Does a limb provoke/take an AOO?

[HeapThaumaturgist]

I agree and my point was that WotC agrees. So, isn't the opposite interpretation and us and WotC "back-dooring called shots?" Yet, HeapThaumaturgist seems to think that requiring one to attack a creature's space is back-dooring called shots.

I think my language may have been conflicting ...

What I was saying, and what I think YOU are saying, is that by allowing AoO only on a limb reaching into a square, you're back-dooring called shots. IE "I hit him in the arm!", since the only part of the creature "in" the square you're threatening is an arm, which normally isn't a legal target.

What I added, in media res, was that WotC had ALREADY back-doored called shots in that the rules for fighting a Hydra involve unique rules on allowing Sunder attacks against the Hydra's heads. I.E. you're allowed to target JUST the head of the hydra, and to treat it like an object, at that.

My personal take on the "hitting a limb with an AoO" is that the ACTION provokes an AoO, but the AoO must be taken on the actual square(s) the creature's facing occupies at that moment. Which, I'm pretty sure, is what you're saying?

And while that makes reach quite powerful ... hey, at least the Giant is busy mauling the party tank with those untouchable Grapple attacks. Plus, if he maintains the grapple, he has to move to occupy space with the tank, and that movement provokes from the other party members nearby. AND, with 3.5 Grapple rules in place, while the giant is grappling your helpless party tank, the rogue can stand on a stepladder and do needlepoint on his kidneys.

--fje

 

[Legildur]

Just to muddy the waters a little further, what if we were considering a creature with 10ft reach trying to pick up an item 5ft away? In this case the object is not in its square, but it would appear to be a simple pick up? How would that be ruled?

And if this (and many other vague rules areas) will be cleared in with 4E, then bring it on!

 

[werk]

Are you very sure about that?

At the least, you should change your first answer to yes. If your first answer is no, then your next two answers are necessarily "Not Applicable".

Sticking with the first answer of no...can't pick it up unless it's in a square you occupy. That makes the rest not applicable, as it resolves the issue being created

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Is it realistic to think that just because you can swing a limb into a space without exposing yourself, that you can actually bend over into the space without leaving yourself open to attack? Or, a related question, is it realistic to think that just because you can swing a limb into a space, you can reach the floor in that space without leaning in?

What I'm trying to say is, is there any indication in the rules of which squares you can legally pick up an object from? I'd be inclined to say either:
1. The square(s) you occupy
2. A number of squares equal to the number of squares you threaten divided by 2

The first, because I can't see someone reaching over 5 feet to pick up a sword without actually entering the other square unless they're Mr. Fantastic. The second, because I could maybe see it if you're big enough or have long enough appendages that a 5 or 10 foot distance isn't much more than a slight stretch for you.

There is the third option: you can grab stuff up from any square you threaten, but I don't like that just because it seems like the inappropriate option to model a reasonably realistic situation. But I'd like to see if there's an actual rule on the subject.

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

It's always interesting to see where people's "Realistic Situation-O-Meter" starts to go off.



Ogres? 10' reach? Taking up an entire 5'? Attacking into the NEXT 5' square over?

Reaching into the next 5' square? You so crazy.



--fje

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

It's always interesting to see where people's "Realistic Situation-O-Meter" starts to go off.



Ogres? 10' reach? Taking up an entire 5'? Attacking into the NEXT 5' square over?

Reaching into the next 5' square? You so crazy.



--fje

Actually, it's the knowledge that you don't actually take up your entire facing that makes me ask questions about how far you can grab something outside of your facing. An ogre might have an easy time grabbing something 5' away, since his arms are apparently more than 5' long. But he might have trouble getting something 10' away, if it's on the floor.

Still, I'm waiting for someone to reference a rule that says what you can and can't pick up. If there's no such rule, how do we know that we can pick up anything at all?

 

[werk]

Still, I'm waiting for someone to reference a rule that says what you can and can't pick up. If there's no such rule, how do we know that we can pick up anything at all?

You're on my train.

Pick up an item is listed under move actions - manipulate an item, so we can definitely pick something up, and it draws AoO. "This includes retrieving or putting away a stored item, picking up an item, moving a heavy object, and opening a door." Now, you can't move a heavy object or push open a (heavy, rusted, dungeon) door at the farthest extension of your reach.

The SRD doesn't seem to have anything further, but there is a reference in consequences of disarm, "If you were armed, the defender’s weapon is on the ground in the defender’s square."
Now, let's say the defender has 20' reach and you disarm him...why would the weapon land in his square rather than the square adjacent to you? If you can only pick up items in your square, that would be a great reason to have this rule.

I know I'm reading a lot into it, but I believe I am reading less into it (simplifying it more) than people suggesting adjacent squares and reach, attacking limbs, etc.

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

So do I have to be occupying the same square as a door in order to open it?


--fje

 

[werk]

So do I have to be occupying the same square as a door in order to open it?

Sure, what's it hurt? Does it say somewhere that you can do it otherwise?

Maybe think of it like the overrun mechanic?

(Doors are generally on the grid line on most maps, so this is a moot argument.)

 

[Krelios]

If you allow a called shot against a creature's limb as an attack of opportunity (which directly contradicts the rules that you must threaten a creature's space not simply his reach to take an AoO) then you must also allow AoO's on creatures that attack with reach weapons. If you only allow that attack on the weapon itself, then you are ruling in a system for called shots to the limbs, which, again, has its own problems.

By the RAW, the giant provokes an AoO that you cannot take if he reaches into an area you threaten without being in an area you threaten.