AoO to trip someone getting up from prone?

[Ender_rpm]

Dude, fighting from prone is only a -4 penalty. Why in the hell would a decent fighter even bother standing up at all, when he can stay on the ground and make full attacks?

EDIT: Also, Ender, you know if you try this, I'm just going to grapple your trip monkey to pieces. I keep telling you, man, Touch Attacks!

To point one: Corssbows FTW!!

@ teh Edit- You REALLY want me to take you up on that? How many HP dig you have left last night?

 

[Mistwell]

Being prone gives you +4 AC vs ranged weapons. Reach weapons are resolved as ranged weapons when you're not adjacent to your target.
-blarg

They are treated as ranged for questions about cover. Not for all issues, I don't think.

[Edit - and I am so friggen late there are two other nearly identical responses ]

 

[KarinsDad]

Dude, fighting from prone is only a -4 penalty. Why in the hell would a decent fighter even bother standing up at all, when he can stay on the ground and make full attacks?

As others mentioned, the Fighter is at -4 to hit and -4 AC. This is against every melee opponent. This means that melee opponents will typically average 25% to 50% more damage (to hit and AC depending) per round against him and he will typically average 25% to 50% less damage per round against any close opponents. Being prone sucks.

Also, he is giving up his mobility. His attackers can choose to either attack him (at such an advantageous position), or move away (sometimes even with just a 5' step and no AoO) and attack someone else. So sure, the PC Fighter can stay on the ground, but intelligent opponents might think that this is a good time to go attack the PC Wizard while the PC Fighter is not doing his job and holding the front line.

Dude.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Take a similar example:
Say an attacker without the improved grapple feat is attemptint to grapple a greatsword wielding fighter. This provokes an attack of opportunity. The greatsword wielding fighter is allowed to swing their greatsword because they are not yet in the grapple. Allowing an AoO on standing to trip the defender again would be the equivalent of saying to the greatsword wielding fighter you can't attack because the greatsword isn't a light weapon.

Take a similar example:
Say a spellcaster is attempting to cast a spell without casting defensively, adjacent to a greatsword-wielding fighter. This provokes an attack of opportunity. The greatsword-wielding fighter hits and deals damage, but the caster doesn't need to make a Concentration check because he is not yet casting his spell.

... or has his Cast a Spell action started after all?

-Hyp.

 

[Ender_rpm]

Take a similar example:
Say a spellcaster is attempting to cast a spell without casting defensively, adjacent to a greatsword-wielding fighter. This provokes an attack of opportunity. The greatsword-wielding fighter hits and deals damage, but the caster doesn't need to make a Concentration check because he is not yet casting his spell.

... or has his Cast a Spell action started after all?

-Hyp.

Which brings us back to Doh, doh doh oh.....

This has been very entertaining.

 

[Sejs]

Being prone gives you +4 AC vs ranged weapons. Reach weapons are resolved as ranged weapons when you're not adjacent to your target.
-blarg

Heh, something's telling me there's more to that statement that's not being said. Such as a 'for the purposes of cover' or the like.

Otherwise it's open to things like using Rapid Shot with longspears and other such silliness.

 

[mvincent]

Heh, something's telling me there's more to that statement that's not being said. Such as a 'for the purposes of cover' or the like.

Heh. I wonder what that 'something' could possibly be?

 

[Mistwell]

Otherwise it's open to things like using Rapid Shot with longspears and other such silliness.

Oh, Oh, Sign me up!

 

[blargney the second]

I missed the "for determining cover" clause in the reach weapons bit. The other guys caught it pretty quickly, at least!
-blarg

 

[AllisterH]

Take a similar example:
Say a spellcaster is attempting to cast a spell without casting defensively, adjacent to a greatsword-wielding fighter. This provokes an attack of opportunity. The greatsword-wielding fighter hits and deals damage, but the caster doesn't need to make a Concentration check because he is not yet casting his spell.

... or has his Cast a Spell action started after all?

-Hyp.

Nope that's actually different since the effect is not against the same target. As you noted, the aggresor in the latter example is the one who suffers the penalties of the AoO but in the grapple check, the grappler doesn't but the grapplee does.

It would be the same if the grapple rules stated that the grappler has to make a concentration check to maintain the grapple when the AoO was triggered.


To grapple someone in 3.X, you're basically extending yourself and making yourself
vulnerable so before the actual grapple check itself starts, the person being grappled gets a free swing.

Conversely, if a mage starts casting, she makes herself vulnerable since the action of casting a spell is supposedly a longer time than it takes to swinf a sword.