Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Sigil" data-source="post: 9219275" data-attributes="member: 2013">Interestingly, I think by the RAW, taking a Feat to get an AoO against a caster DOESN'T actually interrupt the spellcasting unless your AoO (extra attack) deals enough damage to drop the caster to incapacitated (0 HP). You still have to have a houserule that "dealing damage to the caster can interrupt spellcasting" for this Feat to help, as that isn't to my knowledge in the RAW.And as mentioned, I think "allow a Readied Action" to be triggered by "X casts a spell" can accomplish roughly the same thing without "spending a Feat." Note that this STILL requires a houserule to allow "interrupting a spell by dealing damage to the caster" so the real issue isn't that Martials have to spend a Feat, the issue is instead you have to have a houserule for interrupting spellcasting.Also note that "readied action" to deal damage isn't just a martial thing - or a melee thing. My spellcaster can ready a magic missile to thump an enemy caster during their cast and my arcane archer can have an arrow nocked and aimed at an enemy caster if he starts a spell - either of these should satisfy things provided you've houseruled interrupting casting.To reiterate, Feats really have nothing to do with it. It's all about whether or not the house rule that casters can be interrupted exists. Without this house rule, casters care much less about triggering AoO's by casting because you're still not interrupting them - if they have the AC or HP to muscle through the attack, it doesn't matter to them.I should also note here that if the objection is "the martial has to give up their attack for a readied action and may lose it" well yes, that is true. It is the opportunity cost for stopping an action that could instantly incapacitate him. But note also the martial regains that resource (the attack action) the next round of combat - on the flip side, a caster whose spell is interrupted loses a spell slot that they DON'T get back the next round of combat - they have to wait for a Rest. The martial expends a much less scarce resource.So now if we're asking about "the burden of spending a Feat" we're even before anyone spends a Feat. The rule of "Martial takes a Feat that lets him take an AoO on nearby casters" is a BENEFIT to the martial, because now he's getting a reaction attack WITHOUT spending an attack (he spent a Feat instead) - but it's only extra damage he could have gotten before (unless you ALSO have the house rule that spells can be interrupted; but again, you don't HAVE to have the feat to interrupt a spell, you can ready an action instead).And in this world where martials have to spend a Feat to get free AoO's, it becomes equitable to let casters have access to a Feat that denies the martial this AoO, because now we're back where we started - no free attacks for anybody, but both characters have spent one Feat so they're even.</blockquote>

Verification