How often do you see Attacks of Opportunity in your 5e game?

[ad_hoc]

If you ever get to a point where you stop and think that it's an acceptable risk to leave yourself open in combat, because getting stabbed is a minor inconvenience and seriously you'll be fine it's no big deal, then that indicates a severe deficiency in the rule-set. That's a dis-connect on roughly the same level as, "I'll just jump off the cliff, because there's no way it can possibly kill me, and spending an hour to recover from that will take less time than just climbing down the normal way."

Or, you know, heroism.

OAs happen a lot at our table. Mostly by enemy creatures as they swarm to attack weaker PCs.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

I'm the guy who chose "Why is this even a poll?" because it was the closest to my answer.

"Anytime it seems appropriate".

I don't use etched-in-stone situations for determining AoO's. If the situation dictates that it makes sense, I allow it. If a situation dictates that it makes sense, but with some risks/bonus, I allow that. If a situation dictates that it doesn't make sense, I disallow it. Some of the time it's the first one. Most of the time it's the second one. Some of the time it's the third.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[guachi]

Aside from when I DM and the creatures fail a morale check and flee (and in this case the opportunity attack isn't particularly meaningful) I think I can count on one hand the number of opportunity attacks I've ever seen as a player or DM in the last four years on one hand.

 

[ad_hoc]

Aside from when I DM and the creatures fail a morale check and flee (and in this case the opportunity attack isn't particularly meaningful) I think I can count on one hand the number of opportunity attacks I've ever seen as a player or DM in the last four years on one hand.

Do you find you combats are static?

I think we see 2-6 per session. Depends on the nature of the enemies. hit and run, swarm through to hit unarmoured PCs and vice versa. All these things happen

 

[Shiroiken]

Generally happens once every session or two, usually by a player. Players can calculate the risk:reward ratio, and sometimes taking the attack is worth the benefit. Usually it's to get to get into melee with a ranged attacker, but often the withdraw action would work just as well (players tend to hate missing a round of attacks). Occasionally it's done as a defensive measure, to protect the spellcasters. I've even seen someone use the Dodge action against a horde, then provoke several attacks of opportunity (at disadvantage) so that they could back themselves into a corner (opening up the area for AoE and reducing incoming attacks); withdraw could have worked, but with dodge, they felt the odds of anything hitting (including on their next turn) would be too low.

When I DM, monsters tend to be tenacious, sticking with the enemies they initially engage with. If a creature is badly hurt in the middle of the melee, they may decide to take the withdraw action to get out of combat, then flee. If the combat is near the end, they will take the attacks of opportunity, then using their action to dash (otherwise, they'll never actually escape, since the party can just move adjacent and attack, unless they have a much higher speed). Above average intelligence monsters may choose to provoke an attack of opportunity, just as the PCs do.

 

[TwoSix]

Battlemat, minis, large majority.

Only time I don't tend to see them is either trivial battles or battles against one big bad guy.

 

[Maxperson]

I see them in most encounters. Either a player is taking one to get a tactical advantage elsewhere(often me), or the monsters are taking one trying to get to the spellcasters. As for the sentinal feat, I love it. I position myself if possible so that the squishies are protected. Things won't be able to get by me without offering an opportunity attack. If I never get one, I have done my job as no monsters are attacking the casters. If I do get one, then the feat comes into play and I am doing my job in keeping or at least trying to keep the monsters away via the feat.

 

[mrpopstar]

I find that using a grid for combat results in fewer opportunity attacks versus theater of the mind. I figure the reasons for that are many and varied.

 

[guachi]

Do you find you combats are static?

I think we see 2-6 per session. Depends on the nature of the enemies. hit and run, swarm through to hit unarmoured PCs and vice versa. All these things happen

I may be undercounting the number of AoOs. However, PCs generally deal with whatever creature or creatures are in their immediate reach. Because generally if, say, you are fighting 6 zombies then attacking one zombie is as good as attacking any other zombie. Combat is short enough (even if it takes a while to resolve at the table) that it's often easier to kill the creature you are fighting and then reposition yourself after. Also, with the loosened movement restrictions PCs/creatures can often move to a better position without ever breaking contact with the enemy by circling around or sliding laterally.

 

[ad_hoc]

I may be undercounting the number of AoOs. However, PCs generally deal with whatever creature or creatures are in their immediate reach. Because generally if, say, you are fighting 6 zombies then attacking one zombie is as good as attacking any other zombie. Combat is short enough (even if it takes a while to resolve at the table) that it's often easier to kill the creature you are fighting and then reposition yourself after. Also, with the loosened movement restrictions PCs/creatures can often move to a better position without ever breaking contact with the enemy by circling around or sliding laterally.

Right, but what about creatures?

Unless they are mindless, at our table they run to the characters without armour doing the most damage. And there are often enough of them that 1 or 2 OAs matter little.