Vicious Stomp + Greater Trip?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 418 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

81 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here are two feats that grant attacks of opportunity.

Greater Trip:
You can make free attacks on foes that you knock down.

Prerequisites: Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, base attack bonus +6, Int 13.

Benefit: You receive a +2 bonus on checks made to trip a foe. This bonus stacks with the bonus granted by Improved Trip. Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes attacks of opportunity.

Normal: Creatures do not provoke attacks of opportunity from being tripped.

Vicious Stomp:
You take advantage of the moment to brutally kick an enemy when he is down.

Prerequisite: Combat Reflexes, Improved Unarmed Strike.

Benefit: Whenever an opponent falls prone adjacent to you, that opponent provokes an attack of opportunity from you. This attack must be an unarmed strike.

Let's say a character has both these feats, and he successfully trips an opponent. He has Combat Reflexes of course, and a Dexterity score of 18. Does he take one or two attacks of opportunity? Also, why? :D

EDIT: Even if you think you know the answer for sure, please click the FAQ button so that the people who don't know for sure can find out sooner!


AoOs

Quote:
Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity: If you have the Combat Reflexes feat, you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.

I consider them 2 separate provoking events.

-Success on a Trip
-Falling Prone adjacent to you (restricted to an unarmed strike)

Yes, they happen very close together, but they are distinct.
(further, with the feat investment required it's not so bad to do something thematically "cool")


Seconded, on all accounts.


I would allow a player to only take one of the two attacks, whichever one happened to be the most useful in the circumstances.

The AOO rules echo a general theme that you only ever get a single AOO for each provoking event. I see the situation of tripping an opponent and them subsequently falling prone as a single event, and not two distinct provoking events.

Dark Archive

Archaeik wrote:

AoOs

Quote:
Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity: If you have the Combat Reflexes feat, you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.

I consider them 2 separate provoking events.

-Success on a Trip
-Falling Prone adjacent to you (restricted to an unarmed strike)

Yes, they happen very close together, but they are distinct.
(further, with the feat investment required it's not so bad to do something thematically "cool")

This is likewise my interpretation; however, I wanted to see what the consensus was. It does hedge on whether being tripped and then falling prone are the same event or two separate but linked events.

Lantern Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16

Ganymede425 wrote:

The AOO rules echo a general theme that you only ever get a single AOO for each provoking event. I see the situation of tripping an opponent and them subsequently falling prone as a single event, and not two distinct provoking events.

I don't see it as so. Tripping isn't necessary landing flat on your back (as comical as that is to imagine in combat) and it is often enough I'm sure, but is just as plausible to be a variety of other actions that leaves an opponent prone in front of you.

Let's say a monk with a temple sword uses the curved blade to perform a sweeping hook tobring an opponent's leading leg forward, causing the foe toe stumble to the now downed knee; the monk then continues the spin with the sword slice the opponent (Greater Trip AoO). Now downed at hip level to the monk, he finishes the spin with a powerful elbow to the opponent's face (Vicious Stomp AoO).

Of course it can still be the traditional quarterstaff sweep trip, continuing the momentum for an overhead smash with the staff, then a Bruce Lee style leap on the opponent's chest for good measure (sound effect must be included).

BPC


A successful trip attempt inflicts the prone condition on the target, so how can "tripping" NOT be "falling prone?" I just made a trip-focused monk for PFS, so I'd love to get 2 AoO's per trip, but I just can't see this being legal.

FAQ'd.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

FAQ clicked. I can really see both ways on this one. I'm not sure which one I'm even leaning toward.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Thanks all, the more FAQs the better!

With the interpretation of only getting one, I could see Vicious Stomp becoming obsolete eventually; that's my only caveat. Feats should not become obsolete because there's a different feat that does the same thing only better (Great Cleave and the Vital Strike chain are an exception, because they are upgrades of their prerequisites).

It's even more confusing because Vicious Stomp came out in a much later book, and it mentions nothing either way about Greater Trip.


FAQing as well, but i'm in the camp that you provoke two AoOs.

Don't forget to tack on Improved Ki Throw so you're doing unarmed damage with the trip itself and getting a free reposition. Maybe wear a vicious amulet of mighty fists at the same time, because taking 3d6 damage is totally worth doing all of that to someone with a single trip. :P

Dark Archive

I suppose it could also be interpreted as the feats themselves causing the opponent to provoke; therefore, it is definitely two separate conditions for the attack of opportunity.


They provoke an AoO from Greater Trip the instant you beat their CMD with your CMB.

They provoke an AoO when they gain the prone condition.

They do not gain the prone condition until they hit the ground, I think. Because, you know, that's when they're prone.

2 AoOs.

Dark Archive

Would you say then Cheapy, that the attack of opportunity that comes from Greater Trip is made without the +4 bonus that comes from attacking a prone opponent?


That's how I'd do it.


By reversing this FAQ ruling, I'd say so, yes.

Dark Archive

That makes sense. And by that interpretation, it's very cut and dry that there are two attacks of opportunity. I like it! :)


Archaeik wrote:

AoOs

Quote:
Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity: If you have the Combat Reflexes feat, you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.

I consider them 2 separate provoking events.

-Success on a Trip
-Falling Prone adjacent to you (restricted to an unarmed strike)

Yes, they happen very close together, but they are distinct.
(further, with the feat investment required it's not so bad to do something thematically "cool")

I'll just chime in to agree with this. Also note the same book that introduced Vicious Stomp introduced a (very weak) feat to move 5 ft as an immediate action if about to fall prone, presumably at least partly designed to counter Vicious Stomp. So there are definitely scenarios where despite tripping someone, both "AoO events" might not happen.


Mergy wrote:

With the interpretation of only getting one, I could see Vicious Stomp becoming obsolete eventually; that's my only caveat. Feats should not become obsolete because there's a different feat that does the same thing only better (Great Cleave and the Vital Strike chain are an exception, because they are upgrades of their prerequisites).

Not every person you trip falls prone adjacent to you, and not every person that falls prone adjacent to you is someone you tripped. The two feats aren't redundant or obsolete because of that fundamental truth. While there are circumstances when both feats would apply, there are plenty of circumstances in which only one or the other applies.

Dark Archive

It's true that the two feats don't overlap completely.

What do you think of the interpretation that the attack of opportunity that comes from Greater Trip happens before the opponent becomes prone, ie. without the +4 bonus to melee attacks?


Naturally, I don't agree with it. I'd award the +4 to hit during that attack.

Shadow Lodge

I interpret it as 2 different triggers:

I attempt a trip.
I succeed.
>>AOO: I hit you on the way down (can be with a weapon).
Target is prone.
>>AOO: I hit you on the ground (must be unarmed strike).

If you add Enhanced Ki Throw into the mix, it would go:

I attempt a trip.
I succeed.
>>GREATER TRIP AOO: I hit you on the way down (can be with a weapon).
Spend Ki for Enhanced Ki Throw.
Target lands.
>>TARGET TAKES AUTOMATIC UAS DAMAGE
Target is prone.
>>VICIOUS STOMP AOO: I hit you on the ground (must be unarmed strike).

Dark Archive

Attacks of opportunity happen instantly; they're tied with immediate actions for speed. In that way, I can definitely see someone being attacked twice: once for being tripped and again for falling prone.


Mergy wrote:
Attacks of opportunity happen instantly; they're tied with immediate actions for speed. In that way, I can definitely see someone being attacked twice: once for being tripped and again for falling prone.

There is no intervening point in time between being tripped and being prone. They are both the exact same moment; they are one in the same.

Dark Archive

Even so, I still submit that it's two separate conditions giving two attacks of opportunity. Being tripped is not the same thing as falling prone. Being tripped does lead to being knocked prone, but they are not synonymous.


Remember what the relevant rule says, "This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity."

While tripping someone and someone falling prone are not the same thing in a superficial sense, they both result in the exact same opportunity to attack; they both take advantage of an opponent who has just had his arse knocked on the ground.

Secondly, are you just playing devil's advocate? If so, we might all be better served if you spelled out your position and arguments up front instead of rolling them out one-at-a-time.

Dark Archive

I'm not playing devil's anything. :) I want to find out the answer, and if we can have a civilized argument about why or why not there's only a certain number of attacks, that's sure to bring to light arguments that I couldn't have thought of myself.

The reason these thoughts are coming out one at a time are because I'm not very organized about this.

I like the point that Cheapy made here:

Cheapy wrote:
By reversing this FAQ ruling, I'd say so, yes.

If you can't trip an opponent that's getting up from prone because he's already prone, I don't think the attack of opportunity from Greater Trip happens against a prone opponent. It happens against a soon-to-be prone opponent.

With that interpretation the division is quite clear and two attacks seems reasonable.


Mergy wrote:
Even so, I still submit that it's two separate conditions giving two attacks of opportunity. Being tripped is not the same thing as falling prone. Being tripped does lead to being knocked prone, but they are not synonymous.

Techical Jargon: You're correct. One trigger is becoming prone, the other is a successful trip attempt (which results in the target becoming prone).

HOWEVER, even if the source of the AoO were the same to activate the feats, the triggers that cause your AoOs are entirely different - as the trigger results from the feat themselves and not necessarily the act. The acts activate the feats which activate the AoO trigger. Combat Reflexes' restriction does not apply.

In this case, you have two different and separate feats that grant you attacks of opportunity that both occur in this instance. If you had more than one AoO at your disposal you could resolve both triggering AoOs.

Dark Archive

Stynkk wrote:
Mergy wrote:
Even so, I still submit that it's two separate conditions giving two attacks of opportunity. Being tripped is not the same thing as falling prone. Being tripped does lead to being knocked prone, but they are not synonymous.

Techical Jargon: You're correct. One trigger is becoming prone, the other is a successful trip attempt (which results in the target becoming prone).

HOWEVER, even if the source of the AoO were the same to activate the feats, the triggers that cause your AoOs are entirely different - as the trigger results from the feat themselves and not necessarily the act. Combat Reflexes' restriction does not apply.

In this case, you have two different and separate feats that grant you attacks of opportunity that both occur in this instance. If you had more than one AoO at your disposal you could resolve both triggering AoOs.

So... I'm right for the wrong reasons?


What? No, I think you're right, but it gets a little more muddy than you're giving it credit for :)


Mergy wrote:

If you can't trip an opponent that's getting up from prone because he's already prone, I don't think the attack of opportunity from Greater Trip happens against a prone opponent. It happens against a soon-to-be prone opponent.

With that interpretation the division is quite clear and two attacks seems reasonable.

That's comparing apples with oranges.

In the FAQ example, the opportunity that provokes an attack is attempting to get up. This is how most AOO's happen: you make the attack before the other player completes the provocative attempt.

In our example, the opportunity that provokes an attack is being prone/tripped, not attempting to be prone/tripped. You get the AOO because they -are- prone/tripped, not because they are attempting to become prone.

Otherwise, you are arguing that you actually Vicious Stomp someone before they are actually on the ground, something that is both silly to imagine and against the express wording of the feat.

Dark Archive

Ah okay. ^_^

As far as overpoweredness, which has nothing to do with RAW, I don't think it's too bad. It's quite the feat investment (6 feats!) to get to this situation, and one of the prerequisites is 13 intelligence. Only a monk or a fighter has a good chance getting that far with any reasonable speed. The monk is not overpowered by the virtue of being a monk, while the fighter's unarmed strike is not something to write home about, when you consider he could be swinging a greatsword instead.

Ganymede425 wrote:
Mergy wrote:

If you can't trip an opponent that's getting up from prone because he's already prone, I don't think the attack of opportunity from Greater Trip happens against a prone opponent. It happens against a soon-to-be prone opponent.

With that interpretation the division is quite clear and two attacks seems reasonable.

That's comparing apples with oranges.

In the FAQ example, the opportunity that provokes an attack is attempting to get up. This is how most AOO's happen: you make the attack before the other player completes the provocative attempt.

In our example, the opportunity that provokes an attack is being prone/tripped, not attempting to be prone/tripped. You get the AOO because they -are- prone/tripped, not because they are attempting to become prone.

Otherwise, you are arguing that you actually Vicious Stomp someone before they are actually on the ground, something that is both silly to imagine and against the express wording of the feat.

I'm arguing nothing of the sort. You say that an AOO happens before the other player completes the provocative attempt, and that's correct.

So greater trip's AOO provokes before the opponent falls prone. Check.

Now, Vicious Stomp's condition is subtly different. Whenever an opponent falls prone, he provokes an attack of opportunity. He can't be not prone if he's already fallen prone. So the AOO happens AFTER he falls prone.


I've seen multiple references in this thread to Improved Ki Throw granting automatic unarmed damage, yet I can't see where this is coming from.

Improved Ki Throw

PRD wrote:


Improved Ki Throw (Combat)

Your enemies are living weapons in your hands.

Prerequisites: Improved Bull Rush, Ki Throw.

Benefit: When using the Ki Throw feat, you may throw your target into any square you threaten that is occupied by another creature. Make a bull rush combat maneuver check with a –4 penalty against the secondary target. If this check succeeds, the thrown creature lands prone in the secondary target's square, while the secondary target is pushed back and knocked prone in an adjacent square. If the check fails, the thrown creature lands prone in the nearest square you threaten adjacent to the secondary target.

If you throw a Large or larger creature into an area containing multiple secondary targets, you take an additional penalty of –4 on your combat maneuver check for each target after the first.

Special: A monk may take this as a bonus feat at 14th level.

What am I missing?


Wrong feat this is what is being talked about.

Enhanced Ki Throw (Combat)

You enhance the force of your ki throws, enabling you to devastate your opponents as you slam them to the ground.

Prerequisites: Ki pool class feature, Ki Throw.

Benefit: When using the Ki Throw feat, you can expend 1 ki point to amplify the force of your attack. If your ki throw succeeds, when the target hits the ground, it takes damage as if you had hit it with an unarmed strike.

Shadow Lodge

Not "Improved Ki Throw" -- "Enhanced Ki Throw".

Enhanced Ki Throw (Combat)

You enhance the force of your ki throws, enabling you to devastate your opponents as you slam them to the ground.

Prerequisites: Ki pool class feature, Ki Throw.

Benefit: When using the Ki Throw feat, you can expend 1 ki point to amplify the force of your attack. If your ki throw succeeds, when the target hits the ground, it takes damage as if you had hit it with an unarmed strike.


Mergy wrote:


I'm arguing nothing of the sort. You say that an AOO happens before the other player completes the provocative attempt, and that's correct.

So greater trip's AOO provokes before the opponent falls prone. Check.

Now, Vicious Stomp's condition is subtly different. Whenever an opponent falls prone, he provokes an attack of opportunity. He can't be not prone if he's already fallen prone. So the AOO happens AFTER he falls prone.

You're back to using the "being tripped and falling prone are two moments in time" argument, an incorrect argument. Being tripped -is- being prone, there is no moment of time between. There is no point in time in which a character has been tripped and is not yet prone.

Greater Trip activates as soon as the target is tripped. Vicious Stomp activates as soon as the target is prone. Both being tripped and being prone happen at the exact same moment. They are both the same opportunity that is being exploited.

Dark Archive

No, Greater trip activates as soon as the target is tripped, but Vicious Stomp activates after the target is prone. They are different opportunities being exploited.


So what your saying then Ganymede if someone has a feat that lets them take a 5 ft step instead of going prone then you tell your greater trip using player "No AoO for you!"? The guy got tripped and had to expend a resource to stay on his feat but yet you didn't trip him?

Dark Archive

Actually, yeah. What happens if someone is tripped but has an ability that allows them to negate being prone? Greater Trip would still activate. That in itself shows that being prone and being tripped are different triggers.


Mergy wrote:
No, Greater trip activates as soon as the target is tripped, but Vicious Stomp activates after the target is prone.

Considering both feats use the exact same wording and format, it would be silly to interpret their timing differently as you have.

They both use the "Whenever [a specific event happens], that opponent provokes attacks of opportunity." Being tripped and falling prone are both specific events that happen at the exact same time. By definition, one can not happen after the other as you seem to indicate.

Talonhawke wrote:
So what your saying then Ganymede if someone has a feat that lets them take a 5 ft step instead of going prone then you tell your greater trip using player "No AoO for you!"? The guy got tripped and had to expend a resource to stay on his feat but yet you didn't trip him?

Doesn't the answer there depend on what the imaginary feat says? The answers could be, "No, it isn't a successful trip," "Yes, pending he can reach the target's new location," or other possible answers depending on the wording of your make-believe feat.

Secondly, does such a hypothetical serve any real purpose in this discussion?


Mergy wrote:
Actually, yeah. What happens if someone is tripped but has an ability that allows them to negate being prone? Greater Trip would still activate. That in itself shows that being prone and being tripped are different triggers.

This is actually a tautology, a type of fallacious reasoning. It is like saying, "Tripping someone and knocking someone prone are the same thing, except when they are different. They're different therefore they're different." This type of argument is unconvincing even when one doesn't make up rules for it to work.

Dark Archive

There is a world of difference between the text "Whenever you successfully trip an opponent" (happens when you exceed the opponent's CMD) and "Whenever an opponent falls prone adjacent to you" (happens when the opponent falls prone).

Ganymede425 wrote:
This is actually a tautology, a type of fallacious reasoning. It is like saying, "Tripping someone and knocking someone prone are the same thing, except when they are different. They're different therefore they're different." This type of argument is unconvincing even when one doesn't make up rules for it to work.

It's only a tautology if being tripped and being knocked prone are the same; they're not, so it's not.


Mergy wrote:
There is a world of difference between the text "Whenever you successfully trip an opponent" (happens when you exceed the opponent's CMD) and "Whenever an opponent falls prone adjacent to you" (happens when the opponent falls prone).

Yeah, there are plenty of differences, but none of them are germaine to the issue at hand.

Both situations can be caused by independent factors, but they both result in the exact same opportunity to be taken advantage of: some chump just fell down next to you.

Dark Archive

The two attacks happen because of different events. The first because some chump got tripped. The second because some chump fell prone.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mergy wrote:


So... I'm right for the wrong reasons?

If loving AoOs is wrong, I don't want to be right.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Starfinder Superscriber

I'm chiming in with the 2 AoO's as well. As everyone else said.


Mergy wrote:


Let's say a character has both these feats, and he successfully trips an opponent. He has Combat Reflexes of course, and a Dexterity score of 18. Does he take one or two attacks of opportunity? Also, why? :D

I see it as one opportunity, so one AOO.

-James

Dark Archive

The events are separate though, separated by the conditions for the feats to work. One requires beating the opponent's CMD, while the other requires him to go prone adjacent to you. That's two opportunities, so two AoOs.


I asked this same question about the feats together a few months ago and people told me there is no aoo for tripping someone, even if you have vicious stomp. I house ruled to allow it.

Also, what page does it say you suffer an aoo for being tripped? I thought you only suffered it for standing up.


Mergy wrote:
The events are separate though, separated by the conditions for the feats to work. One requires beating the opponent's CMD, while the other requires him to go prone adjacent to you. That's two opportunities, so two AoOs.

That just isn't very compelling or convincing to me.

Rolling higher than someone's CMD is not an "opportunity," at least not in any sense of the word that matters here (you're also mixing rule terminology with in-game events, but that's neither here nor there). Here, the opportunity is a compromised opponent who was just knocked on their butt. One feat lets you take advantage of this opportunity when you cause it, while the second let's you take advantage of this opportunity when anyone causes it, but they are both taking advantage of the exact same opportunity. And per the AOO rules, you only get a single bonus attack per opportunity.

There's simply no way to bifurcate this situation into two distinct oppotunities. Triping someone means that you have knocked them prone, and you get your AOO because of the successful attempt. After this point, there is no other opportunity to take advantage of; the tripped character has done nothing novel or new after the AOO to create a brand new opportunity for attack. He's in the exactly in the same position he was in before the AOO: a guy who was just tripped and knocked prone.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Maps, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber
cranewings wrote:

I asked this same question about the feats together a few months ago and people told me there is no aoo for tripping someone, even if you have vicious stomp. I house ruled to allow it.

Also, what page does it say you suffer an aoo for being tripped? I thought you only suffered it for standing up.

I think you are mistaken. The argument was that you didn't get *two* separate aoos if you had both feats, not that you didn't get an aoo with Vicious Stomp.

In "Ultimate Combat", page 85, the description of "Vicious Stomp" says: "When opponent falls prone, it provokes an attack of opportunity from you". That seems pretty clear. And if you make a successful trip attempt, you do indeed knock your opponent prone.

You'll also get another aoo if that opponent tries to stand up (assuming you have any left). Not only that - both attacks are taken against a prone opponent!

1 to 50 of 418 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Vicious Stomp + Greater Trip? All Messageboards