|
If a creature has two claw attacks and gets rend, they inflict rend damage if they hit with both claws. I know this. Now a player tries to tumble by, and provokes AoO's. The creature gets off two more successful claw attacks, o e in each square that provokes. Does it get rend?
According to the beastiary, a rend occurs when a creature makes two successful claw attacks in one round. Realism makes me want to add "while making a full attack action". According to the RAW, this doesn't hold true. So, if the creature makes two successful AoO's due to a failed tumble, it'd get rend. Is this correct?
If a creature has two claw attacks and gets rend, they inflict rend damage if they hit with both claws. I know this. Now a player tries to tumble by, and provokes AoO's. The creature gets off two more successful claw attacks, o e in each square that provokes. Does it get rend?
According to the beastiary, a rend occurs when a creature makes two successful claw attacks in one round. Realism makes me want to add "while making a full attack action". According to the RAW, this doesn't hold true. So, if the creature makes two successful AoO's due to a failed tumble, it'd get rend. Is this correct?
Rend adds damage to an attack; it's not an attack in and of itself. Just as power attack won't increase sneak attack damage or constrict damage, it won't increase rend damage (although it DOES increase the damage inflicted by the attacks that are necessary to trigger rend in the first place). Rake attacks ARE attacks, so power attack applies there.
Rend kills enough PCs anyway. There's no need to increase its damage, for the same reason there's no reason to tie a machine gun onto a nuclear bomb!
Two-Weapon Rend (Combat)
Striking with both of your weapons simultaneously, you can use them to deliver devastating wounds.
Prerequisites: Dex 17, Double Slice, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +11.
Benefit: If you hit an opponent with both your primary hand and your off-hand weapon, you deal an additional 1d10 points of damage plus 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier. You can only deal this additional damage once each round.
Based on these two entries I would say whether or not the creature successfully "rended" already in the round, if they get off two more successful attacks rend takes effect.
|
|
My only concern would be about the player provoking multiple aoo's from the opponent. If the character is moving past the creature, the creature only gets one attack of opportunity for that whole movement.
Pg 180 right hand side at the top
"Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent.
And you don't provoke by moving in. So unless the character moved past the creatures threatened areas, eating an aoo in the process, stopped, then used their standard action for another move back through, I don't see this guy getting two aoo's off.
Acrobatics lets you try to move past without provoking that aoo, but it wouldn't give the creature an additional aoo.
If a creature has two claw attacks and gets rend, they inflict rend damage if they hit with both claws. I know this. Now a player tries to tumble by, and provokes AoO's. The creature gets off two more successful claw attacks, o e in each square that provokes. Does it get rend?
OK, there is a problem here in the setup. According to the AoO rules, moving out of more than one threatened square in the same round does not count as more than one opportunity, even if the threatening creature has combat reflexes.
With that in mind, if the PC managed to provoke two AoO anyway (say, one by moving, the other by drinking a potion), I wouldn't apply the rend even if both AoO hit. The way I see it, the rend applies because the attacks are taken together in a particular way and not simply because there are two attacks that happen to fall in the same round. Most often, a rend is because both attacks hit the target so that they interact with each other (for example pulling something apart, "rending"). But AoO don't necessarily have that going for them. They could be multiple attacks with the same dominant paw or weapon, for example, and so a rend wouldn't make any sense.
If a creature has two claw attacks and gets rend, they inflict rend damage if they hit with both claws. I know this. Now a player tries to tumble by, and provokes AoO's. The creature gets off two more successful claw attacks, o e in each square that provokes. Does it get rend?
According to the beastiary, a rend occurs when a creature makes two successful claw attacks in one round. Realism makes me want to add "while making a full attack action". According to the RAW, this doesn't hold true. So, if the creature makes two successful AoO's due to a failed tumble, it'd get rend. Is this correct?
Nope, it doesn't work this way.
If the player tries to tumble by and fails his roll, he provokes exactly one AoO. Since the creature will only make a single claw attack as the player goes by, he will never get to rend on his AoO.
Moving out of more than one square threatened by the
same opponent in the same round doesn’t count as more
than one opportunity for that opponent
So it doesn't matter how many threatened squares the player (or whatever) leaves in his failed tumble (or even with no attempt to tumble at all), the act of moving through 1 or more threatened squares never provokes more than one attack.
Now, I can think of ways to provoke two attacks per round. For example, move past a creature, provoking an AoO, then stop adjacent to that creature and attempt to cast a spell, provoking a second AoO.
In this case, I don't think it would be appropriate to rend if both AoOs hit. Technically, we're talking about two different actions. One AoO, and then a totally different AoO.
In the normal case where Rend is usually allowed, the creature is making one single Full Attack action. That one action contain multiple claw attacks, and if two claw attacks hit, the creature can Rend. The key point is that this Rend is giving for successful claw attacks that are all part of the one single Full Attack action.
Since making two AoO attacks are really two different actions, allowing those two separate actions to grant the creature a Rend would be very much the same thing as allowing one claw hit in Round 1 and another claw hit in Round 2 to grant the creature a Rend.
edit: Ninja'd by two minutes...
Two-Weapon Rend (Combat)
Striking with both of your weapons simultaneously, you can use them to deliver devastating wounds.
Prerequisites: Dex 17, Double Slice, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +11.
Benefit: If you hit an opponent with both your primary hand and your off-hand weapon, you deal an additional 1d10 points of damage plus 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier. You can only deal this additional damage once each round.
The emphasised text ('simultaneously") proves (kind of) that Rend can't be done in two separate actions.
Thankfully: even in the same round, one could strike a foe with an AoO, and the same foe with a regular full-attack.
Note that you have to strike with separate limbs to use Rend, it doesn't activate if you strike twice with your main weapon.
(also, this feat has to be reworded: "your primary hand and your off-hand weapon" means that your primary hand has to make an unarmed strike)
The only problem with Louis's reasoning (though I agree that rend should not be applied in the OP's situation, or on separate actions as addressed later) is that iterative attacks and two-weapon fighting's bonus attacks are successive, not simultaneous. It was hotly debated in a thread about how attacking from invisibility works. Also, many of the designers warned against ruling based on the fluff text above each feat as such fluff text is merely flavor and is not intended for balance.
Still, as multiple AoOs are separate actions rather than part of the same action (such as a full attack), rend should not apply.
The only problem with Louis's reasoning (though I agree that rend should not be applied in the OP's situation, or on separate actions as addressed later) is that iterative attacks and two-weapon fighting's bonus attacks are successive, not simultaneous. It was hotly debated in a thread about how attacking from invisibility works.
Iteratives are clearly successive rather than simultaneous, but I don't believe there's any requirement that additional weapons need to be successive. What justification for them being successive as well came out of the invisibility debate?
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.
If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first.
The two of those together essentially say that you alternate hands, taking each attack successively, until you run out of attacks or choose to stop.
The discussion happens here.
The only problem with Louis's reasoning (though I agree that rend should not be applied in the OP's situation, or on separate actions as addressed later) is that iterative attacks and two-weapon fighting's bonus attacks are successive, not simultaneous. It was hotly debated in a thread about how attacking from invisibility works. Also, many of the designers warned against ruling based on the fluff text above each feat as such fluff text is merely flavor and is not intended for balance.
Still, as multiple AoOs are separate actions rather than part of the same action (such as a full attack), rend should not apply.
I understand perfectly. Still, the iterative attacks happen at the same initiative count, which is much closer to simultaneity than doing them in separate actions.
|
|
Holy crap!
Yet again, does anybody know of a list of changes from 3.5 to 3.75?!?!?
Wow, so even if I run a circle around someone with Combat Reflexes, and a Dex of 50, they only get one attack on me in that round? If that's true, then my entire question is moot.
I think I'm just going to make up this list myself and post it. I swear, I LOVE the new rules, but damn, there's SO many small changes that change the tactics of combat, it's not even funny.
Thanks for the reponses guys, and the hammer upside the head about AoO's.
Holy crap!
Yet again, does anybody know of a list of changes from 3.5 to 3.75?!?!?Wow, so even if I run a circle around someone with Combat Reflexes, and a Dex of 50, they only get one attack on me in that round? If that's true, then my entire question is moot.
This was exactly the same in 3.5; the rule was not obvious, however:
If you have the Combat Reflexes feat you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn’t count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.
Holy crap!
Yet again, does anybody know of a list of changes from 3.5 to 3.75?!?!?Wow, so even if I run a circle around someone with Combat Reflexes, and a Dex of 50, they only get one attack on me in that round? If that's true, then my entire question is moot.
This was exactly the same in 3.5; the rule was not obvious, however:
If you have the Combat Reflexes feat you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn’t count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.
Ninja'd Though I was going to highlight a different part of the srd.
This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity).
The key here is that they are separate attacks with the primary weapon, no matter how many subsequent attacks the enemy takes against the PC moving in, out, up, down, around the threatened square each AoO is a separate individual attack. I think some of the confusion comes in the fact that in order to Rend you need to use a full attack action in order to get the simultaneous two attacks, and thus the additional Rend damage.
|
|
This was exactly the same in 3.5; the rule was not obvious, however:
If you have the Combat Reflexes feat you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn’t count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.
Oops....
Won't tell ya how long we've been playing it wrong... loooong time. Boy, are my players gonna be surprised by this one.