AOO and Free actions.

[Mystern]

Unless the guards had Improved Unarmed Strike, they did not threaten with their bare hands, and thus you provoked no attacks for moving through squares adjacent to them.

hm. i didn't realize that you don't threaten without imp unarmed strike. and looking back billd91 said that in the first reply i just didn't read it throughly enough. thanks

 

[Aestolia]

well what came up was that the guards all had crossbows out and i ran past them. my dm ruled that them dropping their crossbows would allow them to attempt a grapple against me as an aoo as i moved out of a threatened square. i know there is like 3 rules violations in there i just can't find the books to back me up.

I'm aware , the point I was making before that is that they don't have the free action to make. No free action, no dropped crossbows, no AoO.

Irdeggman spelled out what I was saying a bit better. Exceptions to the rule are always outlined, speaking specifies that it can be done when it isn't your turn.

Free actions state that you can do them when you act normally. AoO aren't part of your 'normal' actions for the turn. PHB P.141 has a lists of 'Actions in Combat' AoO isn't on that list since it isn't an action you can 'normally' perform.

 

[eamon]

well what came up was that the guards all had crossbows out and i ran past them. my dm ruled that them dropping their crossbows would allow them to attempt a grapple against me as an aoo as i moved out of a threatened square. i know there is like 3 rules violations in there i just can't find the books to back me up.

Note however, that rule 0 strongly applies in this case. You haven't mentioned the specifics, but if you weren't in real combat initiative, then obviously the order of events is unspecified and needs arbitration, and it's not unreasonable for guards to drop their crossbows then.

Even if your were in initiative, it sounds like the guards were "waiting" for you to make a false move. In D&D mechanics, they could have used the "ready" action to shoot you as soon as you move. Ready doesn't normally allow you to change your mind, but the DMG does suggest that it might be reasonable in exceptional cases. For instance, if you ready an action to shoot the next person storming in through the door and it turns out to be your friend...

So, while you're DM shouldn't have called the events "free actions" and "attacks of oppurtunity", the events you describe sound reasonable in their totality, so I wouldn't be too pedantic. In any case, it can't harm to point how these things work, if only to avoid future issues.

 

[eamon]

Oh, and by-the-way: to make an AoO, you need to threaten a square, and specifically, you don't threaten with an unarmed attack unless you have the feat "Improved Unarmed Attack". (Similarly, there are other weapons like ranged weapons and the whip with which you also don't threaten).

 

[Ruslanchik]

The only relevant rule here is that the guys using crossbows do not get AoOs. That seems pretty cut and dry.

However, even if they did have an AoO, they could not drop their weapons and grapple you because you can't take extra actions on an AoO. It is not an Action of Opportunity. You can attack or not. You cannot drop your weapon, use quick draw to draw another weapon, cast a quickened spell, then attack.

Also, I believe Immediate and Swift actions were introduced in the Expanded Psionics Handbook. The are also described in the srd at www.d20srd.org.

 

[Aestolia]

Good point Eamon,

Yes it makes 'sense' that they could drop their weapons and attack regardless (they are city guards and theoretically aren't completely hopeless).

In the end; did it make for a good encounter? Did you survive? more important, was it fun? If so, chalk it up to GM-feat, and let it lay...

Next time tumble! *grins*

 

[werk]

to sum up...

Two points in this thread that I see.

1. you have to threaten a square to get an AoO. Ranged weapons do not threaten.

2. you may perform AoO outside of your turn (that's rther the whole point) "You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your action." Making a touch attack to initiate a grapple was resolved in the Rules Compendium, right?

 

[Aestolia]

I think the question was more a case of:

No they don't threaten, but are they allowed to drop their crossbows so that they DO threaten (assuming Imp Unarmed Strike)?

To which the consensus also says No.

 

[Sektat]

If they had monk levels, they would threaten those squares even while holding a crossbow. The interesting point now is: Could they grapple in that case? I think yes, because they threaten with their unarmed strike, and grapple is an unarmed attack.
How else can we explain the following sentence from the FAQ

> You can also disarm, grapple, or trip as a melee attack (or attack of opportunity).

Of course one could argue that there is a difference between attacking with feet and elbows and doing a grapple (where hands *maybe* must be free. Is that written somewhere?). Which brings up the original question: Could the monk drop the crossbow as a free action to do the grapple?

 

[billd91]

Which brings up the original question: Could the monk drop the crossbow as a free action to do the grapple?

Which, in turn, brings up part of the original answer. You can only take free actions on your own turn, thus, dropping the crossbows is a no-go. The monk either needs to be able to grapple with his feet (something I find dubious unless he's an ape... hey, stranger things have happened) or just kick the guy. A nice in-between action would be to make a trip attack. Monks are often quite good at that...