AoO...Cleave...again...

[ForceUser]

Can you trip on an AoO without a "trip weapon"? Since trip is an unarmed touch attack, I would think you must be threatening the area with an unarmed attack (such as a monk) to be able to use trip or grapple as an AoO.

Can a bodyguard (currently armed with shield and sword) trip someone who tries to run past him? Can he grapple? (Grappling would mean he'd have to drop the sword, but such a free action must occur on his turn, so could not happen in an AoO.)

Am I correct?

Quasqueton

Well, there's RAW, and there's what I'd allow in my game. If a player wanted to drop his sword to grapple on an AoO, I'd allow it. Likewise, I'd allow him a trip attempt, even if he wasn't a monk. Of course, he's going to provoke an AoO if he attacks unarmed without Improved Unarmed Strike, so it all balances out. It's not gamebreaking to allow these actions, and there are consequences to taking them, such as disarming oneself and drawing AoOs of your own. Seems like a fair tradeoff to me, and it allows players the opportunity to make heroic last-ditch, potentially fight-winning maneuvers, which I like.

 

[Dimwhit]

Yes, you can trip as part of an AoO. And, yes, you can also grapple as part of an AoO. Anything that takes the place of an 'attack' action can be used as part of the AoO.

Pinotage

Well, I do believe you have to at least have a weapon that threatens in your hand first. If you have no weapons, and you don't have IUS, you don't threaten and therefore can't even take the AoO in the first place. But if you somehow threaten, you can absolutely take those actions during an AoO.

 

[Pinotage]

Well, I do believe you have to at least have a weapon that threatens in your hand first. If you have no weapons, and you don't have IUS, you don't threaten and therefore can't even take the AoO in the first place. But if you somehow threaten, you can absolutely take those actions during an AoO.

Somehow I read with rather than without!

Pinotage

 

[IanB]

I don't think it stretches credibility at all for a guy to stick out a leg and trip that guy running past him.

 

[irdeggman]

I don't think it stretches credibility at all for a guy to stick out a leg and trip that guy running past him.

Right but this is the rules board and not the common sense or it works great scenematically (neither of which I am opposed to by the way) - but per the RAW you can use any kind of special attack method you are capable of making as part of an AoO.

Now can a player make a trip attack as part of an AoO? I think the answer is yes but unless he has a trip weapon of the improved trip feat his AoO generates an AoO against him and thus the circle of life keeps on spinning around. . .

 

[Gaiden]

For an opponent to provoke an AoO you first have to threaten that opponent. Logic would seem to dictate that then you are limited by what attacks you can make that satisfy that first requirement, meaning, if you don't threaten with an unarmed attack, you can't grapple on an AoO, although you could still hit with your sword (which you do threaten with), could still try and sunder (with your sword) (which would provoke an AoO if you didn't have I.S.), etc. At least in my game, this is how it works. If you want to unarmed trip an opponent on an AoO, you first have to threaten an opponent with your unamred attack for tripping (be it through I.T. or I.U.S.).

 

[irdeggman]

For an opponent to provoke an AoO you first have to threaten that opponent. Logic would seem to dictate that then you are limited by what attacks you can make that satisfy that first requirement, meaning, if you don't threaten with an unarmed attack, you can't grapple on an AoO, although you could still hit with your sword (which you do threaten with), could still try and sunder (with your sword) (which would provoke an AoO if you didn't have I.S.), etc. At least in my game, this is how it works. If you want to unarmed trip an opponent on an AoO, you first have to threaten an opponent with your unamred attack for tripping (be it through I.T. or I.U.S.).

AoO are not generated by threatening. Movement causes an AoO - if you move out of a threatened square (unless only taking a 5 ft step or withdrawing).



Now in order to "make" an AoO you have to threaten.

A difference in conceptualization here.

 

[Sanackranib]

yes and yes however you cannot take a trip AoO when someone is getting back up after you have tripped them. this creates a situation where your opponent is always tripped and is defeniatly unbalanceing = especially when coupled with the feats improved trip / reach weapons/ reach due to size etc.

 

[Artoomis]

yes and yes however you cannot take a trip AoO when someone is getting back up after you have tripped them. this creates a situation where your opponent is always tripped and is defeniatly unbalanceing = especially when coupled with the feats improved trip / reach weapons/ reach due to size etc.

This is the subject of some dispute. I'll leave it to someone else to fully present the opposing view, but, in essence, the argument it does not work that way because the action is interrupted.

 

[Infiniti2000]

If you get an AoO, and 'drop' your opponent, can you then use cleave to hit someone else in range?

Yes.

If you trip during an AoO, can you then use Imp Trip to also attack them?

This depends on what you think "melee combat" means. If it's just what it says (RAW), then it's superfluous because all trip attacks are melee attacks and by definition you're in melee combat. However, it's not entirely unreasonable to interpret a different intent as a houserule for it to mean "attacking in melee during your turn." Given that houserule, you can't take the extra attack unless you tripped during your turn.

I thought it useful to illustrate why this question was asked since no one else addressed it.