Vigilante Up Close and Personal Talent plus Close the Gap Talent

[Timo Fey]

Continuing the Vigilante Class Talents subject, there are two vigilante talents that seem to be a good combination, unless there is some obvious rule I'm missing out and all this sounds silly:

'Up Close and Personal (Ex): When the vigilante attempts an Acrobatics check to move through an opponent's space during a move action, he can attempt a single melee attack against that opponent as a swift action. If the Acrobatics check succeeds, this attack applies the vigilante's hidden strike damage as if the foe were unaware of the vigilante. Otherwise, the vigilante applies the hidden strike damage he would deal if the target were denied its Dexterity bonus to AC. Only a stalker vigilante of at least 4th level can select this talent.'

and

'Close the Gap (Ex): Each round, at the start of his turn, the vigilante can designate one foe within 20 feet that isn't adjacent to him. When he moves, he doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity from that foe as long as he ends his move adjacent to that foe. If he charges that foe, he does not take the –2 penalty to his AC on any attacks made by the designated foe.'

Would it be fair to say that the success of the attack made by using Up Close and Personal depends on a succesful Acrobatics check that is done to avoid an attack of opportunity (as per Tumbling and Acrobatics descriptions in the PRD)?

If so, would preventing an attack of opportunity from a foe by using Close the Gap mean that a Vigilante doesn't make the Acrobatics check as it is success by default and, thus, the Vigilante's Up Close and Personal attack is a success too?

[Saethori]

The vigilante doesn't need to make an Acrobatics check, but that doesn't mean any hypothetical Acrobatics check was successful.

Especially of note is that Close The Gap does not allow you to move through enemy spaces, which is a prerequisite to Up Close And Personal. Sufficiently high Acrobatics checks do.

[Timo Fey]

Saethori wrote:

The vigilante doesn't need to make an Acrobatics check, but that doesn't mean any hypothetical Acrobatics check was successful.

Especially of note is that Close The Gap does not allow you to move through enemy spaces, which is a prerequisite to Up Close And Personal. Sufficiently high Acrobatics checks do.

Thank you indeed. However, to continue reflecting on that, an Acrobatics check while tumbling is applied to find whether a foe's attack of opportunity per se was suffered or avoided, and not to establish whether a character made it through (although, certainly, the latter depends on the former). It may be understood, then, that it is only the attack of opportunity that prevents a character from an automatic success of a tumbling move through a foe's space. This, in turn, may be interpreted that if you designate a foe for your Close the Gap and then move through the foe's space as normal (i.e. by Tumbling), the said foe would not make an attack of opportunity (as you do not provoke an Attack of Opportunity by your movement) and you do not perform Acrobatics check, no?

[Saethori]

That's not how it works.

The rules work on a basis of general and exceptions. If something is a general rule, it can't be deviated from without an exception to that rule.

As a general rule, movement through threatened squares provokes attacks of opportunity. As an exception, high Acrobatics checks, Close the Gap, five foot step and withdraw actions, and many other things say that the movement doesn't provoke. When it doesn't say the movement doesn't provoke, you go to the default that it does.

As a general rule, you cannot move through an enemy's square, only an ally's. As an exception, high Acrobatics checks allow you to move through an enemy's square. Close the Gap does not say you can move through enemy squares, so you fall back to the default, which is that you cannot.

Attacks of opportunity have never been the limiting factor. You cannot move through the square of a flat-footed enemy, even though they cannot make attacks of opportunity. You cannot move through the square of an unarmed enemy, even though they cannot make attacks of opportunity. The rules say you can't move through their square, so you cannot without an effect or ability that is specifically letting you do so, such as Acrobatics.

[Mark Seifter]

Saethori is correct, but also, as you suspected, If you don't make an Acrobatics check to move through an opponent's space as a move action, you don't get the extra attack. The wording is careful because the ability is powerful, and there might be some other option some day that lets you, say, move through the opponent's space to the other side as a free action (in place of a 5-foot-step maybe?) without a check, and UCaP should generally preclude a full attack.

[Chess Pwn]

For Up Close and Personal, if you succeed, can you add on the hidden strike riders? normally those only are added when opponent is unaware of the vigilante. Does doing damage as if unaware trigger the riders?

[Saethori]

I think it does. It says damage as though they were unaware, and the vigilante rules say Hidden Strikes made against unaware targets can have the special abilities applied.

[Timo Fey]

Saethori wrote:

That's not how it works.

Mark Seifter wrote:

Saethori is correct, but also, as you suspected,

Saethori, Mark, Thanks for clarification, that's helpful and that's basically how I see the nature of the Pathfinder rules. There are still some points to clarify.

The reason I paid so much attention to the attack of opportunity while moving through the enemy's square is that at some descriptions it is the AoO only that is mentioned and not the actual move through (or tumbling or whatever), for example:
«This DC is used to avoid an attack of opportunity due to movement» referring to the line clearly saying «Move through an enemy's space»
( http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/coreRulebook/skills/acrobatics.html#jump ing ). There were some other examples too somewhere in the sources.
I see now that the understanding should not be limited to the Attack of Opportunity then.

The first question would be then as follows, as we return to the very basic mechanics:

We can move through a flat-footed/unarmed enemy square applying Acrobatics (or cannot we at all?). The enemy is not supposed to make an attack of opportunity (unless the enemy has some ability allowing it to be made). If we the Acrobatics check fails, would it mean that we just fail to move through the opponents square (and stop in the space directly in front of the enemy) and do not suffer an attack? Or do we fail to move AND suffer an attack, even though the foe is flat-footed/unarmed?

The second question is:
I didn't presume that the Close the Gap talent allow us to move through the enemy's square; surely, it is the Acrobatics skill that does. Would it, however, mean that one excludes another and you wouldn't consider Close the Gap applicable while moving through the enemy's square by using Acrobatics? I even thought that it may be argued that while Close the Gap is not applicable when the Attack of Opportunity is provoked by some action other than movement (that's why I wouldn't consider Close the Gap relieving me while doing spell-casting or a trick etc.), it is also not applicable during the Acrobatics check. I wouldn't agree with it, though, as the rules say «This DC is used to avoid an attack of opportunity due to movement», hence, I would believe it is the actual movement that provokes the attack of opportunity while moving through the enemy's square.

Thanks.

[Saethori]

Timo Fey wrote:

The first question would be then as follows, as we return to the very basic mechanics:

We can move through a flat-footed/unarmed enemy square applying Acrobatics (or cannot we at all?). The enemy is not supposed to make an attack of opportunity (unless the enemy has some ability allowing it to be made). If we the Acrobatics check fails, would it mean that we just fail to move through the opponents square (and stop in the space directly in front of the enemy) and do not suffer an attack? Or do we fail to move AND suffer an attack, even though the foe is flat-footed/unarmed?

You provoke an attack of opportunity from that opponent if you fail the Acrobatics check, always. (Unless an ability says otherwise, of course.) However, circumstances may prevent them from being able to take that attack of opportunity, such as being flat-footed, being unarmed, being out of AoOs for the round, you being invisible, etc.

Quote:

The second question is:

I didn't presume that the Close the Gap talent allow us to move through the enemy's square; surely, it is the Acrobatics skill that does. Would it, however, mean that one excludes another and you wouldn't consider Close the Gap applicable while moving through the enemy's square by using Acrobatics? I even thought that it may be argued that while Close the Gap is not applicable when the Attack of Opportunity is provoked by some action other than movement (that's why I wouldn't consider Close the Gap...

If your goal is to move through the opponent's square, then you provoke an attack of opportunity if you fail, despite Close the Gap. This is because the Acrobatics skill says that you provoke one if you fail to move through their square, so the reason you're provoking is because of that, not because of movement.

Close the Gap isn't entirely useless here, though. If you roll very poorly, and provoke attacks of opportunity for your attempted movement, the AoOs act as if you were flat-footed, and if you are hit, you need to make another check at the same DC or fall prone. (The parsing of Acrobatics is confusing, though, so don't be surprised if people rule differently.) Avoiding these AoOs even in a worst case scenario is still nice.

...it's just not "burn a vigilante talent" nice. In nearly every circumstance, you're going to want to invest in Acrobatics because of UCaP, so Close the Gap is more relevant for Avenger or similar vigilantes who might be wearing heavier armor.

[Curghann]

The relevant text from the Acrobatics skill regarding moving through an occupied square is:

Quote:

If you attempt to move through an enemy’s space and fail the check, you lose the move action and provoke an attack of opportunity.

This means that failing your check means you get AoO'd (potentially mitigated by some other specific trumping general) and your move action is lost, meaning you did not get to make the move and thus did not move through their space.

[Cevah]

Saethori wrote:

Close the Gap isn't entirely useless here, though. If you roll very poorly, and provoke attacks of opportunity for your attempted movement, the AoOs act as if you were flat-footed, and if you are hit, you need to make another check at the same DC or fall prone. (The parsing of Acrobatics is confusing, though, so don't be surprised if people rule differently.) Avoiding these AoOs even in a worst case scenario is still nice.

The Acrobatics skill has Cross Narrow Surfaces/Uneven Ground and Move Through Threatened Squares.

The flat footed is clearly only for the crossing and not the threatened section.

While you are using Acrobatics in this way, you are considered flat-footed and ...

The fall prone is mentioned in the crossing section, and so I think, RAI, it only applies to that section.

/cevah

[Saethori]

As I said, the parsing is confusing.
If it does not apply to moving through threatened squares, then it would seem to be possible to Acrobatics on absolutely all movements, taking the added penalty for full speed, and suffer no adverse effects.

(I'm not saying that to refute. I'm saying that, if the text is read the other way, you can do this.)

[ZZTRaider]

As long as your speed isn't reduced by your armor, sure, you can try it as much as you want. Unless you're specializing in it, though, there's a point where you'll want to just stop trying for the sake of time just because there's so many things you'll pretty much never succeed against.

[ShieldLawrence]

Chess Pwn wrote:

For Up Close and Personal, if you succeed, can you add on the hidden strike riders? normally those only are added when opponent is unaware of the vigilante. Does doing damage as if unaware trigger the riders?

I'm under the opinion that it only activates the better damage since it calls it out specifically as "hidden strike damage" in the ability. That's kinda the worst case but I use that for PFS, a GM could rule differently pretty easily.