Now, standing up from kneeling is certainly quicker than from prone. BUT, it really has to be a move action too. Otherwise you're just going to have people kneeling at the end of each turn, and standing up again at the start of their turn, versus ranged opponents. Would quickly become silly, imho.
Isn't that one of the more common visuals for people in a fire fight? Kneeling when still for a smaller profile and more stable platform for shooting? How is that silly? o.O
I think having mechanics that encourage doing things like that or crouching/ducking down while running between cover are pretty great, and I can't see a physical reason why you wouldn't be able to slide or kneel then get up without using up fully half of your movement (much less why adventurers with beyond perfect bodies would struggle with it). I'd go with free actions to kneel or stand.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is from the Rules of the Game 3.5 Archives, by Skip Williams:
Stand Up from Prone: Use this action to get up when you're lying on the ground. This does not count as movement, but you're pretty darn close to defenseless when regaining your feet, so standing up provokes attacks of opportunity. Getting to your feet when seated on the ground is just as difficult as getting up from a prone position and also requires a move action that provokes attacks of opportunity. If you're kneeling on the ground, getting up takes some time, but it doesn't make you vulnerable, so you use a move action that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. Getting up from a chair is a free action that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity if the chair is fairly high; otherwise it's just like getting up from a prone position.
So if we are going by that ruling, would it be best to get the sitting aspects of the bonus by Alchemically gluing your butt to a stool?
If that were presented to me, I'd suggest that the player also take a -10 penalty to Acrobatics, Diplomacy, Fly, Intimidate, Stealth and Swim as well as being completely unable to ride any normal mount or run at full speed (charging and hustling would still be allowed). If they still want to go through with it, sure, let them have their +2 AC. A stool could act as a shield of sorts, I guess, so it's not totally far-fetched, despite the obvious drawbacks of having a chair stuck to your posterior…
Useful for homebrew, but Pathfinder is independent of 3.5. We still need an official Pathfinder ruling.
Very good find, though! It's very useful for deciding how we'll adjudicate it in the meantime.
I'd suggest dropping into a kneel is a free action, whereas standing up from one is a move action which provokes.
As for an official answer...if one exists, I'm not aware of it.
I second this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Useful for homebrew, but Pathfinder is independent of 3.5. We still need an official Pathfinder ruling.You know, the more I read the forums the more I think that what we think we NEED is really just what we WANT...
PFS does need that level of official detail in order for players to be able to use options that exist. For instance, I can't make a PFS character with a Scorpion Whip because the actual capabilities of my weapon will change every time I sit down at a different table. The weapon is so obtusely worded that every GM has an entirely different interpretation of what it does, so I can never rely on the ability to work one way or another.
Sitting and kneeling is similar. As people have pointed out, +2 AC is huge. If it's a free action to kneel or stand, I will use that in combat, and it will help. I'd like to! It appeals to me to have an archer who can kneel and present a smaller target to his foes. As the rules stand now, though, when I'm doing one adventure, I'll be able to full attack, then stand up, then five-foot-step, because that GM says it's a free action. In another adventure, the laws of physics and motion will be completely altered because standing up from kneeling is a standard action in that GM's world, because it "doesn't specify" and "unspecified actions are standard actions."
That is why I say we "need" it. Yeah, it's just a game, nobody 'needs' anything to survive, but it's silly to get caught up on the semantics of how strongly a forum post is worded when calling for clarity from game leadership on how the rules work.
Ok don't know if this has been covered but it takes a whole lot less effort to go into the kneeling than prone. As an infantryman that's most of my life. We get into the kneeling misstep and get up just as easily so whoever was arguing prone is easier to get into than kneeling needs to go out and actually try it.
I was thinking the same thing. We avoided going prone if at all possible. Much better to be kneeling.
Going out and trying it with 80 to 120 lbs of gear too. Its not just a matter of walking out and flopping on the grass. Put on some body armor, helmet, weapon, backpack with at least 60lbs of various crap in it...then go practice going prone on some rocky terrain and sharp dune grass.
I took a running dive into a prone position in full gear in some tall grass once and landed my groin on a big rock. That was just a great bunch of fun.
As far as in game, I would call kneeling a free action (since going prone counts as one) and standing up would be equivilant to a swift action that does not provoke.
|
PFS does need that level of official detail in order for players to be able to use options that exist.Useful for homebrew, but Pathfinder is independent of 3.5. We still need an official Pathfinder ruling.You know, the more I read the forums the more I think that what we think we NEED is really just what we WANT...
Obviously, I disagree. I promise you that I have no need of an official clarification to be able to use the kneeling/sitting rules in PFS.
|
PFS does need that level of official detail in order for players to be able to use options that exist. For instance, I can't make a PFS character with a Scorpion Whip because the actual capabilities of my weapon will change every time I sit down at a different table. The weapon is so obtusely worded that every GM has an entirely different interpretation of what it does, so I can never rely on the ability to work one way or another.
Sitting and kneeling is similar. As people have pointed out, +2 AC is huge. If it's a free action to kneel or stand, I will use that in combat, and it will help. I'd like to! It appeals to me to have an archer who can kneel and present a smaller target to his foes. As the rules stand now, though, when I'm doing one adventure, I'll be able to full attack, then stand up, then five-foot-step, because that GM says it's a free action. In another adventure, the laws of physics and motion will be completely altered because standing up from kneeling is a standard action in that GM's world, because it "doesn't specify" and "unspecified actions are standard actions."
That is why I say we "need" it. Yeah, it's just a game, nobody 'needs' anything to survive, but it's silly to get caught up on the semantics of how strongly a forum post is worded when calling for clarity from game leadership on how the rules work.
It's not as much of a problem if kneeling is ruled inconsistently compared to the scorpion whip, because you don't need to invest build resources in kneeling. Do it when it makes sense to do so according to the current GM's rulings. It's a bit of a pain, sure, but it won't invalidate your character.
It's an example used to illustrate why I want a ruling to be made. We are again on the topic of semantics.