Aid another in attacks?

[Hypersmurf]

Also, Tatsukun's example doesn't work unless his minion has the "Improved Unarmed Strike" feat

It's arguable.

You don't need to actually threaten; you just need to be in a position to make a melee attack. You could aid from 15 feet away with a whip, for example, since you're in a position to make a melee attack, despite not threatening.

-Hyp.

 

[James McMurray]

Keep in mind, of course, that rats aren't intelligent enough to aid another in combat. nothing with an intelligence of 3 or lower would be able to perform such an act.

I would allow pack animals to do it as part of a flank & harry tactic, ot unlike wolves taking down a moose.

 

[Herpes Cineplex]

Personally, I'd be much more afraid of 23 attacks (keeping in mind that that's 23 chances to roll a natural 20) than one attack that's bound to hit.

Well, that's not really the point of the rule, is it?

The real point of the action is not having to roll 23d20 (and more importantly, not having to make the player wait while you roll 23d20). The single best use of aid another when used by NPCs is reducing the number of times you have to roll something and make the player wait for the results. Getting that one attack that's bound to hit, that's just a bonus; it may just be nuisance damage, but at least it makes the PC feel better about slaughtering them wholesale, because hey, they HIT him.

--
i might be more afraid of 23 attacks, but i'm also likely to be more bored by them
ryan

 

[James McMurray]

I just throw my d20s 10-15 at a time and scan them for the ones that hit. It helps when mooks are all virtual clones of one another.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Well, that's not really the point of the rule, is it?

The real point of the action is not having to roll 23d20 (and more importantly, not having to make the player wait while you roll 23d20). The single best use of aid another when used by NPCs is reducing the number of times you have to roll something and make the player wait for the results.

Aid Another: You make an attack roll against AC 10. If you succeed, your friend gains either a +2 bonus on his next attack roll against that opponent...

Aid Another doesn't change the number of attack rolls you make Unless they all have multiple attacks.

-Hyp.

 

[Caliban]

Yes...



... no. Rats have a 0' reach, so they can't threaten the giant rat's target.

As Tiny creatures, you can fit four in a square, and they have to be in their opponent's square to make a melee attack... I'm not sure if you can fit four Tiny creatures and a Medium creature they're attacking in the same square, but that's certainly the upper limit on how many can Aid the giant rat.

-Hyp.

Now do four tiny creatures with reach weapons. Fear the Grig army.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Now do four tiny creatures with reach weapons. Fear the Grig army.

Heh. You'd fit 32 around you with no Cover penalties, and all with flanking bonuses, wouldn't you?

-Hyp.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Perhaps I should be embarassed, but my low level gnome druid has often used Aid Another. With his Str 10, small sized weapons, and a poor weapon selection exacerbated by emcumberance limitations, the amount of damage I could do is much less valuable on average than a +2 for my buddy with the greatsword.

If I cast Shillelagh on my club, I do okay attacking the normal way. Otherwise Aid Another is definitely the way to go. At least until I can wildshape...

 

[Khristos]

My mage uses Summon monster spells to use for aid another and threaten areas. Pretty handy for getting flanks with rogues.

 

[Herpes Cineplex]

Aid Another doesn't change the number of attack rolls you make

Sure it does. Just look at their attack bonuses, figure out what percentage of them are going to hit AC10, and that tells you how many of them just aided their buddy. Make the one attack roll at the obligatory huge bonus, let the player know that they're swarming all over him, and move on to the next guy. Or if there are enough of them, don't even bother with the math, just figure that the guy they're helping can't help but be hit.

...what, you didn't think I was going to recommend the lazy way out?

If you're looking at 23-on-1, odds are you're working with such puny monsters or such a studly PC that the fight's just going to be a very low speedbump, just a warmup for a later combat against something that can actually be a real threat. I think I'd prefer to invest my time (and my attention to the rules-as-written) accordingly.

And even if you rolled all 23d20 anyway, 22 of those rolls would be really fast (just keeping track of which ones rolled high enough to hit AC10 so you could put the right bonus on roll #23) and you'd still only have to make one damage roll at the end of it. If you've got unusually lucky dice, that can save you a lot of time (no checking for criticals except on the last roll, no damage rolls except for the last one, etc.).

Unless they all have multiple attacks.

Yeah, that too.

--
i treat npcs so very badly sometimes