Back to helpless defenders...
For the "i drop him then AoO and kill him" guy... i already covered that when i asked for why this was a "we cannot do this and have to sacrifice realism..."
The key is that you write therules to make this work. Simply raising the bar for dead (make it negative con) or changing what -10 means ("makes a fort save at end of scene") are ways the rules could be written to accomdate this.
Also, just from a simple point of view, since many creatures and enemies after low levels have multiple attacks a round the double tap is there already. heck, with cleave dropping A allows me to swing at B and then take my iterative swing back at the helpless A to finish him off.
If double taps were such a horrific imbalancing thing, one would think they would not be so easy to do now.
*************
My impression to the one swing or multiple swings would be that helpless is an ongoing trigger for AoOs. If you have six AoOs by dint of 20 dex and combat reflexes, you should be able to use them against a foe who is helpless... just like you theoretically could against someone else.
A archer with four attacks plus haste plus rapid shot can IN THEORY provoke SIX AoOs while manintaining full dex bonus and dodges. I do not see why he should be considered more lapsing in his defense than someone sleeping or paralyzed.
fact of the matter is, most characters dont have combat reflexes so in the vast majority of the cases its one AoO period.
Again, there still remains the "why cannot we make these rules work? Why is this a case where we must throw up our hands and say "we cannot do it?" We are not that good."
*****************
and remember, there are involuntary aoo provocations now. Any forced movement such as a bull rush or a tk "piniata maneuver" can cause the enemy to provoke aoos against his will.
Now, of course, we coul;d take a simpler road. We could REDEFINE AOOS. Take away totally the "lapse in defense" definition and all the text about chatacters continually defending and ducking and dodging... cut out that AoOs occur because the character's defense lapses...
instead come up with a definition that matches the rule and makes sense.
For example... "the gods have ordained that some actions would be considered unworthy in true combat and so these actions are punishable by the gods providing mystical speed for the enemies."
Anyone got an explanation for AoOs that does not involve lapses in defense?
For the "i drop him then AoO and kill him" guy... i already covered that when i asked for why this was a "we cannot do this and have to sacrifice realism..."
The key is that you write therules to make this work. Simply raising the bar for dead (make it negative con) or changing what -10 means ("makes a fort save at end of scene") are ways the rules could be written to accomdate this.
Also, just from a simple point of view, since many creatures and enemies after low levels have multiple attacks a round the double tap is there already. heck, with cleave dropping A allows me to swing at B and then take my iterative swing back at the helpless A to finish him off.
If double taps were such a horrific imbalancing thing, one would think they would not be so easy to do now.
*************
My impression to the one swing or multiple swings would be that helpless is an ongoing trigger for AoOs. If you have six AoOs by dint of 20 dex and combat reflexes, you should be able to use them against a foe who is helpless... just like you theoretically could against someone else.
A archer with four attacks plus haste plus rapid shot can IN THEORY provoke SIX AoOs while manintaining full dex bonus and dodges. I do not see why he should be considered more lapsing in his defense than someone sleeping or paralyzed.
fact of the matter is, most characters dont have combat reflexes so in the vast majority of the cases its one AoO period.
Again, there still remains the "why cannot we make these rules work? Why is this a case where we must throw up our hands and say "we cannot do it?" We are not that good."
*****************
and remember, there are involuntary aoo provocations now. Any forced movement such as a bull rush or a tk "piniata maneuver" can cause the enemy to provoke aoos against his will.
Now, of course, we coul;d take a simpler road. We could REDEFINE AOOS. Take away totally the "lapse in defense" definition and all the text about chatacters continually defending and ducking and dodging... cut out that AoOs occur because the character's defense lapses...
instead come up with a definition that matches the rule and makes sense.
For example... "the gods have ordained that some actions would be considered unworthy in true combat and so these actions are punishable by the gods providing mystical speed for the enemies."
Anyone got an explanation for AoOs that does not involve lapses in defense?
Last edited:
