RANT: Attacks of Opportunity

[Justin Bacon]

"AoOs are so difficult. It's like taking a calculus class!"
"It's impossible to resolve AoOs without using miniatures."
"AoOs are confusing."

What is wrong with you people?

1. Can someone hit me?
2. Did I just do something that provokes an AoO?

1. Can someone hit me right now?
2. Am I still going to move at least 5 feet this turn?
3. Will I have moved more than 5 feet this turn?

What, exactly, do you find difficult, confusing, or impossible about these simple questions?

 

[glass]

I've never seen the big difficulty either.


glass.

 

[greywulf]

Justin, if just one person didn't understand the rules, that's one thing.

The fact is that lots of people find AoO to be one of the biggest stumbling blocks in the game. Either lots of people are wrong to feel that way, or the rules are broken or (at best) badly worded.

I vote the later. AoO is one of the worst aspects of the game IMHO that add nothing to playability or enjoyment. I fully expect lots of people to disagree with me. That's cool, we can all have different opinions without turning it into a RANT (your caps, not mine), because we're adults, right?

 

[frankthedm]

The AoO concept is fairly simple, Do something dumb/risky and risk getting hit as you deserve.

The real 'problem' is that some people forget they are in a combat with trained, competent [having a BAB] foes trying their utmost to put the PCs to the sword.. They feign ignorance in the hope of being able to leap past a combatant with years of training and experience who by rights should be shoving a cold piece of steel into their lightly armored bellies.

The player wants to run past the orc soldier
Orc soldier wants to run him through.
The AoO decides who was right.

 

[Aeric]

We used to have attacks of opportunity as a house rule in 2nd edition (we called them "free hits"), although like most things back then, it was up to the DM whether or not we (or the NPCs) got one based on common sense. When I DM 3.5, I still adjudicate AoOs based on common sense. I don't worry about what it says in the book unless my rules-lawyer player calls me on it (something which I kinda encourage, since it means I can concentrate on storytelling instead of memorizing mountains of rules).

Like the OP says, though, it's really simple. If you are within melee range of somebody and you do something that will leave an opening in your defenses, your opponent will take advantage of it. Admittedly, the movement-based AoOs were a bit confusing at first, but we got the hang of them quickly enough.

 

[Klaus]

I also have no problem with AoO. The only way I'd simplify them for a faster game would be to take the Call of Cthulhu d20 way: if you would generate an AoO, you simply *can't* take the action.

 

[Gold Roger]

I've never had a problem. And most of my "Rules Light" players have found far bigger stumbling blocks than AoO's.

 

[Thanee]

I like AoOs, they make many situations a lot easier to imagine.

Bye
Thanee

 

[glass]

We used to have attacks of opportunity as a house rule in 2nd edition (we called them "free hits"),

...and a core rule, going back even further.


glass.

 

[Psion]

"AoOs are so difficult. It's like taking a calculus class!"
"It's impossible to resolve AoOs without using miniatures."
"AoOs are confusing."

What is wrong with you people?

1. Can someone hit me?
2. Did I just do something that provokes an AoO?

1. Can someone hit me right now?
2. Am I still going to move at least 5 feet this turn?
3. Will I have moved more than 5 feet this turn?

What, exactly, do you find difficult, confusing, or impossible about these simple questions?

Can I get an amen?