So with Attacks of Opportunity being trumpeted as a Fighter feature, and various class and creature specific reactions yet to be revealed, I find myself wondering how knowledge of these reactions will work both in and out of narrative. Even an animal understands how to disengage while minimizing chances of having their flank cut open.
Under the old system, AoOs almost universally applied and the tactics responded accordingly. Players were almost always aware if they were going to provoke and had to make decisions based on that. And in narrative, it makes sense that everyone functions the same way. Sure, there are specific feats or abilities which break that mold, but those are so few and far between that it isn't relevant to the general tactics for players. Or for the GM, unless they are cheating with meta knowledge.
I'm curious what the new paradigm will look like. Will the concept of AoOs be so foreign to a various creatures that they will always wind up provoking the fighter? Will reactions be so varied in their triggers that no one will any idea what triggers what? Will PCs be able to identify what reactions creatures have with an appropriate knowledge check? Will NPCs and PCs be able to somehow do the same to each other? Will there be guidance for GMs on how to handle meta awareness of your players' reactions?
Obviously this is too early and all we can do is speculate, unless one of our Paizo staff members would like to weigh in. But maybe it can be fun speculation! We have a brave new world, and this sounds like one of the bigger changes in how the game is played.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There will be a learning period for sure with monsters doing their own thing in PF2. My fear is that once folks learn the monsters triggers they will never trigger them if possible. Then, only crit fails will cause enemy reactions. PF1 AOO was universal and worked the same for everyone. Its a shame there is no universal AOO on top of additional reactions in PF2.
3 actions right?
So move, attack, ready an action for AoO. (Which maybe gets rid of that pesky attack penalty.)
I believe there was a call for wild speculation?
3 actions right?
So move, attack, ready an action for AoO. (Which maybe gets rid of that pesky attack penalty.)
I believe there was a call for wild speculation?
I think they already said that readying an action costs two actions -- so that sequence won't work unless you are already adjacent to your foe and thus can skip the move action.
And the attack of opportunity is made at a -2 penalty -- so it is not as good as your 1st attack but better than the 2nd attack you gave up.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also AoO uses your Reaction, not your normal Actions.
Thank you! I was thinking that but people keep talking about it being the other way so I was confused.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At the moment when someone provokes an AoO and it's taken there is always the question "do they have combat reflexes?" How do people in your game world currently handle that thought process? What about wild animals? Same logic applies to AoO in PF2.
If they limit AoOs, one of my characters will be almost unplayable. She's a hunter built around getting AoOs for her and her companion.
|
If they limit AoOs, one of my characters will be almost unplayable. She's a hunter built around getting AoOs for her and her companion.
(Well the Hunter class doesn’t exist yet in 2e so it’s unplayable by that issue starting out)
More sincerely, from the talks about the Fighter it was revealed that there are abilities you can take to increase the amounts of Reactions you have per round.
True, but I could have done a similar build for a druid.
|
True, but I could have done a similar build for a druid.
Specific builds are almost never gonna cross editions and work the exact same way. As long as you can play a Druid with an Animal Companion and using the same weapon and be effective in combat, the new edition is fine even if the exact trick you were doing in the last edition no longer quite works.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My fear is that once folks learn the monsters triggers they will never trigger them if possible.
How is that different to now? Pretty much the only time an AoO is provoked is when someone tanky deliberately provokes to allow another player to do something, or when forced to by circumstance or need. That paradigm isn't going to change.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
AOO's becoming Figher-exclusive sounds really weird to me. Exactly what it means depends on how prevalent reaction-type abilities are. If reactions with a similar purpose to AOO's have broad distribution then it may just become a feat tax for front-liners, and everyone has their own particular flavor of it. If they have limited distribution, it's going to be weird and potentially metagamey.
AoOs are a meaningful character building mechanic in PFe1, like Panther/Snake style monks. It would be a shame to not include this highly strategic playstyle from the game. Otherwise, AoOs blanket removed barr exceptions will do a lot to combat speed.
I know this is a hush hush word I am about to utter here...but one of the reasons D&D5 plays so smooth is the addition of clear reactions and throwing away cumbersome mechanics like AoOs.
So, hoping that a reaction heavy build pathway is a possibility for most classes, and perhaps even more polished/less gimicky (Snake-panther style monks, Overwatch style, etc).
Edit. Changed "the reason" to "one of the reasons".
This is not a new problem - monster special abilities and special defenses have always had this issue. The in-game solution should be the same - roll a Knowledge check to determine the monster's reactions, just like you would to determine a monster's DR or special attakcs. If you fail, then your character doesn't know (even if you as a player happen to know.)
As for how to handle metagaming when the players apply knowledge their character wouldn't have - that's a tricky issue, but not a new one.
At the moment when someone provokes an AoO and it's taken there is always the question "do they have combat reflexes?" How do people in your game world currently handle that thought process? What about wild animals? Same logic applies to AoO in PF2.
That's a pretty rare situation though, and is the exception not the rule. Certainly PCs will try to avoid provoking at all, much less twice in one round. Part of what I'm curious about is if AoOs (or other movement provoking reactions) will be the exception like combat reflexes or the rule.
But there are also some things which can influence "do I think this guy has combat reflexes" which work both as meta and narrative clues. Do they look dexterous enough to make use of the feat? Are they mindless creatures which couldn't have it? Are they wielding a whip or a pole arm? Where as it seems harder to justify distinguishing a fighter from another armored melee class.
(Incidentally, my NPCs and animals never assume combat reflexes. If nothing else, someone taking combat reflexes should get a chance to actually use it.)
I don't think this new approach to AoOs is going to be a bad thing necessarily. I have faith that Paizo can make it pretty interesting. I think reactions are just the hardest thing to wrap my ahead around for predicting how profoundly it will change the flow of combat.
|
|
One of the examples listed from I think one of the Know Direction podcasts (maybe the Plot Points recording of the GaryCon seminar) was for Red Dragons.
If you are casting a spell with the fire descriptor in the vicinity of a Red Dragon, the dragon can steal that spell and redirect it onto anyone it likes.
Just as an example of interesting reactions that critters can have.
Edit: It was the Plot Points recording of the GaryCon Seminar.
Additionally, if a T-Rex grabs you it can spend a reaction to just throw you.
The spell shield works like a shield where you can spend a reaction to block like normal. Or you can spend a reaction for it to eat magic missiles.
One of the examples listed from I think one of the Know Direction podcasts (maybe the Plot Points recording of the GaryCon seminar) was for Red Dragons.
If you are casting a spell with the fire descriptor in the vicinity of a Red Dragon, the dragon can steal that spell and redirect it onto anyone it likes.
Just as an example of interesting reactions that critters can have.
Edit: It was the Plot Points recording of the GaryCon Seminar.
Additionally, if a T-Rex grabs you it can spend a reaction to just throw you.
The spell shield works like a shield where you can spend a reaction to block like normal. Or you can spend a reaction for it to eat magic missiles.
Those are some pretty cool examples! Sounds like creatures will be varied and esoteric enough to keep players from defaulting to a particular tactic under the assumption of AoOs.
I'm curious if that will also be true for humanoid melee folks. Will any given reaction be rare enough for someone to not assume it is in play until it has been demonstrated? That might be a neat way to make Class Feats feel niftier, if they provide unique abilities that always take enemies by surprise.
|
|
I'm curious if that will also be true for humanoid melee folks. Will any given reaction be rare enough for someone to not assume it is in play until it has been demonstrated? That might be a neat way to make Class Feats feel niftier, if they provide unique abilities that always take enemies by surprise.
In that seminar they talk about players having a lot of "strikey", defensive, and utility reactions. They didn't say what they were, though.