OK, I mostly agree with that distinction, though I see it working from Full to Standard but not the other way around, but I could easily argue it your way too based on precedent.
If you assume that Gronk does not need to declare what kind of attack he's making and that he can easily just assume a Full Attack without declaring it, then you yourself have defeated your own ITDK by allowing this. My most recent scenario stands, Gronk doesn't have to declare a Full Attack, he can just attack and when ITDK uses The Trick, Gronk just takes his 5'move as part of a Full Attack (but now he's locked into Full Attack because now he IS using one) and continues his Full Attack action - no declaration needed.
Case closed - your loose interpretation of the interchangeability between action types makes Gronk's job even easier - his player doesn't have to be as tactically savvy as my version requires.
Well, there seem to be three primary philosophies at work here, with some variations:
Lots of analysis.
Only #3 complies with the RAW.
Short version:
1. "A readied action against an opponent reacts to an opponent somehow telegraphing their next action before their current action has even completed."
Somehow every combatant in the game, even mindless zombies and oozes, posses the ability to see the future, to know what their opponents are going to do in a future action before the opponent has even begun that action, in fact, while he is still in the middle of previous actions.
Poppycock.
Nobody gets to see the future. Well, maybe as a class or racial ability, but certainly not as a standard generic combat tactic for every combatant in all the game.
2. "A readied action interrupts the action that triggered it."
This is RAW, actually, not a philosophy.
"Any actions prior to the trigger are considered complete, as otherwise there would be nothing to react to--for example, you can't take a standard after a move until the move is complete."
This is also RAW. You cannot, by RAW, begin your standard action while your move action is still in progress. Sure, there are feats for that, such as Spring Attack. Otherwise, without feats or other explicit exceptions, there is now way possible, by RAW, to begin a standard action while you're still in the middle of a move action. Period. When your standard action begins, your move action is, de facto, finished.
"Since the trigger was only about to begin, the interrupted action has not really happened yet and can thus be changed. This is only subtly different than the last--the opponent is still telegraphing the action, but not until it would normally begin."
No. This is not the "philosophy". The interrupted action HAS really happened and cannot be changed. If you begin your standard action, and it gets interrupted by someone's readied action, you can continue the action you had already begun if you are able...
Pretty much my thoughts exactly. Thank you. Bolded is exactly the reason why Jame's interpretation does not make sense as per RAW.
Also, we don't even need another interpretation since you can do what someone said earlier: don't trigger the kobold's readied action in the first place, then next turn full-attack him.
-----------
As for the logic behind this readied action battle, it does make sense. You think the barbarian glaring at you is going to charge you, so you prepare yourself to counter him. He charges you so you sidestep him and smack him while you dodge as he misses.
Makes sense so far.
Because he wasn't prepared for what happened and you were, you act right before him. You can either jump in at him and attack on his flank, or run away, or ready an action to do the same thing you did before.
Makes sense so far. Two scenarios ahead:
1.) Barbarian has an INT/WIS of 5 or below. He charges ahead again, and again, and again, while the character in question just keeps sidestepping and smacking him since the barbarian knows nothing but to attack.
2.) Barbarian has an INT/WIS of 6 or above. He realized that you are going to dodge his attacks and strike, so he steps up and prepares to counter you by smacking you as you dodge.
In response to him not attacking, you are surprised and did nothing, while he is 5 feet away poised to attack you.
Makes sense to me.
The best use of this tactic is to dodge the first hit, then full attack on your next turn. Dancing away like the kobold will only put you behind as he gets the first full-attack.
OK, I mostly agree with that distinction, though I see it working from Full to Standard but not the other way around, but I could easily argue it your way too based on precedent.
If you assume that Gronk does not need to declare what kind of attack he's making and that he can easily just assume a Full Attack without declaring it, then you yourself have defeated your own ITDK by allowing this. My most recent scenario stands, Gronk doesn't have to declare a Full Attack, he can just attack and when ITDK uses The Trick, Gronk just takes his 5'move as part of a Full Attack (but now he's locked into Full Attack because now he IS using one) and continues his Full Attack action - no declaration needed.
Case closed - your loose interpretation of the interchangeability between action types makes Gronk's job even easier - his player doesn't have to be as tactically savvy as my version requires.
Sure, if he's 6th level. And it still takes you 3 rounds for a sixth level barbarian to kill a kobold, and you had to attack at -5.
I think its fair to say something has gone horribly, horribly wrong.
There is no raw declaration of a full attack vs. a standard attack until after the first attack. The swing is the swing, not a subset of a full attack.
Two-Weapon Fighting disagrees.
You only get TWF penalties when you declare a full-attack, meaning you must choose before the first attack.
After your first attack in the full-attack, you can then sacrifice the rest of your attacks for a move action. But it still counts as declaring a full-attack initially.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OK, I mostly agree with that distinction, though I see it working from Full to Standard but not the other way around, but I could easily argue it your way too based on precedent.
If you assume that Gronk does not need to declare what kind of attack he's making and that he can easily just assume a Full Attack without declaring it, then you yourself have defeated your own ITDK by allowing this. My most recent scenario stands, Gronk doesn't have to declare a Full Attack, he can just attack and when ITDK uses The Trick, Gronk just takes his 5'move as part of a Full Attack (but now he's locked into Full Attack because now he IS using one) and continues his Full Attack action - no declaration needed.
Case closed - your loose interpretation of the interchangeability between action types makes Gronk's job even easier - his player doesn't have to be as tactically savvy as my version requires.
Sure, if he's 6th level. And it still takes you 3 rounds for a sixth level barbarian to kill a kobold, and you had to attack at -5.
I think its fair to say something has gone horribly, horribly wrong.
Again, as I said before, you don't need iteratives, you don't need to wait til 6th level.
All Gronk needs is 1 attack at first level.
On round 3, he begins any kind of attack he wants, the ITDK uses The Trick and steps away, Gronk finishes his Full-Round attack by including a 5'Step and making his one attack.
I think you're confusing the idea that The Trick somehow parries or prevents Gronk's attack. It doesn't. The ACTION is interrupted, not the attack. ITDK makes his attack and 5'Step and now Gronk is free to continue his ACTION. If that action is a standard attack, he cannot move or attack anymore since ITDK is out of reach, but if it's a Full-Round attack, he can 5'Step as part of the action and he still has all of his attacks because none of his attacks were prevented by The Trick.
Obviously, in round one, since he started 25' away, he cannot move and Full Attack, so The Trick works in the first round. The second round is a standoff because Gronk is (hopefully) smart enough to ready his own action. Then on round three, Gronk catches the little runt and does him in.
The Immortal Tap Dancing Kobold is really just a Twelve Second Delaying Kobold. Al his effort, all his tactics, they buy him an extra twelve seconds of life.
I'm fairly sure that a cowardly, dodging, running enemy can avoid real-world fighters for at least that long - I've seen World Champion Boxers frequently go longer than 12 seconds looking for an opening to hit a nobody, a guy with a losing record, just because that loser opponent is jabbing and backing up.
There is no raw declaration of a full attack vs. a standard attack until after the first attack. The swing is the swing, not a subset of a full attack.
Two-Weapon Fighting disagrees.
You only get TWF penalties when you declare a full-attack, meaning you must choose before the first attack.
After your first attack in the full-attack, you can then sacrifice the rest of your attacks for a move action. But it still counts as declaring a full-attack initially.
I'm not disagreeing with your point, just that distinction.
So let's clarify the distinction. You're right, the declaration must be made before your first attack when using two weapons.
But you don't actually declare "I'm making a Full Attack. Oh, yeah, and I'm also using two weapons". It's actually the other way around. You declare "I'm using two weapons so that means I must use the Full Attack action to do it."
The declaration is the fact that you're using two weapons and the consequences are that now you must also use a Full Attack to do so.
DM: So if you don't stop the barbarians 5 foot step why do you stop his charge or movement? You're arguing right back to the original point that the person can keep moving and whack the kobold.
Somehow every combatant in the game, even mindless zombies and oozes, posses the ability to see the future, to know what their opponents are going to do in a future action before the opponent has even begun that action, in fact, while he is still in the middle of previous actions.
Poppycock.
Nobody gets to see the future. Well, maybe as a class or racial ability, but certainly not as a standard generic combat tactic for every combatant in all the game.
Everyone who prepares an action that gets triggered and who, with that prepared action, successfully creates a situation where that triggering action cannot happen has seen the future and avoided it.
EDIT: misplaced comma
EDIT2: and spelling
I actually do remember reading somewhere that you can wait until you know the outcome of your first attack before deciding to move or full attack - but not if you TWF, as you need to declare said action and take the penalties. It might have been a 3.0 or 3.5 dev comment or something.
It's in the CRB.
But again, you declare that you're going to use TWF, not that you're going to make a Full Attack. Of course, you must use a Full Attack action since you're planning to attack more than once, but the declaration you make is that you're using TWF. Or in other words, declaring TWF does not force you to use a Full Attack action, but actually using TWF to make more than one attack forces you to use a Full Attack action.
Because you're using TWF, you take the penalties on your attack, even your first attack.
If that first attack kills your enemy (technically, even if it doesn't), you still have the option of converting the Full Attack action to a Standard action which means you can now end your Standard action and you still have your Move action, so you can move.
You planned TWF, suffered the penalty, made one attack, killed your only target, then decided to make that a Standard action, then you moved somewhere else.
All legal, and all in full compliance with everything I've been saying in this thread.
Somehow every combatant in the game, even mindless zombies and oozes, posses the ability to see the future, to know what their opponents are going to do in a future action before the opponent has even begun that action, in fact, while he is still in the middle of previous actions.
Poppycock.
Nobody gets to see the future. Well, maybe as a class or racial ability, but certainly not as a standard generic combat tactic for every combatant in all the game.
Everyone who prepares an action that gets triggered and who, with that prepared action, successfully creates a situation where that triggering action cannot happen has seen the future and avoided it.
EDIT: misplaced comma
EDIT2: and spelling
I disagree. If you guess that an opponent might perform a specific action and then "prepare" (I assume you mean "Ready") your own action that will happen when your opponent does what you guess he might do, and then your opponent begins doing that specific action, you don't need to see the future, you just need to see the opponent standing there right before your eyes, doing what you guessed he might do.
Since he's already doing that action, you are reacting to an action that is in the present, not in the future.
Now, if you manage to interrupt him and that interruption prevents him from completing his action, all that means is that you were better prepared and quicker than him - still no precognitive ability, although I might congratulate you on your successful guess.
I have heard this thing about readying action cheese, and wanted to know what you think.
You ready an action to hit and 5ft step away as soon as enemy starts attack.
So enemy closes in, starts attacking, you interrupt, hit them and step away. You are now out of their reach, and they cannot move up again.Is this real or not? I know its cheesy, but still... is it raw legal
As a DM I would let it work once or twice as a reward for being clever.
But if they do it regularly I see atleast 4 options on the top of my head:
1) They have to announce they are readying the 5 foot step before the other combatants turn. Just take out a crossbow or bow and hit him with that when they are classless enough to pull this tactic. Alternately give them spare weapons so they can throw the one they are holding using the rules for throwing 1 handed blades.
2) Give the enemies Max HP or Extra HP's instead of average to compensate.
3) Build encounters that flood them with ranged attack opponents so they have to be the one to close in and give them a taste of their own medicine.
4) Haste the enemies so they have an extra standard action to close with to counter the tactic.
But if they do it regularly:
They have to announce they are readying the 5 foot step before the other combatants turn.
Exactly what do you have to announce when you ready an action ? And to whom ? Just the DM ? Can part of it be conditional ?
Example: I ready an action to attack enemies who enter my threatened area. If my readied attack fails to kill them, I will five-foot step away, otherwise I will hold my ground.
But if they do it regularly:
They have to announce they are readying the 5 foot step before the other combatants turn.Exactly what do you have to announce when you ready an action ? And to whom ? Just the DM ? Can part of it be conditional ?
Example: I ready an action to attack enemies who enter my threatened area. If my readied attack fails to kill them, I will five-foot step away, otherwise I will hold my ground.
The 5 foot step can be readied as part of a standard action as per the text. So it has to be announced to the DM or its not readied. Passing a note to the DM specifying the actions to be taken as to keep it secret from another PC is valid if the DM allows it.(I would allow it as a DM)
But as a said in the revision of my previous post: As a DM I would allow it to work once or twice as a reward for cleverness. But if it gets abused I will develope counter tactics.
I have heard this thing about readying action cheese, and wanted to know what you think.
You ready an action to hit and 5ft step away as soon as enemy starts attack.
So enemy closes in, starts attacking, you interrupt, hit them and step away. You are now out of their reach, and they cannot move up again.Is this real or not? I know its cheesy, but still... is it raw legal
As a DM I would let it work once or twice as a reward for being clever.
But if they do it regularly I see atleast 4 options on the top of my head:
1) They have to announce they are readying the 5 foot step before the other combatants turn. Just take out a crossbow or bow and hit him with that when they are classless enough to pull this tactic. Alternately give them spare weapons so they can throw the one they are holding using the rules for throwing 1 handed blades.2) Give the enemies Max HP or Extra HP's instead of average to compensate.
3) Build encounters that flood them with ranged attack opponents so they have to be the one to close in and give them a taste of their own medicine.
4) Haste the enemies so they have an extra standard action to close with to counter the tactic.
Haste does not grant an extra standard in Pathfinder.
There are plenty of ways to counter it without resorting to stacking the fight against the players.
Sorry, I sorta skipped over some stuff... But does this mean basically every melee character has to take step up to avoid this problem? Sounds redicuous to me...
No. There really isn't much of a problem. It's intellectually boggling and a little irritating to some folks, but the rules are playable as is if you don't care about little things like causality.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unfortunately, discussion of attacks of opportunity is irrelevant, as a readied action isn't an attack of opportunity. Though both are reactive, they have extremely different rules.Except in the case of spells, which is specifically stated, you do not lose your actions in a chain.
Assume two Level 1 opponents with no feats.
If A tries to trip B, A provokes an AoO.
If B uses that to trip A, B provokes an AoO.
If A uses the AoO and successfully trips B, A never used his original standard action. A still has it. A can now make a standard attack at the prone B.All chains work this way, except, as stated before, in the explicitly described "Distracting Spellcasters" part of readied actions.
Of course it is relevant. Chains are chains.
AoOs happen before the action that triggers it.
Readied actions happen before the action that triggers it.
AoOs allow the original character to continue with their action if able.
Readied actions allow the original character to continue with their action if able.
AoOs are resolved in reverse order of declaration.
Readied actions are resolved in reverse order of declaration.
Like the 50 versions of Hide in Plain Sight, the main difference is the trigger. Additionally, you can do more than just attack with a readied action, you can declare other actions as well.
But the key mechanic is the same. Their action triggers an action from you.
Your readied action "interrupts" their action. *I read this to mean that you go before them, not that they lose their action.
Assume two Level 1 opponents with no feats, again.
If "A" tries to attack "B" with a bow, "A" provokes an AoO.
If "B" uses that AoO to disarm "A", "B" provokes an AoO.
If "A" uses that AoO to trip "B", but misses, "B" now gets to use his AoO.
If "B" is successful in disarming "A", "A" still gets an attack, just not with his bow.
So "A" can't now do the action that triggered the whole thing. It happens.
With readied actions, I believe that it is all the same. If your readied action changes the battlefield and I still have movement or whatever to react and change my action, then I can change my action.
If you ready a spell the removes a section of bridge when I start moving across the bridge, I don't then blindly run across an empty chasm.
If you ready a 5' step and move away from the square I was attacking, I will change my action if possible. It may include switching to a ranged weapon as part of my move that got me there, or I may now throw my weapon, I might cast a spell, I might continue my movement (if I have any left) and cut you in half, or I might turn around and use the rest of my movement to run away from you.
If I am completely out of movement, then there might be a problem. But if I still have a move action, I could still use it to close the gap or put more distance between us.
If it worked where the 5' step automatically stopped the attack, you could run away from melee attacks forever or force a complete stalemate.
Hell, you could even make an argument that you can dodge Magic Missile with it because now the target square has changed, but the caster can't change his action to compensate.
We're talking RAW here. There's nothing in the text suggesting that readied action resolution is anything like readied action resolution--in fact, they're quite different. For example, you can't change your action after that action provokes an attack of opportunity--you've already committed to the action, and that is why it provoked. Find me text linking the two and we'll talk.
Note that it might have greatly simplified things if the two mechanics were reworded to use a general "provoke" rule with specifics pertaining to the situations in which you triggered interrupting behavior. They didn't do it that way. Feel free to do so, especially if it makes your game simpler and more believable. I may even sign up to play. : D
And there's no stalemate, and you can't run forever unless the attacker is really stupid. Read DM_Blake's posts.