Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FireLance" data-source="post: 2702399" data-attributes="member: 3424">I'm going to weigh in on the &quot;No AOO&quot; side of this argument.I don't see how the &quot;reaching into an opponent's square&quot; argument is valid. A kobold Fighter 4/Sor 1/Dragon Disciple (red) 10 might be immune to fire, and might make his spellcraft check to recognize that an opposing spellcaster cast scalding touch, a touch attack spell that deals 13d6 of fire damage, but he still doesn't get an AOO against that spellcaster if he tries to make a touch attack against the Small kobold, or his Medium fiendish dire weasel mount, or his Diminutive toad familiar (assuming it fell out of its master's pocket and is now hopping around on the ground).Similarly, I don't see how the &quot;distraction&quot; argument is valid. Why is focusing your attention to reach down and touch a prone ally more distracting than focusing your attention to reach down and attack a Tiny opponent?&nbsp; If it is more distracting, why does the spellcaster only provoke an AOO from the opponent in the square he's reaching into? In the unfortunate event that he is surrounded by opponents, shouldn't every opponent get an AOO since the spellcaster is performing a distracting act?If I were to give a game effect to the interference posed by an enemy standing over an ally that you want to heal, I wouldn't do it by giving the eneny an AOO. I'd probably use something like what Thanee suggested: the action to touch your ally is no longer automatic. Instead, you'd have to make a touch attack roll, and the enemy gives cover.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FireLance, post: 2702399, member: 3424"] I'm going to weigh in on the "No AOO" side of this argument. I don't see how the "reaching into an opponent's square" argument is valid. A kobold Fighter 4/Sor 1/Dragon Disciple (red) 10 might be immune to fire, and might make his spellcraft check to recognize that an opposing spellcaster cast [I]scalding touch[/I], a touch attack spell that deals 13d6 of fire damage, but he still doesn't get an AOO against that spellcaster if he tries to make a touch attack against the Small kobold, or his Medium fiendish dire weasel mount, or his Diminutive toad familiar (assuming it fell out of its master's pocket and is now hopping around on the ground). Similarly, I don't see how the "distraction" argument is valid. Why is focusing your attention to reach down and touch a prone ally more distracting than focusing your attention to reach down and attack a Tiny opponent? If it is more distracting, why does the spellcaster only provoke an AOO from the opponent in the square he's reaching into? In the unfortunate event that he is surrounded by opponents, shouldn't every opponent get an AOO since the spellcaster is performing a distracting act? If I were to give a game effect to the interference posed by an enemy standing over an ally that you want to heal, I wouldn't do it by giving the eneny an AOO. I'd probably use something like what Thanee suggested: the action to touch your ally is no longer automatic. Instead, you'd have to make a touch attack roll, and the enemy gives cover. [/QUOTE]

Verification