Only if the orc threatens the square that Steve is in when he picks up the sword.
|
Only if the orc threatens the square that Steve is in when he picks up the sword.
I agree, though it raises the question of if, by RAW, you can reach into an adjacent square to pick up an item (the Manipulate Item action on page 187 doesn't make it clear one way or the other IMHO).
I can imagine some GMs may argue that Steve would need to enter Bob's square to pick up his sword and that he at that point would provoke an AoO as he is now in the orc's threatened area.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Only if the orc threatens the square that Steve is in when he picks up the sword.I agree, though it raises the question of if, by RAW, you can reach into an adjacent square to pick up an item (the Manipulate Item action on page 187 doesn't make it clear one way or the other IMHO).
I can imagine some GMs may argue that Steve would need to enter Bob's square to pick up his sword and that he at that point would provoke an AoO as he is now in the orc's threatened area.
If a GM rules that you have to be in the same square to pick up an item, then make sure he enforces it when his NPC wants to pick up a document from his desk to show you - he'll have to climb up onto the desk, grab the item, and then get back down.
And Desna help you if you need to get something from the fridge.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If a GM rules that you have to be in the same square to pick up an item, then make sure he enforces it when his NPC wants to pick up a document from his desk to show you - he'll have to climb up onto the desk, grab the item, and then get back down.
The document is usually going to be within five feet of any character picking it up. The combat grid is an abstract used for the purpose of keeping track of combat situations. It should not necessarily be used in RP scenarios.
And yes, you have to enter a square to pick up an item in that square during combat. It is perfectly reasonable.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
If a GM rules that you have to be in the same square to pick up an item, then make sure he enforces it when his NPC wants to pick up a document from his desk to show you - he'll have to climb up onto the desk, grab the item, and then get back down.The document is usually going to be within five feet of any character picking it up. The combat grid is an abstract used for the purpose of keeping track of combat situations. It should not necessarily be used in RP scenarios.
Ah, so if we're in combat in the NPC's office and he wants to grab the document from his desk to show us he's not our enemy and get us to stop attacking, then he has to enter the square with the document (i.e., get onto the desk) to pick it up. ;)
And yes, you have to enter a square to pick up an item in that square during combat. It is perfectly reasonable.
I can be Small and grapple a Tiny creature in an adjacent square, but can't pick up a greatsword in that same square without entering it first? And that's "perfectly reasonable"?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Only if the orc threatens the square that Steve is in when he picks up the sword.I agree, though it raises the question of if, by RAW, you can reach into an adjacent square to pick up an item (the Manipulate Item action on page 187 doesn't make it clear one way or the other IMHO).
I can imagine some GMs may argue that Steve would need to enter Bob's square to pick up his sword and that he at that point would provoke an AoO as he is now in the orc's threatened area.
If a GM rules that you have to be in the same square to pick up an item, then make sure he enforces it when his NPC wants to pick up a document from his desk to show you - he'll have to climb up onto the desk, grab the item, and then get back down.
And Desna help you if you need to get something from the fridge.
Only if the desk or refrigerator are 5'x5' otherwise you could stand in the same square as the desk with no problem..
Here, tape some 5' squares onto the floor, put a stick in one, now stand in the other and pick up the stick. Now try that for the stick being in any location in the square. I think that you will find it easier and less awkward (man, that is an awkward word!) to step into the square and pick it up. Unless you have really long arms (10' reach).
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Actually, even better:
I'm standing around unarmed, getting some overdue loitering done. Two town guards approach me with swords drawn to inform me of the city's zero-tolerance policy on loitering. They are each adjacent to me.
I decide to disarm one of them. Per the disarm rules, I reach out with my -4 penalty for an unarmed disarm and grab his weapon. Rolling a natural 20, I succeed and am now holding the weapon.
From the adjacent square.
The other guard is terrified of my manliness, drops his sword where he stands, and runs away.
It's "reasonable" for me to have to enter that square to collect his sword, when I was able to grab the other right out of his buddy's hands from outside his square?
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16
|
If a GM rules that you have to be in the same square to pick up an item, then make sure he enforces it when his NPC wants to pick up a document from his desk to show you - he'll have to climb up onto the desk, grab the item, and then get back down.The document is usually going to be within five feet of any character picking it up. The combat grid is an abstract used for the purpose of keeping track of combat situations. It should not necessarily be used in RP scenarios.
And yes, you have to enter a square to pick up an item in that square during combat. It is perfectly reasonable.
I'd also consider that if the character uses Lunge, he could grab it from an adjacent square... of course I'd also consider picking up an item an action that provokes an attack of opportunity, and that -2 AC penalty would be bad.
Technically by the rules you can only reach into that square by entering it.
A medium creature usually has a natural reach of 5 feet. This means they can reach into adjacent squares.
Tiny, Diminutive, and Fine Creatures: "Creatures that take up less than 1 square of space typically have a natural reach of 0 feet, meaning they can't reach into adjacent squares. They must enter an opponent's square to attack in melee."
This is one I'd just leave to the judgement of the ref. There are times when having to enter a square makes sense, and times when it doesn't. I'd probably rule that it's ok to reach into the square to pick the item up, but that if you can do that, the monster can make the attack of opportunity on the bit of you that is in the square.
I had a (slightly) similar situation where a monster with reach was grappling a PC. The other characters couldn't reach the monster to hit it but (successfully) argued that since it was grappling their ally there had to be *some* bit of it that they could hit. I think with a religious adherence to the rules they wouldn't be able to.
I'd say if the orc has the potential to also pick up Bob's sword then Steve is performing an action that provokes within his threatened area and I'd let the orc have an attack of opportunity.
If the orc tried to pick up the sword would the player want an attack of opportunity?
You'd only provoke if you were standing in a threatened square. Just as a giant 1/ 10 ft reach and try and swipe your sword from your hands from 10 ft away and you would be unable to AoO him w/o a reach weapon. Reaching into a threatened square doesn't matter, only if you yourself are IN one.
And it should not be left up to the DM to decide, it's plainly obvious you can reach into another space for an object. If not, disarm would not work.
Nothing is ever "plainly obvious". Otherwise the boards would not be littered with entertaining discussions like these. Disarm is not picking up an object, they're two different actions with different rules to go with them. The rules for disarm are fairly clearly delineated, those for picking up an item less so. (I can only find the phrase "pick up" twice in the core rules).
|
|
And it should not be left up to the DM to decide, it's plainly obvious you can reach into another space for an object. If not, disarm would not work.
Playing devil's advocate, it could be argued that disarming a weapon that is being held by a creature could be possible whilst reaching into a square and picking up an item may not. For example, part of the disarm could be a feint to draw the opponent toward you (foe brings weapon closer), also even a tiny creature if holding the weapon somewhat off the ground meaning you don't have to bend as much.
Personally, as a GM if I ruled an item was dropped close to the border of an adjacent square it could be picked up from that square, but picking it up from the other adjacent squares would be impossible unless you have reach.
My interpretation is that you don't have to enter the square to pick the item up, but you do provoke an attack of opportunity for doing so.
To me, if you can pick up an item from an adjacent square, you have part of your body in that square, a part that is stretched out in a vulnerable way. If that is the case, then the creature threatning that square can snap out an attack on that body part.
The five foot square combat grid is an abstract and conflicts with reality and/or common sense at times. I look for the simplest and least conflicting interpretation - one that will occur to me and my players the rare times that the corner case comes up.
Now the question that I had about the scenario was why didn't Steve move into Bob's square, to cover him, to prevent a Coup-de-Grace?
*tongue planted firmly in cheek*
Or, why didn't the orc 5'step into Bob's square to stop such a movement by Steve?
Most important of all, what is the *orc's* name?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I apologize in advance for the long post, but please bear with me, my megalomania leads me to thinking it might actually be worth your time.
I know there are millions of different fighting styles out there, but at least in the one I wasted quite some of my spare time learning, you actually parry the attack ot the opponent, who has moved close to you to attack you, then grab his wrist, to pull him even closer and take his weapon away from him.
I am well aware that this particular style would most probably be some strange grapple/disarm combination by RAW, but whenever anyone uses disarm it is quite safe to assume that the opponent has closed in on said person to attack him/her, because he'd simply have to do so to hit him.
I know it is not stated in the RAW, since facing and things like that do not exist anymore, but to me, common sense makes it perfeclty clear that characters are not glued to the exact center of their 5ft square. They HAVE to move around in that square, these movements are simply so small that they are being ignored in the rules.
On top of that, if fighters Bob and Fred stand in adjacent squares, their weapons would most probably be at a similar height
Ignore all the x-es, apparently they are needed since the forum simply ignores multiple spaces.
|xxxBxxx|xxxFxxx|
|xxxB-Wx|xW-Fxxx| (seen from the side)
|xxxBxxx|xxxFxxx|
While a weapon lying on the ground is a lot further down at the same horizontal distance, therefore resulting in a larger overall distance.
|xxxBxxx|xxxxxxx|
|xxxB-Wx|xxxxxxx|
|xxxBxxx|xxxWxxx|
(i know this does not take different creature sizes into account, but if you take logic to those, you'll end up with a LOT more questions. Think a tiny character with a vorpal sword rolling a 20 against a large oppponent. Nobody wants to think about how the f**k he reached the neck to chop off the head)
In my eyes, the disarm-CM roll (if you win it) represents drawing your enemy in and tricking him into giving you an opening for your attempt. If you fail the roll, you fail to do so.
So at least I'd want an acrobatics or a CM roll to pick that weapon up from the next square, especially if you want to do so without provoking an AOO. I know that is not RAW, but at least that's what common sense dictates to me and the way I would houserule it.
*edit: my awesome scematics of fighters and weapons got screwed up while posting.
(i know this does not take different creature sizes into account, but if you take logic to those, you'll end up with a LOT more questions. Think a tiny character with a vorpal sword rolling a 20 against a large oppponent. Nobody wants to think abouWet how the f**k he reached the neck to chop off the head)
Well... play Dragon Age (the CRPG) until you encounter an ogre and watch the finisher move (or just search for a youtube vid of that) ;)
(Yeah, I know, it might actually require climbing checks, but... let's drop those.)On topic: I'd also say that you would provoke for picking up stuff out of a threatened square. Because you probably have to move a substantial part of your body inside the square to physically reach the object in a way that it (your body) is not protected, grab the item, and move that part of your body back out. Plenty of time for your opponent to make an AoO.
Besides, if we rule that reaching inside a threatened square and manipulating objects inside of it doesn't provoke, we might end up with lots of shenanigans consisting of placing traps or other harmful objects directly in front of your opponent...
Since tactical combat on a hex grid plays like a turn based video game, board game etc, and in those games you must enter the square to pick up the item, I would rule you need to enter the square to pick up the item.
3.5/Pathfinder is a abstraction of realism, but if you want to be "real", measure out two 5' squares (do it now, really easy to do). Put yourself in the middle of one square, put a friend lying down in the other with a object (call this the threatened square). Now try and get that object without placing the majority of yourself in the threatened square.
Let's throw on top of that at the round is 6 seconds long "abstraction of time" and you the player action and the orcs action are essentially happening at about the same time. I make logical sense if your going not pay attention to this cheesed off orc and try to grab an object on the ground in front of him, he is going to attempt to cut you in half.
Of course maybe I am just a old timer who like to spy on gaming forums.
I'm with the "adjacent is good enough to pick up the item" side of this.
Otherwise you could never pick anything up off of a table, out of a chest, or off of a shelf carved into a wall.
Or off of a pedestal in the middle of a room.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I'm with the "adjacent is good enough to pick up the item" side of this.
Otherwise you could never pick anything up off of a table, out of a chest, or off of a shelf carved into a wall.
Or off of a pedestal in the middle of a room.
Or out of an enemy's hands. (Which the rules explicitly allow).
The core rules allow you to pick up an object from an adjacent square if someone's holding it (via a weaponless Disarm, or the Steal combat maneuver). To suggest that the object being unattended causes you to need to enter its square when you didn't need to before is just plain silly.
@ Abraham: lets say you stand in front of the so often mentioned desk. Said desk is 5x10 feet big, since you're some big boss in his office.
Now if you want to reach something right on your side of the desk (for example your laptop) there's no problem at all.
But now imagine, you want to reach the cup of coffe your secretary brought. Sadly he/she (don't want to get sued for sexism) placed it on the far side of the Desk.
What do you do, to reach it, without walking around your Desk? You Lean over it and stretch your arm quite a bit.
You don't actually LEAVE your square (desk chair) but you stretch far into the adjacent square (desk) Now imagine your secretary is still there, right where he/she was, while placing the cup, but suddenly he/shes an Orc. Wouldn't said orc be absolutely capable of smacking you over the head with his club?
My ruling would be that it is indeed possible to grab an item in an adjacent square, but not in any way without provoking an AOO, which was the actual question to begin with, if I am correct.
Picking up an item is a move action which provokes an attack of opportunity, as said on the actions in combat table.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
My ruling would be that it is indeed possible to grab an item in an adjacent square, but not in any way without provoking an AOO, which was the actual question to begin with, if I am correct.
It was the original question, yes, but about 2 or 3 posts down, a different discussion started: whether or not you can grab an item from an adjacent square at all.
I think everyone's on the same page regarding AoO's. Abraham was replying to the assertion by several posters that you need to enter an item's square to pick it up.
Which, I'll reiterate, is ridiculous. The rules allow you to grab a held item from an adjacent square via the disarm maneuver (if you've got empty hands). They let you grab a worn item from an adjacent square via the steal maneuver. To suggest that the item being unattended suddenly removes your ability to reach into an adjacent square is completely absurd.
That's what's currently being discussed.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Besides, if we rule that reaching inside a threatened square and manipulating objects inside of it doesn't provoke
I don't see how that's even an option to be discussed, as the rules explicitly state that picking up an item provokes.
If you have 5' reach, then you can reach into adjacent squares. That's what 5' reach means. A reach of 0' feet means you can't reach into adjacent squares.
If someone provokes, but you can't reach the square they occupy, you can't hit them.
You do not occupy every square you can reach. If you have to move into a square in order to reach what's inside it, you would have to make acrobatics checks to enter the square of the creature you're fighting.
The only way to hit someone who is reaching into a square is with the Strike Back feat. The existence of that feat means that without that feat, you can't attack someone's limb that reaches into your square, much less into an adjacent threatened square.
Do any of the people arguing that you have to enter a square to reach it, or that you can attack someone outside your reach, have any rules they can quote to support them?
My ruling would be that it is indeed possible to grab an item in an adjacent square, but not in any way without provoking an AOO, which was the actual question to begin with, if I am correct.
Yes, you provoke an AoO. No, the enemy cannot hit you unless you are in a threatened square.
Wouldn't said orc be absolutely capable of smacking you over the head with his club?
The orc does not have the ability to target your limb as you reach into a threatened square.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Never one to miss a challenge I would disagree with Grick and quote a rule to support myself. The rule states
"...performing certain actions within a threatened square." (Provokes an AoO).
The item to be picked up is in a threatened square. Picking it up is taking place within the threatened square (unless you think that the ability to reach into a square teleports the object into your own square). It does not say "performing certain actions while standing within a threatened square", it says the *action* must be in a threatened square. Now if you wish to argue that picking up the object actually takes place within your own square (even though the object is in a different square), I suppose you can, but I don't instantly see a rule which makes this clear, which means it comes down to interpretation (as ever).
Although, I suddenly notice that I have not met the challenge you threw down because I have argued neither that you have to enter the square to reach it nor that I can attack someone outside my reach. Damn. Can't find any examples which say you can do one of those.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Never one to miss a challenge I would disagree with Grick and quote a rule to support myself. The rule states
"...performing certain actions within a threatened square." (Provokes an AoO).
The item to be picked up is in a threatened square. Picking it up is taking place within the threatened square (unless you think that the ability to reach into a square teleports the object into your own square). It does not say "performing certain actions while standing within a threatened square", it says the *action* must be in a threatened square. Now if you wish to argue that picking up the object actually takes place within your own square (even though the object is in a different square), I suppose you can, but I don't instantly see a rule which makes this clear, which means it comes down to interpretation (as ever).
Here's a counter:
ECI
Enemy, Character, Item
Character picks up item. If we go with your above idea, he doesn't provoke, because the action is being performed outside the Enemy's reach.
Good luck getting any GM ever to let you get away with that without taking an AoO. ;)
There is a very big difference between engage someone who is the the 5' space next to you to disarm him, then there is bending over, reaching down and trying to pick up a object in the 5' square next to you (unless your Plastic Man). Again do this now, my office is all 1' x 1' tiles so this is rather easy for me to experiment with.
Now of course, this whole scenario is a combat abstraction. Just as people fighting aren't hitting each other in the same adjacent square all the time one after the other, just as HP and AC are abstractions of different and multiple things.
Of course this it one of the reasons too some of us don't use miniatures, a grid or attacks of opportunities.
Again it you want to go real life with this:
You and you comrade are fighting mugger, you are behind your buddy. Mugger kills your buddy who happened to have a Katana on him (yeah he is one of those goofuses). Katana and buddy drop to the ground. You have no weapon do you lunge at the Katana on the ground (you dead friend is also in that area so you have to try and avoid him never mind if he fell on top of the weapon). Said mugger of course is going to try and take you out while you are going after the weapon. Attack of Opportunity; again another abstraction for tactical grid based combat.
Just my opinion of course, but is seems to me AoO are there to PREVENT someone taking advantage of the nature and rules of tactical grid combat.
Since I don't live in America and will therefore never play in any official games, I will simply houserule it the way I prefer it. May each and everyone of you have fun with their own interpretations, but as long as no magic is involved, I prefer logic over RAW in most cases. I find it completely acceptable to treat somebody who bends over to pick something up from the ground as if said Character occupies both his square and the one of the object at that moment for the purposes of AOOs. In my eyes, this is logical as well as the simplest solution. Besides, treating a character as if he occupies two spaces, simply because he would otherwise have to be placed on the border between the two spaces does happen in the RAW. Example: Riding your horse into combat. I think we can agree on the fact, that a character doesn't inexplicably grow really fat the Moment he mounts a horse but rather he sits on the middle of the horse, which would lead to him being placed on the border of the two squares occupied by the horse.
Edit: To clarify up front, I subscribe to the ruling that Jiggy sees in Malachs post.
By now I think this could actually qualify for an official ruling, since wo don't seem to be able to reach a consensus.
You guys need to get out more.
Says the person with 17,529 posts.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't need to get out more, I need to work on my university paper. ^^
Having stated this, it should be plainly obvious to all of you why I'm spending so much time in the forums. -.-
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
When you attack, preform a combat maneuver, ect. on another player. You're effectively entering their square to preform the task, and then moving back out. Which is why a lot of those type of actions provoke attacks of opportunity.
There is nothing in the rules to support this idea at all. In fact, the grapple rules have this to say:
If you successfully grapple a creature that is not adjacent to you, move that creature to an adjacent open space (if no space is available, your grapple fails).
So no, you do not enter a creature's square to interact with it and then move back out.
What I'm getting at is that disarming a person and picking up a weapon are two entirely different situations.
Yeah, disarming/stealing should be harder, not easier. You can grab an item in an adjacent square while someone is actively trying to prevent you from doing so! I can use Steal to take the bow that's strapped to their back, while they're trying to keep me away, and do so without entering their square. It should not be harder to pick it up off the ground than to take it from their back.
Only if the orc threatens the square that Steve is in when he picks up the sword.I agree, though it raises the question of if, by RAW, you can reach into an adjacent square to pick up an item (the Manipulate Item action on page 187 doesn't make it clear one way or the other IMHO).
I can imagine some GMs may argue that Steve would need to enter Bob's square to pick up his sword and that he at that point would provoke an AoO as he is now in the orc's threatened area.
If a GM rules that you have to be in the same square to pick up an item, then make sure he enforces it when his NPC wants to pick up a document from his desk to show you - he'll have to climb up onto the desk, grab the item, and then get back down.
And Desna help you if you need to get something from the fridge.
That's not what entering a square means. You have to put your arm through the square, at least, to pick up the sword in that square. The square is 5x5. Reach is 5 feet. So, when you bend over to pick it up, you don't have to be STANDING in the square, but part of your body must be in that square, and that is what the orc swings at. Likewise, to grab the doccument, you DO have to put your arm over the table. Consider it a five foot step without taking a step. You're using your arm and torso instead. I would rule that both the square you "came from" and the square you "went to" provoke attacks of opportunity because you are vulnerable in both- bending from one square to the other to pick something up leaves you pretty open. It's the equivalent of a minimum of duckwalking 5 feet and maximum 10 feet.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
That quote for grapples only applies to creatures with greater than 5 foot reach.
Incorrect. Please do not make claims about context without looking first.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
As far as EASIER goes. It's not easier to disarm/steal. First off, either way you provoke an AOO. Unless your character has specifically taken the proper feats to avoid provoking, which signifies particular skill or training.
Secondly, you don't have to roll a CMB/Attack roll to pick up an inanimate object off the ground. When you attempt to disarm/steal, you have to beat their CMD, and if you provoke and get hit, you have to deal with the damage dealt as a negative to your check.
So I honestly don't see either of your points.
The person holding the item could be leaning away from me, holding the item as far away from me as possible - maybe even dangling it into a third square - and I can still grab it as per disarm/steal rules.
Even if the unattended item is in the far corner of the adjacent square, it still can't be any farther away than where an enemy could be holding it. Simply removing the enemy does not make the item harder to reach.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
That quote for grapples only applies to creatures with greater than 5 foot reach.Incorrect. Please do not make claims about context without looking first.The only quote about grapples you said was.
"If you successfully grapple a creature that is not adjacent to you, move that creature to an adjacent open space (if no space is available, your grapple fails)."
Notice the word "IF"? Using deductive logic, if you're able to successfully grapple a creature that is not adjacent to you... it means that character is at least 10 feet away. Since adjacent means that he's in one of the 5 foot squares next to yours. Therefore, IF you successfully grapple him. You'd logically have to have at least a 10 foot reach.
Or you could be using a reach weapon with the grapple quality. Or the target could be a Tiny creature who was in your space.
Deductive logic involves looking at all possibilities, not just the ones that are convenient for your position.