How often do you provoke an AoO on purpose?

[Pyrex]

Back in the 3.0 days my cleric would routinely cast a double-empowered Fire Shield and run around the battlefield provoking as many AOO's as possible.

 

[lukelightning]

Does hitting on people in a bar count? Asking someone out could provoke an emotional attack of opportunity.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

It's too easy to avoid them without using tactically lesser actions (or even different actions), most often via 5-ft. steps or skills/feats, and given the choice, it's kinda obvious what to do.

It is easy to avoid provoking AoOs. Obviously this is a personal style issue to a large degree, including the PC design.

I am pleasantly surprised by the number of players indicating that they use AoO-intensive tactics as part of their SO.

IMHO if you are responding with one of the first two choices, you are probably habitually using sub-optimal tactics. Probably. Obviously my opinion is based on the party composition and mix of monsters I am used to seeing on the battlemat, so YMMV.

 

[frankthedm]

As a player, I *very* rarely provoke AoOs. It's far better to think a step ahead and simply avoid the need.

In a cramped dungeon corridor the tank drawing out the foe's AoO sets the party up to control the battlefield until that foe acts next. Rather than have the rogue tumble to the other side of the foe, the fighter waltzes up to the other side of the foe, eating the AoO, to exactly where the rogue can charge to flanking position. {+4 to hit thanks to charge and flank] After that devastating impact, the cleric moves in and heals whoever needs it or beats on the foe as well.

As a DM? Often enough to keep the players happy. Nothing perks up a depressed player like being able to AoO.

My players tend to get depressed when my NPC’s draw AoOs since that means the foe is going for the character’s or party’s soft spot.

 

[Darklone]

Never but in one old group. I went straight ahead through the enemies threatened area and ate all the AoOs in full defence and our fighter charge brigade came afterwards...

 

[Nail]

.. if you are responding with one of the first two choices, you are probably habitually using sub-optimal tactics. Probably. Obviously my opinion is based on the party composition and mix of monsters I am used to seeing on the battlemat, so YMMV.

I'm not convinced. I've seen people provoke AoOs "on purpose"...and I've also noted that often enough had they thought ahead, provoking an AoO on purpose wouldn't have been necessary.

...but as Ridley's Cohort said: YMMV.

 

[Bagpuss]

Back in the 3.0 days my cleric would routinely cast a double-empowered Fire Shield and run around the battlefield provoking as many AOO's as possible.

But surely if you had a fire shield up they wouldn't bother hitting you.

 

[The Souljourner]

I answered 20-50% on the assumption it was "purposely using maneuvers that as a side effect, draw an attack of opportunity" as opposed to "using maneuvers whose primary goal is expending an opponent's AoO".

Do I charge by crappy skeletons to hit the necromancer, and draw 4 AoO? All the time. And I think anyone who says there are always better tactical options doesn't fight in cramped quarters often enough. Often times, position on the battle field is worth risking taking some damage.

Have I used maneuvers whose sole purpose is to draw attacks of opportunity so the opponent can't use them against someone else? Sure. Not nearly as often, but it definitely happens. And to be honest, those are generally some of the most tactically brilliant moves. Most of the time it involves fighting against opponents with reach, and either getting people into or out of that reach. If the front line fighter gets criticalled and is suddenly at 4 hitpoints, but can't withdraw because the guy he's fighting has 15' reach, the only solution is to have someone else draw the AoO, so when the fighter moves, he'll be safe. Them's tactics, baby! Is there a better tactical choice? Probably nothing that's not very situational or contrived.

-Nate

 

[phindar]

It depends on the character, and on the situation. If I'm playing a tank, I might provoke an AoO so that a mage can move past or back out of melee and cast-- this is particularly true when fighting bigger creatures with Reach.

I was playing a kind of crazy TWF, fighitng grimlocks in an underground cavern. The fighting was going on at various elevations with most of the party in a large central cavern, with grimlocks attacking from caves along the wall. I was up in one of the caves and got surrounded. So I charged a grimlock at the mouth of the cave attempting to Bull Rush him off the ledge, but I didn't have IBR. He misses on his AoO and I bat him over the side to a 30' drop, where the party can hack him to pieces. While I'm on the ledge, another grimlock decides that looked like a good idea, so it attempts to bull rush me, but it doesn't have IBR either. It provokes, I roll a crit threat and confirm and cut it twain, the two halves of its body go flinging out of the cave in a shower of blood. As Napoleon said, "Give me a man who's lucky." (I've always called those "John Wayne Days" when you just can't help but win.)

Bull Rushing and Overrunning were tactics that character just sort of fell into. I never took the feats for it, but that game wound down around 7th level. If we'd kept with it I suppose I would have, but it just seemed like it would be less fun to actually have the feats.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

Our group'll do it occasionally, mostly to soak up stray AoOs and let the more vulnerable character move by. But it's pretty rare.

Now, the time that the Hammer of Moradin (surrounded by levelled hobgoblin legionnaires) spent two rounds attempting to coup de grace a half-fiend version of my goliath barbarian really shouldn't count, as they all kept whiffing.

Brad