Reach Weapon and Hold the Line

[billd91]

Okay, good! Now: Does movement into a threatened square provoke an AoO in your game (sans feats)?

No. Because we operationalize the concept of moving in someone's threatened area based on the mechanic of leaving the threatened square. It either has to occur when you leave it or enter it. Consistency says it's better to stick to one for normal circumstances.

 

[Infiniti2000]

2. A little more loosely - looking at intent. Hold the Line appears to be extending movement-related AoOs from leaving a threatened square to include entering a threatened square. In this case they both fall into one opportunity - one that was moving out of threatened squares but is expended due to the Hold the Line feat.

I disagree that you are even interpreting the intent correctly. Hold the Line does not appear to be what you say it appears. Instead, it's intended to be a defense against charging opponents. In that regard, I'd say that the intent is definitely that it would allow you to take a second AoO if you have combat reflexes and a reach weapon. Coupled with the text on "moving out", I'm firmly in the #1 camp.

 

[Nail]

No. Because we operationalize the concept of moving in someone's threatened area based on the mechanic of leaving the threatened square. It either has to occur when you leave it or enter it. Consistency says it's better to stick to one for normal circumstances.

Err....?

Didn't you just say you don't provoke when entering a threatened sqaure? And didn't you also say that you don't provoke when moving within a square? So for consistancy, you only (normally) provoke when........

 

[billd91]

I disagree that you are even interpreting the intent correctly. Hold the Line does not appear to be what you say it appears. Instead, it's intended to be a defense against charging opponents. In that regard, I'd say that the intent is definitely that it would allow you to take a second AoO if you have combat reflexes and a reach weapon. Coupled with the text on "moving out", I'm firmly in the #1 camp.

Not necessarily so. Yes, it's intent is to defend yourself against charging opponents and it does. It allows someone who is armed with a non-reach weapon to get the first attack in when charged. Without a reach weapon (or reach natually), you don't get that attack in first. I supposed it would also allow someone with a reach weapon to get the first attack against a charging attacker who also has reach too.

In any event, you get an AoO against a charging attacker, something otherwise only available if you had reach and the charging attacker did not. The question is: is that enough of a benefit that this was the intent? Or is it the stronger benefit of getting 2 AoO (again, with the caveat that you have a reach weapon, the charging opponent does not, and you still have something at close range to threaten with)?
My guess is that the situation that makes your interpretation different has so many caveats that it might not have figured into the intent of the writers. Of course, the only way for either you, me, or Nail to know the intent of the writer is to ask him.

But then, it's still such a caveat-filled situation that it might not come up that much (except for monks armed with spears, or spear-wielders with spiked armor) that whichever way the DM rules, it won't make that much of a difference.

Still, I think this is one quite legit way to interpret the Hold the Line rule.

 

[billd91]

Err....?

Didn't you just say you don't provoke when entering a threatened sqaure? And didn't you also say that you don't provoke when moving within a square? So for consistancy, you only (normally) provoke when........

When you leave it. And you still haven't told me how you can move within a square but not go anywhere.

 

[Nail]

An aside: IMC, charging happens _very_ infrequently. Does it happen often enough in your (this is a "ENWorld-wide" your) games?

 

[billd91]

An aside: IMC, charging happens _very_ infrequently. Does it happen often enough in your (this is a "ENWorld-wide" your) games?

Heck, yeah. Strong humanoids love to charge things. Stoopid humanoids. More brawn than brain, I always say.
And I've got players plenty willing to charge things too. Very heroic of them. Of course, one of them is very much into her horse and lance.

 

[Nail]

When you leave it.

Got it! So when you say "moving in someone's threatened area", what you actually mean is "leaving a threatened square".

Since the feat Hold the Line gives you an AoO when someone enters your threatened square, and (in your game) you provoke AoOs by leaving a threatened square:

Why are you not giving 2 AoOs? One AoO from an action (Charging), and one AoO for "movement" (leaving a threatened square). It's consistant with your interpretation of the rules for your game.

And you still haven't told me how you can move within a square but not go anywhere.

You can't.

Had you answered "yes", we'd have had to figure out why you thought so.

 

[Nail]

Heck, yeah. Strong humanoids love to charge things. Stoopid humanoids. More brawn than brain, I always say.

True. Our campaign is at high levels now (I'm playing a Clr 19), so we're fresh out of stupid humaniods. (Have been for nearly a year of RL gaming time.) We've killed 'em all already.

 

[billd91]

Got it! So when you say "moving in someone's threatened area", what you actually mean is "leaving a threatened square".

Since the feat Hold the Line gives you an AoO when someone enters your threatened square, and (in your game) you provoke AoOs by leaving a threatened square:

Why are you not giving 2 AoOs? One AoO from an action (Charging), and one AoO for "movement" (leaving a threatened square). It's consistant with your interpretation of the rules for your game.

What you're missing is that it's via the same movement, meaning that it's ultimately the same provocation. Having Hold the Line just allows the character to switch which way the AoO is handled operationally to enable him to get that first attack in when charged.