How Were AoOs / OAs Explained to You?

[gamerprinter]

Well considering we were playing 2e before that, and that we didn't jump to the update at 3.0, as we didn't switch until 3.5 so the 3.5 PH is where we learned it. We got it wrong for the first year of using it - thinking it meant when you entered a threatened square (not when leaving a threatened square). We got it backwards for about a year, until one DM really looked at the rules closely and figured out what it was supposed to mean. Only now, do we as players automatically recognize when we gain an AoO, or when our opponent does - it was confusing for a while, especially for one or two of our players.

 

[Henry]

"Within, or out of". That's the explanation that made it work for me.

The rest of the corner cases our group put largely to common sense -- in 90% of cases, the rules followed the idea that anything that distracted you from your enemy was op-attack worthy. There are some corner cases where people waffled from version to version, like standing up (3.0? No. 3.5? Yes. 4.0? No.) but in general, most cases we fell into a rhythm of intuitively knowing what provoked and what didn't based on our "common sense" meter.

So, drinking a potion? helping a friend? sheathing (not drawing) a weapon? casting a spell? all made sense to us. Only one that didn't was climbing -- In my mind, focusing on hanging on to a ledge and pulling yourself up or letting down naturally would mean you weren't in a position to guard against your enemies, yet, unless I'm missing it, you don't provoke while you're hanging off a ledge (though if you climbed past someone's threatened space, you could provoke, because you're not 5-ft stepping. )

 

[The Red King]

Since I don't use Xp in my games, I don't make people restart at lower levels, I just usually rule that they can't bring in a clone. Or at least if they do they have to be of the opposite alignment, and have amnesia so they don't know they're the dead character's twin.(yes, I force soap opera parodies on stupid people.)

I want to play in your game!

 

[Argyle King]

Just what the title says:

Were Attacks of Opportunity (aka Opportunity Attacks) explained to you as a rule? ("You provoke an attack by leaving a threatened square.") Or as an in-game logistic? ("You provoke an attack when you do something in melee that leaves you open to an easy potshot. Like running past a guy with a sword, or wiggling your fingers provocatively, etc.") Or did you learn directly from the PHB?

And a follow-up question:

Did/do you understand how AoOs / OAs work, based on how they were explained to you? (Knowing all thirty-seven and a half corner-cases that provoke AoOs isn't necessary to understanding them!)

I first learned what they were by reading the D&D 3rd Edition Player's Handbook.

I understood how they worked without any problems.