So if you ad Lunge and Lunging Stance would that mean you would be able to use an AOO to trip instead of Strike?
Lunging stance states "While you are in this stance, you can use Attack of Opportunity against a creature that is outside your reach but within the reach you would have with a Lunge. If you do, you increase your range with the Strike by 5 feet."
Lunge states "Extending your body to its limits, you attack an enemy that would normally be beyond your reach. Make a Strike with a melee weapon, increasing your reach by 5 feet for that Strike. If the weapon has the disarm, shove, or trip trait, you can use the corresponding action instead of a Strike."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No. It does not.
Lunge is a specific action, that can be a a trip.
Lunging Stance allows the reach of lunge to be used for an AoO, but does not replace the strike used in AoO with the Lunge action.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lots of sticky red tape like that all over 2e.
|
So if you ad Lunge and Lunging Stance would that mean you would be able to use an AOO to trip instead of Strike?
Lunging stance states "While you are in this stance, you can use Attack of Opportunity against a creature that is outside your reach but within the reach you would have with a Lunge. If you do, you increase your range with the Strike by 5 feet."
Lunge states "Extending your body to its limits, you attack an enemy that would normally be beyond your reach. Make a Strike with a melee weapon, increasing your reach by 5 feet for that Strike. If the weapon has the disarm, shove, or trip trait, you can use the corresponding action instead of a Strike."
The only thing that Lunging Stance does is define what your reach is: what you would have with Lunge. It does not use any other part of the Lunge.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lots of sticky red tape like that all over 2e.
Commonly referred to as rules.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lots of sticky red tape like that all over 2e.Commonly referred to as rules.
Persnickety rules.
I've long lost count of people who thought they found a cool, common-sense combo is 2e, only to realize that it didn't stack up the way they had thought because of a single word, or weirdly specific (but not always obvious) phrasing. Much more so than any edition that has come before.
In this instance? Not really.
There are some pretty persnickety rules, but I don't think this is one of them. This is just "the feats do what they say, and can't be lawyered together to do something extra on top."
|
Lots of sticky red tape like that all over 2e.Commonly referred to as rules.Persnickety rules.
I've long lost count of people who thought they found a cool, common-sense combo is 2e, only to realize that it didn't stack up the way they had thought because of a single word, or weirdly specific (but not always obvious) phrasing. Much more so than any edition that has come before.
In this case, I think it's more about mental baggage from 1E where you could sub in a trip for an AoO, than any kind of obvious common sense. The language of lunging stance is pretty clear, it uses the range of lunge. It's your memory that reads more into it than it says.
The other thing here is, I don't think "Trip as an AoO" can really be considered common sense as a possibility in 2E. Remember, Pathfinder 1E made a point of making the 3rd Edition trip-locking tactics not function. In 2E, move actions that do not leave the square, like standing, are resolved before reactions they provoke. As a result, if tripping with an AoO was an option, trip locking would be possible.
That's not something that even seems like a safe assumption.