DragonLancer
Hero
In my games we get at least 3 or 4 per combat. Thats a mix of characters trying something that draws one or preparing to take them on on the opponents, and vice versa.
How often do deal with AoOs?
- Thread starter Quasqueton
- Start date
frankthedm
First Post
AoOs come up fairly often in my game. They are an "in game" sort of thing. and as such are fair game for PCs and NPCs to use. Weaker foes tend to use hit and run tactics when they know they are the weaker foes and if they can't get through the armor, they will try to bend the weraer the wrong way[grappling]. If a character takes the AoO for the first monster fleeing, the other foes will jump him [ trip, disarm, grapple, etc] as he leaves himself open.
Strong foes who recognize the dangers of a spell caster will often move in to kill them swiftly. Drawing an AoO to do so is usually worth the risk.
Strong foes who recognize the dangers of a spell caster will often move in to kill them swiftly. Drawing an AoO to do so is usually worth the risk.
danzig138
Explorer
AoO are pretty frequent in my combats. I tend to use a lot of Large creatures, and reach weapons, and more than one of my players have their characters frequently attempt to tumble past opponents. Unfortunately, my players are having a 3+month string of bad luck when it comes to dice rolls. Not to forget, the sorcerer often ends up in melee range for a short time at least, and the player never remembers to cast defensively.
Patryn of Elvenshae
First Post
I voted "Multiple Times Per Combat" - but then, I like to focus on characters who make the other guys provoke a lot (tripping, disarming, etc.).
Wombat
First Post
AoOs seem to show up about every other combat for us; ultimately, we try to follow the rules, but find them terribly annoying.
Part of the problem for us is trying to figure out what, exactly, D&D combat is trying to map. Actually this is true for most rpgs, but I'll limit the discussion of the moment to D20.
On the one hand you have fairly "realistic" feeling combat maneuver elements, such as firing missiles into melee, attacks of opportunity, and flanking (though this is handled terribly in the opinion of our group); conversely the entire combat is run from a God's Eye approach where the entire combat area is shown to the entire group, no chance of confusion over whether one is attacking friend or enemy or other "fog of war" elements.
In other words AoOs add to the "realism" of combat, but the battle board removes the "realism" at the same time. If you try to enter/leave a threatened area you place yourself in more danger, but it is very easy to calculate exactly where you need to be to avoid such matters and the whole 5' Step element reduces matters to a very schematic view of combat.
In many ways I feel that the only way combat would be logical and realistic would be to have all players hooked up to Virtual Reality machines, with the GM programming the assailants (but not actually playing them). That would lead to a "realisitic" feel.
Barring this, having no map board, no AoOs, etc., would map the more generally heroic, over-the-top approach of most novels, anime, movies, and the like -- description becomes everything.
So, yes, we incorporate AoOs, but only when they are unavoidable; when we have the right mix of players, we ignore them entirely, as well as many of the minutiae points of D20 combat, going for something more streamlined, schematic, and cinematic (less "realistic", more "fantastical"). That tends to suit our group better.
Part of the problem for us is trying to figure out what, exactly, D&D combat is trying to map. Actually this is true for most rpgs, but I'll limit the discussion of the moment to D20.
On the one hand you have fairly "realistic" feeling combat maneuver elements, such as firing missiles into melee, attacks of opportunity, and flanking (though this is handled terribly in the opinion of our group); conversely the entire combat is run from a God's Eye approach where the entire combat area is shown to the entire group, no chance of confusion over whether one is attacking friend or enemy or other "fog of war" elements.
In other words AoOs add to the "realism" of combat, but the battle board removes the "realism" at the same time. If you try to enter/leave a threatened area you place yourself in more danger, but it is very easy to calculate exactly where you need to be to avoid such matters and the whole 5' Step element reduces matters to a very schematic view of combat.
In many ways I feel that the only way combat would be logical and realistic would be to have all players hooked up to Virtual Reality machines, with the GM programming the assailants (but not actually playing them). That would lead to a "realisitic" feel.
Barring this, having no map board, no AoOs, etc., would map the more generally heroic, over-the-top approach of most novels, anime, movies, and the like -- description becomes everything.
So, yes, we incorporate AoOs, but only when they are unavoidable; when we have the right mix of players, we ignore them entirely, as well as many of the minutiae points of D20 combat, going for something more streamlined, schematic, and cinematic (less "realistic", more "fantastical"). That tends to suit our group better.
Psychic Warrior
First Post
2-3 times per combat as I have a Half Orc Fighter/Monk PC with a spiked chain that likes to get enlarged (not all the time but maybe 50%). As the DM I try to set up encounters where everyone can use their abilities - including the monsters.
