Improved Grab and AOO

[Hypersmurf]

Do you count those as part of the same move so only one AoO gets suffered in a worse case senario?

It doesn't matter if they're part of the same move or not; it matters if they occur in the same round.

"Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn’t count as more than one opportunity for that opponent."

If I move past you, and then get bullrushed past you again in the same round, it doesn't count as more than one opportunity.

If I get bullrushed past you again in a different round, it's a separate opportunity.

-Hyp.

 

[frankthedm]

It doesn't matter if they're part of the same move or not; it matters if they occur in the same round.

"Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn’t count as more than one opportunity for that opponent."

If I move past you, and then get bullrushed past you again in the same round, it doesn't count as more than one opportunity.

If I get bullrushed past you again in a different round, it's a separate opportunity.

-Hyp.

I was just making sure Primitive Screwhead counted those as movement as far as the 1 AoO during movement limitation goes.

BTW Hype, would you say the wording of Improved grab makes the victim vulnerble to or shielded from AoO's

And Does the TK:Violent thrust victim suffer AoOs from being flung through threatened areas?

 

[Hypersmurf]

BTW Hype, would you say the wording of Improved grab makes the victim vulnerble to or shielded from AoO's

Hmm... I don't think the wording of Improved Grab protects the victim, only the attacker. The act of dragging the victim into your space doesn't provoke AoOs, but the victim isn't performing the act. The victim is, however, moving out of a square.

And Does the TK:Violent thrust victim suffer AoOs from being flung through threatened areas?

The Bull Rush precedent provides ammunition to make a case for it...

-Hyp.

 

[frankthedm]

victim is, however, moving out of a square.

Are you sure that is movement as far as the D&D definition goes? As i have said bull rush specifies AoOs are drawn due to it, something it would not need to do if that was the case anyways.

Another question...

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Grisly fate!

Grisly fate!

 

[frankthedm]

http://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=181

 

[Infiniti2000]

Hmm... I don't think the wording of Improved Grab protects the victim, only the attacker. The act of dragging the victim into your space doesn't provoke AoOs, but the victim isn't performing the act. The victim is, however, moving out of a square.

I don't agree. I'm with Frank on this one. To see why, let me quote more of the Improved Grab with the middle (irrelevant IMO) part redacted and certain portions underlined:

Improved Grab
If a creature with this special attack hits with a melee weapon (usually a claw or bite attack), it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity.
. . .
When a creature gets a hold after an improved grab attack, it pulls the opponent into its space. This act does not provoke attacks of opportunity. . . .

The huge section in the middle separates the two parts that mention not provoking an AoO. Obviously, ruling as Hyp and Primitive Screwhead do means that the second underlined part is not only redundant but is very out of place for where it should be referring to. The "this act" refers to the previous sentence, does it not? Not all the way at the beginning of the paragraph.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Another question ...

I don't agree that the green gets the AoO in the first place.

However, when the green creature attacks the grappled victim, he cannot automatically pull him out of the grapple. Note that improved grab does not allow you to move into the grapple. Therefore, I'd say that the green creature cannot use an improved grab unless he takes -20. At that point, the victim is grappled by both, but only the orange monster is grappling.

 

[werk]

The "this act" refers to the previous sentence, does it not? Not all the way at the beginning of the paragraph.

Right, like charge. Charging doesn't provoke.

I'd refer to table 8-2: Actions in Combat sub note one (1) which states, with regard to attacks of opportunity: "Regardless of the action, if you move out of a threatened square, you usually provoke an attack of opportunity."



Then it comes down to...does usually mean "except when indirectly stated otherwise in the description" or does usually mean "we said usually because you don't provoke on 5' steps."

 

[Infiniti2000]

Right, like charge.

No, not like charging at all. Charging does not mention not provoking an AoO, but improved grab, twice. Why is it twice, I wonder? More importantly, why does the second time it's mentioned not refer to the sentences that surround it?