[Rules Q] Cleric AoO Against Turned Undead

[el-remmen]

So this came up in my last session, where I am playing a fighter/cleric (of sorts), and I was surprised by the DM's ruling on it because in all my years of running games I did it differently and thought it was clearer than it apparently is.

Here's the situation.

A cleric has undead adjacent to him and then successfully makes a turn attempt. On the undead's turn it turns to flee, which under normal situations would draw an attack of opportunity because the undead is not withdrawing.

In the past I ruled the cleric can take that attack of opportunity without disrupting the turning effect.

The SRD says as follows:

Effect and Duration of Turning

Turned undead flee from you by the best and fastest means available to them. They flee for 10 rounds (1 minute). If they cannot flee, they cower (giving any attack rolls against them a +2 bonus). If you approach within 10 feet of them, however, they overcome being turned and act normally. (You can stand within 10 feet without breaking the turning effect—you just can’t approach them.) You can attack them with ranged attacks (from at least 10 feet away), and others can attack them in any fashion, without breaking the turning effect.

I say that taking the AoO is not "approaching" them, as the undead were already adjacent and are fleeing. It does not explicitly say that the turning cleric cannot attack with melee without breaking the effect. My DM parses that last sentence as meaning the turning cleric can only attack from range without breaking the turn effect.

While people's opinions are welcome, I'd really love if someone knew of somewhere in a rule book or the SRD where this is specifically addressed.

Thanks and let me know if any of this is unclear.

 

[Tovec]

Per SRD, as far as I can tell you and your DM are both making valid rulings. So until someone can provide a more definitive answer I think your DM made a right call. For my money, I would say it cancels the effect if it stops them from moving when they fled. It does make perfect sense since using your attack of opportunity effectively cancels the undead's turn until the attack is complete.

Nice question, very niche but nice.

 

[el-remmen]

But an AoO would not stop their movement - they would continue to move away.

But yeah, I can see my DM's ruling working from a spirit of the rules perspective, which I have no problem with, I had just never considered interpreting the rule that way from what is written.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

The timing of AoOs is such that they occur, or at least use the statistics of stuff including position, before what provoked the AoO. For example, if you tripped an opponent and it got up, you couldn't make a trip attack as part of the AoO because the creature is still technically prone and thus it can't be tripped again. Take a look at http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20041026a and http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20041102a for some more in-depth analysis.

Because of that I'd rule that the cleric could indeed make an AoO against an adjacent (or otherwise threatened) undead that was just turned because it does satisfy the rules for an AoO and attacking is not "approaching" the enemy since I interpret that part to mean actually moving towards them on the grid.

 

[Vegepygmy]

On the undead's turn it turns to flee, which under normal situations would draw an attack of opportunity because the undead is not withdrawing.

I can't recall this coming up in any of my games, probably because we usually rule that Withdrawing is the "best and fastest" means of fleeing from an enemy.

If the undead isn't Withdrawing, what is it doing?

(But insofar as the undead provokes an AoO, I would rule that it does not break the turning effect. It seems to me that the intent of the rule is simply that the cleric cannot approach closer than 10 feet, and the rule as written assumes certain facts that may not apply--namely that the cleric is already at least 10 feet away.)

 

[el-remmen]

I can't recall this coming up in any of my games, probably because we usually rule that Withdrawing is the "best and fastest" means of fleeing from an enemy.

If the undead isn't Withdrawing, what is it doing?

That is a very good point. I always just assumed they were fleeing in terror from the source of the channeled divine power, but the word "best" certainly lays credence to the idea that they would withdraw - but what if withdrawal was not possible, or if fleeing meant the undead had to move through a box you threatened which is not the box they began in. . . As I said, I think an attack in that case would not break the turning.