If a creature can take no actions, can it take AOOs?
Can a Dazed creature take an AOO?
Can a creature that has failed a save verses a Hideous Laughter spell, and is prone laughing, take AOOs?
Can a person that is Held with a Hold person take AOOs?
Yes - these came up in a game tonight... well, all except the last one, that's just my addition.
Thanks for your help!
Before we start, in PF an AoO is not an action! I myself fought valiantly with many posters on this very subject.
The technical answer to your question is *maybe* since AoOs are not actions, but the reality is that if a creature is prevented from acting normally or functioning *at all* the answer is no.
The unconscious condition does not reference AoOs in any way, but it is accepted that an Unconscious creature can't take AoOs because ...well, and that they fall to the floor when they reach unconsciousness.
The rules are not written perfectly, and there are ways to exploit them if they are always read literally. When you are denied actions 99% of the people I know will also deny you the AoO.
The rules are really vague about it, I think it's a case of "Well OBVIOUSLY".
That said, go to p. 180 of the core book, under "threatened squares". The language implies that, in order to threaten, you would have to be capable of making an attack if it were your turn (which seems reasonable).
an unconscious character can not defend them selves, and is helpless (a held character would also be helpless). A dazed creature is not, and a "laughing" character is no (even if prone).
this is the way it is being told to me... I just need something to reference, as it is in PFSOP....
Wraithstrike definitely has the right idea, but just to be an advocate if we read helpless it has nothing to do with AoOs, no references at all. Your AoO question seemingly should apply here as well.
The rules are really vague about it, I think it's a case of "Well OBVIOUSLY".
That said, go to p. 180 of the core book, under "threatened squares". The language implies that, in order to threaten, you would have to be capable of making an attack if it were your turn (which seems reasonable).
Great catch on the exact rules!
Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally).
if you can't attack on your turn, you don't threaten, thus no AoOs.
They *do* have a rule for everything
This reminds me of the argument.
Player:
"Where does it say that I can't cast spells if I am dead?"
DM response:
"Well, you can't do it if you are unconscious and dead is worse than unconscious."
Player:
"Then why are there Undead casters?"
DM response:
"................Because I am the DM now shut up and roll a new character."
An AoO is not an action, but it is an attack. If the creature is in such a state (not to call it a condition just yet) that it can't make attacks, it can't make an AoO, nor (as mentioned) does it threaten any area.
This. The game has such things that are even less than free actions. "Nonactions." AoOs are one such example. If you can't attack, you can't AoO, as it's an attack. If you're paralyzed or otherwise unable to move at all, then obviously you can't. But dzed and other effects that merely limit you to not taking actions do not prevent AoOs or other non-actions.
For another example of a non-action, see perception, specifically the reactive rolls for spot/listen. Or see knowledge checks to ID a creature and so forth.
From the "Action" section of each skill:
"Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus. Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action."
- It intentionally never labels this a "free action."
"Usually none. In most cases, a Knowledge check doesn't take an action (but see “Untrained,” below)."
In case anyone is wondering, "nonaction" is not a specific game term in the PF rules AFAIK. I think they left it unnamed. I take the name from a 3.5 Rules of the Game article that explained this all fairly well.
A 5-foot step is a nonaction you can use to move a short distance when you don't otherwise move during your turn; see Rules of the Game: All About Movement.
Many nonactions are things you can do when it's not your turn, such as making opposed checks to avoid being disarmed or tripped or making an attack of opportunity.
Umm...I did answer you. And provided a link to an article to explain. It's not PF, but unless changed the rule, it should be the same as in 3E.
Daze says you can't take actions. AoO is not an action, so you can still AoO.
Hideous Laughter is the same way. You would take -4 on the AoO for being prone, though. Reminds me of the end of Three Amigos when the bad guy's shot and on the ground, laughing. He motions one of the good guys over as if he has something to say. Guy comes over, bad guy shoots him in the foot and breaks out laughing about what a good trick he pulled, then dies from his wounds. :)
For an example where you could not AoO, look at Nauseated condition. Even though you're still able to take some actions, you cannot attack, so you could not AoO.
In PFS you will not be getting the AoO if you can not attack normally.
Nonactions still require you to be able to act normally.
Stunned says you can't take actions, but don't think a GM is going to allow you to make an AoO because it is not an action.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Look at it this way:
Character A: threatens with a melee weapon, an enemy provokes an attack of opportunity in one of the threatened squares = Character A gets to do an attack of opportunity.
Character B: Dazed, Held or otherwise incapable of attacks/actions = does not threaten. No threatened squares = no attacks of opportunity.
Just my 2 cents.
so... still no answer either way I guess?
Does this mean that in a PFSOP game I can take an AOO with a character who is under the effects of:
a Daze?
A Hideous Laughter?
This is confusing me... as a few of us have said in this thread, we have given you the answer already.
If you currently can't take any actions then you can't make a melee attack. If you can't make a melee attack then you don't threaten any squares. If you don't threaten any squares then you can't make an AoO.
We even cited the rules references for you.
If you cannot attack or physicaly move, such as held/paralyzed or unconscious, you can not AoO. If you merely cannot act or take actions, you can AoO. This is the rules. Does anyone have any rules citations to prove otherwise? I've shown my citations from 3E, and I've seen nothing in PF rules to have changed this.
People seem to think these conditions are worse than they are. A lot of the conditions are more limited than their name may imply for the sake of game balance and/or simplicity. "X condition does exactly Y."
EDIT: Can a stunned creature still make reflex saves? Can he evade out of the way of a fireball? The RAW answer is "of course he freaking can!" If that's taken as granted, why is taking a swipe at someone that passes by so hard to suspend disbelief over?
*Oh god, now people are going to start insisting that stunned characters lose the ability to make reflex saves...*
. Does anyone have any rules citations to prove otherwise?
Err.. yes. We have shown the rules citations in Pathfinder. 3E has nothing to do with this.
From the Combat Chapter: Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally).
From Daze: This spell clouds the mind of a humanoid creature with 4 or fewer Hit Dice so that it takes no actions. Humanoids of 5 or more HD are not affected. A dazed subject is not stunned, so attackers get no special advantage against it. After a creature has been dazed by this spell, it is immune to the effects of this spell for 1 minute.
You can't make an attack, thus you don't threaten, thus no AoO.
You can't use evasion if... you're helpless.
Stunned: A stunned creature drops everything held, can't take actions, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and loses its Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).
Stunned... no AoOs. You can still evade because you're not helpless.
Stream was agreeing with us Stynkk.
Stream was agreeing with us Stynkk.
If you cannot attack or physicaly move, such as held/paralyzed or unconscious, you can not AoO. If you merely cannot act or take actions, you can AoO. This is the rules.
Apologies if he was, but I was specifically referencing this part.
I did not catch her typo. That should have been can't since he said.
If you cannot attack or physicaly move, such as held/paralyzed or unconscious, you can not AoO.
That is also consistent with the rest of his posts.
It was an easy misunderstanding though.
The problem here is that the rules are nuanced, the information is spread across many layers and these spell effects don't reference AoOs, the AoO doesn't reference this either, you have to dig all the way to Threatened Area to discover how the interactions play out.
@wraithstrike:
I don't think Stream is on our side when it comes to AoOs and Daze.
But dzed and other effects that merely limit you to not taking actions do not prevent AoOs or other non-actions.
I will go so far as to say if you're dazed you can't AoO or 5 foot step (since you can't use a move action to move at all).
It seems you are correct. Dazed is about as bad as being stunned. I don't see how you can get the AoO.
The creature is unable to act normally. A dazed creature can take no actions, but has no penalty to AC.
A dazed condition typically lasts 1 round.
Yes, I'm saying that stun and daze does not prevent taking AoOs anymore than it prevents taking a reflex save, which is also not an action. You can AoO because neither condition prevents you from moving at all nor states that you cannot attack.
. Does anyone have any rules citations to prove otherwise?Err.. yes. We have shown the rules citations in Pathfinder. 3E has nothing to do with this.
From the Combat Chapter: Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally).
From Daze: This spell clouds the mind of a humanoid creature with 4 or fewer Hit Dice so that it takes no actions. Humanoids of 5 or more HD are not affected. A dazed subject is not stunned, so attackers get no special advantage against it. After a creature has been dazed by this spell, it is immune to the effects of this spell for 1 minute.
You can't make an attack, thus you don't threaten, thus no AoO.
You can't use evasion if... you're helpless.
Stunned: A stunned creature drops everything held, can't take actions, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and loses its Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).
Stunned... no AoOs. You can still evade because you're not helpless.
Look at what you quoted.
Combat chapter: no mention of what sort of action or nonaction an AoO is or is not, it's merely saying you threaten the squares you can attack with your reach.Daze: It says it prevents the victim from taking actions. Nowhere does it say that it stops him from attacking. Most attacks require actions, of course. But AoOs do not. The conclusion you drew was based upon the claim that "You can't make an attack," but the text you quoted does not say this.
I agree on evasion. You also could not AoO if helpless. If you're helpless it means you're unconsious, bound, paralyzed, or some other situation where you cannot physically move yourself.
Stunned: Again, it says you can't take actions. It never says you cannot attack. I don't know why you're drawing the conclusions you are from the text you're quoting.
Hey so then yes i can make AoO when I'm dead if i have the die hard feat since i never went unconcious at any point right? Right???
It just seems does not make sense to say you can't make an attack when it is your turn, but otherwise you can.
When the notes on conditions in Part One say that you cannot act (for example, when stunned), you cannot make an attack of opportunity.
The rules of the game article part 1 has conditions listed which restrict you from acting. They are toward the bottom of the pate. Part 1
The conditions read the same way they did in 3.5 so it only follows that they have the same meaning until Paizo says otherwise.
Look at what you quoted.
Combat chapter: no mention of what sort of action or nonaction an AoO is or is not, it's merely saying you threaten the squares you can attack with your reach.
An AoO is a direct result of threatening. If you don't threaten you can't make an AoO. Do you agree?
This needs to be FAQ'd. In 3.5 it would not work, and the wording is the same. If the same words have different meanings in PF then it needs to be officially changed.
a character who has not gone yet in the first melee round of combat (sometimes called "Flat-footed") does not threaten. And so does not get AOO, unless he has Combat Reflexes. He still does not threaten, but can take AOOs?
This is not a good example unfortunately - sounds harsh but let me explain.
Flat-Footed is a condition that specifically prohibits you from making AoOs if you can't act normally (sounds familiar?). You can't make an AoO because you don't threaten, you aren't able to react normally to a combat situation.
Flat-Footed: A character who has not yet acted during a combat is flat-footed, unable to react normally to the situation. A flat-footed character loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity.
Combat Reflexes removes the No AoO stipulation of the Flat Footed condition.
Combat Reflexes (Combat)
You can make additional attacks of opportunity.
Benefit: You may make a number of additional attacks of opportunity per round equal to your Dexterity bonus. With this feat, you may also make attacks of opportunity while flat-footed.
Normal: A character without this feat can make only one attack of opportunity per round and can't make attacks of opportunity while flat-footed.
Special: The Combat Reflexes feat does not allow a rogue to use her opportunist ability more than once per round.
Do you agree?
This has no bearing on the rule of threatening. A condition is interacting with the rules in the same way as dazed is.
In fact, it is actually more evidence of the side of not being able to act = no AoOs.
If there was a feat that said: A Dazed Character may take AoOs, that's what you'd need to get around the rules I've presented.
@wraithstrike
This seems to be resolving itself.
|
If you cannot attack or physicaly move, such as held/paralyzed or unconscious, you can not AoO. If you merely cannot act or take actions, you can AoO. This is the rules. Does anyone have any rules citations to prove otherwise? I've shown my citations from 3E, and I've seen nothing in PF rules to have changed this.
People seem to think these conditions are worse than they are. A lot of the conditions are more limited than their name may imply for the sake of game balance and/or simplicity. "X condition does exactly Y."
EDIT: Can a stunned creature still make reflex saves? Can he evade out of the way of a fireball? The RAW answer is "of course he freaking can!" If that's taken as granted, why is taking a swipe at someone that passes by so hard to suspend disbelief over?
*Oh god, now people are going to start insisting that stunned characters lose the ability to make reflex saves...*
An attack is a standard action. If you cannot take this action, you do not threaten squares around you. AoO's are only provoked by moving out of a threatened square, or by performing a distracting action in a threatened square. If you can't threaten, you can't make an AoO.
|
|
actually the person who was doing this in a PFSOP game was the Judge, who is a Venture Officer... not to say he is correct, just that he is not IMHO being a munchkin. My PC Hideous Laughtered a monster- another PC...Yes, I'm saying that stun and daze does not prevent taking AoOs anymore than it prevents taking a reflex save, which is also not an action. You can AoO because neither condition prevents you from moving at all nor states that you cannot attack.
Look at what you quoted.
Combat chapter: no mention of what sort of action or nonaction an AoO is or is not, it's merely saying you threaten the squares you can attack with your reach.Daze: It says it prevents the victim from taking actions. Nowhere does it say that it stops him from attacking. Most attacks require actions, of course. But AoOs do not. The conclusion you drew was based upon the claim that "You can't make an attack," but the text you quoted does not say this.
I agree on evasion. You also could not AoO if helpless. If you're helpless it means you're unconsious, bound, paralyzed, or some other...
Sorry but you're wrong. In order to take an attack of opportunity you have to threaten the squares, the rules state you have to be able to make an attack into those squares in order to take an attack of opportunity, in order to attack you must be able to take a standard action since Attack(Melee) requires a standard action. Now the AoOp section specifically states that if you meet the prereqs you can take the attack even when it is not your turn but you must meet the prereq.
Therefore if you cannot act-> you cannot take a standard action-> you cannot make melee attacks into adjacent squares-> you cannot threaten squares -> you cannot take Attacks of Opportunity.
Not to mention this is the most logical outcome and pretty much the default response you'll get from your DM before he kicks you out for being a munchkin if you try to pull some rules lawyering on him.
I'd argue that they don't threaten because they can't attack - they can't take the standard action to do so. Dazed PCs and Hideously Laughing PCs would therefore be unable to make an AoO.