Suppose Opponent A charges Opponent B.
Opponent C readies an action to move if Opponent B is charged.
So if Opponent C moves in between Opponent A and B, what is Opponent A's Charge outcome?
It seems to me Opponent A's charge could now be applied to Opponent C assuming Opponent A moved at least 10' before they got to Opponent C.
Overrun
As a standard action, taken during your move or as part of a charge, you can attempt to overrun your target, moving through its square. You can only overrun an opponent who is no more than one size category larger than you. If you do not have the Improved Overrun feat, or a similar ability, initiating an overrun provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver. If your overrun attempt fails, you stop in the space directly in front of the opponent, or the nearest open space in front of the creature if there are other creatures occupying that space.
The rules for overrun state it can be made as part of a charge. So, the charging character would make an overrun check, which would provoke an AoO if the character charging does not have improved overrun. If the charging character makes the check, he is able to move past you and continue the charge. If the overrun fails, the charging character stops in front of character C.
comment: Readied actions are situational. If the foe knows you readied and changes tactics you likely wasted your action.
That assumes that your foe knows what the readied action and the trigger is. Just because you declare what the trigger and action are does not mean your opponents know that information.
It also depends on what the objective of the readied action is. If you are trying to prevent another target from being attacked and due to your actions, the protected target is not attacked you have accomplished your objective.
Azothath wrote: comment: Readied actions are situational. If the foe knows you readied and changes tactics you likely wasted your action.
Mysterious Stranger wrote: That assumes that your foe knows what the readied action and the trigger is. Just because you declare what the trigger and action are does not mean your opponents know that information.
It also depends on what the objective of the readied action is. If you are trying to prevent another target from being attacked and due to your actions, the protected target is not attacked you have accomplished your objective.
okay - I'll reply
nope, you are reading into it and adding assumptions and requirements. Simply observing a creature prepare with an appropriate Perception check (if any needed) as the ready consumes an action is enough to lead the foe to the correct deduction that the other combatant prepared an action and thus he should change tactics.
The same is true for full defense, full/1r casting, etc and they all have rather unique observable actions which lead to better tactical responses. RAW requires specific skills like spellcraft otherwise it doesn't cover the particulars so it's left to the GM (another skill check) or the observer to deduce/induce.
Without getting into metagaming, tactics/strategy relies on INT/WIS, class, skills of the observer. In this case I don't think there's an usually high bar to make the tactical change based on simple observation.
At best you may get a general idea of what the action or triggering action is. You can probably figure out if the person is preparing to attack with a weapon, or cast a spell, but beyond that you will not get much detail.
For example, let’s say I prepare to attack if a specific character approaches a specific object or creature. You will not be able to figure out which character I am preparing to attack.
How much information you can gain is going to be up to the discretion of the GM.
Azothath wrote: comment: Readied actions are situational. If the foe knows you readied and changes tactics you likely wasted your action. To notice that someone had readied an action, I would use Sense motive, modified by some of the Perception modifiers (distance and environmental factors) and most of the Sense motive modifiers (guessing what a creature with alien anatomy is preparing is harder than guessing what a human will do).
Familiarity with the target skills will matter too (guessing what a Fighter is reading is easier than guessing what a guy with an unknown class is preparing).
Noticing that someone is preparing something should be relatively easy, guessing exactly what he wants to do is way more difficult.
To make an example:
A fighter wants to counter-charge anyone moving within 15' of a mage.
- noticing that a Fighter is staying ready to act should be very easy, maybe a DC 5;
- deducing that is ready to move is not much more difficult, maybe a base DCX of 10;
- guessing if he wants to interpose himself between someone moving and the wizard or if he instead wants to use a standard action Charge (possible because a readied action limits you to a standard action) is way more difficult. Maybe a 20 DC.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Azothath wrote:
nope, you are reading into it and adding assumptions and requirements.
Not to be rude, but there are NO rules for observing a readied action.
At least non that I can think of.
So its ALL assumptions and GM-territory.
I´m on board with a sense motive check.
Perception would be, where is the creature, which weapon does it wield etc.
But what their intention are, is normally a sense motive check.
For the OP, there is no rule that tells you what will happen.
Overrun is a possibility (but would give Person C an attack of oppertunity unless A has improved overrun) and only works if C is no more than one size category larger than A.
If A doesnt wanna make an overrun maneuver, there is no rule for what will happen.
A GM can allow him to just stop (and wasting his whole turn), to target C with his charge attack (if he moved at least 10 feet) or even say well you moved a little bit, but you can stop before you hit C and even spend you sandard action as you see fit (if A moved less than his movement before his stopped).
For a GM-call I find it important to know, when did C interrupt A's Charge. Right at the start of the charge (before A moved his first 5 feet), nearly at the end of the charge (when A is only 10 feet away from B) or somewhere in the middle?
But as said, that purely GM territory and at least in my knowledge there are no rules for what happens if a charge action is interupted by an readied action.
As others said, there's no RAW for a situation like this other than that a readied action interrupts the triggering action. So it will be mostly gm-fiat.
As GM I would take the actual situation in consideration:
What exactly is the trigger and the intention?
Act as soon as A moves in the direction of B?
Act if someone engages B in melee?
Intercepting A, before he reaches B?
Rushing to help B (therefor maybe getting in to flanking rather than intercepting)?
How far is everyone apart from each other?
Can C even reach A/B with a readied action, or would he need to have delayed his complete turn?
Is A or C closer two B?
Could C run towards A/B in a straight line or would he need to circumvent obstacles or enemies (therefore "unable two build up speed running" in a way that A would be)?
If C can reach A/B, but A would be already gone a few squares (like already beeing in a sprint towards B) I would maybe let A and C roll Initiative.
C wins?
C would be able to intercept and position himself between A and B and somethings like Overrun may occur.
A wins?
C would not be able to intercept, but reach A right after he reaches B and might be able to help in an other way or retaliate.
But those would only be my two copper pieces and any other GM might handle the situation differently.
Mysterious Stranger wrote: Overrun
As a standard action, taken during your move or as part of a charge
Fairly sure this is just letting you take an overrun maneuver in place of your normal attack, given that "charge through" exists.
Charge Through wrote: Benefit: When making a charge, you can attempt to overrun one creature in the path of the charge as a free action. If you successfully overrun that creature, you can complete the charge. If the overrun is unsuccessful, the charge ends in the space directly in front of that creature.
Normal: You must have a clear path toward the target of your charge.
Side Topic
Ju-Mo. wrote: Azothath wrote: nope, you are reading into it and adding assumptions and requirements. ... Not to be rude, but there are NO rules for observing a readied action.
At least non that I can think of.
So its ALL assumptions and GM-territory.
... the first quoted line of your post is explicitly & pedantically correct as RAW does not contain those explicit words. Sadly it ignores the Perception skill and that actions (see Combat, Table 7-2: Action in Combat) are observable. A creature can see who attacks whom and with what weapons. When a creature retrieves an item in the usual manner and is perceivable it creates an Attack of Opportunity for foes nearby. It is obvious and doesn't need explicit RAW as it is covered by "Your senses allow you to notice fine details and alert you to danger. Perception covers all five senses, including sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell." The skill directs the GM to set a DC using the given examples. I'd expect a base of 0(Notice a visible creature) for most actions (those "fine details").
Thus Ready action is perceivable. What the trigger or prepared action is exactly??? that takes more like Detect Thoughts or sensible deduction/induction.
Your last quoted statement then loses validity.
I'll add that spellcasters usually know when spell targets make their save. It's not really observable and a change from DnD 3.5. Spellcasting manifestations is explicitly there as Game Balance to prevent spellcasters from running amok. I don't know why people think Ready is special when it consumes an action and in PF1 it clearly takes spells, feats, or class abilities to obscure/hide common information.
I think saying it is not perceivable is the GM call.
Azothath wrote:
Your last quoted statement then loses validity.
No it doesnt.
I just pointed out, that there is no RAW.
Because you accused someone of "nope, you are reading into it and adding assumptions and requirements. ..."
And if their ist no RAW, everything is an assumption.
Thats all I said.
I know perfectly well, that you need these assumption sometimes to play the game.
That said, I pointed out that if there are no rules, its a GM topic and that the OP wont get an answear here.
Just extra opionions on how to handle the situation, but he will never get an RAW answear.
The difference between the things you pointed out (moving away for a attack of oppertunity, spell being cast etc) is, that this are all things you can really see.
A readied action cant be seen, its a mindset. And as long as you cant read minds its really hard to see.
Or to be precise it depens on how much logic do you want?
Sometimes readied actions are more easy to see (a bow with a drawn arrow is easy to spot, even the genral direction can be spot), some readied actions are hard to see (If he makes a move if drop my weapon) and some are impossible to see (If he attacks my friend I (a sorcerer) cast a still and silent invisbility on myself)
And even these examples are highly debatable.
And as long as something is higly debatable its all assumptions and a GM call.
That said, perception is to see things and sense motiv is to interpret things.
Percetption is to see that he has drawn a weapon, sense motiv is to interpret it as: "He wants to attack" " He wants to drop his weapon" "He wants to pretend to attack" "He just likes his new sword"
To see that a persion draws his sword is easy, to know what he wants to do with it is not so easy until he did what ever he wanted to do.
You can guess, but you cant know.
Sense motiv lets you know what he wants to do with his drawn sword.
If you roll high enough for whatever DC the GM sets (because there are now rules so GM call, if and how high the DC is)
Some with a readied action.
You see someone who doesnt attack his turn, maybe he is waiting his turn until his buddy flankes the enemy. Or maybe he readied an action for something.
To tell how much an readied action is seen is a GM call.
And because you see you enemy on the battlefield all the time, perception is in my opionion the wrong skill for it.
I would call for a sense motiv check to see if you interpret the drawn sword as a readied action, a wait action or maybe something else.
And yes that are all assumptions, non of this is RAW, beacuse there is no RAW on this matter. If you think perception is the right call, pls use it. I think sense motiv ist the right call, so I will use that.
And if you allow all your players to always know what exactly the enemy is planing and reading ... pls do so, its you table not mine.
But its as much RAW as my sense motiv or anything else.
Its just a GM call, because there is no RAW.
Last Side Topic comment
Thanks Ju-Mo, you've misinterpreted the meaning of my original response to Mysterious.
> Azothath "comment: Readied actions are situational. If the foe knows you readied and changes tactics you likely wasted your action."
> MS "That assumes that your foe knows what the readied action and the trigger is. ..."
so right there MS has added knowledge about exactly what the readied action is going to be and trigger which I did not state.
That led to
> Azothath "nope, you are reading into it and adding assumptions and requirements. {then I explain}..."
which is logical and sequential. I take it that english is not your first language and there are always tricky parts to interpretation. Commenting over what you think is exciting or wrong is not unusual.
If you want to disprove my preposition that "Ready is observable" then you need some reasoning as to Why Not as Perception covers it (as I've thoroughly explained). ACTIONS are observable. A creature taking no physical action (on their turn) is observable. Saying it's not observable will take some reasoning (feat, spell, skill, special situation, etc.)
I'd agree that if the creature takes no physical action then it could seem to be a Delay action, but both are observable and Delay does not consume an action (as an immediate, no action). The "in game" description of those two actions as they occur in play are usually rather different. That means they are usually distinguishable.
If you want to GM Rule something else at your table, that's fine. I just don't see that as RAW.
As there are no rules you can argue both ways and both side can say: "But mine is RAW and yours isnt".
There is no ingame rule for observing actions. None.
We just assume some things because
a.) it needs to be done so that one can play the game
b.) we have a reality that shows us a a few things
Not all Actions are observable. Thats just a fact.
Most actions are observable, because most action change the status quo.
But some actions DONT change the status que, so the only thing you can observe is that status quo DOESNT change (which in itself is in observation).
However: You can NOT know for what reason no action to change the status quo was taken. That would be mindreading. There are spells for that, but we let them be for this case.
For example a telepathic bond conversation that exceed the limits of a "free action" and is deemend an full round action.
The NPC or the PC just dont move, but you hae no idea why they dont move or why they dont attack/cast spell/run etc.
You just see them standing still. Ofc you succed in you perception check to see the PC/NPC standing, but thats in no means a way to know what they are doing. (Well there is a feat "Telepathy Tap", and it works with sense motive, not with perception)
As you see, there are action which you cant see and who are not observable (at least not, if you dont have a really specific feat).
So who says which actions are observable and which are not?
As said there are no ruels for either case (and as you said correctly to make an attack of oppertunity you need to see some action) and a few actions are not oberservable.
If there are rules for both cases, and a few cases are just not ruled, its totally up to the GM and the table how to handle it.
Thats a point where you use b.) you sense of reality.
And not every readied action is observable, thats easily proven, see above. So if a specific readied action is observable or not, isnt ruled, its ALWAYS up to the GM how to handle things.
I really dont care, if someone says, "every readied action is observable" or "no readied action is observable". For one it doesnt concern myself and my tables and second, as there is no rule, its just GM concern.
I just wanted to clarify that there are no rules for this topic and you sometimes need real world logic to handle these things.
If you handle it as if there was a ruling, pls be my guest, but its not RAW.
The only thing I dont really like is how you always take perception and not sense motive, as it is obvious the more appropriate skill for sensing the motive of another, but as said, not my table.
The OP has a lot of answears to his original question and a few new things he can consider and a few differnt opinions, so he can take his pick how he wants to handle things.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
