Is this an Attack of Opportunity?

[The Souljourner]

As DCollins said, evidently it does provoke an attack of opportunity to use a touch spell on friends. I don't think I'd let you get out of the AoO in this circumstance. It's just too difficult an action to do with someone standing right there. It's not like you'll lose the spell, so unless the cleric is also almost dead, it's not the end of the world.

-The Souljourner

 

[Infiniti2000]

Cast a spell (1 standard action casting time) Yes

This line is irrelevant as the cleric was not in a threatened area when he cast the spell.

Use touch spell on up to six friends Yes

This line is also irrelevant as it's for a full round action. This doesn't exist in the Standard Actions table, or better yet the description on casting a spell and then moving up and touching someone. Touching six friends is significantly different than touching one. You should not base your decision on a significantly different rule.

Touch Spells in Combat
Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject, either in the same round or any time later. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) the target. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.

Note that nothing here says that touching the target (friend or not) provokes an AoO. Casting does, yes, but not the touching. The next paragraph says that touching an enemy does not provoke an AoO, but it doesn't even have to be an attack spell. You could cast cure light wounds (defensively let's say so that casting does not provoke) and touch an opponent and it does not provoke an AoO. Why would touching an ally provoke?

 

[Faradon]

In this situation I would give the fighter an AoO without much question to it and without a Dex check or anything else.

In this situation the warrior purposely positioned himself, standing over the body, to prevent exactly such an action. I'm not going to penalize the player for using a good tactic because of poorly written or ambiguous rules and not allow him an attack.

Don't be afraid to apply some common sense and good judgement to the rules... they are far from perfect...

 

[Telas]

There seem to be three schools on this:

1. It draws an AoO, since the cleric is both exposed and has to turn his attention to the fallen buddy. Reaching into someone else's square draws the AoO, not the spell.

2. By virtue of making an attack roll, the cleric does not draw an AoO, so the "defender" would have to have a readied action to be able to attack. However, the cleric can miss his attack.

3. Rules-as-written do not address this specific situation, so it's just the same as if the defender were not there.

To clarify, we're not talking about anyone's potential AoO except the defender standing over the unconscious body.

I lean towards the first option. Although I do see the argument in the second option, calling it an attack to avoid AoO smells slightly of rules manipulation. The third option is a bit unrealistic (yes, I know we're talking D&D combat).

To boil it down: Does reaching into an occupied square draw an AoO? (no - think of a touch spell.) Does grabbing something from the floor of an occupied square draw an AoO? (yes - just as grabbing something from the floor of a threatened square does.) Where does this action fall between these?

Please, keep discussing. This is the kind of stuff I like about ENworld forums - intelligent discussion of the grey areas in the rules.

Telas

(PS: The action was potentially fatal - the cleric was injured and the defender was a 13th level Barbarian with a Keen Greataxe, normally getting 30+ points per hit, occasionally critting for over 90.)

 

[Artoomis]

I think the rules are clear. Delivering a touch spell as part of a standard action does not draw an AoO. In this case, the fighter COULD ready an action, but he can't do that in the same round that he made the attack that dropped his opponent.

Note that this is important because it's the same rule that let's you heal your allies when they are in combat.

Now, the wrinkle here is that you are reaching into the SAME SQUARE as the fighter. If you like, you could, perhaps, equate this to picking up an item which draws an AoO. It's quite similar - but not really the same. It would be reasonable to do this, but it would not really be in line with the rules, exactly.

 

[TheGogmagog]

I lean towards the first option. Although I do see the argument in the second option, calling it an attack to avoid AoO smells slightly of rules manipulation. The third option is a bit unrealistic (yes, I know we're talking D&D combat).

To boil it down: Does reaching into an occupied square draw an AoO? (no - think of a touch spell.) Does grabbing something from the floor of an occupied square draw an AoO? (yes - just as grabbing something from the floor of a threatened square does.) Where does this action fall between these?

I agree with you, It is fuzzy, but I lean towards it drawing an AoO.

I disagree that reaching into an occupied square doesn't draw an AoO. There are more cases where doing so does draw an AoO, like grappling, tripping, disarming. I suspect that a touch spell does not draw an AoO because the caster is armed. The touch spell is also typically delivered from a standing caster to a standing defender. Having the target on the ground of an occupied square changes the situation, even if it's not spelled out in the table.

For a different point of view reverse the situation. Your front line fighter goes down while the cleric behind him is still holding the charge of a cure serious. The opponent takes a 5' step forward over the body. On the cleric's turn he wants to deliver the heal spell. Still sounds like an AoO to me.

I don't think I would impose the same penalty for simply delivering a touch spell while within threatened squares, like if the cleric was within 5' or the opponent had reach.

 

[Telas]

As a tangent, the barbarian missed, but the same situation rose later in the combat when one of the enemy survivors cast Teleport from a scroll and got whacked while reaching out for her comrades (that we were standing over).

The DM ruled that the spell went off, but she arrived dead. That's got to make an interesting situation on the other end...

Telas

 

[azhrei_fje]

I agree with you, It is fuzzy, but I lean towards it drawing an AoO.

I agree as well.

If the cleric were attempting to harm the fighter (inflict light wounds, for instance), then the cleric is armed and the AoO doesn't apply.

However, the cleric is clearly not aiming for the fighter (I'm assuming the fighter can tell this quite easily, since the cleric is bent over or kneeling and leaning towards his comrade with an outstretched arm). So the concept of a touch spell not provoking doesn't apply, IMO.

The next closest analogy, as mentioned by multiple posters, is the act of reaching into an opponent's square to retrieve something. In any case, it's clear that the cleric is focused on healing his buddy and not on dodging the blows of the fighter. That is the essence of the AoO rules. (The DM could, in a way, rule that the cleric is denied his Dex bonus while attempting to heal his buddy, but I think that's going too far.)

In the situation given, the fighter should have just attacked the prone creature again, just to finish him off! My players know that I'm not against having an NPC move up to heal one of their buddies (just like the party would do), so the party tends to be a bit on the vicious side and make sure that the BBEG is really dead!

I don't think I would impose the same penalty for simply delivering a touch spell while within threatened squares, like if the cleric was within 5' or the opponent had reach.

Agreed. The AoO is provoked by reaching into another creature's occupied area without threatening said creature. If the RAW don't state it that way, they probably should.

 

[Infiniti2000]

In the situation given, the fighter should have just attacked the prone creature again, just to finish him off! My players know that I'm not against having an NPC move up to heal one of their buddies (just like the party would do), so the party tends to be a bit on the vicious side and make sure that the BBEG is really dead!

Make sure you do the same thing to the PCs. Be viscious. When a PC drops unconscious, go for the jugular.

 

[Artoomis]

...Agreed. The AoO is provoked by reaching into another creature's occupied area without threatening said creature. If the RAW don't state it that way, they probably should.

I agree that this is a pretty good summary of the relevant AoO rules.