Total Defense out of combat?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 119 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

If you have an ability like Uncanny Dodge can you use the Total Defense action constantly to get a constant +4-6 to AC while out of combat? Is there any reason not to do this?

Silver Crusade

What does Uncanny Dodge have to do with Total Defense?

I'm assuming the "can't be caught flat-footed" part?

Hmm, possibly? But it would be very awkward as your character went slower than everyone from place to place with their guard up and being paranoid.


Total Defense is a dodge bonus, so without Uncanny Dodge you won't get it while flat-footed. The purpose would be to keep wary while moving slowly so that even while unaware of an opponent you would get a large bonus to AC from total defense. Moving slowly isn't too big of a deal when you're already moving slowly behind a scout who's looking for traps.

Silver Crusade

*scratches head*

Eh, yeah I'd allow that. Provided you constantly mentioned being on guard and didn't just assume I'd recognize you as constantly being in Total Defense.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Checks out, it means he is not using that action for other things (check for traps and such), and I bet if someone was on that high alert for hours on end they would get fatigued much like if they tried to hustle for hours on end.

Silver Crusade

*nods*


Well, I'd penalise your Intimidate attempts if you did this ...


No, you can't take combat actions outside of combat, and total defense is an action.


Chess Pwn wrote:
No, you can't take combat actions outside of combat, and total defense is an action.

I agree.

You have to wait until you're in combat before you can use these special actions. This is similar to how you can't ready actions outside of combat.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Byakko wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
No, you can't take combat actions outside of combat, and total defense is an action.

I agree.

You have to wait until you're in combat before you can use these special actions. This is similar to how you can't ready actions outside of combat.

I understand how you couldn't take initiative actions outside of initiative. But when you extend that to all combat actions it starts getting weird, like you can't cast Shield out of combat, or you can't shoot an arrow out of combat, or you can't double move outside of combat (see the hustle in overland movement, additional rules, crb.).


+1 dm livgin

I think it would be up to your dm, ask them before hand how they want to handle it.


I'd allow it, but I'd make you role-play it.

Edit: Total Defense

Quote:

Total Defense

You can defend yourself as a standard action. You get a +4 dodge bonus to your AC for 1 round. Your AC improves at the start of this action. You can't combine total defense with fighting defensively or with the benefit of the Combat Expertise feat. You can't make attacks of opportunity while using total defense.

Anyone with Combat Reflexes probably wouldn't want to do this.

I'm sure there are plenty of other reasons it would be a disadvantage.


I'd agree with Chess Pwn, certain actions just break down outside of combat, or simply aren't properly described to work like that. I've had lots of players angry at me because they said "I'll ready an attack as soon as someone opens that door," and I still let them roll initiative before they can attack. Monsters can do the same if they hear you coming, and then it's just a matter of initiative, which amounts to the same thing as not readying at all. If you can do things like that, the GM might feel free to do something similar with his monsters. Monsters usually sit in their designated room waiting to be killed, but if you're pulling tricks like that, the GM might want to gang up encounters so they'd have more chance of beating you (though that's messing with the CR system), or deviate from tactics, or ready a Fireball as soon as you open that door.

Uncanny Dodge has less of a problem with this, but it's simply a matter of logistics. Having a constant +4/6 is simply pretty annoying for a GM to deal with, especially if enemies rely on surprise attacks.

Consider the narrative element as well: being constantly on the top of your guard is extremely stressful and tiring, as well as requiring a certain pose. Talking to NPCs is just awkward, makes them suspicious, and is mentally very exhausting for the character. You try being hyperaware of your surroundings for an hour, and then imagine being like that you entire life. And no matter how well you look, you might always overlook something. You're not always 100% ready for all things. Sure, behind that door might be a couple of Rogues, but it could also be a dragon. The surprise of suddenly encountering something might cause you to drop your guard.

So, while I'd say it's possible, please don't. It might be okay if you're expecting an ambush, but not at all times.


The rules basically break down if you are trying to do this. Honestly, I would allow it, but only if you properly restrict the character. A +4/6 dodge bonus in a surprise round is literally the only benefit to this course of action, but it has a ton of drawbacks. Trying to search for something is basically a no go, as you cannot move, make an active perception check, and total defense at the same time. Any and all social interactions are basically impossible. Movement speeds may be significantly reduced. Any action that would require a standard action in combat is not allowed and doing anything that would require a move action makes you stationary.

Silver Crusade

Um, how would doing Total Defense prevent Perception checks and social interactions?


Technically, searching with Perception is a Move Action unless it's something you get as an automatic response (like when someone wants to use Stealth against you). Total Defense is a standard action. So I'd say you could defend yourself and search for problems or walk around, but not all three at the same time. XD

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 16

11 people marked this as a favorite.

Rysky, it wouldn't absolutely prevent them: It just makes them awkward...

Sketchy Innkeeper: "Sir Knight, why are you standing that way and looking around all the time? It looks like you expect someone to attack you at any moment. I run a nice place: My girls wouldn't do something like that!"

Sir Paranoia: "I'm not here for your girls! I just needed shelter. Besides, I ALWAYS suspect an ambush: That's why I'm still alive!"

Sketchy Innkeeper: "Surely your Worship must need rest and a warm bath to soothe you after the travails and filth of the road."

Sir Paranoia: "Bathing! I would never be so vulnerable! I shall remain ever-vigilant, seeking only the aid of my loyal allies, whose magic can remove the road's soil!"

Sketchy Innkeeper: "Then all I can offer is.... NINJA ATTACK! KIYYYAAAAA!"


Rysky wrote:
Um, how would doing Total Defense prevent Perception checks and social interactions?

All social skills require standard or greater actions to perform (barring altered demoralize action costs). So anything beyond the most cursory interaction would be prohibited. Talking is a free action, conversations are not (Literally from the prd: Speaking more than a few sentences is generally beyond the limit of a free action).

Making an active perception check is a move action, moving is a move action, total defense is a standard action, choose 2.


Rysky wrote:
Um, how would doing Total Defense prevent Perception checks and social interactions?

(S)he's saying that you can't move & make an active perception check in the same round (if you're using total defence) because they both use a move action (& TD uses a standard action).

Calth wrote:
...you cannot move, make an active perception check, and total defense at the same time.

Social interactions are just awkward .. see Sir_Wulf's post above (Hilarious)

I think it's reasonable to think that a party who's actively on the lookout for danger would have their defences up. I also really don't see this as "Breaking the game". It's not all that powerful, and it does come with drawbacks (although you do have to enforce the drawbacks).

I would say that it's an active ability though, not a passive one. That means any player who says: "I wouldn't have been hit because I would have been using Total Defence" gets kicked from the table (or at least told to suck it up). If you want it active you have to say it every round.

Edit:Ninja'd ... by 12 minutes ... that's just embarrassing =P

Dark Archive

The temptation for me, would be to give the attackers a +10 bonus to attack rolls. Not saying that I would do it, it would just be tempting.


I allow it in dungeons, no problem. I don't allow it when walking around town. In dungeons your in a hostile environment where you know with almost certainty that there are monsters out to get you. Every adventurer worth their salt should be expecting danger behind every corner and be constantly on their guard. That's not a reasonable expectation in a civilized town though.

Scarab Sages

Chess Pwn wrote:
No, you can't take combat actions outside of combat, and total defense is an action.

I've heard this argument before, but I don't like it. Combat takes place in real-time, we just suspend the combat rules because it would take forever to resolve social settings if we did them in combat mode.

If players insist on combat actions in non-combat situations, have them roll initiative and keep that up for a bit. The game should still function about the same, but players get to take turns talking and you could put a word cap per turn (for players and NPCs), making long winded NPCs even more annoying.

Regarding total defense specifically, doesn't seem entirely unreasonable, but I think you could use the above to make this tactic unbearable for the other players. In other words, I suggest using peer pressure to get them to stop, rather than enforcing a GM ruling on it.


Murdock Mudeater wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
No, you can't take combat actions outside of combat, and total defense is an action.
I've heard this argument before, but I don't like it. Combat takes place in real-time, we just suspend the combat rules because it would take forever to resolve social settings if we did them in combat mode.

Yeah I don't really understand the argument that you can't take combat actions outside of combat. What if you want to cast a spell, does everyone have to roll initiative? Or drawing/sheathing a weapon? Hell there's combat-rules for DONNING ARMOUR. If you want to wear heavy armour do you have to wait for someone to attack and then waste the first 40 rounds of combat just to put your armour on?

Sorry, rant over =P

Scarab Sages

MrCharisma wrote:

Hell there's combat-rules for DONNING ARMOUR. If you want to wear heavy armour do you have to wait for someone to attack and then waste the first 40 rounds of combat just to put your armour on?

Sorry, rant over =P

Well, you can't sleep in heavy armor, without taking penalties. So, yeah, your fighter is probably fighting without their heavy armor when ambushed in the shower, bath, or while sleeping.

That endurance feat is amazing for fighters that want a good suit of "sleeping/bathing" armor.

Making fighters don armor when spell casters a prepping spells is entirely reasonable and good role playing.

As for combat actions outside of combat, I'm just addressing players that want to constantly be using total defense. That's how I'd handle it. If they want a bonus like that up all the time, I'd just have the party roll initiative and switch to the turn order. Yeah, annoying as hell, but their request to gain combat bonuses outside of combat is not really reasonable within the combat rules, so the easy balance is to just make it "combat" everywhere they go.

Because asking for total defense constantly is well within the rules, but it's also designed to function within the combat rules exclusively. So the happy medium is to just roll initiative. I suspect the result would be players only doing this when they expect trouble, which is an entirely reasonable use of total defense.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Can someone cite a rule that says standard actions cannot be used outside of combat? I see no explicit categorization of in-combat and out of combat actions.

Edit: I did a search for "outside of combat" and apparently the only rule that refers to anything outside of combat is driving a vehicle.

The reason why actions are defined as swift/immediate, move, standard, full round, etc is that because in combat, you are restricted to certain action economy because time is a factor.

Outside of combat, there is no reason to restrict actions (outside of common sense), to in-combat and out-of-combat actions.

Moving in a defensive posture while following your scout is simply good tactical sense -- especially if you have an ability that prevents you from being flat footed.

Murdock: if there is no combat, what is the consequence of gaining combat bonuses?

Scarab Sages

Quintain wrote:

Moving in a defensive posture while following your scout is simply good tactical sense -- especially if you have an ability that prevents you from being flat footed.

Murdock: if there is no combat, what is the consequence of gaining combat bonuses?

In theory, combat is more draining on stamina than casual behavior. Combat "mode" represent the adrenaline kicking in and the hyper awareness that is a life or death situation.

Regarding total defense, I think that is like stealth, you kinda have to know where the opponent is coming from to benefit from it. Yeah, you could "assume" a certain direction that the "enemy" would be coming from, and I'd give you bonuses if the "enemies" come from that direction, but just because you are extra stealthy, or extra defensive, in how you walk, doesn't mean you have lots of extra AC from attacks coming in any direction.

For example, a character could "assume" that walking quietly would be more stealthy and roll for that. They could "assume" a certain vantage point was manned, and move with stealth to avoid being seen from that point. But neither of these will benefit them if their assumptions are wrong.

I will note that your "out of combat" speed will be affected if "constantly" using total defense, because total defense requires a standard action and "walking" is considered moving at a rate of one action (only a move action) per round. A character would be hustling if using two actions per round.

Quote:

Walk

A walk represents unhurried but purposeful movement (3 miles per hour for an unencumbered adult human). A character moving his speed one time in a single round, is walking when he or she moves.
Hustle

A hustle is a jog (about 6 miles per hour for an unencumbered human). A character moving his speed twice in a single round, or moving that speed in the same round that he or she performs a standard action or another move action, is hustling when he or she moves.

Quote:

Hustle

A character can hustle for 1 hour without a problem. Hustling for a second hour in between sleep cycles deals 1 point of nonlethal damage, and each additional hour deals twice the damage taken during the previous hour of hustling. A character who takes any nonlethal damage from hustling becomes fatigued.

A fatigued character can't run or charge and takes a penalty of –2 to Strength and Dexterity. Eliminating the nonlethal damage also eliminates the fatigue.

Pasted from http://www.d20pfsrd.com/alignment-description/movement

The consequence is that you can only maintain it for 1 hour without problems or the need to sleep.

And regarding in-combat vs out of combat. Those are player terms. Technically, there are three in game terms and they refer to moving rules. In combat is "Tactical Movement" which uses squares on the map for moving. "Local movement," like moving around town or in other social settings, is what you are thinking of when you say out of combat. The last is "Overland movement," which is often ignored or summarized, but represents miles per hour movement across further distances.


Quote:


In theory, combat is more draining on stamina than casual behavior. Combat "mode" represent the adrenaline kicking in and the hyper awareness that is a life or death situation.

In theory, but Pathfinder doesn't use fatigue rules for combat. So, it's actually wrong, in practice.

The only impact of being in total defense is moving slower than a standard walk, I think the player is ok with that.

It sounds like you have a problem with Pathfinder not using facing. I don't see this as justification for refusing the ability of a player to remain in a total defensive stance even when not being actively attacked.

Scarab Sages

Quintain wrote:
Quote:


In theory, combat is more draining on stamina than casual behavior. Combat "mode" represent the adrenaline kicking in and the hyper awareness that is a life or death situation.

In theory, but Pathfinder doesn't use fatigue rules for combat. So, it's actually wrong, in practice.

The only impact of being in total defense is moving slower than a standard walk, I think the player is ok with that.

It sounds like you have a problem with Pathfinder not using facing. I don't see this as justification for refusing the ability of a player to remain in a total defensive stance even when not being actively attacked.

Sounds like you ignored the rest of the post.

But anyway, hustling just means that every 600 rounds of combat, you need to take a break or be fatigued. That sounds entirely reasonable on my end. Combat shouldn't last 600 rounds, but if the players hustling out of combat, it does seem entirely reasonable to impose fatigue penalties when the party has been moving at double speed for more than one hour.

Yeah, I'd let the party move at half speed without fatigue if they wanted constant total defense. Sounds reasonable. Still, half speed is a lot, especially if some of the party is already in heavy armor.


How exactly are you "defending yourself" if there is no attacker?
Keeping your "guard up" is called "dexterity modifier on AC" (yes, even if such modifer is negative).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you're going to be doing this, your cohort better be called Sancho Panza.


shadowkras wrote:

How exactly are you "defending yourself" if there is no attacker?

Keeping your "guard up" is called "dexterity modifier on AC" (yes, even if such modifer is negative).

This is being done specifically on a character with Uncanny Dodge.

A character with Uncanny Dodge keeps their "guard up" every waking moment of the day, and can react to attackers they don't know exist.

The same character using total defense would (for example) keep themselves in a perfect defensive posture constantly, making their "guard" that much more effective.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snowblind wrote:

A character with Uncanny Dodge keeps their "guard up" every waking moment of the day, and can react to attackers they don't know exist.

The same character using total defense would (for example) keep themselves in a perfect defensive posture constantly, making their "guard" that much more effective.

My original argument still stands. Keeping on your toes all the time is exhausting. As someone else said, combat is where adrenaline pushes you to extremes, but being hyperaware of your surroundings is terribly exhausting. I have trouble filtering impulses and most busy days I need a nap halfway through to recover from just being outside, let alone in a world where dragons want to eat you for lunch.


Uncanny dodge I always thought of as more of a 'danger sense' - lightning fast reactions to barely recognised clues such as air displacement on a nearly subconscious level rather than constant hyper alertness.

Oh and constant total defense is not happening in any game I run, I will be calling shenanigans. It is explicitly a combat tactic, not a state of being.


Mechanically it screws any person attempting it as well. Standard actions are a combat concept. You are ALWAYS going on a set initiative if you decide to do this, as well as using your most useful action of the round.

Walking down the hall normally? You are going half the speed, anything "normal" is out the window for anyone attempting this. Traveling long distances? Not you. That three day journey just became six. The adventure is going to be over before your super paranoid character gets there. There are just so many ways to mess with some who does this, and they deserve every one of them happening.


Quentin Coldwater wrote:
Snowblind wrote:

A character with Uncanny Dodge keeps their "guard up" every waking moment of the day, and can react to attackers they don't know exist.

The same character using total defense would (for example) keep themselves in a perfect defensive posture constantly, making their "guard" that much more effective.

My original argument still stands. Keeping on your toes all the time is exhausting. As someone else said, combat is where adrenaline pushes you to extremes, but being hyperaware of your surroundings is terribly exhausting. I have trouble filtering impulses and most busy days I need a nap halfway through to recover from just being outside, let alone in a world where dragons want to eat you for lunch.

Yet there are no rules for exhaustion in combat. Spell durations cast outside of combat don't suddenly change just because you are attacked. In the same manner, they don't expire when you vanqish your last enemy, either.

No one says a spell that requires a standard action to cast requires you to be in combat to cast it. You can even cast it prior to rolling for initiative if you think it wise to do so.

Why should using total defense require more? Do you use spell fatigue rules?


The short answer is:
The game's combat system wasn't designed with the idea that you can take these actions continuously outside of combat. If this was supposed to be the norm, you'd have seen some reference to this in a scenario's monster tactics. Heck, they might as well just say "all creatures get +4 AC the first round of combat before they act due to being in a defensive posture aka total defense".

But, if you want to get pedantic:
Total Defense is listed under the general heading of "Actions in Combat". Thus, if you're not in combat (and sane GMs will veto any "always in combat" shenanigans players try to pull), you can't use that action.
Now you might (rightly) ask whether this means players are unable to do all sorts of other reasonable things outside of combat, such as casting spells or activating magic items. While I feel other rules sections may adequately provide permission to do these things in non-combat situations... yeah, perhaps there are things we allow to happen outside of combat which aren't technically legal. Remember, Pathfinder is a permissive rules system.
Bending the rules a bit to allow some technically in-combat actions to be taken outside of combat is something I'm willing to do if the situation warrants it. However, allowing a player to constantly be in a state of total defense is not something you're going to sell me on. Just not gonna happen... not at my table, anyway.


Byakko wrote:

...

If this was supposed to be the norm, you'd have seen some reference to this in a scenario's monster tactics. Heck, they might as well just say "all creatures get +4 AC the first round of combat before they act due to being in a defensive posture aka total defense".
...

Again, this is specifically for a character with uncanny dodge. The vast majority of creatures get jack diddly from Total Defense spam due to being flatfooted at the start of combat.


But doesn't the "combat" start the minute they get up? The monsters that only attack half a day later are just joining the combat while it has been going on for 7200 rounds.

Scarab Sages

Quintain wrote:


Yet there are no rules for exhaustion in combat.

I keep hearing this one. Where are you getting this idea that PCs can fight indefinitely in combat without penalty? Or, for that matter, can hustle or run indefinitely?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am fine with DMs not letting me do combat actions out of combat, but they must allow me to enter combat when I ask to do these items.

If my character has reason to think something is on the other side of a door, and i want to take full defense and open the door. Well Then let s roll initiative.

Although I agree someone saying they are always in total defense is silly.


Finlanderboy wrote:

I am fine with DMs not letting me do combat actions out of combat, but they must allow me to enter combat when I ask to do these items.

If my character has reason to think something is on the other side of a door, and i want to take full defense and open the door. Well Then let s roll initiative.

Although I agree someone saying they are always in total defense is silly.

Good points, and I agree on the "can I be in combat now?" argument, it still doesn't sit right with me. It just doesn't feel like it's intended that way, but that opens the can of "RAW vs RAI"-worms again.

And "there are no rules for exhaustion in combat" is a bad argument. This is a storytelling game, so you need to embrace the fiction and how it works into the ruleset. Some things are just common sense in-universe. There's no rules saying you don't backstab your teammates and take off with their loot, but it's implied. I think this is similar to that.


Finlanderboy wrote:

I am fine with DMs not letting me do combat actions out of combat, but they must allow me to enter combat when I ask to do these items.

If my character has reason to think something is on the other side of a door, and i want to take full defense and open the door. Well Then let s roll initiative.

Although I agree someone saying they are always in total defense is silly.

Technically they don't have to start combat just because you ask. They are the final arbitrator on any in game actions regardless of how you feel about it. You telling the GM they need to roll initiative deserves a "screw off" response. Believing anything else is being an entitled player. The GM tells you when to roll initiative, because they actually know everything that is happening and your character does not, not the other way around.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Quintain wrote:
Yet there are no rules for exhaustion in combat.

There are also no rules about exhaustion from lack of sleep (exept some optional stuff in the Carrion Crown AP), either.

James Jacobs wrote:

I'll go one better.

Nowhere do the rules state that if you fall unconscious or die do you fall prone.

Sometimes, we don't bother putting rules in because hopefully the answers are obvious.

This whole thread falls under the "the rules don't say you can't take actions when you're dead" cheese. The smelly kind of cheese where you have to be careful not to bring open fire in the vicinity for risk of explosions.


We only allow Total Defense when actually in Combat. To 'defend yourself' is active you have to have something to defend yourself from, as opposed to a defensive posture which is passive. The specific things called out as not stacking are all active as well; fighting defensively, Combat Expertise and AoOs. I think this is another 'not defined explicitly enough' rule.

Equally what do we mean by 'combat actions'? Not everything on the 'Actions in Combat' table is a 'combat action' per se.


You can attack a square against a foe when he may or may not be there, or even a threat.

So, why can't a player defend against that same unknown enemy?

The best I have seen in counter-argument is because role-playing.

Oh, and a header for a chart.


Quintain wrote:

You can attack a square against a foe when he may or may not be there, or even a threat.

So, why can't a player defend against that same unknown enemy?

The best I have seen in counter-argument is because role-playing.

Oh, and a header for a chart.

Could you do it constantly? Absolutely in my game. You are also using up all standard actions, and since diplomacy/bluff is a skill check requiring a standard action, and that is the mechanical method for talking, you never get to talk. You also move at half speed and can only take a move action per round.

So for a rogue in medium carrying capacity, moving long distances is now a major chore, as you can only move 60 feet per minute, or .7 mph.


Sounds stressful, but sure. Jumpy little bugger.


Mr Jade wrote:
Quintain wrote:

You can attack a square against a foe when he may or may not be there, or even a threat.

So, why can't a player defend against that same unknown enemy?

The best I have seen in counter-argument is because role-playing.

Oh, and a header for a chart.

Could you do it constantly? Absolutely in my game. You are also using up all standard actions, and since diplomacy/bluff is a skill check requiring a standard action, and that is the mechanical method for talking, you never get to talk. You also move at half speed and can only take a move action per round.

So for a rogue in medium carrying capacity, moving long distances is now a major chore, as you can only move 60 feet per minute, or .7 mph.

Diplomacy is a standard action -- talking is a free one.

Sounds like we agree. As long as the player abides by the restrictions on what he can or cannot do, total defense -- out of combat -- is perfectly permissible.


Quintain wrote:


Diplomacy is a standard action -- talking is a free one.

Sounds like we agree. As long as the player abides by the restrictions on what he can or cannot do, total defense -- out of combat -- is perfectly permissible.

Diplomacy - You can use this skill to persuade others to agree with your arguments, to resolve differences, and to gather valuable information or rumors from people. This skill is also used to negotiate conflicts by using the proper etiquette and manners suitable to the problem.

Bluff - You know how to tell a lie.

No, I mean they could at no point, attempt to persuade, resolve any issues, gather information, or negotiate. Or lie.

As in, helping the party make plans. You could not do it. Talk about what to eat, nope.

I would make the player's life miserable.


I would compare it with trying to talk to someone in real life who's intently watching television, playing a videogame, or reading a book.

1 to 50 of 119 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Total Defense out of combat? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.