Monk using jump to get around shield

[blargney the second]

I'd let the shield still apply +4 AC as normal, but give the monk a +2 bonus for charging and a +1 bonus for higher ground. They almost negate each other at that point.

If an NPC is really surprised by a PC's actions, I will sometimes decide to deny the NPC their Dex bonus to AC. (The same holds true for the PCs.)
-blarg

 

[Lord Pendragon]

So how would you rule it if the monk is attacking from directly above the wizard? That's how I was imagining it; if the monk was just hopping up and down and attacking from the hopzenith, then I'd agree with you.

In this case, I'd rule with you, actually. If he's jumped directly above the wizard, than his attack is no longer crossing the plane of the Shield. But that would raise several other rules issues, such as where the monk plans to end his jump (in the same square as the wizard? Is there room on the other side of the wizard?) and whether or not the wizard has a weapon or weapon-like spell in-hand to take his AoO, since the monk would be moving through potentially threatened squares.

Since none of those issues were mentioned in the OP, I'd been envisioning it--as you say--as the monk simply jumping in place and trying to strike downward over the Shield. If he's actually jumping over the wizard, then I agree with you.

 

[Amal Shukup]

I dislike the 3.0 version of shield, and it creates a number of wierdnesses (like this), but given the rules as they are, it's a reasonably valid whinge (and 3.0's Shield is so broken, I'd be inclined to rule against it by default).

Some interesting bits though..

1. Gotta make the Jump check to clear, say, at least 5' over the Mage's vertical reach (in 3.5 that would require a check of 20 or more). If you picture the spaces around the Mage as 5' cubes, you'll note that the Monk is likely traveling through an adjacent 'cube' and ought to suffer an AOO thereby...

If he grabs SERIOUS air, I'd let him add 'Falling Object' damage to his attack (in 3.5 a typical character - 101-200 lbs - would need to fall 20' feet to do an additional d6). Might thereby avoid moving through a threatened square too...

2. Attacking from above gives him the +1 to hit

3. If the Monk did it by running up, (straight line etc.) I'd let him have the +2 for charging too (it really wouldn't apply unless he were charging from straight above the Wiz, but it's interesting)

4. Now the Monk has to land. First, the Monk is entering the Mage's square. If the mage is in a position make another AOO, then he gets one. Now the square is double occupied, so I'd rule that the Monk falls prone in the square (unless, of course, he's managed to drop the Mage already)...

If the Monk had Spring Attack, I'd let him make a Tumble Check to pass through an occupied Square (DC 25) and finish his move wherever he's got the movement to reach.​

Make it REALLY interesting and take the previous round's Standard Action to 'Feint' - which would deny the Mage's Dex and Dodge bonusses as well...

Now I'm imagining what, say, Stone Giant Monks could do to a party using this sort of technique...(+1d6 for ea. 200 lbs for ea. 10' increment...)

Amal

 

[Kaffis]

For all you guys trying to give out +2 for charging -- I would tend to be careful with that, as it seems like it would be encroaching on the Swashbuckler's acrobatic charge. This is the perfect thing for a swashbuckler to do, though. Higher ground, sure. Deny flanking if you think the wizard's surprised by the screaming monk hurtling at him from above. But no acrobatic charging. And it does seem like iffy spring attack territory, as well. But a monk should have spring attack anyways, imo.

 

[Li Shenron]

I wouldn't have let the Monk do that.

First, I could have said that, with the Wizard in the corner, the Shield wasn't necessarily vertical but could have been 45 degrees (if you can picture the "shield plane" intersecting the 2 walls and floor, it may look triangular).

Technically I would not let the Wiz change the shield's facing on someone else's turn - otherwise you're taking away the only limitation of the spell, that of protecting only from 1 direction - but the Wiz standing there doing nothing is very likely being reading such an action.

Finally, I would not have allowed the Monk to jump and attack from above. That seems to me just beyond a normal character's capabilities (even a Monk). Perhaps with a specific feat I'd let him do that, but not without.

Sorry, should have clarified. We're still using 3.0 since we didn't feel like shelling out for new books.

Seemed clear enough to me since the very start

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Hey, in a game I run the wizard cast shield on himself and backed into a corner of the small house. There were no spellcasters in the party and the melee characters were having a hard time hitting him since they couldn't get behind his shield and with it his AC was 25. (5th level game, the npc had good dex, mage armor, shield, and a ring of protection.)

Here's the question. The monk thought he should be able to jump up in the air above the npc's head and punch down on him, getting behind the plane of the shield. I said no way and he thought I was being unreasonable. (At least in the heat of the action, and that was a hot battle.) Do you think that was an unreasonable ruling?

First question: Small house - how small? If we're talking "standard" height, we have 2,50 meters. If your wizard wasn't a halfling or a gnome, there's not been enough room for that monk to jump over the shield anyway.

Second: Shield grants a 3/4 cover bonus, thus it is reasonable to assume we're dealing with a large mobile disk of force. Jumping over one will take quite a bit...but that's what the monk is all about. From the spell description, though, I'd say it's possible, as the disk rotates around a vertical axis, not a horizontal one also. And it's a disk, not a half-globe. So jumping over it to land on the wizard behind it should be possible.

Third: An attack during your move action is the province of the Spring Attack feat. Ys, I know, creative thinking of the players and all, and I personally prefer to give my players more leeway with their actions, too, if it's not abused, but by the RAW, that kind of action is done via Spring Attack.

Fourth: Where did the monk want to land? On the wizard in question? If he was backed in a corner, the monk didn't have any space behind to jump in?