What's so bad about AoO's?

[Zerovoid]

I like AOO's. They seem very intuitive, and they don't really come up very often in combat. The only other option would be something like what starwars did, which is to simply disallow any actions that would provoke an AOO.

Basically, if you try to run past an opponent, or fire a bow, or cast a spell next to an opponent, you get wacked. Not too hard to swallow.

The problem was definately the description in the first edition of the rules. I had to read it several times to understand it. I also had to guess what they were trying to say. "Moving through a threatened area provokes an AOO? Does that mean enemies hit me when I walk up to them? No, that would be stupid." btw, I had to explain to two other groups that this was not the case in the year after the PHB came out. They all argued with me, and I couldn't believe they possibly thought a rule would work like that. Once you get the general idea, they are very simple.

 

[gamecat]

I like... I mean, I *LOVE* AsofO. They are only logical. If you have a sword in your hand and your opponent in front of you closes his eyes and begins chanting, you would stab him, wouldn't you?

 

[hong]

I like... I mean, I *LOVE* AsofO. They are only logical. If you have a sword in your hand and your opponent in front of you closes his eyes and begins chanting, you would stab him, wouldn't you?

Not if he's casting defensively.

 

[telepox]

AoOs were initially hard to hammer down, due to WotC's wording, but through later explanations have become quite easy for us. The only thing about them is I often don't see an explanation why some AoO rules are there, just that they are there. Luckily, most people can reason out the whys.

 

[Psion]

First off, there are a bunch of cases, but it mostly boils down to this

- Move in front of or do something else foolish in front of an opponent, get whacked.
- Except for the first 5' unless running

That's it. That will get you through 90% of the cases.

Anyways, we use minuatures, but I only set up big battles. Most of the time you don't need miniatures to tell if an AoO is needed. For example if you say "the mage is flanked by two guards with polearms" and they rush past the guards, they get whacked. Or if a player decides to run from combat, they get a parting shot.

IT'S NOT HARD.

 

[rounser]

I suspect that a lot of groups still don't agree on the rules. I joined one just recently who didn't agree with a basic understanding I have about AoO, like getting an AoO on you for leaving any threatened square*, but had their own idea of how moving into, out of and between threatened areas triggered AoOs.

My character was using a polearm at the time, and was surprised when things didn't quite go as expected.

What was frustrating is their resident rules lawyer didn't believe the book when I showed him the entry on it, saying that it was an "early printing of the PHB" and therefore didn't apply - the examples from Dragon supercede it". Then I pointed to the same passage in the examples from Dragon and still wasn't believed.

*: They were confused by the examples in the back showing exceptions to that, I think (when not 5 foot stepping, or when leaving your first square when withdrawing, or if the monster's AoO'd before in that round and lacks Combat Reflexes).

 

[uv23]

I was re-reading some rules bits in the DMG last night and was once again bothered by the poor writing. Some of the most important stuff in the DMG is also the most vague and prone to interpretation. They really should have doubled up on descriptions and examples.

Edit: I meant rules bits in both the DMG and PHB.

 

[Holy Bovine]

The second printing of the PHB I think went a long way towards dispelling the Aura of Confusion that surrounds AoO's for many people. The examples are very visual and show that they really come down to common sense (as many have already pointed out).

Of course in my group we have 3 ex-Blood Bowl players which uses 'tackle zones' virtually identical to AoO's in many ways - made learning the new rules very easy for us.

 

[Razuur]

For us, it is the GMs job to describe the situation.

when it is a players turn, the first thing they ask is what they see, and I describe the stiuation from their perspective.

If it is a larger battle, I draw the basic area on a whiteboard and show them the gist, but only the basics, because a plaeyr should only be aware of what is immediately around him. If I can't describe what is going on from their perspective adequately for them to understand, then I am not doing my job.

Plus, this forces them to think and react quickly, rather than plotting while other people are making their moves. It is more realistic.

For those of you who can do minatures and not feel wargamy, cool. We could never pull it off. And many of our players (usually female) hated it. They wanted to see ti in their head, where their imagination could take over.

Razuur.