Hypersmurf
Moderatarrrrh...
It is is you don't know which square the guy who provoked it is standing in
-Hyp.
Quicker than the Eye and AoO
- Thread starter Hypersmurf
- Start date
It is is you don't know which square the guy who provoked it is standing in
-Hyp.
To answer the original question, NO. Any action you take will not provoke an AoO from those who are bluffed. In fact, they are almost considered flat-footed (no AoO's) during your partial action (no dex bonus). Combat Reflexes does not help here.
As for the more general question of invisibility and AoO's, I have to agree with Caliban. Give the AoO-provoking action a proper Listen DC check, and if made by 20, you know the exact location of said noise and can choose to attack if you want (and are within range). If you make the listen check, but not by 20, you know the general direction of the noise, and can make an educated guess where to make an AoO. If you miss, you didn't hear the action take place, so are not aware that Mr. Invisible's guard is down.
That is my opinion of how the rules work, but as shown above, they are not exactly clear. It's what makes the most sense to me anyway, and that's what truly matters.
As for the more general question of invisibility and AoO's, I have to agree with Caliban. Give the AoO-provoking action a proper Listen DC check, and if made by 20, you know the exact location of said noise and can choose to attack if you want (and are within range). If you make the listen check, but not by 20, you know the general direction of the noise, and can make an educated guess where to make an AoO. If you miss, you didn't hear the action take place, so are not aware that Mr. Invisible's guard is down.
That is my opinion of how the rules work, but as shown above, they are not exactly clear. It's what makes the most sense to me anyway, and that's what truly matters.
drnuncheon
Explorer
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Quicker than the Eye and AoO
Invisible Guy walks up next to you as you are reading a book. He drinks a potion. Do you get an AoO because, while you are reading your book, you are also randomly probing squares around you with attacks?
Maybe that's not a fair example because you're not in a fight? OK. You're a wizard, hanging out behind the front lines. Invisible Guy walks up next to you. Are you randomly twirling your staff around you in a circle of bruising, even though no enemies appear to be near?
The problem here is two very different views of the Attack of Opportunity. One side views them as random, unaimed hits that just happen to get through because the person let down their guard. The other side views them as responses to said letting down of guard: "Ah! He's drinking a potion! That means he can't defend himself when I do this!" Obviously, for those who subscribe to the latter explanation, an attacker unaware of the lapse in guard would be unable to take advantage of the AoO.
Personally, I agree with the 'response to an opening' side. The description of AoOs says "combatants near her can take advantage of her lapse in defense to attack her for free". Making an AoO is also a voluntary decision, which does not fit with the image of someone 'probing randomly' around him with a blade. If he's doing that, how can he decide whether or not to take a particular AoO? AoOs can be trips, disarms, and other 'unusual' attacks as well - again, not fitting with the 'random probe' hypothesis.
However, one cannot just say "invisible creatures do not provoke AoOs" - that would be equally misleading and lead to much silliness with see invisible or invisible casters being able to stand next to you shouting Latin into your ear and still not getting hit. The best explanation - and the only one that fits with the question regarding Quicker Than The Eye which started this entire thread - is that one can only respond to an AoO-provoking action that one is aware of. Quicker Than The Eye and invisibility are two ways of preventing people from noticing the AoO-provoking action.
J
hong said:
Invisible Guy walks up next to you as you are reading a book. He drinks a potion. Do you get an AoO because, while you are reading your book, you are also randomly probing squares around you with attacks?
Maybe that's not a fair example because you're not in a fight? OK. You're a wizard, hanging out behind the front lines. Invisible Guy walks up next to you. Are you randomly twirling your staff around you in a circle of bruising, even though no enemies appear to be near?
The problem here is two very different views of the Attack of Opportunity. One side views them as random, unaimed hits that just happen to get through because the person let down their guard. The other side views them as responses to said letting down of guard: "Ah! He's drinking a potion! That means he can't defend himself when I do this!" Obviously, for those who subscribe to the latter explanation, an attacker unaware of the lapse in guard would be unable to take advantage of the AoO.
Personally, I agree with the 'response to an opening' side. The description of AoOs says "combatants near her can take advantage of her lapse in defense to attack her for free". Making an AoO is also a voluntary decision, which does not fit with the image of someone 'probing randomly' around him with a blade. If he's doing that, how can he decide whether or not to take a particular AoO? AoOs can be trips, disarms, and other 'unusual' attacks as well - again, not fitting with the 'random probe' hypothesis.
However, one cannot just say "invisible creatures do not provoke AoOs" - that would be equally misleading and lead to much silliness with see invisible or invisible casters being able to stand next to you shouting Latin into your ear and still not getting hit. The best explanation - and the only one that fits with the question regarding Quicker Than The Eye which started this entire thread - is that one can only respond to an AoO-provoking action that one is aware of. Quicker Than The Eye and invisibility are two ways of preventing people from noticing the AoO-provoking action.
J
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Quicker than the Eye and AoO
Every example has an equal and opposite counterexample. Suppose you're a fighter, and you're going up against an invisible wizard. You know he's there somewhere. The wizard casts a silenced spell (no Listen check applicable). You were swinging at the spot where he was before he went invisible, and you're still swinging. Why shouldn't you get a chance to damage him when he takes his mind off you for a second (assuming he didn't take the usual 5-foot step out of the danger zone)?
In your example, if the invisible guy was never visible in the first place, then the wizard would be totally unaware of their presence. Hence no AoO. If the invisible guy _was_ visible but then vanished, then the wizard knows _someone_ is out there, and presumably would be on his guard against people sneaking around....
Making an AoO is a voluntary decision on the part of the _player_. In general, 3E is lenient about not forcing players to take actions (eg you don't have to take all attacks in a full attack, you can move in between these attacks, you don't have to pick targets in advance, etc). The choice to take an AoO is just part of that general principle, as far as I see.
drnuncheon said:
Every example has an equal and opposite counterexample. Suppose you're a fighter, and you're going up against an invisible wizard. You know he's there somewhere. The wizard casts a silenced spell (no Listen check applicable). You were swinging at the spot where he was before he went invisible, and you're still swinging. Why shouldn't you get a chance to damage him when he takes his mind off you for a second (assuming he didn't take the usual 5-foot step out of the danger zone)?
In your example, if the invisible guy was never visible in the first place, then the wizard would be totally unaware of their presence. Hence no AoO. If the invisible guy _was_ visible but then vanished, then the wizard knows _someone_ is out there, and presumably would be on his guard against people sneaking around....
Making an AoO is a voluntary decision on the part of the _player_. In general, 3E is lenient about not forcing players to take actions (eg you don't have to take all attacks in a full attack, you can move in between these attacks, you don't have to pick targets in advance, etc). The choice to take an AoO is just part of that general principle, as far as I see.
SpikeyFreak
First Post
FWIW, I think you should be able to make a listen check to pinpoint them, and if you aren't successful, you should be able to make an AoO into a square you pick.
Just my 2 coppers.
--Well Hong Spikey
Just my 2 coppers.
--Well Hong Spikey
I would not allow a character the choice of which square to attack when an AoO is triggered. If you allow this against an invisible opponent, then it logically follows that you should be able to choose the square if triggered by a visible opponent. With the obvious consequences. So to use an AoO against an invisible opponent the character would have to pinpoint the square using a listen or spot roll.
doktorstick
First Post
From my reading of the DMG, pg. 78, it seems that the visible creature must make a Listen check as a free action to make an AoO against an invisible creature. Based on that result, the visible creature a) does not think the invisible creature is nearby; b) knows it is "over there" without regards to distance; or c) has pinpointed the location.
Using the example of drinking a potion, the Listen check would be at DC 0 since the creature is "in combat" modified by distance. I say "in combat" because the character is not flat-footed and actively dodging and weaving to avoid other combatants from hitting or bumping into him. (Although, I'm not sure how Move Silently works in combat and if/how it could be applied to this situation.)
I find the bit about knowing the location of the creature that struck you odd. If you were attacked by a 5-ft. reach weapon, you pinpoint the location; anything with a longer reach and you know the general location. How would you know if it was a weapon with or without reach? I guess thems the rules.
Cheers,
/ds
Using the example of drinking a potion, the Listen check would be at DC 0 since the creature is "in combat" modified by distance. I say "in combat" because the character is not flat-footed and actively dodging and weaving to avoid other combatants from hitting or bumping into him. (Although, I'm not sure how Move Silently works in combat and if/how it could be applied to this situation.)
I find the bit about knowing the location of the creature that struck you odd. If you were attacked by a 5-ft. reach weapon, you pinpoint the location; anything with a longer reach and you know the general location. How would you know if it was a weapon with or without reach? I guess thems the rules.
Cheers,
/ds
drnuncheon
Explorer
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Quicker than the Eye and AoO
Well, if you're swinging at where he was before he went invisible, you've got him pinpointed, haven't you?
You're taking a very specific situation where what you want to say makes sense, and trying to generalize from that to a large group of situations where it does not make sense. I feel that it's better to make rulings based on the general, most widely applicable case, and then make exceptions for the specific, rather than the other way around.
"On your guard" does not necessarily mean furiously whacking in all directions with your staff in the hopes of catching someone unawares.
However, you're starting to agree with me - if you're unaware of the target, you obviously can't make an AoO against them.
All of the player choices reflect choices by the character. The 'choice of the player'/'choice of the character' dichotomy that you present is not a part of the rules, it's a part of hong's interpretation of the rules, so I'm afraid it's not exactly a selling point for me on the issue under discussion.
I see nothing in the PHB to indicate that the character is not the one making the choice whether or not to take advantage of an AoO opportunity.
J
hong said:
Well, if you're swinging at where he was before he went invisible, you've got him pinpointed, haven't you?
You're taking a very specific situation where what you want to say makes sense, and trying to generalize from that to a large group of situations where it does not make sense. I feel that it's better to make rulings based on the general, most widely applicable case, and then make exceptions for the specific, rather than the other way around.
hong said:
"On your guard" does not necessarily mean furiously whacking in all directions with your staff in the hopes of catching someone unawares.
However, you're starting to agree with me - if you're unaware of the target, you obviously can't make an AoO against them.
hong said:
All of the player choices reflect choices by the character. The 'choice of the player'/'choice of the character' dichotomy that you present is not a part of the rules, it's a part of hong's interpretation of the rules, so I'm afraid it's not exactly a selling point for me on the issue under discussion.
I see nothing in the PHB to indicate that the character is not the one making the choice whether or not to take advantage of an AoO opportunity.
J
coyote6
Adventurer
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Quicker than the Eye and AoO
Why couldn't you make a Listen check? A Silent spell is a spell with no verbal components; it doesn't eliminate the sounds you make pulling bat guano out of your spell component pouch, the sounds you make breathing, the whisper of those silly robes you insist on wearing, the sounds of those bottles of Foster's clinking around in your backpack, or any of the other myriad sounds you wacky Austrian wizards make.
The DC to hear those sounds would be higher than the DC to hear you chanting in Pig Latin ("Iceday, ivegay emay a-ay oodgay ollray, and-ay oastay isthay ofomay!"), but you could still make a Listen check. Or the Spot check to notice dust motes behaving oddly, errant breezes from someone moving, strange distortions in the air, and whatever other clues one uses to Spot an invisible thing. If you succeed, hey, you realized he dropped his guard, smack him while you can! Good thing you aren't flatfooted.
hong said:
Why couldn't you make a Listen check? A Silent spell is a spell with no verbal components; it doesn't eliminate the sounds you make pulling bat guano out of your spell component pouch, the sounds you make breathing, the whisper of those silly robes you insist on wearing, the sounds of those bottles of Foster's clinking around in your backpack, or any of the other myriad sounds you wacky Austrian wizards make.
The DC to hear those sounds would be higher than the DC to hear you chanting in Pig Latin ("Iceday, ivegay emay a-ay oodgay ollray, and-ay oastay isthay ofomay!"), but you could still make a Listen check. Or the Spot check to notice dust motes behaving oddly, errant breezes from someone moving, strange distortions in the air, and whatever other clues one uses to Spot an invisible thing. If you succeed, hey, you realized he dropped his guard, smack him while you can! Good thing you aren't flatfooted.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
D&D (2024)
Creating good stealth rules for 2024 5e
