For the purposes of my question assume the melee has an initiative of 10 and the caster a 9.
I am a melee charcter and I am standing next to a caster who is trying to melt my face. I decide I do not want my face melted.
To this end on my initiative I declare I am "readying and action" and "If the caster tries to cast I am going to attack".
Question 1
- If the caster takes a 5' step and casts do I get to follow with a 5' step of my own and attack?
Question 2
- If the caster takes a 5' step and casts can I use the 'lunge' feet to attack?
Question 3
- If caster uses an item (scroll/wand/potion) would I still get to attack since they are technically not 'casting a spell'?
Came up in our game this week and I am looking for some clarification.
Thanks
1) Only if you had the Step Up feat. However, you could declare your readied action to be "I chop him if he moves or casts" and be good.
2) Yes, if you have Lunge, you have +5 foot reach, and can attack him even if he takes a 5' step.
3) Scroll, yes, he's casting a spell from a spell completion item. Wand is up to your GM. Potion I'd say no, he's not doing what you said you were looking for. As a GM, I'd let you attack on a scroll or wand (those can be offensive) but not the potion (that's defensive).
1. Yes, if you didn't move on your turn.
Reason: The rules say you can take a 5-foot step as part of a readied action, but only if you didn't move any distance that round.
2.+3. See mdt's answers.
1. Yes, if you didn't move on your turn.
Reason: The rules say you can take a 5-foot step as part of a readied action, but only if you didn't move any distance that round.
2.+3. See mdt's answers.
Good catch, my bad.
On the "I chop him if he moves or casts".... What's the limit on things you can assign on a readied action? I was under the impression that I could only assign a single "thing" to a readied action?
I don't know that you would want to assigned a whole list of things to a readied action. I have rad it a few times but I am not clear on the limits of a readied action and how many different criteria you can assign.
On the "I chop him if he moves or casts".... What's the limit on things you can assign on a readied action? I was under the impression that I could only assign a single "thing" to a readied action?
I don't know that you would want to assigned a whole list of things to a readied action. I have rad it a few times but I am not clear on the limits of a readied action and how many different criteria you can assign.
That's not defined by the rules, so it's a GM call.
In my own games, I usually let you do up to your Int Mod + 1 in different contingencies, minimum 1. So, if you had an Int of 12, and a Mod of +1, you could put two things in (if she casts or uses a wand). If you had an Int of 18 and a mod of +4, then you could put in four things (if she casts, or uses a wand, or pulls a weapon, or tries to run away).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am a melee charcter and I am standing next to a caster who is trying to melt my face. I decide I do not want my face melted.
To this end on my initiative I declare I am "readying and action" and "If the caster tries to cast I am going to attack".
How detailed the readied action needs to be and how detailed the condition need to be are a matter of culture that varies from group to group. It shouldn't catch anyone by surprise, and the GM shouldn't use that variance to catch the player unawares. The GM reasonably knows what's going to happen and can help the player clarify to meet variance. The relevant text is:
You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don't otherwise move any distance during the round.
and the specific text regarding the special form of readying an action to disrupt a spell:
A readied action takes place before the action attempted, and the target continues the action if able. The special readied action to disrupt a spellcaster kinda takes place during the casting, in my mind. The initiative consequence of either is the same, and in your defined case, it is irrelevant.
1) "You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don't otherwise move any distance during the round." My take is that this can always be part of the readied action. If the table culture requires that it is stated, then the clause "..by taking a 5-foot step if needed," seems to me to make the distinction pedantic. A 5 foot step is not an action at all and should be allowed when able, in my mind. YMMV.
2) What feats can be used as part of a readied action is a matter of table culture. In my view, the feat needs to be stated as part of the readied action; this is table culture. By RAW, it is undefined.
3) If your intent is to just hit him rather than distract him, then alternate language should certainly get the job done. Casting from a scroll is close enough, in my mind, to have been covered by what you are saying...it provokes, is spell completion that provokes an AoO, and can be disrupted in any case. Wand use is a bit different in nature (spell trigger, doesn't provoke an AoO, etc.) and I would expect to see more table culture variance.
3) If your intent is to just hit him rather than distract him, then alternate language should certainly get the job done. Casting from a scroll is close enough, in my mind, to have been covered by what you are saying...it provokes, is spell completion that provokes an AoO, and can be disrupted in any case.
Technically, with such a readied action, he'd get up to two attacks. One for the readied action (resolved before the person casts). Then, as they cast, if they don't do it defensively (or fail the spellcaster check), then he'd get another via the AoO.
Technically, with such a readied action, he'd get up to two attacks. One for the readied action (resolved before the person casts). Then, as they cast, if they don't do it defensively (or fail the spellcaster check), then he'd get another via the AoO.Agreed.
Which if he hits, means the caster has to make all sorts of caster level checks. :) To avoid losing the spell, to cast defensively, to avoid losing the spell a second time if he's hit by the AoO.
So, a readied action is outside/seperate from the AoO granted when a caster casts? I guess I never did that math.
This is one of the things that I've never really wrapped my head around.
So, a readied action is outside/seperate from the AoO granted when a caster casts? I guess I never did that math.
This is one of the things that I've never really wrapped my head around.
It's no different than if you'd just attacked normally. You'd still get the AoO when the spell was being cast, so it's perfectly valid to get it after your readied attack.
As a DM I'd rule that if the readied action interrupts and stops the spell being cast then the AoO doesn't happen as the readied action technically goes first - you hit the caster, stopping the spell, and there's nothing left to AoO. If the caster makes the check and continues casting then the AoO would go off normally.
You can't 5' step when making an AoO so the readied action would still be necessary unless the caster was immobilised, or backed against a wall. Edit: this sentence was just to explain why to ready and not rely on AoO when adjacent to a caster.
As a DM I'd rule that if the readied action interrupts and stops the spell being cast then the AoO doesn't happen as the readied action technically goes first - you hit the caster, stopping the spell, and there's nothing left to AoO. If the caster makes the check and continues casting then the AoO would go off normally.
That is correct. The statement above was that if the caster is able to cast after the readied attack, it provokes another AoO and thus requires another caster level check. It's that bit about it being up to 2 attacks.
Technically, with such a readied action, he'd get up to two attacks. One for the readied action (resolved before the person casts). Then, as they cast, if they don't do it defensively (or fail the spellcaster check), then he'd get another via the AoO.
You don't provoke an AoO if you try to cast defensively and fail, you just lose the spell.
Technically, with such a readied action, he'd get up to two attacks. One for the readied action (resolved before the person casts). Then, as they cast, if they don't do it defensively (or fail the spellcaster check), then he'd get another via the AoO.You don't provoke an AoO if you try to cast defensively and fail, you just lose the spell.
Ah, sorry, that's my bad as well. We had a long standing house rule that the caster could, if they failed the cast defensively check, continue casting the spell but they provoked an attack of opportunity at that point.
We had a long standing house rule that the caster could, if they failed the cast defensively check, continue casting the spell but they provoked an attack of opportunity at that point.
We used to play that way as well. In fact, it wasn't until I read the PF rules on casting defensively, thinking "strange change", that I went back to read the 3.5 rules and found that they were the same.
Not really sure which way is better.
Ah, sorry, that's my bad as well. We had a long standing house rule that the caster could, if they failed the cast defensively check, continue casting the spell but they provoked an attack of opportunity at that point.Technically, with such a readied action, he'd get up to two attacks. One for the readied action (resolved before the person casts). Then, as they cast, if they don't do it defensively (or fail the spellcaster check), then he'd get another via the AoO.You don't provoke an AoO if you try to cast defensively and fail, you just lose the spell.
Yeah, only Spellbreaker allows you to attack a caster that fails their Defensive Casting check as an AoO and the spell is lost if the Defensive Casting check is a bust.
We had a long standing house rule that the caster could, if they failed the cast defensively check, continue casting the spell but they provoked an attack of opportunity at that point.We used to play that way as well. In fact, it wasn't until I read the PF rules on casting defensively, thinking "strange change", that I went back to read the 3.5 rules and found that they were the same.
Not really sure which way is better.
The core way is better, and the houserule is inferior, because it eliminates choice. This is from an objective sense, not subjective in that "i don't like it".
The houserule essentially means that there is no reason, ever, to not cast defensively. The core rule forces a choice. Failure on a concentration check holds different consequences than casting the spell in the core rules. If you cast defensively, you could lose the spell. If you don't cast defensively, you will suffer an AoO. IF that AoO hits, you might fail another concentration check and lose the spell anyways.
The houserule essentially means that there is no reason, ever, to not cast defensively. The core rule forces a choice.
That's a very good point. Choice is good :)
The houserule essentially means that there is no reason, ever, to not cast defensively. The core rule forces a choice.That's a very good point. Choice is good :)
Right. Now, if you wanted to trim the fat out of your houserule, it would go like this.
"When casting a spell, you first make a concentration check. Failure means you provoke an attack of opportunity from any foes who threaten you."
I still feel it is lacking compared to the Core, but at least it does not present a false sense of option.
The houserule essentially means that there is no reason, ever, to not cast defensively. The core rule forces a choice.That's a very good point. Choice is good :)
Right. Now, if you wanted to trim the fat out of your houserule, it would go like this.
"When casting a spell, you first make a concentration check. Failure means you provoke an attack of opportunity from any foes who threaten you."
I still feel it is lacking compared to the Core, but at least it does not present a false sense of option.
There is still choice with the houserule, it's just different. The choice becomes whether to dive into the melee and depend on defensive casting to avoid AoOs, or trying to find a safe positioning free from AoOs to begin with. Which is a choice that makes sense enough.
The houserule essentially means that there is no reason, ever, to not cast defensively. The core rule forces a choice.That's a very good point. Choice is good :)
Right. Now, if you wanted to trim the fat out of your houserule, it would go like this.
"When casting a spell, you first make a concentration check. Failure means you provoke an attack of opportunity from any foes who threaten you."
I still feel it is lacking compared to the Core, but at least it does not present a false sense of option.
I don't see your argument as lack of choice.
Yes, you should always cast defensively with this house rule.
You then have the option to either continue casting if you fail, and take the AoO, or lose the spell and provoke no attack.
It's still a decision. If the caster has a high AC (Cleric in Full Plate for example), then maybe he wants to take that chance on the hit missing. If it's a sorcerer with a 13 AC, maybe he'd rather lose the spell.
The point is with this ruling, why would you ever not want to cast defensively? There is no downside.
Never said there was. What I said was it had the same number of OPTIONS as the original rule. You claimed it reduced the options to none, which was incorrect.
Original rule :
Cast Defensively?
Yes
__Make Caster Level Check
__Success -> Cast Spell without AoO
__Failure -> Lose Spell
No
__Take AoO
__Was Hit, Make Caster Level Check
____Success -> Cast Spell
____Failure -> Lose Spell
__Was Not Hit, Cast Spell
So, with the original rule, you have one option, cast defensively or not. Based on that, you have to make caster level checks.
House Rule :
Cast Defensively
Success
__Cast Spell without AoO
Failure
__Continue to Cast Spell
____Take AoO
____Was Hit, Make Caster Level Check
_______Success -> Cast Spell
_______Failure -> Lose Spell
____Was Not Hit, Cast Spell
__Discontinue Spell, Lose Spell, No AoO
If you look, it's the same number of options, the house rule contains the option on the back end, where the core rules contain it on the front end. Either way, it's a similar choice. It's a different choice, but it's still a choice. The original post said the house rule took all the choice out, and it doesn't. It just changes the framework of the choice, it's now a choice of whether to continue casting and take the AoO or lose the spell. I like it this way personally because I just can't see someone ignoring a sword swinging at them. I can see them always trying to cast the spell without getting hit, and then either failing and trying to get the spell off anyway, or letting go of the spell to avoid that sword swinging at their head.
As a DM I'd rule that if the readied action interrupts and stops the spell being cast then the AoO doesn't happen as the readied action technically goes first - you hit the caster, stopping the spell, and there's nothing left to AoO. If the caster makes the check and continues casting then the AoO would go off normally.
You can't 5' step when making an AoO so the readied action would still be necessary unless the caster was immobilised, or backed against a wall. Edit: this sentence was just to explain why to ready and not rely on AoO when adjacent to a caster.
Just to add a couple cents in the pot: between a readied action and an attack of opportunity, the former is the only way to use Lunge.
between a readied action and an attack of opportunity, the former is the only way to use Lunge.
Neither, actually.
Lunge: "You can increase the reach of your melee attacks by 5 feet until the end of your turn"
Ready: "The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun."
Can't you ready a partial charge, so that if he moves away you might still be able to charge up and hit him?
I thought they were still permitted in circumstances where you are limited to a standard action. It was mostly used for zombies. Does that mean zombies and slowed people have no way to move and attack?
I thought they were still permitted in circumstances where you are limited to a standard action.
Yes, they are. If you only had one action on your turn, due to getting a surprise round for instance, then you could ready a charge.
But in a normal round, you're not limited to only a standard action, so you can't ready a standard-action charge.
Can't you ready a partial charge, so that if he moves away you might still be able to charge up and hit him?
There was a huge thread about it, with no real satisfactory answer.
It's pretty clear you can't do it during a normal turn:
During your turn, you take a move action to go 15' forward, while drawing your weapon. A swift action to activate Arcane Strike, a free action to shout "Death to the Traitor!", and a standard action to Ready a Charge when the Elf begins casting a spell. Your turn ends. The goblins light things on fire and skin a cat. The dwarf casts Bless. The Elf begins to cast a spell, thus your readied action is triggered.
The problem is, you can only do a partial charge if "you are restricted to taking only a standard action on your turn". During your turn you were not restricted, in fact you took all sorts of other actions. Even if you didn't take those actions, you were not restricted to only a standard action.
The buggery happens if you -are- restricted. Say, it's a surprise round. The Elf walks into your ambush, and you surprise him! You use your (limited) Standard Action to Ready a Charge. Surprise round ends, Elf (having beaten you on init) begins casting, and you Charge.
I don't like this, so I would (possibly house-) rule that you can't ready a charge ever, as Charge is a full-round action (though it's a full-round action that can, in some cases, still be performed when limited to only a standard). Why? Because that means a guy that is Slowed can ready a charge to interrupt a spellcaster, but a guy that is Hasted can't. So to make it fair, no-one can ready a charge, only perform one during their turn.
-edit- more!
This does mean that Zombies and Slowed people can still charge, they just can't Ready a charge to interrupt someone else's turn.
Also, this prevents CHEEZ where someone uses a move action to skirt around some rubble, then Ready a charge triggered by the end of his turn, which is then activated, allowing him to move, partial charge, and not drop in init.
A rule could be created where anyone can Ready a charge if they forgo all other movement and actions during the turn they Readied and would accomplish the same balance. (With unhappy spellcasters, too)
I knew there was still partial charge in PF. We use it for zombies, slowed people and surprise rounds.
In our game you can also ready a partial charge: "If he starts casting a spell, I will charge him." Since it is a partial charge, you can only move half your movement, in an unobstructed straight line, with an attack at the end.
This interpretation of the rules does not seem game breaking.
You can not ready a full round action.
We are talking about a partial charge, which is what you use when you are limited to a standard action each round, like when you are slowed. The rules are less clear on this point. We allow you to ready a partial charge if you have made no other movement.
between a readied action and an attack of opportunity, the former is the only way to use Lunge.Neither, actually.
Lunge: "You can increase the reach of your melee attacks by 5 feet until the end of your turn"
Ready: "The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun."
I think it's clear enough that the readied action becomes your turn, it changes your initiative count to when it was taken.
I think it's clear enough that the readied action becomes your turn, it changes your initiative count to when it was taken.
The Ready action states that your turn is over. You are taking an action, not a turn. The action interrupts another character's turn. Your initiative count then changes.
If you have an effect that lasts for a turn (say, Divine Vessel), it is expended because your turn was already over. You begin your turn, lunge can increase your reach until the end of your turn. You Ready. Your turn ends. Your reach is no longer increased.
Are you granting them an extra turn in the middle of the round? Are you going back and re-creating the turn they already finished? If the Ready lasts until after the init count resets, and they lose their next turn, does it count as a turn, or does the readied action become the next turn (which they lose)? Too much fiddling, it's much more clear to have the turn be the turn, and the readied action simply an action.
I think it's clear enough that the readied action becomes your turn, it changes your initiative count to when it was taken.The Ready action states that your turn is over. You are taking an action, not a turn. The action interrupts another character's turn. Your initiative count then changes.
If you have an effect that lasts for a turn (say, Divine Vessel), it is expended because your turn was already over. You begin your turn, lunge can increase your reach until the end of your turn. You Ready. Your turn ends. Your reach is no longer increased.
Are you granting them an extra turn in the middle of the round? Are you going back and re-creating the turn they already finished? If the Ready lasts until after the init count resets, and they lose their next turn, does it count as a turn, or does the readied action become the next turn (which they lose)? Too much fiddling, it's much more clear to have the turn be the turn, and the readied action simply an action.
No, nothing so complicated, and I don't know why you make it so unnecessarily convoluted. To ready is similar to delaying a remainder of a turn, with set conditions. If they don't arise it goes back to where it was, but if they do occur the remainder of the turn comes up, and just like delaying, the initiative count changes.
A full round action means you use all of the actions you have in a round, whether it be one action (move) or multiple actions (a standard turn).
What?
It's a type of action. A full-round action requires an entire round to complete.
If you move 20' then cast a spell, that's not a full-round action, that's a move action and a standard action. If you move 30', then again move 30', that's also not a full-round action, it's two move actions (or, more accurately, a move action and a standard action used to move).
And it doesn't use all your actions, just the equivalent of move and standard. You can perform a full attack (Full-round action) as well as a swift action and free actions.
As for charging, "Some full-round actions can be taken as standard actions" could be read either way, meaning Charge is still a full-round action, thus can't be Readied in a surprise round, or that since it's taken as a standard, that it could. I think it's DMs call, barring an unexpected input from the Devs Above.
No, nothing so complicated, and I don't know why you make it so unnecessarily convoluted.
Because it doesn't make sense, and it's not what the rules say.
It says your turn is over. It says you're taking an action, not a turn.
Since there are effects that last until the end of your turn, and the Readied action cannot take place until that turn is finished, adding rules about how it's extending the turn you already finished just adds complication. What if you have a protective benefit that lasts for your turn. Then your Readied action provokes an AoO, which goes off before your Readied action, since the Readied action is a delayed part of your turn, does your protective benefit still apply to the incoming AoO? Does it apply to any attacks made between the end of your turn, and the delayed remainder? If it's still your turn when you take a Readied action, is it still your turn when you make an AoO? Or cast an Immediate Action spell? If you're blinded by Glitterdust, do you make your save at the end of the turn when you Readied? Or the delayed end of the turn when your readied action goes off? What if it never triggers, you lose the save?
Yes, it's complicated, and yes, it's ridiculous, and none of those questions are necessary if it's simply read as written: Your turn is over, and you are only taking the Readied action.
Anyway, I don't mean to sound argumentative or dismissive. I've run Ready/Delay wrong for quite a while, so I'm glad to get a better handle on it. (Init can be tricky) My reason for spending time in these forums is to better understand what the rules actually are, and find out when I'm wrong (before it comes up at the table!). Cheers.
|
|
"You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don't otherwise move any distance during the round."
One of the first thing I have read in this forum was one of those "unbeatable" combo that will make a guy "invincible".
It was a guy with a reach weapon with the trip ability, a item/spell giving him the blindsight ability and a fog cloud around him.
The guy was constantly moving to keep at you 10' range and trip you every time you were moving, allowing him to use the full attack routine and and an attack of opportunity while you were raising, while you were capable,
at best to attack once if you were capable to rise and approach him while avoiding being tripped.
My proposed solution was that if you were capable to stand up without being tripped again you were not to move but instead ready an action to sunder the weapon.
The reply was that it is not possible without the Strike back feat.
So my questions are:
- it true that you need the strike back feat?
- as you have not moved any distance you can ready a action that say "when he next attack with his reach weapon I will move 5' toward him and sunder his weapon"?
So my questions are:- it true that you need the strike back feat?
- as you have not moved any distance you can ready a action that say "when he next attack with his reach weapon I will move 5' toward him and sunder his weapon"?
No. The strike back feat allows you to ready an action to attack them regardless of their reach, without needing to move.
You can ready an action to move towards and attack the foe.
No, nothing so complicated, and I don't know why you make it so unnecessarily convoluted.Because it doesn't make sense, and it's not what the rules say.
It says your turn is over. It says you're taking an action, not a turn.
Since there are effects that last until the end of your turn, and the Readied action cannot take place until that turn is finished, adding rules about how it's extending the turn you already finished just adds complication. What if you have a protective benefit that lasts for your turn. Then your Readied action provokes an AoO, which goes off before your Readied action, since the Readied action is a delayed part of your turn, does your protective benefit still apply to the incoming AoO? Does it apply to any attacks made between the end of your turn, and the delayed remainder? If it's still your turn when you take a Readied action, is it still your turn when you make an AoO? Or cast an Immediate Action spell? If you're blinded by Glitterdust, do you make your save at the end of the turn when you Readied? Or the delayed end of the turn when your readied action goes off? What if it never triggers, you lose the save?
Yes, it's complicated, and yes, it's ridiculous, and none of those questions are necessary if it's simply read as written: Your turn is over, and you are only taking the Readied action.
Anyway, I don't mean to sound argumentative or dismissive. I've run Ready/Delay wrong for quite a while, so I'm glad to get a better handle on it. (Init can be tricky) My reason for spending time in these forums is to better understand what the rules actually are, and find out when I'm wrong (before it comes up at the table!). Cheers.
Those situations would be handled the same as they would in the case of a delayed action as opposed to a readied one. Would the protective benefit persist in the event of a delayed action? Can you delay a turn to postpone a glitterdust save? A lot of the rest of your points are just dumb. A readied action splits your turn in half, like I said earlier, it does not prolong over other character's turns.