NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 3587355" data-attributes="member: 7240">I can see that. And I'm not saying my personal experience of 6 gaming groups in 2 cities thousands of miles apart all having trouble with AoOs is any more representative. I agree. "Complexity," is just below "realism" on the list of dumb, non-descriptive, inaccurate objections to things.... And not just in gaming, either! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />That's true of "them." But not of the particular players I've worked with who have had AoO trouble. Our trouble has usually been that the counter-intuitive nature of the AoO seems to make it harder for us to simultaneously internalize the geometry of the board and the consequences of the AoO system. That's the experience of me and my current military-ranking Thursday night GM who lectures internationally on military strategy. Again, just annecdotal but I know I'm not the only strategy geek who likes his battles but not his AoOs. Now, that stated, I am happy to concede that fewer strategy geeks have trouble with AoOs than, for instance, story geeks or drama geeks. But a number of us do.But the double-move exemption screws up my geometric picture of the rule. I have internalizing the idea that if I leap on a horse after fleeing, I provoke an attack of opportunity but if I run around my horse, I don't. Add to that the five foot step exemption and pretty soon, AoOs start happening less than 50% of the time people leave threatened squares in most combats. When the exception, in practice, is usually more common than the rule, the rule, itself, becomes hard to internalize.</blockquote>

Verification