Standing up from prone

[eamon]

Perhaps if you stand up from prone with an enemy in your square he could just decide where you have to shift freely, making it more balanced instead of an AoO.

If a creature is capable of shifting when an opponent is on top of it, why isn't it capable thereof when no opponent is on top of it?

I don't see the big balance problem with simply banning the shift, and permitting an OA-provoking 1 square move. Frankly, it's really lenient to permit a creature to be unconcious, wake up, stand up and move 5 feet all within a single move action in 6 seconds without provoking.

Another problem with the push or forced shift mechanic is that in general you can always push someone fewer squares. Or you push toward blocking terrain (and fail). What happens in these cases?

I think it's reasonable to penalize creatures for being in a horribly disadvantageous situation, and it's unreasonable to deny them these stand up abilities merely because they weren't helpless and there's no enemy standing on top of them. If you're really worried about prone being impossible to escape, grant some expensive action - say, if you use a standard action to stand up, you may shift a square - something, in any case, which makes it unattractive to use in normal situations so that you're not stuck with the inconsistency that only creatures with enemies on top of them (meaning they were helpless) can somehow stand up and move without getting hit.

I don't think there a balance issue with penalizing helpless critters being straddled by their enemies, and I think there is a consistency issue with penalizing those that weren't helpless and straddled.

 

[HighTemplar]

The whole issue is that standing up dosent provoke AoO and the whole ruleset has as a guideline that noone can share squares. So what happens if you stand up but your square is occupied, CS or PHB ruled that you can shift freely, which as you say is indeed riduculous if you couldn't do it without having your square occupied.

My point was that instead of ruling that being prone with an enemy in your square is a "horrible disadvantadge" which is obviously contrary to what the rules say (this whole thread is about how lenient they are on this issue) you can make a compromise thats more reasonnable than the illogical rules and less penalizing than getting up and getting merked or spending a standard action.

imho they should just have kept the stand up action provoking AoO but it is refreshing not to have it with the multitude of attacks that can make someone prone.

I guess other possible solutions could take into accoutn that being prne with an enemy on top of you is actually a worse situation for you then you just being prone. the rules seem tho think the latter but all of us here pretty much think that having an enemy standing on top of you shouldn't be helping you at all to move away.

I feel like i'm repeating myself, but anyways ruling could be: You either crawl out of there normally and then stand up from prone (which hurts, two move actions, + AoO) or that you just have to pay for the shifting (two move actions) or perhaps something weaker that implies that when you stand up from prone you can shift as a minor action kindof of making the stand up action a minor one IF you are willing to shift immediately afterwards. Afterall it is kind of possible to stand up while moving out of where you're currently standing.

Edit: Anyone who bullrushes a foe into a wall or difficult terrain is a retard.. Who would try to push someone on a wall ? I mean there's probably 7 other squares(directions) 5 of which im betting are not walls to push him towards.