Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
New Revision Spotlight: Attacks of Opportunity
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="Spatzimaus" data-source="post: 879115" data-attributes="member: 3051"><p>The "multiple AoOs against a target" thing does worry me. Besides the Recursive AoO Chain effect, it's a bit unbalancing in general since it bypasses the whole BAB issue.</p><p></p><p>What I mean is, if I'm a first-level Fighter with an 18 DEX and Combat Reflexes, I get one normal attack per round, same as anyone else. When confronted with someone who does a lot of things provoking an AoO (say, running in circles around me at a distance of 5'), the Fighter without Combat Reflexes gets double his normal damage, while I get 6 times the normal. I'm doing 5 times as much damage on the target's turn as I am on my own.</p><p></p><p>The person's normal attack progressions become almost meaningless in this situation. Take the guy with the Spiked Chain; by standing in the middle of the battlefield, he's practically guaranteed to get lots of AoOs, even at low level.</p><p></p><p>Now, I understand why the ability to do multiple AoOs on one target is a good thing. If you don't give this capability, people will do a meaningless action (like move through a threatened square) to draw the AoO that could have disrupted a save-or-die spell. You could always choose not to take that first AoO, but that's not really a realistic thing.</p><p></p><p>That's why IMC we made a custom Feat, "Improved Combat Reflexes" (no relation to the splatbook feat) that, among other things, allowed the person to take additional AoOs on a single target at their Full Attack progression. That is, if I'm a 12th-level Fighter, I can take no more than 3 AoOs on a single target; the first is at my full attack bonus, the second at -5, the third at -10. After all, when AoOing a guy you shouldn't be able to get in more attacks than you would in a Full Attack action.</p><p>Each of these AoOs still counts against your Combat Reflexes total, so if you think other opponents are going to be drawing AoOs you should choose to hold off on taking all of them on the first guy you see.</p><p>Personally, I'd rather see it done this way as the general rule. IMC we'll probably use 3.5E and just house-rule it to this (removing the Feat).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Spatzimaus, post: 879115, member: 3051"] The "multiple AoOs against a target" thing does worry me. Besides the Recursive AoO Chain effect, it's a bit unbalancing in general since it bypasses the whole BAB issue. What I mean is, if I'm a first-level Fighter with an 18 DEX and Combat Reflexes, I get one normal attack per round, same as anyone else. When confronted with someone who does a lot of things provoking an AoO (say, running in circles around me at a distance of 5'), the Fighter without Combat Reflexes gets double his normal damage, while I get 6 times the normal. I'm doing 5 times as much damage on the target's turn as I am on my own. The person's normal attack progressions become almost meaningless in this situation. Take the guy with the Spiked Chain; by standing in the middle of the battlefield, he's practically guaranteed to get lots of AoOs, even at low level. Now, I understand why the ability to do multiple AoOs on one target is a good thing. If you don't give this capability, people will do a meaningless action (like move through a threatened square) to draw the AoO that could have disrupted a save-or-die spell. You could always choose not to take that first AoO, but that's not really a realistic thing. That's why IMC we made a custom Feat, "Improved Combat Reflexes" (no relation to the splatbook feat) that, among other things, allowed the person to take additional AoOs on a single target at their Full Attack progression. That is, if I'm a 12th-level Fighter, I can take no more than 3 AoOs on a single target; the first is at my full attack bonus, the second at -5, the third at -10. After all, when AoOing a guy you shouldn't be able to get in more attacks than you would in a Full Attack action. Each of these AoOs still counts against your Combat Reflexes total, so if you think other opponents are going to be drawing AoOs you should choose to hold off on taking all of them on the first guy you see. Personally, I'd rather see it done this way as the general rule. IMC we'll probably use 3.5E and just house-rule it to this (removing the Feat). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
New Revision Spotlight: Attacks of Opportunity
Top