Two independent actions, separate stealth checks required. At least, RAW it's that way, most people will probably house rule it to only one check for time / ease.
It's two actions. However you only provoke for moving from any single opponent once a turn, no matter if they have combat reflexes or not.
While separate skill checks are technically required per move action, this can quickly get tedious and so limiting to a single check per turn is not unheard of.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
So if taking two move actions doubles your speed
It doesn't. It lets you move a total amount equal to double your speed.
You're getting confused because the word "double" can sometimes be a verb, but in this case it's a noun. If you re-read the rules, you'll see that the verb in that sentence is "move", not "double". "Double" is instead a noun meaning "an amount equal to twice as much as [your speed]".
If the rule said "when taking a double move, double your speed", then "double" would be a verb and would tell you to multiply your speed by two (which would have the result of moving that far in each move action, as you surmised).
But that's not what it says. It says that if you take two move actions, you can "move up to double your speed".
But if it's two separate actions, I could move up to the creature and through one threatened square at the very end to provoke on the first action, then provoke a second time for what is, essentially, the same movement when I start the second move action.
Whether it's one action or two is irrelevant for provoking-issues, since the rules state: "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."
So an opponent can only get one AoO against you for moving out of threatened squares per round, regardless of how many actions you use to make such movements.
So, here's a question.
If I do a "double move action" does that mean I have to physically move, or can one move action be physical movement (at twice my speed) and the other be a move action that is not physical movement, such as drawing a potion or opening a door?
So, here's a question.
If I do a "double move action" does that mean I have to physically move, or can one move action be physical movement (at twice my speed) and the other be a move action that is not physical movement, such as drawing a potion or opening a door?
Since what you're doing is substituting a move action for a standard action, then I see no reason why you could not.
if you take two move actions, moving at your base speed, it is called a "double move". It is still two actions. You will provoke however many times you move out of a threatened square.
Adamantine Dragon, you would be taking two move actions. It wouldn't be called a double move, because you are not moving twice. You are moving and taking a move-equivalent action.
So, here's a question.
If I do a "double move action" does that mean I have to physically move, or can one move action be physical movement (at twice my speed) and the other be a move action that is not physical movement, such as drawing a potion or opening a door?
No, not with moving at "twice your speed". The so-called "double-move action" doesn't let you move at "twice your speed" at all.
It only explains that the total movement you can make in a round where you move twice will be equal to double your speed. As an example: Say your speed is 30 ft; if you move twice, you can move a total of 60 ft.
If you only perform one action of actual movement, you won't move more than 30 ft.
Double moves are, by RAW definition, taking two separate move actions, each one up to your max speed. Don't get confused by trying to name this one action called a "Double Move".
You are sacrificing a standard action, and taking a move action in place of that standard action. Now, as far as two stealth and provoke checks, mechanically that's the way it works per RAW.
But, as a DM, I would houserule that this requires only one provoke and Stealth check, since most people that double move don't move 30 feet, stop in a square, and then move 30 more feet. They would move 60 feet all at once.
I see some posters above share my opinion on this, as well.
So, here's a question.
If I do a "double move action" does that mean I have to physically move, or can one move action be physical movement (at twice my speed) and the other be a move action that is not physical movement, such as drawing a potion or opening a door?
You can indeed move up to your speed and draw a potion or open a door. But you sacrifice your standard action that round to do so. You would not be able to go twice your speed AND open or draw, as that requires three move actions.
If you were hasted (and thereby earned an extra standard action), this would be possible by sacrificing that extra standard for another move.
You provoke as many times as you provoke. If you keep traveling across threathened squares, you're going to provoke multiple times whether it's a single move or a double. The only limitations are on the creature or creatures you provoke from. If they don't have combat reflexes, they can react only once per combat turn.
That's both correct and incorrect.
You provoke when you leave a threatened square, but a single opponent cannot take more than one AoO per source of provocation. So, if I run through 3 spaces that a Rogue threatens, he can take one AoO at any point along that 3 spaces of movement, but he can't take 3 AoO's.
If, on the other hand, he has combat reflexes, and I stand up in a square he threatens, and then move through the other 2 squares he threatens, then I provoke AoO twice, once for standing up, and once for moving out of his threatened square. And he can take both. You can't take more than one AoO per provoking action, no matter how many times he provokes with that single action.
The OPs question was, is doing a double move considered two actions. So, if I use full move to move through 2 squares he threatens (and provoke AoO), do I provoke another when I start my second move, since it's a second action and I'm provoking. The answer is, RAW, yes, you do. As stated, most people hand-wave it.
If you were hasted (and thereby earned an extra standard action), this would be possible by sacrificing that extra standard for another move.
Haste doesn't give you an extra standard action. It gives you an extra attack if you make a full attack action, or it increases your movement. you don't get extra actions of any kind.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Several people here need to re-read this rule:
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.
Despite what multiple people have said, the "multiple squares is one AoO" rule checks rounds, not actions.
Not exactly the same subject, but...
We usually make "double move" while climbing a single check, particulary if it would let a character with a speed of 30 to climb 15 ft. instead of 10ft.
We typically combine two moves with a skill attached into a single action for the sake of simplicity. If the GM thinks it is important, he can decide its two actions.
|
Note: I don't recall the entire detail, but there has been an observation that two move actions are handled at least one way differently between 3.5 and PF. You may not end movement in an illegal square. In 3.5, this is checked at the end of each move action. In PF, it is checked only at the end of the total movement.
I haven't independently varified this, which is rare for me. But, given how much bad information has been tossed out in this thread, I'm sure we'll sort it out.
Is this going to come up in some way where Withdraw wouldn't work just as well or better?
That's my take on it -- since Withdraw allows you to double move as a single action, the discussion is partly moot.
Withdraw is not even comparable, actually, since it's a full-round action. It's not the same thing as a double move at all, and it's situational. It requires that you are moving away from combat.
Several people here need to re-read this rule:
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.Despite what multiple people have said, the "multiple squares is one AoO" rule checks rounds, not actions.
LOL, I was closer than the guys saying you provoked every square and could get hit multiple times with combat reflexes. :)
Withdraw is not even comparable, actually, since it's a full-round action. It's not the same thing as a double move at all, and it's situational. It requires that you are moving away from combat.
True, up until the latter part. See the last line of the action description.
If, during the process of withdrawing, you move out of a threatened square (other than the one you started in), enemies get attacks of opportunity as normal.
You may not withdraw using a form of movement for which you don't have a listed speed.
Note that despite the name of this action, you don't actually have to leave combat entirely.
Similarly to Expeditious Retreat, the name implies that you are using it to escape, but the actual description of the mechanics includes no explicit requirement to leave combat (and in the case of the action, actually states that you need not do so).
|
|
Withdraw does not require moving out of combat. Barry, your batting average is weak in this thread. ;)
Double move, two move actions, can sometimes result in differences with what you can do. You can draw a weapon as a free action with a BAB+1; with two move actions you can do so twice. You'll get GM variance as to whether you can draw during a withdraw.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A full round action is not a move and a standard. In a single round you can take 1) a full round action, 2) a move and a standard, 3) two moves. It's east to think of a full round as a move and a standard, but they aren't equivelant. Why does it matter? Because you'll run into rules that depend on understanding the distinction else be confuzzled.
I have used expeditious retreat many, many times in my career.
I don't think I've ever once used it to retreat.
|
|
A full round action is not a move and a standard. In a single round you can take 1) a full round action, 2) a move and a standard, 3) two moves. It's east to think of a full round as a move and a standard, but they aren't equivelant. Why does it matter? Because you'll run into rules that depend on understanding the distinction else be confuzzled.Where would I get confused? You get a move-move just by converting a standard action into a move action. Or instead of taking the standard and move action option, you can take a full-round action.
I don't see any place for confusion.
You said the following:
A double move uses a standard and move action. That's what a Full Round action is.
That says something different that what you said above. A standard and move is NOT what a full round action is. In any case it sounds like all is well and good.
That says something different that what you said above. A standard and move is NOT what a full round action is. In any case it sounds like all is well and good.So in other words by thinking of a full-round action as a move and a standard together, you'd never get confused? Because I'm only seeing you make a fuss over semantics here.
It is not semantics. It is only semantics if it is a different way of saying the same thing. For the purpose of rules interaction the difference does matter. If you are granted an additional move and standard action somehow, it would not grant you an additional full round action.
edit:You may not get confused, but it may confuse others.
Withdraw is not even comparable, actually, since it's a full-round action. It's not the same thing as a double move at all, and it's situational. It requires that you are moving away from combat.True, up until the latter part. See the last line of the action description.
** spoiler omitted **
Similarly to Expeditious Retreat, the name implies that you are using it to escape, but the actual description of the mechanics includes no explicit requirement to leave combat (and in the case of the action, actually states that you need not do so).
Exactly, a rogue item (gives Greater Invisibility so I count it as a rogue item) only activates after you withdraw (so withdraw to enemy then sneak attack).
|
|
That says something different that what you said above. A standard and move is NOT what a full round action is. In any case it sounds like all is well and good.So in other words by thinking of a full-round action as a move and a standard together, you'd never get confused? Because I'm only seeing you make a fuss over semantics here.
Exactly contrary to what I'm saying. Thinking of a full round action as a move and a standard WILL result in confusion. It has nothing to do with semantics.
We're having tremendous difficulty communicating here. I won't be responding on this branch of the thread further.
Withdraw works very well for when you want to get away quickly, but you might want to look at the situation. The cool thing about double move is at the end of your second movement (or before) you can choose to do something else instead. Lets say you move around a corner and an enemy is there. You can stop and even attack (as a standard). With Withdraw, you can also stop there, but then you are out of actions :P
In a normal round, you can perform a standard action and a move action, or you can perform a full-round action.That at the very least implies an equivalency. The rules naturally aren't 100% clear because extra standard actions aren't going to happen so this is a rather theoretical discussion. That said, if extra standard actions did come up, then historically the options are always explained (and, AFAIK, historically in d20 when something grants an extra standard and an extra move, it always says that can be used as a full-round action -- one of those options is typically parenthetical).
The Bandit archetype for Rogues gives you the Ambush special ability. It allows you to take a move action and a standard action in a surprise round (instead of a move or standard action). It does not allow a full-round action.
Hmm, that's a poorly worded ability, imho.And if you are right, how bizarre. That ability means you can't charge on a surprise round anymore. You'd think an ability like that would cover the issue of full-round actions since it is so highly unusual.
Not at all. If I have Power Attack, am allowed to take a to-hit penalty to up my damage, but I am not required to do so. The Bandit Archetype gives you the ability to take a move + standard on the surprise round, it doesn't force you to. If you want to charge, you don't use your Bandit Ambush ability, and thus you only have a standard action, and can Charge on it.
That says something different that what you said above. A standard and move is NOT what a full round action is. In any case it sounds like all is well and good.So in other words by thinking of a full-round action as a move and a standard together, you'd never get confused? Because I'm only seeing you make a fuss over semantics here.It is not semantics. It is only semantics if it is a different way of saying the same thing. For the purpose of rules interaction the difference does matter. If you are granted an additional move and standard action somehow, it would not grant you an additional full round action.
edit:You may not get confused, but it may confuse others.
I don't actually think it is clear-cut.
In a normal round, you can perform a standard action and a move action, or you can perform a full-round action.That at the very least implies an equivalency. The rules naturally aren't 100% clear because extra standard actions aren't going to happen so this is a rather theoretical discussion. That said, if extra standard actions did come up, then historically the options are always explained (and, AFAIK, historically in d20 when something grants an extra standard and an extra move, it always says that can be used as a full-round action -- one of those options is typically parenthetical).
It may not confuse you, but it has confused others before when the difference matters, and as for history they have to go out of their way to say it is granting both because the two are not equal. If they were perfectly equal that comment would not even be needed.
As an aside people that are lax in other subforums are more anal here because even a slight miswording of a rule can change how it is read.
As an example providing a natural armor bonus and a bonus to natural armor sound similar, but they are not the same.
edit: I see Durngrun Stonebreaker has provided an example.
Ok, count me as one of the confused now. I always considered a full-round action to take the entirety of your turn, all your move and standard actions. Not just any move and standard action you happen to have. So, a hypothetical ability that granted an extra move action would allow you to take a move, move, standard. But, NOT a move, full-round.
Am I wrong?
When it is your turn you can take a full round action OR a move+standard action.
If an ability only gave you an extra move action you could add the move action to either option, but you are granted an extra "move+standard" action you do not get two 2 full round actions. You would have "move+standard"+full round action".
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Here's an example of why it matters that a full-round action is not the same as a move+standard:
Say you wanted to move 60ft, and had a speed of 30ft. After you've moved about 25ft, you discover that I'm a jerkface caster who had a readied action to cast grease, and now you've failed your save and are lying prone in the slippery puddle. If you were using a move action to move 30ft and were planning to take another move using your standard, you've only used your move and can now decide to do something else: stand up, cast a spell at my cheeky arse, whatever. If instead you were using a full-round action (say, charging or withdrawing), then that action has already been spent; you're done, and you'll be spending my allies' turns prone.
The difference between being able to stand up (or whatever else) versus lying on the ground for an entire round seems plenty significant to me.
|
Once you've committed to a full-round action, you can't decide to do something else partway through. That's crazy talk.Crazy or not, it's sometimes legal. In the section of the core rulebook that taks about Full Attacks (a particular kind of full-round action), it says:
After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I gave a hypothetical situation, and included two possible outcomes ("if X, this happens; if Y, this other thing happens instead"). To which you replied "Naw, that doesn't work." What doesn't work? The first version? The second? The explanation itself?
You also said "You'd have to break up existing full-round actions into standard and move actions, which wasn't what I was saying at all." But I never claimed you were saying anything in particular, so what's the purpose of pointing out what you didn't say? I saw that some folks were discussing whether a full-round action was literally a standard and a move or not, and whether or not the distinction mattered. So I showed why the distinction mattered. Heck, I didn't even say which one was how it actually works; just that they'd end up working differently from each other. And your response to "working this way is different than working that way" is "it works one of those ways"? How does that even make sense as a reply?