Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DevoutlyApathetic" data-source="post: 566169" data-attributes="member: 1093">Luck isn't a factor. If you aren't aware of an action taking place, one that would normally trigger an AoO, then you can't react to it, because you don't know its happening, thus you shouldn't get an AoO. You had your chance to detect the action (spot and listen), but if you failed it, you don't know it even happened. Alright, we have differing perceptions of what an AoO is.To my mind an AoO is simply the result of maintaining an effective defense.  You are ALWAYS threatening those around you.  When they let down their guard this vigilence pays off.  You don't have to realize that they did it, you'll know it if you connect.  If you don't you won't notice much at all.You say that the guard might have been "lucky", right? One of out three squares lucky.  That's if he's smart.How do you know that the rogue wasn't "lucky" as well? He's got 50% of luck built into the system.  More over none of this is really luck.  It's choices on the part of each participant.Somehow I doubt that a sneaking rogue would walk through a threatened area with her eyes closed. She would be careful not to get hit by a "lucky" swing (whatever that means).Take 5 foot steps then.  Taking 24 seconds to get past somebody with no penalty is not outrageous. Either way, luck isn't a factor. If it is, then you have to take into account the rogue's luck, at which point they cancel each other out, thus luck isn't a factor anyways. 50%, 50%, 50%.  You are right in that luck isn't the real issue, it's tactical choices.  It is perhaps why I happen to like it.If you've got something ruleswise please share it.  I know my above views are heavily influenced by 2e.  I don't believe such rules text exists.  Mostly I see 'common sense' agruments which really don't mean much in general.</blockquote>

Verification