Eliminating Attacks of Opportunity
- Thread starter Sado
- Start date
Thanee
First Post
Plane Sailing said:
You could also use something similar to the size differences (where the actual difference is irrelevant), just because I like the principle applied there
D):Every 5' Reach above the initial 5' give you +1 attack and +1 AC.
0' Reach gives -1 attack and AC.
Bye
Thanee
Attack of oppurtunities do three good things:
-They break up the artificial idea of combat rounds. Have you ever played Final Fantasy Tactics? There's an enemy standing right there, but your main character can just walk right by him, go up, and stab the boss. Cuz its not the enemy's turn right now, you see - and god knows he couldn't act if its not his turn!
-They create a sort of "Tactical defense". In a real fight, a lot of punches you throw (or bullets you fire, or whatever) arn't to hit the other guy, they're to keep the other guy from getting in your face and beating you. This is also one of the main advantages of a sword or spear: if someone unarmed charges you, you can stab him before he gets close enough to hit you.
-They keep you from doing other ridiculous things. "The guy is charing at you, what do you do?" "open my backpack, get out the ancient compass, turn the dial clockwise to '4', and fry the guy with the resulting bolt of lightning." Uh, no.
The disadvantages, as you say, are that the rules are much more complicated than some of us would like. The easy way to do with this is to simply play it by ear. Make a rules that says "if you do something that I can't visualize, you provoke an attack of oppurtunity or take a penalty. My choice." For me, this is no problem. But some people will hate it.
You could also assign different situations different bonuses or penalties. Ie, if you've got a melee weapon and your opponent has a bow, well, he can't very well parry with the damned bow can he? So you have a +2 to hit him. (where as now, you get an attack of oppurtunity when he tries to fire the bow at you. ) Exalted takes a vaguelly similiar approach, in that weapons give Defense bonuses. You're not armed? Trying to cast a spell? No defense bonus for you. So sorry.
Those are my suggestions.
-Mei
-They break up the artificial idea of combat rounds. Have you ever played Final Fantasy Tactics? There's an enemy standing right there, but your main character can just walk right by him, go up, and stab the boss. Cuz its not the enemy's turn right now, you see - and god knows he couldn't act if its not his turn!
-They create a sort of "Tactical defense". In a real fight, a lot of punches you throw (or bullets you fire, or whatever) arn't to hit the other guy, they're to keep the other guy from getting in your face and beating you. This is also one of the main advantages of a sword or spear: if someone unarmed charges you, you can stab him before he gets close enough to hit you.
-They keep you from doing other ridiculous things. "The guy is charing at you, what do you do?" "open my backpack, get out the ancient compass, turn the dial clockwise to '4', and fry the guy with the resulting bolt of lightning." Uh, no.
The disadvantages, as you say, are that the rules are much more complicated than some of us would like. The easy way to do with this is to simply play it by ear. Make a rules that says "if you do something that I can't visualize, you provoke an attack of oppurtunity or take a penalty. My choice." For me, this is no problem. But some people will hate it.
You could also assign different situations different bonuses or penalties. Ie, if you've got a melee weapon and your opponent has a bow, well, he can't very well parry with the damned bow can he? So you have a +2 to hit him. (where as now, you get an attack of oppurtunity when he tries to fire the bow at you. ) Exalted takes a vaguelly similiar approach, in that weapons give Defense bonuses. You're not armed? Trying to cast a spell? No defense bonus for you. So sorry.
Those are my suggestions.
-Mei
Thanee
First Post
mmadsen said:
Because the 5 ft. step is meant to simulate the dynamics of combat. Combatants do not simply stand there and trade blows and the 5 ft. step allows this sort of dynamics during a fight. It's adjusting, repositioning, not really movement in the game sense.
Because that is precisely the point of withdrawal, to get away from the enemy without letting your guard down.
Bye
Thanee
Li Shenron
Legend
AoOs are almost but not quite easy to use, but they have the problem (IMHO) of requiring too much precision in the combat map. If it wasn't for AoOs, there would still be spells and movement to need a battle grid and minis, but not so much.
I kind of like that there are actions which provoke AoOs, especially shooting ranged weapons, spellcasting and other miscellaneous (retrieve an object for instance). If you eliminate AoOs, you really should find another way to make these actions uncomfortable, especially ranged attacks - otherwise why bother with melee weapons if ranged weapons also work in melee?
It is not hard to do anyway:
IMO something as simple as "a ranged attack from 5ft receives a -4 penalty" should work fine.
For spells you can even more easily just say that casting within enemy reach is ALWAYS done on the defensive (no AoOs, Concentration roll or lose the spell).
You can do the same for the miscellaneous actions (no AoOs, Concentration roll or waste the action).
I like much less AoOs for special attacks (they are already done at -4 unless you have the relevant feat) which I find unnecessary and generated the stupid AoO loop situation. I'd simply remove them outright, adding a -4 to those which don't already have.
I am uncertain about AoOs for moving. They make sense, but they are definitely the most complicated of all AoOs. If you want to eliminate them, I'd probably suggest to cut movement speed in half whenever withdrawing from or passing through an enemy's reach (or to 1/4 when very crowded), and let Tumble checks allow to keep the speed.
I kind of like that there are actions which provoke AoOs, especially shooting ranged weapons, spellcasting and other miscellaneous (retrieve an object for instance). If you eliminate AoOs, you really should find another way to make these actions uncomfortable, especially ranged attacks - otherwise why bother with melee weapons if ranged weapons also work in melee?
It is not hard to do anyway:
IMO something as simple as "a ranged attack from 5ft receives a -4 penalty" should work fine.
For spells you can even more easily just say that casting within enemy reach is ALWAYS done on the defensive (no AoOs, Concentration roll or lose the spell).
You can do the same for the miscellaneous actions (no AoOs, Concentration roll or waste the action).
I like much less AoOs for special attacks (they are already done at -4 unless you have the relevant feat) which I find unnecessary and generated the stupid AoO loop situation. I'd simply remove them outright, adding a -4 to those which don't already have.
I am uncertain about AoOs for moving. They make sense, but they are definitely the most complicated of all AoOs. If you want to eliminate them, I'd probably suggest to cut movement speed in half whenever withdrawing from or passing through an enemy's reach (or to 1/4 when very crowded), and let Tumble checks allow to keep the speed.
Last edited:
I would steal an idea from Exalted. Melee weapons give a bonus to Iniative and Defense. If you're firing a bow or casting a spell, you're missing out on a potential bonus. (even if you've got a sword in your off hand or whatever. )
For Fighter feats, let them increase the amount of damage they deal with melee weapons, to compensate for the extra damage they had been doing with AoO.
For Fighter feats, let them increase the amount of damage they deal with melee weapons, to compensate for the extra damage they had been doing with AoO.
