| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is the absolute mentality of many people on this forum. They see a rule interpretation as one way and only one way. When in reality they have just made a choice as to which they think is correct.
Diego points out you target a creature, not a square. True, and ridiculous all in one.
If I target a creature, and the creature moves but I don't change my targeting, I can't hit the creature. So, to hit a creature with a bow, that has moved due to a triggered readied action, the attacker MUST be allowed to change his targeting. Otherwise the best he could do is hit where the target was.
But wait, why couldn't the same attacker just move another 5' (assuming movement available) and finish the attack? Clearly the readied action happens BEFORE the attack, as stated in the CRB. If it happens before the attack, then there is no reason why the movement has to stop.
But to some people, that's just crazy! According to them, you have got to be off your rocker to even imagine such a scene. How dare you! Maybe one day you will get it. On like your fifth try.
But seriously, as written, both ways are legitimate interpretations of a turn-based system that tries to keep a "live action" feel. And until the Devs actually rule on how interrupts really work in the game, this question will arise.
|
Diego, using your own example:
If the kobold DD 400 Feet away when the arrow leaves the bow, would you allow the arrow hit the kobold?
the answer to that question is the same if the kobold moves 5 Feet or 400 Feet.
Hope you see the problem now.
I have nothing else to say.
As already said the readied action happen before the archer fire his bow. He can still see his target? He make his free perception check?
If the reply is yes for both things, yes, he can still fire at the target. If it is no for one of them he can't fire.And if you think that a target moving 5' or 400' is the same thing, you should go outside and see how the world work.
Is it a rule that the dancing kobold can attack, five foot step, and thus deny the fighter the rest of the round? No.
I am in the camp that yes, if I Ready to Attack and 5' step, you move up to me, I attack and 5' away out of your reach you cannot change your action afterwards.
I feel that way, because I feel that it IS a rule.
When I read, "If the triggered action is part of another character's activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action," that reads to me that your opponent MUST continue the action he was taking that your interrupted.
Reading your (and others') arguments, I can see how you have arrived at a different reading of this text. As James often says, there is no one singular RAW. I still don't agree, but I can see where you're coming from.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Reading your (and others') arguments, I can see how you have arrived at a different reading of this text. As James often says, there is no one singular RAW. I still don't agree, but I can see where you're coming from.
It is NOT a rule. It is an interpretation of a rule. On all fronts its a bad one. RAW he is clearly NOT capable of swinging at you anymore, you're not there, he continues his actionS .. ie his move and standard. RAI it messes with the game bigtime.
Which drops it into the other part. What on earth does the dancing kobold add to the game? Why add an infuriating layer of annoyance into the game? What does it add? The last thing thegame needs is something that gives MORE reason to have a martial or a spellcaster. Don't picture an annoying kobold: a wizard can just 5 foot step out of the barbarians swing and then fireball the party.
It is NOT a rule. It is an interpretation of a rule. On all fronts its a bad one. RAW he is clearly NOT capable of swinging at you anymore, you're not there, he continues his actionS .. ie his move and standard. RAI it messes with the game bigtime.
And YOUR reading is ALSO an interpretation of the rule.
The rule is the exact words on the page. For you to use it in the game, you have to decide what those words MEAN.
And your Doomsaying just doesn't really play out. You're worried about the wizard doing this...? Why is the wizard standing there instead of flying out of the barbarian's reach? Why play initiative games when he could have just fireballed the party on his own initiative?
This does nothing to widen martial/caster disparity considering the wizard already had better options.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It all comes back to the trip lock.
Interrupt is meant as "go before" not "Stop opponent". That is why the trip lock does not work. When tripping a prone character that is standing up as an AoO, there is no benefit because the prone character just gets up after the trip attempt. The prone character was not stopped.
Imagine this:
Player 1 Readied action, "I attack if someone attacks me."
Player 2 action "I move up to and attack player 1"
Readied action happens and Player 1 5' steps BEFORE triggering action.
Player 2 continues his action. His action was to move up to and attack. He MUST (strict reading, not mine) continue moving up and attack. So he continues moving up 5 more feet and attacks.
The interrupt (read as: change order of actions) happens before the attack. Therefore Player 2 never finished his move action and can complete it.
This all fits within the strict reading of the Readied Actions.
|
I'll throw my hat into this ring with the readied action and 5' step is legit group. It adds another level to battlefield tactics that would be frankly welcome by me in my games. Mainly because we are forgetting that most combats are not one on one. You want to ready against my barbarian vital strike attack and step away? Cool. Now feel the wrath of my buddy's paladin smite before your next possible readied action.
Also, want to negate the tactic? There's always Spring Attack. YMMV.
|
|
What this tactic add to the game:
- make way more interesting the few (one?) weapons that can alter their reach as a free action
- lunge become more interesting (it is no action activating it)
- the archetypes that can add reach become more interesting.
The "wizard move 5' and fireball" argument has no sense. Why he is not using it at range? What if he guess wrong and waste his action reading a counter to something that is not done?
The majority of the spellcaster are ranged attackers, if someone get within 5' of them they are in deep trouble.
you can't ready an action to "cast a spell", you must specify what spell you are casting. If for some reason the spell isn't appropriate the spellcaster waste his action, don't move away and end adjacent to a melee enemy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Trying to convince Diego that this shouldn't work is a lost cause. Both sides are pretty entrenched. For me the purpose of the debate is the undecideds that come to these threads to resolve table issues. It needs to be made clear that this is a contended issue, and players can't just bring it to the table and say "well the forums back me up." We have been over this in a 500 post thread not six months ago that has already been linked. The text can be read both ways because the readied action going before triggering action creates a paradox. Something cannot logically be triggered by something else and yet go before it. So you have to resolve that on your table how you feel it should go.
Our group discussed this after the last thread and came firmly on the side that if someone's readied action means that another creature can't target them, then they can finish that action in a reasonable way. If the enemy steps away and fighter still has movement, then he can continue to move to try and reach the target. Anything else is odd. If the Kobald flees their full movement to try and get out of the fighters charge range, fair enough. But just stepping 5ft back is nonsense. If the wizard dimension doors away before the fighter can hit him, then the fighter can hit the adjacent cleric instead.
This for us is the least-worst interpretation and the one least likely to be abused. There are feat and class abilities that let a person step back as an immediate action when attacked and to my knowledge don't let you avoid the attack entirely. A five foot step is not a 'dodge' it is supposed to represent the general tide of battle and the small shuffling of steps and positioning over the course of a round - that is why you don't get it if you move.
Diego, I maintain that the 5' step Kobald is ridiculous not 'interesting'. If the Kobald is close enough to attack the fighter, then the fighter should be able to hit the Kobald - under you "tactic" they can't. Both are ready to swing their sword but one can and one can't. Can you come up with any logical reason this should be possible?
You say these are tactical choices and that attacking a readied creature is playing dumb. However, there is no 'in game' sign that shows a creature has readied an action. If yours is the only Kobald that can be reached, or if the attacker has animal or low intelligence (about a third of the creatures in the game), then it would be silly for the attacker to do anything other than attack.There is no 'cost' to a readied action if you can reasonable predict what an opponent will do.
Barbarian: "Hey, I haven't seen that Kobald attack anyone in the last six seconds, I'd better sheath my sword, draw my bow and shoot him with an arrow, just in case he plans on stepping away from me when I charge - oh wait I can't do all that in one round - I'd better advance slowly, just in case and attack him later"
|
In regards of accuracy, 400 feet is the same as 5 feet if you are not throwing trebuchet boulders.
This exemple goes to show that you can't ready any action you want, or at least, any trigger you want.
And as I said, and others have said, rules wise, you are correct, but RAI? I do not think so.
Just consider this:
Would you allow any possible trigger to fly out?
If don't? Which terms would make you decide one way or the other?I have no more arguments to convince you why I think the statement that the kobold gets his attack and auto-dodges the incoming attack is not valid.
\
It's in the rules that, yes, he does. Because his attack and movement happens before the incoming attack. That's a fact.
Rules:
May you spend a standard action to declare that you attack the first enemy to attack you?
Clearly yes.
May you take a 5-foot step before,during or after this action?
Clearly yes.
Does this action occur before the triggering action?
Clearly yes.
Does this invalidate a 5-foot reach attack?
Clearly yes.
------------
There is some ambiguity to how exact your trigger and response must be. As well as to how targeting works.
Now, you don't have to like it. You can change it at your tables. But the rule is the rule.
Please don't argue that the rule doesn't exist.
Here are some honest approaches to the issue...
A) Asking Paizo to change the rule
B) Ask other people to ignore the rule
C) Complain about the rule until you are satisfied
But not...
D) Say the rule doesn't exist when it clearly does, in very plain english.
Yes, it is weird that someone can attack and then move with no repercussions... but you can do that on your turn. And there is one, though maybe minor, repercussion. Your initiative changes to just before the triggering characters. Call it a quirk of being a turn based game.
Remember, readying an action is tantamount to taking your turn, in a limited fashion, at a time that you do not select except through a predetermined trigger and response action.
The character is paying for a 'maybe' action. This is not very powerful.
I would suggest to everyone on this forum to try combat with this rule in play from all sides an see exactly how meaningful it is.
That means PCs and NPCs.
Who would take the action?
What tactics does it make available? What tactics does it invalidate?
Does it make the battle scene more fluid and use more floor space?
Is giving up full attacks worth running away step by step?
What if the enemy has a reach weapon or natural reach?
What if two people who are fighting, every turn ready an action against an attack? Do they both feel silly afterwards?
I bet you'll find it is not world breaking and has the potential to make the game more interesting.
Especially considering 1 vs 1 happens so very rarely. And that is where it would be most effective.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lorewalker, the 5' step to avoid an attack is an interpretation of a number of rules. These rules do not specify what happens when the fighter still has movement left. Neither does it specifically say the fighter can't take other actions. It says "Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action." The FAQ specifies paralysation as preventing further action.
Them rules create a paradox where the readying action and triggering action CANNOT happen in the way you describe.
As has been stated - this area of the rules needs common sense judgement to apply. Feel free to explain how the Kobald can attack the fighter and yet the fighter can't hit the Kobald.
What happens when I ready a bow attack or magic missile when the guard opens the window? Does it happen before the triggering action? Common sense solves the problem.
Perhaps you should be a bit less definitive when discussing something that clearly is not cut and dried. Perhaps assume that it is a problem for some people, rather than patronise us by saying what we are discussing doesn't really matter. My PCs would be as peeved if I used this on them as i would be if a PC used this.
|
|
... cut some stuff...The text can be read both ways because the readied action going before triggering action creates a paradox. Something cannot logically be triggered by something else and yet go before it. So you have to resolve that on your table how you feel it should go.
The prepared action must come first. That is literally how it works. It is why you can't trip someone standing up, it is why you can interrupt spell casting. AOOs work the same way. That is why you can kill someone with an AOO before their attack hits you.
Or do you disagree with that too?Our group discussed this after the last thread and came firmly on the side that if someone's readied action means that another creature can't target them, then they can finish that action in a reasonable way. If the enemy steps away and fighter still has movement, then he can continue to move to try and reach the target. Anything else is odd. If the Kobald flees their full movement to try and get out of the fighters charge range, fair enough. But just stepping 5ft back is nonsense. If the wizard dimension doors away before the fighter can hit him, then the fighter can hit the adjacent cleric instead.
You could do that on your turn. Why not on a readied action? A readied action is the intention to take your turn just before a triggering event.
But, changing how the rule works for your group is a good thing if it makes the game more fun for your group. Congrats on finding the fun!...cut some more stuff...
If the Kobald is close enough to attack the fighter, then the fighter should be able to hit the Kobald - under you "tactic" they can't. Both are ready to swing their sword but one can and one can't. Can you come up with any logical reason this should be possible?
Once again, this already happens in other areas of the game. Since, this is a turn based game. Strike and run tactics are a real life tactic... so that is a logical reason?
But the other one is that I can literally attack someone in game and then run away before they can do anything to me already.You say these are tactical choices and that attacking a readied creature is playing dumb. However, there is no 'in game' sign that shows a creature has readied an action. If yours is the only Kobald that can be reached, or if the attacker has animal or low intelligence (about a third of the creatures in the game), then it would be silly for the attacker to do anything other than attack.There is no 'cost' to a readied action if you can reasonable predict what an opponent will do.
Barbarian: "Hey, I haven't seen that Kobald attack anyone in the last six seconds, I'd better sheath my sword, draw my bow and shoot him with an arrow, just in case he plans on stepping away from me when I charge - oh wait I can't do all that in one round - I'd better advance slowly, just in case and attack him later"
First, saying there is no in game way to see a creature is readied is... specious at best. Much like most of the game, appearance is up to the GM.
Have you ever watched baseball? Ever see a baserunner lead off? You can tell they are preparing to run. Just as a barbarian with a sword raised above there heads looks like they are going to attack someone.Purely mental actions may have little tells(which is a good use of sense motive or perception) but physical ones could have large tells.
Why not use them?
|
|
Lorewalker, the 5' step to avoid an attack is an interpretation of a number of rules. These rules do not specify what happens when the fighter still has movement left. Neither does it specifically say the fighter can't take other actions. It says "Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action." The FAQ specifies paralysation as preventing further action.
Them rules create a paradox where the readying action and triggering action CANNOT happen in the way you describe.
As has been stated - this area of the rules needs common sense judgement to apply. Feel free to explain how the Kobald can attack the fighter and yet the fighter can't hit the Kobald.
What happens when I ready a bow attack or magic missile when the guard opens the window? Does it happen before the triggering action? Common sense solves the problem.
Perhaps you should be a bit less definitive when discussing something that clearly is not cut and dried. Perhaps assume that it is a problem for some people, rather than patronise us by saying what we are discussing doesn't really matter. My PCs would be as peeved if I used this on them as i would be if a PC used this.
It is an 'interpretation' of one rule on whether you can take the five foot step. And I dare you to find another 'interpretation' of that that does not violate the english language.
This one."You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don't otherwise move any distance during the round."
And, about whether or not your action happens before the triggering one? How about this...
"The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character's activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action."
Almost as if you read their intended action and then reacted to it as if you were prepared for it... odd that.
It isn't that you magically time travel... it is that you prepared for the event in case it happened. Then watched for the event and stopped it before it happened because you saw it coming.Sort of like if you see someone wind up to throw a baseball at your head... it is not a paradox to dodge it. You saw it coming. You prepared for it. Then you dodged just before it hit you.
There is some ambiguousness, as there is in much of this game, but there is NONE involved with the whether or not response happens before trigger. There is NONE involved with whether or not you can take a 5-foot step. I will speak definitive where there is definitive language. Which there is for that which I spoke definitively about. You don't have to like that this is what the text says... but you offend your breath to rail so hard against that which is certain. Instead, look at what ISN'T certain.
I don't care one tiny bit whether or not you like the ability. What i get peeved at is when someone doesn't like a rule in the game and then complain at people when they say a rule that exists... exists.
You don't have to like it. But you should acknowledge it exists. You can change it. You can have any problem you like with it. But ignoring it doesn't make it go away. Nor does telling other people it doesn't exist. There are better ways to handle what you dislike... like inventing 'better' rules or advocating Paizo to change the rule.
Some things in this game are certain, some things in this game are very clear. 'Logical' or not. Just as I disagree with the rule that nauseated leaves you with only move actions. That leads to... some very funny consequences. But it is STILL a rule. That the game meet some form of 'real world logic' isn't really in the rules.
What is ambiguous(a bit): "can I still move after my attack was invalidated?". Which should be a no. They began their swing, they just haven't taken it yet. But it is open to interpretation.
Or, "Can I change my target?" Again, this should be a no for the same reason as above. But, they certainly can perform any other valid actions they may have left. Same openess to interpretation. If they had pounce, they could certainly target their next attacks against another adjacent foe.
Your earlier statement about the guard and window, though, is not ambiguous. You wrote it to be silly... but it does come out to a logical conclusion. The magic missile does not hit the guard. At the time of casting the window is not open. It is being opened, but the PC fired the missile too soon. (choose poor triggering)
WHAT. The Kobald waiting for the charging barbarian to get with 5ft the attacking and stepping back is not hit and run. It is stand-and-wait. Standing and waiting for the barbarian to reach you is the opposite of hit and run. Lol.
I think you have missed the earlier discussions on this Lorewalker. I am not claiming the Kobald can't step back! People arguing for the 5' step Kobald say that because the attacker has already stated they are attacking they can no longer move any more. This is where the paradox occurs. They argue that you have to swing at an empty square. You seem to recognise is what I am arguing about in your second post - acknowledging that it is ambiguous.
You cannot have it both ways. You were very definitive in saying the action goes before. Either the action goes before and then the fighter can act differently afterwards (my preferred option) or it goes after in which case the Kobald can't negate the fighters attack. I'm not changing any rules, I am interpreting what the phrase "you can continue you actions" means in the readying section and for the record the are many rules being interpreted here, readied actions; five foot steps; targeting enemies; and the games action rules. The text does not read "you interrupt the action" it reads you "interrupt the creature" which is what going before them in the initiative order does.
I understand how AOO work, I have no problem with a person receiving a charge or seeing an opportunity, taking that opportunity and then getting hit back if the opponent still stands. I would have an issue if the attack of opportunity let you make a 5ft step that the attacker couldn't hen respond to. This is essentially what others are suggesting.
You would say that the attacker can't change their target or continue their actions. I say they can. We are both interpreting the rules for readied actions.
|
|
WHAT. The Kobald waiting for the charging barbarian to get with 5ft the attacking and stepping back is not hit and run. It is stand-and-wait. Standing and waiting for the barbarian to reach you is the opposite of hit and run. Lol.
I think you have missed the earlier discussions on this. People arguing for the 5' step Kobald say that because the attacker has already stated they are attacking they can no longer move any more. This is where the paradox occurs. They argue that you have to swing at an empty square.
I'm not changing any rules, I am interpreting what the phrase "you can continue you actions" means in the readying section.
I understand how AOO work, I have no problem with a person receiving a charge or seeing an opportunity, taking that opportunity and then getting hit back if the opponent still stands. I would have an issue if the attack of opportunity let you make a 5ft step that the attacker couldn't hen respond to. This is essentially what others are suggesting.
I suspect we agree on the the key issues Lorewalker, but I'm not sure you fully understand what is being suggested by the 5ft stepping Kobald.
... I'm not going to argue the basics of real world combat with you. So lets leave this to game rules, eh? We are in the rules section of the forum, afterall.
It is NOT a paradox. A paradox requires a contradiction. There is no contradiction here. You aren't seeing into the future. You aren't having an effect before a cause. This represent preparing yourself for a certain kind of action, seeing a current actions lead to a logical conclusion, discerning that the current situation leads to what you were prepared against... and then acting. This is something YOU no doubt do often in your daily life. But again, we are arguing realities, when we should be arguing rules.
The rule is clear. The response happens before the trigger. You can't argue against this and be correct. You can take a five foot step as part of the response. You can't argue against this an be correct.
But, what it exactly means for the one interrupted... that is certainly up to the GM. The rules are not solid here... other than the readied action interrupts the targets actions.
Honestly? It is valid to say 'he was OPENING the window so my magic missile hit him through the partially open window' just as it is valid to say 'he was readying his swing to hit me after stopping movement, but I struck first and retreated'.
It is also valid to say 'He was starting to open the window and I shot an arrow... it hit the closed window' or 'he was readying to swing at me so I struck and fled... and he followed me and killed me'
All of those ARE valid interpretations given the current rules. And what is right at your table at different times... is what is right at your table.
But, I think one thing you are missing here is... there is a third option. See, a triggering event doesn't actually not happen. It begins to happen.
Have you ever played magic the gathering or done any programming?
If so, this should be something you are familiar with.
Example...
Creature A elects to attack creature B.
This gets thrown on the stack to be resolved.
Creature B, having prepared, acts to attack and evade Creature A.
This gets thrown on the stack to be resolved.
Now, resolve in reverse order....
Creature B attacks and evades
Creature A, who had begun there attack now swings at air
See? It isn't that one action happens entirely before another... it is that their action begins and you interrupt it with your own. You can't interrupt an action unless that action is happening. An interruption happens between the begining and the end of something.
It seems odd at first, but this isn't the only place in the rules where resolution doesn't happen immediately after action election.
|
|
stuff....
You would say that the attacker can't change their target or continue their actions. I say they can. We are both interpreting the rules for readied actions.
No, you are saying some concrete rules aren't. Such as one action happens before another.
And THEN we are both agreeing that there is room to interpret what that means. Except you have decided on the 'right way for you' and seem to consider it only 'the right way'.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is really something that needs to be fixed(clarified).
I think we should FAQ the opening post so the devs add it to the other FAQ(with 110+clicks).
You aren't interrupted the action, you are interrupting the creature as I have demonstrated. Nowhere have I seen it written that the readied action interrupts the attack. In fact spells are separately called out as an action that can be interrupted. The need for this encourages me to interpret that other actions aren't. The FAQ specifically says actions that prevent a creature from acting - like Hold Person stop further actions - it doesn't say actions that make things inconvenient do.
This isn't a card game or a computer program. A turn based system works very well until people want to do things at the same time. Then common sense must then be applied. I'm not sure why you find a DM interpreting this with common sense objectionable.
You keep contradicting yourself. On one hand you say one action happens before another and two posts back say that the fighter has already started to swing his sword. It sounds like you have decided a tactic should be available and now are trying to justify it.
I have decided the right way for our table as I said. You then told me I was ignoring concrete rules of the game and said the issue was straight forward. I don't believe it is and your posts on the matter haven't made things any clearer.
|
|
The text does not read "you interrupt the action" it reads you "interrupt the creature" which is what going before them in the initiative order does.
I reread this. And... sorry I'm not understanding. Are you suggesting I prepare to attack someone if they attack me... but my action is invalid because they haven't moved next to me yet, as I taking my turn immediately before there's?
I understand how AOO work, I have no problem with a person receiving a charge or seeing an opportunity, taking that opportunity and then getting hit back if the opponent still stands. I would have an issue if the attack of opportunity let you make a 5ft step that the attacker couldn't hen respond to. This is essentially what others are suggesting.
Want to know something funny?
"You can take a 5-foot step before, during, or after your other actions in the round."
Each round's activity begins with the character with the highest initiative result and then proceeds in order. When a character's turn comes up in the initiative sequence, that character performs his entire round's worth of actions. (For exceptions, see Attacks of Opportunity and Special Initiative Actions.)
Thus, you can take a 5-foot step as part of an AOO.
|
|
You aren't interrupted the action, you are interrupting the creature as I have demonstrated. Nowhere have I seen it written that the readied action interrupts the attack. In fact spells are separately called out as an action that can be interrupted. The need for this encourages me to interpret that other actions aren't. The FAQ specifically says actions that prevent a creature from acting - like Hold Person stop further actions - it doesn't say actions that make things inconvenient do.
This isn't a card game or a computer program. A turn based system works very well until people want to do things at the same time. Then common sense must then be applied. I'm not sure why you find a DM interpreting this with common sense objectionable.
You keep contradicting yourself. On one hand you say one action happens before another and two posts back say that the fighter has already started to swing his sword. It sounds like you have decided a tactic should be available and now are trying to justify it.
I have decided the right way for our table as I said. You then told me I was ignoring concrete rules of the game and said the issue was straight forward. I don't believe it is and your posts on the matter haven't made things any clearer.
Did I not already agree that the END RESULT is ambiguous, and thus left up to the GM? Why are you trying to argue this with me?
I showed VALID ways to judge it. Gave a third to the two very stringent versions you gave. But I'm not saying any of them are the RIGHT way. As, there is no rule that says any are the right way. Other than the GM is final arbiter, he sets what is right for the table.And I did not contradict myself. Responses happen before actions. This is concrete. But what that means... *shrugs* is not concrete. Other than the creature is interrupted, and may continue valid actions afterwards.
Then we have arrived at the same point Lorewalker - the question is ambiguous and subject to interpretation. Which is all I have been saying if you read my earlier posts on the subject.
That five foot+AOO point is interesting. Would you also be allowed five foot as part of an immediate action?
My gut feeling is not, is there any other examples or evidence to support this? Anybody know of a FAQ request?
An AoO does not fall under any action type. It is not even under the "no action/not an action" category.
Also the statement of:
"You can take a 5-foot step before, during, or after other actions in the round." is referring to things that happen on your turn.
This is shown by the following statement.
When a character's turn comes up in the initiative sequence, that character performs his entire round's worth of actions.
An AoO is an act(thing you can do aka action in the common english sense) not an action(game term).
Just so we are clear are you saying the PDT intends for you to take a 5-foot step during an immediate or free action?
|
|
Then we have arrived at the same point Lorewalker - the question is ambiguous and subject to interpretation.
That five foot point is interesting. Would you also be allowed five foot as part of an immediate action?
My gut feeling is not, is there any other examples or evidence to support this? Anybody know of a FAQ request?
I whole-heartedly disagree at any point in which you contradict clear text. But, yes, the end result is very ambiguous.
And, honestly, I don't think it is very fixable. Since readying actions are so... open ended. I don't know how they could write a rule that completely covers it. Maybe just like 6 different examples. '1 melee with movement' '1 ranged with movement' 'door opening' 'one with a bluff check involved' 'an example of sense motive' 'one with charging'
Also...
Is an immediate action an action that you take in a round? And, is it an exception to the rule that you take all your actions during your turn in the round?
Now, remember, the power in this is limited in the fact that you must not move during your regular turn.
I know immediate actions can happen outside of your turn. The swift and immediate actions were not orginally part of the core rules for 3.5, which is where Pathfinder came from.
They never adjusted the verbage after adding in those actions, and Pathfinder copied and pasted it over.
So my question remains, since I am asking about what you think intent is---> Do you think the PDT would say that you can take a 5-foot outside of your turn?
|
|
An AoO does not fall under any action type. It is not even under the "no action/not an action" category.
Also the statement of:
"You can take a 5-foot step before, during, or after other actions in the round." is referring to things that happen on your turn.This is shown by the following statement.
When a character's turn comes up in the initiative sequence, that character performs his entire round's worth of actions.An AoO is an act(thing you can do aka action in the common english sense) not an action(game term).
Just so we are clear are you saying the PDT intends for you to take a 5-foot step during an immediate or free action?
Remember a 5-foot step isn't an action. It is something you can do with other actions, though. Before, during or after any action you take in a round.
Also, you should really read the whole of a sentence. Further on...
(For exceptions, see Attacks of Opportunity and Special Initiative Actions.)
An attack of opportunity is specifically listed in the quote as an action that you can take off your turn, despite the normal rule of all actions must be taken during your turn.
AOO says you get to attack for free. But it doesn't use the word action. This is true. That makes it a YMMV issue... but not one off the table.
Immediate actions though, you can certainly take a 5-foot step with. It meets all the criterion, and 5-foot step can be taken at any time during the round before after or during an action.
And if you try to argue that AOOs aren't actions and thus you can not take a 5-foot step with it... then you must also accept that 5-foot steps(which are specifically not an action) is not limited by 'actions must be taken during your turn, with exception'.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know immediate actions can happen outside of your turn. The swift and immediate actions were not orginally part of the core rules for 3.5, which is where Pathfinder came from.
They never adjusted the verbage after adding in those actions, and Pathfinder copied and pasted it over.
So my question remains, since I am asking about what you think intent is---> Do you think the PDT would say that you can take a 5-foot outside of your turn?
Why don't you ask them?
I'm only reading rules here and seeing in what ways they fit together. Whether or not is good for a table... well that is for the table.The rule is as the rule is. And I'm not seeing any particular reason why this shouldn't be allowed, as a game breaking issue. Nor any reason why this 'shouldn't be' and, while I can not make the claim that I have read everything ever written on the subject of Pathfinder, I certainly have never read this issue spoken of in the negative from a developer.
Personally, I prefer to not assign intention to other people. I'd rather they give it to me.
I would also prefer to not consider the game designers as ones who can not even understand what they are writing. Especially when the book in question has had 5 erratum.
So just to be clear you have no opinion or idea of how it was intended to work, or are you saying you would just prefer to keep it to yourself?
An AoO does not fall under any action type. It is not even under the "no action/not an action" category.
Also the statement of:
"You can take a 5-foot step before, during, or after other actions in the round." is referring to things that happen on your turn.This is shown by the following statement.
When a character's turn comes up in the initiative sequence, that character performs his entire round's worth of actions.An AoO is an act(thing you can do aka action in the common english sense) not an action(game term).
Just so we are clear are you saying the PDT intends for you to take a 5-foot step during an immediate or free action?
Remember a 5-foot step isn't an action. It is something you can do with other actions, though. Before, during or after any action you take in a round.
Also, you should really read the whole of a sentence. Further on...
(For exceptions, see Attacks of Opportunity and Special Initiative Actions.)An attack of opportunity is specifically listed in the quote as an action that you can take off your turn, despite the normal rule of all actions must be taken during your turn.
AOO says you get to attack for free. But it doesn't use the word action. This is true. That makes it a YMMV issue... but not one off the table.
Immediate actions though, you can certainly take a 5-foot step with. It meets all the criterion, and 5-foot step can be taken at any time during the round before after or during an action.
And if you try to argue that AOOs aren't actions and thus you can not take a 5-foot step with it... then you must also accept that 5-foot steps(which are specifically not an action) is not limited by 'actions must be taken during your turn, with exception'.
No, I don't. What has to be accepted is that the rules were not written as clearly as they could have been so one must learn how to parse the text to get to the correct interpretation.
|
|
So just to be clear you have no opinion or idea of how it was intended to work, or are you saying you would just prefer to keep it to yourself?
I would rather not get this personal, but if you keep pushing it that is where it will land. Your way of handling disagreeing with text, and deciding on other people's feelings is not my way and I would prefer you not push it on to me.
I've never seen that argued in all the time I've played Pathfinder but maybe you can thrash it out in another thread. It sounds pretty crazy to me. But it would be a derailment of this thread.
|
|
I understand how AOO work, I have no problem with a person receiving a charge or seeing an opportunity, taking that opportunity and then getting hit back if the opponent still stands. I would have an issue if the attack of opportunity let you make a 5ft step that the attacker couldn't hen respond to. This is essentially what others are suggesting.Want to know something funny?
"You can take a 5-foot step before, during, or after your other actions in the round."Each round's activity begins with the character with the highest initiative result and then proceeds in order. When a character's turn comes up in the initiative sequence, that character performs his entire round's worth of actions. (For exceptions, see Attacks of Opportunity and Special Initiative Actions.)Thus, you can take a 5-foot step as part of an AOO.
AoO aren't actions.
So just to be clear you have no opinion or idea of how it was intended to work, or are you saying you would just prefer to keep it to yourself?I would rather not get this personal, but if you keep pushing it that is where it will land. Your way of handling disagreeing with text, and deciding on other people's feelings is not my way and I would prefer you not push it on to me.
I did not decide anything about your feelings. I asked a simple question. You need to stop reading more into what I say that what you are actually reading.
Yes I am asking again do you have no opinion or do you wish to keep it to yourself?
Also when we had our first debate you claimed to be familiar with how this place works, but when most people here say how a rule works they are referring to how it is intended to be run.
If you are saying "this is what I think the rules literally mean, but it is not how I would run it" then you should spell that out to avoid confusion. <----Me being helpful, not telling you what to do in case you misread that also.
And YOUR reading is ALSO an interpretation of the rule.
It is NOT a rule. It is an interpretation of a rule. On all fronts its a bad one. RAW he is clearly NOT capable of swinging at you anymore, you're not there, he continues his actionS .. ie his move and standard. RAI it messes with the game bigtime.
Its a better interpretation. This isn't binary. Some interpretations are better than others. The dancing kobold forces the raw pretty heavily into one specific meaning, ignores the more likely meaning that if you knock the other guy unconcious he doesn't get to hit you back in some sort of simultaneous strike, and replaces entire sections of the games hit and miss with readied action shenanigans. The ensuing mechanics that would drop out of that interpretation are never again referenced nowhere else in the game or in any of the thousands of new feats, spells, and special abilities that have come out since.
And your Doomsaying just doesn't really play out.
Because no one does this. Either they don't read the rule that way, or the dm doesn't read the rule that way, or it annoys players and they move on.
The ensuing mechanics that would drop out of that interpretation are never again referenced nowhere else in the game or in any of the thousands of new feats, spells, and special abilities that have come out since.Unfortunately, for your assertion, Pathfinder did release the Step Up feat and a tree of follow-up talents to it.
Which not only works just fine without a dancing kobold interpretation but gets even wonkier with one (as you wind up 5 foot stepping twice to full attack.
Your line of reasoning here is beyond tenuous.
The dancing kobold interpretation opens up HUGE Swaths of game for exploitation, play, and opportunities for feats, magic items, etc. Yet.. it hasn't been. Why?
Because its not the rules that are intended. They would have been utilized if they were.