And yet it says right there, "subject of a successful attack," and "if the attacker hits." That sounds like the attack should be considered a success.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And this is where common sense comes in.
To be tripped is go from standing to prone. If you are already prone, you can't go from standing to prone, therefore you cannot be tripped.
Agreed with fretgod99.
A successful hit is not "an attack roll that equals or exceeds the creature's AC and does damage". It's simply "an attack roll that equals or exceeds the creature's AC". If you have an ability that simply states that it requires a successful hit to trigger, then it triggers even if you fail to deal damage; if you have an ability that states that it requires damage, then you not only have to successfully hit them, but that hit also has to deal damage to them.
Thus why a Wizard with IUS can be holding a charge of a touch spell, make a successful unarmed strike against a foe, have every bit of the damage from the strike absorbed by the target's DR - and still discharge the held touch spell. And why a Rogue with an injury poison on his punching dagger can confirm a crit on a target - and fail to apply the poison because the target is somehow immune to damage from piercing weapons.
There are two ways of reading Greater Trip, and both are potentially valid depending on what other areas of the rules you reference. That's why the FAQ seems necessary.
I agree with all of this except the second to last line.
The goal of a trip action is to knock the target prone. That is ‘the goal’. So… for a trip action to be successful, it must accomplish that goal. A trip action is therefore not successful unless it has knocked the target prone.
The goal of an attack action is to cause damage to the target, yet an attack action is still considered 'successful' to trigger numerous effects even if it deals no damage at all.
That's a false comparison. Making an attack and dealing damage are distinct game events, with distinct rolls. A trip is a single event, with a single roll.
Consider:
Monster 1: "I was attacked by an adventurer today!"
Monster 2: "Are you alright?"
M1: "Yeah, she beat my AC but didn't get past my DR."
M2: "That's a relief."vs.
M1: "I was tripped by an adventurer today!"
M2: "Are you alright?"
M1: "Yeah, he beat my CMD, but I'm a Emperor Cobra and immune to trips."
M2: "So, she didn't actually trip you."
M1: "I guess not."Like Remy, you seem to be begging the question (and missing the point of what I said). Your second example is assuming that that "successful trip" means "beat my CMD and fall prone" when that is what is under question. Your definition of trip provided in the second example follows a different logic to determine success than what is used in the first example.
In your first example, the adventurer made a successful attack roll against monster 1. The monster's DR negated it, but the fact is that the attack roll was successful, so it was a successful attack.
Now, with that in mind, which restatement of your second example is correct:
1. The adventurer made a successful trip attack versus monster 1's CMD. The monster's immunity to trip negated it, but the fact is that the combat maneuver roll to trip was successful, so it was a successful trip.
or
2. The adventurer made a successful trip attack versus monster 1's CMD. The monster's immunity to trip negated it, so the trip attempt was not successful.
Option 1 follows the same logic as used to determine what a successful attack is; option 2 follows different logic in that the roll must be successful and the creature must fall prone from it.
Option 2 follows the normal logic.
Imagine trying to attack an incorporeal creature with a mundane sword, ie a creature 'immune to non-magical attacks'.
You can roll high enough to hit them all day long, but you never will.
You can roll high enough to trip a snake all day long, but you never will.
Option 1 doesn’t follow logic. The trip roll was successful, the trip was not.
The goal of a trip action is to knock the target prone. That is ‘the goal’. So… for a trip action to be successful, it must accomplish that goal. A trip action is therefore not successful unless it has knocked the target prone.The goal of an attack action is to cause damage to the target, yet an attack action is still considered 'successful' to trigger numerous effects even if it deals no damage at all.
If you attack a ghost with a regular longsword, and roll high enough to hit his AC, but fail to hit him because he is incorporeal and immune to being struck. Is this a 'successful attack'?
And this is where common sense comes in.
To be tripped is go from standing to prone. If you are already prone, you can't go from standing to prone, therefore you cannot be tripped.
The OP might seem very basic and even stupid on the surface. But it is actually addressing 3 questions:
#1 Does "Successfully Trip" mean just the Roll or the Roll and Effect?
#2 Can you reapply a Condition in order to qualify for an ability.
#3 Do only you gain the AoOs or everyone around the target?
Set aside #2 and #3. They are minor points in relation to #1.
If "successfully trip" is defined as just beating the target's CMD on a roll, regardless of that target's current circumstances, then the answer to the OP is "Yes, you can use Greater Trip to generate AoOs for you and your allies."
Of course, this would mean that Buddy A can then use his AoO to "trip" the prone target, thereby making more AoOs for everyone. And then Buddy B does the same with his new AoO to make more, and so on until all told everyone has collectively had about 8 or 12 or 16 damaging swings on the guy before they even get to their regular actions.
Conversely, if "successfully trip" is defined as you beat the CMD and the target is now prone, then the answer is "No, you cannot Greater Trip the target as he is already prone." No extra AoOs are created this way.
As to the difference in wording, yes there are cases where Hit is the focus regardless of Effect and other times Effect is required. That is the main contention around "Successfully Trip". Some phrases say "successful trip attempt" or "successful trip maneuver". These specifically seem to be calling out the Roll. "Successfully trip" however suggests to me that this is the action in it's entirety. I cannot claim to have successfully tripped something that cannot be knocked prone. Otherwise we get:
PC#1 "Yes! I tripped him."
PC#2 "Great job! That was awesome!"
Target <standing there in front of PC#1 as an ability makes him immune to being knocked prone> "Umm, guys..?"
Now if PC#1 had an ability that triggered on "successful trip attempt", then it would fire as only the Roll is needed. Then the target's prone-immune ability would kick in and disallow him actually falling prone. But does Greater Trip require just the Roll? Or does the target have to be, in effect, facing the results of that roll? i.e. he is now Prone.
Or would being tripped and being knocked prone be synonymous? Can you knock an Ooze prone with an Overrun? It is immune to being tripped...but nothing is said about being knocked prone. Is this assumed to be the same?
???
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The OP might seem very basic and even stupid on the surface. But it is actually addressing 3 questions:
#1 Does "Successfully Trip" mean just the Roll or the Roll and Effect?
#2 Can you reapply a Condition in order to qualify for an ability.
#3 Do only you gain the AoOs or everyone around the target?Set aside #2 and #3. They are minor points in relation to #1.
If "successfully trip" is defined as just beating the target's CMD on a roll, regardless of that target's current circumstances, then the answer to the OP is "Yes, you can use Greater Trip to generate AoOs for you and your allies."
Of course, this would mean that Buddy A can then use his AoO to "trip" the prone target, thereby making more AoOs for everyone. And then Buddy B does the same with his new AoO to make more, and so on until all told everyone has collectively had about 8 or 12 or 16 damaging swings on the guy before they even get to their regular actions.
Conversely, if "successfully trip" is defined as you beat the CMD and the target is now prone, then the answer is "No, you cannot Greater Trip the target as he is already prone." No extra AoOs are created this way.
As to the difference in wording, yes there are cases where Hit is the focus regardless of Effect and other times Effect is required. That is the main contention around "Successfully Trip". Some phrases say "successful trip attempt" or "successful trip maneuver". These specifically seem to be calling out the Roll. "Successfully trip" however suggests to me that this is the action in it's entirety. I cannot claim to have successfully tripped something that cannot be knocked prone. Otherwise we get:
PC#1 "Yes! I tripped him."
PC#2 "Great job! That was awesome!"
Target <standing there in front of PC#1 as an ability makes him immune to being knocked prone> "Umm, guys..?"Now if PC#1 had an ability that triggered on "successful trip attempt", then it would fire as only the Roll is needed. Then the target's prone-immune ability would kick in and disallow him actually falling prone. But does Greater Trip require just the Roll? Or does the target have to be, in effect, facing the results of that roll? i.e. he is now Prone.
Kazaan mentioned it in the other trip thread... but he had a good point. I had a similar line of thinking, but hadn't distilled it into words as clearly as he has. There are 3 possible stages when something happens. Declaration, Determination, and Resolution.
My repeated objection to ignoring the part of the text of Greater Trip “an opponent” is because of these three stages.
Declaration – Attempt a trip/perform a trip/trip
Determination – Successful trip attempt/successfully trip/succeed on trip maneuver check
Resolution – Successfully trip an opponent/trip an opponent successfully/opponent is tripped and knocked prone
Each of those statements/phrases is referring to a different part of the sequence of declaration – determination – resolution.
The text found in the feat Greater trip is referring to the resolution step.
How do we know this? Why is ‘an opponent’ so important?
Because that is the sequence we use in the rules.
Declaration - state intention/begin action
Determination – roll die and compare to target number/determine how well you do
Resolution – Apply effects of action/ Immunities/resistances/defenses etc applied to effect/ The opponent is checked for his resiliency to the effect
So… to successfully trip an opponent means we have completed the resolution step. We must have checked his resilience to the effect, because the trip was successful against him.
Where does it say to check immunity at the end? Why would you do that? Check it after the action is declared, otherwise you're wasting time.
As for the ghost being attacked with a mundane weapon, it's treated just like tripping a snake. It doesn't matter how high you roll because the target is not succeptible to the attack. Ergo, the attack can never be successful.
Also, you keep acting like when someone says "I'm going to make a trip attempt" there's no object or target of it until we get to resolution. That's nonsensical. A trip must have a target. The trip attempt must have a target. A completely resolved trip must have a target. The object is present the entire way.
Just because they refer to the trip as a noun sometimes and a verb at other times doesn't mean there isn't the same target of the action the entire time. It's the same with the more generic language for attacking. The object is always present.
|
Wanna complicate matters?
How about using a Seven branched sword.
Hard to stumble when you dont have feet or arent standing.
For the Seven Branch Sword the word "attempt" appears in that text. So I take that as talking about the Roll, not the activity in its entirety. Plus the wording is assuming the target is in a position to stumble. A Prone target cannot stumble or be knocked down, so it wouldn't work.
Does this mean you can't make a trip attempt against a prone target? I would think you could go through the motions. The FAQ on tripping as an AoO against a target standing up suggests you can make the attempt. But the overall effort will fail, because a prone target cannot be knocked prone. So Trip attempt can be made and even succeed (meaning the roll was good enough), but you cannot successfully trip what is already prone.
I'm assuming this is the case with creatures that are immune to being tripped as well. They cannot be made to stumble and they cannot be knocked prone. Their anatomy is such that the condition "Prone" means nothing to them. Sort of like how "Bleed" means nothing to the Undead. It would have helped had the Devs came out and said this, but I think the inference is reasonable enough.
Where does it say to check immunity at the end? Why would you do that? Check it after the action is declared, otherwise you're wasting time.
As for the ghost being attacked with a mundane weapon, it's treated just like tripping a snake. It doesn't matter how high you roll because the target is not succeptible to the attack. Ergo, the attack can never be successful.
Most rules interject Immunities or Resistances at the Resolution stage. You hit the demon but don't get past its DR. You inject the poison into a creature, but it is immune and the poison has no effect.
Resistances must always be rolled against. Just because the DR is 15 doesn't mean you can't score 16+ and do something. Immunities, however, are just that. They are immune. A GM is certainly free to waive the Roll in the interest of saving time (why bother make that non-magical attack against the ghost if it's just going to fail). But as we've seen with the Trip FAQ the Roll can in fact be made. It just won't have any effect. So even if the Roll happens and signifies a successful attempt, the attacker still fails to successfully trip his target.
Of quick note, those rules that intercede at the Determination stage are rules that affect the roll itself...usually bonuses or penalties that are applied directly to the roll, like Weapon Focus or Cover.
*bump* Only takes a day or two to slip off the front page. Please FAQ the OP if you haven't yet.
I flagged your post for "breaking other guidelines". Don't bump your own post. If people find the thread compelling, it will naturally stay near the top. Furthermore, the number and frequency of FAQ posts does not mean it will get resolved any faster.
Perhaps I should simply have posted "If you haven't yet, please FAQ this if the topic interests you."
I have seen OPs bump their own before. After reading through the FAQ guidelines I must have missed that part. But if my behavior was incessant, then I would agree with you.
Are you flagging because you have an issue with the topic? Or something else? I don't have any issues discussing this or other things here or through PM. :)
Regarding the OP, it does answer that question. If the target cannot be knocked prone through a trip attempt, then this may indicate that the attacker has not met the requirements of Greater Trip. Hence the "Why or why not?" as the follow up. It was designed to ask for clarification on:
Is the AoO dependent upon the Effect being applied?
Can the Effect be applied even though the target is already prone?
Does only the tripper gain the AoO or anyone threatening?
If you feel this is not sufficient you certainly don't need to FAQ it for me. Plus you are free to submit your own question. And if I agree it seems like a good candidate for a FAQ request, I would indicate so.
|
I did FAQ the question of whether or not you can use the trip combat maneuver against a prone target because that is certainly a valid question. This does not answer the question of whether an AoO occurs prior to a target falling prone because, despite what you may think, it is a wholly different subject. The fact that both have to do with the trip combat maneuver is the only part of the Venn Diagram that intersects.
If the resolution of the question to whether or not you can trip a prone opponent is "no", that doesn't answer whether or not an AoO from Greater Trip occurs before or after the target falls prone, it just tells you that you can't use the trip combat maneuver against a prone opponent.
If the answer is "yes", it still doesn't answer whether an AoO occurs before or after the target falls prone, it just tells you that you can still make a trip combat maneuver against prone targets for the purpose of granting other effects (AoO, Meteor Hammer, etc) that require the use of the trip combat maneuver.
EDIT: I went back and reread the OP, and you didn't ask the question that I had thought you asked. A more complete question could have been: Can you use the Trip combat maneuver against prone opponents in order to gain additional effects that require the use of the Trip combat maneuver (such as an AoO from Greater Trip, or a drag from a Meteor Hammer)?
Yes, I agree that would be a more complete question. But I was also concerned about spacing and complexity. They do ask that we keep the questions simple and to the point. The one I asked I thought was approaching that limit. Others may disagree.
Concerning the question and possible answers:
We already know through the FAQ on AoO-tripping a standing target that we can in fact make the attempt. Nothing stops us from doing so. But the results are nil as it does not stop the target from standing. So with that assumption in place we are then left with 3 possible answers that I know of. There are more when working in Point #3, but I'm not going to include them for simplicity. And if there are others that I may have missed, I'm certainly open to hearing of them. :)
First, if the AoO comes before the Prone Effect, then the question of "successfully trip" is dependent upon the CM check only and does not care about the condition of the target. In this case a successful check constitutes "successfully tripped" and the AoO fires. So the answer here would be a Yes.
Second, if the AoO comes after the Prone Effect then the Effect is required for the definition of "successfully trip" and if the Effect can be reapplied to an already prone target, then again the answer would be Yes.
Third, but if the AoO comes after the Prone Effect ("successfully trip" requires the target to be knocked prone) and the Effect cannot be reapplied, then the answer would be No.
So my intention if this were to be answered, would be to hear either a Yes or No followed by an explanation of some type answering my question of Why or why not, as to the placement of the AoO, what constitutes "successfully trip", can a condition be reapplied for this purpose, and so on.
But again, if you think the key point here is where the AoO lands, then it would be simple enough to post the question of "What does the Greater Trip requirement 'Successfully Trip' mean? Is it when the CM Roll is successful or when the target is knocked prone?"
I'd be happy to FAQ request that one should someone post it or something similar.
|
|
First, if the AoO comes before the Prone Effect, then the question of "successfully trip" is dependent upon the CM check only and does not care about the condition of the target. In this case a successful check constitutes "successfully tripped" and the AoO fires. So the answer here would be a Yes.
Second, if the AoO comes after the Prone Effect then the Effect is required for the definition of "successfully trip" and if the Effect can be reapplied to an already prone target, then again the answer would be Yes.
Third, but if the AoO comes after the Prone Effect ("successfully trip" requires the target to be knocked prone) and the Effect cannot be reapplied, then the answer would be No.
That's a fairly complicated way to go about the discussion. Especially if one carries the opinion that the target needs to be prone to trigger the AoO: you start asking all of these questions. If you divorced the effect from the successful roll (even though they do occur as one "action") you don't have to ask all of these questions.
But again, if you think the key point here is where the AoO lands, then it would be simple enough to post the question of "What does the Greater Trip requirement 'Successfully Trip' mean? Is it when the CM Roll is successful or when the target is knocked prone?"
For one concerned with spacing and complexity, you do have a way of asking simple questions in a complex way. ;-)
EDIT:
I'd be happy to FAQ request that one should someone post it or something similar.
This thread definitely deserves more FAQ's, something tells me that the downside of having 4 (or is it 5 now) threads on this is making it hard for people to see which one is which.
Hopefully 27 is enough to get a response. Maybe more people will hit the button.
All I know is my MMA fighter character would love to know if he gets +4 to his AOO for tripping someone, and if not, what other wild shenanigans he might pull off otherwise.
Up to 29 clicks so far. I know numbers aren't supposed to matter. But they don't hurt either. :)
I will say, given the fact that this question has come up at least 5 different times in the past 3 years (at least based on my searches on the forums), it does qualify as a frequently-asked question.
Can I use Greater Trip on a prone target and make that target provoke AoOs for me and my allies? Why or why not?
Where an AoO lands in the trip sequence and what constitutes a “successful trip” have been points of contention for a while now. If “success” is determined by the Roll only, then it would suggest the answer to the above question is “Yes”. But if both the Roll and the Knocking Prone must take place, then the above answer may be “No”. The rule wording tends to get ambiguous.
This gets slightly more complicated when throwing in debate over whether non-stacking, non-worsening, and non-lengthening conditions can be reapplied for the purposes of triggering abilities (i.e. “Whenever you trip a target…”, “Whenever you blind a target…”, “Whenever you diarm a target…”, etc).
There are other threads to debate these issues as have been done at length. For this, please hit the FAQ button and let’s see if we can get this answered.
Is this a normal Trip or a Ki Throw trip? Because the designers change their minds depending on how you ask.
My post was referring to a normal trip where you knock the target prone. A Ki Throw specifically calls out the successful Roll portion of the equation as the trigger it is looking for, followed by the Prone Effect. So that isn't in question...for me anyway. Greater Trip's version, however, has proven to be a divided interpretation. Reworded they could read as:
#1 "Whenever you successfully perform a trip maneuver against your target..."
or
#2 "Whenever you successfully knock prone your target..."
The question I posted would hopefully get to the heart of the divide as #1 would suggest a Yes answer to the question and #2 would suggest a No.
My post was referring to a normal trip where you knock the target prone. A Ki Throw specifically calls out the successful Roll portion of the equation as the trigger it is looking for, followed by the Prone Effect. So that isn't in question...for me anyway. Greater Trip's version, however, has proven to be a divided interpretation. Reworded they could read as:
#1 "Whenever you successfully perform a trip maneuver against your target..."
or
#2 "Whenever you successfully knock prone your target..."
The question I posted would hopefully get to the heart of the divide as #1 would suggest a Yes answer to the question and #2 would suggest a No.
My tripper character has 0 ranks in Perform: Dance... so he'd never be able to successfully perform a trip maneuver.