Absurd AoO.... what can be done?

[MarkB]

You mentioned wildshape, so disarming or sundering won't help you.

The other option is total concealment. Use foes who can throw down areas of magical darkness (your Drow are a start, but their Darkness ability only creates dim light), or who can blind opponents, or who can use invisibility in combat.

 

[Crothian]

Unfortunately, this one player likes to think it's a competition.

Part of me is to the point of just removing him from the group period, but I am worried that would cause friction in the group.

After a few years of putting up with players like that I just lost interest and now I refuse to play with that kind of player. It's not any fun for me and many times it is not fun for the other people at the table.

 

[delericho]

Example- Robillar's Gambit + Double Hit and Improved Combat Reflexes.

Robilar's Gambit is the only troublesome feat here, and is dealt with by using reach weapons, ranged weapons, spells, attacking someone else, or otherwise not provoking. Or, of course, banning the feat.

Double Hit isn't too bad, largely by virtue of the several prerequisites and the fact that it requires you to use a very suboptimal fighting style to get any benefit.

Improved Combat Reflexes is an Epic feat, and so requires you to be level 21+ to get it, and is extremely situational - your opponents need to provoke more times than your Dex would have allowed you AoO's anyway, and how often does that happen (RG aside)?

Note also that neither Double Hit nor Improved Combat Reflexes allows you to make more than a single AoO against any given target in a single round (indeed, ICR in the ELH specifically states that it does not). Robilar's Gambit provides an exception, which is why it is problematic, but the other two do not.

(Edit: that last paragraph is actually in error - there was a change between 3.0e and 3.5e and I got my wires crossed. Sorry.)

 

[the Jester]

Unfortunately, this one player likes to think it's a competition.

Part of me is to the point of just removing him from the group period, but I am worried that would cause friction in the group.

If it's at that point, it isn't going to get any better through handling it in-game.

Let the player know, out of game, that he's ruining the fun for you (and, as the dm, your fun is paramount; the game goes on minus any one player- but not the dm). Explain to him that the game's not a contest, and that you're not willing to compromise the whole game for him. Be gentle, but if you're already thinking of kicking him, you need to resolve the issue soon.

If he's unreceptive, give him the boot. A single bad player is able to ruin everyone's fun. I don't know if your group is annoyed by him, but again, if you as the dm are frustrated and not having fun, the game may be on life support anyway. Instead of pulling the plug, cut out the cancer. Or preferably, get the cancer to turn back into healthy cells. If you'll pardon the kind of horrible metaphor.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

Note also that neither Double Hit nor Improved Combat Reflexes allows you to make more than a single AoO against any given target in a single round (indeed, ICR in the ELH specifically states that it does not). Robilar's Gambit provides an exception, which is why it is problematic, but the other two do not.

Slight nitpick on this: Only a single AoO perr character can be made for a given provoked opportunity. However, if the opponent does some actions that each provoke an AoO then the character is entitled to however many AoO's are doable based on their feats and such. The feats and opportunities to make an AoO are the limiting factor, not an arbitrary number of times a round unless the character doesn't have Combat Reflexes et al, which would put the number of AoOs at 1. The simplest (but also a very unlikely to actually happen) example of a character provoking multiple AoOs from a character with regular Combat Reflexes would be one that moved out of the character's weapon threat range with a normal move action (thus provoking the first AoO), then moving back into the threat range (doesn't provoke) and again moving out (which provokes the second AoO).

A more likely scenario than an enemy willfully leaving itself open to be hit twice from movement is if there was a spellcaster against a foe with Combat Reflexes and Stand Still. If the caster tries to move out of threat range with a normal move action (and for whatever reason can't get out of threat range with a 5-foot step), they provoke an AoO and could get hit with a Stand Still AoO, which means they might be forced to not move. If the caster then tries to cast a spell and fails the concentration check to cast defensively or doesn't have another way to not provoke an AoO, the spell cast also provokes an AoO.

Or an enemy with 6 or more BAB but without the necessary feats to make, say, disarming not provoke an AoO (Improved Disarm takes away the AoO possibility) could provoke two from the same person by trying to disarm them twice.

As has been mentioned though, Double Hit doesn't change the number of AoOs technically, and it's suboptimal anyway since splitting the damage between two weapons with an accuracy penalty too is quite crappy. Adding salt in the wounds is the wasteful number of feats to get to that point. And the two weapons will cost more than a single too.


But the other advice still stands: If the player is currently causing issues with the game, you're probably better off dealing with the player through methods outside the game rather than in. Besides your own fun being taken down, talk with the other players to see how they feel about that sort of thing. Also let the players know the consequences of one of the players using that tactic, which will likely be that since you're not having as much fun anymore you're less willing to put forth the effort to make the game as enjoyable for all, and the game will definitely suffer for it.

 

[RangerWickett]

AoOs are ridiculous anyway. If Inigo and Westley are dueling, and Fezzik walks behind Westley's back, the Dread Pirate can spin around and take his opportunity attack without apparently ever dropping his guard against Inigo.

Also, you get one bonus attack this way per round (unless you have Combat Reflexes). So by the logic of the game, I guess if someone nearby you isn't defending themselves, you can attack them for free, right? But the rules won't let you, say, use your opportunity attack to cut a rope holding up a chandelier, or to stab an enemy caught with hold person. I mean, they're not defending themselves, are they? But nope, that's unrealistic apparently. But thrusting your longspear at four people coming from four different directions -- all in the same round you make a full attack against someone else -- that's perfectly fine.

Long story short, I say just get rid of the damned things. Institute a new rule, perhaps, that if you take an action that would normally provoke an opportunity attack, instead you take a -4 penalty to AC until the start of your next turn.

 

[Celebrim]

But thrusting your longspear at four people coming from four different directions -- all in the same round you make a full attack against someone else -- that's perfectly fine.

Well, performing 4 AoO requires a feat combat reflexes to represent the uncanny and above normal skill required to pull that off, right?

So, what if I told you that there was also a feat at my table that gave a person the uncanny and above normal skill to make attacks on nearby objects without dropping his guard to do so?

At least in my case, your complaint is rendered without substance.

But I think in general, the substance of your complaint is based on a false narration of the events leading to an attack of opportunity. Fezzik walking up behind Wesley's back doesn't provoke an AoO. You do not provoke an AoO for entering someone's threat zone. Fezzik only provokes an AoO if he tries to dart past the DPR's in order to get behind him, which Fezzik could perhaps do successfully if he had a gift for 'Mobility'.

Alas, he's lacking in 'Agility'.

 

[James the Newbie]

I'm going to go with a bit of a wordy post, because power gaming is something I'm trying to recover from myself and that I feel I have a reasonable insight into


It's really important to understand why he has built his character in a way that's disrupting the game and not just 'how to deal with it.' No one worth playing with thinks to themselves 'I'm going to build a broken character and spoil this game for everyone' (I'd bet good money your friend at the table doesn't)


A DM who understands this is in a position start asking why someone is playing in a way that lessens the enjoyment for the others at the table (or you as a DM) and get the opportunity to help players grow, and to grow as a DM in the process.


People power play for loads of different reasons, but it all comes down to the big issue that they don't understand what D&D is about, they see it as something other than a role play experience (usually as a 2D puzzle game, or a some form of challenge without real living beings to interact with)


You will go a lot further working with the person on fleshing out their character and getting them to act in character as part of the story than you will working with them on their abilities which they already see as 2D and want to get the most out of.


What struck home for me was reading Darths and Droids and someone calling me out as being the player who acted like R2 did in the comic http://darthsanddroids.net/episodes/0001.html


If you show them the way they are acting, and present them with the alternative, you haven't just dealt with a single (or even group of) deadly abilities, you've helped someone learn to play the game in a new and ultimately more rewarding way. You've learned to deal not just with a single problem, but with power gamers as they come and go.


It's a lot easier to ban or nerf someone that it is to convince someone they are at fault and that they need to change their attitude. But the second away is far more rewarding long term for everyone at the table.


I'd personally suggest telling the player his character is very well built, but the fact that it's so well built makes it hard for the party to play with them before taking through all this and asking if they would be willing to roll a new character. This gives them the chance to build someone they really want to play as rather than a set of statistics they really want to play with.


And I'll finish my dealing with them shpeal by saying its a slow road, his first new character will still probably be a little over the top, but that's ok, let people have a few perks so long as it's a step in the right direction. it will all improve with time and effort, and you should be able to see the work that used to go into making a truly powerful character goes into playing a truly in depth 3D personality.


---


When it comes to other players in the party, who just don't feel they match up to the others, try giving them rewards for roleplaying well and abilities that link to their character, by strengthening all of the less powerful characters to something that balances to that of the stronger players you've created an equal party by helping struggling players rather than punishing successful ones.


It's a lot harder to complain about your ally getting stronger than it is to complain about you getting weaker. I don't know many players who would go 'no I don't want that new cool ability' or 'why are you making our team stronger, that sucks'


Then all you need to do is make the new monsters challenge rating appropriate by buffing them a little and your done

 

[delericho]

Slight nitpick on this: Only a single AoO perr character can be made for a given provoked opportunity. However, if the opponent does some actions that each provoke an AoO then the character is entitled to however many AoO's are doable based on their feats and such.

Sorry, I'm going to have to ask for a cite for that. Both Combat Reflexes (PHB) and Improved Combat Reflexes (ELH) specify one AoO per target per round, not per opportunity. And, as this discussion indicates, it's an important balancing rule.

Edit: Aw, crap. Sorry, my bad - this was a change between the 3.0e PHB and the 3.5e PHB. Sorry.

So, yes, you're right.

 

[MarkB]

Sorry, I'm going to have to ask for a cite for that. Both Combat Reflexes (PHB) and Improved Combat Reflexes (ELH) specify one AoO per target per round, not per opportunity. And, as this discussion indicates, it's an important balancing rule.

I can't see such text in the SRD version of Combat Reflexes, or the general rule on Attacks of Opportunity. It says you can't take more than one attack per opportunity, not per opponent.