Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Simultaneous Initiative + AoO
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="radmod" data-source="post: 5280682" data-attributes="member: 93008"><p>I was rewriting my 3.5 house rules, when I realized I had been inconsistent.</p><p></p><p>I use simultaneous initiative as I find it more realistic, quicker and easier. Essentially, all it means is that everything occurs in a round's "real-time". The only time you roll initiative is to determine the order of actions when actions occur at roughly the same time.</p><p></p><p>I'm pretty sure I've done the following (the inconsistency):</p><p>Case M: A mage is casting a spell. You move to strike at him before he completes. The mage DOES NOT provoke an AoO.</p><p>Case O: An orc attempts to flee. You move and intercept him. The orc DOES provoke an AoO.</p><p></p><p>Rather than just decide what's correct, I thought I'd see if anyone has any ideas/thoughts. I'll fix the wording later, but right now it easier to do it solely on the basis of a PC's move action. I'm thinking of five possibilities:</p><p></p><p>Option 1: (the Easiest) Neither provokes as they began their action before your move.</p><p>In both cases, neither provokes.</p><p>The problem with this is that anyone that moves through combat would not provoke against someone who also moved. </p><p></p><p>Option 2: Treat it as RAW. If their action is provoking by the time you get there, they provoke. They could abandon the provoking action if they want.</p><p>In both cases, they provoke.</p><p>While this may be the most realistic, I just don't like it from a gaming POV. </p><p></p><p>Option 3: You do not get an AoO if you move more than half your movement. Otherwise, RAW.</p><p>Obviously, in both cases, they provoke if you move up to half your speed.</p><p></p><p>Option 4: After your move, your adjacent squares are treated as non-threatened for any creatures currently in them. If a creature moves into a normally threatened square it will provoke if the actions does. </p><p>In case M, the mage (who does not move) will not provoke.</p><p>In case O, the orc does not provoke in his initially adjacent square, but will provoke if he then moves into a square which would normally be threatened (e.g. he attempts to run past you).</p><p></p><p>Option 5: Combine 3 and 4. After your move (which cannot be over half your movement), your adjacent squares are treated as non-threatened for any creatures currently in them. If a creature moves into a normally threatened square it will provoke if the actions does. </p><p>Same as option 4 but based on how far you move.</p><p></p><p>Any ideas?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="radmod, post: 5280682, member: 93008"] I was rewriting my 3.5 house rules, when I realized I had been inconsistent. I use simultaneous initiative as I find it more realistic, quicker and easier. Essentially, all it means is that everything occurs in a round's "real-time". The only time you roll initiative is to determine the order of actions when actions occur at roughly the same time. I'm pretty sure I've done the following (the inconsistency): Case M: A mage is casting a spell. You move to strike at him before he completes. The mage DOES NOT provoke an AoO. Case O: An orc attempts to flee. You move and intercept him. The orc DOES provoke an AoO. Rather than just decide what's correct, I thought I'd see if anyone has any ideas/thoughts. I'll fix the wording later, but right now it easier to do it solely on the basis of a PC's move action. I'm thinking of five possibilities: Option 1: (the Easiest) Neither provokes as they began their action before your move. In both cases, neither provokes. The problem with this is that anyone that moves through combat would not provoke against someone who also moved. Option 2: Treat it as RAW. If their action is provoking by the time you get there, they provoke. They could abandon the provoking action if they want. In both cases, they provoke. While this may be the most realistic, I just don't like it from a gaming POV. Option 3: You do not get an AoO if you move more than half your movement. Otherwise, RAW. Obviously, in both cases, they provoke if you move up to half your speed. Option 4: After your move, your adjacent squares are treated as non-threatened for any creatures currently in them. If a creature moves into a normally threatened square it will provoke if the actions does. In case M, the mage (who does not move) will not provoke. In case O, the orc does not provoke in his initially adjacent square, but will provoke if he then moves into a square which would normally be threatened (e.g. he attempts to run past you). Option 5: Combine 3 and 4. After your move (which cannot be over half your movement), your adjacent squares are treated as non-threatened for any creatures currently in them. If a creature moves into a normally threatened square it will provoke if the actions does. Same as option 4 but based on how far you move. Any ideas? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Simultaneous Initiative + AoO
Top