IceBear said:
And suffer an AoO from the orc for drinking a potion in the orc's threatened area
Indeed
That a nice rule. We like to play the round in a sequential matter. Step by step. So if something goes wrong, you can change your following course of action. BUT we give very short decision time to the player. It's like having the player make a wis check instead of the character
Quick AoO question
- Thread starter Xarlen
- Start date
IceBear
Explorer
Yes, but then that's unfair to the Wis 18 character with the Wis 3 player 
In general I play with the once you declare your action that's it, BUT if it gets hot then I fall back to this. I find that players settle down from a argument if you let them have SOME chance via a dice roll. If they succeed they are happy. If they fail, it was the dice and not me that screwed them
IceBear
In general I play with the once you declare your action that's it, BUT if it gets hot then I fall back to this. I find that players settle down from a argument if you let them have SOME chance via a dice roll. If they succeed they are happy. If they fail, it was the dice and not me that screwed them
IceBear
AuraSeer said:
We have no problems with resolving AoO retroactively like I said somewhere in one of my post. Unless you do something in between the moves. You couldn't move, attack and move. But you could move 5ft, move and attack. The way we handle it, it becomes a 5 foot step if you stop moving after 5'. I don't think it's forbidden by the rule, it's just another way of handling it, leaving a bit more option to the players. I have to admit that I've never seen anyone use that "rule" (call it a house rule if you want...). It's not different from the moving away from a theatened area and then choosing to do standard action making the space you left threatened in the end and allowing retroactively a AoO.
And to answer IceBear, we found it's a fun way to handle stress in stressful situations
.
Last edited:
jlhorner1974
First Post
Bastoche: No offense intended. Please accept my apology. I really intended to post the link for the benefit of everyone reading the thread because it is easy to start scrolling down the page of diagrams and miss the link to the Dragon article at the top.
As for changing actions, people have made very good points about allowing players to change actions or not. It seems that it really is up to the DM about how flexible he wants to be.
If you allow this flexibility, though, the rule about "if all you do is move, the square you begin in is not considered threatened" may mean that you may have to apply an AOO "retroactively". As long as the players understand that this can happen, everything is fine.
If you plan to only disengage (move away without attacking) while standing next to an enemy, but something changes your mind (while in mid-action) so that you now want to attack, the AOO the enemy gets should be applied as you leave the square you start in. So if he drops you with it, you never even get a chance to complete your movement, and you never get your attack, right?
Personally, I like IceBear's idea. Players should declare intenions when their turn comes up (after all, they should have something in mind that they are planning on doing during their turn).
However, the player should have a way to change strategy in response to seeing the outcome of a readied action. A Wis check seems fine to me.
Still though, I think there should be limits on what you can do when you change your mind.
Like the PHB says, you can wait until the outcome of your first attack before deciding whether to move or continue into a full attack. This makes sense. (The rules allow this, so there is no penalty here.)
However, there is potential for abuse as Hypersmurf said -- someone that begins a change (a full round action) should not be able to stop a charge partway or convert it to a partial charge(changing his mind) to avoid making a Reflex save because he now notices a concealed a pit in front of him.
I would say that if you move then attack or attack then move, then you have a chance after seeing the outcome of the first part to alter the second part.
For instance, if you plan to double move, you can move your speed (as a Move-equivalent action) and then if you see something that makes you want to attack, you can replace the standard action move with a standard attack action. I might ask for a Wis check in this case.
If you plan to hit a badly wounded enemy (who has already used an AOO) and then move to close with another enemy, but suppose you miss. In this case, you could replace the move you intended with drinking a potion (since you now know you won't draw an AOO because the enemy made an AOO previously this round). I might ask for a Wis check in this case too.
In any case, if the event that triggers the change in strategy was expected or even anticipated, I would either waive the Wis check or give bonuses to the roll. If it were completely unexpected, I would give penalties.
As for changing actions, people have made very good points about allowing players to change actions or not. It seems that it really is up to the DM about how flexible he wants to be.
If you allow this flexibility, though, the rule about "if all you do is move, the square you begin in is not considered threatened" may mean that you may have to apply an AOO "retroactively". As long as the players understand that this can happen, everything is fine.
If you plan to only disengage (move away without attacking) while standing next to an enemy, but something changes your mind (while in mid-action) so that you now want to attack, the AOO the enemy gets should be applied as you leave the square you start in. So if he drops you with it, you never even get a chance to complete your movement, and you never get your attack, right?
Personally, I like IceBear's idea. Players should declare intenions when their turn comes up (after all, they should have something in mind that they are planning on doing during their turn).
However, the player should have a way to change strategy in response to seeing the outcome of a readied action. A Wis check seems fine to me.
Still though, I think there should be limits on what you can do when you change your mind.
Like the PHB says, you can wait until the outcome of your first attack before deciding whether to move or continue into a full attack. This makes sense. (The rules allow this, so there is no penalty here.)
However, there is potential for abuse as Hypersmurf said -- someone that begins a change (a full round action) should not be able to stop a charge partway or convert it to a partial charge(changing his mind) to avoid making a Reflex save because he now notices a concealed a pit in front of him.
I would say that if you move then attack or attack then move, then you have a chance after seeing the outcome of the first part to alter the second part.
For instance, if you plan to double move, you can move your speed (as a Move-equivalent action) and then if you see something that makes you want to attack, you can replace the standard action move with a standard attack action. I might ask for a Wis check in this case.
If you plan to hit a badly wounded enemy (who has already used an AOO) and then move to close with another enemy, but suppose you miss. In this case, you could replace the move you intended with drinking a potion (since you now know you won't draw an AOO because the enemy made an AOO previously this round). I might ask for a Wis check in this case too.
In any case, if the event that triggers the change in strategy was expected or even anticipated, I would either waive the Wis check or give bonuses to the roll. If it were completely unexpected, I would give penalties.
jlhorner1974
First Post
I agree with Bastoche -- if you take a move-equivalent action to move but stop after 5 feet, then I would treat it as a 5 ft step if you make no other movement during the round.
Changing your mind in mid move (because it triggered ready actions) seems to be the issue. I'd probably allow it on a successful Wis check.
Changing your mind in mid move (because it triggered ready actions) seems to be the issue. I'd probably allow it on a successful Wis check.
I'm considering the wis check.
On our last session we had problems getting a little discipline among the players, many talks all at once i.e. when it was not their turn and it made the combat very. We'll see tonight what correction could be made to speed up the process. Using the wis check might help a bit, I'll suggest it.
On our last session we had problems getting a little discipline among the players, many talks all at once i.e. when it was not their turn and it made the combat very. We'll see tonight what correction could be made to speed up the process. Using the wis check might help a bit, I'll suggest it.
Similar Threads
