Receiving a potion from an invisible comrade: AoO or No?

[kreynolds]

You can drink a potion as a free action if you have one of these, therefore solving the problem of potion-drinking permanently. [/IMG]

Yeah, I have a hat like that. It lets me drink beer as a free action while at the ballpark. Well, OK, I dislike baseball and don't go to the ballpark, but that's not the point.

 

[Enceladus]

For a human to attack someone with a longsword in melee, they need to be standing within 5 feet. To hand an object to your pal, you need to be standing within 5 feet. But, to pour a potion down someone's throat, well, I don't think standing within 5 feet is gonna cut it, especially if that someone is knocked out. When you hand someone something, usually, they're meeting you half way. If they aren't, you have to get closer, like when you discreetly give something to someone from behind their back.

Understanding is attained. Enlightenment is achieved.



*sitar music plays in background*

I had not thought of that, I was thinking in grid terms and not having to occupy the same space ( in a sense) in regards to administering the potion.

If retrieving an item is a move-equivalent action, why wouldn't giving an item to someone be a move-equivalent action? Besides, somebody is doing the retrieving in that exchange, I promise.

This is true. I was thinking more along the lines of administration, you have a give and a take at the same time, thus taking up a whole standard action?

Why 10? According to the DMG, drinking a potion works the same as casting a spell for Concentration check purposes. DC 15 + damage to see if you can drink it. And why should it be easy for someone to give a person completely absorbed in combat, who is ducking, weaving and dodging? 10 just seems to easy for me.

*shrug*

Go with that then, just throwing out alternatives. You really don't need a house rule in this instance anyway IMO. Its just a matter of interpreting the rules and ejudicating. Which, for all intents and purposes, looks exactly like what you're doing. But hey, its your game.

 

[kreynolds]

This is true. I was thinking more along the lines of administration, you have a give and a take at the same time, thus taking up a whole standard action?

Perhaps. If administering a potion to an unconcious creature, who is lying still, by the way, is a full-round action, then why would administering a potion to a creature that is ducking, dodging, weave, keeping up their guard in a fight take less time?

 

[Enceladus]

Perhaps. If administering a potion to an unconcious creature, who is lying still, by the way, is a full-round action, then why would administering a potion to a creature that is ducking, dodging, weave, keeping up their guard in a fight take less time?

That's what I'm sayin'.

 

[reveal]

*shrug*

Go with that then, just throwing out alternatives. You really don't need a house rule in this instance anyway IMO. Its just a matter of interpreting the rules and ejudicating. Which, for all intents and purposes, looks exactly like what you're doing. But hey, its your game.

Thanks for your approval. I think I'll do that. By the way, I was looking for an answer to my questions to clarify your position, not sarcasm and a "whatever" attitude.

 

[reveal]

Perhaps. If administering a potion to an unconcious creature, who is lying still, by the way, is a full-round action, then why would administering a potion to a creature that is ducking, dodging, weave, keeping up their guard in a fight take less time?

I thought about that. I figure the reason you take a full round when they're unconcious is so you don't choke them to death. They have no gag reflex, so if you pour it down the wrong pipe they will drown.

In my scenario a) the recepient knows it's coming and b) they have a gag reflex so the Pixie doesn't have to be as careful as they would administering it to an unconcious person.

 

[Enceladus]

Thanks for your approval. I think I'll do that. By the way, I was looking for an answer to my questions to clarify your position, not sarcasm and a "whatever" attitude.

Em, its not a "whatever" attitude. I didn't necessarily agree with the DC and threw out an alternative, if you don't like it thats up to you, I have no say in your final decision since "its your game".

Besides, I think basically you answered your own house rule with the rule in the DMG, so if you follow that you don't need a house rule. Again in this situation it think it comes down to interpreting the rules and ejudicating.

Is the house rule fair? In my honest opinion I would say no.

What do your players think?

 

[kreynolds]

That's what I'm sayin'.

Um...no. You said...

I was thinking more along the lines of administration, you have a give and a take at the same time, thus taking up a whole standard action?

A standard action, even a "whole standard action", does not take up as much time as a full-round action. I'm saying it should be a full-round action either way.

 

[kreynolds]

In my scenario a) the recepient knows it's coming and b) they have a gag reflex so the Pixie doesn't have to be as careful as they would administering it to an unconcious person.

They are also hopping around, ducking, dodging, weaving, and deflecting attacks to protect their hide. That's not easy, and it's certainly not easier than administering a potion to someone that's knocked out.

 

[Enceladus]

Um...no. You said...



A standard action, even a "whole standard action", does not take up as much time as a full-round action. I'm saying it should be a full-round action either way.

See, when you start talkin' about types of actions, and me having the memory of a goldfish, I need to start bringing my book with me to work. That's in line with what I meant anyway. I tried to cover my ass with the question mark at the end.