Pathfinder 2E Less Opportunity Attacks

[Jaeger]

...Even more generally, Attacks of Opportunity or Opportunity Attacks were added to 3rd edition and retained in 5th edition because movement was and is free. ...

I think it is also an artifact of AC being a passive defense. There are really no rolls to Defend in D&D.

An enemy goblin runs at you, rolls to hit, then as they only used half their movement, they keep going past!

AoO is a way to not allow Monsters or PC's to get in a "free hit".

...So yes, the basic core reason was to make "entering melee" a significant decision. It wouldn't feel right if your foe could just leg it with you being unable to do anything about it.
...

It's interesting that in real life you opponent can do exactly that!

From a gaming perspective I understand the reasoning behind AoO. But IMHO, sometimes game designers overthink stuff a bit too much.

But having played many games that do not have AoO, I find it largely an artifact of D&D style systems.

 

[CapnZapp]

It's interesting that in real life you opponent can do exactly that!

Well, real life is simply not the desired ideal of some games or gamers.

In a movie, for instance, you don't expect the heroes to swashbuckle their way past the guards to reach the evil Cardinal without some sort of struggle. The role of the guards is to shield their employer.

Whether a guard is powerless to prevent you from exiting the duel (in either direction) in real life is simply not a concern in many aspects of a ttrpg - namely the "game" aspect and the "story" aspect.

Cheers

 

[Schmoe]

But because there's so many things that require an action, you don't want to move unless you have to. Even if you have a big penalty, it's always better to make an extra attack and hope for a 20 than just move or waste an action. Unless you're a mobile character with a move-and-attack action, you're always better planting yourself in a good position and unloading.

I realize I'm a little late to the party here, so apologies for the late reply. I still haven't had a chance to play, but my impression from reading quite a few play reports is that actually movement is critical to doing well in the game. Since you are often outmatched, an opponent's 2nd and 3rd attacks are much more likely to land than yours, which makes it more worthwhile to move away and force the opponent to waste actions following you around than to stick around and crit-fish on a long-shot while taking much greater damage in return. All of the playgroups I've read who say they finally feel like they are doing well in encounters mention how critical movement is to the gameplay.

<shrug> Just thought I'd pass that along, in case your experience is different.

 

[Tallifer]

In King Stannis's words, "Fewer."

 

[Jaeger]

Well, real life is simply not the desired ideal of some games or gamers. ...

Like I said, I understand the reasoning behind AoO.

I just think having played many game systems without it, that it is largely unnecessary.

In a movie, for instance, you don't expect the heroes to swashbuckle their way past the guards to reach the evil Cardinal without some sort of struggle. ...

Running an on and off Swashbuckling game right now between 5e sessions. The system has no AoO.

And the above scenario you highlight (which I had occur in game) is simply not an issue because I had the NPC guards move and position themselves in an intelligent manner.

 

[Zaukrie]

Like I said, I understand the reasoning behind AoO.

I just think having played many game systems without it, that it is largely unnecessary.



Running an on and off Swashbuckling game right now between 5e sessions. The system has no AoO.

And the above scenario you highlight (which I had occur in game) is simply not an issue because I had the NPC guards move and position themselves in an intelligent manner.

I'm not arguing with you on any of that, btw.....

 

[Jaeger]

I'm not arguing with you on any of that, btw.....

Personally, I think AoO is just an artifact of the way D&D chooses to do combat since 3e.

No other game system really uses it. And you don't hear of issues with those combat systems.

PF2 just changed the way character actions are done in combat and they were largely able to just drop AoO.

As Much as 5e caters to theatre of the mind - AoO is still in there due to the standard 5' square grid combat structure that is still very much a part of the underlying combat rules.

.

 

[CapnZapp]

And the above scenario you highlight (which I had occur in game) is simply not an issue because I had the NPC guards move and position themselves in an intelligent manner.

Can I ask you to not phrase it like others are running their NPCs in a less intelligent manner? This isn't about GMing it wrong.

If you have a game where a hero somehow "sticks" to an enemy as soon as he comes into contact with it, that helps the fiction where you can't simply run past opponents (and monsters can't run past your fighter character either).

If you don't, then three guards in a passage four squares wide simply can't do anything about a hero using all his movement to move past the guards. There's no intelligent positioning to be had, unless by "intelligent" you mean "not using a battlemap" and essentially not using the rules of the game by saying "the three guards can easily prevent you from running past them". How do they do that? In game-mechanical terms, I mean?

This is the scenario attacks of opportunity are created to mitigate.

Regards

 

[CapnZapp]

No other game system really uses it.

Warhammer Fantasy Role-Play already in its first edition gave creatures a free whack at people moving away from them in combat. I'm sure many fantasy games make an attempt at preventing/mitigating the "run past" issue inherent in any "i go you go" combat model.

The similarities to formalized attacks of opportunities are clear.

 

[Jaeger]

Can I ask you to not phrase it like others are running their NPCs in a less intelligent manner? This isn't about GMing it wrong.

Can I ask you not to project things into what I wrote that aren't there?

If you have a game where a hero somehow "sticks" to an enemy as soon as he comes into contact with it, that helps the fiction Genre Emulation where you can't simply run past opponents (and monsters can't run past your fighter character either).

If not being able to run past your opponents is something the game designer wants to emphasize, than AoO helps with this.

D&D does this. Other games do not.

PF2 does not have universal AoO - and if reading peoples experiences with the game on this site is any indication, it is simply not an issue.

If you don't, then three guards in a passage four squares wide simply can't do anything about a hero using all his movement to move past the guards. There's no intelligent positioning to be had, unless by "intelligent" you mean "not using a battlemap" and essentially not using the rules of the game by saying "the three guards can easily prevent you from running past them". How do they do that? In game-mechanical terms, I mean?
....

I will venture a guess that you see a PC or Enemy just being able to run past or away from an opponent on their turn is an issue.

Some games do not see it as an issue at all.

... I'm sure many fantasy games make an attempt at preventing/mitigating the "run past" issue inherent in any "i go you go" combat model.
...

I'm sure they do as well, but a D&D style AoO is not the only way to deal with such an issue - assuming of course that the game designer sees it as an issue with his combat system at all.

.