Does a PC in Total Defense get an AoO vs someone who charges them?


log in or register to remove this ad

Hypersmurf said:
Careful, there... I haven't actually taken a position on this one yet ;)

I simply provided a third option for consideration.

Right. Seems I was refering to another thread where you wrote something about interpretation of core rule books :D
 


Darklone said:
I am with Hyp in this one. Usually, in the PHB, if any action precludes AoOs, then they say so. Here they don't.

What other actions preclude AoOs? Are there enough of them that we can see a trend?


Aaron
 


Rel said:


Then why would the same not be true of Fighting Defensively?

You still get an attack. A full attack if you wish, or anything that may be done in place of an attack (grapple, trip, disarm, ect). Total defense prevents this completely. Taking away AoOs seems excessive.
 

Darklone said:
Usually, in the PHB, if any action precludes AoOs, then they say so. Here they don't.

I am pretty sure this is the direct interpretation of the rules and fits with the Sage reply mentioned by Hyp.

I think this fine because I don't see AoOs as that powerful. Others believe AoOs are powerful and should be stopped. I just don't see them comming up nearly as often as others do I suppose.
 


Hypersmurf said:
Hmm? Care to elaborate there? Why not?

Probably a misinterpretation of the text. The writeup states that enemies can attack you "as if you were stunned", meaning they "get a +2 bonus, and you lose any Dexterity bonus to Armor Class". But as you know, you are _not actually_ stunned while climbing.
 
Last edited:


Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top