| 10 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
If a monster has an attack which, if successful, leads to another attack, and uses the first attack in an Attack of Opportunity, does it then get the second attack also?
Example: A behir has a bite attack which, if successful, leads to a grab attack. Fighter charges the behir, which has reach. This provokes an Attack of Opportunity. The behir bites the fighter. Does it just get the bite, or does it also get the grab and subsequent constrict damage?
|
If a monster has an attack which, if successful, leads to another attack, and uses the first attack in an Attack of Opportunity, does it then get the second attack also?
Example: A behir has a bite attack which, if successful, leads to a grab attack. Fighter charges the behir, which has reach. This provokes an Attack of Opportunity. The behir bites the fighter. Does it just get the bite, or does it also get the grab and subsequent constrict damage?
If the AoO leads to an attack that requires no other actions, but which is a natural consequence of the first attack, then those subsequent attacks occur in the AoO as well. If the subsequent attacks require additional actions, even free actions, they are not taken.
In the case of the behir, the grab requires a free action, which can only be taken on the behir's turn, not during the AoO. It gets the bite; it does not get the grab.
Note: While these are the natural consequence of the rules regarding when actions can be taken or not taken, I have never seen it played this way. Rather, I've always seen the free-action subsequent attacks taken as part of the AoO; I run it this way myself and would chalk it up to houserule if pressed on the matter. I understand this to be a case of people generally treating free actions as "not an action" and/or processing it within their thinking as an inherent part of the original attack.
I think your analysis is correct. It is the one I came to as well. But like you, it always seems to be played the other way.
I'd like to get a FAQ ruling on this.
|
|
I think your analysis is correct. It is the one I came to as well. But like you, it always seems to be played the other way.
I'd like to get a FAQ ruling on this.
I dropped a FAQ on it as well. Not sure I've ever seen this addressed going back to 3.5 days. I don't know that it will get FAQ votes though, as most are either unaware of the issue, it's very rare, and/or it just gets eye-roll and handled as we've both seen it.
There are a few areas like this, both for AoO and readied actions, that don't tend to get played at the most rule-intensive manner. The other example I can think of immediately involves counter spelling. Counter spelling takes place as a readied action. A readied action can be a std, move, free, or swift action. Drawing spell components is a free action when casting. So, a caster can ready to counter spell (what will usually be a standard action), but he cannot prepare the components for that casting, which would involve an free action. Anytime there is an imbedded free-action as part of another action, or in which a subsequent action is a free action, it is subject to this situation.
I tend to go with the idea that if the rules clearly allow you to do something, but the mechanics get in the way, you get to do it anyway. Of course, what is clearly possible to me isn't necessarily clearly possible to someone else. :D