Is this an Attack of Opportunity?

[KarinsDad]

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.

Hard to do in this case.

Touch spells do not provoke.

Just like many other actions in the game do not provoke.

Adding a provoke when one does not exist seems inherently wrong to me. It seems like DM heavy handedness. It matters not which square an enemy is in, you provoke only when the rules say so.

At first, this seemed like an open-ended question. But, the more I investigated, the more it became clear that this was "wishful thinking".

To me, the provoke list should be one that is pretty much a solid list. You don't really add stuff to it.

It's not as if the book states "in cases of unusual movement, you should add an AoO".

The book never recommends adding an AoO for any reason. It lists when they occur. It also states that there could be some more (not that DMs should add more). This appears to be a minor quibble that they left it open-ended so that splat books and possibly other places in the core books that they missed could add to the list.

But, it seems crystal clear to me. Free actions do not ever provoke. Not An Action actions do not ever provoke. Just like a Quicken Spell does not provoke as a Swift Action, even though casting spells normally provokes. Free Actions, Immediate Actions, Swift Actions and Not An Action actions are just too fast to provoke.

To give them this quality of equating to Move Actions and Standard Actions that are slower and take more effort and sometimes do provoke seems inherently wrong to me. Next, someone will be wanting to give an AoO because someone is in the same square, or because a character is moving on a horse (note: doing an AoO on the horse is fine, not the rider), or against a Familiar because a Familiar is on a PCs shoulder when the PC moves, or for a soft fall off a horse (which btw is a No Action action) because they see it as movement.

Quite frankly, I'm kind of surprised that you have not "switched sides" in this. Your position appears to be that although Touch Spells do not provoke, you want to make them provoke for this special circumstance. Very strange.

There are times when the rules appear to be a shade of gray. This does not appear to be one of those times. You want me to admit there is a shade of gray when one does not exist. Sorry, no can do.

 

[Pielorinho]

I encourage y'all to take a look at the brand new sticky, especially the fourth item.

Night, all!
Daniel

 

[KarinsDad]

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

You just stated it.

"part of the standard action used to cast the spell"

Any action that is explicitly listed as part of another action is called a No Action action unless it is explicitly listed as a free action.

"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. For instance, using the Use Magic Device skill (page 85) while trying to activate a device is not an action, it is part of the standard action to activate a magic item."

"To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject, either in the same round, or any time later. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) the target. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll."

The touch here is automatic, it matters not when you do it in a round.

From Rules of the Game:

"If you cast a spell with a range of touch, you can touch one recipient as a nonaction that's part of the action you used to cast the spell."

There are a LOT of No Action actions in the game. An opposed check when being Tripped or Grappled or Disarmed. A soft fall off a horse. Casting Defensively. Concentrating to hide the display when manifesting a psionic power. A Search check for an Elf merely walking past a secret door. The list goes on and on and on.

Show me where it is written that reaching into an occupied square does not provoke an attack of opportunity.

It doesn't work that way.

You have to show me where reaching into an occupied square DOES provoke an attack of opportunity. Note: Grapple, Sunder, Disarm, and Unarmed Attack do not provoke for reaching in. There is not one sentence that states that that is the reason.

The onus in on the person making up the new rule.

 

[Artoomis]

...Quite frankly, I'm kind of surprised that you have not "switched sides" in this. Your position appears to be that although Touch Spells do not provoke, you want to make them provoke for this special circumstance. Very strange.

There are times when the rules appear to be a shade of gray. This does not appear to be one of those times. You want me to admit there is a shade of gray when one does not exist. Sorry, no can do.

I am also surprised you have not switched sides.

The rules CLEARY state that the tabled list of AoOs is only partial, but you seem to hang on to that list as if it was gospel. They also gve guidance on deciding on how to handle other situations.

...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...
An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you...
Actions in Combat notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity...

Now, the fact that using a touch spell on an ally does not draw an AoO does NOT mean it won't if you do it into an enemy-occupied square. That situation is simply one of the ones not covered in the "many of the actions" listed on the AoO tables.

 

[Artoomis]

I encourage y'all to take a look at the brand new sticky, especially the fourth item.

Night, all!
Daniel

I read it. I agree - I've been trying to say pretty much exactly that. There's more than one way to look at this.

I certainly do not claim to have the ONLY right answer here, especially in this case.

 

[Caliban]

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

This is not actually true. Free actions do not usually provoke an AoO, but some still do. The Rapid Reload feat in the PHB reduces the reload time for a light crossbow to a free action which still provokes an AoO, for example.

 

[beepeearr]

It doesn't work that way.

You have to show me where reaching into an occupied square DOES provoke an attack of opportunity. Note: Grapple, Sunder, Disarm, and Unarmed Attack do not provoke for reaching in. There is not one sentence that states that that is the reason.

The onus in on the person making up the new rule.

Now show me where in the rules it states that you can reach into an occupied square in the first place, and nowhere can I find that they absolutely never provoke an attack of opportunity.

I can give you an example of a "not an action" that would though. A reach 0 creature takes a five foot step into an occupied square to make an attack. A five foot step is defined as a "no action" action, on the action list, but will provoke an attack of opportunity in an unusual situation.

 

[beepeearr]

I read it too, I think, it was the keep it civil one right. Who was it directed at though, I thought we were being pretty civil compared to some of the other threads I've read though.

If it was me, I'm not sure what I did, but I obviously didn't mean to offend any one.

 

[Artoomis]

I read it too, I think, it was the keep it civil one right. Who was it directed at though, I thought we were being pretty civil compared to some of the other threads I've read though.

If it was me, I'm not sure what I did, but I obviously didn't mean to offend any one.

I think he meant:

4) Ultimately, none of us has the single, final right answer on any rules question. We don't even have a firm agreement on what a right answer looks like: some people operate according to a Rules As Written approach, while others believe that a looser interpretation based on perceived intent and overall coherence of the rules is the best way to derive the right answer. If you and another poster can't find common ground, it's perfectly okay to agree to disagree, instead of insisting on making the other poster see that they're wrong and you're right.

 

[KarinsDad]

Now, the fact that using a touch spell on an ally does not draw an AoO does NOT mean it won't if you do it into an enemy-occupied square.

It is always the action itself that indicates whether you are lowering your guard in a threatened square. It is never the circumstances of where enemies are around you when you perform the action.

If you are reaching into his square or not, you are still in a threatened square.

Your position is: This action does not provoke while in a threatened square. So, let's put a caveat on the action that it actually does provoke in some circumstances, even though it does not provoke normally.

What's up with that?

You are even admitting that touch spells do not provoke. Not provoking means that you are not lowering your guard when doing that action, regardless of external circumstances.

You touch an ally. All of the rules remain the same.