A debate sprang up with my DM the other day and I was curious what everyone else thought.
Say a goblin is moving past my monk, provoking an AoO.
I decide that I want to trip him in place of my melee attack, but I do not have the Improved Trip feat.
Does my trip attack provoke an AoO from the Goblin, on his turn, while he is actively moving? His AoO count would reset when his turn started, so he's always guaranteed to have one while he is moving.
Does he get to slice at me before my trip, and then continue walking past if I fail to trip him?
The wording of Attacks of Opportunity is this: "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."
My argument is that if the goblin has already "let his guard down" to move past me, he should not be able to attack me when I try to trip him, even if I "let my guard down" to do so.
Obviously, other creatures adjacent to me should be able to attack me, but should the moving goblin who is provoking an AoO get a shot?
Obviously, other creatures adjacent to me should be able to attack me, but should the moving goblin who is provoking an AoO get a shot?
I'm pretty sure that only the target of the action that provokes the AoO actually gets one, movement being an obvious exception.
I'm pretty sure that only the target of the action that provokes the AoO actually gets one, movement being an obvious exception.
Obviously, other creatures adjacent to me should be able to attack me, but should the moving goblin who is provoking an AoO get a shot?
No, but that is the case for trips.
No, but that is the case for trips.I'm pretty sure that only the target of the action that provokes the AoO actually gets one, movement being an obvious exception.
Obviously, other creatures adjacent to me should be able to attack me, but should the moving goblin who is provoking an AoO get a shot?
I was under the impression that Combat Maneuvers only provoke from the target of the CM, while other actions that provoke do so from everyone who threatens. Is this correct?
I was under the impression that Combat Maneuvers only provoke from the target of the CM, while other actions that provoke do so from everyone who threatens. Is this correct?
The Combat Maneuvers section specifically says "Performing a Combat Maneuver provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of the maneuver", so I assume you are correct.
Thanks for this. I still think it's weird for someone who has dropped their guard to be able to stab at me if I try to trip them, but that's how the rules work I guess.
I disagree with this view, simply because it doesn't make a lot of sense. As noted by the OP, an AoO is provoked because someone is dropping their guard in the middle of combat.
Let's say it's because I'm drinking a potion. Someone tries to trip me while I'm trying to get the potion out of your my or whatever. While I'm in the middle of grabbing for the potion, I somehow have the presence of mind to stab the other guy, with no penalty to my attack whatsoever? With a greatsword?
I'd personally rule that either a) actions that would normally provoke don't in this situation or b) you can take any actions that would provoke. I lean towards option A because I don't want to deny someone the chance to disarm you of a potion or sunder an over-confident archer's bow.
That said, my personal views are not RAW.
My Attack of opportunity can beat up your honor roll student.
IF a wood chuck could chuck wood, would he provoke an attack of opportunity?
I think I'm going into the bumper sticker business....
Let's say it's because I'm drinking a potion. Someone tries to trip me while I'm trying to get the potion out of your my or whatever. While I'm in the middle of grabbing for the potion, I somehow have the presence of mind to stab the other guy, with no penalty to my attack whatsoever? With a greatsword?
[nitpick] If you are using a greatsword, you'd have to remove at least one hand from the weapon to grab for the potion. That means you wouldn't be armed and thus can't take the attack of opportunity. [/nitpick]
I thought that existed a rule that said you cannot use an action that provokes an AoO IN an AoO. No?
I thought that existed a rule that said you cannot use an action that provokes an AoO IN an AoO. No?
I do believe you are correct.
So, in summary, some actions provoke from everyone who threatens (standing from prone, crawling, some movement, retrieving/using certain objects), while Combat Maneuvers only provoke from the target of the maneuver. Yes?
Edit: removed erroneous quote
So, in summary, some actions provoke from everyone who threatens (standing from prone, crawling, some movement, retrieving/using certain objects), while Combat Maneuvers only provoke from the target of the maneuver. Yes?
Edit: removed erroneous quote
Not necessarily. Your movement from a Bull Rush or Overrun would provoke from others even if you had the Imp. feats.
You can only make a single attack when performing an aoo, not a combat manouver...that takes a standard action/...simple and effective...
Not all combat manuvuers require a standard action. Specifically, Disarm, Sunder & Trip are used "in place of a melee attack." So you can do multiple attempts per round with iterative attacks, or use them in place of the melee attack you get as part of an AoO.
[nitpick] If you are using a greatsword, you'd have to remove at least one hand from the weapon to grab for the potion. That means you wouldn't be armed and thus can't take the attack of opportunity. [/nitpick]
If we're picking nits, I don't think that wielding a weapon ineffectively counts as unarmed. Take a -4 non-proficiency penalty if you think it's appropriate, but you're still armed.
Edit: And I knew I was going to get Ninja'd on that one. So I don't count as flat-footed, right?
Not necessarily. Your movement from a Bull Rush or Overrun would provoke from others even if you had the Imp. feats.
So, in summary, some actions provoke from everyone who threatens (standing from prone, crawling, some movement, retrieving/using certain objects), while Combat Maneuvers only provoke from the target of the maneuver. Yes?
Edit: removed erroneous quote
A good, and often overlooked, point.
I think i would play it...
-Not being able to use a AoO provoking maneuver as part of an AoO.
-Allowing use of the Maneuvers when the Improved+ versions remove the AoO for using them.
-Call it another perk for spending the feat.
I thought that existed a rule that said you cannot use an action that provokes an AoO IN an AoO. No?I do believe you are correct.
Making an Attack of Opportunity
An attack of opportunity is a single melee attack, and most characters can only make one per round. You don't have to make an attack of opportunity if you don't want to. You make your attack of opportunity at your normal attack bonus, even if you've already attacked in the round.
An attack of opportunity "interrupts" the normal flow of actions in the round. If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character's turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character's turn).
There's no rule I can find that says that.
__________________You can only make a single attack when performing an aoo, not a combat manouver...that takes a standard action/...simple and effective...Not all combat manuvuers require a standard action. Specifically, Disarm, Sunder & Trip are used "in place of a melee attack." So you can do multiple attempts per round with iterative attacks, or use them in place of the melee attack you get as part of an AoO.
Correct.
While many combat maneuvers can be performed as part of an attack action, full-attack action, or attack of opportunity (in place of a melee attack), others require a specific action.
___________________
Not necessarily. Your movement from a Bull Rush or Overrun would provoke from others even if you had the Imp. feats.
You don't need to move to Bull Rush.
This phenomenon is called an AoO chain
There is a weak link in that chain.
There is a concept in the rules that you can't pause an action once announced to perform another action and then go back to the original action. Some feats allow some specific exceptions, like spring attack and flyby attack, but generally speaking once a creature commences an action, they can't take another until it's resolved.
Now it's true that AoO are considered as happening as though immediatly before the action that provoked them, but this is a term of art, it's really happening in the middle, which is why it can interrupt action. And regardless the original action was announced and must resolve.
This means that if A does something that provokes an AoO from B, B's action may itself provoke, but A can't do anything about it because he's occupied and must finish his current action first.
Pragmatically, this makes common sense - Goblin is running past the monk, he can't stop in his tracks, pinwheel, taking advantage of the monk leaving himself open by trying to trip the running goblin, to himself trip the monk and then go back to running without breaking stride. That goblin could be a grand master of flowers and not pull that off.
Some bystander may be able to captialise on the Monk leaving himself open, but the one who prokoved is already doing what they're doing. Likewise neither can the Monk try to trip the bystandard trying to trip him. He can't pause tripping the goblin to try to trip the bystander, etc.
So, no chain.
What that means is AoO are the chance to use Trip, Disarm, and Sunder in the middle of combat despite not having a feat.
AoO can happen and do in fact make realistic sense. If you're trying to drink a potion and someone attempts to get a hit in quickly, it isn't that unimaginable for you to get an easy parry riposte if he slips up.
Careful readings of the rules (such as why you can't trip lock) make it clear that AoO's occur before the event that the thing that triggers them occurs.
Yea, I adressed that.
It'd be nice if they were perfectly explicit for every case, but at least with movement, they do state explicitly that you can't make an attack in the middle of a move (cf. spring attack). So, with situations like the goblin running past the monk, there should be no question. There's also a lot of examples in the rules of being occupied or distracted causing you to lose your ability to make an attack of opportuinity. So - even not getting caught up in the rules retroactive weirdness of things happening in response to actions that technically haven't taken place yet - it's more reasonable to infer that if the nature of the act is so distracting and pre-occuplying that it leaves you open to attack because you can't properly defend yourself, you're also too pre-occupied to attack in response.
I buy a parry repose from an en garde position, but not when you're so pre-occupied chugging (or tripping, or disarming, or spell casting etc.) you can't properly respond - which is the justification for the AoO in the first place.
A) He hits/misses you, but you fail to trip and he continues running by.or
B) He hits/misses you, but you manage to hook he leg and he falls flat on his face preventing further movement forward.
The real problem I have here is that if he hits you, you add his damage as a penalty to the combat maneuver. With a goblin, this isn't bad, but if you're trying to disarm a Stone Giant as he runs past, you could easily be hit and have a -20 (or worse) on the check.
Like others have said, moving might have been a bad example. What about casting a spell, or drinking a potion?
1. The giant drops his guard for a moment to fumble with a potion and drink it.
2. Before he actually drinks it, but while he is fumbling with it, my AoO goes off. I attempt to trip him.
3. He, while his guard is down, fumbling with a potion, grabs his greatclub and smacks me for 20 damage.
4. I get hit, but my trip goes off with a -20 to the CMB roll. I obviously fail.
5. The giant finishes drinking his potion, and laughs.
That doesn't sit right with me.
Yea, I adressed that.
It'd be nice if they were perfectly explicit for every case, but at least with movement, they do state explicitly that you can't make an attack in the middle of a move (cf. spring attack). So, with situations like the goblin running past the monk, there should be no question. There's also a lot of examples in the rules of being occupied or distracted causing you to lose your ability to make an attack of opportuinity. So - even not getting caught up in the rules retroactive weirdness of things happening in response to actions that technically haven't taken place yet - it's more reasonable to infer that if the nature of the act is so distracting and pre-occuplying that it leaves you open to attack because you can't properly defend yourself, you're also too pre-occupied to attack in response.
I buy a parry repose from an en garde position, but not when you're so pre-occupied chugging (or tripping, or disarming, or spell casting etc.) you can't properly respond - which is the justification for the AoO in the first place.
I'd agree if things were going normally, however, it is established that either the other person has either stumbled leaving themselves wildly out of position (nat 1 on attack) or is clearly improvising a maneuver. Either way it more a manner of incompetence on your opponent's part granting you the AoO rather than your own finesse.
|
Yes, AoO can and do trigger AoO when appropriate.
It's important to remember there's a certain level of abstraction built into the rules. It doesn't really take a full 3 seconds to stick the pointy end of a sword in someone, and the rules don't expect you to believe it does, even though a normal attack is a standard action which takes about 3 seconds of game time. That one attack roll could be a barbarian swinging his greataxe in a ponderous but powerful roundhouse blow, or a series of lightning fast thrusts and parries between rapier wielders, ending with one (on a successful attack roll) slipping under the guard of the other, or anything in between. The AoO system is a great tool for simulating the fact that these things don't really take 3 seconds... unless your opponent has his guard up... and there's no reason why one of these attacks can't trigger another - it makes for much more dynamic combat, after all.
Looking at it another way - the only reason the goblin can't just casually stab your monk on his way past is that your monk is aware and has his guard up. The goblin trying to run past you opens himself up to a shot from you, but if you choose to exploit that opening by dropping your own guard, then there's no reason why he can't just stab you first. These things are immediate in game mechanics terms, coming just before the action which triggered them, but within that abstraction they're just combat at a faster pace.
So... you see the goblin running towards you, and see that's given you an opening. You drop your guard, trying to do something you're not really well practiced at. The goblin stabs at you, praising his goblin deities for the opportunity you've given him. If still up, you then try to follow through on your attempt to trip him. If he's still up after that, he keeps running. Descriptively it should all happen together like an action movie - the goblin doesn't really stop as you try to trip him, then keeps running. No, it's more like: as he's running your leg shoots out for a sweep, and he swings at your head with his sword whilst trying to jump that leg, not pausing in his run. The wonders of bullet time give you enough room to actually roll the dice... ;)
Welp, consider that provoking an AoO isn't the same as granting one. Lots of things can keep one from being able to capitalise on that opportunity. Some are explicit (being flat footed, grappling, etc.) I think being pre-occupied with the current provoking action is at least an implicit one.
I'd consider using that read, even if you don't agree with it on techinical grounds. I think it is supported, but I also like it for game play reasons since, aside from avoiding the chain of AoO business in a common sense way, it lets people use combat manuvers sometimes without have to buy a feat.
Makes combats more interesing and fun if people can get in a disarm or a trip now and again, because their opponent left themselves open to it.
Seems to me the way those situations play out is more just:
Tall guy drinks (provoking)
Short guy trips (provoking)
Tall guy sticks out arm (Flavor text describing short guy's MISS vs the big guy's CMB. Even in this example, it's not an attack for damage or trip, disarm, or sunder - because if so it'd be obvious he couldn't do both things at once)
Tall guy laughs as a free action after finishing his drink.
Problem with interpreting it that the tall guy can simultaniously chug the drink and not just defend himself but actually get a bonus melee attack/trip/sunder/disarm on the short guy, while chugging - aside from it being unbeliveable, unless maybe if he's Cayden Cailean or Drunken Master - is you'd rarely get that scene unless the short guy was especially trained (improved trip), since the short guy would be too afraid of the Tall guy's attack (which he'd somehow get despite letting his guard down *and* doing something else at the same time) to try it.
As an aside: Have you ever seen pewter tankards with glass bottoms? Point of those was so you could still keep an eye on the guy in front of you while you drink, so the guy couldn't take a free shot at you while your guard was down (A RL item actually designed to let you drink without provoking AoO!)
From what I thought, u can use trip or other things that normally provoke an AoO as an AoO without provoking.
Otherwise, if two fighters WITHOUT imp. Unarmed strike attacked each other, they would continually provoke each other therefore being stuck in stasis.
Unless of course ur not armed unarmed w/o IUS.
But the same could be said for a trip.
I trip opponent. I provoke. My opponent attempts to trip me as an AoO. It provokes, so I attempt to trip him. Etc etc etc. Stasis.
From what I thought, u can use trip or other things that normally provoke an AoO as an AoO without provoking.
Otherwise, if two fighters WITHOUT imp. Unarmed strike attacked each other, they would continually provoke each other therefore being stuck in stasis.
Unless of course ur not armed unarmed w/o IUS.
But the same could be said for a trip.
I trip opponent. I provoke. My opponent attempts to trip me as an AoO. It provokes, so I attempt to trip him. Etc etc etc. Stasis.
Hence the finite number of AoO's even with combat reflexes.
Normally, combat manuvers provoke -
Question is can you pause a current action to take another action then complete the original action (general rule is you can't, specifically you can't during a move).
Or, Argument is since everthing's counted as happening retroactivly, you're not pausing an action because the action hasn't been started - (Which then is like you're in an alternate reality like Stephen Hawking taked about where time flows backwards and effects preceed their causes).
You need one or the other to get an AoO from the target of to your own AoO who himself provoked by doing something.
The limit on the number of AoO you can take in a round and Combat reflexes is more about how many AoO provoking goblins running past you can you ever reasonably slice in 6 second timeframe.
Normally, combat manuvers provoke -
Question is can you pause a current action to take another action then complete the original action (general rule is you can't, specifically you can't during a move).
Attacks of opportunities aren't actions, they're reactions.
I always love AoO chains. Especially when it's two people with combat reflexes going at it with high Dex.
A runs by, provoking from B.
B tries to trip, provoking from A.
A tries to disarm, provoking from B.
B tries to disarm, provoking from A.
A tries to trip, provoking from B.
B tries to trip, provoking from A.
A tries to disarm, provoking from B.
B tries to trip, provoking from A.
A tries to disarm, provoking from B.
B tries to trip, provoking from A.
A tries to trip, provoking from B.
B tries to disarm, provoking from A.
A tries to disarm, provoking from B, but B has taken all of his attacks of opportunity, so he can't retaliate. A disarms him.
Now, B can't disarm,
A can't trip,
B can't trip
A can't disarm
B can't trip
A can't disarm
B can't trip
A can't trip
B can't disarm
A can't disarm
and B can't trip.
An epic battle of wits from two rogues with combat reflexes.
|
Normally, combat manuvers provoke -
Question is can you pause a current action to take another action then complete the original action (general rule is you can't, specifically you can't during a move).
Attacks of opportunities aren't actions, they're reactions.
I always love AoO chains. Especially when it's two people with combat reflexes going at it with high Dex.
A runs by, provoking from B.
B tries to trip, provoking from A.
A tries to disarm, provoking from B.
B tries to disarm, provoking from A.
A tries to trip, provoking from B.
B tries to trip, provoking from A.
A tries to disarm, provoking from B.
B tries to trip, provoking from A.
A tries to disarm, provoking from B.
B tries to trip, provoking from A.
A tries to trip, provoking from B.
B tries to disarm, provoking from A.
A tries to disarm, provoking from B, but B has taken all of his attacks of opportunity, so he can't retaliate. A disarms him.Now, B can't disarm,
A can't trip,
B can't trip
A can't disarm
B can't trip
A can't disarm
B can't trip
A can't trip
B can't disarm
A can't disarm
and B can't trip.An epic battle of wits from two rogues with combat reflexes.
Er, isn't it one AoO per target per round, even with Combat Reflexes?
And I think it's perfectly reasonable for the goblin or giant to get a swing at a character trying an unarmed maneuver (that he's not trained at) against an armed opponent.
|
Er, isn't it one AoO per target per round, even with Combat Reflexes?
No. It is one AoO per opportunity, meaning a provoking event. There can be multiple AoO per target. There can even be multiple AoO per action, if the action consists of multiple triggering events; an example would be a full round action making multiple ranged attacks. Movement provokes only once and is an explicit exception.
A tries to disarm, provoking from B, but B has taken all of his attacks of opportunity, so he can't retaliate. A disarms him.
Now, B can't disarm,
A can't trip,
B can't trip
A can't disarm
B can't trip
A can't disarm
B can't trip
A can't trip
B can't disarm
A can't disarm
and B can't trip.An epic battle of wits from two rogues with combat reflexes.
I have a problem with your resolution:
A tries to disarm, provoking from B, but B has taken all of his attacks of opportunity, so he can't retaliate. A disarms him.
Now, B disarms at a -4 penalty for being unarmed, may successfully disarm A, if so, then B can immediately wield the weapon.
A can trip, and succeeds (lets say)
B can trip, and also succeeds (just go with it)
A can disarm, at -4 for being unarmed and -4 for being prone, may successfully disarm B, taking his weapon back.
B can't trip, A is already prone.
A can't disarm, as B is not armed.
B can't trip, A is already prone.
A can't trip, B is already prone.
B can disarm, at -4 for being unarmed and -4 for being prone, may successfully disarm A, taking A's weapon.
A can disarm, at -4 for being unarmed and -4 for being prone, may successfully disarm B, taking his weapon back.
and B can't trip, A is already prone.
End result, both are prone, B's weapon is laying in his space, and A's weapon went to B, A, B, and then A again.
Otherwise, if two fighters WITHOUT imp. Unarmed strike attacked each other, they would continually provoke each other therefore being stuck in stasis.
Fortunately, not true. Since neither fighter is considered "armed", neither attack would provoke. Feel free to punch away.
A tries to disarm, provoking from B, but B has taken all of his attacks of opportunity, so he can't retaliate. A disarms him.
Now, B can't disarm,
A can't trip,
B can't trip
A can't disarm
B can't trip
A can't disarm
B can't trip
A can't trip
B can't disarm
A can't disarm
and B can't trip.An epic battle of wits from two rogues with combat reflexes.
I have a problem with your resolution:
A tries to disarm, provoking from B, but B has taken all of his attacks of opportunity, so he can't retaliate. A disarms him.
Now, B disarms at a -4 penalty for being unarmed, may successfully disarm A, if so, then B can immediately wield the weapon.
A can trip, and succeeds (lets say)
B can trip, and also succeeds (just go with it)
A can disarm, at -4 for being unarmed and -4 for being prone, may successfully disarm B, taking his weapon back.
B can't trip, A is already prone.
A can't disarm, as B is not armed.
B can't trip, A is already prone.
A can't trip, B is already prone.
B can disarm, at -4 for being unarmed and -4 for being prone, may successfully disarm A, taking A's weapon.
A can disarm, at -4 for being unarmed and -4 for being prone, may successfully disarm B, taking his weapon back.
and B can't trip, A is already prone.End result, both are prone, B's weapon is laying in his space, and A's weapon went to B, A, B, and then A again.
I'll go with that. It's much funnier than I was originally envisioning. Imagine two ridiculously dexterous people locking hands, twisting around in mid-air, flipping and turning before just crashing into the ground.
Perfect.
I thought that existed a rule that said you cannot use an action that provokes an AoO IN an AoO. No?
This is what our group usually does, regardless of it is an actual rule or not. the above examples makes my head hurt...
Question is can you pause a current action to take another action then complete the original action (general rule is you can't, specifically you can't during a move).
Well the clear and generel answer to that question is: Yes, you can take actions in the middle of other actions.
While you mention that you cannot take an attack action in the middle of a move without a feat, there is a lot of other situations where faster actions are taken during others:- 5-foot step: Is taken before, after or during other actions.
- Swift actions: Many of these assume being used during other actions (rage powers comes to mind). As such there aren't any rule that limit them to use outside of other actions.
- Free actions: As swift actions state that they function as free action, the above should apply for both free and swift actions.
- AoO: Being a free action, there should be no problem using it during your own action.
EDIT: Just noticed this part in the combat chapter, that states that free actions can be done during other actions:
"Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free, as decided by the GM."