AoO Headaches...

[Hypersmurf]

Just a gentle reminder to check the sticky thread at the top of the forum before deciding to head off on a published rules vs FAQ 'What's right?' tangent.

-Hyp.
(Moderator)

 

[WD40]

Just a gentle reminder to check the sticky thread at the top of the forum before deciding to head off on a published rules vs FAQ 'What's right?' tangent.

-Hyp.
(Moderator)

No probs... looks as though I've got my answer anyhoo... I was just curious...

Cheers all!

 

[Infiniti2000]

You're quite right, I guess I have a habit of overeacting when things trip up my interpretations like this...

No problem. In actuality, I think trading a few attacks of opporunity would be pretty neat, much like Patryn illustrated.

Is there already a thread on that? Could I trouble you for a link?

There might be a thread, but I don't have search capability. I could be thinking of other forums. Anyway, since you asked and are the original poster, let me briefly describe both sides. The assumption here is that you plan to take a full attack action and have BAB +6 or higher.

Sunder is a Standard Action
Sunder is a standard action because it's listed as such in the standard actions table.

Sunder is a Melee Attack
Note that Attack (melee) is also listed as a standard action in the table, but the full attack action let's you take more than one per round, which is an exception to the one standard action per round rule (except for Hyper chokers, of course ). Because Sunder specifically says "You can use a melee attack ..." I (and others who support my position) argue that Sunder can be used in a full attack action in place of the regular melee attack action. Even if one views this as a conflict between the Sunder text and the table, text takes precedence.

Rebuttal for Sunder is a Standard Action
None of the other special attacks (that specify as "melee attack") are listed on the Standard Actions table, so the same equivalency of Sunder==Melee Attack cannot be made as it is for disarm or trip. Additionally, there is the footnote under the Miscellaneous Actions table specifically and only for disarm, grapple, and trip that says "These attack forms substitute for a melee attack, not an action. As melee attacks, they can be used once in an attack or charge action, one or more times in a full attack action, or even as an attack of opportunity. "

Patryn, is that succinct and accurate?

Edit: Added footnote.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Patryn, is that succinct and accurate?

You forgot the footnote.

-Hyp.

 

[Gaiden]

On a rules board, one would have to agree with this FAQ answer. Nothing in RAW prevents you from using a Trip in place of an AoO attack.
Also nothing prevents that attempted trip to draw an AoO from the person you are tripping.
If you happen to be using a weapon to do so, nothing prevents him from attempting a counter trip...or any other action that can be substituted for a 'normal' attack.

Normally the insanity stops here, as you pointed out only 1 AoO per round. Only when someone in the interplay has Combat relfexes can it go farther..

Last in, First out.. just like the M:tG card game. If his sunder is succesfull, your trip attempt fails.. and he has saved himself.

I have seen this alot and you are absolutely mistaken about it. You only receive an AoO when you threaten your target. Therefore, it logically follows that you can only take that AoO with an action that would result from threatening your target. Because tripping is unarmed (unless specifically using a tripping weapon) and you must have IUS to threaten an area with unarmed attacks, unless you have IUS, you cannot trip on an AoO unless you do so with a tripping weapon. In this case, I think the character had a staff of some sort, so could in fact trip with that, of course, the sunderer was getting the initial AoO.

 

[Legildur]

<snip> you cannot trip on an AoO unless you do so with a tripping weapon. In this case, I think the character had a staff of some sort, so could in fact trip with that, of course, the sunderer was getting the initial AoO.

I didn't think that a staff was a tripping weapon? Or do you mean that since a melee weapon was being wielded that they therefore threatened and could then take the AOO, but using a trip attack instead?

 

[Felnar]

Take someone without Improved Unarmed Strike, wielding a dagger, in combat with someone without Improved Trip who is not wielding a tripping weapon.

You could describe it as:

"I make an unarmed attack, which provokes."
"Well, I try to trip you first."
"Well, then, I'll stab you with my dagger first. *roll* I do three damage."
"*roll* I trip you."
"*roll* I hit you with my unarmed strike, and do two damage."

would Redgar take penalties for fighting with two weapons?

 

[dcollins]

Any other interpretations/opinions out there? Who (if anyone) is right?

This is a black-and-white "yes" in the core rules of the PHB. Check out the Combat chapter, "Table: Actions in Combat". Disarm, Grapple, and Trip all have a footnote. The footnote says this:

These attack forms substitute for a melee attack, not an action. As melee attacks, they can be used once in an attack or charge action, one or more times in a full attack action, or even as an attack of opportunity.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

would Redgar take penalties for fighting with two weapons?

In my game? No. You take TWF penalties "when fighting this way," which to me means "when taking advantage of the TWF rules to make an extra attack in a full-attack action." It does not mean, to me, "whever you are holding something weapon-like in each hand."

 

[Felnar]

In my game? No. You take TWF penalties "when fighting this way," which to me means "when taking advantage of the TWF rules to make an extra attack in a full-attack action." It does not mean, to me, "whever you are holding something weapon-like in each hand."

its not that he's holding something, its that Redgar is wielding a fist and a knife in the same round
so would you rule that someone wielding a longspear could make adjacent AoO's with armor-spikes. All without TWF penalties?