Question about AOO's ...

[tomBitonti]

Ok, this is *almost* trolling, .. but this has been really bugging me lately.

I a character chooses to stand still, closes their eyes, and puts their hands in their pockets, they do not draw an AOO. (Or, say, does a couple of jumping jacks, with their eyes closed, while singing "Lalalala" ...)

If the character instead moves (not a 5' step) to the side then shoots their bow into the dirt for show, that draws two (2) AOOs.

(So, is there a question here somewhere ...)

The more that I think about it, the more I'm having problems with AOOs.

One possible response: Them's the rules. Get over it.

Check. Got it. And realistically, I doubt that I will ever convince any of my players to not use the rules as they stand.

A second possible response: And did you consider if the wizard summons an invisible rabbit next to the fighter who can see invisible, and the fighter takes an AOO against said rabbit, dropping it, and then cleaving into a nearby combatant ...

Check. Have heard that before and find it quite amusing.

What I am looking to do is get back to the underlying reasoning for AOO's. I understand that these are an abstraction which accommodates the initiative / player sequencing mechanic of the game.

Also, does anyone have an alternate mechanic (say, to drop AC instead, and to allow an attack as an immediate action, that counts against ones next round actions)?

Thx!

 

[starwed]

I a character chooses to stand still, closes their eyes, and puts their hands in their pockets, they do not draw an AOO.

The rules assume that normally, you're attempting to avoid attacks. An AoO is drawn by something which distracts or prevents you from doing so.

If a character deliberately stops this activity, it's perfectly reasonable for opponents to get AoO on them.

 

[PallidPatience]

See, the trick is that the rules for AoOs only cover activities that players will do. Movement, and attack modes are chief among those. After that, things were left out. Helplessness doesn't draw AoOs for balance reasons: you can already not act, and are able to be coup de graced. But deliberately acting a fool should draw an AoO as much as overextending your concentration, or turning your attention to a more distant foe.

 

[Vegepygmy]

I a character chooses to stand still, closes their eyes, and puts their hands in their pockets, they do not draw an AOO.

They do when I'm the DM.

The list of "distracting acts" that provoke AoOs is not a finite one.

 

[Rvdvelden]

Not only that, but AoO supposed to happen in combat. If someone is doing jumping jacks, just stand around with his hands in his pockets or anything else this foolish, I'd make sure he gets the full attention of the creatures attacks as the creature probably sees this as a taunt.

If a character is doing "nothing" in combat, you can presume he's doing everything he can to avoid being hit, ie. not drawing AoO's.

 

[glass]

They do when I'm the DM.

The list of "distracting acts" that provoke AoOs is not a finite one.

What he said.


glass.

 

[tomBitonti]

Not only that, but AoO supposed to happen in combat. If someone is doing jumping jacks, just stand around with his hands in his pockets or anything else this foolish, I'd make sure he gets the full attention of the creatures attacks as the creature probably sees this as a taunt.

If a character is doing "nothing" in combat, you can presume he's doing everything he can to avoid being hit, ie. not drawing AoO's.

Only, that isn't born out in the rules.

A character who is laying on the ground, because they fell to less than 0 on a previous round, does not draw an AOO.

I haven't done a search, but I am not aware, generally, of cases where an AOO occurrs because a character is helpless or immobilized.

Let me put it like this: Your character walks into a prison, wherein a dozen demons are held by magical shackles. You take a round to coup-de-grace one. On your off round, can you take an AOO against one (or several, with combat reflexes) of the bound demons?

 

[Lord Zardoz]

What I am looking to do is get back to the underlying reasoning for AOO's. I understand that these are an abstraction which accommodates the initiative / player sequencing mechanic of the game.

Not being an author of the rules, I cannot say with an absolute certaintly what the intended effect of AoO's was. But I can make some observations on what AoO's allow for.

At the absolute core of it, they make combat a great deal more tactical than it would otherwise be. AoO's and Flanking, and to a lesser degree, terrain considerations, make melee combat more then 'I move adjacent to my target and start swinging'. Position matters.

They provide a real degree of battlefield control to melee types. Their existence prevents a DM from swarming the casters with 1 HD Goblins if the players make any effort to protect one another. They also prevent combatants from gaining flanking with impunity. Ultimately, it makes entering into melee against a capable melee combatant a very dangerous thing. If your going to move into melee range, your basically obligated to Fight or eat AoO's.

Now, what you seem mostly curious about is not the movement related AoO's, but the 'distraction' AoO's that happen when you essentially do not engage in melee. This, I think, is mostly to help overcome the fact that in a real fight, people do not stand there and take turns hitting one another. When your in a melee, your supposed to be moving and flailing at your opponent in an honest effort to either kill or inflict bodily harm. By necessity, the rules abstract it out to that. The distraction rules account for the fact that everyone who is trying to kill you aren't exactly standing still when it is your turn to perform an action.

Melee combat is an abstraction of what is essentially near constant action. So most moves that can be expressed as a single discreet action will usually provoke an AoO. The decision on what moves qualify is arbitrary though, for a combination of reasons (usually balance).

END COMMUNICATION

 

[glass]

A character who is laying on the ground, because they fell to less than 0 on a previous round, does not draw an AOO.

They do when I'm the DM.

...although admittedly that is technically a houserule. The rules on AoO are not very consistent.


glass.