|
Scenario:
Two(2) winged opponents flying in mid-air fighting it out (lets go with X and Y)
X decides to stop flapping its wings and falls to the ground (## feet below).
Does Y get an Attack of Opportunity?
To Provoke an AoO
Provoking an Attack of Opportunity: Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing certain actions within a threatened square.
Moving: Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes attacks of opportunity from threatening opponents. There are two common methods of avoiding such an attack—the 5-foot step and the withdraw action.
Threatened Squares:
You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you're unarmed, you don't normally threaten any squares and thus can't make attacks of opportunity.
Fly Skill:
..snip...
Attacked While Flying: You are not considered flat-footed while flying. If you are flying using wings and you take damage while flying, you must make a DC 10 Fly check to avoid losing 10 feet of altitude. This descent does not provoke an attack of opportunity and does not count against a creature's movement.
Collision While Flying: If you are using wings to fly and you collide with an object equal to your size or larger, you must immediately make a DC 25 Fly check to avoid plummeting to the ground, taking the appropriate falling damage.
..snip..
Drop Prone:
Dropping to a prone position in your space is a free action. (And the table that lists what provokes, says this action does not)
Falling:
Is listed under Environmental Rules.
Trip:
...snip...
Some creatures—such as oozes, creatures without legs, and flying creatures—cannot be tripped.
...snip...
All of the above were invoked in the discussion that happened at the table.
X's argument was while there are two [u]common[/u] methods of avoiding an AoO there could be others. Since falling is neither movement, nor performing certain actions within a threatened square (as noted by the definition of Threatened Squares saying only certain actions provoke). In fact the closest action X made was to Drop Prone, but with no floor to stop the fall, and Dropping Prone does not provoke.
Y's argument was around how "Attacked While Flying" specifically called out that the movement taken after being hit did not provoke (as it was forced movement, not voluntary), where as "Collision While Flying" did not(even if you were the one who was collided into (so not on your turn) and failed the save). Plus, as you cannot be tripped while flying, you cannot fall prone while flying, so Dropping Prone is not a legal action while flying.
The discussion ended when it was made clear that the potential damage from the fall could equal what could be dealt out by the attacker.
X's move felt "cheesy" but Y's contradictory rules around "Collision While Flying" felt off.
So now we are curious.
I saw there were a few threads on the subject of Falling and Attack of Opportunity, but they focused on the accidental fall, or being dropped by a grappling monster and they still tend to lean toward both answers being right.
|
The rules will not be able to cover every corner case. Sometimes the GM has to make a tough call and use their best sense of judgment.
Remember Arial combAT is three dimensional. I suspect that the creature moved out of the others threatened area(we should be able to threaten the.squares both adjacent above and below). I would.grant the attack.
|
This has been addressed by this post by James Jacobs almost exactly 5 years ago. Falling doesn't alter the AOO rules. If the movement would have provoked on the ground, it will provoke in the air.
This is actually contrary to what I have generally heard, which has been based off of the part of the rules that deal with involuntary movement not provoking AOOs. In any case, unless someone can find a subsequent change to this ruling, it seems legit to me.