Who can take an AoO's.

[0-hr]

I'm trying to frame a house rule about what weapons can be used for AoO's but first I need to understand exactly how the current rules as written are supposed to function. My question is:

Which of the following can take an AoO should the opportunity present itself:

1a) A person armed only with a shield.
1b) Even if they are using that shield for AC.

2) A person with a bow in one hand and nothing in the other.

3) A spell caster with a staff in one hand.

4a) A person with no weapons prepared and no unarmed feats.
4b) The same person wearing platemail guantlets.
4c) The same person wearing platemail with armor spikes.

 

[maddman75]

1) - I'd let it fly, but the character would lose benefit of the shield until their next round unless they had the Shield Expert feat

2)They don't threaten any spaces, so they can't have AoOs generated for them.

3)Sure - why not? IIRC grabbing a weapon with a free hand that is held in the other is a non action.

4)I'd say no. I don't believe you threated any squares with gauntlets or armor spikes. Gauntlets don't allow you to do anything but deal unarmed damage as real instead of subdual.

The key (as you might have picked up) is whether or not a character threatens squares.

 

[thegreatbuddha]

Going by the rules, all of your examples can make attacks of opportunity. Basically, it boils down to unarmed attacks being considered melee attacks that are performed without a weapon, and anyone capable of making a melee attack threatens the area around them... blah blah blah. There's a new debate about it every week or so.

Specifics
1a) They can either make an AoO unarmed (which would not provoke an AoO from the defender, since an AoO cannot provoke an AoO), or they could use the shield, although I think a feat is necessary to avoid nonproficiency/improvised weapon penalties.

1b) Unarmed AoOs only

2) If they are just holding the bow, they threaten the area around them since they have a free hand. If they used the bow at all on their previous initiative action, they are considered armed with a ranged weapon and threaten nothing. They could conceivably take an MEA to "put away" the bow, thus becoming unarmed again.

3) Again, he threatens unarmed. If he has the Monkey grip (Staff) feat, he can threaten with the staff, but this is not the norm.

4a) You can perform AoOs unarmed.

4b) You can performed AoOs unarmed, or the gauntlet counts as a weapon (I dont remember right now)

4c) If the only attacks you made during your turn were with the spiked armor, you threaten with the spiked armor. If you attacked unarmed, you threaten unarmed. You could, however, attack unarmed and threaten with the spikes by taking the TWF penalties, although there really isn't a reason for doing this.

Someone will invariably post an argument against the above. Ignore them. They are trying to force realism and/or logic on the rules system. That never works.

 

[Hypersmurf]

(which would not provoke an AoO from the defender, since an AoO cannot provoke an AoO)

Cite?

Someone will invariably post an argument against the above.

Yeah, put me down for one of those - unarmed characters don't threaten an area.

-Hyp.

 

[thegreatbuddha]

I hate reposting, but somebody beat me to it, and they're incorrect.

From the PHB Glossary, p 275-282
[all emphasis is mine]

attack of opportunity: A single extra melee attack per round that a combatant can make when an opponent within reach takes an action that provokes attacks of opportunity. One-half or better cover prevents attacks of opportunity.

melee attack: A physical attack suited for close combat.

threaten: To be able to make an attack of opportunity against an opponent within reach. Creatures threaten all areas into which they can make melee attacks, even when it's not their turn to take an action.

unarmed attack: A melee attack made with no weapon in hand.


Looks pretty clear to me. Since unarmed attacks are considered melee attacks, and anyone who can make a melee attack can make an AoO, characters who are unarmed can make AoOs. There's a bit of flavor text in the unarmed combat section that says something about moving one's body closer. Ignore it. All standard PC races naturally threaten the area 5ft around them, and do not have to move into an opponent's square to do anything other than bull rush or grapple.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I hate reposting, but somebody beat me to it, and they're incorrect.

Sage says otherwise...

-Hyp.

 

[thegreatbuddha]

Yes he did, and if he had read the rules before he had ruled on the matter, I would be more inclined to agree with him.

I really don't like to badmouth the Sage, since I think that he makes bad rulings through ignorance as opposed to some kind of intentional malevolence, but the fact remains that, for the most part, he doesn't know what he's talking about. Show me ten randomly selected Sage rulings, and I'll show you eight Sage rulings that are overruled by a Core Rulebook.

And I can't find anything to cite about AoOs not being able to provoke AoOs. Check one of the multitude of other AoO threads and I'm sure you'll find it.

 

[Hypersmurf]

And I can't find anything to cite about AoOs not being able to provoke AoOs. Check one of the multitude of other AoO threads and I'm sure you'll find it.

I've never heard it before.

The closest I can remember is the (incorrect) claim people often make, that the attack taken as an AoO cannot itself be an action that provokes AoOs - for example, "you cannot make a Disarm attempt as an AoO, since it provokes an AoO in turn"... which is untrue, of course.

Your rule here is completely new to me.

-Hyp.

 

[0-hr]

One of my main problems with the rules as written is that it makes it really easy to stop a grapple. If anything (even your foot) can be used for an AoO, then it's very easy to stop a grapple attempt:

1) Gargantuan dragon tries to grab a pixie with it's claw (grapple check at -20)
2) Unarmed pixie makes an unarmed strike and hits for d4-6 subdual damage.
3) This does a minimum of 1 point and so foils the grapple.

 

[thegreatbuddha]

That may be what I had in mind.

It still doesn't change the fact that unarmed characters can make AoOs, since they are capable of making melee attacks into the surrounding areas (assuming that they are size small or larger).

If a character couldn't make an AoO without being a monk or having the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, I think that either the monk class description or the feat description would make mention of the added ability to threaten while unarmed. Since neither do so, and other portions of the core rulebooks clearly state that unarmed characters threaten the area around them, I am going to assume that you're only argueing this point for the sake of argueing.

I'm right. you're wrong. Deal with it.