But not, apparently, standing and retrieving an item, which you cannot, RAW, stop from happening. Unless I am mistaken, which is possible. CAN you stop those actions? And how, if the AoO takes place before the action? Why can't Indiana Jones, while in combat with the thugge cultist, use his whip to pull a gun out of some guys hand that he just picked up? That qualifies as an AoO, and is cool for the player, would definitly add to his fun, but is expressly disallowed RAW. Does that not seem odd? In a game where mages bind devils and druids teleport through trees, a Bard can't stop a Wizard from retrieving a wand with an AoO EVEN THOUGH THEY GET AN ATTACK?
Sure, I can Ready an action to stop either of these from happening. Binding that devil takes (at least) 10 minutes. Striding through that tree takes 9-12 seconds (at least a Standard action to cast the spell and Full-Round action to transport, possibly a Move action to step into the tree depending on how far away the tree is). Doing the two mundane things requested, in comparison, only takes a little preparation and 3 seconds...So, it's possible, it just takes more effort than a Free action.
Director of Games
|
It keeps going and going and going....
Anywho,
As it concerns consistency and casting spells and AoOs: The concentration check is a specifically called exception to the chain of events. So while the AoO occurs before the spell is completed (and technically before the action), the exception allows it have an effect on whether or not the spell is completed. No such exception exists for tripping, disarming, or moving, unless other game rules would dictate a interruption (such as going unconscious).
Moving along...
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I didn't think there was any question as to the rules for concentration checks being specifically different--I've noted that multiple times... Was there something in the discussion I missed on this?
I didn't think there was any question as to the rules for concentration checks being specifically different--I've noted that multiple times... Was there something in the discussion I missed on this?
Not that I know of, I thought we were all pretty clear on how things ARE, more of a discussion about how things should be.
I mean I appreciate Jason stopping by, maybe he's just so sick of seeing us that he wanted to swing by and tell us to shut up :0( lol
Heh, could be. This thread is in jeopardy of getting an Energizer Bunny award...
Heh, could be. This thread is in jeopardy of getting an Energizer Bunny award...
Yesss...yessssss!
Sure, I can Ready an action to stop either of these from happening.Which is not an AoO, which is what I was expressly arguing.
So, it's possible, it just takes more effort than a Free action.An AoO is actually NOT a free action. You only get 1 a round, unless you spend a feat to get up to your DEX mod. It is a resource, like any other action.
Sure they are. "Sometimes a combatant in a melee lets her guard down or takes a reckless action. In this case, combatants near her can take advantage of her lapse in defense to attack her for free. These free attacks are called attacks of opportunity."
There are 6 types of actions defined in the game--Standard, Move, Full-Round, Swift, Immediate, and Free. An AoO is obviously not a Standard, Move, Full-Round, or Swift action, as you can only take these on your turn. It is also not an Immediate action, since you only ever get one of these per turn. That leaves Free action. As noted in the rules, there are at times limits even to Free actions. In the case of an AoO, that limit is either 1 or, given Combat Reflexes, your Dex modifier.
You want to perform something with a Free action that is more appropriately performed (in Pathfinder) by a Standard action. That's pretty much all there is to it. You obviously don't like that aspect of the rules, but that's the joy of the Most Important Rule...
After being tripped can one stand up? Yes. Thus a trip on an AOO for standing up does NOT mean that they cannot stand up afterwards.And I would not, and never have, argue that you cannot get up afterwards. I do argue, though, that being tripped should cost you your move action. Which means you can now stand up using your standard action. If your opponent has only 1 AoO, they cannot now trip you. If they have more, they have now expended two to keep you in place PROVIDED they fail BOTH CMB vs CMD checks. I simply fail to see why this is considered so powerful. So powerful, in fact, that the designers feel it should cost more than just a couple of AoO's (and successful checks, and a feat to GET more AoO's, and a good DEX).
And considering the number of combat maneuvers that give the prone condition (1), I would argue that tripping IS the counter to standing. And when things do not have counters, you get weird situations where an actions is uninterruptable by any means short of killing the opponent with an AoO, which is just plain silly. It's not some sort of new computer game thing; I have been arguing this point (on various topics) since 1st Ed. What I consider a computer game thing is that you cannot do it because conditions are binary, either 1 or 0 with nothing in-between.
Emphasis mine. You continue to hang onto the concept that the developers somehow put this rule in place specifically to combat trip-lock. Can you cite a reference as to why you keep saying that, even though the developer has specifically stated it was a decision for simplicity?
And of course, I showed just a few posts back that you can indeed counter these actions with a Ready action...
The words "hope option" was not snark. I was actually serious, and no I am not being snarky now. When you have to depend on the opponent rolling badly or else I think hope is pretty much all you have left.Well ... that's just ... that's just daft man!
You *do* realize that while it's a role playing game, about 90% of conflict resolution involves rolling of die, right??
Die-rolling is a full on element of chance ... it's NEVER negated in-game.
*stunned look on face*
The point you keep missing is the you normally have options other than luck or a specific feat selection to get you out of a situation. The dice-rolling is not the issue.
Also remember that the tripped target is going to have friends to back him or her up.
NB I am not answering that again.
Edit: I already said his buddies can get him out if the "locker" is outnumbered, but in my TPK example all the NPC's are optimized triplockers. That was the gist of it anyway.
The CAUSE of something MUST happen BEFORE any effect of that action can occur. You MUST be trying to stand before provoking an attack, you MUST be grabbing an item from the ground before provoking. You MUST be casting a spell BEFORE provoking. No AoO can occur BEFORE the provoking action, or none of them make any logical sense. Why this would be the only mechanic in this whole game to not function that way is beyond me.The movement from prone to standing isn't instantaneous. You can trigger an AoO when you start to rise, but before you gain the "standing" condition.I've seen that mentioned a few times, and it seems like a lame duck to me.
the process of grabbing an item off the ground isn't instantaneous either.
Please respond to that ENTIRE paragraph. The ruling either works or it does not.
The act of STANDING is what provokes the AoO. From the SRD
Stand Up
Standing up from a prone position requires a move action and provokes attacks of opportunity. You are standing up. That is the action that provokes. Just like when you GRAB an item from the ground, the grabbing is what provokes.NB everything that provokes does so because you have to let you guard down in order to do it.
1. You let your guard down2. You get attacked
3. You continue your action.
The point you keep missing is the you normally have options other than luck or a specific feat selection to get you out of a situation. The dice-rolling is not the issue.The words "hope option" was not snark. I was actually serious, and no I am not being snarky now. When you have to depend on the opponent rolling badly or else I think hope is pretty much all you have left.Well ... that's just ... that's just daft man!
You *do* realize that while it's a role playing game, about 90% of conflict resolution involves rolling of die, right??
Die-rolling is a full on element of chance ... it's NEVER negated in-game.
*stunned look on face*
Die-rolling is *always* a factor in all things except field-control type spells (where no DC's really come into play or whatever).
Of *course* there are options because trip =/= "you win" as a maneuver. It's advantageous - but that's about it.
The point you keep missing is the you normally have options other than luck or a specific feat selection to get you out of a situation. The dice-rolling is not the issue.The words "hope option" was not snark. I was actually serious, and no I am not being snarky now. When you have to depend on the opponent rolling badly or else I think hope is pretty much all you have left.Well ... that's just ... that's just daft man!
You *do* realize that while it's a role playing game, about 90% of conflict resolution involves rolling of die, right??
Die-rolling is a full on element of chance ... it's NEVER negated in-game.
*stunned look on face*
Die-rolling is *always* a factor in all things except field-control type spells (where no DC's really come into play or whatever).
Of *course* there are options because trip =/= "you win" as a maneuver. It's advantageous - but that's about it.
I am saying dice-rolling is not a factor for my point because you tried to make it into a major point for no reason. I dont even know the point of your dice rolling statement.
Here it is again: If ALL you have is a very specific feat selection and hoping the bad guy rolls low to possibly get you out of situation the tactic is too good. Strike back can only be used with a readied action and if you have a CMB of 11.
Example 1: Triplocker rolls poorly on AoO check when you try to stand up. You try to move away and you provoke again, most likely he won't roll badly twice, and you are on the ground again. You basically have to hope he rolls low.
Even grappling which is designed to be a lockdown feat can be overcome if you roll high enough. Aid another even helps with your CMB to escape Trip does not even give you a roll. You can also be greased by the party arcanist. A grappler also gains the grappled condition. Mr.Lockdown has no such issues. All he has to do is keep you down as a free action. He can probably keep two party members down, and still has his full round action to do ______.
The point you keep missing is the you normally have options other than luck or a specific feat selection to get you out of a situation. The dice-rolling is not the issue.The words "hope option" was not snark. I was actually serious, and no I am not being snarky now. When you have to depend on the opponent rolling badly or else I think hope is pretty much all you have left.Well ... that's just ... that's just daft man!
You *do* realize that while it's a role playing game, about 90% of conflict resolution involves rolling of die, right??
Die-rolling is a full on element of chance ... it's NEVER negated in-game.
*stunned look on face*
Die-rolling is *always* a factor in all things except field-control type spells (where no DC's really come into play or whatever).
Of *course* there are options because trip =/= "you win" as a maneuver. It's advantageous - but that's about it.
I am not saying it is an auto-win, but it is close enough. 9 out of 10 times an optimized trip-locker keeps you in place until you die in a one on one situation. This assumes the party is tied up with his buddies of course since if he is alone he will most likely lose.
Also remember that the tripped target is going to have friends to back him or her up.
NB I am not answering that again.
Edit: I already said his buddies can get him out if the "locker" is outnumbered, but in my TPK example all the NPC's are optimized triplockers. That was the gist of it anyway.
I see what you're saying, but I think that example is pretty specialized. I could run a party up against a superior number of equivalent level well mages with two or three specific feats throwing save or suck spells and it would probably get bad fast too.
I think the big point of contention was at what point in the action chain the AoO occurs, which in my mind (and this is CLEARLY AGAINST what has been ruled) is during the action itself, not before. The big point made on this front by Jason was that in order to keep the game simple even though AoO's "interrupt" an action, they occur before the action, with the notable exception of Concentration Checks, which occur during.
So we hammered down the official rules for the thing, the problem is the wording in the rule book.
Now personally I won't play it that way and think its pretty sloppy, but I've voiced my concerns on the matter.
The argument of wether or not trip-lock is unfair is kind of a moot point, as you can still do it by the RAW, it just needs a second tripper readying actions to pull it off.
He won't necessarily lose in that situation, either. I could counter point the argument, but I think that on both sides of the fence it's going to be so subjective in terms of raw data that it probably wouldn't go anywhere... ultimately, even while prone you have option.
Can I see it as a problem if an entire group of specialized enemy trippers attack the party? Sure, but you could say the same for a LOT of things in the game and I don't see it as a point that either validates or invalidates anything.
Can I see it as a problem if an entire group of specialized enemy trippers attack the party? Sure, but you could say the same for a LOT of things in the game and I don't see it as a point that either validates or invalidates anything.
+1 for this man.
Honestly, that's about as far as it's going to get argument-wise.
:shrugs:
Also remember that the tripped target is going to have friends to back him or her up.
NB I am not answering that again.
Edit: I already said his buddies can get him out if the "locker" is outnumbered, but in my TPK example all the NPC's are optimized triplockers. That was the gist of it anyway.
I see what you're saying, but I think that example is pretty specialized. I could run a party up against a superior number of equivalent level well mages with two or three specific feats throwing save or suck spells and it would probably get bad fast too.
I think the big point of contention was at what point in the action chain the AoO occurs, which in my mind (and this is CLEARLY AGAINST what has been ruled) is during the action itself, not before. The big point made on this front by Jason was that in order to keep the game simple even though AoO's "interrupt" an action, they occur before the action, with the notable exception of Concentration Checks, which occur during.
So we hammered down the official rules for the thing, the problem is the wording in the rule book.
Now personally I won't play it that way and think its pretty sloppy, but I've voiced my concerns on the matter.
The argument of wether or not trip-lock is unfair is kind of a moot point, as you can still do it by the RAW, it just needs a second tripper readying actions to pull it off.
He won't necessarily lose in that situation, either. I could counter point the argument, but I think that on both sides of the fence it's going to be so subjective in terms of raw data that it probably wouldn't go anywhere... ultimately, even while prone you have option.
Can I see it as a problem if an entire group of specialized enemy trippers attack the party? Sure, but you could say the same for a LOT of things in the game and I don't see it as a point that either validates or invalidates anything.
Trip-lock itself is not the issue. Triplock by one person using free actions is. Even if you have two lockers someone has to use a readied action.
I dont think other specializations bring the same issues to the table. Even if it were grapplers a reasonable chance to escape is there.
Can I see it as a problem if an entire group of specialized enemy trippers attack the party? Sure, but you could say the same for a LOT of things in the game and I don't see it as a point that either validates or invalidates anything.+1 for this man.
Honestly, that's about as far as it's going to get argument-wise.
:shrugs:
Honestly you are wrong. Every example named earlier in the post had a reliable counter. Trip-lock if built correctly can basically stop you from taking actions.
Sleep, Dominate, SoD's, grappling, petrification, and so on.
I am going to make this real simple. Tell me how to get out of trip lock using a standard character(someone that does not know they will be triplocked). A caster might get out. Before you answer think of what you would do to try to keep them trip locked. That way I dont have to counter with things like readying an action to force a concentration check.
Strike Back is not available until you get a BAB of 11.
I keep hearing people say it is ok, but nobody has told me how to get out of it yet.
Can I see it as a problem if an entire group of specialized enemy trippers attack the party? Sure, but you could say the same for a LOT of things in the game and I don't see it as a point that either validates or invalidates anything.+1 for this man.
Honestly, that's about as far as it's going to get argument-wise.
:shrugs:
Honestly you are wrong. Every example named earlier in the post had a reliable counter. Trip-lock if built correctly can basically stop you from taking actions.
Sleep, Dominate, SoD's, grappling, petrification, and so on.
I was trying to curtail this, but I find it really difficult to think that its more powerful then A crew of mages throwing high DC save or suck spells that take you out not for one round, not for two rounds, but either for the duration of the fight or permanently. You have a fighting chance while prone, there are things you can still do, as opposed to being petrified/asleep/dead.
You can still take actions while prone, do you think you can't?
I am going to make this real simple. Tell me how to get out of trip lock using a standard character(someone that does not know they will be triplocked). A caster might get out. Before you answer think of what you would do to try to keep them trip locked. That way I dont have to counter with things like readying an action to force a concentration check.
Strike Back is not available until you get a BAB of 11.I keep hearing people say it is ok, but nobody has told me how to get out of it yet.
You're not making anything simple, you're assuming that the target isn't a rogue, assuming the CMB is succesful every time.
Well, assuming that everything works all the time I'm sure you'll never get away. Assuming its a one on one fight you might not be able to get up... doesn't mean you can't do anything, you can still act from prone, or crawl away. Wait, here's an idea, crawl five feet away and stand up. Now can he move to you and trip you next turn? SURE, but he could have done that anyway, even if you'd stood up. Or you cuold attack him from prone. Or you might have an item that lets you teleport.... or or or or....
Too many variables for an argument like that to work, Wraithstrike. I understand that you don't like the trip-lock, but the framework for an argument like this hasn't been established. In order to get into the detail you're hinting at we would need character sheets, a map, the stats for everything, and a clear definition of what an "average" character looks like at any level, not to mention the DM's inclinations toward RAW and gameplay.
Do you get what I'm striking at here?
Can I see it as a problem if an entire group of specialized enemy trippers attack the party? Sure, but you could say the same for a LOT of things in the game and I don't see it as a point that either validates or invalidates anything.+1 for this man.
Honestly, that's about as far as it's going to get argument-wise.
:shrugs:
Honestly you are wrong. Every example named earlier in the post had a reliable counter. Trip-lock if built correctly can basically stop you from taking actions.
Sleep, Dominate, SoD's, grappling, petrification, and so on.I was trying to curtail this, but I find it really difficult to think that its more powerful then A crew of mages throwing high DC save or suck spells that take you out not for one round, not for two rounds, but either for the duration of the fight or permanently. You have a fighting chance while prone, there are things you can still do, as opposed to being petrified/asleep/dead.
You can still take actions while prone, do you think you can't?
Save of suck spells sound nice in theory, but first the fail has to save, and then there are usually magic items or spells to negate or help prevent the spells from ever taking place. Most players try to get high saves so it is not like they are going out of their way to avoid them anyway. Most SoD's dont have a 90% success rate. My point with the other things is that they are more easily prevented, and there are things do that can get rid of them during the course of battle. Nothing prevents triplock, and short of killing the attacking monster there is almost no way out.
I am going to make this real simple. Tell me how to get out of trip lock using a standard character(someone that does not know they will be triplocked). A caster might get out. Before you answer think of what you would do to try to keep them trip locked. That way I dont have to counter with things like readying an action to force a concentration check.
Strike Back is not available until you get a BAB of 11.I keep hearing people say it is ok, but nobody has told me how to get out of it yet.
You're not making anything simple, you're assuming that the target isn't a rogue, assuming the CMB is succesful every time.
Well, assuming that everything works all the time I'm sure you'll never get away. Assuming its a one on one fight you might not be able to get up... doesn't mean you can't do anything, you can still act from prone, or crawl away. Wait, here's an idea, crawl five feet away and stand up. Now can he move to you and trip you next turn? SURE, but he could have done that anyway, even if you'd stood up. Or you cuold attack him from prone. Or you might have an item that lets you teleport.... or or or or....
Too many variables for an argument like that to work, Wraithstrike. I understand that you don't like the trip-lock, but the framework for an argument like this hasn't been established. In order to get into the detail you're hinting at we would need character sheets, a map, the stats for everything, and a clear definition of what an "average" character looks like at any level, not to mention the DM's inclinations toward RAW and gameplay.
Do you get what I'm striking at here?
You can't crawl away. Crawling provokes. Standing also provokes, and that bastard has reach if he is optimized. This has been repeated multiple times.
It does not matter if it is a rogue or fighter. How is a rogue any better off? What item do you know of that lets you teleport other than scrolls? Those also provoke. Not only that it would take on action to pull the scroll out, and another to activate. I would just sunder the scroll.Edit: Removed first sentence due to an over reaction on my part because I keep having to repeat the same rules about crawling provoking an AoO.
Good tripper are generally Large or more.
Then :
* you approach. he trips you with AoO.
* he's out-of-reach. You try to stand up, but he prevent the action.
* you crawl away, provoke an AoO, and stand up. During his turn, he makes a 5-feet-step and trips you.And for now, he hasn't use many of his action. He has to use an attack only if you crawl away. And only if he his reach is only 5 feet more than you.
..and to add if there are enough available feats the tripper will have improved disarm or greater disarm. Readying an action to disrupt spells will keep the casters in place.
Woah there folks. first off, never claimed I was a physicist, and two common teleport items are cape of the mountebank and boots of teleportation. as far as provoking, only you can get angry at something, that's not on me. will respond in full later, at the gym till one.
After skimming over the many posts here, one point occured to me that I haven't seen; if it has already been mentioned, I apologize. Simply, an aoo (being either a immediate or free action) is not going to have the same level of control a standard action will.
An aoo to trip someone who is doing regular movement would probably not in most cases actually knock them flat on their butt if successful, but would be enough to disrupt their center of gravity enough to render them unable to move any farther. In the case of someone who is trying to get up, their center of gravity is already in flux, and the person standing up is prepared to deal with the minor adjustments necessary; the amount of further disruption capable of being caused in the time that an immediate(or free with combat reflexes) action would not likely be significant enough to cause the person standing up much problem. A readied action, conversely, implies that the tripper is specifically watching for this particular action, and is thus primed to take the full measures necessary to keep someone down, and as a standard action implies that there is enough time to inflict the necessary.
As far as spellcasting or anything that requires concentration, the aoo does not itself cause the loss of the action, as several people have stated. All the aoo does is force the caster to refocus his concentration after a split second disruption. The success or failure of the refocusing is what can cause failure of the initial action, usually spellcasting of some kind, not the aoo itself. As in the case of the person running, its the change in condition that renders the intial action incapable of being finished, not the aoo that triggered the change in condition. If you are already prone, being rendered prone again by someone elses immediate or quicker action does nothing to change the initial circumstances that the target was dealing with.
A standard action equivalent, in both time and control, is necessary in that circumstance.
90% success? How?
Against a "matched" level/CR opponent? I think you're being REALLY generous there.
Against a non-combat chump -sure (but then, I'd hardly call that a matched opponent). Against lower level critters (ie: 1 hd goblins vs. a 5 hd character) - again, sure.
You're only getting that high a # if the odds are tipped vastly in favor of the tripper build.
Best comparison point would be 2 fighters, IMO. One all about trip, the other just .... a fighter (for sake of YOUR argument, assume he's not using the 2-feat dip to become immune to trips outright, even though the base feat would be plenty useful).
First off is the CMB calculation - the tripper needs to beat this and he can have either a weapon w/trip for a +2 on attempts, the weapon + feat, or weapon + 2 feats (depending on level).
I'm just going to pick level 5 for a start:
level 5 tripper probably has the weapon and the 1 feat (+6 bab needed for the other, no?), so 5 on bab + (str mod - whatever it is - call it a +2 ok?) + size mod (likly nothing as most are medium sized character). Then add in the maneuver specific boons and it's say a 5+2+2(wpn)+2(trip) = +11 to try his maneuver against a target.
The target's CMD = 10 (base) + 5 (bab) + 2 (str) + 2 (just making a "middle guy" on str and dex here) + size mod (0 - again medium). So he's got a 19 to *beat* in order to get tripped, assuming no sort of prepared design to deal with the tripping guy.
In what world is +11 vs. a DC 19 target 90%? How is that guaranteed victory in any way, shape, or form?
HOWEVER it also gets better ... for the DEFENDER - any of a number of bonuses to AC can work and be applied to this number to make it higher. From the SRD, "A creature can also add any circumstance, deflection, dodge, insight, morale, profane, and sacred bonuses to AC to its CMD."
Dodge is a pretty good feat to have in general, and not trip-specific in defense, but it will apply and raise that DC to 20. Combat Expertise is also a great feat and has a lot of utility - it, too, can raise that DC target of the trip-monster. Fighting Defensively or total defense - both can apply and increase the DC again (DC 22 or 24 respectively). Add in Combat Expertise for maximum effect and the DC can go from 23 - 27 for "fighting defensively" or 25 - 29 for "full defense" ... this is all against Mr. Trip-monster's +11 "to trip" and being all twinked out.
If the guy on the round wants to stand up - even unprepared (seriously - 2 common and universally useful feats granted of the fighter's total amount is a tame estimate, and both would apply to *most* martial characters again for equal utility) he absolutely can stack the deck for himself to get up and lay the hurt on the bastich trying to keep 'em down.
Another likely feat the "downed" target will have - Vital Strike. It's useful for precisely the times when you only get 1 attack (which are incredibly numerous, thus making the feat an almost necessity), and that would be exactly the description of Mr. Trip-monster and his trip you up twinkage.
Seriously ... it's a maneuver with an "ok" chance of success but it's easily defeated, or at least significantly challenged with a smattering of already useful and likely to be chosen feats in the first place.
Just trying to give you some actual #'s to look at a bit here.
And no - not all feats have been taken into consideration, or stats - just some middle of the line feats and stats to just put up some sort of fair comparison.
Maneuvers are actually a good deal harder to pull off w/the PF changes, honestly.
After skimming over the many posts here, one point occured to me that I haven't seen; if it has already been mentioned, I apologize. Simply, an aoo (being either a immediate or free action) is not going to have the same level of control a standard action will.
An aoo to trip someone who is doing regular movement would probably not in most cases actually knock them flat on their butt if successful, but would be enough to disrupt their center of gravity enough to render them unable to move any farther. In the case of someone who is trying to get up, their center of gravity is already in flux, and the person standing up is prepared to deal with the minor adjustments necessary; the amount of further disruption capable of being caused in the time that an immediate(or free with combat reflexes) action would not likely be significant enough to cause the person standing up much problem. A readied action, conversely, implies that the tripper is specifically watching for this particular action, and is thus primed to take the full measures necessary to keep someone down, and as a standard action implies that there is enough time to inflict the necessary.
As far as spellcasting or anything that requires concentration, the aoo does not itself cause the loss of the action, as several people have stated. All the aoo does is force the caster to refocus his concentration after a split second disruption. The success or failure of the refocusing is what can cause failure of the initial action, usually spellcasting of some kind, not the aoo itself. As in the case of the person running, its the change in condition that renders the intial action incapable of being finished, not the aoo that triggered the change in condition. If you are already prone, being rendered prone again by someone elses immediate or quicker action does nothing to change the initial circumstances that the target was dealing with.
A standard action equivalent, in both time and control, is necessary in that circumstance.
That's a valid outlook on it.
My big problem, and the reason I mentioned causality in this particular circumstance had NOTHING to do with a percieved knowledge of physics... I'm military, we don't do that thinking stuff.
However, my point ALSO remains valid. Your argument, Stephane, hinges on a perception of the rule text, being specifically that it's the initiation of the action that causes the AoO. The rules state, explixitly, that it's the Standing, Grabbing, Casting, that initiates the AoO's, there's a seperate ruling that Jason made that clarifies the timing. It needs to be re-worded to reflect what's intended.
"If I pick something up, and you try to knock it out of my hand because I'm being careless enough to ignore you and pick it up" makes logical, rational sense.
"I picked something up, and you succesfully knock it out of my hand because I'm being careless enough to ignore you, but you do so before the item is ACTUALLY IN MY HAND" is niether logical nor rational.
"You get an attack of opportunity on me because I'm GOING to pick something up" also works, and makes good logical sense.
If a rule exists that doesn't make logical, rational sense I'm tossing it out. Until such a time as AoO's are amended to happen in an order that can legitimately be described in action without requirring me to do a figure 8 to describe what happens, I'm not playing them that way. Now three is what's INTENDED by the rules, but two is whats HAPPENING by the mechanics.
and Wraithstrike, your point about the optimized build has never been in question. I'd want to be large, I'd want to be good at, but he's not going to always succeed, you're not stating anything about the target whatsoever, and you're not discounting that a trip build character can do *almost* all of what you're saying anyway.
Frankly a large size character makes it just as bad, as you can use your reach AoO to trip,subsequent AoO's for damage, and ready an action to trip THEN step back, and use subsequent AoO's to propegate the cycle. Is it really any different?
Trips Nathan, and keeps on tripping him as he tries to stand up.
Damnation, its all those blithering tentacles!
TriOmegaZero you rascal!
*trips the thread when it provokes AoO*
*continues to make use of options from the Prone position so as not to provoke*
The issue with the free tripping is action economy. Triplocking as a free action makes it basically an endless cycle. It is no secret that action economy wins the game. Timestop does not even damage you but because it gives you so many free rounds it is a spell that. I don't think anyone will be convinced that is not already convinced though.
Wow!!! MM, that's just ... wow!
So if you're maxed out on trip and disarm, you can *potentially* net 2 AoO's on the target?? Yipes!!
Trip (w/improved ==> AoO) to AoO for damage, continue w/your full attack.
Target stands = AoO to disarm and this is a move action for the target. Target now only has 1 standard action left, but no weapon. It cna draw a secondary (as long as +1 bab at least) free and standard attack, though. Or it can reach down and pick up the weapon to provoke another AoO ... to be tripped, which leads to another AoO for damage on the trip provocation.
Of course you (attacker) *do)* need to beat the CMD a few times, the second one likely being harder w/the target able to act fully and adjust defenses for dealing w/Mr. Trip Monkey, though.
At the highest end, we're talking about a 1 wpn type getting in 6 swings vs. 4. Or w/a 2-wpn type, it's up to 9 swings ... jeez!
That's just ... not fair. Totally raw as it's been enforced, too, no?
Yeah ... looking like I favor the simple fix of "AoO's can *only* be damaging attacks" honestly. It'll patch every corner case just fine.
The issue with the free tripping is action economy. Triplocking as a free action makes it basically an endless cycle. It is no secret that action economy wins the game. Timestop does not even damage you but because it gives you so many free rounds it is a spell that. I don't think anyone will be convinced that is not already convinced though.Except, if that were true, you would only be able to deal damage with an AoO. You can trip someone, they stand, Disarm them with an AoO, they pick it up, THEN trip them with another AoO. All perfectly legal currently and completly OP by action-economy.
So, if action economy is the issue, the rules should be changed to allow only damage on AoO's. Which would also answer this issue.
I agree, since my interpretation of an AoO is making a quick attack based on someone else dropping their defense, and therefore it should only be damage without any special affects.
Well it was but then you came along and STOKED THE FLAMES!
ARISE, BROTHAZ!