Do you have to threaten the enemy to use Bodyguard?

[RustyShackelford]

We're having a disagreement on this in my game. RAW, I think it lends to not being able to use bodyguard unless you threaten, but RAI I argue that you don't need to threaten, just have an adjacent ally that is attacked, given behavior on similar buffs for defense like Blundering Defense.

Does anyone have insight on this?

[colemcm]

It doesn't state that the enemy has to provoke an attack of opportunity in order to activate it. Only that an ally within range be attacked, at which point you may use one of your attacks of opportunity for the round to aid them in defense.

Since they don't have to provoke an AoO, I'd say that it's not necessary for you to threaten them.

[RustyShackelford]

Errr edit here due to wrong copypasta. The reason this is an issue is the wording of Aid Another which states:

In melee combat, you can help a friend attack or defend by distracting or interfering with an opponent. If you're in position to make a melee attack on an opponent that is engaging a friend in melee combat, you can attempt to aid your friend as a standard action.

Bodyguard allows you to aid another using your AAO. So, bodyguard triggers AAO when anyone is attacked adjacent to the player allowing you use to aid another, but you can only aid another to defend if you threaten the opponent.

So literal rules seem pretty clear on this, but I don't think it's as bodyguard is intended to be used.

[colemcm]

Since it doesn't grant a 5' step for you to intervene, I'd say that you would have to also be threatening them.

[Magda Luckbender]

There has been extended discussion of this very point in other threads. It is unresolved, and each GM must decide individually.

The two interpretations are:

1. In order to use the Bodyguard feat the Bodyguard must be adjacent to the person they protect.

2. In order to use the Bodyguard feat the Bodyguard must be adjacent to the person they protect, AND the Bodyguard must threaten the attacker.

The RAW seem to allow either interpretation, depending on how you apply legalese to Pathfinder game rules.

Most of the Pathfinder GMs I've played with go with Option 1. I've seen it come up a few times. I also made that call when GMing.

The more restrictive interpretation, Option 2, is very difficult to meet, and renders Bodyguard nearly useless. It's not as though Bodyguard is overly powerful, even with the less restrictive interpretation. I choose Option 1. so as not to gimp a flavorful feat.