# Mouser Underfoot Assault

### Rules Questions

So apparently there's been a lot of questions regarding this ability, but no clarification. I wanted to start a specific thread regarding it. I think the primary issues are these:
1. What penalties do you/the opponent take while sharing their squares?
2. What provokes the attack of opportunity for the mouser/what doesn't?

Some relevant rulings:

Core Rule Book wrote:
Hampered Movement: Difficult terrain, obstacles, and poor visibility can hamper movement (see Table: Hampered Movement for details). When movement is hampered, each square moved into usually counts as two squares, effectively reducing the distance that a character can cover in a move.
Core Rule Book wrote:

Squeezing: In some cases, you may have to squeeze into or through an area that isn't as wide as the space you take up. You can squeeze through or into a space that is at least half as wide as your normal space. Each move into or through a narrow space counts as if it were 2 squares, and while squeezed in a narrow space, you take a –4 penalty on attack rolls and a –4 penalty to AC.

...
A creature can squeeze past a creature while moving but it can't end its movement in an occupied square.

Underfoot Assault (Ex): At 1st level, if a foe whose size is larger than the mouser's is adjacent to her and misses her with a melee attack, the mouser can as an immediate action spend 1 panache point to move 5 feet into an area of the attacker's space...

While the mouser is within her foe's space, the foe takes a –4 penalty on all attack rolls and combat maneuver checks not made against the mouser, ...
The mouser can move within her foe's space and leave the foe's space unhindered and without provoking attacks of opportunity, but if the foe attempts to move to a position where the mouser is no longer in its space, the movement provokes an attack of opportunity from the mouser.

I'm going to attempt to give my best answer, but let's look at the pieces here. Some basic definitions:

1. Move into a space: The space you're moving into is the space you are going *to*.
2. Move through a space: The space you're moving through is the space you are *leaving* (if you want additional proof of this, see "Moving through a threatened space").

Given this, I think it's safe to say that you can 5' out of difficult terrain ("each square moved into"), but NOT while squeezing (each move into *or* through). People seem to think you can 5' step out of a space while you are squeezing, and I can't see any way RAW how this could be the case, but I'm open to hearing the argument.

As for underfoot assault, I'd agree the creature *could* 5' step safely, since specific rules (for 5' step) trump generic, however, under normal circumstances (they're not *much* larger than the underfoot assaulter and don't have freedom of movement), they won't be able to take a 5' step.

Now for the second question. Honestly, I have no idea. It's unclear whether the text in Underfoot Assault is meant as an additional penalty (beyond that of squeezing), whether they're both squeezing, and the mention of the penalty is restating RAW, or whether they're both squeezing, and the mention not taking a penalty against the mouser is overriding RAW (normally the +4 attack and -4 AC would cancel out). I think the most probable way of looking at this is this, though, given the mention of the mouser moving "unhindered":

The mouser is not considered squeezing.
The mousers' foe is considered squeezing.
The mousers' foe does not take the squeezing penalty for attacks on the mouser, but follows all other normal squeezing rules.

A mouser occupies his own space within the opponents square and thus is never squeezing.

He is distracting the opponent by pointing his small rapier upwards while between the opponents legs. There are penalties if he ignores the mouser but is not penalized due to squeezing.

A tiny mouser wouldn't squeeze a huge opponent but underfoot assault would still apply.

I don't think squeezing is relevant. You can sometimes get an AoO for a 5-foot step (see FAQ ruling in above thread.) I would just take the ability as written: The mouser occupies the same square as the other guy, and if the other guy tries to leave, the mouser gets an AoO. Also, the other guy takes the -4 penalty against foes other than the mouser.

 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Who said anything about rapiers? I prefer bites and paws with my Mighty Fighting Fox! ;)

Grey_Mage wrote:

A mouser occupies his own space within the opponents square and thus is never squeezing.

He is distracting the opponent by pointing his small rapier upwards while between the opponents legs. There are penalties if he ignores the mouser but is not penalized due to squeezing.

A tiny mouser wouldn't squeeze a huge opponent but underfoot assault would still apply.

Nowhere does it say the enemy doesn't also occupy that space... The enemy is squeezing RAW, assuming the mouser is size Small (which is what the rules were likely written for).

Tiny Mousers are better, though.

 1 person marked this as a favorite.

The enemy is not squeezing. Thats a completely random and arbitrary complication to add to the system. If the mouser added the squeezing condition it would have said it added the squeezinig condition.

BigNorseWolf wrote:
The enemy is not squeezing. Thats a completely random and arbitrary complication to add to the system. If the mouser added the squeezing condition it would have said it added the squeezinig condition.

It's not random/arbitrary, it's the rules for squeezing. When you share a square, you're squeezing.

When you share a square, you're squeezing.

Citation

BigNorseWolf wrote:
The enemy is not squeezing. Thats a completely random and arbitrary complication to add to the system. If the mouser added the squeezing condition it would have said it added the squeezinig condition.

If the movement rules tell you to apply penalties when two creatures share the same space an individual feat doesn't need to repeat them any more than Fleet needs to tell you that you take movement AoOs as applicable for the extra 5' of movement.

I posted the rules for squeezing above, relevant pieces:
"In some cases, you may have to squeeze into or through an area that isn't as wide as the space you take up."
"A creature can squeeze past a creature while moving but it can't end its movement in an occupied square."

The creature is squeezing while moving past a character (occupying the same square). Normally it couldn't finish its move there, but the mouser provides special rules for that.

Atarlost wrote:

If the movement rules tell you to apply penalties when two creatures share the same space an individual feat doesn't need to repeat them any more than Fleet needs to tell you that you take movement AoOs as applicable for the extra 5' of movement.

Please cite the movement rules telling you to apply penalties when two creatures share the same space

The creature is squeezing while moving past a character (occupying the same square). Normally it couldn't finish its move there, but the mouser provides special rules for that.

A creature squeezing past is NOT occupying the same square. They are occupying different squares: squeezing into them. Not going through

HHHHHHHHHHOO
CHHHHHHHHEOO

O= Ogre
E= elf

If the ogre squeezes past the elf they squeeze themselves into the H squares above the elf (and will cost 20 feet of movement). They never occupy square E.

@BigNorseWolf: Is there any evidence that is true? Because the rules for squeezing indicate "A creature can squeeze past a creature while moving, but it can't end its movement in an occupied square." Which leads one to believe it is occupying the square *while* moving.

Also this:

If we look at the case of 2 medium creatures occupying the same square, they are typically considered squeezing.

@BigNorseWolf: Is there any evidence that is true?

You're asking me to prove a negative. Please keep in mind that the rules would never say "moving through another creature is not squeezing" But there's a lot of evidence that this is the case

1) Lack of evidence. You haven't directly cited anything saying that moving through IS squeezing

Moving Through a Square:

You can move through an unoccupied square without difficulty in most circumstances. Difficult terrain and a number of spell effects might hamper your movement through open spaces.

Friend: You can move through a square occupied by a friendly character, unless you are charging. When you move through a square occupied by a friendly character, that character doesn't provide you with cover.

Opponent: You can't move through a square occupied by an opponent unless the opponent is helpless. You can move through a square occupied by a helpless opponent without penalty. Some creatures, particularly very large ones, may present an obstacle even when helpless. In such cases, each square you move through counts as 2 squares.

Ending Your Movement: You can't end your movement in the same square as another creature unless it is helpless.

Overrun: During your movement, you can attempt to move through a square occupied by an opponent (see Overrun).

Tumbling: A trained character can attempt to use Acrobatics to move through a square occupied by an opponent (see the Acrobatics skill).

Very Small Creature: A Fine, Diminutive, or Tiny creature can move into or through an occupied square. The creature provokes attacks of opportunity when doing so.

Square Occupied by Creature Three Sizes Larger or Smaller: Any creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories larger than itself.

A big creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories smaller than it is. Creatures moving through squares occupied by other creatures provoke attacks of opportunity from those creatures.

Designated Exceptions: Some creatures break the above rules. A creature that completely fills the squares it occupies cannot be moved past, even with the Acrobatics skill or similar special abilities.

There really should be something there about squeezing while doing most of that.

2) Replace the elf in the above example with a 5X5 pillar. The ogre does not have to pass through the solid rock pillar, he can go around it. An elf is even easier to move around

3) You cannot move through an enemies square without acrobatics.

Opponent: You can't move through a square occupied by an opponent unless the opponent is helpless. You can move through a square occupied by a helpless opponent without penalty. Some creatures, particularly very large ones, may present an obstacle even when helpless. In such cases, each square you move through counts as 2 squares.

4) Acrobatics has rules for doing this and it never mentions squeezing

5) A rider sharing space with a mount does not cause squeezing

Because the rules for squeezing indicate "A creature can squeeze past a creature while moving, but it can't end its movement in an occupied square." Which leads one to believe it is occupying the square *while* moving.

Or that the ogre can suck his belly in for a few seconds but can't stay there.

When a Large creature (which normally takes up 4 squares) squeezes into a space that's 1 square wide, the creature's miniature figure occupies 2 squares, centered on the line between the 2 squares. For a bigger creature, center the creature likewise in the area it squeezes into.

Also this:

Thats.. something a brand new dm did and they messed up a few things there.

Sorry, so there's two pieces here. When moving *past* an opponent, you're correct, that you aren't actually occupying their square, you're squeezing to the side/above/below them.

However, you also squeeze when you occupy a space that's not big enough to contain you. In the mouser's space, they're occupying the square that you're also occupying, and I'd argue the space is no longer big enough to contain you, hence squeezing penalties.

I'd say that I do generally think that the rules for squeezing are extremely unclear, but we've *always* played that when two creatures occupy the same square, they're squeezing (minus size stuff going on).

However, you also squeeze when you occupy a space that's not big enough to contain you. In the mouser's space, they're occupying the square that you're also occupying, and I'd argue the space is no longer big enough to contain you, hence squeezing penalties.

The space is big enough to contain the mouser and the other creature.They can both end their turn there.

Quote:
I'd say that I do generally think that the rules for squeezing are extremely unclear, but we've *always* played that when two creatures occupy the same square, they're squeezing (minus size stuff going on).

Thats the problem with house rules, you change one thing in the system it tends to ripple a little bit and have unintended consequences. You normally cannot share spaces, so there are no rules for squeezing while sharing spaces.

We've actually had it come up a lot with someone who is helpless/unconscious and then gets healed.

I disagree that the space is big enough to contain both creatures, but that's a separate matter, and I'd agree, it throws a lot of things off, namely moving through allies would then cost double movement, which is not the way most people play.

However, you're agreeing that the enemy and the mouser occupy the same square, just that neither is squeezing? If that's the case:
"Moving through a square: You can't move through a square occupied by an opponent."

According to that, the enemy can't actually *leave* the space occupied by the mouser (it would be moving through that space).

but that's a separate matter, and I'd agree, it throws a lot of things off, namely moving through allies would then cost double movement, which is not the way most people play.

With good reason, because its not a rule.

Quote:

However, you're agreeing that the enemy and the mouser occupy the same square, just that neither is squeezing? If that's the case:

"Moving through a square: You can't move through a square occupied by an opponent."

They're not moving through they're moving out of. Also the mouser ability specifically allows it.

You've got a house rule mixed up in there, no other way about it.

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Thats the problem with house rules, you change one thing in the system it tends to ripple a little bit and have unintended consequences. You normally cannot share spaces, so there are no rules for squeezing while sharing spaces.

When the house rules are made by 5 star PFS GMs, I feel like they may be a bit more than house rules. They're actually an interpretation of RAW that disagrees with yours, but isn't invalid.

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Thats the problem with house rules, you change one thing in the system it tends to ripple a little bit and have unintended consequences. You normally cannot share spaces, so there are no rules for squeezing while sharing spaces.
When the house rules are made by 5 star PFS GMs, I feel like they may be a bit more than house rules. They're actually an interpretation of RAW that disagrees with yours, but isn't invalid.

What raw are you interpreting to get there?

And believe me I know what the the qualifications are to dm in PFS. They'll let ANYONE in.... :)

BigNorseWolf wrote:

They're not moving through they're moving out of. Also the mouser ability specifically allows it.

You've got a house rule mixed up in there, no other way about it.

I think you've got your definition of "moving through" mixed up. The space you're moving through is the space you're leaving, not the space you're entering. It's the language almost all of the Attack of Opportunity vs Movement is built around.

BigNorseWolf wrote:

They're not moving through they're moving out of. Also the mouser ability specifically allows it.

You've got a house rule mixed up in there, no other way about it.

I think you've got your definition of "moving through" mixed up. The space you're moving through is the space you're leaving, not the space you're entering. It's the language almost all of the Attack of Opportunity vs Movement is built around.

Then the specific rules for the mouser overrule the general rules for how a creature moves with an enemy. None of those rules say, hint, or even imply that there's squeezing going on.

Re: Squeezing

So I think you have me converted. I do think this is a gray area, as I think you could legitimately argue that if you're trying to squeeze into an area with a creature, that area isn't as wide as the space you take up. Still, I agree that that interpretation seems incorrect given current rules for moving through an allies space. I'll definitely be changing the way this is done at my tables, as well as mentioning it to some other GMs if I see it come up.

Do note, though, that makes the language "A creature can squeeze past a creature while moving but it can't end its movement in an occupied square." completely unnecessary/nonsensical in the squeezing rules, as by these rules, you never were in an occupied square. RAW, something doesn't make sense, and I'd agree it's the last line of the squeezing description, and not many other rules.

Re: Mouser

"but if the foe attempts to move to a position where the mouser is no longer in its space..."
"a foe may move to a position where the mouser is no longer in its space, but if they do..."

There's actually currently no wording indicating that that movement is legal, just what happens if it occurs. I like this interpretation, as it adds additional clarification around 5' step, which would normally be disallowed, but is now permissible, but because of a more specific rule, also provokes (in other words, there's no arguing which rule is more specific anymore...).

 1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Thats the problem with house rules, you change one thing in the system it tends to ripple a little bit and have unintended consequences. You normally cannot share spaces, so there are no rules for squeezing while sharing spaces.
When the house rules are made by 5 star PFS GMs, I feel like they may be a bit more than house rules. They're actually an interpretation of RAW that disagrees with yours, but isn't invalid.

Star ratings are a measure of quantity, not rules knowledge.

Do note, though, that makes the language "A creature can squeeze past a creature while moving but it can't end its movement in an occupied square." completely unnecessary/nonsensical in the squeezing rules, as by these rules, you never were in an occupied square. RAW, something doesn't make sense, and I'd agree it's the last line of the squeezing description, and not many other rules.

It means that you can't KEEP occupying half your space because there's a creature there: the ogre can suck in his belly, but it flops back out and becomes an illegal space when he finishes moving. Without that rule the ogre would be able to squeeze into a 1 by 2 rectangle pretty much any time they wanted, which isn't the plan.

"but if the foe attempts to move to a position where the mouser is no longer in its space..."
"a foe may move to a position where the mouser is no longer in its space, but if they do..."

Yes. Because there's no restriction the mouser places on their movement. The alternative you're suggesting is

"The foe can't move
"If the foe moves

Which is pretty much a contradiction, as opposed to something that can be interpreted.

Quote:
There's actually currently no wording indicating that that movement is legal, just what happens if it occurs.

One strongly implies if not outright says the other. There would be no need to mention what happens in the event of an impossibility.

Quote:
I like this interpretation, as it adds additional clarification around 5' step, which would normally be disallowed, but is now permissible, but because of a more specific rule, also provokes (in other words, there's no arguing which rule is more specific anymore...)

Correct! If you look in the other thread you'll see that i'm a strong s supporter of the idea that a 5 foot step out of a mousers space provokes, because the other option is that the author didn't know that tiny creatures already threatened their space and traded a swashbucklers best trick: parry and riposte , for a can of magic beans.

BigNorseWolf wrote:
It means that you can't KEEP occupying half your space because there's a creature there: the ogre can suck in his belly, but it flops back out and becomes an illegal space when he finishes moving. Without that rule the ogre would be able to squeeze into a 1 by 2 rectangle pretty much any time they wanted, which isn't the plan.

So this is the only bit that I don't agree with. I don't see anything indicating you can't squeeze through a space over multiple turns, or anything indicating you *stop* squeezing at the end of a turn.

Even if this was the case, particulary with creatures, the the text should read "a creature can squeeze by a creature while moving, but may not end its turn *while squeezing with a creature*"

The current text "in an occupied space" has no bearing. It's squeezing into an unoccupied space to get by the creature. And actually, I *do* think an Ogre can squeeze into a 1x2 space all the time (with the appropriate penalties...).

1.
"squeezing past" is not synonymous with "sharing a space"

Although this might make sense, logically, it's not equivalent in game terms. Further, from a purely RAI standpoint, I feel that if squeezing was relevant to this power then it would have been specifically mentioned.

---

2.
Any attempt to move to an unshared square provokes, including a 5' step. I would not consider a teleportation effect to be movement for the purposes of this ability (or most others), but you may see table variation.

---

Imho, the creature who is being subjected to Underfoot Assault may move as normal while at least one square is being shared, but once they "separate" from the Mouser, they are again subject to normal movement rules.

Also note, that such movement may provoke even if the creature does not "separate" from the mouser, but if the creature later does "separate" they will not provoke a second time. (this is a reversal of my previous opinion due to the tiny creature FAQ linked earlier).

Byakko wrote:

1. "squeezing past" is not synonymous with "sharing a space"

Although this might make sense, logically, it's not equivalent in game terms. Further, from a purely RAI standpoint, I feel that if squeezing was relevant to this power then it would have been specifically mentioned.

I realize this. The question becomes that you are technically squeezing any time you are in an area not big enough to fit your space. If there's already a creature in your area, is that area no longer big enough to fit you space?

As I said before, I think the answer to this, given other rules, is "no", but at the same time, I don't think it's clear RAW.

I realize this. The question becomes that you are technically squeezing any time you are in an area not big enough to fit your space. If there's already a creature in your area, is that area no longer big enough to fit you space?

the answer is not necessarily and definitely not here. A rider can share their mounts space. A tiny creature can share your space. I think the rules are a little unclear about whether creatures with 3+ size differences can share space.

The mouser has a special ability to share someone's space. That by definition means that they do fit in the square.

Another consideration is that it would make the ability way too powerful: you'd have a -4 from having themouser in your square, another -4 for squeezing, AND a -4 to your AC from squeezing against the rest of the party.

Quote:
As I said before, I think the answer to this, given other rules, is "no", but at the same time, I don't think it's clear RAW.

You're making your own definition of squeezing and then making weird leaps of logic from there. Neither one of those are good rules interpretations on their own and together they're really wonky. That does not mean that there's raw ambiguity or a blanket rule.

I'm really not... I'm quoting squeezing. Like, literally quoting it:
"In some cases, you may have to squeeze into or through an area that isn't as wide as the space you take up."

This is obvious in the case of squares that are partially occupied by a solid structure such as a wall. Do you agree a medium character has to squeeze into a square that's half-occupied by a wall (thereby occupying only half that square)? If so, is it any stretch to read the rules in a similar manner for two creatures occupying the same square?

Listen, please stop the accusations of "making up rules". Rules in Pathfinder can be ambiguous. It doesn't mean your wrong, it doesn't mean someone who reads it the other way is wrong...

I've already said that most of the other rules seem to point to this not being the case, but squeezing itself doesn't make this interpretation impossible, it's just putting it in the context of the remaining rules that makes it unlikely.

A creature can squeeze (with squeezing penalties) into an area as small as the size of a creature one size category smaller.

If a smaller creature is sharing space with a larger the larger does not have its full space to occupy because some of that space is taken by the smaller creature. At least the larger and possibly both creatures must be squeezing, just as a giant would have to squeeze when passing a statue of a halfling in a 10' wide corridor.

There should be a special exception for riding, but there don't seem to be any rules for riding in the third printing CRB, just actions that can be taken while riding. Language relating to space sharing when mounted isn't under the ride skill, in the additional rules chapter, or in the combat chapter.

Atarlost wrote:

A creature can squeeze (with squeezing penalties) into an area as small as the size of a creature one size category smaller.

If a smaller creature is sharing space with a larger the larger does not have its full space to occupy because some of that space is taken by the smaller creature. At least the larger and possibly both creatures must be squeezing, just as a giant would have to squeeze when passing a statue of a halfling in a 10' wide corridor.

There should be a special exception for riding, but there don't seem to be any rules for riding in the third printing CRB, just actions that can be taken while riding. Language relating to space sharing when mounted isn't under the ride skill, in the additional rules chapter, or in the combat chapter.

A horse (not a pony) is a Large creature and thus takes up a space 10 feet (2 squares) across. For simplicity, assume that you share your mount's space during combat.

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Atarlost wrote:

A creature can squeeze (with squeezing penalties) into an area as small as the size of a creature one size category smaller.

If a smaller creature is sharing space with a larger the larger does not have its full space to occupy because some of that space is taken by the smaller creature. At least the larger and possibly both creatures must be squeezing, just as a giant would have to squeeze when passing a statue of a halfling in a 10' wide corridor.

There should be a special exception for riding, but there don't seem to be any rules for riding in the third printing CRB, just actions that can be taken while riding. Language relating to space sharing when mounted isn't under the ride skill, in the additional rules chapter, or in the combat chapter.

A horse (not a pony) is a Large creature and thus takes up a space 10 feet (2 squares) across. For simplicity, assume that you share your mount's space during combat.

There are FAQs that say that, and it may be in the 4th printing, but in 3rd it's just as reasonable to assume the rider occupies a space above the mount. The high ground bonus even suggests as much.

the mouser provides a specific change to the rules that allows a mouser to occupy the space of another creature, provided it is larger. This is all that part of the rule does. You may occupy its space, since penalties or other conditions are not mentioned there are none, for either creature. Why is this rule necessary? You can't move through an enemies space unless you are very small or there's a difference of 3 size categories ( Acrobatics provides an exception to this rule). Only very small creatures can move into and occupy another creatures space - they have a reach of 0 and must occupy another creatures space to attack, conveniently 4 of such creatures can occupy the same square, so they can always attack each other. Squeezing does not apply (if it did then it would seem these creatures impose the squeezing penalties on any creature they attack that is larger than tiny). Tiny creatures have a rule that exempts them from the normal, as does the mouser.

The mousers presence does not affect the larger creatures movement in any way. It ignores the mouser effectively for considerations of movement. Why? There's no mention of any such effect in the ability. If it moves away from the mouser he gets an AOO.

The presence of the mouser does impose a -4 penalties on the larger target in much the same as as many conditions and feats do. It applies under a specific set of circumstances - attacks direct at other creatures, almost like a reverse aid another.

At no time is there a mention of squeezing or changes to the large creatures movement. Squeezing is a non issue in the same way is a non issue for very small creatures. The mouser is using a ability to impose a penalty on a foe.

That's my take anyway.

 Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

BigNorseWolf wrote:
When you share a square, you're squeezing.
Citation

I've never seen a citation that you could share a square, so there won't be a citation that sharing is squeezing.

We both could be proven wrong if he turns up a method of sharing a square that labels it as squeezing.