So here is my question: You are wielding a reach weapon. You decide to try and trip your opponent, who is 10 feet away with your reach weapon. You do NOT have Imp. Trip. However, would they still get an AoO if they do not have a 10 foot reach themselves? If so does that also mean you can use a reach weapon for an AoO on someone within 5 feet?
they do not get an aoo if they cannot reach you. Ninja edit
So here is my question: You are wielding a reach weapon. You decide to try and trip your opponent, who is 10 feet away with your reach weapon. You do NOT have Imp. Trip. However, would they still get an AoO if they do not have a 10 foot reach themselves? If so does that also mean you can use a reach weapon for an AoO on someone within 5 feet?
#1: would they still get an AoO if they do not have a 10 foot reach themselves?
Your target would get an AoO opportunity. However, if they don't also have a reach weapon then they can't actually make the Attack, if that makes any sense. It triggers the condition, but they can't fulfil it, even if they wanted to.
#2: If so does that also mean you can use a reach weapon for an AoO on someone within 5 feet?
You can't use a reach weapon at 5 feet.
If someone triggers an AoO for you from 5 feet away - and you've got your reach weapon out at the time - you can't take your AoO against them. Same problem as above. The conditions are met, but you can't follow through as your weapon will not allow you to attack at that range.
you require a 10 ft reach weapon with the trip special ability to attempt this.
This is not the case. Please see the updated Pathfinder FAQ regarding Trip Maneuvers here: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/v5748btpy88yj/faq#v5748eaic9nvd
Your target would get an AoO opportunity. However, if they don't also have a reach weapon then they can't actually make the Attack, if that makes any sense. It triggers the condition, but they can't fulfil it, even if they wanted to.
You can't use a reach weapon at 5 feet. If someone triggers an AoO for you - and you've got your reach weapon out at the time - you can't take your AoO against them. Same problem. The conditions are met, but you can't follow through.
Ah ok, that makes sense. It triggers one, but they cannot MAKE one. Similar to not HAVING to take one just because someone triggered one if you want to save it for later. It makes a lot more sense than them still getting the AoO even though they don t have the reach and being able to attack with a 10ft weapon within 5ft only for AoOs would. lol
you require a 10 ft reach weapon with the trip special ability to attempt this.This is not the case. Please see the updated Pathfinder FAQ regarding Trip Maneuvers here: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/v5748btpy88yj/faq#v5748eaic9nvd
Yes, that is correct. The ONLY thing a "trip" weapon does now is allow you to drop the weapon rather than being tripped yourself.
Oh and to further explain my pondering here:
The plan was to have a Fighter with a reach weapon, Combat Reflexes, Agile Maneuvers, and Stand Still. Stop em dead with the AoO and Stand Still, then try a trip or disarm on my turn as part of my attacks. I was just concerned as to whether or not they would still get AoOs on me if I did not have the Imp. versions of those feats. Thank ya for clearing that up!!
You can't use a reach weapon at 5 feet.
If someone triggers an AoO for you from 5 feet away - and you've got your reach weapon out at the time - you can't take your AoO against them. Same problem as above. The conditions are met, but you can't follow through as your weapon will not allow you to attack at that range.
Now I heard it said that if you had something like a spiked gauntlet, you could still use that for a 5 ft. AoO while having a reach weapon. True or False? If false, what about if you drop the reach weapon?
So here is my question: You are wielding a reach weapon. You decide to try and trip your opponent, who is 10 feet away with your reach weapon. You do NOT have Imp. Trip. However, would they still get an AoO if they do not have a 10 foot reach themselves? If so does that also mean you can use a reach weapon for an AoO on someone within 5 feet?
Nope. They can't get an AoO, and they can't even target your weapon or your hand (if you're large) or anything like that.
You need a high level feat(strike back) to be able to hold an action to hit someone that hits you with reach.
Now I heard it said that if you had something like a spiked gauntlet, you could still use that for a 5 ft. AoO while having a reach weapon. True or False? If false, what about if you drop the reach weapon?
If you are holding a two-handed weapon, you can't use a spiked gauntlet to make an AoO. Your hands are already busy (this is a fairly debatable issue though, and a lot of people play it differently).
You can bypass any controversy by using armour spikes instead of spiked gauntlets. :)
What about using your AoO to attempt to sunder the reach weapon? That should be in range, especially if it was just used on a failed trip attempt. Any idea if that is legal using raw?
By RAW there is no rules for this. Just like there aren't any rules letting you take readied attacks against a creature with natural reach weapons.
It might be perfectly reasonable for a DM to allow it though.
What about using your AoO to attempt to sunder the reach weapon? That should be in range, especially if it was just used on a failed trip attempt. Any idea if that is legal using raw?
The AOO comes before the trip resolves, so the trip attempt wouldn't be failed (yet). Also, sunder is a maneuver used against a character who is in this case out of reach, and weapons themselves can't provoke[1], so it's not even a lack of rules but actually against the rules, imo. However, if I were the DM, I'd allow it IF the defender had Strike Back AND the attacker did not have Improved Trip[2], but the rule supporting that is Rule 0.
Now I heard it said that if you had something like a spiked gauntlet, you could still use that for a 5 ft. AoO while having a reach weapon. True or False? If false, what about if you drop the reach weapon?If you are holding a two-handed weapon, you can't use a spiked gauntlet to make an AoO. Your hands are already busy (this is a fairly debatable issue though, and a lot of people play it differently).
You can bypass any controversy by using armour spikes instead of spiked gauntlets. :)
Gah! I love cheesy munchkinism but armour spike AOOs make me think a character needs to be attacked by monkeys.
At least go Improved Unarmed Strike and kick!
My DM originally ruled against even that -- said I had to pick whether to use weapon strikes or uas for the entire round -- but later changed his mind. Honestly, I think even forbidding a spiked gauntlet is a hard sell -- it's a non-action to switch between wielding a double weapon or a 1 hand weapon in one or two hands, so why not a reach weapon?
[1] Can a dancing weapon use maneuvers?
[2] And using a whip (for anything, including a trip attempt) provokes an AOO whether you have Improved Trip or not, but I would consider that AOO to occur at the player, not the weapon, even assuming that weapons themselves could provoke AOOs which they can't.
The ONLY thing a "trip" weapon does now is allow you to drop the weapon rather than being tripped yourself.
And it allows you to use the weapons bonuses to your CMB. (Enhancement bonus, weapon focus, etc.)
By RAW there is no rules for this. Just like there aren't any rules letting you take readied attacks against a creature with natural reach weapons.
Sure there are. You can't attack a creature you can't reach. You can ready an action to attack a creature, but if it never moves into a threatened area, the action will never happen. As BigNorseWolf mentioned upthread, the Strike Back feat allows you to do this.