How does that help to avoid OAs?
The logic of OAs
It can be even more, since some monsters get more than one turn (e.g. ettins).
Black Knight Irios
Explorer
If you want it expressed like a mathematical formula try this:
x = number of combatants (enemies, allies, you, whatever) in an encounter
y = max. number of OAs per round
y = x - 1 (-1 because you can't use an OA on your own turn)
x = number of combatants (enemies, allies, you, whatever) in an encounter
y = max. number of OAs per round
y = x - 1 (-1 because you can't use an OA on your own turn)
RangerWickett
Legend
I'm actually fine with bopping folks who run past you. I'm more amused that you can get all these easy attacks against people, but not against inanimate objects. Heck, it's fair to require a standard action to drop a chandelier, because you've got to cut the rope and make sure the enemy stays under the target spot. But I've had a couple of GMs who balk at the idea of easily smashing unattended things during combat.
Likewise, once my ranger was blinded by a spray of acid in the face. I kept failing saves, and was blind, so I wanted to use a Heal check to grant myself an extra save. But nope, by the rules as written, you can only scrape acid out of your buddy's eyes, not your own. Though, again rules as written, I could make my falcon animal companion perform a Heal check on me to grant me a save.
(In 3e, I witnessed a barbarian player who wanted to chase after a badguy who had used an unseen servant to close a door behind him as he fled. By the rules, the PC couldn't run to the door, open it, and keep running. However, he had spring attack, so he could move to the door, destroy it with a power attack, and keep moving through.)
I'm just pointing out that sometimes the rules come across as a little silly.
Likewise, once my ranger was blinded by a spray of acid in the face. I kept failing saves, and was blind, so I wanted to use a Heal check to grant myself an extra save. But nope, by the rules as written, you can only scrape acid out of your buddy's eyes, not your own. Though, again rules as written, I could make my falcon animal companion perform a Heal check on me to grant me a save.
(In 3e, I witnessed a barbarian player who wanted to chase after a badguy who had used an unseen servant to close a door behind him as he fled. By the rules, the PC couldn't run to the door, open it, and keep running. However, he had spring attack, so he could move to the door, destroy it with a power attack, and keep moving through.)
I'm just pointing out that sometimes the rules come across as a little silly.
Squire James
First Post
I think of it this way: when those 4 guys went past you, presumably they had some objective in mind other than getting beat upon by you. For instance, if they're clearly off to geek your wizard, you desperately lash out at them as they pass by in hopes of either killing them or making them reconsider going after the wizard. If you don't care about the wizard, you can always let them through if you wish.
The chandelier rope is an entirely different issue. Unless that thing's hanging awfully low, it's an attack on something a little out of reach or actually some kind of thrown weapon attack. I can see those being standard actions. The gamist within me wants to apply a game balance rule to these things: if the falling chandelier causes enough damage to be an effective attack in itself it is a standard action; if it just causes combat advantage or other slightly debilitating effect it is a minor action.
The chandelier rope is an entirely different issue. Unless that thing's hanging awfully low, it's an attack on something a little out of reach or actually some kind of thrown weapon attack. I can see those being standard actions. The gamist within me wants to apply a game balance rule to these things: if the falling chandelier causes enough damage to be an effective attack in itself it is a standard action; if it just causes combat advantage or other slightly debilitating effect it is a minor action.
UngeheuerLich
Legend
2e had attacks of opportunity... at least we played with them...
Aulirophile
First Post
Can't take OAs on your own turn.
Because Readying an Action is a Standard, but the Action goes off as an Immediate Reaction. Since you cannot take Immediate Reactions on your own turn, you are clearly taking it on someone else's turn. So "These five guys ready a charge, when their leader goes, they'll go." Leader rushes off, Fighter gets an OA on the leader (or not, up to the Fighter) then all five guys, still on the boss guys turn, charge as an Immediate Reaction. Bam, six guys move on the same turn, you only get one OA.
This defeats stuff like Visions of Avarice, as well. Ready an action to walk out of the burst if you pass your save vs Immobilize (which is why clever Wizards also slow the enemies, wheee).
As a DM my intelligent monsters are incredibly frustrating for my players. My dumb ones are just walk overs though, hehe.
Saeviomagy
Adventurer
Yup, OAs are a construct almost entirely concocted to stop people running past each other in a turn based system. Thankfully 4e mostly restricts it to this, and doesn't have the massive list of OA situations that 3.5 did.
It works pretty well at that.
As to why you can't smash every inanimate object within range because they've let their guard down? I always just assumed that when you attack an inanimate object, that sort of thing is taken into account: I doubt that destroying a door would ordinarily be easier than stabbing a kobold to death - the numbers assume that you're making multiple successful attacks against the door for each one against the creature.
I'd totally agree on the saving throw stuff though: in fact I'd go so far as to say that the heal mechanics are completely wrong for almost any save-granting scenario.
On fire? You need a heal check to put the fire out! Immobilised by a net? Heal check! Paralysed by magic? Heal check! Covered in sewage and retching? Heal check!
There needs to be a general "by spending a standard action you can grant any creature a saving throw". Trained heal should have a special "when granting a save against the following effects, you may roll a heal check. The target uses the result of this heal check or his own saving throw to determine success".
It works pretty well at that.
As to why you can't smash every inanimate object within range because they've let their guard down? I always just assumed that when you attack an inanimate object, that sort of thing is taken into account: I doubt that destroying a door would ordinarily be easier than stabbing a kobold to death - the numbers assume that you're making multiple successful attacks against the door for each one against the creature.
I'd totally agree on the saving throw stuff though: in fact I'd go so far as to say that the heal mechanics are completely wrong for almost any save-granting scenario.
On fire? You need a heal check to put the fire out! Immobilised by a net? Heal check! Paralysed by magic? Heal check! Covered in sewage and retching? Heal check!
There needs to be a general "by spending a standard action you can grant any creature a saving throw". Trained heal should have a special "when granting a save against the following effects, you may roll a heal check. The target uses the result of this heal check or his own saving throw to determine success".
FreeTheSlaves
Adventurer
I know there were rules for smacking combatants fleeing battle, but not if they, err "fled" forward through your front ranks to your second-liners.
Wasn't there in 1e, because actions were declared before initiative, and entering melee pretty much stopped your effective movement. (The AD&D rules are very abstract when it comes to movement).
Once you're in melee, to move requires a Fighting Withdrawal or Retreat!
Cheers!
