And as explained, REPEATEDLY, it already specifies movement out of a threatened area. It does not care if the movement is to another threatened square. AOOs could care less. You could move 600ft away from the threatened area and you'd still provoke an AOO. You could do laps around the threatening creature and you still provoke one AOO.
If someone leaves threatened area, they left all the threatened squares. We all know that.
If someone moves from one threatened square to another threatened square, THAT'S moving within a threatened area.
You're arguing that simply performing actions that are classified as move actions to be moving. It isn't. Mobility's use of "move out of or within an threatened area" is about movement from square to square, not using move actions while staying in one square.
You are correct, also a charge specifies it doesn't provoke.
TriOmegaZero found the rule on this I was trying to recall where it was.
The full round action of charge does not, in and of itself, provoke. Movement as part of taking that charge does though.
This is similar to casting a spell defensively does not provoke, but if that spell results in a ranged touch attack, the ranged touch attack itself will still provoke.
Sorry Moorningstaar, but you are simply reading more into the rules then is there in this case. Everyone who has posted stating it does not work like you think it does is a regular poster in the rules forums. That does not mean they are infallible, but the fact they have all agreed on how this works rather than arguing over minutiae (like we usually do) is very telling.
But let me get some clarity on where you stand. You believe that an action that is listed as provoking, and that would involve some kind of movement of the body - be that the arms/hands are moving, the head moving, or the legs are moving, would qualify as movement to trigger the feat, is that correct?
If so, then I'd like to go back to one of my original points: do any of these actions also prevent taking a 5' step during your turn?
You can move 5 feet in any round when you don’t perform any other kind of movement.
I'd like your honest answer to this question. Do these actions that involve 'movement of some part of the body' prevent taking a 5' step? Yes or no?
No what you seem to be having trouble understanding is that there is no difference between moving out of a threatened area and within a threatened area. The game doesn't care or pay attention to this. All it looks at is whether you left an area. You insist on suggesting that this feat in effect says:
"You get a +4 dodge bonus to Armor Class against attacks of opportunity caused when you move out of or out of a threatened area. A condition that makes you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) also makes you lose dodge bonuses."You read both 'out of' and 'within' as the same. Why the two iterations then? Did they stutter? Did Porky Pig write it? Or is it even slightly possible in your mind that they were describing different qualifiers.
And yes those actions listed under move are ALL move actions.
Yes there is a functional difference to moving within and out of a threatened area. I'm just simply using the appropriate term "threatened squares" when I make my argument.
Threatened area consists of threatened squares. When one moves from one threatened square to another, they're moving within a threatened area. Leaving a threatened square, does not necessarily mean leaving a threatened area. If a medium size creature was adjacent to a huge creature with 15 foot reach, leaving one threatened square is not gonna get out of the threatened area.
So Mobility works like this:
You get a +4 dodge bonus to Armor Class against attacks of opportunity caused when you move out of (when you leave all the threatened squares of enemy) or within (when you go from one threatened square to another threatened square) a threatened area. A condition that makes you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) also makes you lose dodge bonuses.
Yes both instances of leaving a threatened are and moving within it provoke. The feat simply mentions both cases. IF it only says moving out of a threatened area, then if one was to simply move from threatened square to threatened square, they'd still provoke but not benefit from Mobility. It would have been better if it was written as leaving a threatened square instead.
|
Ah but is there a difference between taking a move action and movement? Or are these synonyms? And why would it prevent 5 ft steps as they specify that they NEVER provoke?
Yes. A Move Action is a specific game term. It is not always movement.
It would prevent a 5ft Step due to the rule that bbangerter quoted.
You can move 5 feet in any round when you don’t perform any other kind of movement.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm so sorry I read this thread.
I'm going to take my 'Move' move action to move into Golarion now. Right after I use a move action to 'Stand from Prone'.
Ah but is there a difference between taking a move action and movement?
Yes. Their is a huge difference. That is the point everyone is making.
For example, in a round you can:
Swing your sword (standard action, not movement, no provoke)
Sheathe your sword (move action, not movement, provokes)
Take a 5' step (not an action, movement, no provoke)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Guys, just stop feeding the troll. You've all pointed out the rules to him. He's just blatantly hung up on the idea that a move action is movement. It's not, we all know this, but he doesn't or is just drawing this out.
He's insulted people, blatantly ignored rules, and declared others aren't listening to him when he's not listening to others.
Moorningstaar, if you are indeed not a troll. Please see reason and rules where it's been posted. Movement =/= Move action. And it is by SQUARES not areas.
Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing certain actions within a threatened square.
Now, I suggest just letting this thread die. Or pray a mod locks it.
You missed a few iterations of this thread. I linked a table on the combat page that specifies which actions are considered move actions and which of those provoke AOOs.
No, actually I didn't. Don't make an assumption that just because I don't reply to every comment means I'm not following the thread.
There are tables of standard actions, move actions, swift actions, full-round actions, immediate actions, free actions, and non-actions.
Not all move actions require "movement". And not all actions that are not move actions mean that they cannot contain "movement".
Some examples:
Withdraw: Full round action. Prevents AoO only from the first square of movement.
Charge: Full round action. Initiating a charge does not cause an AoO, any movement as part of the charge does though.
Contrast charge with bull rush, standard action
...initiating a bull rush provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.
and regardless any movement you move past enemies as part of your bull rush will also provoke from those enemies.
So the argument that those actions on under "Move Actions" on the table provoke does not mean it is a provocation related to moving (which is the criteria for mobility). Those actions provoke because they are distracting to the character doing them - requiring them to take their attention away from the combat for a moment.
Now, if you want an honest discussion, please answer my question instead of ignoring it:
I'd like your honest answer to this question. Do these actions that involve 'movement of some part of the body' prevent taking a 5' step? Yes or no?
And lets face it, all trolls are active on their forums.
This is a poor way to respond to a counter view point.
|
There's debate about whether or not you can draw a weapon for free as part of a 5-foot step when you have +1 BAB. The answer? Maybe... Though I usually see it allowed.
There is no debate about whether or not you can take a 5-foot step after using a move action to draw a weapon. The answer? Yes, you can take a 5-foot step, because despite taking a move action, you have not moved (changed locations on the map).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really dislike being brought into these kinds of arguments. No one ever seems to know how to use me correctly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm afraid you are incorrect. You can ENTER a threatened area all day and never provoke an AOO. It is only upon LEAVING a threatened area AND taking more than a 5ft step that you provoke. So why reiterate when the rules only look for exiting? They don't care about moving within a threatened area from one square to another. Only exiting.
Threatened AREA and threatened SQUARE isn't the same thing.
I gotta reiterate the point that they're not the same thing constantly because it's not clicking with you.Exiting one threatened square (provokes) AND entering another threatened square (doesn't provoke) EQUALS moving within a threatened area (which consists of threatened squares). So moving within a threatened area provokes because of exiting that first threatened square in the area.
I'm concluding you haven't read the Core Rulebook enough and your rules knowledge is unfortunately from mostly reading d20pfsrd.com (while a great reference resource, not ideal for learning to play the game in a holistic manner). I suspected as much from constant referencing to the Actions in Combat table that we all know about because anyone that's read the Combat chapter knows of it and the obstinate lack of understanding of move action does not equal movement in game terms.
...
As for gaining additional AoOs per turn. There is a Barbarian Rage power and one of the Elf feats from ARG can each grant an additional AoO per turn which should stack with those from Combat reflexes. Might be other options out there.
...
Let's make a list.
You mentioned the Elven Battle Training feat.
You mentioned the Quick Reflexes Rage Power.
There is the Battle Master Hex from the Battle Spirit.
I wonder if there are any others.
|
|
No offense Merriam Webster, but we don't need you here.
Movement is defined in the game. There's a whole section on it. Tactical Movement, the thing you do in combat, is measured in feet per round. Did you move a number of feet during the round? If not, you did not use movement. Waving your arms around as part of casting a spell is not movement as defined in Pathfinder.
Movement
There are three movement scales, as follows:Tactical, for combat, measured in feet (or 5-foot squares) per round.
Local, for exploring an area, measured in feet per minute.
Overland, for getting from place to place, measured in miles per hour or miles per day.
Modes of Movement: While moving at the different movement scales, creatures generally walk, hustle, or run.Walk: A walk represents unhurried but purposeful movement (3 miles per hour for an unencumbered adult human).
Hustle: A hustle is a jog (about 6 miles per hour for an unencumbered human). A character moving his speed twice in a single round, or moving that speed in the same round that he or she performs a standard action or another move action, is hustling when he or she moves.
Run (×3): Moving three times speed is a running pace for a character in heavy armor (about 7 miles per hour for a human in full plate).
Run (×4): Moving four times speed is a running pace for a character in light, medium, or no armor ( about 12 miles per hour for an unencumbered human, or 9 miles per hour for a human in chainmail) See Table: Movement and Distance for details.
|
|
...
As for gaining additional AoOs per turn. There is a Barbarian Rage power and one of the Elf feats from ARG can each grant an additional AoO per turn which should stack with those from Combat reflexes. Might be other options out there.
...Let's make a list.
You mentioned the Elven Battle Training feat.
You mentioned the Quick Reflexes Rage Power.
There is the Battle Master Hex from the Battle Spirit.
I wonder if there are any others.
Lost among all the arguing, I posted about the spell line in the sand
Also, the Kensai Magus gets an additional number of AoOs equal to his INT modifier at 11th level, and the ability explicitly stacks with Combat Reflexes.
It is entirely possible to move within a threatened area and not leave a threatened square. You all assume Medium sized creatures.
Assume for a minute there is a human. He threatens all squares around him. There is also a hostile ogre (a Large size creature). One corner of the ogres space is in the humans upper right threatened square. The ogre, being stupid, moves 5 feet to the left as a move action (not a 5 foot step, so it provokes; or maybe he used his other move action to get up to the human and so couldn't take a 5' step) and now occupies the top middle and top right threatened squares of the human. Said ogre never left the original threatened square (top right), but as he did move within a threatened area, he still provokes.
It is possible to move without actually leaving a threatened square (if Large or larger).
Note that the Actions table says using a Move action to move provokes. It does not say "Only if leaving a threatened square". Using a Move action to move provokes regardless of whether or not you leave a threatened square. This is an important distinction for multi-space creatures that can move without leaving some squares.
@bbangerter. Your not using any move action on that list. You also state actions other than move actions can still be movement. SO how do you tell what is and is not movement? Well its not defined so lets go back to the dictionary:
move·ment
ˈmo͞ovmənt/Submit
noun
1.
an act of changing physical location or position or of having this changed.
"a slight movement of the upper body"
synonyms: motion, move; More
2.
a group of people working together to advance their shared political, social, or artistic ideas.
"the labor movement"
synonyms: political group, party, faction, wing, lobby, camp
"the labor movement"So what I'm finding is that these actions do prevent as per other threads on these forums.
Contextual usage of the word also matters. The context within pathfinder doesn't imply or mean 'slight movement'. The pathfinder context of movement is almost always "from one square to another". And the only reason I don't say always is because there may be a few obscure references where it doesn't that I'm not aware of.
Lastly, all I did was counterpoint your counterpoint. You suggest that because someone is active in forums they should be listened to. All I did was point out a situation in which this logic was false.
You misunderstood. One person making a point in the forums, whether they've been here 2 days or 10 years doesn't matter match. Multiple people making the same point, without any disagreement between them, particularly in these forums, is something you should take notice of.
But in either case, simply dismissing their view point "as trolling" isn't an honest response in a discussion. Are there some trolls on these forums? Probably. Having been around for quite a long time I wouldn't classify any of those who have posted in this thread as trolls. But you may have a different definition of what trolling is than I do. All I see is several people trying to help you come to a correct understanding of the rules related to the questions you asked - to varying degrees of success in doing so in a way that you feel you are or are not being attacked personally.
Moorningstaar, you still have not answered my one specific question. Why is that?
And based on a cursory search of the forums a 5ft step can not be combined with drawing a weapon.
Is the claim that you cannot use a move action to draw a weapon and take a 5' step in the same turn? This is false.
Or is the claim that you cannot take a 5' step, and as a free action as part of movement draw a weapon? This is true.
Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat, or putting it away so that you have a free hand, requires a move action.....If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you may draw a weapon as a free action combined with a regular move.
Given that a 5' step is not a move action (its a non-action). And given a 5' step is not a regular move (its a special kind of movement to avoid AoOs). Then based on the rules for drawing a weapon, you cannot do so as a free action taken with a 5' step.
|
|
Oh also, one of you said that charge provokes as normal for movement. Where did you find that? I have a rules lawyer who got me with that the other day because charge just states it doesn't provoke period. It seemed weird but by the writing I let it go.
Charging can provoke. Definitely. It provokes if you charge past threaten areas and it can also provoke if the creature you are charging has greater reach (like you have a sword and they have a long sprear, you'll provoke when you move out of their threatened area to deliver your melee attack).
But the charge action doesn't inherently provoke, like loading a ranged weapon would. It's the movement that is provoking, not the charge action per say. And it depends where you move.
Okay, so if an action says it provokes, that means it provokes ALWAYS when doing that action (like making ranged attacks in melee combat).
An action that doesn't mention if it provokes may still provoke if performing that action triggers a provoking from something else (like charging through threatened areas).
If the action specifically says it doesn't provoke, that means it NEVER provokes when doing that action (like a 5-foot step).
That said, there are always feats and such which change what provokes, so grain of salt on that "always" and "never".
As an added note, if a creature "readies an action" to attack an enemy when it moves, this will trigger even on movement which doesn't provoke just the same as it would trigger on movement that does provoke.
|
|
I'm sure there are long threads out the discussing it. The thing that comes to mind in the rules for me, off the top of my head, is the FAQ on casting a ranged touch spell, and why it provokes twice.
Ranged Touch Attack Spells and AOOs: When you cast a spell that allows you to make a ranged touch attack (such as scorching ray), and an enemy is within reach, do you provoke two attacks of opportunity?
Yes, you provoke two attacks of opportunity: one for casting the spell and one for making a ranged attack, since these are two separate events.
(Note that at spell that fires multiple simultaneous rays, such as scorching ray, only provokes one AOO for making the ranged attack instead of one AOO for each ranged attack. It still provokes for casting the spell.
Both casting a spell and making a ranged attack provoke. Both are part of the standard action of casting the spell, but they still provoke distinctly.
Charging is a full round action which encompasses movement. Charging doesn't provoke, but movement does, so charging through a threatened area would provoke once, not twice.
I also feel like there's an ability somewhere that makes your movement not provoke from the target of the charge. I can't remember where, and I may be confusing it with something else. The existence of such an ability would strongly imply that the movement normally does provoke
|
|
Ironically a rogue had readied and did stop the charging creature. But could you point me to a section of the rules that says this or a ruling from a dev? Thanks.
Says what?
Provoking by moving through a threaten area is covered in the CRB under "Attacks of Opportunity" which is found in the combat section of rulebook.
Charging is found in the Special attacks section of that same combat section. It describes itself as "movement" which is all that matters for the attacks of opportunity section.
Or did you mean the readied actions? Should be found under "Special Initiative actions" within the Combat section of the CRB.
This is all CRB combat rules questions. If you lack access to the CRB (Core Rule Book), you could try here for the official PRD on the subject.
|
|
Perhaps but I can already here the argument. Charge specifically states it does not provoke AOO. This could be interpreted to suggest it is canceling the AOOs normally provoked from movement. Thus I need a ruling.
I don't get to just say 'Look I'm the DM and this is how I've ruled'. There will be an argument. People will get pissed. In an attempt to prevent this I'd like to be able to point him to a specific source.
Yes, you do get to say that. You get to say that you've gone to the boards, asked around, and that based on what you've seen there, and the way that you read the rules, this is how you are going to rule it. That is the role of the GM when the rules aren't clear.
|
|
This will not prevent a 30 minute argument.Yes, you do get to say that. You get to say that you've gone to the boards, asked around, and that based on what you've seen there, and the way that you read the rules, this is how you are going to rule it. That is the role of the GM when the rules aren't clear.Perhaps but I can already here the argument. Charge specifically states it does not provoke AOO. This could be interpreted to suggest it is canceling the AOOs normally provoked from movement. Thus I need a ruling.
I don't get to just say 'Look I'm the DM and this is how I've ruled'. There will be an argument. People will get pissed. In an attempt to prevent this I'd like to be able to point him to a specific source.
The Pathfinder ruleset has a lot of things that are not absolutely defined. It is the role of the GM to interpret what is there to the best of their abilities. There is a large amount of circumstantial evidence that the act of charging and the movement during a charge can have separate rules for provoking, including an FAQ explaining how a single action (casting a spell with a ranged touch attack) can provoke from two separate parts of that action.
If your player insists that you rule their way or they walk, then they really aren't participating the the social contract of what a Roleplaying Game is. You sit down at a table as a player agreeing for someone to act as the GM. You might disagree with how they interpret something, but you go with what their interpretation is. All you can do is state your case.
If you as a GM feel that the rules are not specific enough, and you don't want to have movement from a charge provoke, then you don't have to do that. It's your game. If you are a player sitting at someone else's table, where they are spending their time and effort to provide a fun experience for you, then you should respect the decisions they make in the process of doing so. Present the evidence you have, then accept what they decide after seeing it.
|
|
But that's an issue with that guy, not an issue with the rules or how Paizo intends us to use them. In the absence of a direct statement from a Pathfinder Design Team Member, which is unlikely to happen in any short timeframe, you will have to decide if you want to let the rule go in order to not create additional conflict in your particular situation. That's not a reason for Paizo to change their philosophy behind the rules.
Your best bet is to go over to the Ask Mark Seifter thread and post the question. He doesn't always answer rules questions there, and the answers he does give are not "official" rulings. But he is a member of the design team and will often state how he interprets the rules for his own games.
|
|
where is this superscript? I just read charge and found none. I just read actions in combat and it only points out that charge can be taken as a move action.
Look at the table Actions in Combat. In the second column header, Attack of Opportunity has a superscript. That directs you to the footnotes at the bottom of the table, where number 1 explains what that column refers to.