|
The only problem is the word "normally" in the sentence. Why is that word even there? Are there non-normal actions you can take, and thus not permitted to use a free action?Neither. An attack of opportunity is not an action.
Doesn't that answer part of the main question?
Since free actions are listed as being performed while taking another action normally and an AOO is not an action, you can't perform free actions during an AOO?
So trip or grab won't work during an AOO, since they are free actions and an AOO is not an action, hence the free action cannot be performed during an AOO. (They only work as part of an attack that uses an action.)
Speak can be done out of turn and speak is a free action, so if you speak you can change grip, quickdraw, grab and catch rocks..........not
Speak can be done out of turn and speak is a free action, so if you speak you can change grip, quickdraw, grab and catch rocks..........not
Speaking has a specific rules exception and it is called out as an exception.
The other ones do not have that exception written into the rules.
I do not agree with what RedDog is saying, but I see his point.
Most of us are reading Snap Shot as:
If loading your weapon is a free action, such as loading a bow, you can load and shoot your bow during any time you can make an AoO.
We are adding the idea that you may take the free action whenever an AoO is triggered.
I believe he is reading Snap Shot as:
If loading your weapon is a free action, AND you can take free actions, such as loading a bow when it is your turn, you can load a shoot your bow as part of an AoO.
He is using the free action as the limiter of the feat.
That is the problem with the English language. I don't agree with his interpretation, but it is not as far out there as it first appears.
I see what he is saying. But it is wrong.
Snap Shot: Can a character with Snap Shot (page 119) and Combat Reflexes make multiple attacks of opportunity with a ranged weapon, assuming that loading the ranged weapon is a free action?
Yes. As long as you can reload your weapon with a free action you can reload your weapon as part of the ranged attack attack of opportunity you are making with the Snap Shot feat.
The free action to reload is part of the AoO. It isn't a free action unto itself, but is part of the AoO.
This is also precedent for considering an AoO as its own classification of misc action. At least in regard to free actions being part of them.
We know that free actions can be part of an AoO. And, since the abilities which grant rider effects with free actions are acting as part of an attack, which can be used in an AoO, it seems both RAW and RAI to allow the use of free actions that abilities say you can use.
Eg.
A creature with the trip special attack can attempt to trip its opponent as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity if it hits with the specified attack. If the attempt fails, the creature is not tripped in return.
The way this is written is permissive. It tells us that we can make a trip as a free action. If hit, then trip. Seems permissive. And since we know that free actions can be a part of an AoO, the ruling seems to be that it is indeed capable of using the trip when it makes an AoO.
I deduce that free actions can only he taken on your turn because immediate actions specifically state that they can be taken outside of your turn while no other type of action does.
Free actions are not immediate actions, they can only be taken on your turn. AoO's don't happen on your turn, there for no, these types of maneuvers can not be used during AoO's.
@Remy who did you quote about rapid shot there? It seems like an oversight
*Edited, seemed cluttered
And since we know that free actions can be a part of an AoO, the ruling seems to be that it is indeed capable of using the trip when it makes an AoO.
No WE don't know it. The argument against it is that free actions are only allowed on your turn unless specifically stated otherwise.
Snapshot works because we know you have the draw the arrow in order to take the shot.
Speaking works because it is called out as a specific exception.
I deduce that free actions can only he taken on your turn because immediate actions specifically state that they can be while no other type of action does.
Free actions are not immediate actions, they can only be taken on your turn. AoO's don't happen on your turn, there for no, these types of maneuvers can not be used during AoO's.
@Remy who did you quote about rapid shot there? That would indeed mean that you can use free actions during an AoO, but the rules clearly state otherwise, as I defined above. I believe your quote to be an oversight.
The only way that it could he true would be if there were an oversight in the definition of free action, but I see no reason to believe that.
Edited to add
That is the FAQ about Snap Shot. I doubt it is an oversight.
There's only 2 possibilities, either there's an oversight in the definition of 'free action' or there was an oversight in yur quote from the FAQ
And since we know that free actions can be a part of an AoO, the ruling seems to be that it is indeed capable of using the trip when it makes an AoO.
No WE don't know it. The argument against it is that free actions are only allowed on your turn unless specifically stated otherwise.
Snapshot works because we know you have the draw the arrow in order to take the shot.
Speaking works because it is called out as a specific exception.
Of course we do.
Drawing an arrow is a free action. You can perform this free action as part of the attack you take in your attack of opportunity. Thus: We know you can perform a free action as part of your AoO.
We already know you can perform a free action as part of another action. Since we know that for this purpose an AoO is being treated as an action, it is all rather straightforward.
If a free action is a part of the action you are performing, it happens with the action you are performing.
Yall are trying to overcomplicate a pretty simple concept here.
You cannot just do any random free action you want whenever, just cause. But you most certainly can perform any free action that is a part of an action you are explicitly permitted.
If you can trip as a free action with your attack, then if you use that attack in an AoO, you can trip with it.
It is pretty simple.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And if it's an oversight in the definition of 'free action', that means anytime a creature gets a free trip attempt with a successful attack, then you will never get off the ground. A pack of wolves would be a threat well beyond their CR.
There's only 2 possibilities, either there's an oversight in the definition of 'free action' or there was an oversight in yur quote from the FAQ
Naw.
And if it's an oversight in the definition of 'free action', that means anytime a creature gets a free trip attempt with a successful attack, then you will never get off the ground. A pack of wolves would be a threat well beyond their CR.
You are prone still when the AoO occurs for standing up. Any trip that happens while you are prone is redundant. After all the AoOs, you stand up.
Unless you are saying something I'm missing.
There's only 2 possibilities, either there's an oversight in the definition of 'free action' or there was an oversight in yur quote from the FAQNaw.
Uh, yeah. Immediate action states it can be done outside of your turn. Free action doesn't, if it can be done outside your turn then it should follow suite and state it. "Naw" as an arguement in disagreement is beyond flimsy
And if it's an oversight in the definition of 'free action', that means anytime a creature gets a free trip attempt with a successful attack, then you will never get off the ground. A pack of wolves would be a threat well beyond their CR.You are prone still when the AoO occurs for standing up. Any trip that happens while you are prone is redundant. After all the AoOs, you stand up.
Unless you are saying something I'm missing.
that's a good point about the trips, but I stand by my point on free actions during AoO's
The only problem is the word "normally" in the sentence. Why is that word even there? Are there non-normal actions you can take, and thus not permitted to use a free action?Neither. An attack of opportunity is not an action.
The attack of opportunity rules say that an attack of opportunity is one melee attack. Melee attack can be found under the actions table as "Attack (melee)". Doesn't that mean that the attack itself is an action even if the attack of opportunity isn't?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I had no idea people felt this strongly about the issue. I can see the problems with either line of logic. At one extreme Snap Shot literally does nothing despite the FAQ and at the other extreme speaking will allow you to drop your weapon and draw another one with Quick Draw any time you feel like it. Reasonable people can disagree about how to adjudicate this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The attack of opportunity rules say that an attack of opportunity is one melee attack. Melee attack can be found under the actions table as "Attack (melee)". Doesn't that mean that the attack itself is an action even if the attack of opportunity isn't?The only problem is the word "normally" in the sentence. Why is that word even there? Are there non-normal actions you can take, and thus not permitted to use a free action?Neither. An attack of opportunity is not an action.
Yeah, I would think that's the case. Furthermore, being able to make AoOs with a bow via feats or special abilities also suggests you can indeed take free actions as part of an AoO.
If I had to guess, I would say that when they wrote the definition of free action, they just inserted "normally" without really thinking about the consequences of that word OR it was meant as a catch-all just in case something weird came up, and as such they would probably make a specific ruling about it, so that the specific rule would overwrite the general rule. I'm probably going to assume the latter, and thus if the rules don't specifically state that you cannot take a free action, I'm going to assume you can take the free action. I'm going to assume that when they make an action that says "this action cannot include free actions" or something like that, then every listed action is indeed "normal". Thus, in a nutshell, you can indeed use grab with your attack of opportunity.
I realize that's not official or anything, but until we get something from Paizo, I think that is a clear reasoning.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
My impression is that taking an AoO (or speaking) doesn't explicitly give you a free action to change your grip on your weapon (or draw a new one), so you can't do it. A Purple Worm hitting with a Bite does explicitly give it a free action to grapple though, so the worm can do it. In my opinion a Frost Giant who looks just like Lagertha Lothbrok being hit with a rock also gives her a free action to catch it. These are not free actions those creatures could take at other times. They are specific results of other events in combat. For instance, even during its turn a Purple Worm can't just crawl up and grapple you as a free action. That free action is triggered by hitting with an attack which has Grab.
I can understand DEXRAY's strict RAW based opinion that you would need to ready an action to catch a rock, but I think it seems silly since the ability could simply say that you can ready an action to catch a rock. It would also be a fairly worthless ability. That doesn't mean I'm right of course, but I think the "intuitive" feeling that Rock Catching should work as a defensive ability out of turn is strong enough that it isn't completely unreasonable to ask for a FAQ answer. Grab is a much more important ability and certainly FAQ-worthy.
Im still confused as why people are bringing up a feat that lets u take a free action as part of a aoo and using that feat as grounds to say that u can take any free action as part lf aoo.
i thought feats were things that u take that u nornally couldnt do if u didnt have the feat. So im confused as why a feat is explaining why u can do something when u normally couldnt without the feat..
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
RAW, It's pretty straight forward that you're not allowed to do it. Sure, it's a Free Action you can take when you hit a creature with an attack; if it occurs outside your turn, you aren't given a special exception to take that Free Action outside your turn, since there is no clause explicitly stating it can be used with Attacks of Opportunity or otherwise.
Speaking sets the precedent that Free Actions are limited to be taken only during your turn, since it is the only written subject that signifies language stating you can do so outside your turn. Everything else which lacks such language would follow the same restrictions as nearly every other action type.
RAI, it's pretty straight forward that the ability should be accomplished regardless of whether the attack occurs inside or outside your turn, both in a realistic manner and in terms of designed mechanics. I believe the reason they put the term Free Action is to signify that it doesn't take any effort at all to do. Consequently, that language has no needed purpose, since there are already subjects which require no action at all. Instead, they use a defined game term with a precedent requiring it to be your turn to take it unless otherwise specified (which this case does not).
Of course, if we kept with the RAI interpretation and allowed Free Actions to occur outside your turn, it would lead to Two-Handed Reach Martials gimmicking the system by being able to take hands off of their weapon whenever someone gets within 5 feet of them to threaten both 10 and 5 feet simultaneously, something that is obviously not intended to be plausible without special abilities (which are otherwise more costly and then become obsolete if this rule is enforced).
The simplest (and most intended) fix is to just remove the "as a Free Action" clause, since that is the crux of the issue regarding this ability. Once removed, it can work with attacks both during and outside your turn as intended, and not cause gimmicking shenanigans in games.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And since we know that free actions can be a part of an AoO, the ruling seems to be that it is indeed capable of using the trip when it makes an AoO.
No WE don't know it. The argument against it is that free actions are only allowed on your turn unless specifically stated otherwise.
Snapshot works because we know you have the draw the arrow in order to take the shot.
Speaking works because it is called out as a specific exception.
Of course we do.
Drawing an arrow is a free action. You can perform this free action as part of the attack you take in your attack of opportunity. Thus: We know you can perform a free action as part of your AoO.
We already know you can perform a free action as part of another action. Since we know that for this purpose an AoO is being treated as an action, it is all rather straightforward.
If a free action is a part of the action you are performing, it happens with the action you are performing.
Yall are trying to overcomplicate a pretty simple concept here.
You presume too much. The Snap Shot FAQ does not necessarily mean "AoO are actions". Nor does it mean "Free Actions can be taken in conjunction with AoO". All we can definitely know without debate based on that FAQ is that it explicitly allows reloading to occur while making an AoO, if you can normally reload your ranged weapon as a free action.
Either it stands for the principle that free actions can ordinarily be taken with AoO (which takes a fair bit of reading into the FAQ), or it stands for the principle that the Snap Shot chain creates an exception to the ordinary rule that one cannot take a free action outside of one's turn (aside from speaking) and that this exception is specifically limited to free action reloads of a ranged weapon with which you are making an AoO (because without this exception in place, the Snap Shot chain would be nearly though not completely gutted).
While the former implication could certainly be derived from the FAQ, it takes a lot of extra implied and assumed meaning to get there. The latter reading is plainly obvious. It's better to stick with the more limited reading unless there is good indication a broader meaning is intended.
And since we know that free actions can be a part of an AoO, the ruling seems to be that it is indeed capable of using the trip when it makes an AoO.
No WE don't know it. The argument against it is that free actions are only allowed on your turn unless specifically stated otherwise.
Snapshot works because we know you have the draw the arrow in order to take the shot.
Speaking works because it is called out as a specific exception.
Of course we do.
Drawing an arrow is a free action. You can perform this free action as part of the attack you take in your attack of opportunity. Thus: We know you can perform a free action as part of your AoO.
We already know you can perform a free action as part of another action. Since we know that for this purpose an AoO is being treated as an action, it is all rather straightforward.
If a free action is a part of the action you are performing, it happens with the action you are performing.
Yall are trying to overcomplicate a pretty simple concept here.
You cannot just do any random free action you want whenever, just cause. But you most certainly can perform any free action that is a part of an action you are explicitly permitted.
If you can trip as a free action with your attack, then if you use that attack in an AoO, you can trip with it.
It is pretty simple.
The trip or grab is not a part of the attack that allows it. It is its own action that is granted if you complete the attack. Now if you only made one roll and got the results of the normal attack roll and the trip then I would see your point, but since you have the option to not trip or grab that makes them their own actions and not allowable.
As an example when you use snapshot you HAVE TO draw that arrow. It is not an option since it is part of the shooting itself.
The attack of opportunity rules say that an attack of opportunity is one melee attack. Melee attack can be found under the actions table as "Attack (melee)". Doesn't that mean that the attack itself is an action even if the attack of opportunity isn't?The only problem is the word "normally" in the sentence. Why is that word even there? Are there non-normal actions you can take, and thus not permitted to use a free action?Neither. An attack of opportunity is not an action.
No. That attack is referring to the attack action which is a standard action. Not every act requires an action(game tern).
How immediate actions work, is meaningless to how free actions work.
yes, but how its worded has establishes a pattern for definition of other similarities, just like any other definition in the game. 'Immediate action' defines that it can be used outside your turn because it is different from normal actions in that way. If 'free actions' were also different in that way they should also be defined
I had no idea people felt this strongly about the issue. I can see the problems with either line of logic. At one extreme Snap Shot literally does nothing despite the FAQ and at the other extreme speaking will allow you to drop your weapon and draw another one with Quick Draw any time you feel like it. Reasonable people can disagree about how to adjudicate this.
this falls in line with what I said about their being an omission either in the FAQ or the wording of 'free action'. Personally, I believe free action is not usable outside your turn and that snap shot should be a specific rule that overrides the general rule. I may be wrong though, and if I am, they need to change the definition of 'free action' to include that it can be used outside your turn
Now it is possible that the intent was for these abilities to work on an AoO, but they should not have been labeled as a free action, but written up as an optional rider affect.
@Devilkiller a free action isn't what grants access to a free action. If free actions can be taken at any time, you wouldn't need to speak, you could drop your weapon and pull another (with quickdraw) at any time regardless. The purple worm is different because his free action is dependant on another action, dropping a weapon is not
Now it is possible that the intent was for these abilities to work on an AoO, but they should not have been labeled as a free action, but written up as an optional rider affect.
We pretty much see it the same way, though I do see reason to describe those effects as free actions. I just think that they are examples of specific rule trumping general rule
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
RAW, It's pretty straight forward that you're not allowed to do it. Sure, it's a Free Action you can take when you hit a creature with an attack; if it occurs outside your turn, you aren't given a special exception to take that Free Action outside your turn, since there is no clause explicitly stating it can be used with Attacks of Opportunity or otherwise.
Speaking sets the precedent that Free Actions are limited to be taken only during your turn, since it is the only written subject that signifies language stating you can do so outside your turn. Everything else which lacks such language would follow the same restrictions as nearly every other action type.
Please link where it says you must take a free action only on your turn. When you read the Free Action description from the PRD, it says no such thing. It seems that unless you have a link to the rulebook stating that a free action must be taken on your turn, you are assuming. Most actions occur on your turn, and free actions are done with normal actions, so obviously the vast majority of free actions occur on your turn. But, there is no stated restriction that a free action must occur on your turn. The restriction is that it accompany a normal action.
So, a normal action can be a melee attack. A melee attack is part of an Attack of Opportunity. So, please, provide your link that a free action must be done on your turn only.
Furthermore, to the post about pointing out feats that allow you to take free actions with a bow to do an AoO. The feat doesn't allow the free action, it allows the AoO. Because it allows the AoO, and the only way to attack with a bow using an AoO is to also draw the arrow, which is a free action. So, if the feat allowing an AoO from a bow required you to hit the creature with a melee attack with your bow (like swinging the actual bow), then you might imply you can't draw an arrow and shoot it in an AoO. But, that's not the case, you actually shoot the creature as an AoO, so you have to draw an arrow, which is a free action, which of course doesn't happen on your turn. Another way to think about it is the feat would say "You can make an AoO with your bow ONLY if you have an arrow already drawn and ready." But of course, it doesn't say that.
The reason it doesn't say that is because there is nowhere stated that free actions must occur on your turn. The only restriction is that it happens with a normal action. Stop reading stuff that isn't there.
A situation to consider.
Wolf moves provoking an AoO from a PC. The PC uses his AoO to do something that provokes from the wolf. The wolf bits the PC for his AoO - does the wolf get to apply trip? It is the wolf's turn after all.
While RAW technically doesn't allow the trip when it is not the wolves turn - because of the above, RAI, to me, is plainly that the wolf does get the trip regardless of whose turn the attack happens on. or creatures with grab get their grab regardless, etc.
The exception given for speaking is one of the reasons people believe that free actions can only be taken during your turn.
That exception is to allow you to speak without taking a normal action. Things would have been clearer had they specifically stated it this way instead, then everyone would understand it is linked to the normal action rule, not the turn "rule".
The exception given for speaking is one of the reasons people believe that free actions can only be taken during your turn.That exception is to allow you to speak without taking a normal action. Had that been the way it was written, things would have been clearer.
The rules aren't that you can take a free action when taking a normal action. The rules are that normally you take can free actions while taking another action.
Normally has quite a distinct meaning from normal.
You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally
Could also be written as
"Normally, you can perform one or more free actions while taking another action."
A situation to consider.
Wolf moves provoking an AoO from a PC. The PC uses his AoO to do something that provokes from the wolf. The wolf bits the PC for his AoO - does the wolf get to apply trip? It is the wolf's turn after all.
While RAW technically doesn't allow the trip when it is not the wolves turn - because of the above, RAI, to me, is plainly that the wolf does get the trip regardless of whose turn the attack happens on. or creatures with grab get their grab regardless, etc.
So, let's put it a bit more real. The wolf moves through a threatened square to move into another threatened square of the same creature (trying to get a flank position +2 bonus). The creature tries to trip the wolf for his AoO without having the Improved Trip feat. Because the creature lacks the Improved Trip feat, this also provokes an AoO, so the wolf then bites (which has the trip feature as a free action). Yes, this all would "fire" at the very first square, so the wolf's bite would go off, but it wouldn't get the +2 flank bonus because all this occurs in the first threatened square, not the second square with the flank bonus. So, let's assume the wolf hits and trips the creature. The creature then goes prone, attempting to trip the wolf while prone and fails. Then the wolf moves into the square with the flanking position bonus.
At least, that's how I think it would get resolved. I've seen arguments on the forums about provokes that provoke, that provoke, ad infinitum. I think when that happens, I'd just rule the AoOs cancel each other out and move on with the game. It's such a rare situation that it's not worth getting an official ruling.
The exception given for speaking is one of the reasons people believe that free actions can only be taken during your turn.That exception is to allow you to speak without taking a normal action. Had that been the way it was written, things would have been clearer.The rules aren't that you can take a free action when taking a normal action. The rules are that normally you take can free actions while taking another action.
Normally has quite a distinct meaning from normal.
You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normallyCould also be written as
"Normally, you can perform one or more free actions while taking another action."
Yeah, that's completely right. So, let's write it that way. Normally, you can perform a free action while taking another action.
Now, that implies that there might be specific instances when you cannot. Well, which ones? I would assume (oh boy, that word) that what it implies that the developers will state specifically when you cannot use a free action, or if a specific free action can only be done in certain times/actions/whatever. Thus, it would be the specific rule overwriting the general rule.
Going with that concept, it should say very clearly in the Attacks of Opportunity section or somewhere, that you cannot take free actions as part of an Attack of Opportunity. Or in the section for GRAB, it would say "this free action can only be used on your turn". Until that specific rule is mentioned to overwrite the general rule (why I think they added the word "Normally"). They could further clarify with a statement like "Unless otherwise noted, a free action can be performed with any action." Thus, we would know they intend to limit free actions with specific language.