Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Keeping AoO for PC's, but removing AoO from enemies
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Laurefindel" data-source="post: 8061557" data-attributes="member: 67296"><p>While I agree that some posts were needlessly snarky, I agree with (what seems to be) the general consensus about keeping AoO for monsters, or getting rid of it altogether.</p><p></p><p>1) What is fun and what is not is highly subjective, but I think you overestimate the "not fun-ness" of AoO made against players. It is one of the last (and few) tactical element of 5e combat, and one that works just as good in grid-and-minis and theatre-of-the-mind playstyles. AoO is a reality of combat, and PCs have several ways to cancel or mitigate their effects (through class features, feats, and strategy). It is similar to how friendly fire may restrict your wizard's spells if allies would be caught in the area of effect of their fireball; if fireball can be used anywhere and in any situation with impunity, the value of some other spell is diminished.</p><p></p><p>2) It might open new strategic option via positioning, but you'd rob your players of some of the existing strategic options that revolve around AoO, like the PC with high hp and AC provoking the enemy's AoO and force it to use its reaction, using the protection fighting style to shield another from an AoO, teleporting an ally out of AoO's reach, using spells like fog cloud to impose disadvantage on AoO, etc.</p><p></p><p>3) In D&D, PCs have little reasons to move in general. In mind's eye, it's easier to imagine combat as a fluid entity but on the square grid, there is no point of going places other than flying to the rescue of another player or moving out of a spell's area of effect. If PCs can do that without risks, it cheapens the "drama" of the situation.</p><p></p><p>4) What one consider fun strategic option, or out-of-the-box thinking, another may call it abuse or cheesy shenanigan, and at a point the trick gets more tiring than fun. Potential AoO are already the gambling elements of many strategies; I'm not sure if removing that gambling element would be wise.</p><p></p><p>However, I think a middle-ground could be reached if you decide that "mooks" monsters and creatures don't have a reaction, while "normal" creatures do. PCs are fighting 15 goblins, a goblin chief, and an ogre, perhaps only the chief and the ogre can deliver AoO. But even then, potential AoO is sometimes the only real threat of numerous, low CR creatures, so IDK.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Laurefindel, post: 8061557, member: 67296"] While I agree that some posts were needlessly snarky, I agree with (what seems to be) the general consensus about keeping AoO for monsters, or getting rid of it altogether. 1) What is fun and what is not is highly subjective, but I think you overestimate the "not fun-ness" of AoO made against players. It is one of the last (and few) tactical element of 5e combat, and one that works just as good in grid-and-minis and theatre-of-the-mind playstyles. AoO is a reality of combat, and PCs have several ways to cancel or mitigate their effects (through class features, feats, and strategy). It is similar to how friendly fire may restrict your wizard's spells if allies would be caught in the area of effect of their fireball; if fireball can be used anywhere and in any situation with impunity, the value of some other spell is diminished. 2) It might open new strategic option via positioning, but you'd rob your players of some of the existing strategic options that revolve around AoO, like the PC with high hp and AC provoking the enemy's AoO and force it to use its reaction, using the protection fighting style to shield another from an AoO, teleporting an ally out of AoO's reach, using spells like fog cloud to impose disadvantage on AoO, etc. 3) In D&D, PCs have little reasons to move in general. In mind's eye, it's easier to imagine combat as a fluid entity but on the square grid, there is no point of going places other than flying to the rescue of another player or moving out of a spell's area of effect. If PCs can do that without risks, it cheapens the "drama" of the situation. 4) What one consider fun strategic option, or out-of-the-box thinking, another may call it abuse or cheesy shenanigan, and at a point the trick gets more tiring than fun. Potential AoO are already the gambling elements of many strategies; I'm not sure if removing that gambling element would be wise. However, I think a middle-ground could be reached if you decide that "mooks" monsters and creatures don't have a reaction, while "normal" creatures do. PCs are fighting 15 goblins, a goblin chief, and an ogre, perhaps only the chief and the ogre can deliver AoO. But even then, potential AoO is sometimes the only real threat of numerous, low CR creatures, so IDK. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Keeping AoO for PC's, but removing AoO from enemies
Top