|
I'm not sure what you mean by 'opinion'? Houserule?
I would ask that you don't deliberately try to provoke me. It's not a houserule, it's a rules interpretation. Attacks of opportunity and threatening are both very loosely defined, and without an FAQ entry, that's how I interpret them.
If you have a melee weapon and you're adjacent to an enemy, you threaten. If you're unable to take actions, you can't take actions, but you still threaten for the purposes of flanking. That's how I interpret the rules.
If you want to discuss it, take it to another thread.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'opinion'? Houserule?I would ask that you don't deliberately try to provoke me. It's not a houserule, it's a rules interpretation. Attacks of opportunity and threatening are both very loosely defined, and without an FAQ entry, that's how I interpret them.
If you have a melee weapon and you're adjacent to an enemy, you threaten. If you're unable to take actions, you can't take actions, but you still threaten for the purposes of flanking. That's how I interpret the rules.
If you want to discuss it, take it to another thread.
Not trying to provoke, just trying to figure out how this is supposed to work. I indicated at the end of my post that "I see how this can be nitpicked."
|
|
Sorry. I do tend to take offence when people tell me the way I'm interpreting something is a houserule. If it's a houserule I'll call it that myself.
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). An enemy that takes
certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an
attack of opportunity from you. If you’re unarmed, you
don’t normally threaten any squares and thus can’t make
attacks of opportunity.
So going as strict as possible, if you don't have any attacks of opportunity, do you threaten? If you're dazed, do you threaten? If you've used dimension door or some variant of, do you threaten? I choose to look at it loosely, because it simplifies the game for me. I don't think that's a houserule; I think that's just making things simple. If the minis line up, that's a flank. I can't make an AoO because I don't have any actions left, but I can indeed flank.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'opinion'? Houserule?I would ask that you don't deliberately try to provoke me. It's not a houserule, it's a rules interpretation. Attacks of opportunity and threatening are both very loosely defined, and without an FAQ entry, that's how I interpret them.
If you have a melee weapon and you're adjacent to an enemy, you threaten. If you're unable to take actions, you can't take actions, but you still threaten for the purposes of flanking. That's how I interpret the rules.
If you want to discuss it, take it to another thread.
So by your interpretation, a dazed character, stunned monk, PC under the effects of Hideous Laughter, unconscious character, paralyzed character, or petrified character all provide flanking? That is one interpretation, but it seems to severely stretch the definition of "being able to make a melee attack"...
I agree with Whale_Cancer's interpretation - if you would legally be allowed to attack the square with a melee weapon, you are threatening, regardless of whether you have an available AoO.
|
If not being able to take an attack because you're done with your actions prevented threatening, then nobody would ever threaten if it wasn't their turn!
I'm with Mergy on this one. Threatening is based on having the ability to make an attack, regardless of whether you can actually make that attack at this particular moment.
Remember, the combat system in Pathfinder isn't a simulation of every detail of what happens every second of combat. A round is 6 seconds, so when a PC makes an attack with a weapon as a standard action, it doesn't mean that's the only time they're moving their weapon around during those 6 seconds. It just means they're maneuvering, feinting, swinging or stabbing with their weapon several times in 6 seconds, and that single "attack" represents the fact that they're likely to have only one good shot at doing real damage during that 6 second time period. That's also why higher level characters get more attacks - they're not physically faster, they're just better at getting real shots in during that 6 second period.
The game concept of "threatening" represents all those "not a game action" movements of your weapon that force your enemy to keep track of the fact that you're there, waiting for an opening. That's why flank bonuses occur if one person has to keep track of enemies threatening them from opposite sides.
If not being able to take an attack because you're done with your actions prevented threatening, then nobody would ever threaten if it wasn't their turn!
This is spelled out and has already been quoted:
You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn
If you can "take no actions", you can't make a melee attack. Therefore you don't provide flanking.
At least spoiler it if you're going to be going offtopic. Continue to talk about conjuration vs. universalist or start a new thread to debate this.
??? This is directly related to how powerful the Conjuration subschools are, it's completely on topic.
At least spoiler it if you're going to be going offtopic. Continue to talk about conjuration vs. universalist or start a new thread to debate this.
This is relevant to the viability of shift and the main topic seems to be a dead horse.
Fair enough. I was referring to wizard specialists, not wizard archetypes.Elemental schools aren't archetypes, though. They're not like Wildblooded bloodlines. They're just other schools you can choose.
So if choose conjurer can I ban two elemental schools instead of PHB schools?
So if choose conjurer can I ban two elemental schools instead of PHB schools?Fair enough. I was referring to wizard specialists, not wizard archetypes.Elemental schools aren't archetypes, though. They're not like Wildblooded bloodlines. They're just other schools you can choose.
Instead of specializing in one of the standard eight schools of magic, a wizard can choose to specialize in one of the four elemental schools of magic. Like a normal arcane school, an elemental school grants a number of school powers and one bonus spell slot of each level the wizard can cast, from 1st on up. This bonus spell slot must be used to prepare a spell from the elemental school's spell list (see Chapter 5). Unlike a normal arcane school, each elemental school requires the wizard to select his opposed element as his opposition school (air opposes earth, fire opposes water). He does not need to select a second opposition school. He must expend two spell slots to prepare a spell from his opposed elemental school as normal.
Yes, but you only need 1 opposed element.
If you use the eastern elements (with Wood and Metal), the opposition elements change a bit. The rules for that are in Ultimate Magic (AFAIK).
Yes, but you only need 1 opposed element.
What I meant was: If choose to be a conjurer (teleportation) wizard can I ban fire insted of necromancy for example?
Yes, but you only need 1 opposed element.
What I meant was If choose to be a conjurer (teleportation) wizard can I ban fire insted of necromancy for example?
Oh, sorry, I misread! No, that is not legal.
So to sum up the general consensus is that both school are good but conjurer is a little better.
Now Please tell me if this scenario is legal:
Round 5: My wizard is almost dead so instead of attacking I ready an action (shift) to trigger when someone tries to hit me.
Round 6: Big bad enemy character Melee attack me and I Shift. My turn is over and so is his but now I go before the bad guy on the next round.
Round 7: Since I go before the BG I repit the ready/shift combo escaping from the guy until my party handles him!
Is that correct?
So to sum up the general consensus is that both school are good but conjurer is a little better.
Now Please tell me if this scenario is legal:
Round 5: My wizard is almost dead so instead of attacking I ready an action (shift) to trigger when someone tries to hit me.
Round 6: Big bad enemy character Melee attack me and I Shift. My turn is over and so is his but now I go before the bad guy on the next round.
Round 7: Since I go before the BG I repit the ready/shift combo escaping from the guy until my party handles him!
Is that correct?
...or until you run out of shifts.
So to sum up the general consensus is that both school are good but conjurer is a little better.
Now Please tell me if this scenario is legal:
Round 5: My wizard is almost dead so instead of attacking I ready an action (shift) to trigger when someone tries to hit me.
Round 6: Big bad enemy character Melee attack me and I Shift. My turn is over and so is his but now I go before the bad guy on the next round.
Round 7: Since I go before the BG I repit the ready/shift combo escaping from the guy until my party handles him!
Is that correct?
You could do this but anyone can accomplish the same thing:
Round 5: Ready a melee attack (or a total defense) against his attack. After you make your attack, 5-foot step away as part of your readied action.
Round 6: Ready a melee attack against his attack. When he 5-foot-steps and attacks you, you make your attack and 5-foot-step away as part of your readied action.
Round 7: repeat
(Now, even I'm suspicious of what I just wrote - it seems like far too much of an exploit, but it seems perfectly legal by RAW.)
...or until you run out of shifts.
LOL LOL Wizard last words: Shift! Oh my s... I didn't have any left!
So to sum up the general consensus is that both school are good but conjurer is a little better.
Now Please tell me if this scenario is legal:
Round 5: My wizard is almost dead so instead of attacking I ready an action (shift) to trigger when someone tries to hit me.
Round 6: Big bad enemy character Melee attack me and I Shift. My turn is over and so is his but now I go before the bad guy on the next round.
Round 7: Since I go before the BG I repit the ready/shift combo escaping from the guy until my party handles him!
Is that correct?
You could do this but anyone can accomplish the same thing:
Round 5: Ready a melee attack (or a total defense) against his attack. After you make your attack, 5-foot step away as part of your readied action.
Round 6: Ready a melee attack against his attack. When he 5-foot-steps and attacks you, you make your attack and 5-foot-step away as part of your readied action.
Round 7: repeat
(Now, even I'm suspicious of what I just wrote - it seems like far too much of an exploit, but it seems perfectly legal by RAW.)
Yeah, this looks like it works... I would probably ban this at my table if someone were to exploit it.
Here is the ready action rules text for those interested.
The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun. Readying is a standard action. It does not provoke an attack of opportunity (though the action that you ready might do so).
Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character's activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Your initiative result changes. For the rest of the encounter, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action.
You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don't otherwise move any distance during the round.
Initiative Consequences of Readying: Your initiative result becomes the count on which you took the readied action. If you come to your next action and have not yet performed your readied action, you don't get to take the readied action (though you can ready the same action again). If you take your readied action in the next round, before your regular turn comes up, your initiative count rises to that new point in the order of battle, and you do not get your regular action that round.
Distracting Spellcasters: You can ready an attack against a spellcaster with the trigger “if she starts casting a spell.” If you damage the spellcaster, she may lose the spell she was trying to cast (as determined by her Spellcraft check result).
Readying to Counterspell: You may ready a counterspell against a spellcaster (often with the trigger “if she starts casting a spell”). In this case, when the spellcaster starts a spell, you get a chance to identify it with a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell level). If you do, and if you can cast that same spell (and are able to cast it and have it prepared, if you prepare spells), you can cast the spell as a counterspell and automatically ruin the other spellcaster's spell. Counterspelling works even if one spell is divine and the other arcane.
A spellcaster can use dispel magic to counterspell another spellcaster, but it doesn't always work.
Readying a Weapon against a Charge: You can ready weapons with the brace feature, setting them to receive charges. A readied weapon of this type deals double damage if you score a hit with it against a charging character.
Yeah, this looks like it works... I would probably ban this at my table if someone were to exploit it.
Hahah yes, immediately after writing that I went straight to my "houserules" Google doc and added "No 5-foot-step as part of a readied action."
easy to beat with smart monsters. After two times, it does something besides melee attack, like breathe fire on you while you waste a turn readying for a non-existant condition.
Can't I be ready for any attack from X? Do I have to specify the specific attack type?
easy to beat with smart monsters. After two times, it does something besides melee attack, like breathe fire on you while you waste a turn readying for a non-existant condition.Can't I be ready for any attack from X? Do I have to specify the specific attack type?
You can ready against any arbitrary condition or set of conditions. You can ready an action to go off "when I think it should go off." The only limitation is that you have to specify in advance what the action you are going to take will be (so you can't, for example, ready "to trip him if he moves, to attack him if he casts, or to disarm him if he draws a potion.") But you can "ready to attack him if he moves, casts, or draws a potion."
You can ready against any arbitrary condition or set of conditions. You can ready an action to go off "when I think it should go off." The only limitation is that you have to specify in advance what the action you are going to take will be (so you can't, for example, ready "to trip him if he moves, to attack him if he casts, or to disarm him if he draws a potion.") But you can "ready to attack him if he moves, casts, or draws a potion."
So what your saying is:
A) I should save my shift for other uses cause I can use a 5-foot instead for dodge.
B) Attacking with a melle weapon and casting against me are different types of action so I can not prepare for both!
Is that right? Is a range attack with a bow also a different type of attack given the previous explanation?
B) Attacking with a melle weapon and casting against me are different types of action so I can not prepare for both!
Not quite - you can ready against any number of actions, but you can only ready a specific action.
The trigger could be a number of different things, but you can't (for example) ready to fire an arrow against a caster, but when he starts casting decide you want to cast a spell instead.
B) Attacking with a melle weapon and casting against me are different types of action so I can not prepare for both!Not quite - you can ready against any number of actions, but you can only ready a specific action.
The trigger could be a number of different things, but you can't (for example) ready to fire an arrow against a caster, but when he starts casting decide you want to cast a spell instead.
In that case a ready 5-foot step can save him against melee, ranged and ray attacks or virtually anything but not AoE! THAT IS A HUGE EXPLOIT!!!!
Threatening, Flanking, and all that:
We use the general thought, as the terms are a little ill defined, that "if your enemy would reasonably believe you are a threat, then you are a threat."
If the enemy has no way of knowing whether or not:
(1) you can still hit after a shift,
(2) you can still hit after using Dimension Door
(3) how many AoOs you may or may not have remaining
(4) whether or not you are suffering an effect that makes it impossible to attack
(5) <insert other concepts here>
then you provide flanking. You are a threat and the enemy has to split his focus.
If you are clearly not a threat:
paralyzed, turned to stone, unconscious, then you do not provide flanking.
Ok, I had the wrong of it about the 5-foot-stepping to avoid attacks. I started this thread about it and people set me straight.
The Shift away from combat I think actually could work, though. You don't even have to use a Shift every round, only every other round (not including the first.)
Round 1:
1) Defender readies a melee attack.
2) Attacker moves adjacent to Defender and tries to attack.
3) Defender makes an attack and 5-foot-steps away.
4) Attacker takes a second move action to move adjacent to Defender.
Round 2:
5) Defender 5-foot-steps back and readies a Shift.
6) Attacker 5-foot-steps forward and tries to full attack.
7) Defender Shifts away.
8) Attacker has already 5-foot-stepped and cannot move.
Subsequent rounds:
9) Repeat steps 1-8
Couldn't this be use to kill a higher level oponent?