improved trip and reach (again?)

[mikebr99]

Spells have a rule stating that an AOO (of ANY sort) can prevent the casting. Grappling has a similar rule. Getting up has no such rule. Thus, an AOO, in and of itself, does not prevent getting up. An AOO, in and of itself, DOES prevent casting or initiating grappling.

Just to clarify... it's the failed concentration attempt due to damage taken (from the sucessful AoO) that may prevent casting... not a sucessful AoO all by itself.


Mike

 

[tauton_ikhnos]

I would word it that the concentration check counters the prevention effect, but however you prefer

 

[Will]

Personally, it makes a lot of 'in game' sense that you should be able to trip someone to prevent them from standing.

Think about it... someone starts standing up and you shove them while they are unbalanced.

Or whathaveyou.

 

[IceBear]

Personally, it makes a lot of 'in game' sense that you should be able to trip someone to prevent them from standing.

Think about it... someone starts standing up and you shove them while they are unbalanced.

Or whathaveyou.

Agreed, but to do otherwise leads to DMs like this one asking how to nerf this combo

 

[Legildur]

I'm okay with the AOO on an opponent trying to stand from prone NOT being able to keep them down.

The AOO could still be a trip attack, and if the character had Improved Trip and successfully tripped again (leaving the opponent in exactly the same position as they were) then the character would simply get the bonus attack from the feat. But the opponent still gets to stand up once the AOO (and bonus attack, if any) is resolved.

That is, there is no advantage is trying to trip again as you may as well just take the bonus attack to start with and be done with it.

 

[Evilhalfling]

Im not sure logic matches tauton and Pkitty's interpretation, but the rules seem to.
I can't see how someone on the ground provokes an attack without being at least half standing.

I could logically accept that standing up is a single provoking action, if target is tripped again in the middle of it, I could rule that standing becomes a full round action.

Allright if I do accept that the trip cannot prevent standing as a single move action then the person must be still considered prone when the AoO takes place, so the PC should logically get the +4 to hit prone target, right?

Oh I found the rules to my second question,
Can the chain be used from the second rank?
It can, but the first rank acts as cover (+4AC and chance of striking cover)
just like missle attacks into melee.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Can the chain be used from the second rank?
It can, but the first rank acts as cover (+4AC and chance of striking cover)
just like missle attacks into melee.

It's debated.

Some people say "That's soft cover, and it only applies to ranged attacks, so the chain gets no penalty," and others counter with "Ah, but melee attacks against non-adjacent targets use the ranged attack rules for determining if someone has cover," and the first lot come back with "That's right - those rules say they have soft cover... which only applies to melee attacks, so there's no penalty," and it goes back and forth like that for a while...

-Hyp.

 

[Caliban]

I'd say it's perfectly legal to trip somone as they are standing up. You obviously can't trip them before they try to stand up. Once they start to stand up they are no longer prone, and can be tripped on the AoO. Your AoO is interrupting their "stand up" action, and the attack occurs before the action is completed, but after it is started.

Tripping is not an automatic thing, even if you have a higher trip bonus than they do. And if you fail to trip them, then you might be tripped in return, or forced to drop your weapon.

 

[Trainz]

So... what's the official stance on this ?

Like I mentioned in another thread, I DM a game with a spiked chain Minotaur in it, and that info would be VERY valuable to me.

 

[Caliban]

So... what's the official stance on this ?

Like I mentioned in another thread, I DM a game with a spiked chain Minotaur in it, and that info would be VERY valuable to me.

There is none, so far. Send the question into the Sage if you want one "official" stance on it.