Reactions such as Attack of Opportunity have to occur when the even that triggers it occurs. In the case of movement, if someone was adjacent to you and moved and you couldn't react until they finished moving, they would very likely be out of your reach. So your reaction would do no good.
That said, Attack of Opportunity isn't all that common.
Specific reactions might have more guidance though, about how and when it happens. For instance, Attack of Opportunity's ability to disrupt manipulate actions.
Reactions care about the trigger that cause it. AoO is written to have a trigger of when a creature moves or does something with the manipulate trait (or makes a ranged attack or leaves a square in a move action it's using). In this case, if you were approaching a creature with Threatening Approach and they have a reach of more than 10ft, they're totally going to get a chance to hit you on your way in before you can intimidate them. Doesn't mean it's useless, just means that creatures with bigger reach are going to make you pay the price for getting close.
I disagree with the consensus that it's clear the AoO wouldn't be affected by any frightened condition that may be applied for threatening approach. It would be clear if it said you stride and then attempt to demoralize, or if it said at the end of your movement like sudden charge does. But it doesn't. It says you do X and Y all in the same sentence. It doesn't say what the order is. However, it also doesn't say you can change the order like it does in some abilities with the words "At any point during this movement". There's precedent for both being explicitly stated, and this one seems to be right smack-dab in the middle without any clear indication one way or another.
So, without a clear indication (imo) that one must be completed before the other can start I think it's very much up to the interpretation of the GM. As a GM, personally I would go with it happening part way through the movement, perhaps half way through. That seems to be consistent with the theming of the situation to me, as it's the approach itself that is threatening, so you definitely have to start moving towards them, but I don't think it would necessarily take until you're 5ft from them to start realizing what's going on and getting a little spooked.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While it's not definitive, the text of the feat says: You stride to be adjacent to a foe and Demoralize that foe.
When I read that, the only likely interpretation to me is you stride first, and once adjacent, intimidate that foe.
Never once would I think to interpret that to mean you could start off by intimidating or break your movement up into two parts and intimidate in the middle.
I'm imagining it like so many shonen anime villains that run up on a target and then menacingly say something like "Hi".
To add to the discussion, first, I'm not talking about an attack of opportunity, but a reaction of someone you're approaching.
Also, Claxon, if you eat Ham and Eggs, you'll eat the ham first and then the eggs? Or if you eat the eggs, did you said you ate an eggs and ham?
Thanks
It's not the same because no one cares what order you eat in.
But within the context of the way the feat is written it doesn't enter my mind that the order in which the actions must be completed are anything but:
1) Move adjacent to enemy
2) Demoralize
As to your comment about not AoO specific, it could be dependent on the way the reaction is worded. Without you giving a specific example though, AoO is a good example to review. It triggers in response to a move action or leaving a threatened square.
Unless Threatening Approach allows you to demoralize before moving or to split your movement up and demoralize while you are not within the threatened area of your enemy you will generally provoke reactions.
The takeaway here is, don't try to use this against bigger enemies/enemies with greater reach than yours.
And Jared Walter provided the evidence that in general your resolve one action before doing another meaning that unless the feat explicitly said you can split up the movement (it doesn't) then you would need to be allowed to demoralize first and then move. But there's nothing insinuate that's the case either. You could ask your GM to let you run it that way, but if PF2 there are many feats that are not good in all circumstance. In fact, it's a general theme that feats are good under specific situations rather than all the time.
Threatening Approach would depend on not attack an enemy with greater reach than you, and even then not really. Because it doesn't stop it from working, it just means you're probably going to get walloped on your way up there.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To add to the discussion, first, I'm not talking about an attack of opportunity, but a reaction of someone you're approaching.
Also, Claxon, if you eat Ham and Eggs, you'll eat the ham first and then the eggs? Or if you eat the eggs, did you said you ate an eggs and ham?
Thanks
I'd just like to point out that an attack of opportunity could trigger as someone's approaching. If a creature has a reach greater than 5ft, then an AoO would trigger if someone strides up to them (within 5ft) because they'd leave a square within the creature's reach during the move action (going from 10ft away to 5ft away)