Changing Attacks of Opportunity

[Flexor the Mighty!]

The movie 'Excalibur', when Mordred forcibly impaled himself on Arthur's lance to get within melee distance.

Wasn't it the other way around? Didn't Mordred run Arthur through, then Arthur jammed Excalibur through Mordred's breastplate? Either way it's a cool scene.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

Wasn't it the other way around? Didn't Mordred run Arthur through, then Arthur jammed Excalibur through Mordred's breastplate? Either way it's a cool scene.

I just fired up the DVD and you are correct. Arthur impales himself on the spear, and Mordred utters the line just prior to that. I had remembered it as Mordred forcing himself down the spear and then saying it.

Cool scene in the movie, but *really* stupid when you watch it all by itself. Arthur just stands there and lets Mordred run him through, then Mordred just holds on to the spear while Arthur forces himself closer and strikes. Almost turn-based.....

 

[Psychic Warrior]

The movie 'Excalibur',

Ah - I have seen that movie once when I was a kid. Never really grabbed me (surprisingly!)

TheGM AoO can certainly make combat slower. For my game i don't mind this but others are not going to like it. I am curious as to what 1E/2E basics you are referring to though. Just curiosity (and it is the point of the thread too - whaddaya know back on topic!)

 

[Slobber Monster]

Put me in the camp that wonders why anyone has a problem with AoO's. Particularly after having played 1E with its total lack of consideration for the value of size, reach, and defensive positioning. Remove AoO's - fine, but something else has to go back in to account for those things.

 

[Arnwyn]

How would you change attacks of opportunity?

My only change (that I can immediately think of) would be to remove the AoO when moving within threatened squares.

 

[Slobber Monster]

My only change (that I can immediately think of) would be to remove the AoO when moving within threatened squares.

This removes the advantage of superior reach - how would you account for that?

 

[The Shaman]

Particularly after having played 1E with its total lack of consideration for the value of size, reach, and defensive positioning.

...except among GMs who used their common sense and perhaps the position of minis on a table to introduce this element to the game.

 

[Conaill]

Heh, just made this alternative AoO proposal on another thread:

Instead of giving an *extra* attack, just allow the defender to use one of his normal attacks, at a +2 (or more) to hit because the opponent is leaving himself open to attack. If the defender has no iterative attacks and decides to take the AoO, he would only have a Move left when his turn comes around. If he does have multiple attacks, he can use one for theAoO, and then on his turn either Move or take the remainder of his Full Attack.

This gets around a lot of the issues people have with follow-up attacks (such as AoO's triggering AoO's, Cleaves, etc.)

 

[The Shaman]

If Fiznip is just moving past Ugluk then no problem.

That's kinda my thought too - maybe force Ugly Ugluk to make a Concentration check, or impose a penalty to his attack roll to take the extra swing at Fiznip, to represent that he has his hands full with Balan the Bold.

btw - I love the names

I might just have to make a gnome character named Fiznip - it's growing on me...

 

[Slobber Monster]

...except among GMs who used their common sense and perhaps the position of minis on a table to introduce this element to the game.

OK... so you had AoO's anyways, except via ad hoc house rules. That's fine and all, but it doesn't really defeat my point.