D&D 4E AoO's are still in 4e

[Kae'Yoss]

To a trained fighter? I'd say the first... I mean if they get you on the ground, they have an advantage.

If he gets your head off your shoulders, you'll get on the ground, too. And you won't get up again...

If the enemy succeeds in tripping you, you still have a chance - you can roll out of harm's way and get up again, you can trip him, too, you can catch the weapon's shaft....

If the enemy succeeds in decapitating you, you're gone.

At least, that's how I see it. There sure are people out there who wouldn't miss anything their head contains, except maybe their mouth, but they're not exactly the norm...

 

[Pbartender]

It's probably going to look a lot like the Saga list of AOO Provokers, which is basically two things:

1) moving out of a threatened square
2) stuff that is distracting

Or, they took a note from Iron Heroes, which boils AoOs down to:

If...

• It is a standard action or full-round action; and
• It is not an attack action; and
• It does not specifically have a note that it does not provoke (such as using Concentration to defensively cast a spell)

...then an action provokes attacks of opportunity.

And, you may move up to 1/4 your base move without provoking an attack of opportunity.

 

[Victim]

And, you may move up to 1/4 your base move without provoking an attack of opportunity.

Which makes AoO much more complex, IMO, as well as requires additional special rules to make reach weapons function as intended.

 

[Treebore]

Now there are two things that make me hopeful that 4E will be useful to me.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I rather like the way they appear to be going from the Dragon encounter example. Perhaps each character gets a limited number of interrupts per round (maybe only one, most of the time). If someone tries to get by you, run in on your reach, etc, you can nail them. Or you can save the interrupt for something else. It could both simplify the whole mechanic and at the same time make it cover a far wider range of options. That is an elegant solution, and also makes the AoO a choice that a person might sometimes forgo--thus contributing to player choice.

 

[EyeontheMountain]

If they do have AoOs in 4E they need to make some kind of ruling abut attacking paralyzed or helpless foes within reach.

As it stands now, you get an AoO if your active opponent does something dumb, but the helpless guy next to him does not get one. AoOs should be allowed on them.

 

[Pbartender]

Which makes AoO much more complex, IMO, as well as requires additional special rules to make reach weapons function as intended.

Not necessarily... It just gives faster characters/monsters an advantage against reach weapons. To wit, you're fast enough to move inside the reach of said weapon, before your enemy can attack with it.

Regardless, I was including that particular piece of the rule for completeness... It's the first three criteria for non-movement based actions that makes AoOs in IH pretty easy to figure out. All you need to know is what type of action it is (standard, full or move-equivalent), whether or not it is an attack action, and whether it has a special exception (which are few and far between, and which 4E seems to be eliminating anyway).

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

It's probably going to look a lot like the Saga list of AOO Provokers, which is basically two things:

1) moving out of a threatened square
2) stuff that is distracting

But that's the baseline list from 3E, too. The additions are in things like the spcial attacks rules (grapples, sunder, etc, etc).

I'm not complaining ... I like AoOs ... but if the two items above constitute "simpler" AoOs then I'm scratching my head about what problems people have with the current AoO system ... 'cause that list won't fix most of the complaints I've heard.

 

[Scribble]

In D&D? Yup

In real life? Not so much.

Many real life fights end up going to ground. And the guy on the bottom isn't always the one at the disadvantage.

But again, working w/i the framework of D&D being "tripped to death" is quite an ignoble and frustrating way to go out, getting caught in that AoO loop sucks.

I'm not sure I agree with this statement... The guy on the bottom is almost always at a disadvantage. Sure, he might know a few tricks to help him out of said situation, but even in wrestling (which seems to routinely be on the ground) the two combatants are almost always struggling to be on top.

That said; we were talking about a halberd fight, where a guy on the ground would almost definitely be at the disadvantage.

If he gets your head off your shoulders, you'll get on the ground, too. And you won't get up again...

If the enemy succeeds in tripping you, you still have a chance - you can roll out of harm's way and get up again, you can trip him, too, you can catch the weapon's shaft....

If the enemy succeeds in decapitating you, you're gone.

Sure, I will admit, if you are dead, you are (most likely) at a much larger disadvantage then being tripped... But that's not a valid argument man...

If you are a trained fighter, and someone attacks you, you have the knowledge and skill to defend yourself and attempt to eliminate the threat.

If you get tripped, the guy doesn't stop flying in your face with the halberd... He just does so now, with you on your backside, attempting to roll out of the way (or lowering your guard as you get up.)

 

[whydirt]

Honestly, I think a good portion of what makes AoO confusing is the name - it's rather cumbersome. If they were just called a Free Attack instead, I think that would calm some of the opposition.