| 22 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So... This came up pretty recently in my local PFS group. I won't say which side i'm with, but, truth be told, both points of view had pretty decent points. I've browsed a little bit, and it seems there is not an official answer to this, and the few times it's been asked in the forums, there was not a deffinitive conclussion.
So, in my pursue of an answer, i'm asking: "Does a creature provoke an Attack of Oportunity by falling through a square threatened by an enemy?"
To make this simple, I would like to break it down in two different cases, as there might be different answers for each one:
- A) The creature falls on their on will (like someone jumping to the bottom of a pit to engage on an enemy).
- B) The creature is forced to fall (like a caster getting their "fly" dispelled).
I'd also like to make a request: Please, mark this as FAQ, i would REALLY like to see an official rulling on this.
Thank you for your time and for your answers.
It seems i was unclear, i'm not talking about falling "prone", i'm talking about descending movement due to gravity, the kind that usually results in falling damage (even if you use Acrobatics to avoid falling prone). Falling prone does not make you leave a threatened square, therefore it does not provoke. Falling from the air to the ground, however, passes trhough (enters and then leaves) many squares, and any number of those might be threatened, in which case, it is unclear if said movement provokes an AoO.
You are correct about dispelling Fly, i didn't remember that. Maybe i should have used another example, like a flying creature affected by "sleep" or similar effects. Anyway, falling slowly should not make much of a difference about this: You are still entering and leaving squares, therefore it should be the same: either both provoke or both don't, the speed doesn't matter (after all, a dwarf moving 20 ft and an air elemental flying 100 ft both porvoke if they pass through a threatened square, right?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
'falling' into a pit to engage someone is jumping down.
Deliberate movement provokes, forced or involuntary movement doesn't. You need to do something to provoke.
Sometimes a combatant in a melee lets her guard down or takes a reckless action.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
dragonhunterq is correct. Only deliberate movement provokes, or when the rules specifically says it provokes (such as the Greater Bull Rush feat).
voideternal: The rule it there mainly so you can't, for instance, drag a creature past all your martial friends so they can all get a free attack on them, then the next person drags them the other way for a new set of AoO, then the next guy... ect until all AoO are used up.
It stops a LOT more inconsistencies than creating those like Case #2.
Avatar-1: "Provoking an Attack of Opportunity: Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing certain actions within a threatened square."
Falling isn't either one of those since the key word is "action". Involuntary movement isn't an action. At best it's a reaction.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
RAW you need to take an action to provoke. RAI you need to take an action to provoke. I'm not seeing the conflict in which we are to go by.
The intention is writ large throughout the rules. Every single time where you have involuntary or forced movement you do not provoke.
Gotcha!
I've FAQ'd this - there's clearly a RAW and a RAI angle here and it isn't clear which we're meant to be going by.
Not seeing the RAI angle being different. No one wants their characters to get shredded by a bunch of guys as they fall up from a reverse gravity, fall 100' up then immediately fall back down 100' to a whole new set of AoO...
Does anyone actually have a source that says involuntary movement doesn't provoke, or do some just considered it implied because some involuntary movement specifically doesn't provoke?
Does anyone actually have a source that says involuntary movement doesn't provoke, or do some just considered it implied because some involuntary movement specifically doesn't provoke?
"Provoking an Attack of Opportunity: Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing certain actions within a threatened square."
Falling isn't an action, hence it isn't something that can provoke an Attack of Opportunity. It's right in the basic AoO rules in the core book.
"Action Types
An action's type essentially tells you how long the action takes to perform (within the framework of the 6-second combat round) and how movement is treated. There are six types of actions: standard actions, move actions, full-round actions, swift actions, immediate actions, and free actions."
Note actions are things YOU do, not things done to you.
"Table: Actions in Combat"
Actions in Combat
Look at the list of actions in the core book and note that involuntary movement is not on that list.
Beyond, the reason for AoAs is generally (always?) because your triggering action interferes with your ability to be doing the background dodging assumed to be going on that limits your opponent to only the attacks earned by his BAB. If you're falling or being (non-Greater) bull rushed you can still twist away from or block incoming attacks as usual while moving.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Only if the Paladin did something really, really bad. Like not saving the goblin babies.
Does anyone actually have a source that says involuntary movement doesn't provoke, or do some just considered it implied because some involuntary movement specifically doesn't provoke?
There would be no point in Greater Bull Rush if involuntary movement provoked. Also, I've specifically seen game developers state this here on the forums. If I can find the source, I will post it.
This is what I've been able to find so far: A post of Lead Designer Jason Bulmahn, during the development days of Pathfinder, expressing concern over forced movement provoking attacks of opportunity.
Does anyone actually have a source that says involuntary movement doesn't provoke, or do some just considered it implied because some involuntary movement specifically doesn't provoke?There would be no point in Greater Bull Rush if involuntary movement provoked.
You're ignoring the fact that regular Bull Rush specifically states that it doesn't provoke, so that's why Greater has to say it does. So, reversing your argument, if involuntary movement doesn't provoke, why does regular Bull Rush have to specifically say that it doesn't?
You're ignoring the fact that regular Bull Rush specifically states that it doesn't provoke, so that's why Greater has to say it does. So, reversing your argument, if involuntary movement doesn't provoke, why does regular Bull Rush have to specifically say that it doesn't?Does anyone actually have a source that says involuntary movement doesn't provoke, or do some just considered it implied because some involuntary movement specifically doesn't provoke?There would be no point in Greater Bull Rush if involuntary movement provoked.
That's not quite what it says.
Under Bull Rush:
"An enemy being moved by a bull rush does not provoke an attack of opportunity because of the movement unless you possess the Greater Bull Rush feat.": Note it's saying calling out that only Greater Bull Rush allows you to gain AoO. It's pointing out an exception to the normal rule that forced movement doesn't provoke.
Drag and repositions maneuvers work the same way. Only with the Greater version of the relevant feat do you cause them to incur AoOs as part of their involuntary movement.
No it is not, it is specifying that a Bull Rush maneuver doesn't provoke, and then stating the exception to said rule, just like it does a couple of lines earlier, where it says that you provoke AoO when performing the maneuver unless you have Improved Bull Rush.You're ignoring the fact that regular Bull Rush specifically states that it doesn't provoke, so that's why Greater has to say it does. So, reversing your argument, if involuntary movement doesn't provoke, why does regular Bull Rush have to specifically say that it doesn't?Does anyone actually have a source that says involuntary movement doesn't provoke, or do some just considered it implied because some involuntary movement specifically doesn't provoke?There would be no point in Greater Bull Rush if involuntary movement provoked.That's not quite what it says.
Under Bull Rush:
"An enemy being moved by a bull rush does not provoke an attack of opportunity because of the movement unless you possess the Greater Bull Rush feat.": Note it's saying calling out that only Greater Bull Rush allows you to gain AoO. It's pointing out an exception to the normal rule that forced movement doesn't provoke.
Drag and repositions maneuvers work the same way. Only with the Greater version of the relevant feat do you cause them to incur AoOs as part of their involuntary movement.
And said maneuvers specifically states so, which doesn't mean ALL involuntary movement works that way (if anything, the fact that they had to write that down implies it's not the general rule, but an exception).
Kind of irrelevant what the combat manoeuvres and related feats say. You are getting distracted.
Provoking an Attack of Opportunity: Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing certain actions within a threatened square.
Involuntary movement is not an action. You have to act to provoke (unless specified otherwise).
"On your turn, bullrush me off the balcony so I don't provoke from all those giants under us."
"On your turn, bullrush me off the balcony so I don't provoke from all those giants under us."
So someone wastes their entire turn so someone else takes free falling damage but avoids AoO's? Seems fair. It also doesn't stop any of the giants readied actions and doesn't assure the bull rush roll beats the CMD.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does anyone actually have a source that says involuntary movement doesn't provoke, or do some just considered it implied because some involuntary movement specifically doesn't provoke?"Provoking an Attack of Opportunity: Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing certain actions within a threatened square."
Falling isn't an action, hence it isn't something that can provoke an Attack of Opportunity. It's right in the basic AoO rules in the core book.
"Action Types
An action's type essentially tells you how long the action takes to perform (within the framework of the 6-second combat round) and how movement is treated. There are six types of actions: standard actions, move actions, full-round actions, swift actions, immediate actions, and free actions."
Note actions are things YOU do, not things done to you.
"Table: Actions in Combat"
Actions in CombatLook at the list of actions in the core book and note that involuntary movement is not on that list.
So, your answer is: "No, you don't have a literal source, just inferences."
Also, AoOs are not actions and can provoke, so your premise that only actions can provoke is flawed.
Meh my take...
Deliberate drop? AoO's
Surprised fall? Surprise round.
So, your answer is: "No, you don't have a literal source, just inferences."
You mean other than the printed word in the core rules right? Basic rule, actions provoke. Nothing in the falling rule provides an exception to that RULE. General rule: "Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity"...
Is falling an action? No, so it fails the general rule.
Does it have an exception? No, so the general rule stands.
Also, AoOs are not actions and can provoke, so your premise that only actions can provoke is flawed.
There are exceptions to rules. Finding one doesn't disprove the general rule.
Example: Disarm provokes. Improved disarm doesn't disprove the general rule that disarming provokes, it just gives an exception.
Somewhat surprisingly, I found that the "are you falling intentionally "-argument seems to be backed up by the rules.
If you're hit while flying with wings, you have to make a fly check to avoid "falling" (losing altitude). If you fail that check, you gain 10 ft of free movement, and that movement does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Attacked While Flying: (...) If you are flying using wings and you take damage while flying, you must make a DC 10 Fly check to avoid losing 10 feet of altitude. This descent does not provoke an attack of opportunity and does not count against a creature’s movement.
That makes me wonder... Is there anything stopping a flying creature from voluntarily failing a fly check, plummet to the ground with free movement without provoking AoOs, and then casting Feather Fall when they're 5 feet above the ground?
We play it like this:
Leaving a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity (unless some other condition or effect says otherwise).
Whether walking, flying, awake, asleep or petrified, falling provokes.
We haven't found anything to contradict this, so that's how we play it.
Yes, Reverse Gravity gets deadlier.
That's life. It's a high level spell, it's supposed to hurt.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, I have to understand that, for those whose position is that falling does not provoke, the movement of falling is forced by...gravity?
I rather consider that the willfulness of an act has nothing to do with its consequences. I fell into the burning pit, but I did not want to, can I ignore the fire damage?
If I am falling I will suffer the consequences of falling. Provoking an AoO isn't an intrinsic consequence of falling. What I haven't done is taken an action that lowers my guard, an action that is required by the rules to provoke.
Leaving a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity
Not quite, taking an action to move out of a threatened square provokes, not simply leaving it.
And what is your answer to the dominated person? Just curious.
Did you actually read the spell? "You can control the actions of any humanoid creature."
Now look at AoO: "Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity".
Actions provoke AoO. Dominate can cause you to take an action, while falling isn't an action. So it's pretty much an apple/orange situation.
Eyup. You did technically leave a threatened square.
Threatened Squares
You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you.
If the enemy is not taking an action (one of the "certain actions"), then they do not provoke an attack of opportunity from you.
Falling is not an action a creature takes. Thus, no AoO.
It really is that simple.
That is far from simple.
Not an Action: Some activities are so minor that they are not even considered free actions. They literally don't take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else, such as nocking an arrow as part of an attack with a bow.
So even non actions are a type of action.
its not a matter of what catagory its in. The fact is that he is moving out of a threatened square. That will provoke. The idea that its not an action to move out of a threatened square so it won't provoke is... pretty tenuous to start with as an argument. Why does it matter why he's moving out of the square?
Okay, can you give me any rules support for non-action movement out of a threatened provoking?
As far as I'm reading, the rules say that taking a Move Action provokes.
Movement, in of itself, does not.
Can you give me any rules that the action type or non type matters at all?
Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing certain actions within a threatened square.
Moving
Notice here that moving is entirely separate from any sort of action being performed.
Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes attacks of opportunity from threatening opponents. There are two common methods of avoiding such an attack—the 5-foot step and the withdraw action.
This is moving, as in a physical body going from one place to another. It doesn't specify that it has to be a move action a standard action or any kind of action at all. Movement is movement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You moved out of a square. Did you 5 foot step? No. Did you withdraw? No. Does any rule say that your movement does not provoke? If not you get whacked.
Which of these action types are you claiming falling is?
I'm not claiming its one of your action types. This action or non action thing is rules lawyering nonsense, and asking a leading question to place my answer in a framework that I'm questioning in the firstplace is nonsensical.
There is a good case to be made that there's a trend that involuntary movement tend not to provoke, so falling doesn't provoke, but its far from concrete. The action/non action thing smacks of rules lawyering chicanery.
While I grant that the posed questions are leading, it's with good intentions.
Its not. Its with the intention of tricking someone into accepting your premise, which is questionable.
It's stated in multiple places that actions can provoke attacks of opportunities. Things that are not actions simply don't provoke, unless there's some special rules involved.
To start with there are many unfounded assumptions there. That falling is a non action, that non actions aren't actions, and that non actions don't provoke. You don't have rules for any of that. That the three not an actions we know of don't provoke does not set a rule for all of them.
There's nothing rules lawyery about it. AoOs are generated by creatures performing activities that distract them from defending themselves. If you're not performing an activity, your defenses are not distracted.
You just said that hurtling through the air towards the ground is not distracting and thats not a rules lawyering statement.
While I grant that being moved by an external force may be distracting in real life, the rules don't consider this to be a situation where you're lowering your guard.
Entirely circular. The rules don't consider it a situation where you're distracted because the rules don't consider this a situation where you're distracted
Only actions you perform do.
Citation
Provoking an Attack of Opportunity: Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing certain actions within a threatened square.
You could easily say that moving out of a threatened square is thus defined as an action, an action that falling can make you take.
You are really just putting a lot of stake in the value of the word action here.
Put it in context once. Right after the AoO section, you have Speed, Saving Throws then Actions In Combat... When the term is defined a short distance away, why would I NOT put "a lot of stake in the value of the word action". The combat section tells me what actions is after all. The AoO section also tells us what provokes AoO. "Two kinds of actions" Nowhere is falling defined as an action. So I'll have to disagree with you're saying "Falling is an action." Falling is a reaction, not an action of the person falling.
BigNorseWolf: Falling is never defined as an action. As such, it's not an action of movement. As far as "You could easily say that moving out of a threatened square is thus defined as an action", you can't under the rules as they are in the combat section. Falling isn't an action as actions are things that a creature does out of it's action economy:
"action's type essentially tells you how long the action takes to perform": Note an action is something YOU perform. In the game you don't perform falling, something forces you to fall. Deliberate jumps are an action vs "slipping or falling"
Not an Action: "They literally don't take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else": If falling is a non-action, that means it's "an inherent part of doing something else". Please tell me what action it's a part of?
There is literally no evidence falling provokes...