Inquisitor Teamwork Feats with Solo Tactics questions


Rules Questions

51 to 66 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Wonderstell wrote:
or simply put the ability to "give out AoOs".
Nope. The rules don't say that you get an Attack of Opportunity. They say Attacks of Opportunity are provoked. That's significantly different. Your substitution deviates from the text of the rules, and is not does not logically follow.

While it's understandable that you would come to this conclusion, I am still referring to the act of provoking an AoO. I believe I've stated earlier that unless explicitly stated otherwise I am always talking about provoking. Since you don't approve of the simplification, I'll use the complex term you agreed with:

"the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from your ally"

Now, for ease of comprehension I'll slightly change this sentence for the context of Solo Tactics. If we're talking about the Inquisitor's benefit, it will say:

"the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from [her allies]"

and for the Inquisitor's allies it will say:

"the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from [the Inquisitor]"

Solo Tactics:
At 3rd level, all of the inquisitor’s allies are treated as if they possessed the same teamwork feats as the inquisitor for the purpose of determining whether the inquisitor receives a bonus from her teamwork feats. Her allies do not receive any bonuses from these feats unless they actually possess the feats themselves. The allies’ positioning and actions must still meet the prerequisites listed in the teamwork feat for the inquisitor to receive the listed bonus.

***

Solo Tactics, Substitution v2:
At 3rd level, all of the inquisitor’s allies are treated as if they possessed the same teamwork feats as the inquisitor "Outflank" for the purpose of determining whether the inquisitor receives a bonus from her teamwork feats "the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from [her allies]". Her allies do not receive any bonuses from these feats "the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from [the Inquisitor]" unless they actually possess the feats "Outflank" themselves. The allies’ positioning and actions must still meet the prerequisites listed in the teamwork feat "Outflank" for the inquisitor to receive the listed bonus "the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from [her allies]".

***

'Her allies do not receive "the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from [the Inquisitor]" unless they actually possess "Outflank" themselves.'

Which is incorrect according to the FAQ. So Solo Tactics does not give you the "Benefit Section" of Outflank.

Was there anything else? We could remove the brackets for the same result if you're still not convinced.


Inquisitor gets the Benefit of the Ally having had an Attack of Opportunity Provoked, even if the Ally doesn't really get the AoO provoked.

This is because the rules. If you don't rewrite the rules, the rules exactly say what I said they say.


Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Inquisitor gets the Benefit of the Ally having had an Attack of Opportunity Provoked, even if the Ally doesn't really get the AoO provoked.

We'll move on to discuss your statement in a moment.

I have explained in detail how to reach the conclusion that Solo Tactics does not give you the "Benefit Section" of Outflank. Would you like further clarification or do you agree?


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
VVonderstell wrote:
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Inquisitor gets the Benefit of the Ally having had an Attack of Opportunity Provoked, even if the Ally doesn't really get the AoO provoked.

We'll move on to discuss your statement in a moment.

I have explained in detail how to reach the conclusion that Solo Tactics does not give you the "Benefit Section" of Outflank. Would you like further clarification or do you agree?

Your interpretation involves rewriting the rules and finding justifications for doing so.

The rules work just fine as written, they have a coherent meaning.

Paired Opportunist literally says that Attacks of Opportunity that are provoked by your allies are also provoked by your.

Outflank says that when you score a Crit, it provokes Attacks of Opportunity from your flanking Ally.

Solo Tactics says you get the bonuses as if your Allies had your Teamwork Feats.

The FAQ says those bonuses can be the provocation of Attacks of Opportunity.

The rules say each and every one of those things.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Okay, lets have a look at your way of analyzing this.

Solo Tactics:
At 3rd level, all of the inquisitor’s allies are treated as if they possessed the same teamwork feats as the inquisitor for the purpose of determining whether the inquisitor receives a bonus from her teamwork feats. Her allies do not receive any bonuses from these feats unless they actually possess the feats themselves. The allies’ positioning and actions must still meet the prerequisites listed in the teamwork feat for the inquisitor to receive the listed bonus.

***

I accept this as Solo Tactics.

Let's look at "bonus" as if it meant Benefit vis a vis Outflank

Outflank wrote:
whenever you score a critical hit against the flanked creature, it provokes an attack of opportunity from your ally.

***

Wonderstell wrote:

Solo Tactics, Substitution v2:

'Her allies do not receive "the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from [the Inquisitor]" unless they actually possess "Outflank" themselves.'

Which is incorrect according to the FAQ. So Solo Tactics does not give you the "Benefit Section" of Outflank.
Was there anything else? We could remove the brackets for the same result if you're still not convinced.

Huh, I'm starting to kind of see your point.

The Benefit is that the person gets an AoO Provoked from the Ally, which the Ally specifically doesn't get. So that should mean the Ally should not cause an AoO to happen from the Inquisitor, because that would be a benefit the Ally is not entitled to.

You have found a example of a bonus offered Solo Tactics that is not offered by the Benefits of Outflank.

Still, you have not offered a definition of bonus that is supported by the rules that justifies denying an Attack of Opportunity based on Bonus= Benefits. If anything, your definition of bonus has been even more inclusive than mine.

The FAQ is sadly focused on Outflank + Solo Tactics, and it doesn't speak to Outflank, Solo Tactics, + Paired Opportunist.

Your operational definition of Solo Tactics "bonus" seems to apply thusly.

If you and your flanking Ally had Outflank + Paired Opportunist, you would both get the AoO whenever either of you scored a Crit.

Solo tactics gives you generally the positive effects of your Teamwork Feats as if your Ally had them, but the Ally doesn't get those unless they actually do.

So that means if you have Paired Opportunist, Outflank, Solo Tactics, and a Flanking Ally, you should get the general positive effects: you get the Attack of Opportunity whenever you or your ally score a crit as if your ally had Outflank and PO, but your Ally doesn't get those unless he really had those.


Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Still, you have not offered a definition of bonus that is supported by the rules that justifies denying an Attack of Opportunity based on Bonus= Benefits. If anything, your definition of bonus has been even more inclusive than mine.

All in due time, first we must agree on the fundamentals.

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Huh, I'm starting to kind of see your point.

The Benefit is that the person gets an AoO Provoked from the Ally, which the Ally specifically doesn't get. So that should mean the Ally should not cause an AoO to happen from the Inquisitor, because that would be a benefit the Ally is not entitled to.

Yes, exactly.

So we are in agreement that Solo Tactics does not give you the "Benefit Section" of Outflank, correct?


VVonderstell wrote:
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Still, you have not offered a definition of bonus that is supported by the rules that justifies denying an Attack of Opportunity based on Bonus= Benefits. If anything, your definition of bonus has been even more inclusive than mine.

All in due time, first we must agree on the fundamentals.

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Huh, I'm starting to kind of see your point.

The Benefit is that the person gets an AoO Provoked from the Ally, which the Ally specifically doesn't get. So that should mean the Ally should not cause an AoO to happen from the Inquisitor, because that would be a benefit the Ally is not entitled to.

Yes, exactly.

So we are in agreement that Solo Tactics does not give you the "Benefit Section" of Outflank, correct?

You've demonstrated that it gives a bonus that is not a Benefit. But you haven't demonstrated that it does not give the Benefits.


Scott Wilhelm wrote:
VVonderstell wrote:

Yes, exactly.

So we are in agreement that Solo Tactics does not give you the "Benefit Section" of Outflank, correct?
You've demonstrated that it gives a bonus that is not a Benefit. But you haven't demonstrated that it does not give the Benefits.

That part should come intuitively since you've already understood why "the Ally should not cause an AoO to happen from the Inquisitor" (if Solo Tactics gave you the "Benefit Section").

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Huh, I'm starting to kind of see your point.

The Benefit is that the person gets an AoO Provoked from the Ally, which the Ally specifically doesn't get. So that should mean the Ally should not cause an AoO to happen from the Inquisitor, because that would be a benefit the Ally is not entitled to.

Using the same reasoning you've just spelled out, let's see what the "Benefit Section" would allow the Inquisitor to do.

Solo Tactics, Substitution v2:
At 3rd level, all of the inquisitor’s allies are treated as if they possessed the same teamwork feats as the inquisitor "Outflank" for the purpose of determining whether the inquisitor receives a bonus from her teamwork feats "the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from [her allies]". Her allies do not receive any bonuses from these feats "the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from [the Inquisitor]" unless they actually possess the feats "Outflank" themselves. The allies’ positioning and actions must still meet the prerequisites listed in the teamwork feat "Outflank" for the inquisitor to receive the listed bonus "the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from [her allies]".

***

'all of the inquisitor’s allies are treated as if they possessed "Outflank" for the purpose of determining whether the inquisitor receives "the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from [her allies]".'

So if "Bonus" meant "Benefit Section", the enemy would provoke AoOs from the Inquisitor's allies since only the act of "making an enemy provoke an AoO from your ally" is considered a benefit of the feat.

But this is not allowed by the FAQ, so Solo Tactics does not give you the "Benefit Section" of Outflank.
Would you like further clarification or do you agree?


Just because there are bonuses granted by Solo tactics that are not on the list of benefits by no means implies that Solo Tactics does not grant bonuses that are from the Benefits section.

Again, your description of "bonus" is much more inclusive than mine ever was.

It still looks like you are making a logical leap.


Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Just because there are bonuses granted by Solo tactics that are not on the list of benefits by no means implies that Solo Tactics does not grant bonuses that are from the Benefits section.

'

That is not what I am making an argument for.

I have demonstrated that "the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from your ally" is not considered the "Bonus" that Solo Tactics states that the Inquisitor's allies doesn't get. You agree with this.

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Huh, I'm starting to kind of see your point.

The Benefit is that the person gets an AoO Provoked from the Ally, which the Ally specifically doesn't get. So that should mean the Ally should not cause an AoO to happen from the Inquisitor, because that would be a benefit the Ally is not entitled to.

'

It follows logically that "the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from your ally" is also not considered the "Bonus" that Solo Tactics states that the Inquisitor is given. (Read my previous post again for the proof)

Would you like further clarification or do you agree?


VVonderstell wrote:

It follows logically that "the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from your ally" is also not considered the "Bonus" that Solo Tactics states that the Inquisitor is given. (Read my previous post again for the proof)

Would you like further clarification or do you agree?

That does not follow logically.

The ability of Solo Tactics to allow bonuses that are not on the list of the Benefits of Outflank does not imply that Solo Tactics does not grant the Benefits of Outflank. To suppose so is to fall for a logical fallacy unless you have further evidence.

Are you trying to argue that Solo Tactics does not grant any benefits of any Teamwork Feat just because there is 1 bonus granted that is not in 1 feat's Benefits section? How's THAT for reduction ad absurdum, Magda?

I think that it is generally the case that bonuses granted by Solo Tactics do come from the Benefits section of Teamwork Feats. It seems that based on the FAQ, those bonuses can include Attacks of Opportunity, and as you pointed out in the case of Outflank, it can even include Attacks of Opportunity that are not listed amongst the Benefits of the Feat.

But you have not demonstrated that Inquisitors do not get the Benefits from Paired Opportunists.

Let me give you a counter sample. What if I were an Inquisitor with Paired Opportunist, Greater Bull Rush, and Solo Tactics.

Greater Bull Rush wrote:
Whenever you bull rush an opponent, his movement provokes attacks of opportunity from all of your allies (but not you).
Paired Opportunist wrote:
Enemies that provoke attacks of opportunity from your ally also provoke attacks of opportunity from you
Solo Tactics wrote:
all of the inquisitor’s allies are treated as if they possessed the same teamwork feats as the inquisitor for the purpose of determining whether the inquisitor receives a bonus from her teamwork feats.

Are you saying that this Inquisitor does not get an Attack of Opportunity off of Greater Bull Rush as if all his allies also had Paired Opportunist? The phrasing of the AoO mechanic is the same for Outflank and for Greater Bull Rush.

Outflank wrote:
whenever you score a critical hit against the flanked creature, it provokes an attack of opportunity from your ally.
Greater Bull Rush wrote:
Whenever you bull rush an opponent, his movement provokes attacks of opportunity from all of your allies (but not you).

Just how are you bridging this logical gap, and how far are you willing to go?


Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Are you saying that this Inquisitor does not get an Attack of Opportunity off of Greater Bull Rush as if all his allies also had Paired Opportunist?

'

That's a false equivalence since Greater Bull Rush is not a teamwork feat. Also, we are at the moment talking about Outflank. I'd appreciate if you could wait with asking questions regarding Paired Opportunist until after we're done.

Scott Wilhelm wrote:
Are you trying to argue that Solo Tactics does not grant any benefits of any Teamwork Feat just because there is 1 bonus granted that is not in 1 feat's Benefits section? How's THAT for reduction ad absurdum, Magda?

'

That's closer to a Strawman than an ad absurdum argument. And for the record, I am not.
I am showing you what happens if Solo Tactics actually gave you the "Benefit Section" of Outflank.

Scott Wilhelm wrote:
VVonderstell wrote:

It follows logically that "the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from your ally" is also not considered the "Bonus" that Solo Tactics states that the Inquisitor is given. (Read my previous post again for the proof)

Would you like further clarification or do you agree?

That does not follow logically.

'

Let me guide you through it then.

We are both in agreement that the "Benefit" of Outflank is "the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from your ally".
So if Solo Tactics lets us treat our allies as if they possessed Outflank for the purpose of deciding if the Inquisitor gets the "Benefit Section" of Outflank, an Inquisitor would be able to "make an enemy provoke an AoO from [her allies]".

So if the "Bonus" of Solo Tactics meant "Bonus Section" for the purpose of Outflank, it would result in a situation that is not allowed by the FAQ. Ergo, the Inquisitor is not given the "Benefit Section" in the case of Outflank.

Anything amiss?


Whops, meant "Benefit Section"

Quote:
So if the "Bonus" of Solo Tactics meant "Bonus Section" for the purpose of Outflank, it would result in a situation that is not allowed by the FAQ. Ergo, the Inquisitor is not given the "Benefit Section" in the case of Outflank.


Well, it would seem as if Scott has left me hanging. So for anyone else stumbling upon this mess of a thread, here's why the combination of Outflank, Paired Opportunists and Solo Tactics would not give you an Attack of Opportunity.

1. Paired Opportunists would only trigger if an AoO is provoked from your ally, which according to the Outflank/Solo Tactics FAQ is a situation that never occurs.

This should convince most people that the combination doesn't work, but it was being claimed that the "Bonus" of Outflank and Solo Tactics is to gain the "Benefit Section" of Outflank, which includes making an enemy provoke an AoO from your ally.

2. The "Bonus" of Solo Tactics combined with Outflank is that the enemy provokes an AoO from you.

The Solo Tactics + Outflank FAQ gives us clear insight into what the "Bonus" is considered to be by giving us two important rules.

A) The enemy only provokes an AoO when the Inquisitor's ally critically hits the enemy, and it is provoked from the Inquisitor.
B) The enemy will not provoke an AoO from the Inquisitor's ally, since this is considered the "Bonus" of Outflank in the context of Solo Tactics.

This should lead you to the conclusion that the enemy provokes an AoO from you is considered the "Bonus", but the Opposition was not content with this answer. They kept claiming that the "Bonus" is to make an enemy provoke an AoO from your ally, and provided no rules citation to support their statement.

3. The "Bonus" of Solo Tactics combined with Outflank is not to make an enemy provoke an AoO from your ally.

If I'm to make a guess at how this idea came to be, I'd say that the opposition considers the ability to make an enemy provoke an AoO from their ally a "Bonus" since it is written in the benefit section of Outflank. But this statement isn't simply false, it's also exceedingly easy to disprove.

Solo Tactics gives you the Bonus of your teamwork feats, but explicitly disallows your allies from getting these Bonuses. So if the "Bonus" of Outflank was to make an enemy provoke an AoO from your ally, your allies would not be given this ability since it is considered a Bonus. Which means that the enemy could never provoke an AoO from the Inquisitor.
The converse would also happen, that the Inquisitor would be able to make enemies provoke an AoO from her ally.

Here is when the opposition stuck to their conviction and stated that the FAQ only proved the existence of an additional Bonus, separate from the Bonus of making an enemy provoke an AoO from your ally (again, no rules citation). Which is a largely pointless statement to make.

Because even if you are also given the "Bonus" of making an enemy provoke an AoO from your ally (which as per the FAQ simply doesn't happen), it would still not trigger Paired Opportunists.

4. Outflank does not allow you to be treated as if an AoO is provoked from your ally.

The Benefit of Outflank has never been to be treated as if the AoO is provoked. A simple glance on the feat text makes this clear, which states that the AoO is provoked from your ally. So the idea that you are somehow treated as if the AoO is being provoked just isn't supported by the rules in any form or way.

And as mentioned way earlier in this thread and post, the enemy never provokes an AoO from your ally so Paired Opportunists simply doesn't trigger.


I apologize for leaving you hanging. I had rl concerns. And I can't say I was looking forward to making this post.

VVonderstell wrote:

1. Paired Opportunists would only trigger if an AoO is provoked from your ally, which according to the Outflank/Solo Tactics FAQ is a situation that never occurs.

This should convince most people that the combination doesn't work, but it was being claimed that the "Bonus" of Outflank and Solo Tactics is to gain the "Benefit Section" of Outflank, which includes making an enemy provoke an AoO from your ally.

The Outflank FAQ does specifically say that Outflank does not provoke attacks of opportunities from Allies who do not have the Outflank Feat. I was wrong about that. You are right.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Alright, don't worry about it. Thank you for bringing closure to the thread.

51 to 66 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Inquisitor Teamwork Feats with Solo Tactics questions All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.