll to see whether the attack went astray.)"
For people switching from 3.5 to Pathfinder it seemed like there was an effort to remove cases where forced movement provoked.
And yet they get a save anyway *shrug*. It doesn't make much sense but that's how saves work, having 0 Dex does not prevent you from making a reflex save.
Dex is the modifier you add to ref saves, but you have a base ref score and even if it is 0 (or negative in the case of helplessness) you still get to roll the d20.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In the example of becoming paralyzed/unconscious mid jump, I have to point out that AoO's interrupt other actions. If the opponent successfully paralyzes the jumper with an AoO the order of actions is interrupted at the time of the jump and the reflex save never occurs.
Despite the example not being the best to illustrate your point i think i understand what you are trying to say. A different one would be 'your character is paralyzed/unconscious when an alchemist's bomb goes off nearby, roll a reflex save for half'.
The simple fact is that even if you are paralyzed, unconscious, and completely encased in mummy wrappings you still get a ref save within the rules. Reflex saves are not a skill based on Dex, they are not automatically turned off if your Dex is 0. Furthermore, you get the benefit of your reflex save even though you have 0 dex. The failure or success of your save does not depend on your dex score, it depends on whether or not you pass the DC. In the example you gave, ignoring the issue of the AoO, if the character managed to make their reflex save despite the negative from having 0 dex then they would grab onto the ledge. That is the result of that save, so that is what would happen.
On subsequent turns you could have them make more saves, with increasing DC's, but if they continue to beat the DC's then they will continue to hold onto that ledge. There is no disconnect between making a save and receiving the benefit of it, they are one unit.
This requires the GM to get a little creative with their storytelling since it doesn't make a whole lot of sense sometimes. For instance, in the case of the alchemist's bomb i would say something like: 'the noise of the bomb triggers a reaction in your lizard brain, your whole body jerks violently. Somehow you manage to avoid the worst of the shrapnel.' Notice you don't have to make any move actions, you never change squares or positions.
Obviously this was an example i thought of myself, but the example doesnt really matter since you are never denied your save, or the benefit/drawback of it. It is not a possibility that exists in the rules.
|
|
A helpless creature is incapable of moving. So if the reflex save means moving, it can't be done. Luck doesn't make you roll uphill.Dexterity measures agility, reflexes, and balance. This ability is the most important one for rogues, but it's also useful for characters who wear light or medium armor or no armor at all. This ability is vital for characters seeking to excel with ranged weapons, such as the bow or sling. A character with a Dexterity score of 0 is incapable of moving and is effectively immobile (but not unconscious).
...A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent's mercy. A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (–5 modifier). Melee attacks against a helpless target get a +4 bonus (equivalent to attacking a prone target). Ranged attacks get no special bonus against helpless targets. Rogues can sneak attack helpless targets.
To repeat it again, nothing there that say that you can't try a save.
Nothing it the spell that say that you can't try a save if paralyzed.Make whatever fluff you want: "when the pit open the ship in the floor move you to safety", "your belt has caught in a rock" or whatever. The RAW is that you can try a reflex save.
Yes, you'd still get a save; but you couldn't move as a result of it even if you succeeded if you have some adverse status that sets your Dex to zero since, as quoted, "A character with a Dexterity score of 0 is incapable of moving and is effectively immobile (but not unconscious)." Even if you succeed at the reflex save, you cannot jump out of the way if you are immobile.
Without a specific rule in the spell, no, you don't need to be ablre to move to benefit from a successful save.
You are inventing rules.|
|
So yeah, you can take half damage from a fireball while hogtied and unconscious with a saving throw (yeaye, luck!). But making a save won't prevent you from falling into a Create Pit if you're in a 10x10 room with unclimbable sides.
As written, you are moved in the nearest open space. Even it that is a ledge 70' up.
Any creature standing in the area where you first conjured the pit must make a Reflex saving throw to jump to safety in the nearest open space.
Weird? Yes. But you are opening a extra dimensional space. Twisting space/time can have weird effects.
Probably I would play otherwise and make that phrase "a Reflex saving throw to jump to safety in the nearest open space adjacent to the pit", but the spell don't say that.
Actually, it is non RAW but treating it as other conjuration spells like dimension door, where you are shunted to the nearest space by magic if you end in a occupied space (with create pit if you make the save, instead) isn't a bad idea.
Balance wise it is a second level spell and making it "unbeatable" if you have the right conditions is a bit of jerk move. And one that affect, mostly, those that can't fly.
|
|
Anyway, that's besides the point. Sometimes a GM's gotta make rulings that make sense even if the spell doesn't specifically call out what happens in odd situations.
So you go with DM fiat, fine.
But don't try to pass that as RAW. RAW in this situation is that if you make the save you are moved to the nearest open space.
Reflex: These saves test your ability to dodge area attacks and unexpected situations. Apply your Dexterity modifier to your Reflex saving throws.Ability to dodge. That is what a reflex save is. [...]
Yes, exactly, your ability to dodge is governed by your reflex save and nothing else. Your immobility is taken into account in the reflex save in the form of a negative modifier resulting from having 0 dex. Therefore, if you pass the reflex DC in spite of the negative modifier then you have dodged, by definition.
By saying 'you automatically fail your reflex save' or 'you do not receive the benefit of the save you have made' you are circumventing the rules for reflex saves entirely.
What part of "incapable of moving and is effectively immobile" is so hard to grasp here? If succeeding at a reflex save involves...
RAW, already quoted above, explicitly permits reflex saves while immobilized.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would not want to be a player in this hypothetical game. A GM says,
"Your not-an-action is an action;" "Your forced movement was not forced, because you chose to take the Reflex save that led to it;" "You don't get to make the Reflex save to which you're entitled, because I can't think of a way it would actually succeed, even if you rolled a 20;" "I'm right about this tangential issue; therefore, I'm right about the main issue. I'm right and you're wrong, end of story!"
That GM doesn't sound like one who'd compromise with the players.
As A GM, I'd say, "Since the spell says you have to move if you've saved successfully, and it doesn't say, 'This Provokes,' I'd call it forced movement. So even if your jump away from the sudden magic pit takes you out of an enemy's threatened space, you don't have to turn your back on your enemy to do it."
As a player, I'd either say, "Right, I'll just take a 5-foot-step and Rush the foe into the pit on my turn," or "So, my combat maneuver roll works and I trip them in mid-jump, so they stumble and fall down in their landing space. Then, I tell my associates with UMD that I'll help them all buy Create Pit wands or make Flight potions."
Well that^ was unnecessary.
The concept being discussed is kind of non-intuitive since it doesn't map to the real world at all. No need to be rude about it.
|
|
First of all, sorry for the rudeness. I took issue with the sophistry that kept getting employed. I wanted to be non-confrontational about it, but on re-read, it did come off as sort of generally dismissive.
Also, I know it's a non-intuitive corner case. The second half of my post up there was basically, "though I'd rule that it doesn't provoke, I'd be okay with working it out with the whole group, if it should get disputed". I know how issues like this can bring a dramatic fight to a halt.
|
|
The hardest thing to do in a fantasy environment is to apply logic. Sometimes logic gets violently violated in order to streamline game play. Otherwise, you end up with an entire library just to combat. This also allows GMs to modify rules to fit thier version of reality. In real life, there is no way you can dodge a hand grenade while in a 5ft room. In pathfinder, you can.
I could paralyze you, encase you up to your neck in cement, use sovereign glue to stick you to the floor and then cast create pit beneath you and you will get a reflex save to avoid the spell. As mind blowing as it is. If you don't like it, house rule it differently and let your players know.
I have found, over the course of 30 years of playing rpgs, micromanaging rules for every situation makes the game unplayable. You live in a fantasy world that scares the hell out of logic and is where physics professors go to die.
On a side note, I've found this thread very entertaining. Thank you.