|
| 10 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Okay so apparently one can kneel in combat to gain bonuses while firing a ranged weapon but does anyone know what action this is to enter, does it provoke an AoO to enter, does it provoke to leave, what action is it to leave a kneel?
Any help would be greatly appreciated as well as official sources for the information.
There have been FAQ requests for that since 2009.
A popular answer is 'free action to kneel, move action to stand from kneeling, does not provoke'.
|
|
There have been FAQ requests for that since 2009.
A popular answer is 'free action to kneel, move action to stand from kneeling, does not provoke'.
Really? This has been on the FAQ docket since 2009 and NO ONE has decided to answer it yet?! The thing is on the freakin' GM's screen! How the hell can you have rules presented in a game that is largely about tactical combat and then NOT EXPLAIN how they freakin work for at least 6 years!?!
Christ...
|
|
...A popular answer is 'free action to kneel, move action to stand from kneeling, does not provoke'.That is the most reasonable way to handle kneeling and sitting.
The theory I was working under was that it was a move action to drop to a kneel (since it is considered the same action as sitting) but you could do it as part of your move, allowing you to move your movement and drop into the kneel at the end. Haven't worked out whether or not it provokes yet but I'm thinking yes.
|
Really? This has been on the FAQ docket since 2009 and NO ONE has decided to answer it yet?! The thing is on the freakin' GM's screen! How the hell can you have rules presented in a game that is largely about tactical combat and then NOT EXPLAIN how they freakin work for at least 6 years!?!
Funny enough, in all of my game play, I do not recall ever having a player sit or kneel in combat. While it would be nice to have the answers to every situation in the game, it just isn't reasonable.
How can you lump an action that is defined as mechanically advantageous and disadvantageous as "every situation?" It is a specific "state" that has never had an action economy assigned to it.
|
|
The theory I was working under was that it was a move action to drop to a kneel (since it is considered the same action as sitting) but you could do it as part of your move, allowing you to move your movement and drop into the kneel at the end. Haven't worked out whether or not it provokes yet but I'm thinking yes....A popular answer is 'free action to kneel, move action to stand from kneeling, does not provoke'.That is the most reasonable way to handle kneeling and sitting.
Hey doc, do you have a link/reference to where it says that sitting is a move action? I am not nay-saying you at all, but if there is a reference, it would be nice to have.
If you think of a move action being around 2 to 3 seconds, taking that amount of time to kneel or sit would be a bit excessive. A free action 'feels' to me to be more accurate.
I should also point out that D&D (Next) currently cites that sitting or kneeling is a free action...and while I am not very familiar with that system, they still use a similar Standard Action/Move Action structure for their combat. In this situation the two systems are close enough draw a comparison from.
+1 to both FAQs
Really? This has been on the FAQ docket since 2009 and NO ONE has decided to answer it yet?! The thing is on the freakin' GM's screen! How the hell can you have rules presented in a game that is largely about tactical combat and then NOT EXPLAIN how they freakin work for at least 6 years!?!Funny enough, in all of my game play, I do not recall ever having a player sit or kneel in combat. While it would be nice to have the answers to every situation in the game, it just isn't reasonable.
In my 14 year experience with 3.x/PF the reason no one kneels or sits in combat is because there was no action/benefit for it.
I should also point out that D&D (Next) currently cites that sitting or kneeling is a free action...and while I am not very familiar with that system, they still use a similar Standard Action/Move Action structure for their combat. In this situation the two systems are close enough draw a comparison from.
I would be cautious drawing on 5th Edition. A lot more things are "free", like equipping or even switching weapons and shields, among others. It's a lot less "fiddly" about actions. Simple, fast, easy....but not better.
|
|
I should also point out that D&D (Next) currently cites that sitting or kneeling is a free action...and while I am not very familiar with that system, they still use a similar Standard Action/Move Action structure for their combat. In this situation the two systems are close enough draw a comparison from.I would be cautious drawing on 5th Edition. A lot more things are "free", like equipping or even switching weapons and shields, among others. It's a lot less "fiddly" about actions. Simple, fast, easy....but not better.
As I said, 'In this situation the two systems are close enough to draw a comparison from.'
|
|
The theory I was working under was that it was a move action to drop to a kneel (since it is considered the same action as sitting) but you could do it as part of your move, allowing you to move your movement and drop into the kneel at the end. Haven't worked out whether or not it provokes yet but I'm thinking yes....A popular answer is 'free action to kneel, move action to stand from kneeling, does not provoke'.That is the most reasonable way to handle kneeling and sitting.Hey doc, do you have a link/reference to where it says that sitting is a move action? I am not nay-saying you at all, but if there is a reference, it would be nice to have.
If you think of a move action being around 2 to 3 seconds, taking that amount of time to kneel or sit would be a bit excessive. A free action 'feels' to me to be more accurate.
I should also point out that D&D (Next) currently cites that sitting or kneeling is a free action...and while I am not very familiar with that system, they still use a similar Standard Action/Move Action structure for their combat. In this situation the two systems are close enough draw a comparison from.
There isn't really a reference anywhere for what action it is to sit as far as I know but the most intuitive answer to me is that it's a move action that provokes an AoO. I mean I think about sitting down or standing up from a chair and firing as something a person could do in about 6 seconds but not much else. Also it makes more sense as a move action since you are not just letting gravity take you down into a sitting position but guiding yourself so you don't just land in a chair and send the whole thing falling over. Otherwise we are just looking at going prone.
From their it seems right that kneeling would have the same action economy since it is sharing the same mechanics as sitting (and would be silly to build one as mechanically better than the other based on the action economy cause you'd classify them differently then in buff and no one would use the weak one) and it follows a similar logic wherein you aren't just like dropping to your knees and firing bur taking the knee, centering your shot with your new position, and firing.
Also it keeps it from becoming a superior choice to something like going prone since even though it offers a smaller buff it can be used by archers with bows and theoretically by someone with cover. Keeping it a move helps mitigate players from potentially entering cover, kneeling and full attacking as easily unless they plan it better. It also prevents something like 5ft kneel kiting shenanigans where you could have an archer 5ft, kneel, and full attack ad nausea. With an AoO for standing and being unable to perform it as part of the move you negate the combo and up it's risk at close range while incentivizing its use further afield, which I believe is what people feel like it's supposed to be used for.
I don't understand the logic that you can't drop into a chair but you can drop to the ground. Both leave you in a position that you can still fight, so neither are reckless actions.
I have "plopped" into hundreds of chairs that haven't fallen over. I can't think of one instance where I dropped prone that I have done it faster than I could sit down. Knocked prone, that happens pretty fast!
If I were to tactically stand from a chair, in most cases I would do so with enough force to either start into a sprint or kick the chair out behind me as to keep it out of my way. Either way, I don't see it taking very long. And I absolutely can keep my arms free to defend myself, unlike standing from prone which requires hands or some type of aggressive body movement to due quickly.
I am not really advocating for a certain action economy, but the logic that it takes LONGER and more effort to sit than it does to drop all the way to the ground baffles me.
Nonetheless, we do not kneel.
This has always been my ruling on kneeling:
Treat kneeling or standing from kneeling as taking a 5' step. So you can't 5' step into a kneel, and you can't rise from kneeling and then take a 5' step. Otherwise, it counts as 5' of movement if you already moved or are intending to move after standing.
EDIT: apply sitting to this rule also.
|
|
I don't understand the logic that you can't drop into a chair but you can drop to the ground. Both leave you in a position that you can still fight, so neither are reckless actions.
I have "plopped" into hundreds of chairs that haven't fallen over. I can't think of one instance where I dropped prone that I have done it faster than I could sit down. Knocked prone, that happens pretty fast!
If I were to tactically stand from a chair, in most cases I would do so with enough force to either start into a sprint or kick the chair out behind me as to keep it out of my way. Either way, I don't see it taking very long. And I absolutely can keep my arms free to defend myself, unlike standing from prone which requires hands or some type of aggressive body movement to due quickly.
I am not really advocating for a certain action economy, but the logic that it takes LONGER and more effort to sit than it does to drop all the way to the ground baffles me.
The idea is that it takes longer in a combat situation not necessarily a noncombat one. I've thrown myself into a seat many times as well but I'm willing to bet most if not all of those times for the both of us were not while someone was trying to hack us to pieces with a machete. The increased action cost is again to represent and further enforce the buff. You are dropping into a kneel and shouldering the weapon to give yourself a more stable platform to shoot from, doing so requires that you not just suddenly drop a few inches but doing so, shouldering the weapon, stabilizing yourself, and then following up with the aim and fire. The latter 2 sound like 3 seconds for your standard action and the former sounds like something a professional would do in 3 seconds of time rather than in a span of time that is meant to be too small to measure.
As for the longer logic I would put the dropping prone at it doesn't really take you the person much time since dropping prone is basically an act of gravity and since the target is well earth you don't usually have to worry about missing it. Also from prone you often end up in a more detrimental position in most pathfinder games since your AC and Atk vs. melee attacks takes a beating, you can't fire bows from prone, the AC bonus is only at range (which often gets closed quickly), your movement speed decreases to 5 ft which provokes, and standing provokes an AoO which hits at your prone AC. Meanwhile as far as we know from kneeling your only big loss is -2 to melee. You don't lose AC, hell in RAW as it stands you don't even lose any movement speed to remain prone (which feels off to me). As it stands it might arguably be better in most situations since though the buff is smaller your penalties are also way less harsh.
I don't take issue with the idea that it takes some effort to kneel/sit. I take issue with the list of that effort being applied to kneeling/sitting and then being dismissed because: gravity.
The further I allow gravity to move me, the more effort it requires so that I don't hit the object too hard.
You need to compare apples to apples. If I can "drop prone" without regard for the ground or positioning, I can sit without regard for the seat or positioning.
If I have to take care to sit without damaging myself, I have to take care to "drop prone" without damaging myself.
That is where I see the failure in logic. All parts of the "move" should be applied the same to both.
|
How the hell can you have rules presented in a game that is largely about tactical combat and then NOT EXPLAIN how they freakin work for at least 6 years!?!
1) They don't consider the game largely about tactical combat.
2) Opportunity cost. Something is always more important than answering this question.
3) "What action does kneeling take?" has near zero import on the health of the game or the company as a whole.
By all means continue to request a response. Just be realistic about how important it is.