D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Standing up from prone draws AoOs?

[DWARF]

Tumble through opponents square DC25
Tumble through square opponents threaten DC15
Tumble within your square avoiding AoO (such as kip up, or kicking a sword up for you to grab) DC10

Looks good to me. Keeps the realism but avoids the "trip-hit-trip-hit" cycle.

 

[Darklone]

Don't forget the tumbling dwarves in full plate.

Ack! Do dwarven barbarians in medium armour now retain their movement of 30ft?????

Kewl. Dwarves in breastplate tumble faster and walk faster than anyone else.

 

[DWARF]

Unless I'm mistaken, your armor penalty affects your Tumble rolls. So unless those Dwarf fighters have taken massive amounts of tumble, it's unlikely that they'll be able to pull that trick off...

 

[Li Shenron]

Since everyone has for sure already read the new books or the new SRD, when we talk about if it makes sense "realistically" to trigger an AoO or not when standing up from prone, let's consider also that:

- to Ready/Loose a Shield doesn't provoke an AoO (I wonder... don't you need another hand to do this?)

- to Mount/Dismount a horse doesn't provoke an AoO

- to Open/Close a door doesn't provoke an AoO

- to Draw a weapon (even if hidden) doesn't provoke an AoO

- to Extinguish flames (FRA) doesn't provoke an AoO

We could talk for ages about those actions and if it's fair or not that a PC doesn't really open himself to attacks when doing them.

Besides:

- to Move 10ft close to an opponent can provoke an AoO

- to Sunder a weapon provokes an AoO

- to release a Crossbow bolt in the chest of an opponent after having readied the XBow and having kept it 1foot from his heart still provokes an AoO

D&D still have very good realism IMHO, but many design choices, especially when realism is questionable, follows aims different from realism itself.

 

[Stalker0]

I think people are giving way too much credit to the trip mechanic, it is not as easy as it seems.

First of all, as far as I know, you still have to make a touch attack. That's not automatic.

Second, its an ability score contest. Meaning all of that fighter's weapon focus, weapon spec, +5 magical buzzsaw means jack crap. Furthermore, the defender can choose to go with either a str or dex check, meaning the difference is not going to be a whole lot.

Third, if he fails, then there a countertrip for free. My butt could be on the matt, or I could just give up my weapon and be disarmed.

Fourth, we are talking a huge oppurtunity cost. At mid to higher levels, a fighter with his first attack goes through most AC's like butter. So he is giving up a lot of damage- for the "potential" of dealing more damage and putting the opponent at a disadvantage. Its a gamble, and if you want people to gamble, the reward has to justify the risk.

Frankly, the 3.0 trip mechanic didn't have a lot of reward for the risk. Sure you could take out somebodies full round action, which was nice, but consider how much risk was involved it often times wasn't worth it. From what I can tell reading the forums for the last year or so- a lot of people didn't use trip unless in very very specific circumstances.

So hooray!! Maybe people will actually use special tactics, and break up the boringness of hack and slash.

For all of those people who say the new mechanic is ungodly broken, go ahead and play one of those specialized trip monkeys. You'll have a lot of fun when your constantly putting your opponent to the mat, laughing as he tries to crawl away. And you'll be very embarrased when you waste a large damage dealing strike to trip up a dex 20 rogue and fail, or find yourself the one trying to crawl away.

It is like many things in dnd, AN option, not THE option.

 

[hong]

So hooray!! Maybe people will actually use special tactics,

There are plenty of tactics in D&D. They just work on a different level to the individual-level stunts you're thinking of.

Say you have a typical bunch of PCs fighting a dozen orcs, with a shaman behind them. Do you move to engage the shaman, and risk being cut off? Or do you attack the orcs, and leave the shaman free to throw spells at you? Do you hang back to protect the wizard, or do you attack and draw the orcs' attention away from him? There's your tactics right there. Vary to suit the circumstances, terrain and available resources.

and break up the boringness of hack and slash.

Introducing more combat options does not usually serve to reduce the combat focus of a game.

 

[Pielorinho]

First of all, as far as I know, you still have to make a touch attack. That's not automatic.

Not automatic -- but I can easily design (and have posted in this thread a trip-monkey (literally) that, at tenth level, will hit 95% of touch attacks less than

Second, its an ability score contest. Meaning all of that fighter's weapon focus, weapon spec, +5 magical buzzsaw means jack crap. Furthermore, the defender can choose to go with either a str or dex check, meaning the difference is not going to be a whole lot.

However, someone dedicated to tripping can at tenth level get their bonus up to +22 on this check, via size increases, feats, and strength buffs. (You can actually get it much higher -- this is with a modicum of spell and magic resources). And remember that your opponent also doesn't get weapon focus, weapon spec, +5 magical buzzsaw bonuses either. Your average tenth-level character who isn't optimized for tripping has very little chance of winning this opposed skill check: normally, a +5 is a pretty high bonus to get on the check.

Third, if he fails, then there a countertrip for free. My butt could be on the matt, or I could just give up my weapon and be disarmed.

True, but a remote risk. When you usually have a +17 or greater advantage (i.e., your +22 to an opponent's +5) on an opposed skill check, the chance of your losing two opposed checks in a row is negligible.

Fourth, we are talking a huge oppurtunity cost. At mid to higher levels, a fighter with his first attack goes through most AC's like butter. So he is giving up a lot of damage- for the "potential" of dealing more damage and putting the opponent at a disadvantage. Its a gamble, and if you want people to gamble, the reward has to justify the risk.

Any trip-monkey is going to have the improved trip feat, meaning that when they succeed on a trip attempt, they get a free attack at +4, meaning there's no opportunity cost at all. Furthermore, all their remaining attacks against that opponent are at +4. That's a net opportunity gain. Consider also that a trip-monkey with power attack can choose to power-attack for 4 points with their two-handed weapon: they're still almost certain to hit with their touch attack, their opposed strength roll is unaffected, and all their remaining attacks (including the free one for a successful trip) are against the opponent's normal AC, (+4 for being prone, -4 for power attacking) but do +6 damage. Not an opportunity cost at all.

Frankly, the 3.0 trip mechanic didn't have a lot of reward for the risk. Sure you could take out somebodies full round action, which was nice, but consider how much risk was involved it often times wasn't worth it. From what I can tell reading the forums for the last year or so- a lot of people didn't use trip unless in very very specific circumstances.

Build a trip-monkey and try it out. It was nasty in 3.0, and it's even nastier in 3.5. Sure, the technique isn't fantastic for a normal character -- but it's relatively simple to build a character who's extremely good at it without giving up too much else. And that's the problem.

Daniel

 

[coyote6]

choose to power-attack for 4 points with their two-handed weapon: [...] do +6 damage.

+8 damage. Power Attack w/two-handed weapons is doubled. It ought to have been x1.5 (Andy Collins or someone said so, IIRC), but it isn't.

Well, outside of house rules.

 

[Wippit Guud]

Ray of Enfeeblement! No save!
Trip me now, weaking! MUHUHAHAHAHahack hack *cough* can I have a glass of water please...

 

[Tellerve]

Daniel how'd you get +22? I'm assuming your using some cleric build to get righteous might or something. I see +4 from improved trip, and then well, err as I said I'm guess your going with a cleric build. So normally I'd think your going with a higher wisdom instead of strength. I think the spells you could use are righteous might...I think that's the one that increases your size, so +4. And then your strength and I think that adds to the righteous might (the one that bumps it up to 18). I think that'd make a 22 str, not positive. So that'd be total of +14 as I figure it, +4 imp trip, +4 size, +6 strength. Where is the other +8 coming from? Is there another cleric spell that stacks that I didn't add in?

And, while I agree +14 is somewhat nasty, those spells don't last all that long and so while he is nasty in one battle, he isn't as beefy for a longer sustained combat adventure.

Tellerve