AoO on a AoO?

[Egres]

I was debating with a friend of mine about this problem: can i make a AoO in response to an opponent AoO?

I'm quite sure that the answer is yes, but then he replied me:

"No:the 3.0 FAQ clearly stated that you can't do that, and then, since WotC stated that, unless the FAQ 3.5 would negate this, the 3,0 FAQ remains valid, you can't make a AoO against a AoO!".

Who's right?

Just to add a (lol) "official" reference( ), this is the CustServ reply about this topic:

More in general: can an attack of opportunity cause an attack of opportunity?
And if not, where the manuals say it?

- Yes, you can provoke an attack of opportunity with your attack of opportunity.

How you think to resolve the situation described before if we can make a
loop of attacks of opportunity?

- Whenever you have a loop where the attack of opportunity causes another attack of opportunity, which provoke another, and so on, there is no limit to the number of attacks that can be provoked. Once one of the characters stops provoking an attack and actually makes an attack, then you resolve the attacks in the reverse order that they were provoked.

Thanks!

*Please quote this e-mail in any reply.*

Darrin
Wizards of the Coast Customer Service Department
Wizards of the Coast
1-800-324-6496

 

[Nail]

"No:the 3.0 FAQ clearly stated that you can't do that, and then, since WotC stated that, unless the FAQ 3.5 would negate this, the 3,0 FAQ remains valid, you can't make a AoO against a AoO!".

You'll have to ask him where in the 3.0e FAQ he read that. The link to the FAQs is here

I've looked through both 3.5e and 3.0e FAQs, and can't find anything supporting your friend's position. Besides, there is no "recurring loop", as no one can take an indefinite number of AoOs. It's limited by Dex.

 

[DungeonmasterCal]

A couple years ago, my gaming group nearly broke up after I brought up something similar. Some of the interchange between the players very nearly resulted in physical altercations!

I suggested, on our group's message board, that if you turn to make an AoO against someone moving into your range, then your opponent would then be able to make an AoO against you because you'd turned your attention from him. At the very least, you'd be considered flanked. This still makes sense to me, and some of us even tried some mock combats with yardsticks and such (yeah...we're geeks), and I seemed to have been correct in my assumptions. But boy oh boy...did this cause a fracas. A couple players just quit a few weeks later, and even now if you mention 3e to them, their response is along the lines of "I hate (censored) 3e and their damned AoO's." Never mind the fact that since the days of 1e we had a "free attack rule" that you could make if your opponent turned to run away.

Anyway, despite what the official rules say, I believe that if you turn your attention to another opponent to perform an AoO, you're opening yourself up to your primary opponent. And in my next set of houserules, by gum, that's gonna be included. Hmpf!

 

[Egres]

"No:the 3.0 FAQ clearly stated that you can't do that, and then, since WotC stated that, unless the FAQ 3.5 would negate this, the 3,0 FAQ remains valid, you can't make a AoO against a AoO!".

You'll have to ask him where in the 3.0e FAQ he read that. The link to the FAQs is here

I've looked through both 3.5e and 3.0e FAQs, and can't find anything supporting your friend's position. Besides, there is no "recurring loop", as no one can take an indefinite number of AoOs. It's limited by Dex.

Sorry.

I forgot to add that we were also talking about this feat:


From the SRD:

IMPROVED COMBAT REFLEXES [EPIC]
Prerequisites: Dex 21, Combat Reflexes.
Benefit: There is no limit to the number of attacks of opportunity the character can make in one round. (the character still can’t make more than one attack of opportunity for a given oppertunity.)

 

[Nail]

Right.

Well, that *would* be a problem now, wouldn't it?

So: where in the FAQ(s) does it say you can't take an AoO off another's AoO?

"I summon thee, oh daemon lord of the rules forum, oh master of literal readings of the pseudo-sacred text, oh moderator with the pretty glowing-orange letters. Hypersmurf, I summon thee!"

(looks around ....did it work?)

 

[Egres]

Right.

Well, that *would* be a problem now, wouldn't it?

So: where in the FAQ(s) does it say you can't take an AoO off another's AoO?

"I summon thee, oh daemon lord of the rules forum, oh master of literal readings of the pseudo-sacred text, oh moderator with the pretty glowing-orange letters. Hypersmurf, I summon thee!"

(looks around ....did it work?)

I'll admit that i can't find it.....

I'm starting to think that he was trying to make fun of me!

 

[Sejs]

Yeah, you can make an AoO off an AoO, assuming one was provoked.

Yeah, if both combatants had Improved Combat Reflexes this could in theory go on forever.



But ICF is an Epic feat. What did you expect? Basically the ICF/ICF endless loop would look sort of like Neo and Agent Smith going at it faster than your eyes can follow... but really... we're talking about epic characters here. Epic characters do that sort of thing.

 

[Particle_Man]

Hmmm, well going off the custserv, if two creatures both with that epic feat get Aoo's on each other's Aoo's, and neither wishes to blink first, I would imagine that we would have to apply RULES of infinity! They would each get one simultaneous attack, followed by another simultaeneous attack, etc., until at least one of them was incapacitated and unable to attack. (Because if you start in reverse order from the end of an infinite series, but have only finite time (a six second round) you need to have attacks take smaller and smaller amounts of time taking up all of the 6 second interval before the original action that spurred the Aoo infinite loop; But this would lead to an infinite series of simultaneous actions, since there would be no time to take turns anymore).

Oh, and they would both die or at least have their arms fly off their bodies, from having to move faster than their bodies could support.

 

[Kemrain]

"I summon thee, oh daemon lord of the rules forum, oh master of literal readings of the pseudo-sacred text, oh moderator with the pretty glowing-orange letters. Hypersmurf, I summon thee!"

Oh, come on, Nail! You know as well as I that you invoke He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named-But-Who's-Name-Starts-With-H-And-Isn't-Hastur by speaking his name three times in succession. Seriously... Amatures.

- Kemrain the Friendly Cultist.

 

[Nail]

Actually, I'm not sure this (infinite loop) is as possible as it sounds....even with Epic rules.

After all, you can only attack with an Attack of Opportunity. And there are only so many attacks that provoke attacks of opportunity........