How about this scenario: ...
It would probably be best to handle it the same way I handle who goes first when multiple creatures would take an AoO, such as when an enemy provokes while threatened by two or more PCs.
Just go by who has the highest initiative order and assume they have the first call on whether to take the AoO (or Readied action) or not. Then move to the next fastest.
As all three things were triggered from the some action by the wizard, the rules do not define order of operation for these, so it entirely becomes a GM call. I think Piiza Lords approach is as good as any. But I would add one additional note in which I would handle the immediate action stone shield last.
Both the AoO and the readied action trigger because the wizard begins casting a spell.
Immediate action stone shield triggers because the wizard completes the casting of a spell with the sorcerer as a target. This second event during the wizards casting of a spell may never occur if the wizard dies/fails a concentration check or is otherwise unable to complete the casting.
What I see a lot of is someone readies a reach weapon with brace against a charging foe.
The reach weapon user attacks for double damage when the charging attacker moves into range.
THEN
The charging attacker provokes by leaving the threatened space, allowing a second attack.
I got a little confused in the back and forth of this thread, but that is legal, right?
Yes Lynceus that's perfectly legal.
In that scenario the readied action definitely happens first because the trigger occurs when the enemy enters the threatened square, while the trigger for the AoO is when the enemy leaves the threatened square.
It's a little thematically dubious that a braced weapon could be used for an AoO, but the rules for Beacing don't actually say anything about it.
If you use a readied action to set a brace weapon against a charge, you deal double damage on a successful hit against a charging character (see Chapter 8).
Even if they did prevent you from taking AoOs, technically you're no longer bracing after you've taken your attack, so because of the order of operations it still works.
How about this scenario:
The Ranger readies an action to shoot the Evil Wizard if he casts a spell.
The Evil Wizard - who is standing next to the Fighter - casts Scorching Ray at the Sorcerer, thus provoking an AoO from the Fighter.
The Sorcerer casts Stone Shield as an Immediate Action to avoid the Scorching Ray.
So we now have one standard action - the Scorching Ray - which satisfies the requirements for a Readied Action from the Ranger, an AoO from the Fighter and an Immediate Action from the Sorcerer. What is the order of the 3 interrupting actions?
According to Ryze it should go Fighter (AoO), Sorcerer (Immediate), Ranger (Readied).
I don't know exactly what order they should go in, but I think the Readied Action should trigger first. Here's why ...
Let's say all 3 interrupting actions give some kind of status effect that lasts for 1 round ... The Ranger is using Erastil's Distracting Shot, the Fighter is using Dazing Assault and the Sorcerer is using ... actually Stone Shield works for this - the Stone Shield lasts for 1 round.
So the Stone Shield effect (Immediate Action) will last until the beginning of the Evil Wizard's next turn.
If the Fighter hits the Evil Wizard (with the AoO) and the Evil Wizard fails his Fort Save then the Dazing effect will last until the beginning of the Evil Wizard's next turn.
But if the Distracting Shot (Readied Action) hits the Wizard then the effect will past until the beginning of the Ranger's mext turn. Since the Ranger readied an action she will change her Initiative order and now go before the Evil Wizard. On the Ranger's following turn the Daze and Stone Shield would still be in effect, but the Distracting Shot would not be. Since they all have a duration of 1 round this means the Distracting Shot (the Readied Action) started before the other two actions.
Round1:
Ranger1 uses a Standard Action to Ready an Action to use Distracting Shot on Wizard1 with the condition "if he casts a spell".
Evil Wizard casts Scorching Ray, satisfying the Ranger's Readied Action condition "if he casts a spell".
The Readied Action happens first, and the Ranger's Initiative is changed to go just before Wizard1, and his Distracting Shot will go before the Wizard casts his spell.
The Ranger uses Distracting Shot, and is successful, and the Fighter gains a +2 AC vs. the Wizard until the beginning of the Ranger's turn next round.
The Wizard's spell begins, and provokes 2 Attacks of Opportunity from the Fighter.
All actions in the round stop, and the Fighter resolves both Attacks of Opportunity immediately, and 1 hits and 1 misses.
The Wizard makes a Conc Check DC 10 + Dmg Caused + 2 Spell Level, and is successful.
The Wizard makes a Fortitude save 10 + the Fighter's BAB to avoid the Daze effect from Dazing Assault and is successful.
All actions in the round resume.
The Sorcerer uses an Immediate Action to cast Stone Shield while the Wizard's spell is mid-cast.
The Wizard successfully casts Scorching Ray against the Sorcerer, and the Sorcerer may use the AC and Cover Bonuses from Stone Shield against this Scorching Ray.
The Wizard's Ranged Touch attack misses by 1 AC.
I know you guys are just coming up with every scenario where a Readied Action would go first, and it's entirely based off the condition you set in place.
So here's a hard mode question:
Using the Exact same scenario as MrCharisma's Evil Wizard vs. the party of Ranger, Sorcerer, and Fighter. How would the order precedence play out if the Ranger's Readied Action Condition was changed to: "I would like to Ready an Action to perform a Distracting Shot on the Wizard as soon as someone else damages him".
The Wizard then performs a Scorching Ray on the Sorcerer, provoking 2 Attacks of Opportunity. The Fighter's first AoO causes damage, thus triggering the Ranger's Readied Action.
Does the Ranger's Distracting Shot get resolved after the 1st AoO is resolved, thus interrupting the 2nd AoO? Or is the normal flow of actions in the round suspended until both AoOs are resolved, so the Ranger's Readied Action gets resolved immediately after both of the Fighter's AoO's are resolved?
Does the Ranger's Distracting Shot get resolved after the 1st AoO is resolved, thus interrupting the 2nd AoO? Or is the normal flow of actions in the round suspended until both AoOs are resolved, so the Ranger's Readied Action gets resolved immediately after both of the Fighter's AoO's are resolved?
I guess it all depends on if AoO are some kinds of action or not. If they are, then the Ranger would be able to shoot after the first attack of opportunity is resolved. If they are not, then i believe that RAW you can't ready yourself against a non-action.
Readying an Action
You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character’s activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Your initiative result changes. For the rest of the encounter, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action.You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don’t otherwise move any distance during the round.
I might be wrong though, this is worst than Magic the Gathering Instant Spell stack lol.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know you guys are just coming up with every scenario where a Readied Action would go first, and it's entirely based off the condition you set in place.
I gave you a set of conditions where the 3 "reactions" were all triggered by the same action. You can swap out "casts a spell" for anything you like that provokes, and you can switch out the 3 "reactions" for other versions and it shouldn't change anything.
So here's a hard mode question:
Using the Exact same scenario as MrCharisma's Evil Wizard vs. the party of Ranger, Sorcerer, and Fighter. How would the order precedence play out if the Ranger's Readied Action Condition was changed to: "I would like to Ready an Action to perform a Distracting Shot on the Wizard as soon as someone else damages him".
The Wizard then performs a Scorching Ray on the Sorcerer, provoking 2 Attacks of Opportunity. The Fighter's first AoO causes damage, thus triggering the Ranger's Readied Action.
Does the Ranger's Distracting Shot get resolved after the 1st AoO is resolved, thus interrupting the 2nd AoO? Or is the normal flow of actions in the round suspended until both AoOs are resolved, so the Ranger's Readied Action gets resolved immediately after both of the Fighter's AoO's are resolved?
Between AoOs.
The flow isn't automatically suspended for both AoO's anyway. If the Fighter succeeds at his 1st AoO and the Evil Wizard fails his concentration check then the spell is lost, so he never provokes the 2nd AoO. Likewise if the Fighter hits with the 1st AoO and the Ranger hits with the readied action then the Wizard has to make another Concentration check for the Ranger's attack as well. If he fails either check the spell is lost and once again the Wizard never provokes the 2nd AoO.
I know you guys are just coming up with every scenario where a Readied Action would go first, and it's entirely based off the condition you set in place.
So here's a hard mode question:
Using the Exact same scenario as MrCharisma's Evil Wizard vs. the party of Ranger, Sorcerer, and Fighter. How would the order precedence play out if the Ranger's Readied Action Condition was changed to: "I would like to Ready an Action to perform a Distracting Shot on the Wizard as soon as someone else damages him".
The Wizard then performs a Scorching Ray on the Sorcerer, provoking 2 Attacks of Opportunity. The Fighter's first AoO causes damage, thus triggering the Ranger's Readied Action.
Does the Ranger's Distracting Shot get resolved after the 1st AoO is resolved, thus interrupting the 2nd AoO? Or is the normal flow of actions in the round suspended until both AoOs are resolved, so the Ranger's Readied Action gets resolved immediately after both of the Fighter's AoO's are resolved?
Its not really that hard a scenario to resolve.
AoO 1 is triggered for wizard attempting to cast a spell.
Figher makes AoO 1, hits and deals damage, the AoO is now resolved, but the damage triggers the readied action.
Readied action goes off.
Then, assuming the wizard makes any and all concentration checks to against damage received, he completes the casting of the spell.
Upon completing the casting of the spell the wizard now selects a target for the spell, and makes a ranged attack. This ranged attack triggers AoO 2.
Figher now makes AoO 2.
Note that both AoOs are not triggered from the wizard casting a spell. One is triggered from the wizard casting the spell. The second is triggered from the wizard making a ranged attack. The ranged attack only occurs if the spell is succesfully completed.
Here is an alternate scenario:
If wizard is flanked by a fighter and a rogue and casts a spell, provoking from both of them, which AoO occurs first?
1) Who cares? (If one was a readied action instead, again, who really cares which one happens first).
2) If it actually matters for some reason: let the players decide, go in initiative order, or let the GM pick some other arbitrary but consistant method for determining order. If two things are triggered at once the rules do not define which is first.
I guess it all depends on if AoO are some kinds of action or not. If they are, then the Ranger would be able to shoot after the first attack of opportunity is resolved. If they are not, then i believe that RAW you can't ready yourself against a non-action.
You can ready an action against something that is not an action (always subject to GM discretion of course).
eg, I could ready an action if someone is tripped. In this case an action took place to trip them, but them being tripped isn't an action in and of itself.
Or like Ryze scenario, ready an action when someone takes damage. If we are all standing in lava, at the start of someones turn they take fire damage, triggering my ready while no actions have been taken.
I might be wrong though, this is worst than Magic the Gathering Instant Spell stack lol.
Its actually pretty much exactly like magic instant spell stacks, with one exception. If I provoke an AoO/readied action from multiple people at the same time, which one goes on the stack first? After that, additional interrupts can happen anywhere along that chain of resolving them.
I guess it all depends on if AoO are some kinds of action or not. If they are, then the Ranger would be able to shoot after the first attack of opportunity is resolved. If they are not, then i believe that RAW you can't ready yourself against a non-action.
You can ready an action against something that is not an action (always subject to GM discretion of course).
eg, I could ready an action if someone is tripped. In this case an action took place to trip them, but them being tripped isn't an action in and of itself.
Or like Ryze scenario, ready an action when someone takes damage. If we are all standing in lava, at the start of someones turn they take fire damage, triggering my ready while no actions have been taken.
Yeah that's definitely how i play readied action. Is just that one line i bolded that seems to define how readed action proceed: Which is right after the action that triggered it. Taking damage from lava isn't an action thus i'm not sure the readied action would proceed.
Then again, it might only mean that the readied action will always trigger before ''an action'' that triggers it, instead of ''the action''. The way it's written seem to imply that an action is necessary.
Although, it's not how i want the rule to be played out and i think most would agree that this interpretation would lead to silly results. So i'm not willing to die on that hill.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I guess it all depends on if AoO are some kinds of action or not. If they are, then the Ranger would be able to shoot after the first attack of opportunity is resolved. If they are not, then i believe that RAW you can't ready yourself against a non-action.
You can ready an action against something that is not an action (always subject to GM discretion of course).
eg, I could ready an action if someone is tripped. In this case an action took place to trip them, but them being tripped isn't an action in and of itself.
Or like Ryze scenario, ready an action when someone takes damage. If we are all standing in lava, at the start of someones turn they take fire damage, triggering my ready while no actions have been taken.
Yeah that's definitely how i play readied action. Is just that one line i bolded that seems to define how readed action proceed: Which is right after the action that triggered it. Taking damage from lava isn't an action thus i'm not sure the readied action would proceed.
Then again, it might only mean that the readied action will always trigger before ''an action'' that triggers it, instead of ''the action''. The way it's written seem to imply that an action is necessary.
Although, it's not how i want the rule to be played out and i think most would agree that this interpretation would lead to silly results. So i'm not willing to die on that hill.
That is more of a result of action based rules. Devs have commented that "before the triggering action" is there because there isn't any "in the middle of an action" type mechanic. But obviously we do that sort of thing to make some readied actions actually work.
e.g, I ready an action to make a melee attack against someone who walks through a door. Someone starts their turn, moves 20', then walks through the door. Obviously I cannot actually attack them when they are 20' away, and behind a wall where I can't see them. Clearly here my readied action goes in the "middle of someone elses action". But ultimately my init is shifted to just before that characters turn. My init definately cannot be moved to "the middle of someone elses action".
Edit: for non-action triggers, I would move the readied players init to just before whatever characters turn it currently is. eg, the lava example, if the orc is the one taking fire damage at the start of its turn, I move my init to just before the orc.
A more complicated example would be I ready based on the orc attacking. My wizard friend foolish casts in the orcs threatened area. Orc starts an AoO, triggers my readied, and my init moves to just before my wizard friend (the character whose turn it actually is).
Welp, I think you guys are wrong. Both AoO's had been provoked and all actions (including the readied action) would be suspended until both are resolved, and then actions can resume again.
And this is due to the rule "Attacks of Opportunity stop the normal flow of actions in a round" and are resolved the exact instant they're provoked.
So both AoO's would get resolved first, then the normal flow of actions resumes, and then the Ranger's Readied Action is resolved.
So you believe that if I cast a spell, and you AoO me, and I fail my concentration check, you also get another AoO for making a ranged attack that I never actually make (or even begin to make)?
Here is a variation on that. If my BAB 11 archer makes a full attack, and an AoO provoked for my first attack roll results in my archer being unconscious, do my enemies still get 2 more AoOs against me for my BAB-5 and BAB-10 attacks? Attacks I don't get to make since I'm unconscious.
|
So you believe that if I cast a spell, and you AoO me, and I fail my concentration check, you also get another AoO for making a ranged attack that I never actually make (or even begin to make)?
This
I think if the concentration check is failed, the spell is never successfully cast, therefor no ranged attack gets made, which in turn means no second AoO
Yeah sorry Ryze. The 2 AoOs in that scenario actually have different triggers.
Let's play out this scenario ...
Evil Wizard has 45HP.
Ranger readies a shot "when the Wizard takes damage".
Evil Wizard casts Scorching Ray.
Fighter takes both AoOs . The Fighter deals 10 damage on each AoO, bringinging him down to 25HP, but the Wizard passes both concentration checks.
Now the Ranger takes a shot, gets a crit and deals 30HP of damage, bringing the Wizard to -5HP, unconscious and dying.
Except that the Readied Action interrupted the Wizard's casting, meaning that - while he still cast the spell - he never got the shot off, so never provoked the 2nd AoO from the Fighter.
Now that's an easy one, you needed all 3 attacks to knock him unconscious, so whatever the order he ended up in the same place.
But wait, we never rolled a concentration check vs the Ranger's damage. That's a DC - what, 42? - concentration check? The Wizard fails. Now since he to concentrate while casting he lost the spell, which means he never provoked the 2nd AoO for shooting, which means he's alive with 5HP.
Negative gents, casting the spell and making a ranged touch attack both provoke two attacks of opportunity because they're considered two separate events but for the same provoking action (casting scorching ray), and both AoO's are made DURING the casting of Scorching Ray. You would add up the damage of both for the Conc check to keep the spell.
There's an FAQ about this.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Negative gents, casting the spell and making a ranged touch attack both provoke two attacks of opportunity because they're considered two separate events but for the same provoking action (casting scorching ray), and both AoO's are made DURING the casting of Scorching Ray. You would add up the damage of both for the Conc check to keep the spell.
There's an FAQ about this.
Um, that FAQ very specifically says
"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."It does not say you provoke twice for casting scorching ray. It says you provoke once for casting a spell (scorching ray) and you provoke once for making a ranged attack.
It does not discuss what happens if the caster fails the concentration check to finish casting.
Rules regarding concentration then include the following
If something interrupts your concentration while you’re casting, you must make a concentration check or lose the spell.
and
If you take damage while trying to cast a spell, you must make a concentration check with a DC equal to 10 + the damage taken + the level of the spell you’re casting. If you fail the check, you lose the spell without effect. The interrupting event strikes during spellcasting if it comes between the time you started and the time you complete a spell (for a spell with a casting time of 1 full round or more) or if it comes in response to your casting the spell (such as an attack of opportunity provoked by the spell or a contingent attack, such as a readied action).
So here is the question. If I don't complete a spell because I'm either dead/unconscious/failed a concentration check, do I still get to make a ranged attack with the spell? If I don't get to make a ranged attack, what is provoking the second AoO? The FAQ says you get to make the second AoO because the caster is making a ranged attack.
Further, regarding
and both AoO's are made DURING the casting of Scorching Ray
No. Any damage taken DURING casting of a spell requires a concentration check, or you lose the spell. The AoO for making a ranged attack cannot cancel the spell. The spell casting is completed at that point, and all that is left is to pick a target, roll an attack roll, and deal damage. Both AoOs are triggered during the action used to cast the spell, pick targets, and apply the spells consequences. But they do not both occur DURING the casting of the spell. The first AoO event occurs at the start of the action (during the spell casting), the second AoO event occurs at the end of the action (after spell casting is completed, but before targeting and damage are resolved).
There is almost always some kind of action involved with provoking an AoO, but a single action can sometimes provoke more than one AoO during the course of the action. Each of these is a single event. An event which never happens never provokes. See my example above of an archer at BAB 6+ using a full round action to make multiple attacks in a round. If an AoO after any of those attacks renders the archer unable to continue attacking, then no more attacks are made by the archer, and no more AoOs are provoked either. Casting a ranged attack spell is EXACTLY the same.
There is nothing in the rules that says what you're saying is how it operates. You do not provoke a first AoO for starting to cast the spell, and then provoke a 2nd AoO later at the end of the cast if you make your Concentration Check. I'm going to need you to proffer a single rule that explicitly says that's how it works, because frankly I think you're just making things up. Otherwise, we're going to be using these rules:
Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively.
Attacks of Opportunity: Generally, if you cast a spell, you provoke attacks of opportunity from threatening enemies. If you take damage from an attack of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 10 + points of damage taken + the spell's level) or lose the spell. Spells that require only a free action to cast don't provoke attacks of opportunity.
And therefore, per the FAQ, you provoke two Attacks of Opportunity for Casting a Spell that has a Ranged Touch Attack, because the Ranged Touch Attack is made as a part of Casting the Spell.
And due to the "interrupts the flow of actions in the round" from Attacks of Opportunity rules, those TWO attacks of opportunity are going to be resolved the exact instant they're provoked, and these two AoO's take precedence over Immediate Action or Readied Actions, and that is because the normal flow of actions in the round have been interrupted once the Attacks of Opportunity have been provoked.
There is nothing in the rules that says what you're saying is how it operates. You do not provoke a first AoO for starting to cast the spell, and then provoke a 2nd AoO later at the end of the cast if you make your Concentration Check. I'm going to need you to proffer a single rule that explicitly says that's how it works, because frankly I think you're just making things up. Otherwise, we're going to be using these rules:
Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively.Attacks of Opportunity: Generally, if you cast a spell, you provoke attacks of opportunity from threatening enemies. If you take damage from an attack of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 10 + points of damage taken + the spell's level) or lose the spell. Spells that require only a free action to cast don't provoke attacks of opportunity.And therefore, per the FAQ, you provoke two Attacks of Opportunity for Casting a Spell that has a Ranged Touch Attack, because the Ranged Touch Attack is made as a part of Casting the Spell.
And due to the "interrupts the flow of actions in the round" from Attacks of Opportunity rules, those TWO attacks of opportunity are going to be resolved the exact instant they're provoked, and these two AoO's take precedence over Immediate Action or Readied Actions, and that is because the normal flow of actions in the round have been interrupted once the Attacks of Opportunity have been provoked.
The FAQ you provided has the answers contained within it. That is the rule that tells you there are two provoking events. If one of those events never happens you cannot claim an AoO off of it.
Some basic questions:
If my spell fails/I'm unconscious/dead, do I get to make an attack roll and deal damage?
If I don't get to make an attack roll then am I really making a ranged attack?
Can the AoO generated from making a ranged touch attack interrupt the spell and force a concentration check?
And on the side, you also have not answered the question regarding how AoOs with a archer making multiple attacks works.
(Personally I find it very telling that you won't provide direct responses to my questions above. You keep trying to dance around the issue without giving a straight forward answer to these. You still haven't even responded to my "If an AoO provokes an AoO which one resolves first")
These are all examples that the rules operate exactly like I've been telling you they do. AoOs are triggered off of events (not specific actions, the FAQ you reference tells us that). The rules also tell us that a provoking action cannot generate more than one AoO. So we see plainly from the FAQ that that "action" talked about as a triggering action for an AoO is not a game defined action, but rather an "event" as it is called in the FAQ. And a single game defined action can clearly generate multiple AoO events (for example, casting a ranged attack spell, or making a full attack as an archer).
...and that is because the normal flow of actions in the round have been interrupted once the Attacks of Opportunity have been provoked.
Readied actions (and immediate actions) also interrupt the normal flow of actions, they are not themselves part of the normal flow of actions. We know that because the rules on readied actions tell us "...you interrupt the other character". I'm not sure why you keep ignoring this detail. Its even plain in your acknowledgement that a readied action triggered off someone making an attack would interrupt an AoO just as easily as it would interrupt a standard action attack.
So, yes, I acknowledge and continue to acknoledge that AoOs interrupt the normal flow of actions. But neither readied actions or immediate actions are within the normal flow of actions. Both of them are also capable of interrupting the normal flow. Both of them are triggered of off specific types of events that occur just like AoOs are. And if those events don't occur, you cannot use the readied/immediate actions (ok, technically some immeidate action spells could be cast without a triggering event, but doing so would be a pointless endeaver that simply wastes a spell - eg, feather fall could be cast while not actually falling).
And therefore, per the FAQ, you provoke two Attacks of Opportunity for Casting a Spell that has a Ranged Touch Attack, because the Ranged Touch Attack is made as a part of Casting the Spell.Are you actually arguing that casting a spell with a ranged attack roll defensively and failing, still causes you to provoke an AoO for making a ranged attack?
I'm sorry, but that's a ludicrous stance to have.
Actually, based on his stance, I think he would have to declare that making your defensive concentration roll means you would not provoke for casting OR making the ranged attack that comes with it... but I'll add this to the list of questions I'd like a direct response too:
If I cast a ranged attack spell, and roll a defensive concentration check, how many AoOs do I generate? (How many if I fail my concentration roll, and how many if I make my concentration roll)Of course by declaring you get 2 AoOs off of casting a spell, he already breaks the rule of
This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity)
He wants there to be two seperate triggering events for casting a ranged attack spell while simultaneously there only being one event that triggers both AoOs
There’s also precedent for a single action provoking multiple attack of opportunity. A creature can provoke attack of opportunity multiple time within a move action if they move out of multiple threatened square. Those attack do not resolve at the same time, otherwise it would mean a creature that would fall unconcious because of one of those attack would still get attacked for move they didn’t do.
It’s the same for ranged touched spell. It’s the same action, but it has multiple components that provoke, you need to resolve it in order.
There’s also precedent for a single action provoking multiple attack of opportunity. A creature can provoke attack of opportunity multiple time within a move action if they move out of multiple threatened square. Those attack do not resolve at the same time, otherwise it would mean a creature that would fall unconcious because of one of those attack would still get attacked for move they didn’t do.
It’s the same for ranged touched spell. It’s the same action, but it has multiple components that provoke, you need to resolve it in order.
That is a little different though. For a single move action you will not provoke more than once from any given creature. But if you move past 5 creatures you generate an AoO for each of them. The full attacking archer though does generate multiple AoOs from each creature.
That is a little different though. For a single move action you will not provoke more than once from any given creature. But if you move past 5 creatures you generate an AoO for each of them. The full attacking archer though does generate multiple AoOs from each creature.
Oh, i guess you're right, i've been playing combat reflexes wrong all this time, oh well.
Although, your Archer example is a good one. It would be weird for an Archer to get all their AoO at the begening of their full attack action, potentially dropping them before they can even make enough attack to account for the number of attack of opportunity they took.
You still provoke AoO's for casting Spells that have Ranged Touch Attacks, even if you cast them defensively. That's in the Ranged Touch Spell rules.
Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively. Unless otherwise noted, ranged touch attacks cannot be held until a later turn.
You still provoke AoO's for casting Spells that have Ranged Touch Attacks, even if you cast them defensively. That's in the Ranged Touch Spell rules.
Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively. Unless otherwise noted, ranged touch attacks cannot be held until a later turn.
That is correct, but this does not mean that the casting of the spell and the attack happens at the same time, it just means that they happen as part of the same action. The FAQ you linked earlier even mentionned the casting and the attack being two seperate event.
At this point though, i'm not sure either party will be able to convince the other. I can see the logic you're arguing for, but then again i don't see our interpretation as wrong either. It just happens that your interpretation seems to cause more problems than it solves.
That is correct, but this does not mean that the casting of the spell and the attack happens at the same time, it just means that they happen as part of the same action. The FAQ you linked earlier even mentionned the casting and the attack being two seperate event.
At this point though, i'm not sure either party will be able to convince the other. I can see the logic you're arguing for, but then again i don't see our interpretation as wrong either. It just happens that your interpretation seems to cause more problems than it solves.
No, both AoO's are provoked the exact instant you begin to cast the spell. The Ranged Touch Attack is made as a part of casting that spell. It's considered two separate provoking events for the same singular action.
Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively. Unless otherwise noted, ranged touch attacks cannot be held until a later turn.
That is correct, but this does not mean that the casting of the spell and the attack happens at the same time, it just means that they happen as part of the same action. The FAQ you linked earlier even mentionned the casting and the attack being two seperate event.
At this point though, i'm not sure either party will be able to convince the other. I can see the logic you're arguing for, but then again i don't see our interpretation as wrong either. It just happens that your interpretation seems to cause more problems than it solves.
No, both AoO's are provoked the exact instant you begin to cast the spell. The Ranged Touch Attack is made as a part of casting that spell. It's considered two separate provoking events for the same singular action.
Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively. Unless otherwise noted, ranged touch attacks cannot be held until a later turn.
We can't have an honest discussion about this until you respond to these questions:
If my spell fails/I'm unconscious/dead, do I get to make an attack roll and deal damage?If I don't get to make an attack roll then am I really making a ranged attack?
Can the AoO generated from making a ranged touch attack interrupt the spell and force a concentration check?
You sort of answered this one:
If I cast a ranged attack spell, and roll a defensive concentration check, how many AoOs do I generate? (How many if I fail my concentration roll, and how many if I make my concentration roll)
Do I get a ranged attack AoO regardless of whether I make my defensive concentration check or not?
We can't have an honest discussion about this until you respond to these questions:
We stopped having an honest discussion about this when you said these Actions defined in the rules aren't relevant.
I don't find that particular relevantAction 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
Move
Full-round
Swift
Immediate
Free^------ Actions are defined as those 6 types.
Because, they are. Especially since later in the same section of the rules it says: Attacks of Opportunity interrupt the normal flow of actions
Unless you're going to argue that this passage in the Combat Rules is fluff text, then it is indeed relevant.
No, both AoO's are provoked the exact instant you begin to cast the spell. The Ranged Touch Attack is made as a part of casting that spell. It's considered two separate provoking events for the same singular action.
And yet if you fail your concentration check the spell ''fizzle with no effect''(As per Concentration under the combat section), meaning that you don't even get to make a ranged attack as spell such as Schorching rays list the rays as being the effect. If there's no rays being fired, there's no attack being made, so you get AoO for something you didn't even do.
Again i see your logic, but i can't agree with it. This is fine though, it's such a corner case scenario that i legit never saw happened in more than 15 years of play.
We can't have an honest discussion about this until you respond to these questions:
We stopped having an honest discussion about this when you said these Actions defined in the rules aren't relevant.
I don't find that particular relevantAction 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
Move
Full-round
Swift
Immediate
Free^------ Actions are defined as those 6 types.
Because, they are. Especially since later in the same section of the rules it says: Attacks of Opportunity interrupt the normal flow of actions
Unless you're going to argue that this passage in the Combat Rules is fluff text, then it is indeed relevant.
At the time I pointed out that readied actions also are allowed to interrupt the normal flow of actions, from the rules on delay
You also can’t interrupt anyone else’s action (as you can with a readied action).
Feel free to explain why a readied action is just part of the normal flow of actions despite this. Or how this interrupting anyone else's action is different than an AoO interrupting actions. Or why, despite being a normal flow of actions (as you claim) it still gets special priveledge that it can interrupt an AoO if the trigger condition is an attack (with no specific rules stating that a readied can interrupt an AoO). That is, if you stil feel this point is relevant, we can discuss it further. You did not address it upthread though.
As can immediate actions
However, unlike a swift action, an immediate action can be performed at any time—even if it’s not your turn.
So in terms of discussing AoOs, readied actions, and immediate actions, yes, that rule is irrelevant. Its relevant regarding normal actions. We are in agreement that an AoO interrupts the normal flow of actions. Readied and immediate actions aren't normal actions. They both have specific rules (just like the AoO) that allow you to interrupt the normal flow of actions.
So humor me, if your viewpoint is correct, these should be trivial questions to give yes/no responses too. Then feel free to elaborate as much as you like if you feel it is warranted.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is nothing in the rules that says what you're saying is how it operates. You do not provoke a first AoO for starting to cast the spell, and then provoke a 2nd AoO later at the end of the cast if you make your Concentration Check. I'm going to need you to proffer a single rule that explicitly says that's how it works, because frankly I think you're just making things up.
- "You make all pertinent decisions about a spell (range, target, area, effect, version, and so forth) when the spell comes into effect." CRB pg. 213
Until you've successfully finished casting the spell, the spell doesn't come into effect. Until the spell comes into effect, you don't declare a target. Without a target, there can be no attack roll. Without an attack roll, there can be no AoO for making an attack. Therefore, you don't provoke for making a ranged attack until you've successfully finished casting.
So yeah, how bbangert described it was indeed correct. You really do "provoke a first AoO for starting to cast the spell, and then provoke a 2nd AoO later at the end of the cast if you make your Concentration Check".
Feel free to explain why a readied action is just part of the normal flow of actions despite this. Or how this interrupting anyone else's action is different than an AoO interrupting actions. Or why, despite being a normal flow of actions (as you claim) it still gets special priveledge that it can interrupt an AoO if the trigger condition is an attack (with no specific rules stating that a readied can interrupt an AoO). That is, if you stil feel this point is relevant, we can discuss it further. You did not address it upthread though.
Readied and immediate actions aren't normal actions. They both have specific rules (just like the AoO) that allow you to interrupt the normal flow of actions.
Despite the fantastic usability of an Immediate Action, an Immediate Action is still just a normal action, and it's listed in this section below. It essentially operates as a "Better Swift Action", and when used, it will consume your ability to use a Swift Action in your next turn. This most definitely fits within the description of "normal flow of actions in a round".
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
Move
Full-round
Swift
Immediate
Free
A Readied Action is also a normal action, but with special conditions upon *when* it gets performed. Like Immediate Actions, it has fantastic usability, and a Readied Action's iconic feature is that it's taken later in the round, but that Readied Action will occur just before a triggering event set by the PC and then change their Initiative. But when it really comes down to it, it's still just a Standard, Move, Swift, or Free Action.
I think we're all in agreement that AoO's interrupt the normal flow of actions. I think we're all also in agreement that an Immediate Action can be performed in response to (and interrupt) a Readied Action under general conditions. A Readied Action is a normal action after all, and Immediate Actions "can be used at any time", so an IA can be used in response to an enemy's Readied Action against you, and even interrupt that Readied Action while it's in progress.
So when an AoO gets provoked, it interrupts the normal flow of these 6 action types, the order precedence is
AoO > Immediate > Readied
But if you specifically set your Readied Action to counter an AoO or an Immediate Action, then the order precedence becomes:
A Specific Readied Action to Counter an AoO > AoO > A Specific Readied Action to Counter an IA > Immediate Action > Other Readied Actions
And it's because setting a Readied Action with a contingency of specifically countering an AoO or Immediate Action should be allowed to be performed before the triggering event, as per the Readied Action Rules.
Is that a fair assessment?
There is nothing in the rules that says what you're saying is how it operates. You do not provoke a first AoO for starting to cast the spell, and then provoke a 2nd AoO later at the end of the cast if you make your Concentration Check. I'm going to need you to proffer a single rule that explicitly says that's how it works, because frankly I think you're just making things up."You make all pertinent decisions about a spell (range, target, area, effect, version, and so forth) when the spell comes into effect." CRB pg. 213
Until you've successfully finished casting the spell, the spell doesn't come into effect. Until the spell comes into effect, you don't declare a target. Without a target, there can be no attack roll. Without an attack roll, there can be no AoO for making an attack. Therefore, you don't provoke for making a ranged attack until you've successfully finished casting.So yeah, how bbangert described it was indeed correct. You really do "provoke a first AoO for starting to cast the spell, and then provoke a 2nd AoO later at the end of the cast if you make your Concentration Check".
I don't care what you think about anything, regardless of the topic.
I don't care what you think about anything, regardless of the topic.
I didn't post what I think about something, I've shown what the rules say.
That you don't care about my post where I give the rule quote that you asked for shows that you have absolutely no interest in how the rules actually are. Which indicates that you're continuing to argue just so you don't have to admit to having been wrong.
But really, I didn't make my post for your benefit. I know that you lack the intellectual honesty to actually listen to arguments, and that you often throw around insults if someone dares to dissent to what you say. I knew you wouldn't have the integrity to admit to having been wrong even when confronted with evidence. I made my post to show everyone here that your knowledge of the rules isn't anywhere as good as your cocky attitude would suggest.
I don't care what you think about anything, regardless of the topic.I didn't post what I think about something, I've shown what the rules say.
That you don't care about my post where I give the rule quote that you asked for shows that you have absolutely no interest in how the rules actually are. Which indicates that you're continuing to argue just so you don't have to admit to having been wrong.
But really, I didn't make my post for your benefit. I know that you lack the intellectual honesty to actually listen to arguments, and that you often throw around insults if someone dares to dissent to what you say. I knew you wouldn't have the integrity to admit to having been wrong even when confronted with evidence. I made my post to show everyone here that your knowledge of the rules isn't anywhere as good as your cocky attitude would suggest.
I don't care what you say about anything. Just trying to save you some time in case you were under the delusion that I did care.
<details of how you believe the AoO rules work>Is that a fair assessment?
We are in agreement that a readied action with the correct trigger can go before either an AoO or a immediate action.
We are likewise in agreement that an AoO could interrupt either a readied action or an immediate (say an immediate action to move with a special ability).
I'm not clear on whether you believe an immediate action can go before an AoO (assuming an immediate action that is in response to an attack).
We are not in agreement that the six actions listed are always part of the normal flow of actions - which I think is the real crux of the disagreement. So let me address that.
The rules don't directly tell us what the normal flow of actions is, so we have to infer it. I don't believe you have correctly defined what the normal flow of actions is.
You have quoted the six action types, what you left off was the sentance following that.
There are six types of actions:Standard
Move
Full-round
Swift
Immediate
Free
In a normal round, you can perform a standard action and a move action, or you can perform a full-round action. You can also perform one swift action and one or more free actions. You can always take a move action in place of a standard action.
Notably absent from that list of what you can do in a normal round is the immediate action - thus immediate actions do not fall within the normal flow of actions - they are not listed as a normal action. Also note, it does not state that if you are doing one of those actions, it has to be in the normal flow of actions. Only that during the normal round you can do those actions.
Further, under how combat works we have these rules
Combat is cyclical; everybody acts in turn in a regular cycle of rounds. Combat follows this sequence:1. When combat begins, all combatants roll initiative.
2. Determine which characters are aware of their opponents. These characters can act during a surprise round. If all the characters are aware of their opponents, proceed with normal rounds. See the surprise section for more information.
3. After the surprise round (if any), all combatants are ready to begin the first normal round of combat.
4. Combatants act in initiative order (highest to lowest).
5. When everyone has had a turn, the next round begins with the combatant with the highest initiative, and steps 3 and 4 repeat until combat ends.
Here is the definition of the normal flow of actions. Note step 2 points proceeding to normal rounds. Steps 4 and 5 explain that in a normal roundthe character with the highest initiative takes their actions, then the next, and the next, down to the character with the lowest initiative.
Furthermore, right below that section is a definition of the combat round, which contains this paragraph
Each round’s activity begins with the character with the highest initiative result and then proceeds in order. When a character’s turn comes up in the initiative sequence, that character performs his entire round’s worth of actions. (For exceptions, see Attacks of Opportunity and Special Initiative Actions.)
Note in particular the bolded section. AoOs and Special Initiative Action (delay and ready) are noted as exceptions to the normal way a round works. Thus AoOs and ready (and delay) do not fall within the normal flow of actions.
But let me also show that other action types do not have to follow the normal flow of actions either (they usually do, but just because it is one of those action types does not mean that it does).
Here is the scenario:
I'm fighting a wolf.
It takes a move action to move out of my threatened square.
I take an AoO and make a trip attempt (without the improved trip feat).
The wolf takes an AoO, and on a successful hit also get a free trip attack.
What is the order of resolution between these two AoOs and the free trip attack?
I declare that the resolution is the wolve's AoO, followed the the wolve's free trip attack (so in this case the free attack is not part of the normal flow of actions), followed by my AoO.
Regarding immediate actions, I've mentioned this before, but it is an important detail. Most immediate action spells are made in resonse to an attack. The rules do not distinguish between a normal attack or a AoO attack. Without any distinction, then we have to read it as any attack qualifies.
So at this point, I continue to maintain that AoO, Readied, and Immediate actions have no heirarchy of priority. The only thing that matters is what order the triggering conditions happen in.
Addendum, in case the above wasn't clear.
The normal flow of actions is one character takes their turn at a time, from highest to lowest init. Anything that breaks or interrupts that flow is outside the normal flow of actions (or outside of the normal round).
Notably absent from that list of what you can do in a normal round is the immediate action - thus immediate actions do not fall within the normal flow of actions - they are not listed as a normal action. Also note, it does not state that if you are doing one of those actions, it has to be in the normal flow of actions. Only that during the normal round you can do those actions.
I would argue that the reason IA's are notably absent from this line in the rules is because they're covered later, and are considered equivalent to Swift Actions.
Immediate Action
An immediate action is very similar to a swift action, but can be performed at any time—even if it’s not your turn.
Immediate Actions
Much like a swift action, an immediate action consumes a very small amount of time but represents a larger expenditure of effort and energy than a free action. However, unlike a swift action, an immediate action can be performed at any time—even if it’s not your turn. Casting feather fall is an immediate action, since the spell can be cast at any time.
Using an immediate action on your turn is the same as using a swift action and counts as your swift action for that turn. You cannot use another immediate action or a swift action until after your next turn if you have used an immediate action when it is not currently your turn (effectively, using an immediate action before your turn is equivalent to using your swift action for the coming turn). You also cannot use an immediate action if you are flat-footed.
I would argue that an Immediate Action is simply a "Better Swift Action", but action-wise, they are in fact the exact same. If you use your Immediate Action before your turn, your Swift Action isn't available on your next turn. I think this quote below could include the {ooc text that I added} and it would make much more sense.
In a normal round, you can perform a standard action and a move action, or you can perform a full-round action. You can also perform one swift action and one or more free actions. You can always take a move action in place of a standard action.
That's why I consider IA's to be part of the normal flow of actions in a round. It is called out as "same as using a swift action and counts as your swift action" as well as "equivalent to using your swift action" in the Immediate Action rule section.
I would also agree with your wolf example. Strangely enough, the AoO from the Wolf would be > the original AoO that provoked it, and the wolf's AoO would be resolved immediately and interrupt the first AoO.
As far as Readied Actions, a Readied Action would go before any triggering event, including an AoO if that's what triggered the event, and that's because the Readied Action rules specifically call this out as:
The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character’s activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action.
.
And this would include going before an AoO if that was the trigger.
But if you provoked an AoO once you perform w/e it is you're doing during that Readied Action, such as firing a ranged weapon while threatened, an AoO would interrupt that Readied Action and become resolved immediately. Just like your wolf example, AoO's interrupt everything and become resolved immediately, including other AoO's, and including Readied Actions that provoke an AoO.
And I would argue that since an Immediate Action is a "normal flow of actions" due to its equivalency to a swift action, that an IA cannot be performed once an AoO has been provoked. All normal actions in the round are essentially suspended once an AoO has been provoked, and it is immediately resolved before anything else can continue. I personally think that arguing that an IA can interrupt an AoO in progress would be like arguing that a Swift Action could interrupt an AoO in progress.
I would argue that an Immediate Action is simply a "Better Swift Action", but action-wise, they are in fact the exact same. If you use your Immediate Action before your turn, your Swift Action isn't available on your next turn. I think this quote below could include the {ooc text that I added} and it would make much more sense.
Being like a swift action in some regards does not make it a swift action though. A swift action is like a free action, and can be taken any time a free action can. That does not mean a GM can (within the written rules) say that you have already taken to many free actions this round so you cannot take a swift action.
Them having some similarities does not mean they are the same. Them sharing a 'slot of things you can do' does not make them the same. You can move as a move action. You can also move as a standard action. That does not make the move and standard actions equivalent.
I would argue that the reason IA's are notably absent from this line in the rules is because they're covered later, and are considered equivalent to Swift Actions.
You cannot make a RAW argument for that though. Because the word immediate does not appear in that list of 5 actions that are part of a normal turn.
For the RAI argument there are several issues you need to resolve to make a convincing RAI argument.
1) You have to present evidence that after writing there are six action types, the next paragraph, which talks about normal actions, listed only 5 of them and somehow forget to even so much as mention the immediate action. That is, the omission isn't an accident or oversight. If an immediate action was supposed to be part of a normal round, it should have been mentioned then and there.
2) Repeating myself from upthread, here is a list of immediate action spells that can be made in response to an attack. Either to cast the spell, or trigger an immediate action at a future time after the spell was cast:
Windy Escape, Emergency Force Sphere, Ether Step, Stone Shield, Martyr’s Bargain (if the AoO was a held touch spell), Mental Barrier, Guardian Armor, Wooden Wing Shield, Reflexive Barrier, Die for Your Master, Bleed for Your Master, Litany of Dependability, Paladin’s Sacrifice, Wave Shield, Foe to Friend, Duelist’s Parry, Defensive Grace (this is an immediate action trigger at a later time one the spell is active, like hostile juxtaposition), Visualization of The Body (another trigger once the spell is active).
And some more spells that I missed the first time through:
Foe to Friend, Stay the Hand, Timely Inspiration, Deivon's Parry, Ether Step
And then to add to that list some spells that could be cast after making an attack, but are not exclusive to an attack:
Borrow Fortune, Gallant Inspiration
Or when you are about to take damage:
Hero's Defiance
There are 40 immediate action spells in the game. Sorting by casting time you will initially count 53, but 13 of them are psychic spells that are repeats of lower level versions.
So you have to show in the rules that when all of these spells say "When being attack" that the rules mean being attacked by an attack that is not an AoO. You originally tried to claim that there were a few spells that were exceptions. But that list is more than half the immeidate action spells in the game. Those aren't exceptions. None of them are called out as exceptions. The rules is simply "When an attack is made..." with no limitations. A few of the spells have specific qualifiers on the target of the attack, but not why the attack is being made.
Note that simply quoting the AoO rules again is begging the question. You need to find other rules to support your view (like I have done with this list of immediate action spells).
3) The windy escape spell specifically. I will again just repeat myself from upthread.
You cannot use windy escape against an attack of opportunity you provoked by casting a spell, using a spell-like ability, or using any other magical ability that provokes an attack of opportunity when used.
If you already cannot use an immediate action to interrupt an AoO, why is this being called out? No need to repeat rules that are already in place.
Okay, so it could be reminder text, but shouldn't they have just said "As usual, you cannot use an immediate action to interrupt an AoO".
Okay, maybe they are modifying the base rule. Then shouldn't it read, "This spell can be cast to interrupt an AoO so long as the AoO was not triggered from you <using a magical ability>".
But they didn't do that either. So I see two options at this point. Either the writer had no idea how AoOs work, and wrote the spell as they did (it wouldn't be the first time something like this got butchered), and the editors missed it. OR, the base rule is you can use an immediate action to interrupt an AoO, but this specific spell has some special limitations.
So you need to provide an explanation for the wording of the windy escape spell in a way that supports your RAI argument.
4) And again, me repeating myself from upthread:
There are also the swashbuckler Dodging Panache, and Opportune Parry and Riposte deeds. There are probably other classes with immediate actions that could be used to good effect against an AoO.
So I have multiple rules strongly implying the RAI (in addition to the RAW) is on my side as well. What rules can you quote that imply differently?
When we have multiple rules we are looking at, and an interpetation of one of those rules results in logical inconsistancies with the others, or gaping holes that were not explained by the rules, and the other interpetation does not have those holes, which one do you think is the correct interpetation?