Reach Weapon and Hold the Line

[Infiniti2000]

Off-Topic

I have to admit, Hyp, you come up with hands-down the best examples.

 

[Artoomis]

But the one opportunity rule could have been considered when the new feat was written.

If I have a spell that affects 1 creature / level (all gnomes in the area are considered to constitute a single creature), and subsequently the Expanded Psionics Handbook is published, do three half-giants count as three creatures or one creature for the purposes of the spell?

I maintain that the answer is not "There's no way of telling, because half-giants didn't exist when the spell was written!" The answer is "Three creatures, because nothing in the half-giant description states that they also count as a single creature for the purposes of the pre-existing spell".

-Hyp.

First, your example is again not valid because half-giants are certainly no more like gnomes in any way than other creatures already existing at the time the spell was written. If half-gnomes were introduced, the question is far more interesting and closer to a parallel situation.

Moving into a square is very much like moving out of a square, Different, but very similar - perhaps even similar enough to count as "one opportunity" - perhaps not, but it's NOT a small-dunk decision either way.

Second, if we are to base out analysis upon the assumption that the author of this fit fully considered all core rules (including the "one opportunity" rule), then we must assume that:

"Your attack of opportunity happens immediately before the charge attack is resolved."

applies even if you attack with a reach weapon - meaning no additional AoO. The remaining movement must not count (in the author's mind, at least) against "immediate" in order for this to make sense and always be true - again, remembering that all the core rules must have been considered.

Thrid, It seems clear that all the core rules were NOT carefully considered and the situation of attacking with a reach weapon was not fully thought out in this feat design. In that case, it's up to us (each individual DM, that is) to decide if the new situation that provokes an AoO because of this feat (entering a square) is similar enough to leaving a square that it counts as "one opportunity."

I think that it is very similar - it an AoO provoked by movement. I'd lump them together.

Other may feel differently, and that's okay. The only thing I really take issue with is using the "one opportunity" language to exclude this new opportunity without analysis of how this new opportunity is or is not similar to leaving a threatened square

 

[Cabled]

Moving around...

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

For a diminutive size creature (And even more so for one that can fly or move 3 dimensionally), there is a LOT of real estate in a "5' space"

 

[Hypersmurf]

Second, if we are to base out analysis upon the assumption that the author of this fit fully considered all core rules (including the "one opportunity" rule), then we must assume that:

"Your attack of opportunity happens immediately before the charge attack is resolved."

applies even if you attack with a reach weapon - meaning no additional AoO. The remaining movement must not count (in the author's mind, at least) against "immediate" in order for this to make sense and always be true - again, remembering that all the core rules must have been considered.

Well, let's look at a spiked chain instead of a longspear.

He charges into your threatened area, 10 feet away. Through the Hold the Line feat, you can now make an AoO immediately prior to the charge attack resolving. In other words, not yet.

His charge continues, and he leaves a threatened square, provoking an AoO; you take AoO #1.

He reaches the adjacent square, and goes to make his attack. Immediately prior to his attack resolving, you can now make the AoO (AoO #2) that the Hold the Line feat granted to you when he charged into your threatened area.

Any problems with that?

The only thing I really take issue with is using the "one opportunity" language to exclude this new opportunity without analysis of how this new opportunity is or is not similar to leaving a threatened square

We did analyse it. The result was "not similar" - it's due to entering a threatened area while charging, not due to leaving a threatened square.

-Hyp.

 

[billd91]

For a diminutive size creature (And even more so for one that can fly or move 3 dimensionally), there is a LOT of real estate in a "5' space"

There is for a small or medium creature as well. But there's no significant in-game effect in for a creature of any size.

 

[coyote6]

Anyway, This feat is very, very useful to folks who don't use reach weapons often. To those who do use reach weapon often, it's superflous.

At least that's the way I read it.

Aside:
Actually, it is useful for those with reach weapons -- they can use Hold the Line when they're being charged by opponents with (equal) reach. My (occasionally) glaive-wielding fighter has been charged by hill giants, ogres, minotaurs, an athach, even a dragon -- Hold the Line would've given him an AoO against those guys, whereas merely wielding a reach weapon didn't.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled discussion...

(MHO: I wouldn't be surprised if the designers simply didn't consider whether or not they wanted a longspear or glaive-wielder to get 2 AoOs against a charging orc, and thus had no "intent" one way or the other. Wasn't Hold the Line originally published in a 3e book? If so, it probably wasn't considered at all, since in 3e, it was "one AoO per person per round", rather than "per provocation". IMO, the only way to know the "Official Intent" is to ask Andy Collins.)

 

[Artoomis]

Well, let's look at a spiked chain instead of a longspear.

He charges into your threatened area, 10 feet away. Through the Hold the Line feat, you can now make an AoO immediately prior to the charge attack resolving. In other words, not yet.

His charge continues, and he leaves a threatened square, provoking an AoO; you take AoO #1.

He reaches the adjacent square, and goes to make his attack. Immediately prior to his attack resolving, you can now make the AoO (AoO #2) that the Hold the Line feat granted to you when he charged into your threatened area.

Any problems with that?

Well, maybe. It works per the strict reading of the feat IF you also think the two types of movement (into and out of a square) are sufficently different to not count as the same opportunity like all other movment out of squares.

We did analyse it. The result was "not similar" - it's due to entering a threatened area while charging, not due to leaving a threatened square.

-Hyp.

Ah, but the anaylsis was based, to a large extent, upon the lack of wording in the core rules about this new moving into a square opportunity.

I have no trouble at all with calling them different, as long as you recognize that calling them similar enough to count as the same opportunity is equally valid. There is no firm basis in the rules either way, right?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Well, maybe. It works per the strict reading of the feat IF you also think the two types of movement (into and out of a square) are sufficently different to not count as the same opportunity like all other movment out of squares.

Right.

Was he in a threatened square when he charged into the threatened area? If no, he wasn't leaving a threatened square threatened by that opponent, right?

"Not leaving a threatened square" is about as different from "leaving a threatened square" as one can get, surely?

Ah, but the anaylsis was based, to a large extent, upon the lack of wording in the core rules about this new moving into a square opportunity.

The core rules state that there is one AoO per opportunity, with Combat Reflexes.

That covers 'this new moving into a square opportunity'.

There is also a rule that leaving more than one square threatened by the same opponent only counts as one opportunity. This rule does not cover 'this new moving into a square opportunity'.

So, the core rules cover Hold the Line - it's an opportunity, and it's not part of the rolled-up leaving-squares opportunity.

I have no trouble at all with calling them different, as long as you recognize that calling them similar enough to count as the same opportunity is equally valid. There is no firm basis in the rules either way, right?

I disagree. There's no ambiguity in the rules in this case.

-Hyp.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Well, maybe. It works per the strict reading of the feat IF you also think the two types of movement (into and out of a square) are sufficently different to not count as the same opportunity like all other movment out of squares.



Ah, but the anaylsis was based, to a large extent, upon the lack of wording in the core rules about this new moving into a square opportunity.

I have no trouble at all with calling them different, as long as you recognize that calling them similar enough to count as the same opportunity is equally valid. There is no firm basis in the rules either way, right?

Well, except that the rules recognize two categories of things that provoke attacks of opportunity:
1. Moving out of a threatened square
2. Everything else

And since moving into a threatened square is not 1, it's 2. Moving into something is different than moving out of that same something. That's not controversial. It's practically definitive of "different."

 

[Artoomis]

Well, except that the rules recognize two categories of things that provoke attacks of opportunity:
1. Moving out of a threatened square
2. Everything else

And since moving into a threatened square is not 1, it's 2. Moving into something is different than moving out of that same something. That's not controversial. It's practically definitive of "different."

No, because basically there are two kinds of AoOs - those from movement and everything else. Core rules, the only movement AoO is when you leave a square; this feat introduces a new movement-related AoO, when you enter a square.

Very, very similar. Different, but similar.

Simialr enough? No real guidance in the rules for that - so, no real ruling can be made per the rules, it takes a judgement call, period.