Is this an Attack of Opportunity?

[Artoomis]

I think no matter how you rule on this one it's a "house rule" (if you really want to give it that label) since the RAW does not cover this situation.

Given that, I think the best approach is to take the AoO rules as a whole and go with what seems best for you.

A little common sense can go a long way here.

Edit: See beepeearr's post below - it says a lot of what I would have said here but was, really, too lazy to type it all out. It is , I think the most common sense way of looking at the rules involved.

 

[beepeearr]

SRD: Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Actions in Combat notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity.

Many does not equal all.

Not every situation is covered in the PHB table, they even say so in the description of AoO, it is not an all inclusive list so don't treat it as one. There will be instances where an action is not listed on it, so use the spirit of the rule, and the spirit of the rule is performing a distracting action while threatened provokes an attack of opportunity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by beepeearr
however ignoring your opponent to deliver the touch spell on an ally he is standing over should.

Should, would, could, ...

Where in the rules does it state that you are ignoring an opponent?

Admit it, you made this part up.

Quoted from SRD
ATTACKS OF OPPORTUNITY
Sometimes a combatant in a melee lets her guard down. In this case, combatants near her can take advantage of her lapse in defense to attack her for free. These free attacks are called attacks of opportunity.
Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your action. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you’re unarmed, you don’t normally threaten any squares and thus can’t make attacks of opportunity.
Reach Weapons: Most creatures of Medium or smaller size have a reach of only 5 feet. This means that they can make melee attacks only against creatures up to 5 feet (1 square) away. However, Small and Medium creatures wielding reach weapons threaten more squares than a typical creature. In addition, most creatures larger than Medium have a natural reach of 10 feet or more.
Provoking an Attack of Opportunity: Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing an action within a threatened square.
Moving: Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes an attack of opportunity from the threatening opponent. There are two common methods of avoiding such an attack—the 5-foot-step and the withdraw action (see below).
Performing a Distracting Act: Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Table: Actions in Combat notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity.
Remember that even actions that normally provoke attacks of opportunity may have exceptions to this rule.

Quote:
Originally Posted by beepeearr
I would treat this and similar activities as entering your opponents square, but without leaving your own (important distinction as both of these actions would provoke separate attacks of opportunity, that a character with Combat Reflexes could whack you twice for).

None of the special attacks indicate that the target gets an Attack of Opportunity for you entering their square except Bull Rush and Overrun where you are actually attempting to enter the square. In fact, you are NOT entering the square at all with this action.

Hence the reason I said "I would treat this and similar activities as entering your opponents square, but without leaving your own"

This is an assumption as to why those rules give AoOs and have nothing to do with RAW.

There is two other mentions of provoking attacks of opportunity for entering an opponents square.

One regarding creatures with reach 0.

They must enter an opponent’s square to attack in melee. This provokes an attack of opportunity from the opponent.

and again on page 148 of the PHB when discussing a very small creature moving into or through an opponents square. Note this has nothing to do with attacking the creature.

Also, none of the special attacks (except Bull Rush) give the Attack of Opportunity to anyone other than the target of the attack (and even with Bull Rush, you are attempting to enter the square).

You are also not attacking the character in the square with this action, so why exactly should he get an AoO if you are not attacking him?

See above.

You are not entering his square.

Once again, hence the reason I said "I would treat this and similar activities as entering your opponents square, but without leaving your own"

You are not attacking him.

Which has nothing to do with anything.

You are not doing an action that provokes.

That is the root of this whole discussion. Not all possible actions that provoke an attack of opportunity are covered. The Rules do not cover every single possiblity. I'm simply stating why I would award the AoO.

Why exactly again should he get an AoO? That's the confusing part of the pro-AoO side. Nobody has yet explained via the rules why this happens. They explained why they want it to happen, but not why it happens via the rules.

Here is the entry for AoO from the SRD.

ATTACKS OF OPPORTUNITY
Sometimes a combatant in a melee lets her guard down. In this case, combatants near her can take advantage of her lapse in defense to attack her for free. These free attacks are called attacks of opportunity.

Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your action. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you’re unarmed, you don’t normally threaten any squares and thus can’t make attacks of opportunity.
Reach Weapons: Most creatures of Medium or smaller size have a reach of only 5 feet. This means that they can make melee attacks only against creatures up to 5 feet (1 square) away. However, Small and Medium creatures wielding reach weapons threaten more squares than a typical creature. In addition, most creatures larger than Medium have a natural reach of 10 feet or more.
Provoking an Attack of Opportunity: Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing an action within a threatened square.
Moving: Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes an attack of opportunity from the threatening opponent. There are two common methods of avoiding such an attack—the 5-foot-step and the withdraw action (see below).
Performing a Distracting Act: Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Table: Actions in Combat notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity.
Remember that even actions that normally provoke attacks of opportunity may have exceptions to this rule.

The question is would reaching into an opponents square, for an action other than attack count as either a distracting act or letting your guard down. I don't think it would be unfair to classify reaching into an opponents square for a non-hostile action as letting your guard down. It's one thing to touch a downed ally with a touch spell within reach of an enemy, but touching a downed ally while the enemy is actually standing over the body would, and should be a bit more difficult.

None of the special attacks indicate that the target gets an Attack of Opportunity for you entering their square except Bull Rush and Overrun where you are actually attempting to enter the square. In fact, you are NOT entering the square at all with this action.

True, you are not entering the square, but you are reaching into it in a non-threatening manner. To me anyway these are the sort of actions AoO where created for in the first place.

 

[KarinsDad]

The question is would reaching into an opponents square, for an action other than attack count as either a distracting act or letting your guard down. I don't think it would be unfair to classify reaching into an opponents square for a non-hostile action as letting your guard down. It's one thing to touch a downed ally with a touch spell within reach of an enemy, but touching a downed ally while the enemy is actually standing over the body would, and should be a bit more difficult.

Why? The pro-AoO side keeps stating "should". Not "does". Should is house rules. Does is RAW.


"Performing a Distracting Act: Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Table: Actions in Combat notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity."

There is not ONE "reaching into your opponents" square action that indicates that the opponent gets an attack of opportunity BECAUSE you are reaching in. Not one.

Not Grapple.

Not Sunder.

Not Disarm.

Not Unarmed Attack.

Additionally, none of these give an AoO to anyone except the opponent you are targeting.


Overrun and Bullrush do indicate that you get the AoO because the opponent is "entering the square".

But, a touch spell is not entering. This is not targeting the opponent. It is a "No Action" action part of casting the spell and there is a rule that allows for the character to automatically touch an ally as part of that action. If they wanted to allow AoOs for that, they would have listed it.

No rule states that you ever drop your guard or divert your attention from battle when performing a touch spell. Not one rule.

There are rules that indicate that you do not (the "No Action" rule and the Touch Attack spell rules).


Seriously, your interpretation is house rules area. The rules on when you do not "divert your attention from battle" are pretty explicit. You do not do that when doing a "No action" action. Those are part of other actions. The original action might provoke, but the no action does not.

 

[Artoomis]

...Seriously, your interpretation is house rules area. The rules on when you do not "divert your attention from battle" are pretty explicit. You do not do that when doing a "No action" action. Those are part of other actions. The original action might provoke, but the no action does not.

Yours is also House Rules, if that's what you want to call it when making a ruling that does not exist in RAW.

Your argument has been most effectively countered, and I find your counter-counter-argument to be somewhat less than persuasive.

"The rules on when you do not "divert your attention from battle" are pretty explicit." This statement is patently false. The "fact" that "no action" activities ever provoke an AoO is also false.

The rules CLEARLY leave open the possibility for AoOs for actions not listed. Reaching into an opponent's square for a non-combat action is clearly not in the AoO tables.

I agree that not provoking an opportunuity is one POSSIBLE answer, but I find the opponent being entitled to an AoO to be the FAR more persuasive argument.

You are attempting to find a ruling from RAW to fit a situation that was apparently not anticipated, so, as one might expect, you are really stretching to try and make some specific rule fit here.

 

[KarinsDad]

The "fact" that "no action" activities ever provoke an AoO is also false.

Name one.

 

[Artoomis]

Name one.

I do not need to. I need only point out that the AoO rules leave open the possibility for other actions to provoke AoOs.

 

[KarinsDad]

I do not need to. I need only point out that the AoO rules leave open the possibility for other actions to provoke AoOs.

Do they?

"Not an Action: Some activities are so minor that they are not even considered free actions. They literally don’t take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else."

It is not it's own action, it is part of another action. So, how do the AoO rules apply to actions which are not actions? According to all precedence in the game, the AoO rules do not apply. Ever. There is not one example of an NAA ever resulting in an AoO (or a free action for that matter). You just do not "divert your attention from battle" by doing something that does not take any time at all to do. That really does not make sense, nor do you have one example of it.


Your "minor loophole" is a slippery slope with the rules. It allows you to have an AoO on a "Not An Action" action and to have an AoO on the action that the NAA was part of.

Two AoOs for the price of one.

Free actions do not ever have an AoO associated with them.

NAA actions do not ever have an AoO associated with them.

But, even with all of this precedence, you are grasping at straws here and claiming that "Well, you can do it...".


This leads to things like: "I Overrun you. You can avoid it. But, because my familiar is on my shoulder, I THINK it should get an AoO against you because you are now in the same square as the familiar and performing a NAA to avoid. Avoidance never resulted in an AoO before (just like touch spells), but that's ok. The opponent is in the same square as the familiar, so I FEEL like it should happen."


If you are saying that it is ok for a DM to rule this way in his game, I agree.

If you are saying that the rules in any way support this (outside of the similar rule rule and even that is really stretching it because nothing you have used is similar at all), I disagree.


This is a minor literal loophole in the rules which is not supported in any way by any other rules.

 

[Artoomis]

...

You are over-focusing on two things:

First, that no "free action" or "not an action" actions are defined as provoking an AoO (true, but irrelevant)

and

Second, that all actions should be matched up to existing AoO table actions or else they do not provoke an AoO (not true - the rules make it very clear that the tables are only examples and NOT a complete list).

Both of those are misguided when you are talking about a sitution not covered by the rules. The situation we are talking about is very, very limited, so you do not have to worry about opening the door to abuse.

The situation is restricted to in combat, when reaching into an enemy-occupied square for a reason OTHER than a pre-defined combat-related action or an action already defined as provoking an AoO (in which, case, of course, you provoke an AoO from everyone who threatens you, as normal).

Under those circumstance, you provoke an AoO from the occupant of the square in question.

This is not really subject to the abuse you fear. It also is within the rules as written, but it's filling the gaps of a missing activity in the AoO tables and so is subject to interpretation, certainly.

 

[Artoomis]

You know, KarinsDad, I don't really expect to convince you, but I'd like to get you to admit that there might be more than one legitimate way to veiw this situation within the rules.

 

[beepeearr]

But, a touch spell is not entering. This is not targeting the opponent. It is a "No Action" action part of casting the spell and there is a rule that allows for the character to automatically touch an ally as part of that action. If they wanted to allow AoOs for that, they would have listed it.

Where are you finding that using a touch spell is a no-action. It is either a part of the standard action used to cast the spell, or a standard action if used after the round it is cast, but I'm not finding any rules for "no actions" other than 5'step or delay, which 5' step is listed under misc. actions, and has the following sentence "for actions not covered below, the DM lets you know how long an action takes to perform and whether doing so provokes an attack of opportunity.

Show me where it is written that reaching into an occupied square does not provoke an attack of opportunity. Awarding an attack of opportunity or not awarding an attack of opportunity is not a house rule it is a DM judgement call. All I'm saying is that there are actions where entering or "effecting objects or creatures" within an occupied square does provoke an attack of opportunity from the occuppying creature.

Where
No rule states that you ever drop your guard or divert your attention from battle when performing a touch spell. Not one rule.

It's not the touch spell we are focusing on, but the action of reaching into an occupied square.

Seriously, your interpretation is house rules area. The rules on when you do not "divert your attention from battle" are pretty explicit. You do not do that when doing a "No action" action. Those are part of other actions. The original action might provoke, but the no action does not.

What page does it specifically state or define what a "no action" is and that they never provoke an AoO, or that using a touch spell is even considered a "no action" that allows you to reach into an occupied square.. In addition since there are no rules written for reaching into an occupied square for anything other than an Attack or special action, what makes you suggest it is even allowed. I could easilly accuse you of houseruling as well.

The actions and AoO list is not an all inclusive list. It does not list every possible action that can be performed. The DM is encouraged to make judgement calls. A DM ruling is not a House Rule. Seriously, how easy do you think it would be to touch someone lying at the feat of someone swinging a sword about.