Can you change your mind?

[myradale]

If your action is intereupted somehow before it is completed, can you change your action?

For example, if a paladin was charging a monk with a spiked chain, and the monk used his AoO (from the paladin leaving his threatened space at 10') to disarm the paladin of his trusty greatsword, the greatsword would drop at the 10' range.
But would the paladin be able to stop his movement at the 10' range, or would he continue to the 5' range weaponless?
Would he be able to draw another weapon and then attack with that?
Would it be different if it wasn't a charge?
Basically, what degree of freedom do people have once they've declared their actions?

I'm just wondering, because the cinimatic of a noble paladin charging across a battlefield only to realize at the last moment that his bloody great sword isn't ACTUALLY in his hands is just too priceless to resist.

 

[Sejs]

But would the paladin be able to stop his movement at the 10' range, or would he continue to the 5' range weaponless?

If he hadn't moved to 5' range, he wouldn't have provoked the AoO, and thus wouldn't have been disarmed in the first place, so no, he can't stop at 10'.

As a DM I would probably let him attack with whatever weapons he still had available and ready to use (unarmed strikes or similar), or if he so desired, I would let him forefit the remainder of his actions and just not do anything else while standing at that 5' range. Image-wise, the paladin gets his greatsword ripped out of his hand and just bowls into his foe with a bodycheck or a shoulder tackle, etc, or he gets his greatsword ripped out of his hands and comes to a screeching halt, but he loses a moment of action while he keeps himself from falling over after putting the brakes on so hard, snap-decides what to do, etc.

As for the drawing another weapon mid-charge after being disarmed right at the moment of impact, I'd probably say no. He already declaired what his actions were, and while changing some aspects of an action (what weapon he's attacking with in a charge when one became unavailable) is one thing, tacking on new actions after the fact is another matter.

I have -no- idea how in-line with the RAW this is, I'm just saying how I'd probably deal with it if the situation arose in one of my games.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

If he hadn't moved to 5' range, he wouldn't have provoked the AoO, and thus wouldn't have been disarmed in the first place, so no, he can't stop at 10'.

I'm not sure about the conclusion, but the premise isn't true. It's the attempt to do something verboten that triggers an AoO, not the success. In fact, many AoOs are taken exactly to prevent the success of the attempted action.

I don't think there's anything in the rules that requires that interrupted actions be completed against the, um, interruptee's interests.

Imagine a theoretical ability to detect pit traps by moving within 10 feet of them. If a player declares a charge, but his PC detects a pit trap in the way, would you require the player to cross over the trap? I can see realism arguments for it, and -- as another poster said -- cinematic arguments for it, but so far as I know, nothing in the rules requires following through with a declared action that is interrupted, and there are plenty of cases where it's actually impossible.

 

[Li Shenron]

But would the paladin be able to stop his movement at the 10' range, or would he continue to the 5' range weaponless?
Would he be able to draw another weapon and then attack with that?
Would it be different if it wasn't a charge?
Basically, what degree of freedom do people have once they've declared their actions?

Mah, in the case of AoOs I usually tell the players that both the AoO and the action which provokes it happen at the same time (at least in a very generic sense). Probably in this case of charging, I would say that the monk disarming AoO happens while the paladin is stepping from 10ft to 5ft, so he is at 5ft when the AoO resolves.

I'd let it draw a weapon only if he had Quick Draw, but there wouldn't be time for attacking with it (I mean, I wouldn't allow him to continue charging with another weapon).

It may be different if he was just moving + attacking. In that case I'd let him Quick Draw and attack.

However, I think the problem here is that it's not nice the rules allow to disarm a charging character as an AoO: unless the monk had a specific feat or ability to do that, it sounds quite a very hard thing to do...

 

[Sammael]

Mah, in the case of AoOs I usually tell the players that both the AoO and the action which provokes it happen at the same time (at least in a very generic sense).

By the RAW, however, the AoOs are always resolved before the action that triggered them. If this weren't the case, an Improved Trip/Combat Reflexes person could keep an opponent on the ground infinitely.

 

[Felix]

I think the most equitable is:

Interruption makes it impossible for person to continue to do what he was doing:
eg
Getting tripped makes it impossible to double move.
Cutting a rope prevents any climbing of it.

In this case, the other character now chooses what to do based on his altered condition.

Interruption does not preclude character from completing action:
eg
Readied action to counterspell does not stop mage from casting, only negates effects.
Disarming a charging character does not stop him from attacking with other things.

Of course, any situation could be argued both ways, but I think to a large degree the answer must be "it depends". So, yes and no.

I'd let it draw a weapon only if he had Quick Draw, but there wouldn't be time for attacking with it (I mean, I wouldn't allow him to continue charging with another weapon).

I would allow that. Consider:

Charge, Full Round Action.
Full Attack, Full Round Action.

If you have three iterative attacks, you can attack, attack, drop, quickdraw, attack. And you can throw a 5-foot-step anywhere in there.

Since charge has more to do with the movement of the PC, and not the condition of the weapon, if you can quickdraw as a free action, the moment just before you attack is a viable point at which to arm yourself.

Think of a master samurai, blade in the scabbard. He charges an opponent and in one clean sweep, brings his katana out just before making the fatal cut and standing above the corpse dramatically.

And if that works mechanically, I'd let someone with the feat be quick enough to pull and attack even as they are disarmed while charging.

 

[FireLance]

The rules document one instance of being able to change your mind after you have committed yourself to an action: if you declare the full attack action, you can decide to take a move action after resolving your first attack. I suppose this can happen for several reasons. You could kill your opponent with your first attack, and move towards another one, or you could roll 19 and miss, and decide to run away.

In the spirit of that rule, I would allow the following:

1. If the paladin has moved no more than his speed, he could decide to take another standard action. He will still suffer the AC penalty from charging until his next action, but will gain the charging bonus if he decides to make a melee attack or any other action that can be performed in conjunction with a charge (e.g. a bull rush).

2. If the paladin has moved more than his speed, he can only make a melee attack or any other action that could be performed in conjunction with a charge (e.g. a bull rush). He will still suffer the AC penalty from charging until his next action, but will gain the charging bonus.

3. If the paladin has Quick Draw, drawing a weapon becomes a free action, and free actions can be performed in conjunction with other actions. I would rule that the paladin can draw another weapon before attacking and still gain the bonus from the charge.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

If your action is intereupted somehow before it is completed, can you change your action?

For example, if a paladin was charging a monk with a spiked chain, and the monk used his AoO (from the paladin leaving his threatened space at 10') to disarm the paladin of his trusty greatsword, the greatsword would drop at the 10' range.
But would the paladin be able to stop his movement at the 10' range, or would he continue to the 5' range weaponless?
Would he be able to draw another weapon and then attack with that?
Would it be different if it wasn't a charge?
Basically, what degree of freedom do people have once they've declared their actions?

I'm just wondering, because the cinimatic of a noble paladin charging across a battlefield only to realize at the last moment that his bloody great sword isn't ACTUALLY in his hands is just too priceless to resist.

I fear the main problem is that, with the rules as written, your example won't really work. A Disarm maneuver works as a melee attack, and as such is a standard action that doesn't fit into the timeframe of an AoO, at least from my point of view. I know I'm a bit nitpicky here, but Disarm states it's a melee attack, which is different from a full attack or an attack of opportunity, at least as D&D core sees it.

But related to that, what happens when somebody charging draws enough AoO damage on his way to actually drop to 0 hitpoints before he could reach the target? Is his charge interrupted, or does the effect of 0 hitpoints set in in the next round?

 

[FireLance]

I fear the main problem is that, with the rules as written, your example won't really work. A Disarm maneuver works as a melee attack, and as such is a standard action that doesn't fit into the timeframe of an AoO, at least from my point of view. I know I'm a bit nitpicky here, but Disarm states it's a melee attack, which is different from a full attack or an attack of opportunity, at least as D&D core sees it.

Nope. Disarm has a little footnote (PH, p. 141) 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."

But related to that, what happens when somebody charging draws enough AoO damage on his way to actually drop to 0 hitpoints before he could reach the target? Is his charge interrupted, or does the effect of 0 hitpoints set in in the next round?

I would allow him to continue the charge if he wants to, but if he does, that would be taking a strenuous action, and he would drop to -1 hp after completing it. If he has moved less than his speed, I would also allow him to take a move action without losing any extra hp.

 

[hobgoblin]

err, charge dont trigger a aoo, atleast not in the 3.0 rules (unless there is something specfic about monks being able to take a aoo on anything that i have missed)...