Bodyguard Feat - Requires An Actual AoO to Use?

[Warhaven]

Hey Everyone,

At a recent PFS game, a companion of mine was attacked by a clockwork monstrosity. I stated that I'd like to use my bodyguard feat (from 2nd rank with my bardiche) in order to interfere and grant my allay a bonus to his AC. The GM said I can't use the feat because the monster didn't provoke an AoO.

I scratched my head for a bit, but decided to wait until the break to dispute his statement in order to keep the game flowing. During the break, he clarified:

An enemy has to actually trigger an attack of opportunity (move through a threatened square) while en route to attack an adjacent allay in order for me to use the bodyguard feat. If the enemy doesn't trigger an AoO in its attempt to attack an adjacent allay, then I can't use the bodyguard feat.

I disagreed, stating that I interpret the feat as using up one of your AoO's for the round in exchange for an immediate Aid Another action to AC, and that it's not dependent upon making an actual AoO. He stood by his decision, stating that he has made an official ruling on the use of the feat at a previous con. I shrugged, stated that I disagree, but that I respect his decision as GM and dropped the issue for the game.

So... does the bodyguard feat really require the enemy to trigger an AoO en route to attacking an adjacent allay in order to use it?

[DigitalMage]

I would agree with your interpretation.

[Jeffrey Fox]

Bodyguard only requires your ally to be attacked.

[Mark Garringer]

1 - Rules question. Only relevant to PFS in that it happened at a PFS table.
2 - Your GM was incorrect, but you show incredible tact and restraint in going along with a bad interpretation. Kudos to you.

From the feat description: Benefit: When an adjacent ally is attacked, you may use an attack of opportunity to attempt the aid another action to improve your ally's AC. You may not use the aid another action to improve your ally's attack roll with this attack.
Normal: Aid another is a standard action.

I emphasized the key part of the trigger. Now, you need an AoO to spend in order to do this so unless you've already used them all for this 'turn' you'd be able to use the aid other action as you expect.

[Branding Opportunity]

This is not part of your question, but I thought I'd mention it, as it pertains. Note that the Bodyguard feat requires you to be adjacent to an ally and the Aid Another action (from p. 197 of the Core Rulebook) requires you to be able to make a melee attack "on an opponent that is engaging a friend in melee combat". Note that this means that if you have reach, you can grant the AC bonus against attackers who are not adjacent to you but still within your reach, but you always need to be adjacent to the ally.

I agree with Mark, the GM was incorrect and you handled it very well. If the attacker had to actually trigger an AoO before you could use the feat, it would make this two feat chain ALMOST ENTIRELY USELESS. This is a metric I often use when ruling on feats/abilities/etc: if your ruling makes the ability/feat/etc almost entirely useless, it's probably not a correct interpretation. Not that there are some exceptions to this (some abilities/feats/etc are very poorly crafted or written).

[Eric Clingenpeel]

As the others have said, your interpretation was correct, and kudos on showing restraint and dropping it. I know how frustrating it can be to have to back off when you know the person is wrong.

[Warhaven]

Mark Garringer wrote:

1 - Rules question. Only relevant to PFS in that it happened at a PFS table.

2 - Your GM was incorrect, but you show incredible tact and restraint in going along with a bad interpretation. Kudos to you.

From the feat description: Benefit: When an adjacent ally is attacked, you may use an attack of opportunity to attempt the aid another action to improve your ally's AC. You may not use the aid another action to improve your ally's attack roll with this attack.
Normal: Aid another is a standard action.

I emphasized the key part of the trigger. Now, you need an AoO to spend in order to do this so unless you've already used them all for this 'turn' you'd be able to use the aid other action as you expect.

Thank you everyone for your replies. I would have posted this in general rules, but I felt that since it happened in a PFS game and was in regards to a GM's ruling, that it should go here.

[Warhaven]

Alex Greenshields wrote:

This is not part of your question, but I thought I'd mention it, as it pertains. Note that the Bodyguard feat requires you to be adjacent to an ally and the Aid Another action (from p. 197 of the Core Rulebook) requires you to be able to make a melee attack "on an opponent that is engaging a friend in melee combat". Note that this means that if you have reach, you can grant the AC bonus against attackers who are not adjacent to you but still within your reach, but you always need to be adjacent to the ally.

I agree with Mark, the GM was incorrect and you handled it very well. If the attacker had to actually trigger an AoO before you could use the feat, it would make this two feat chain ALMOST ENTIRELY USELESS. This is a metric I often use when ruling on feats/abilities/etc: if your ruling makes the ability/feat/etc almost entirely useless, it's probably not a correct interpretation. Not that there are some exceptions to this (some abilities/feats/etc are very poorly crafted or written).

One more minor, but very important clarification, as I believe I may be in err with my interpretation as well. When using the Bodyguard Feat, am I performing the Aid Another action at the cost of an AoO for the round, or am I performing an actual AoO in response to the enemy's attack on my allay? This is important because it would dictate whether or not I could use this feat from behind cover; as in directly behind an allay via a reach weapon or through a hard corner.

[Drogon]

The cost is an AoO, which you must be in a position to take.

You are performing an aid another action.

You must abide by the strictures and limitations of both actions (cover will disallow you from taking the action, and you must be adjacent to your ally). You also gain the benefits of both actions (interrupt their attack via AoO, but only have to hit AC 10 with a touch).

[Warhaven]

Drogon wrote:

The cost is an AoO, which you must be in a position to take.

You are performing an aid another action.

You must abide by the strictures and limitations of both actions (cover will disallow you from taking the action, and you must be adjacent to your ally). You also gain the benefits of both actions (interrupt their attack via AoO, but only have to hit AC 10 with a touch).

Clears this up perfectly. Thank you Drogon and everybody.

[DrDeth]

Drogon wrote:

The cost is an AoO, which you must be in a position to take.

You are performing an aid another action.

You must abide by the strictures and limitations of both actions (cover will disallow you from taking the action, and you must be adjacent to your ally). You also gain the benefits of both actions (interrupt their attack via AoO, but only have to hit AC 10 with a touch).

Exactly. Your DM is wrong. But to be honest, why not just show him this thread, and say when you designed the PC that's how you thought the feat worked? if he is unwilling to let the feat work as per RAI and RAW, then he should let you swap it out.